Channel Selectivity) for the receive side. Since with beamforming, the probability of blockers coming from the same direction as the BS or of transmitting toward other UEs is much lower, both the ACLR and ACS can be relaxed. Furthermore, it is common practice that the BS per- formance requirement is more stringent than the UE performance requirement, and a higher ACS on the BS side further relaxes the ACLR on the UE side. Coexistence sim- ulation results based on a 5% throughput loss together with the consensus on the BS ACS VS. UE ACLR balance resulted in an ACLR requirement for FR2 of 17 dBc instead of 30 dBc in FR1. 12.4.4.3 MPR and A-MPR In FR1 and the QPSK full allocation case, the difference between the out-of-channel (like the ACLR of 30 dBc) and in-channel requirements (like an EVM of 17.5%, which corre- spond to 15 dBc SNR) is large, and thus the linearity requirement in the PA is dictated by the ACLR. In FR2, however, both are very similar (17 dB ACLR and 15 dBc EVM), and IM3-related spectral regrowth being dominant in-channel, the PA linearity is nominally dictated by the EVM and IBE. If these were the only requirements to be fulfilled, the maximum power as defined by the power class could be obtained for a fully allocated waveform. However, another parameter that is part of regulation in some regions needs to be met: an occupied band- width (OBW) of 99%. This means that 99% of the emitted power need to fit within the channel bandwidth; thus, that only 1% should lie outside. Considering the power on adjacent channels on both side of the channels, this means that the ACLR cannot be higher than 23 dBc (and that is assuming there is only negligible power further away from the allocated channel). With 17 dBc ACLR on each side, at least 4% of the power is outside the channel. In order to keep the system parameters aligned and thus enable best UE efficiency and maximum power, it was decided that the maximum output power as defined by the power class would only be achievable for partial allocations in the mid