Air-Ground Telecommunications Services, 19293-19312 [05-6948]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 13, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19293-19312]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-6948]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 22, and 90

[WT Docket Nos. 03-103, 05-42; FCC 04-287]


Air-Ground Telecommunications Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(``Commission'') revises rules governing the four megahertz of 
dedicated spectrum in the 800 MHz commercial Air-Ground Radiotelephone 
Service band. The Commission adopts a flexible regulatory approach to 
determine the configuration of the band; adopts rules that enable 
interested parties to bid on spectrum licenses according to the band 
configuration that they believe will best meet their needs for the 
provision of air-ground services; makes available nationwide air-ground 
licenses in three configurations: band plan 1, comprised of two 
overlapping, shared, cross-polarized 3 MHz licenses (licenses A and B, 
respectively), band plan 2, comprised of an exclusive 3 MHz license and 
an exclusive 1 MHz license (licenses C and D, respectively), and band 
plan 3, comprised of an exclusive 1 MHz license and an exclusive 3 MHz 
license (licenses E and F, respectively), with the blocks at opposite 
ends of the band from the second configuration; and finally, the 
Commission revises and eliminates certain Public Mobile Services (PMS) 
rules that are no longer warranted as a result of technological change, 
increased competition in Commercial Mobile Radio Services (CMRS), 
supervening changes to related Commission rules, or a combination of 
these factors.

DATES: Effective May 13, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Arsenault, Chief Counsel, 
Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, at 202-418-0920 
or via e-mail at Richard.Arsenault@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order portion (Report and Order) of the Commission's Report and 
Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 04-287, in WT Docket Nos. 
03-103 and 05-42, adopted December 15, 2004, and released February 22, 
2005. Contemporaneous with this document, the Commission publishes a 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) (summarized elsewhere in this 
publication). The full text of this document is available for public 
inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC 
Reference Information Center, 445 12th St., SW., Room CY-A257, 
Washington, DC 20554. The complete text may be purchased from the 
Commission's duplicating contractor: Best Copy & Printing, Inc., 445 
12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 800-
378-3160, facsimile 202-488-5563, or via e-mail at fcc@bcpiweb.com. The 
full text may also be downloaded at: https://www.fcc.gov. Alternative 
formats are available to persons with disabilities by contacting Brian 
Millin at (202) 418-7426 or TTY (202) 418-7365 or at 
Brian.Millin@fcc.gov.

Synopsis of the Report and Order

A. 800 MHz Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service

    1. The Commission initiated this proceeding, inter alia, to 
reexamine the 800 MHz Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service band plan and 
service rules. Although the Commission initially licensed six 800 MHz 
air-ground nationwide licensees, only one licensee (Verizon Airfone) 
continues to provide service in the band, and our current technical 
rules allow it to provide only a limited range of narrowband voice and 
data services. This circumstance led us to question in the Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking in this proceeding, 68 FR 44003, July 25, 2003, 
whether our existing rules were impeding the provision of 
telecommunications services desired by the public onboard aircraft. 
Nearly all parties commenting on these issues agree that our existing 
band plan and rules have hindered the efficient, competitive provision 
of air-ground services desired by the public. Based on our review of 
the record in this proceeding, we find that the public interest will be 
served by adopting flexible rules that will enable interested parties 
to bid on licenses in three possible band configurations. Each of the 
three band configurations includes at least one spectrum block that 
will permit the provision of high-speed telecommunications services to 
the public onboard aircraft.
    2. In reexamining the current band plan and service rules, we must 
address both competitive issues (i.e., how many competitors can the 
spectrum and the market support) and technical

[[Page 19294]]

considerations (i.e., how much spectrum is necessary to efficiently and 
effectively support a range of air-ground service offerings, including 
voice and broadband applications, and the technical parameters to 
minimize the potential for air-ground systems to cause interference). 
We resolve these interrelated issues by adopting flexible rules to 
determine the best technological configuration of the band and the 
number of competitors for air-ground communications over multiple 
platforms (i.e., terrestrial and satellite). We find that 
reconfiguration of the 800 MHz air-ground band will facilitate 
competition with satellite-based offerings in the provision of high-
speed air-ground services to commercial and other aircraft. We also 
note that other spectrum is available for the provision of air-ground 
communications services. Based on our review of the record developed in 
this proceeding and for the reasons stated below, we conclude that a 
flexible licensing approach coupled with flexible technical and 
operational rules will promote the highest valued use of the 800 MHz 
air-ground spectrum for the provision of air-ground services that 
better meet the needs of the public.
1. Background
    3. In 1990, the Commission allocated four megahertz of spectrum for 
commercial Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, authorizing operation at 
849-851 MHz (ground stations) and 894-896 MHz (airborne mobile 
stations). Each band was divided into ten paired channel blocks, which 
are allotted to specific geographic locations (essentially a national 
grid). Each channel block contains 29 narrowband (6 kHz) communications 
channels and 6 very narrowband (3.2 kHz) control channels. Under the 
current service rules, each licensee has an exclusive control channel, 
shares all the communication channels with the other licensees in the 
band, and must provide nationwide service. To promote interoperable 
communications and to manage interference, some of the ground station 
locations in North America and channel block assignments have been 
predetermined consistent with bilateral agreements with Mexico and with 
Canada. The number of communications channels limits the number of 
voice calls that can be simultaneously handled in a particular area, 
and the narrow bandwidth of these channels limits a service provider to 
voice and low-speed data services.
    4. The current 800 MHz Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service rules 
contemplate six competing licensees providing voice and low-speed data 
services. Six entities were originally licensed under these rules, 
which required all systems to conform to detailed technical 
specifications to enable shared use of the air-ground channels. Only 
three of the six licensees built systems and provided service, and two 
of those failed for business reasons. Only Verizon Airfone remains as 
an incumbent in the band. The prescriptive command-and-control nature 
of the current air-ground service rules, the regulatory requirement to 
share only four megahertz of spectrum among up to six licensees, and 
the limited data capacity of the narrow bandwidth (6 kHz) 
communications (slow dial-up modem speed) preclude the provision of 
broadband services to the public onboard aircraft.
2. Market for Air-Ground Wireless Communications Services
    5. There is substantial and rapidly growing consumer, airline, and 
service provider interest in access to high-speed Internet and other 
wireless services onboard aircraft. Market research suggests that many 
frequent flyers are willing to pay for high-speed access to the 
Internet and their corporate network.
3. Reconfiguration of the 800 MHz Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service 
Band
a. Available Air-Ground Band Plans
    6. We have reviewed the extensive record in this proceeding and 
conclude that the public interest will be served by adopting a flexible 
framework that will enable interested parties to bid on spectrum 
licenses according to the band configuration that they believe will 
best meet their needs for the provision of air-ground services. 
Interested parties may bid on spectrum licenses in any of the following 
three band plans, including two overlapping, shared, cross-polarized 
spectrum licenses (band plan 1) as advocated by AirCell, Inc. and the 
Boeing Company and exclusive spectrum licenses (band plans 2 and 3) as 
proposed by Space Data Corporation and Verizon Airfone. Licenses will 
have a ten-year term.
    Band plan 1--two overlapping, shared, cross-polarized 3 MHz 
licenses (licenses A and B, respectively).
    Band plan 2--an exclusive 3 MHz license and an exclusive 1 MHz 
license (licenses C and D, respectively).
    Band plan 3--an exclusive 1 MHz license and an exclusive 3 MHz 
license (licenses E and F, respectively), with the blocks at opposite 
ends of the band from the second configuration.
    7. The Commission will award licenses to winning bidders for the 
licenses comprising the band plan that receives the highest aggregate 
gross bid, subject to long-form license application review. In order to 
further competition and ensure maximum use of this frequency band for 
air-ground services, no party will be eligible to hold more than one of 
the spectrum licenses being made available.
    8. We believe this flexible approach to configuration of the band 
will promote our goal in this proceeding of facilitating the highest 
valued use of this scarce spectrum resource, resulting in the provision 
of wireless communications services that better meet the needs of the 
traveling public onboard aircraft. We also further our strategic 
objective to encourage the growth and rapid deployment of innovative 
and efficient communications technologies and services by adopting 
rules that will permit licensees to deploy any current or future 
technology with an occupied bandwidth that fits within its assigned 
spectrum and to provide any kind of air-ground service to any type of 
aircraft. As explained below, we also provide a transition period for 
the incumbent system currently operated by Verizon Airfone.
    9. Future licensees in the 800 MHz air-ground band, as well as 
other interested parties, will have the opportunity to engage in 
spectrum leasing under our rules. Future licensees will also be 
permitted to engage in partitioning and/or disaggregation of their 
licenses. These regulatory opportunities are intended to provide the 
air-ground marketplace greater flexibility to respond to consumer 
demand.
    10. Below, we address the location of ground stations, the 
provision of deck-to-deck service (i.e., service from takeoff to 
landing), competitive considerations, and the provision of services in 
the air-ground band.
(i) Location of Ground Stations
    11. Band plans 2 and 3 provide for exclusive spectrum licensing and 
will afford new licensees significant flexibility to configure and 
modify their systems to address current and future market conditions. 
For example, licensees will be able to initially configure their 
systems to best meet the needs of their customers, and may flexibly 
reconfigure or add ground stations to respond to future demand for air-
ground services. An exclusive licensee also could deploy new 
technologies in response to changing market conditions--without having 
to coordinate its choice of technology with another licensee in the 
band. If the band

[[Page 19295]]

is comprised of two overlapping 3 MHz licenses (band plan 1), the new 
licensees will be required to jointly file a spectrum sharing and site 
selection plan with the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau within six 
months of the initial grant of their spectrum licenses and will be 
required to notify the Bureau of any changes to the plan. The Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau will issue a public notice prior to the 
Commission's auction of new 800 MHz air-ground spectrum licenses in 
which it will specify the filing requirements for the plan. This 
approach would provide parties with overlapping spectrum licenses 
flexibility to configure their systems without having to adhere to 
minimum spacing requirements or site locations dictated by the 
Commission.
(ii) Provision of Deck-to-Deck Service
    12. The record reflects that parties desire deck-to-deck service 
(i.e., service from terminal to terminal). We note that air-ground 
communications services are currently provided to Federal, State, and 
local agencies, including the FBI, the U.S. Department of Energy, and 
the U.S. Customs Service, and that the air-ground spectrum can be used 
to support aircraft management, other public safety services, and 
homeland security communications. In view of the foregoing and in light 
of our statutory mandate to promote the safety of life and property, we 
have selected three band plans that would enable licensees to provide 
deck-to-deck service.
    13. An exclusive licensing approach (band plans 2 and 3) would 
facilitate the provision of service continuously because ground 
stations can be located without inter-system coordination and would not 
have to be limited in power or sector orientation by the presence of an 
overlapping licensee. If a spectrum sharing approach (band plan 1) is 
selected by the auction winners, the record indicates that the parties 
will have to agree on power limits and sharing rules to facilitate the 
full provision of deck-to-deck service.
(iii) Competitive Considerations
    14. The flexible band configuration approach that we adopt today 
will enable interested parties to bid on overlapping spectrum licenses 
(band plan 1) in the event that they believe spectrum sharing will best 
meet their needs for the provision of air-ground services. Under this 
approach, the individual licensees--rather than the Commission--would 
determine the criteria for ground station locations and other technical 
requirements necessary to facilitate the provision of broadband 
services on an overlapped basis. Moreover, in lieu of codifying their 
sharing plan into the Commission's rules, any sharing plan that the 
winning bidders develop between themselves can be modified at any time 
without their having to seek a change in the rules. If band plan 1 is 
implemented, we expect the parties to engage in good faith negotiations 
in developing and implementing their spectrum sharing plan. If the two 
licensees cannot agree on a spectrum sharing plan or if a dispute 
arises under their initial or amended agreement, we would encourage 
them to use binding arbitration or other alternative dispute resolution 
procedures. Alternatively, either party may request that the Commission 
resolve major disputes by filing, for example, a petition for 
declaratory ruling.
    15. In developing the available band plan options, we have 
considered the potential harms and benefits that may accrue from the 
possibility of a single provider in this band versus opportunities for 
multiple service providers. We have also weighed the possible harms and 
benefits in the context of our goal in this proceeding of facilitating 
the highest valued use of this spectrum, resulting in the provision of 
wireless telecommunications services onboard aircraft that better meet 
the needs of the traveling public. We have considered not only the 
existence of emerging satellite-based competition but also the 
availability of other spectrum for the provision of air-ground service. 
In addition, we have taken into account the fact that our new air-
ground band plan and rules will provide an adequate amount of spectrum 
for the provision of new high-speed wireless services using the 800 MHz 
air-ground spectrum that cannot be provided under our current rules, 
and we anticipate that any future provider will take advantage of the 
new rules to provide services that will compete more directly with 
broadband air-ground providers operating from different platforms. 
Therefore, we find that the air-ground band plan and the flexible 
service rules that we adopt today are likely to enhance intermodal air-
ground competition even if ultimately only one entity operates in the 
800 MHz air-ground band.
    16. Nevertheless, in light of the very limited amount of spectrum 
(four megahertz) available in the 800 MHz air-ground band, we conclude 
that the public interest would be served by ensuring access to this 
spectrum by more than one entrant by prohibiting any single party from 
controlling more than three megahertz of spectrum in the band. Although 
other spectrum and platforms will be available for the provision of 
domestic air-ground service, the 800 MHz air-ground band constitutes 
the only four megahertz of spectrum dedicated specifically to the 
commercial air-ground service in the United States. Thus, there is 
currently no guarantee that any spectrum other than the 800 MHz air-
ground band and the spectrum used by satellite services will in fact be 
used for commercial air-ground service. We accordingly conclude that it 
is in the public interest to promote competition by ensuring that at 
least two parties will have an opportunity to provide service in the 
800 MHz air-ground band. Other providers will be able to access the 
spectrum through secondary markets, resale or similar means. In 
addition, the record demonstrates that no more than three megahertz of 
spectrum is required to deliver high-speed air-ground services using 
today's broadband technologies. Permitting one party to control the 
entire four megahertz of spectrum comprising the band therefore could 
result in one megahertz of spectrum (25 percent of the band) lying 
fallow, which would undermine our goal of promoting the highest valued 
use of this spectrum. A 1 MHz spectrum block could support such 
applications as email service, Internet access, messaging services, 
avionic support, and homeland security services. Given the many 
potential uses of a 1 MHz spectrum block, restricting the access of any 
single party to three megahertz of the spectrum not only will increase 
the air-ground service choices available to consumers, but also will 
ensure the efficient use of this spectrum. We also believe that 
promoting competition in the band and with satellite-based service 
providers will serve the public interest by spurring technological 
innovation. In light of these findings, we conclude that it is in the 
public interest to have two licensees in this band.
    17. In view of the foregoing, we will prohibit any party from 
obtaining a controlling interest, either at auction or by a post-
auction transaction, in more than three megahertz of spectrum (either 
shared or exclusive) in the 800 MHz air-ground band. Each of the three 
band configurations contains two licenses and each includes at least 
one 3 MHz license. Accordingly, no party may have a controlling 
interest in more than one license in the band plan implemented as a 
result of the Commission's auction of new air-ground licenses. For 
purposes of this eligibility restriction, individuals and entities with 
either de jure or de facto control of a licensee in the band will be 
considered to have a controlling

[[Page 19296]]

interest in the licensee. De jure control is evidenced by holdings of 
greater than 50 percent of the voting stock of a corporation, or in the 
case of a partnership, general partnership interests. De facto control 
is determined on a case-by-case basis.
    18. We also will apply the definitions of ``controlling interests'' 
and ``affiliate'' currently set forth in Sec. Sec.  1.2110(c)(2) and 
1.2110(c)(5) of the Commission's rules. These provisions have worked 
well to identify individuals and entities that have the ability to 
control applicants for Commission licenses and therefore are well-
suited to our goal here of ensuring that no party will hold a 
controlling interest in more than three megahertz of spectrum (shared 
or exclusive) in the 800 MHz air-ground band. We note that Sec.  
1.2110(c)(2) includes the requirement that ownership interests 
generally be calculated on a fully diluted basis, and also provides 
that any person who manages the operations of an applicant pursuant to 
a management agreement, or enters into a joint marketing agreement with 
an applicant, shall be considered to have a controlling interest in the 
applicant if such person, or its affiliate, has authority to make 
decisions or otherwise engage in practices or activities that 
determine, or significantly influence, the types of services offered, 
or the terms or prices of such services. We find that, together with 
the other provisions of Sec. Sec.  1.2110(c)(2) and 1.2110(c)(5), these 
provisions will ensure that no entity will hold a controlling interest 
in more than three megahertz of spectrum (shared or exclusive) in the 
800 MHz air-ground band.
    19. We note that, like other Part 22 licensees, 800 MHz Air-Ground 
Radiotelephone Service licensees are classified as commercial mobile 
radio service (CMRS) providers and thus are subject to common carrier 
regulation under Title II of the Communications Act (Act). While the 
Commission has previously decided to forbear from applying certain 
provisions of Title II to CMRS providers, it has determined that it 
would be inappropriate to exempt CMRS providers from the competitive 
safeguards embodied in Sec. Sec.  201 and 202 of the Act. Air-Ground 
licensees therefore are required to provide service upon reasonable 
request, and their ``charges, practices, classifications, and 
regulations for and in connection with'' service must be just and 
reasonable. Moreover, Air-Ground licensees may not make any unjust or 
unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, 
regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with a like 
communication service and may not afford any undue or unreasonable 
preference or advantage to any person or class of persons. Accordingly, 
if an air-ground licensee were to unreasonably discriminate in its 
service rates, terms, or conditions, it could be subject to enforcement 
action by the Commission as well as a complaint proceeding initiated 
pursuant to Sec.  208 of the Act.
(iv) Air-Ground Services
    20. A new licensee may provide any type of air-ground service 
(i.e., voice telephony, broadband Internet, data, etc.) to aircraft of 
any type, and serve any or all aviation markets (e.g., commercial, 
government, and general). A licensee must provide service to aircraft. 
We note that current bilateral agreements between the United States, 
Canada, and Mexico provide for coordinated use of air-ground 
frequencies over North American airspace and are based on a narrow 
bandwidth channel scheme, and therefore may need to be renegotiated to 
provide for more flexible use of this spectrum.
    21. At this time, we decide not to permit a licensee to provide 
ancillary land mobile or fixed services in the 800 MHz air-ground 
spectrum.
4. Technical Standards
    22. We are adopting the minimal set of technical rules for the new 
air-ground service necessary to implement the three alternative band 
plan configurations that will be subject to auction. Generally, these 
rules provide licensees flexibility to deploy any type of transmission 
technology, provided that the radio emissions produced fit within a 
licensee's assigned spectrum. The new technical rules limit only 
transmitting power and the power level of unwanted emissions. As a 
general matter, these new technical rules are crafted to allow 
sufficient power to provide robust air-ground services, while limiting 
the potential for harmful interference to services operating in 
adjacent spectrum.
    23. Interference to air-ground from adjacent services. Each of the 
two paired bands comprising the 800 MHz air-ground allocation is 
adjacent to and just above spectrum allocated to the cellular 
radiotelephone service. The 849-851 MHz uplink band is adjacent to and 
just below spectrum allocated to land mobile services including public 
safety, which will soon become all public safety pursuant to the 800 
MHz Order. The 894-896 MHz downlink band is adjacent to and just below 
spectrum allocated to land mobile services including 900 MHz SMR. These 
services are heavily used in many areas. Base stations in these 
adjacent services are authorized to utilize high power levels.
    24. The services adjacent to the 849-851 MHz band are subject to 
rules that limit their potential to cause interference to air-ground 
service. We do not, at this time, find a need to adopt additional or 
more stringent rules applicable to the adjacent service licensees to 
further limit interference potential to the air-ground service. We 
believe that, under the current rules, new air-ground systems should be 
able, through careful ground station site selection and technical 
coordination with the licensees in the adjacent services, to build out 
their systems. Potential licensees should plan on obtaining qualified 
engineering advice regarding system design and ground station site 
selection, taking fully into account the existing radio frequency 
environment at candidate sites.
    25. Interference to Cellular Block B. The air-ground ground station 
transmit band at 849-851 MHz is adjacent to the Cellular Radiotelephone 
Service Block B band, which is used for cellular base station 
receivers. We note that no harmful interference problems between the 
cellular service and the commercial air-ground service have been 
reported to the Commission during more than ten years of air-ground 
service operations, despite the fact that the air-ground mobile station 
and ground station transmit bands are reversed from the adjacent 
cellular bands. We believe that several factors may explain why there 
have been no reported interference problems. First, both services have 
out of band emissions (OOBE) limits to suppress undesired signals from 
adjacent allocations. Second, there are far fewer ground stations in an 
air-ground system than in a cellular system (e.g., the entire U.S. 
airspace can be covered at an altitude of 20,000 feet by fewer than 200 
ground stations). Third, an air-ground licensee must employ careful 
site selection practices for its ground stations, including an 
unobstructed view of the sky and consideration of the local RF 
environment (i.e., what other stations are nearby). Further, air-ground 
antennas also are typically up-tilted whereas cellular antennas are 
often down-tilted, adding some isolation between the two. The rule 
changes that we adopt to permit broadband air-ground services will not 
alter any of these factors and, consequently, we expect that these 
factors will be effective in avoiding inter-service interference under 
our new air-ground band plan.
    26. Furthermore, we do not believe that the use of wider bandwidth

[[Page 19297]]

technologies in the 800 MHz air-ground spectrum will result in 
increased interference between air-ground operations and cellular 
operations. Although spread spectrum emissions typically have broader 
out-of-band noise skirts, the level of this noise is subject to the 
Commission's OOBE rules. We also note that the broadband spread 
spectrum based technologies used in the cellular band and those that 
the parties have proposed for use in the air-ground band are resistant 
to small amounts of out-of-band noise. In summary, we find that 
applying our standard OOBE rules here is adequate to limit unwanted 
emissions between ground stations in the air-ground service and base 
stations in the cellular service. We note that our standard OOBE rules 
also provide that the Commission may require greater attenuation of 
unwanted emissions in the event it is necessary to prevent interference 
to other services.
    27. The airborne mobile transmit band (894-896 MHz) is adjacent on 
its lower side to the cellular telephone receivers of the Cellular B 
Block licensee. There have been no reported instances of harmful 
interference between airborne mobile stations and cellular telephones. 
This stems from the large distance separation between aircraft and 
cellular phones on the ground, and our decision today does not change 
this factor. We conclude that our OOBE limits and the distance 
separation make it likely that the mobile units in these two services 
will continue to operate in adjacent spectrum without harmful 
interference problems. Nevertheless, if an air-ground licensee elects 
to operate aircraft mobile transmitters on the ground or during 
approach and take-off, they may find it necessary in some cases to 
provide additional attenuation of OOBE falling into the spectrum below 
894 MHz, in order to avoid interference to cellular phones in use in 
the immediate vicinity of airports.
    28. Interference to Public Safety. The upper edge of the air-ground 
ground station transmit band at 849-851 MHz is adjacent to what are now 
mobile receivers for interleaved business, industrial and land 
transportation, SMR, and public safety radio channels, but which will 
soon become the National Public Safety Plan Advisory Committee (NPSPAC) 
public safety channels pursuant to our recent 800 MHz Order, 69 FR 
67823, November 22, 2004. Nextel asserts that OOBE from air-ground 
ground stations could produce a significant amount of noise energy in 
nearby public safety receivers. Although we have found that emissions 
from cellular base stations may have contributed to interference 
problems with public safety and critical infrastructure mobile 
receivers above 851 MHz, there is no history of similar interference 
being caused by the existing air-ground ground stations to mobile 
receivers. There are again several factors that we believe may explain 
why air-ground caused interference is rare, including the fact that 
there are so few air-ground ground stations, as compared to cellular 
base stations, and the deployment characteristics of ground stations 
(e.g., up tilted antennas). Further, we note that NPSPAC operations 
above 851 MHz will be protected by our OOBE limit rule, including the 
provision that allows the Commission to require greater attenuation if 
necessary to prevent interference.
    29. Nevertheless, we believe that it is prudent to adopt a rule 
providing that ground stations in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service 
that operate in the 849-851 MHz range will be subject to the same 
interference abatement obligation rules adopted for cellular services 
in the 800 MHz Order. The rule we are adopting is essentially the same 
as that adopted for cellular in the 800 MHz Order. We will not require 
air-ground licensees to participate in the establishment of the 
electronic notification process because we anticipate that this process 
will be in place by the time that new air-ground licenses are issued.
    30. Interference to 900 MHz SMR base receivers. The airborne mobile 
transmit band (894-896 MHz) is adjacent on its upper side to the base 
station receive band in the 900 MHz SMR service. Distance separation 
will normally serve to protect 900 MHz SMR base station receivers 
because airborne stations normally operate at altitudes well above 900 
MHz SMR base stations. Nextel, however, contends that there may be a 
problem where its 900 MHz SMR base stations are located near airport 
runways, and if there are several aircraft at low altitude nearby at 
the same time. This possibility appears to be atypical and we find that 
it would be best addressed on a case-by-case basis rather than by a 
broad-based rule. Air-ground licensees and 900 MHz SMR licensees should 
cooperate to resolve any interference problems of this type.
    31. Miscellaneous interference issues. We do not believe the record 
justifies adoption of more stringent OOBE limits for the Air-Ground 
Radiotelephone Service. Accordingly, we will apply our harmonized 
flexible OOBE limits rule, which currently applies to cellular and 
broadband PCS, to the 800 MHz Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service. We 
note that, in the event that band plan 2 or 3 is implemented, the 
exclusive licensees would be subject to the OOBE standards between 
their spectrum blocks, as well as outside the air-ground band.
    32. Miscellaneous technical rules. The existing air-ground rules 
have provided particular limits on transmitter frequency tolerance and 
specifications for automated operating procedures. We conclude it is 
unnecessary to retain such a detailed frequency tolerance rule. Under 
the legacy band configuration, numerous closely packed air-ground 
channels were shared by multiple licensees, so we required a frequency 
tolerance rule that tightly controlled frequency stability to minimize 
the possibility of adjacent channel interference. By contrast, our new 
rules establish wider spectrum blocks and we anticipate fewer 
communications channels. In addition, we expect that the advanced 
technologies likely to be used in this band will have to be inherently 
stable in order to work properly, and, in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone 
Service, possibly to compensate for Doppler shift as well. Thus, we 
find that we need only require in our rules that the frequency 
stability of equipment used be sufficient to ensure that, after 
accounting for Doppler frequency shifts, the occupied bandwidth of the 
fundamental emissions remains within the authorized frequency bands of 
operation. In the event that band plan 1 is implemented and licenses 
for spectrum sharing are issued, the licensees may choose to agree upon 
any number of miscellaneous technical standards that may be needed to 
facilitate shared spectrum operation and include them in the spectrum 
sharing plan that they would file with the Wireless Telecommunications 
Bureau.
5. Incumbent Station KNKG804
    33. Verizon Airfone Inc. is the sole incumbent currently operating 
in the 800 MHz air-ground band. In April 2004, the company filed an 
application for renewal of its authorization to operate in the band, 
Call Sign KNKG804. We grant Verizon Airfone Inc. a non-renewable 
license for a five-year term commencing on the effective date of this 
Report and Order.
a. Transition of Incumbent System
    34. In order to ensure that the air-ground spectrum can be used to 
provide broadband air-ground services to the public in the near future, 
it is imperative to clear the incumbent narrowband system from a 
minimum of three megahertz of spectrum as soon as reasonably 
practicable. We conclude

[[Page 19298]]

that, given the declining and relatively low usage level of Verizon 
Airfone's system, and because the original 800 MHz air-ground band plan 
was intended to accommodate six competing licensees, the existing 
system can be provided comparable spectrum in one megahertz of spectrum 
in the air ground band.
    35. Verizon Airfone's incumbent system must cease operations in the 
lower 1.5 MHz portion of each 2 MHz air-ground band within 24 months of 
the initial date of grant of any license, if band plan 1 or 2 is 
implemented; Verizon Airfone may relocate its incumbent operations to 
the upper 0.5 MHz portion of each 2 MHz band and may continue to 
operate under the renewal authorization until the end of the five-year 
license term. If band plan 3 is implemented, Verizon Airfone's 
incumbent system must cease operations in the upper 1.5 MHz portion of 
each 2 MHz air-ground band within 24 months of the initial date of 
grant of any new license; Verizon Airfone may relocate its incumbent 
operations to the lower 0.5 MHz portion of each 2 MHz band and may 
continue to operate under the renewal authorization until the end of 
the five-year license term. We note that this transition period is 
consistent with Verizon Airfone's request that we provide it a 
``limited transitional period'' for its narrowband system. In revising 
our current air-ground rules, we are eliminating all of the command and 
control technical rules, which enabled dynamic sharing of communication 
channels under the former licensing scheme. Verizon Airfone may 
reconfigure the narrowband channelization of its existing system in the 
upper 0.5 MHz portion of each 2 MHz band (or lower 0.5 MHz portion of 
each band if band plan 3 is implemented) any way it wants, including 
using control channel(s) of any authorized bandwidth less than 6 kHz 
(not limited to 3.2 kHz as they are now). We note that if Verizon 
Airfone acquires a new spectrum authorization as a result of 
competitive bidding, it could elect to continue its incumbent 
operations under such new authorization.
b. Reimbursement of Relocation Costs
    36. We conclude that it would not be inequitable for Verizon 
Airfone to bear costs associated with relocating its narrowband 
operations within the 24-month period set out above to accommodate a 
new entrant in the air-ground band. The original 800 MHz air-ground 
band plan was intended to accommodate six competing licensees in the 
air-ground band, and Verizon Airfone has never had a right to exclusive 
use of the band. The new license that we grant Verizon Airfone today, 
moreover, provides the company a substantial period--two years from the 
initial grant of any new air-ground license--to relocate its narrowband 
operations to one megahertz of spectrum in the band.
    37. We do not foresee harm to the flying public flowing from 
Verizon Airfone bearing any relocation expenses it may have. As noted 
above, demand for Verizon Airfone's service has markedly declined in 
recent years, and the company's system is approaching technological 
obsolescence. We note that a new air-ground licensee could seek to 
negotiate and compensate Verizon Airfone to relocate earlier than 
required by the terms of Verizon Airfone's new license; Verizon 
Airfone, however, will not be obligated to engage in such negotiations. 
On balance, we conclude that any burden that might be incurred by 
Verizon Airfone to relocate its operations under the conditions we are 
adopting should be minimal. Accordingly, we require Verizon Airfone to 
bear any costs for relocating its narrowband operations in the air-
ground band at the end of the 24-month transition period.
c. Renewal of Call Sign KNKG804
    38. We hereby grant Verizon Airfone Inc. a non-renewable license, 
Call Sign KNKG804, for a five-year term subject to the following 
conditions:
     If band plan 1 or 2 is implemented, Verizon Airfone must 
cease its existing narrowband operations in the lower 1.5 MHz portion 
of each 2 MHz air-ground band within 24 months of the initial date of 
grant of a new spectrum license.
     If band plan 1 or 2 is implemented, Verizon Airfone may 
relocate its incumbent operations to the upper 0.5 MHz portion of each 
2 MHz band (0.5 MHz at 850.500-851.000 MHz paired with 0.5 MHz at 
895.500-896.000 MHz).
     If band plan 3 is implemented, Verizon Airfone must cease 
its existing narrowband operations in the upper 1.5 MHz portion of each 
2 MHz air-ground band within 24 months of the initial date of grant of 
a new spectrum license.
     If band plan 3 is implemented, Verizon Airfone may 
relocate its incumbent operations to the lower 0.5 MHz portion of each 
2 MHz band (0.5 MHz at 849.000-849.500 MHz paired with 0.5 MHz at 
894.000-894.500 MHz).
     The existing Sec.  22.867 power limits for ground stations 
(100 Watts ERP) and airborne mobile stations (30 Watts ERP) will become 
license terms. We are amending Sec.  22.867 and it will apply to the 
new licensees only.
     The existing Sec.  22.861 out-of-band and spurious 
emission limits will become license terms. We are amending Sec.  22.861 
and it will apply to the new licensees only.
     The authorized emission bandwidth of any transmission from 
the existing system may not exceed 6 kHz. This license condition 
replaces Sec.  22.857(a)(2) because we are removing Sec.  22.857. This 
condition requires that the existing system remain a narrowband system.
    39. Verizon Airfone must coordinate any technical changes within 
885 kilometers (550 miles) of the U.S.-Canadian or U.S.-Mexican borders 
with the appropriate air-ground licensees in those countries prior to 
requesting appropriate governmental approval. Verizon Airfone may 
locate or relocate ground stations operating at any power level (not 
exceeding 100 Watts), subject only to international coordination. 
Verizon Airfone must maintain and provide to the FCC and the new 800 
MHz air-ground licensee(s) a current list of the locations and channels 
used at all ground stations, which will enable the licensee(s) to 
provide interference protection to the existing system's operations.
    40. During the period that the existing system continues to operate 
and provide service, the licensee of a new spectrum license must not 
cause harmful interference to it. Protection from interference requires 
that the signals of the new licensee(s) must not exceed the current 
adjacent channel emission limit, which is a ground station received 
power of -130 dBm in 6 kHz, assuming a 0 dBi vertically polarized 
antenna. This limit will provide full interference protection to the 
existing system.
6. Construction Requirements
    41. We find that a five-year substantial service construction 
requirement for any new spectrum license--other than the 1 MHz spectrum 
licenses D and E--will serve the public interest and is consistent with 
our statutory mandate to prevent stockpiling or warehousing by 
licensees, and to promote investment in and rapid deployment of new 
technologies and services. At the end of the five-year construction 
period, a licensee must provide substantial service to aircraft. We 
define substantial service as service that is sound, favorable, and 
substantially above a level of mediocre service that would barely 
warrant renewal. We establish two safe harbors that would satisfy this 
substantial service obligation. First, construction and operation of 20 
base stations, with at least one base station in each of the ten FAA 
regions, at the five-year

[[Page 19299]]

benchmark would constitute substantial service. Alternatively, the 
construction and operation of base stations capable of serving the 
airspace of at least 25 of the 50 busiest airports (as measured by 
annual passenger boardings) at the five-year benchmark would constitute 
substantial service.
    42. We do not establish a construction requirement for spectrum 
licenses D and E. If either of these licenses is acquired, the licensee 
would have to share spectrum with Verizon Airfone's incumbent system 
until the expiration of Verizon Airfone's non-renewable license term. 
Depending on system configuration, a licensee of spectrum block D or E 
might not find it technically desirable to operate an air-ground system 
while sharing spectrum with the incumbent system. Under these 
circumstances, a construction requirement could result in a licensee 
deploying a less than optimal system.

B. 400 MHz Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service

    43. The general aviation air-ground service operates in the 
454.675-454.975 and 459.675-459.975 MHz bands and involves the 
provision of telecommunications service to private aircraft such as 
small single engine craft and corporate jets. As explained by one of 
the commenters in this proceeding, the channels licensed in this 
service are used for emergency and other purposes. These channels are 
interconnected with the public switched telephone network. Pursuant to 
our biennial review of regulations in the Notice, we are revising and 
eliminating certain rules governing this service. In addition to the 
rules revised or eliminated as discussed below, we take this 
opportunity to update and reorganize the general aviation air-ground 
rules. In particular, we redesignate current Sec.  22.803 of the 
general rules as new Sec.  22.807 of the general aviation air-ground 
rules, and delete certain superfluous language therein that relates to 
the Rural Radiotelephone Service.
1. Form 409, Airborne Mobile Radio Telephone License Application
    44. In contrast to most part 22 services, Sec.  22.3(b)(1) requires 
an individual authorization to operate a general aviation airborne 
mobile station-an end user unit-in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone 
Service. This requirement is also reflected in Sec.  1.903(c) of our 
rules. Individuals must file FCC Form 409 (Airborne Mobile Radio 
Telephone License Application) to apply for authority to operate an 
airborne station or to modify or renew an existing license.
    45. We do not believe that the continued licensing of individual 
airborne mobile stations is warranted. At present, and likely for the 
foreseeable future, members of the public desiring service using the 
current Air-Ground Radiotelephone Automated Service (AGRAS) system must 
first purchase and install an AGRAS-compatible mobile telephone aboard 
their aircraft. Such mobile units are considerably more expensive and 
not as readily available as mobile telephones typically used with land-
based public mobile systems. Coupled with the fact that the number of 
general aviation users is relatively small, the probability of 
unauthorized users is minimal.
    46. More importantly, a potential air-ground subscriber must first 
register with the billing service utilized by the various air-ground 
licensees to obtain an aircraft telephone number in order to receive 
service. Therefore, the licensee's own billing service would know the 
number and identification of legitimate users of the air-ground AGRAS 
system. Presumably, if an un-registered user attempted to place calls 
over the AGRAS system, service would be denied.
    47. In addition, the Commission has received few complaints 
regarding these stations. Air-Ground equipment is used to communicate 
with ground facilities that are otherwise licensed by the Commission. 
Moreover, we believe that the requirement to file Form 409 imposes an 
unnecessary regulatory burden on end users, because it involves 
preparation of a form as well as payment of a $50 fee for each 
subscriber unit.
    48. Therefore, in keeping with the Commission's policy of 
simplifying, where appropriate, its licensing procedures and easing the 
administrative burden on licensees and other users of Wireless Radio 
Services, we eliminate, by revising Sec. Sec.  1.903(c) and 22.3(b), 
the requirement that an authorization be obtained to operate general 
aviation airborne mobile stations in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone 
Service. We also eliminate FCC Form 409 and delete references to that 
form in Sec. Sec.  1.1102 and 1.2003 of our rules.
2. Idle Tone
    49. Section 22.811 provides that, when a ground station transmitter 
authorized to transmit on any Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service channel 
listed in Sec.  22.805 (for general aviation air-ground service) is 
available for service but idle, it must continuously transmit a 
modulated signal on that channel with a power between 10 and 20 dB 
lower than the normal transmitting power. We continue to believe that 
the deletion of Sec.  22.811 from our rules is warranted. We take this 
opportunity to point out that the removal of this rule in no way 
prohibits carriers from employing the idle control tone. To the 
contrary, the action we take today is permissive. To the extent that 
idle tone transmissions are deemed valuable by system operators, they 
are free to continue to use it. In light of today's automated system, 
however, we do not believe that mandating its continued use is 
warranted.
3. Construction Period for General Aviation Ground Stations
    50. Section 22.815 provides that ``[t]he construction period (see 
Sec.  22.142) for general aviation ground stations is 12 months.'' We 
correct the reference in Sec.  22.815 to specify the actual rule 
section, Sec.  1.946.
4. AGRAS
    51. Section 22.819 provides that, after January 1, 1996, stations 
transmitting on the general aviation air-ground service channels must 
operate in compliance with the requirements set forth in the document, 
``Technical Reference, Air-ground Radiotelephone Automated Service 
(AGRAS), System Operation and Equipment Characteristics,'' dated April 
12, 1985. The industry is currently developing a new operating 
technology that may be superior to AGRAS.
    52. We delete Sec.  22.819. Our deletion of the rule does not mean 
that the AGRAS protocols are prohibited. To the contrary, technological 
advancements in this area may continue to utilize AGRAS protocols if 
developers believe it would be appropriate. We are unwilling at this 
time to mandate the use of a particular technology when the market is 
more suited to make these decisions. We also believe that it is 
unlikely that the industry would simply forsake the current users of 
these systems.

C. Revision of Part 22 Non-Cellular Rules

1. Scope and Authority
a. Authorization Required, General Eligibility, and Definitions
    53. Section 22.3(b) provides that, except for certain stations in 
the Rural Radiotelephone Service and the Air-Ground Radiotelephone 
Service, the operation by subscribers of mobile or fixed stations in 
the Public Mobile Services is covered by the authorization held by the 
common carrier providing service to them. Part 22 also contains other 
rules that use the term ``common carrier.'' Section 22.7 states that,

[[Page 19300]]

``except as otherwise provided in this part, existing and proposed 
common carriers are eligible to hold authorizations in the Public 
Mobile Services.'' We also pointed out that several of the definitions 
contained in Sec.  22.99 include references to the term ``common 
carrier.'' Finally, we observed that the distinctions previously drawn 
between a radio common carrier and a wireline common carrier under the 
part 22 rules became obsolete in 1984.
    54. We revise Sec. Sec.  22.3(b), 22.7, and 22.99 by replacing the 
term ``common carrier'' with the term ``licensee,'' and thus deleting 
the requirement that licensees in part 22 services be common carriers. 
We also revise Sec.  22.1(b) to delete the reference to ``domestic 
common carrier,'' and Sec.  22.401 to delete the words ``Communications 
common carriers'' and replace with the words ``Eligible entities (see 
Sec.  22.7).'' Section 22.351, regarding channel assignments, should be 
similarly amended. Finally, we delete the definitions for Radio Common 
Carrier and Wireline Common Carrier, as these terms are no longer used 
in part 22, and correct references to the term ``Air-ground 
Radiotelephone Service'' contained in several definitions in Sec.  
22.99 to read ``Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service.''
2. Licensing Requirements and Procedures
a. Construction Prior to Grant of Application
    55. Section 22.143(d)(4) of our rules provides that, for any pre-
grant construction or alteration that would exceed the requirements of 
Sec.  17.7, the licensee must notify the FAA and file a request for 
antenna height clearance and obstruction and marking specifications 
(FCC Form 854) with the FCC, PRB, Support Services Branch, Gettysburg, 
PA 17325. The correct filing location for FCC Form 854 is WTB, Spectrum 
Management Resources and Technologies Division, 1270 Fairfield Road, 
Gettysburg, PA 17325. We revise FCC Form 854 accordingly, and we amend 
Sec.  22.143(d)(4) of our rules to include this updated address.
b. Computation of Distance
    56. We recodify Sec.  22.157 as new Sec.  1.958 in part 1, subpart 
F. This will make the Sec.  22.157 distance calculation method 
applicable to all Wireless Radio Services described in parts 1 (except 
parts 21 and 101 as explained below), 20, 22, 24, 27, 80, 87, 90, 95, 
and 97, and supersede any conflicting regulations in these parts. We 
note that software used by the Commission to process applications under 
parts 21 (Domestic Public Fixed Radio Services) and 101 (Fixed 
Microwave Services) is programmed to round the result of a distance 
calculation to the nearest tenth of a kilometer. Accordingly, we 
include language in new Sec.  1.958 to indicate that distance 
calculations for applications under these parts must be rounded to the 
nearest tenth of a kilometer.
c. Computation of Terrain Elevation
    57. We recodify Sec.  22.159 as new Sec.  1.959 in part 1, subpart 
F. Part 90 services in the 470-512 MHz band, due to their proximity to 
TV operations, will continue to be governed by Sec.  90.309(a)(4). 
Thus, all wireless services under parts 1, 20, 22, 24, 27, 80, 87, 90 
(except the 470-512 MHz band), 95, 97 and 101 will be subject to the 
same computation methodology.
d. ASSB
    58. Section 22.161 sets forth application requirements for base 
stations in the Paging and Radiotelephone Service, Rural Radiotelephone 
Service, and Offshore Radiotelephone Service where the applicant 
proposes to employ amplitude compandored single sideband modulation 
(ASSB). We delete Sec.  22.161. This rule section is obsolete in light 
of Sec.  22.357, which permits part 22 licensees to use any emission 
type that complies with applicable emission limits.
3. Operational and Technical Requirements
a. Channel Assignment Policy
    59. Section 22.351 sets forth the general policy for the assignment 
of PMS channels. The third sentence of this section uses the term 
``common carrier.'' We amend Sec.  22.351 to replace the term ``common 
carrier'' with the term ``licensee.''
b. Interference Protection
    60. Section 22.352 provides, in pertinent part, that PMS licensees 
shall be considered non-interfering if they operate in accordance with 
FCC rules that provide technical channel assignment criteria for the 
radio service or channels involved, all other applicable FCC rules, and 
the terms and conditions of their authorizations. We modify the 
relevant portion of Sec.  22.352 to read ``Public Mobile Service 
stations operating in accordance with applicable FCC rules and the 
terms and conditions of their authorizations are normally considered to 
be non-interfering.'' The streamlined wording we adopt more accurately 
reflects how the Commission currently addresses interference issues, as 
we make clear that operation consistent with Commission rules and the 
applicable authorization--whether on a site-by-site basis or on a 
geographic area basis--creates a presumption of non-interfering 
operation.
c. Emission Types and Emission Masks
    61. An emission mask is defined as ``[t]he design limits imposed, 
as a condition or certification, on the mean power of emissions as a 
function of frequency both within the authorized bandwidth and in the 
adjacent spectrum.'' Section 22.357 provides that any authorized PMS 
station may use any type of emission provided that it complies with the 
appropriate emission mask. Section 22.359 is the general emission mask 
rule. Section 22.861 is the emission limitations and mask rule for 
commercial aviation air-ground systems. At the time the Commission 
adopted the part 22 rules, it generally used the emission mask approach 
to regulate in-band energy distribution. Recently, however, the 
Commission has been decreasing its reliance on the use of emission 
masks as a means to limit interference and, instead, increased its 
reliance on the use of out-of-band emission (OOBE) limits. The salient 
difference between emission masks and OOBE limits is that OOBE limits 
do not limit emission levels within a particular frequency band. 
Rather, they are intended to limit emissions outside of the authorized 
bandwidth.
    62. Consistent with the recent increased use of OOBE limits, we 
replace the emission mask requirements found in Sec. Sec.  22.357, 
22.359, and 22.861 with an OOBE limitation. We believe that OOBE 
limitations are preferable to emission masks for the PMS because OOBE 
limitations do not need to be revised every time a new technology is 
implemented (unlike emission masks). Moreover, OOBE limitations make 
more sense with channels that are often combined in blocks, since there 
is no need for a single licensee on adjacent channels to be required to 
use an emission mask on each channel to protect itself. OOBE 
limitations protect services operating beyond the outer edges of the 
channel block. Emission masks require protection of each individual 
channel within the block.
d. Standby Facilities
    63. Section 22.361 permits PMS licensees to install standby 
transmitters, without separate authorization, to continue service in 
the event of transmitter failure or during transmitter maintenance. It 
is now universally understood in the wireless industry that licensees 
are not required to obtain a separate authorization to install standby

[[Page 19301]]

transmitters. Eliminating Sec.  22.361 is warranted. We also note that 
doing so is in line with our desire to streamline or eliminate rules 
that are no longer necessary. Thus, we eliminate Sec.  22.361.
e. Directional Antennas
    64. Section 22.363 and Table C-2 to Sec.  22.361 set forth 
directional antenna technical requirements. These requirements were 
adopted at a time when the Commission generally considered fixed 
wireless operations to be secondary to mobile operations. These 
regulations appear to no longer be necessary because, when the 
Commission licenses spectrum today, it provides greater flexibility to 
licensees to use the spectrum for mobile or fixed operations. We 
eliminate Sec.  22.363 and Table C-2 to Sec.  22.361.
f. Wave Polarization
    65. Section 22.367 sets forth polarization requirements for the 
electromagnetic waves radiated by PMS providers. Where fixed and mobile 
services operate on a co-channel basis, the polarization restrictions 
may no longer be necessary or effective in reducing interference. We 
delete Sec.  22.367.
g. Access to Transmitters
    66. Section 22.373 generally requires PMS transmitters to be 
accessible only to persons authorized by the licensee. We remove Sec.  
22.373 from our rules. We believe that the rule is unnecessary due to 
the fact that licensees have an economic self-interest to prevent 
unauthorized access to their transmitters.
h. Replacement of Equipment
    67. Section 22.379 permits PMS licensees to replace equipment 
without notifying the Commission, provided that such equipment meets 
certain technical requirements. Licensees have known since the rule 
change in 1994 that applications are not required for replacement 
equipment.
    68. We therefore eliminate Sec.  22.379.
i. Auxiliary Test Transmitters
    69. Section 22.381 limits the use of auxiliary test transmitters to 
testing the performance of fixed receiving equipment located remotely 
from the control point. Section 22.381 further provides that such 
transmitters may only transmit on channels designated for mobile 
transmitters. We believe that Sec.  22.381 unnecessarily restricts the 
use of test equipment, and therefore we eliminate this section from our 
rules. We are aware of no harm that would arise from operating 
auxiliary test transmitters on any authorized channel, whether base or 
mobile, and no commenters have suggested otherwise.
4. Developmental Authorizations
    70. Part 22, subpart D--which includes Sec. Sec.  22.401, 22.403, 
22.409, 22.411, 22.413, 22.415, and 22.417--governs grant of 
developmental authorizations in the PMS. As pointed out in the Notice, 
a review of Commission records indicates that these rules are seldom 
used and, instead, parties frequently file waiver requests that are 
tantamount to requests for developmental authorizations.
a. Developmental Authorization of 43 MHz Paging Transmitters
    71. Sections 22.411 and 22.531(a) provide that 43 MHz channels can 
be initially assigned only as developmental authorizations. The 
requirements of Sec. Sec.  22.411 and 22.531(a) are intended to 
mitigate interference with the intermediate frequency stages of 
receivers in television sets and video recorders. Section 22.411 also 
requires licensees to conduct and file semi-annual surveys during the 
first two years of operation to determine the extent of any 
interference to broadcast television receivers. We believe that 
Sec. Sec.  22.411 and 22.531(a) are no longer required. Modern NTSC 
televisions are no longer particularly vulnerable to interference from 
the 43 MHz paging frequencies. Previously, television sets utilized an 
intermediate frequency amplifier that converted the received channel to 
a frequency between 40 and 46 MHz. New television sets, on the other 
hand, no longer employ this type of technology. In addition, the number 
of licensees and new applications for these paging channels is minimal. 
Consequently, it appears that there is no need for developmental 
authorizations for 43 MHz paging transmitters, and we delete these 
sections of our rules.
b. Developmental Authorization of 928-960 MHz Fixed Transmitters
    72. Section 22.415 provides that channels in the 928-931 and 952-
960 MHz ranges may be assigned to fixed transmitters in point-to-
multipoint systems at short-spaced locations (i.e., those that do not 
meet the 70-mile separation requirement of Sec.  22.625(a)). The 
Commission cannot issue any developmental authorizations under Sec.  
22.415 unless it waives the licensing prohibition of Sec.  22.621. This 
language would no longer be necessary were we to adopt our proposal to 
eliminate Sec.  22.415. In light of the prohibition in Sec.  22.621 
against licensing any new 900 MHz frequencies, we eliminate Sec.  
22.415 and modify Sec.  22.625(a) by eliminating all text following the 
first sentence that pertains to short-spaced developmental 
authorizations under Sec.  22.415.
c. Developmental Authorization of Meteor Burst Systems
    73. Section 22.417 provides that Rural Radiotelephone Service (RRS) 
central office and rural subscriber stations in Alaska may use ``meteor 
burst'' propagation modes. Meteor burst systems bounce radio signals 
off the ionized trails of evaporating space rocks to receivers up to 
1,000 miles away. Meteor burst technology, however, only works in brief 
spurts because a typical meteor trail has an average duration of a few 
hundred milliseconds, while wait times between suitable trails can 
range from a few seconds to minutes. As such, the technology is well-
suited for bursty data transmissions but is not suitable for a 
continuous voice call. Section 22.725(c) provides that channels 42.40, 
44.10, 44.20 and 45.90 MHz may be used for such purposes in Alaska. 
Section 22.729 governs station operations using meteor burst 
propagation modes on these channels. There are no part 22 licensees on 
these channels in Alaska, although there are some licenses issued under 
part 90.
    74. We do not believe that RRS stations in Alaska would benefit 
from maintaining the licensing option under Sec. Sec.  22.417, 
22.725(c), and 22.729, and we delete these section from our rules. 
Currently, there are no licensees taking advantage of these rules. In 
addition, as a practical matter, meteor burst propagation cannot be 
used to transmit voice calls, which is at the core of the RRS. We also 
delete the definition of ``meteor burst propagation mode'' in Sec.  
22.99, the Sec.  22.313(a)(3) station identification requirements for 
Rural Radiotelephone Service subscriber stations using meteor burst 
propagation, and the Sec.  22.727(f) limits on transmitter output power 
for meteor burst stations.
5. Paging and Radiotelephone Service Rules
a. Composite Interference Contour Over Water
    75. Under Sec.  1.929(c)(1), any increase in the composite 
interference contour (CIC) of a site-based licensee in the Paging and 
Radiotelephone Service, Rural Radiotelephone Service, or 800 MHz 
Specialized Mobile Radio Service is a major modification of license 
that requires prior Commission approval. In March 2001, the Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau conditionally waived Sec.  1.929(c)(1) to

[[Page 19302]]

permit expansion of paging CICs over water on a secondary basis.
    76. We amend Sec.  1.929(c)(1) and treat expansions of the CIC of a 
site-based licensee in the Paging and Radiotelephone Service, Rural 
Radiotelephone Service, or 800 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio Service 
over water, on