Private Land Mobile Radio Services, 23799-23803 [E9-11908]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 97 / Thursday, May 21, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Adoptions Act signed into law on
October 7, 2008 after the publication of
the final rule September 26, 2008. For
example, the new law raises a set of
questions about whether data
maintained through the Federal Parent
Locator Service and the State Parent
Locator Service are available to assist
State child welfare agencies in carrying
out their responsibilities to locate adult
relatives of children removed from
parental custody in order to identify
potential placements.
The other substantive comment raised
similar concerns regarding PCAs. In
particular, the commenter was
concerned with the PCAs being an
‘‘agent of the child’’ for the purpose of
locate requests under section 453 of the
Social Security Act. The commenter
believes that the PCA in child support
matters represents the parent, not the
child, thus is not ‘‘the agent of the
child’’ and is not authorized to receive
any Federal Parent Locator Service
information from the IV–D agency. The
commenter also suggested that similar
to the access provided to title IV Social
Security Act programs, human service
programs serving the same family as the
child support program should have
clear and unambiguous access to
Federal information. For example, the
commenter encouraged the Office of
Child Support Enforcement to provide
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program access to child support
information to determine income
eligibility.
Response: The Department believes
that the comments received on the
notice published in the Federal Register
on April 15, 2009 [74 FR 17445]
soliciting comments on the delay in the
effective date of the rule support the
delay in the effective date until
December 30, 2010. While the
substantive comments on the policies
contained in the rule were not solicited,
the delay will provide time for
Department officials to assess those
comments as well as review all issues of
law and policy raised by the rule.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.563, Child Support
Enforcement)
Dated: May 18, 2009.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–11936 Filed 5–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:12 May 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 90
[WP Docket No. 07–100; FCC 09–29]
Private Land Mobile Radio Services
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This document addresses
revisions to the Commission’s rules and
policies regarding private land mobile
radio (PLMR) services and particularly
public safety operations. In the Report
and Order portion of this document, the
Commission accords primary status to
4.9 GHz band permanent fixed stations
that are used to deliver broadband
service; harmonizes output power
measurement procedures for 4.9 GHz
technology with procedures for similar
devices that are regulated by part 15 of
the Commission’s rules; and clarifies
that cross-band repeaters are permitted
for all public safety systems. The
Commission makes these changes to
reduce uncertainty in the rules and
harmonize the rules. The intended effect
for public safety licensees is to allow
additional flexibility, create
opportunities for public safety users to
benefit from speedier deployment of
new technologies in the 4.9 GHz band,
and lead to expanded use of 4.9 GHz
broadband networks. The intended
effect for manufacturers is to allow
technologies similar to those covered by
part 15 to be used in the 4.9 GHz band,
resulting in speedier deployment of new
technologies in this band. The intended
effect of the cross-banding rule change
is to enhance communications among
public safety agencies operating in
various frequency bands.
DATES: Effective June 22, 2009.
ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for locations where the
public may inspect, copy, or purchase
hardcopies of the Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Eng, Policy Division, Public
Safety and Homeland Bureau, Federal
Communications Commission,
Washington, DC 20554, at (202) 418–
0019, TTY (202) 418–7233, via e-mail at
Thomas.Eng@fcc.gov, or via U.S. Mail at
Federal Communications Commission,
Public Safety and Homeland Security
Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Report and Order
portion of the Commission’s Report and
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23799
Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in WP Docket No. 07–100,
adopted on April 7, 2009 and released
on April 9, 2009. The complete text of
this document is available for
inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference
Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY–A257,
Washington, DC 20554. This document
may also be purchased from the
Commission’s duplicating contractor,
Best Copy and Printing, Inc., in person
at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554, via telephone at
(202) 488–5300, via facsimile at (202)
488–5563, or via e-mail at
FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Alternative
formats (computer diskette, large print,
audio cassette, and Braille) are available
to persons with disabilities or by
sending an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or
calling the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418–0530, TTY
(202) 418–0432. This document is also
available on the Commission’s Web site
at https://www.fcc.gov.
The major decisions in the Report and
Order are as follows:
• Amends § 90.1207 of the
Commission’s rules, which governs
licensing of the 4.9 GHz band, to grant
primary status to stand-alone permanent
fixed links that are used to deliver
broadband service and permanent fixed
links that connect 4.9 GHz base and
mobile stations that are used to deliver
broadband services, as well as other
public safety networks using spectrum
designated for broadband use.
• Amends § 90.1215 of the
Commission’s rules to require the same
output power measurement procedures
for 4.9 GHz technology as those required
for devices that use digital modulation
techniques and are regulated by part 15
of the Commission’s rules.
• Continues to permit paging
operations on Very High Frequency
(VHF) public safety frequencies.
• Modifies the existing language in
§ 90.243(b)(1) to clarify that cross-band
repeaters are permitted for all public
safety systems.
• Declines to amend § 90.20 to
authorize privately-run metropolitan
transit systems to use frequencies in the
Public Safety Pool.
4.9 GHz Band
In the earlier Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM), 72 FR 35190, June
27, 2007, in this proceeding, the
Commission sought comment on two
proposals by M/A–COM to modify the
Commission’s rules regarding the 4.9
GHz band. First, M/A–COM asks the
Commission for an amendment to
§ 90.1207(c) that would ‘‘clarify that
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
23800
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 97 / Thursday, May 21, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
point-to-point and point-to-multipoint
fixed links in the 4.9 GHz public safety
networks are co-primary with mobile
links’’ and ‘‘grant primary status to fixed
links connecting public safety networks
with each other using the 4940–4990
MHz band.’’ Second, M/A-COM
proposes to add a new § 90.1215(d)
thereby updating this section
‘‘consistent with changes the
Commission * * * made to § 15.407(a)
of its rules’’ (i.e., reflecting the same
revised measurement procedures
adopted by the Commission for devices
that use digital modulation techniques
regulated by part 15).
Primary Status to Certain Fixed Links.
§ 90.1207 currently provides 4.9 GHz
licensees with authority to ‘‘operate
base and mobile units (including
portable and handheld units) and
operate temporary (1 year or less) fixed
stations,’’ but not to ‘‘operate permanent
fixed point-to-point stations.’’ Further,
§ 90.2107 provides that ‘‘[l]icensees
choosing to operate [permanent fixed
point-to-point stations] must license
them individually on a site-by-site
basis’’ and ‘‘will be authorized only on
a secondary, non-interference basis to
base, mobile and temporary fixed
operations.’’ In its petition seeking
clarifications regarding the 4.9 GHz
band rules, M/A–COM states that ‘‘the
Commission did not define * * * [the]
allocation status of hot spots or
temporary fixed links, i.e., whether such
hot spots and links have primary or
secondary status, and the Commission’s
part 90 rules do not address the
allocation status of such links.’’
Therefore, M/A–COM states that the
‘‘present part 90 rules create regulatory
uncertainty—as they are vague or
potentially inconsistent with the 4.9
GHz Third Report and Order, 68 FR
38635, June 30, 2003—and could
discourage public safety users and first
responders from deploying * * *
broadband networks.’’ M/A–COM states
that ‘‘public safety users and first
responders will need integrated
networks with scalable network
architectures that allow for dynamic
routing of traffic over both fixed and
mobile links,’’ and thus proposes that
the Commission amend its part 90 rules
to ‘‘grant primary status to point-topoint and point-to-multipoint fixed
links that are part of a 4.9 GHz public
safety network.’’ M/A–COM adds that
‘‘the Commission should continue to
grant secondary status to traditional,
stand-alone point-to-point links for
purposes such as backhaul.’’
The Commission sought comment on
‘‘M/A–COM’s proposal to expressly
afford primary status to certain
permanent fixed links,’’ while also
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:12 May 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
asking if, ‘‘given the limited amount of
spectrum in the 4.9 GHz band,
permitting fixed operations on a
primary basis may result in severely
limiting the spectral availability and
reliability of both permanent and ad hoc
mobile networks.’’ The Commission
asked whether ‘‘adoption of M/A–
COM’s proposal would compromise the
ability of public safety agencies to
utilize the band for temporary ‘incident
scene’ operations, a use that received
overwhelming support in the record of
WT Docket No. 00–32.’’ Finally, the
Commission asked if the M/A–COM
proposal would ‘‘provide more flexible
use of this band,’’ and whether ‘‘such
flexibility would come at the expense of
maintaining adequate spectrum for
mission-critical public safety mobile
operations.’’
Most commenters, including several
public safety organizations, indicate that
the Commission should clarify its rules
to afford primary status to fixed pointto-point and point-to-multipoint links
operating as part of an integrated 4.9
GHz public safety broadband network.
The American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO), the Land Mobile
Communications Council (LMCC), and
the National Public Safety
Telecommunications Council generally
support primary status for 4.9 GHz
permanent fixed links that deliver
broadband service.
We find that it is in the public interest
to clarify whether certain fixed links in
the 4.9 GHz band are primary or
secondary in order to facilitate public
safety broadband use of the band and to
minimize confusion in the marketplace.
In this regard, we modify our rules to
accord primary status to fixed links that
connect 4.9 GHz base and mobile
stations that are used to deliver
broadband service, as well as other
public safety networks using spectrum
designated for broadband use. We also
accord primary status to stand-alone
permanent fixed 4.9 GHz links that are
used to deliver broadband service, such
as a fixed video surveillance link used
to monitor a high-risk target or
environment. In contrast, fixed 4.9 GHz
links that only connect narrowband base
stations operating in public safety bands
not designated for broadband (i.e.,
public safety UHF, VHF, narrowband
700 MHz, and 800 MHz) to other
networks, or serve to backhaul
narrowband traffic originating from
narrowband base stations, will remain
secondary. We limit primary status to
fixed links in this manner to preserve
and ensure the use of the 4.9 GHz public
safety band in serving broadband needs.
We believe that proper frequency
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
coordination among public safety
agencies in a given location will ensure
that different services and technologies
can operate unimpeded without causing
interference. We want to make certain
that public safety can reliably establish
broadband networks (e.g., permanent or
temporary hot-spot networks) to
transmit broadband data without
concern of interference. Consistent with
existing rules, permanent fixed point-topoint and to point-to-multipoint links
accorded primary status must use
directional antennas with gains over 9
dBi up to 26 dBi. Permanent fixed links
used for traditional backhaul that only
carry narrowband traffic remain
secondary and must be licensed
separately, as specified in § 90.1207(d).
We find that this rule change is
consistent with the Commission’s vision
for the 4.9 GHz band and is supported
by public safety commenters. The
Commission endeavored to provide 4.9
GHz band public safety licensees with
the maximum operational flexibility
practicable consistent with its vision for
the 4.9 GHz band. We believe that
providing primary status for fixed links
as described above will provide
additional flexibility for public safety
and thereby lead to expanded use of 4.9
GHz broadband networks. Finally, we
find that the rule change addresses
concerns about the uncertainty that
secondary status may introduce in 4.9
GHz broadband networks utilizing fixed
point-to-point or point-to-multipoint
links. In sum, we find that this rule
change serves the public interest by
encouraging public safety users to more
fully utilize the 4.9 GHz band in support
of broadband communications.
Next, we address licensing issues for
primary permanent fixed stations. The
record in this proceeding contains
support for licensing all permanent
fixed stations on an individual, site-bysite basis. This would ensure that
adequate data is readily available to
facilitate interference protection and
resolution. Accordingly, we shall
license permanent fixed stations, both
designated as primary or secondary, on
an individual, site-by-site basis.
However, as we explain in the Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(published elsewhere in this issue)
portion of this document, we have
concerns about ensuring interference
protection among primary permanent
fixed stations, and we tentatively
conclude therein that a more formal
licensee-to-licensee coordination
process may be necessary for such
stations. Accordingly, until the
Commission resolves a potential new
coordination requirement, applicants
seeking primary status for 4.9 GHz
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 97 / Thursday, May 21, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
permanent fixed stations must ensure
that they meet the minimum
requirements of § 90.1209(b).
Further, we believe it prudent to
distinguish between primary permanent
fixed stations and secondary stations in
our licensing database. The Commission
has established station class codes in
the past to distinguish between
licensees that are subject to different
regulatory requirements on the same set
of frequencies. Similarly, in this
instance, establishing a new class code
for primary permanent fixed stations
will assist interested stakeholders as
well as the Commission’s licensing staff
to distinguish between primary and
secondary permanent fixed stations.
Accordingly, we delegate to the Chief,
Public Safety and Homeland Security
Bureau, authority to issue a public
notice announcing the establishment of
a new 4.9 GHz primary permanent fixed
station class code. The public notice
also will provide licensees holding
permanent fixed stations with
instructions for modifying their
authorizations to reflect the new station
class code.
Measurement Procedures. In the
NPRM, the Commission also proposed,
as suggested by M/A–COM, to amend
§ 90.1215 to reflect the same
measurement procedures adopted by the
Commission for devices that use digital
modulation techniques and are
regulated by part 15 of the rules.
Specifically, in 2004, the Commission
modified part 15 to permit the
determination of a device’s output
power by using average power
measurements in addition to the
existing peak output power
measurement method. M/A–COM
proposed replacing the term ‘‘peak
transmit power’’ with ‘‘maximum
conducted output power,’’ and adding a
peak excursion ratio limit. These
changes would make the measurement
procedures in §§ 90.1215 and 15.407(a)
virtually identical.
We agree with the majority of
commenters who believe that the
proposed measurement procedures
should be adopted to harmonize the
measurement procedures for similar
unlicensed devices that use digital
modulation techniques and operate in
nearby frequency bands under part 15.
Given that manufacturers are
considering technologies similar to
those covered by part 15 for use in the
4.9 GHz band, and because parallel
treatment will speed deployment of new
technologies in this band for the benefit
of public safety users, we conclude that
measurement procedures under the part
15 rules and the 4.9 GHz rules should
be consistent.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:12 May 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
Miscellaneous 4940–4990 MHz Band
Technical Matter. Motorola believes that
the NPRM contains a typographical
error in the proposed revision to the text
of § 90.1215(a). Specifically, Motorola
observes that the text of the proposed
change to § 90.1215(a) referred to a peak
power spectral density limit of 20 dBm
per megahertz, rather than 21 dBm per
megahertz, which had been the existing
requirement. Motorola urges the
Commission to retain the existing 21
dBm per megahertz limit in order to
maximize coverage and robustness of
public safety transmissions. The
Commission did not intend to propose
a change to the 21 dBm per megahertz
limit, as evidenced by a lack of related
discussion in the NPRM text.
Accordingly, we clarify that we are
retaining the existing 21 dBm per
megahertz limit.
Miscellaneous Proposals
Part 90 Paging on Public Safety VHF
Frequencies. VHF public safety
frequencies (150–174 MHz) are used
primarily for two-way voice
communications (e.g., mobile dispatch).
The Commission’s rules, however, also
allow for paging operations on these
frequencies. As the Commission
observed in the NPRM, experience has
shown that paging and two-way voice
operations can generally co-exist on the
same channel in the same area without
interference, provided the paging
transmissions are infrequent (low traffic
volume) and the paging licensee
monitors the channels before
transmitting. Experience also has shown
that the potential for paging to interfere
with voice operations tends to increase
as the amount of paging traffic
increases.
The Commission previously
expressed concern about the potential
incompatibility between high-volume
paging operations and public safety twoway voice communications operating on
VHF frequencies. To address the
possibility of interference in these
situations, the Commission sought
comment on whether paging operations
conducted pursuant to § 90.22 on VHF
public safety frequencies should be
restricted, especially on those
frequencies reserved under the rules for
mutual aid/interoperability
communications.
The majority of commenters
expressed support for continuing to
permit paging operations on all VHF
public safety frequencies. They assert
that restrictions on paging operations on
VHF public safety frequencies would
result in a significant, negative impact
on the ability of public safety agencies
to provide mission-critical notifications.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23801
Other commenters note that search and
rescue operations have experienced
similar intolerable interference from
hospital paging operations, or support
an elimination of paging on certain
shared or mutual aid frequencies that
are monitored by public safety and
medical personnel.
We take seriously the potential for
interference that may result from paging
operations to two-way public safety
voice communications. However, the
record demonstrates substantial reliance
by fire and EMS departments on the use
of paging on VHF frequencies. The
Commission did not receive any specific
reports in the comments that hospital
paging systems’ disruption of two-way
voice communications is a continuing
problem. Accordingly, based on the
record before us, we cannot conclude
that paging operations conducted on
VHF frequencies pursuant to § 90.22,
including on specific mutual aid
channels, represent an interference risk
to VHF public safety frequencies at this
time.
In reaching this decision, we note that
many of the concerns raised by
commenters appear to concern paging
operations permitted under
§ 90.20(d)(10), which was not the
subject of the Commission’s inquiry in
the NPRM. In other words, the
Commission did not intend to propose
limiting operations conducted by public
safety licensees for one-way paging to
ambulance and rescue squad personnel.
Regardless, we take no action to restrict
paging operations in the VHF bands,
whether conducted pursuant to § 90.22
or § 90.20(d)(10). The record shows
paging transmissions to be a proven and
cost-effective way to recall first
responders when emergency incidents
occur. We also find persuasive
comments from the public safety
community that prohibiting or
otherwise restricting paging operations
on VHF public safety frequencies would
have a disruptive impact on a number
of local communities that currently rely
heavily on existing VHF paging
operations as integral to their public
safety operations. We are particularly
concerned with the potential disruptive
effects that paging restrictions would
have on limiting the availability of
emergency communications or
hampering the ability of public safety
entities to provide services in a timely
manner to the public.
Rather than impose restrictions on
paging at this time, we find that
applications for future paging
operations should continue to be
licensed on a case-by-case basis in
tandem with the frequency coordination
process. In the absence of a more
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
23802
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 97 / Thursday, May 21, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
significant likelihood of harmful
interference involving paging and twoway operations, we are not inclined to
amend our rules where we believe the
existing mechanisms provide adequate
safeguards. We also encourage users of
VHF public safety frequencies,
including the mutual aid/
interoperability channels, to develop
and rely on frequency sharing and
priority access protocols to facilitate
local and regional emergency
coordination efforts.
While we decline to place new
restrictions on paging operations on
VHF public safety frequencies,
including mutual aid/interoperability
channels, we remain mindful of the
potential for paging transmissions to
cause harmful interference to voice
operations. Accordingly, should specific
instances of paging interference to twoway voice operations arise on the VHF
public safety frequencies, including the
mutual aid/interoperability channels,
we retain our discretion to revisit this
issue in the future and to take
appropriate action as warranted.
Cross-Banding. Section 90.243(b)(1)
states that ‘‘in the Public Safety Pool,
medical services systems in the 150–160
MHz band are permitted to be crossbanded for mobile and central stations
operations with mobile relay stations
authorized to operate in the 450–470
MHz band.’’ Because one could
interpret this rule to mean that only
medical services systems are permitted
to use cross-band repeaters, the NPRM
sought comment on a proposal to
modify the rule to state specifically that
cross-band repeaters are permitted for
all public safety systems.
All commenters who addressed this
issue agree that § 90.243(b)(1) should be
amended to clarify that cross-band
repeaters are permitted for all public
safety systems. Because the purpose of
the rule is not limited to medical
services systems but rather applies to all
eligible users of the Public Safety Pool,
we amend the rule accordingly. In this
respect, we ensure that all users of
public safety systems may confidently
employ cross-band repeaters and thus
enhance communications among public
safety agencies operating in various
frequency bands.
Transit Systems and Toll Roads.
Under the current rules, only state and
local governmental entities are eligible
to hold authorizations in the Public
Safety Pool. Thus, to the extent
metropolitan transit systems and toll
roads are publicly-operated services,
they are eligible to hold authorizations
in the Public Safety Pool. However, the
Commission noted in the NPRM that not
all metropolitan transit systems and toll
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:12 May 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
roads are publicly-owned. Some are
privately-owned, and operate under
contracts or similar arrangements with
governmental entities. Because nongovernmental entities are ineligible to
hold authorizations for Public Safety
Pool frequencies, the NPRM sought
comment on whether § 90.20 should be
amended to authorize privately-run
metropolitan transit systems and toll
road systems to hold authorizations to
use frequencies in the Public Safety
Pool.
The majority of commenters on this
issue state that private operators of
transit systems and toll roads should not
be eligible to hold licenses to operate on
public safety frequencies. For example,
according to AASHTO, while private
operators of transit systems and toll
roads should be able to use public safety
frequencies licensed to governmental
entities via contractual agreement,
public safety frequencies must remain
within the control of public entity
licensees. LMCC points out that the
Commission’s rules already allow a
licensee to designate an agent or thirdparty contractor of the licensee as the
control operator of its station, provided
that the licensee retains ultimate control
over the use of the spectrum. On the
other hand, the U.S. Department of
Transportation observes that, given the
‘‘role played and services offered by
private sector operators of public transit
systems are indistinguishable from their
traditional public sector counterparts
* * * the public or private sector origin
of the operator of the affected
infrastructure is immaterial.’’
In view of the record before us, we are
not persuaded to amend § 90.20 to
permit privately-run metropolitan
transit systems to be authorized on
frequencies in the Public Safety Pool.
Such an amendment to our rules would
undermine the rationale of the
Commission in restricting eligibility to
hold a license in the Public Safety Pool
in the first place. A chief reason for
establishing such eligibility in the first
instance was to assure that those public
safety entities specifically charged with
the protection of the life and property of
the general public have access to
spectrum.
The Commission’s other reasons for
establishing its eligibility requirements
in the Public Safety Pool were to
promote interoperability between all
entities involved in ensuring the safety
of life by allowing them to communicate
with one another, and remain consistent
with other Commission definitions of
public safety radio services. The
Commission indicated that restricting
Public Safety Pool eligibility in this
manner was not only consistent with
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the Commission’s definition of public
safety services in other contexts, but
also with the Public Safety Wireless
Advisory Committee’s definition of
public safety, reflected in its Final
Report.
Because state and local public
agencies share similar responsibilities
when it comes to safety of life and
protection of property, it is critical that,
especially during times of emergencies,
the deployment and use of Public Safety
Pool frequencies remain within the
control of these public safety agencies.
Control is best assured when such
licenses are held by public safety
eligibles only. The current rule ensures
that the continuity and expertise
underlying the coordination and
expansion of public safety
communications systems appropriately
remain with a region’s state and local
agencies. Consistent with the view of
the majority of commenters on this
issue, we find that the current rule
ensures that a local or State
governmental entity exercises
responsibility and accountability for the
use of the Public Safety Pool spectrum,
even if the contract with the private
entity either expires or terminates, or if
the private entity itself ceases to exist by
way of bankruptcy, merger, or other
organizational change. We therefore
decline to amend our rules with respect
to Public Safety Pool eligibility. Because
we decline to amend § 90.20, we need
not address the outstanding issues
raised in the NPRM on this issue
regarding the administrative criteria to
be used in the event we decided to
amend the rule.
Procedural Matters
Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission
has prepared a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis of the possible
impact of the rule changes contained in
the Report and Order portion of this
Report and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking on small entities.
The Final Regulatory Flexibility Act
analysis is set forth in Appendix D of
the Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The
Commission’s Consumer Information
Bureau, Reference Information Center,
will send a copy of this Report and
Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, including the Final
Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis, to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 97 / Thursday, May 21, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Analysis
This document does not contain new
or modified information collection(s)
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. In
addition, therefore, this document does
not contain any new or modified
‘‘information collection burden for
small business concerns with fewer than
25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
Congressional Review Act Analysis
The Commission will send a copy of
this Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in a
report to be sent to Congress and the
Government Accountability Office
pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Ordering Clauses
Accordingly, It is ordered, pursuant to
sections 4(i), 303(r), and 403 of the
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C.
154(i), 303(r), and 403, that this Report
and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is hereby
adopted.
It is further ordered that part 90 of the
Commission’s rules is amended as set
forth in Appendix B of the Report and
Order, and that these rules shall be
effective June 22, 2009.
It is further ordered that the
Commission’s Consumer Information
Bureau, Reference Information Center,
shall send a copy of this Report and
Order, including the Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the U.S. Small
Business Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 90
Communications equipment, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR part 90 as
follows:
■
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
PART 90—PRIVATE LAND MOBILE
RADIO SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 90
continues to read as follows:
■
Sections 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r) and
332(c)(7) of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 303(g),
303(r) and 332(c)(7).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:12 May 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
23803
devices using channel bandwidths other
than those listed above are permitted;
however, they are limited to peak power
spectral density of 21 dBm/MHz. If
§ 90.243 Mobile relay stations.
transmitting antennas of directional gain
*
*
*
*
*
greater than 9 dBi are used, both the
(b) * * *
maximum conducted output power and
(1) In the Public Safety Pool, systems
the peak power spectral density should
operating on any of the public safety
be reduced by the amount in decibels
frequencies listed in § 90.20(c) are
that the directional gain of the antenna
permitted to be cross-banded for mobile exceeds 9 dBi. However, high power
stations operations with mobile relay
point-to-point and point-to-multipoint
stations where such stations are
operations (both fixed and temporaryauthorized.
fixed rapid deployment) may employ
*
*
*
*
*
transmitting antennas with directional
■ 3. Section 90.1207 is amended by
gain up to 26 dBi without any
revising paragraph (d) to read as
corresponding reduction in the
follows:
maximum conducted output power or
spectral density. Corresponding
§ 90.1207 Licensing.
reduction in the maximum conducted
*
*
*
*
*
output power and peak power spectral
(d) Permanent fixed point-to-point
density should be the amount in
and point-to-multipoint stations in the
decibels that the directional gain of the
4940–4990 MHz band must be licensed
individually on a site-by-site basis. Such antenna exceeds 26 dBi.
(b) Low power devices are also
fixed stations that connect 4940–4990
MHz band base and mobile stations that limited to a peak power spectral density
are used to deliver broadband service, as of 8 dBm per one MHz. Low power
well as other public safety networks
devices using channel bandwidths other
using spectrum designated for
than those listed above are permitted;
broadband use, are accorded primary
however, they are limited to a peak
status. Primary status is also accorded to power spectral density of 8 dBm/MHz.
stand-alone permanent fixed 4940–4990 If transmitting antennas of directional
MHz band links that are used to deliver
gain greater than 9 dBi are used, both
broadband service. Primary permanent
the maximum conducted output power
fixed point-to-point and point-toand the peak power spectral density
multipoint stations must use directional should be reduced by the amount in
antennas with gains greater than 9 dBi
decibels that the directional gain of the
up to 26 dBi. Permanent fixed point-toantenna exceeds 9 dBi.
point stations that do not meet the
(c) The maximum conducted output
criteria for primary status will be
power is measured as a conducted
authorized only on a secondary, nonemission over any interval of
interference basis to base, mobile,
continuous transmission calibrated in
temporary fixed, and primary
terms of an RMS-equivalent voltage. If
permanent fixed operations.
the device cannot be connected directly,
■ 4. Section 90.1215 is amended by
alternative techniques acceptable to the
revising paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) and
Commission may be used. The
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
measurement results shall be properly
adjusted for any instrument limitations,
§ 90.1215 Power limits.
such as detector response times, limited
*
*
*
*
*
resolution bandwidth capability when
(a)(1) The maximum conducted
compared to the emission bandwidth,
output power should not exceed:
sensitivity, etc., so as to obtain a true
maximum conducted output power
High
Low power
power
measurement conforming to the
maximum
maximum
Channel bandwidth conducted conducted definitions in this paragraph for the
(MHz)
output
emission in question.
output
power
power
*
*
*
*
*
(dBm)
(dBm)
(e) The ratio of the peak excursion of
1 ............................
7
20 the modulation envelope (measured
5 ............................
14
27 using a peak hold function) to the
10 ..........................
17
30 maximum conducted output power
15 ..........................
18.8
31.8 shall not exceed 13 dB across any 1
20 ..........................
20
33 MHz bandwidth or the emission
bandwidth whichever is less.
(2) High power devices are also
[FR Doc. E9–11908 Filed 5–20–09; 8:45 am]
limited to a peak power spectral density
of 21 dBm per one MHz. High power
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
2. Section 90.243 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 97 (Thursday, May 21, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23799-23803]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11908]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 90
[WP Docket No. 07-100; FCC 09-29]
Private Land Mobile Radio Services
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document addresses revisions to the Commission's rules
and policies regarding private land mobile radio (PLMR) services and
particularly public safety operations. In the Report and Order portion
of this document, the Commission accords primary status to 4.9 GHz band
permanent fixed stations that are used to deliver broadband service;
harmonizes output power measurement procedures for 4.9 GHz technology
with procedures for similar devices that are regulated by part 15 of
the Commission's rules; and clarifies that cross-band repeaters are
permitted for all public safety systems. The Commission makes these
changes to reduce uncertainty in the rules and harmonize the rules. The
intended effect for public safety licensees is to allow additional
flexibility, create opportunities for public safety users to benefit
from speedier deployment of new technologies in the 4.9 GHz band, and
lead to expanded use of 4.9 GHz broadband networks. The intended effect
for manufacturers is to allow technologies similar to those covered by
part 15 to be used in the 4.9 GHz band, resulting in speedier
deployment of new technologies in this band. The intended effect of the
cross-banding rule change is to enhance communications among public
safety agencies operating in various frequency bands.
DATES: Effective June 22, 2009.
ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for locations where the public
may inspect, copy, or purchase hardcopies of the Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Eng, Policy Division, Public
Safety and Homeland Bureau, Federal Communications Commission,
Washington, DC 20554, at (202) 418-0019, TTY (202) 418-7233, via e-mail
at Thomas.Eng@fcc.gov, or via U.S. Mail at Federal Communications
Commission, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, 445 12th
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Report and Order
portion of the Commission's Report and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in WP Docket No. 07-100, adopted on April 7, 2009
and released on April 9, 2009. The complete text of this document is
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in
the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased
from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing,
Inc., in person at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC
20554, via telephone at (202) 488-5300, via facsimile at (202) 488-
5563, or via e-mail at FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Alternative formats (computer
diskette, large print, audio cassette, and Braille) are available to
persons with disabilities or by sending an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or
calling the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530,
TTY (202) 418-0432. This document is also available on the Commission's
Web site at https://www.fcc.gov.
The major decisions in the Report and Order are as follows:
Amends Sec. 90.1207 of the Commission's rules, which
governs licensing of the 4.9 GHz band, to grant primary status to
stand-alone permanent fixed links that are used to deliver broadband
service and permanent fixed links that connect 4.9 GHz base and mobile
stations that are used to deliver broadband services, as well as other
public safety networks using spectrum designated for broadband use.
Amends Sec. 90.1215 of the Commission's rules to require
the same output power measurement procedures for 4.9 GHz technology as
those required for devices that use digital modulation techniques and
are regulated by part 15 of the Commission's rules.
Continues to permit paging operations on Very High
Frequency (VHF) public safety frequencies.
Modifies the existing language in Sec. 90.243(b)(1) to
clarify that cross-band repeaters are permitted for all public safety
systems.
Declines to amend Sec. 90.20 to authorize privately-run
metropolitan transit systems to use frequencies in the Public Safety
Pool.
4.9 GHz Band
In the earlier Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), 72 FR 35190,
June 27, 2007, in this proceeding, the Commission sought comment on two
proposals by M/A-COM to modify the Commission's rules regarding the 4.9
GHz band. First, M/A-COM asks the Commission for an amendment to Sec.
90.1207(c) that would ``clarify that
[[Page 23800]]
point-to-point and point-to-multipoint fixed links in the 4.9 GHz
public safety networks are co-primary with mobile links'' and ``grant
primary status to fixed links connecting public safety networks with
each other using the 4940-4990 MHz band.'' Second, M/A-COM proposes to
add a new Sec. 90.1215(d) thereby updating this section ``consistent
with changes the Commission * * * made to Sec. 15.407(a) of its
rules'' (i.e., reflecting the same revised measurement procedures
adopted by the Commission for devices that use digital modulation
techniques regulated by part 15).
Primary Status to Certain Fixed Links. Sec. 90.1207 currently
provides 4.9 GHz licensees with authority to ``operate base and mobile
units (including portable and handheld units) and operate temporary (1
year or less) fixed stations,'' but not to ``operate permanent fixed
point-to-point stations.'' Further, Sec. 90.2107 provides that
``[l]icensees choosing to operate [permanent fixed point-to-point
stations] must license them individually on a site-by-site basis'' and
``will be authorized only on a secondary, non-interference basis to
base, mobile and temporary fixed operations.'' In its petition seeking
clarifications regarding the 4.9 GHz band rules, M/A-COM states that
``the Commission did not define * * * [the] allocation status of hot
spots or temporary fixed links, i.e., whether such hot spots and links
have primary or secondary status, and the Commission's part 90 rules do
not address the allocation status of such links.'' Therefore, M/A-COM
states that the ``present part 90 rules create regulatory uncertainty--
as they are vague or potentially inconsistent with the 4.9 GHz Third
Report and Order, 68 FR 38635, June 30, 2003--and could discourage
public safety users and first responders from deploying * * * broadband
networks.'' M/A-COM states that ``public safety users and first
responders will need integrated networks with scalable network
architectures that allow for dynamic routing of traffic over both fixed
and mobile links,'' and thus proposes that the Commission amend its
part 90 rules to ``grant primary status to point-to-point and point-to-
multipoint fixed links that are part of a 4.9 GHz public safety
network.'' M/A-COM adds that ``the Commission should continue to grant
secondary status to traditional, stand-alone point-to-point links for
purposes such as backhaul.''
The Commission sought comment on ``M/A-COM's proposal to expressly
afford primary status to certain permanent fixed links,'' while also
asking if, ``given the limited amount of spectrum in the 4.9 GHz band,
permitting fixed operations on a primary basis may result in severely
limiting the spectral availability and reliability of both permanent
and ad hoc mobile networks.'' The Commission asked whether ``adoption
of M/A-COM's proposal would compromise the ability of public safety
agencies to utilize the band for temporary `incident scene' operations,
a use that received overwhelming support in the record of WT Docket No.
00-32.'' Finally, the Commission asked if the M/A-COM proposal would
``provide more flexible use of this band,'' and whether ``such
flexibility would come at the expense of maintaining adequate spectrum
for mission-critical public safety mobile operations.''
Most commenters, including several public safety organizations,
indicate that the Commission should clarify its rules to afford primary
status to fixed point-to-point and point-to-multipoint links operating
as part of an integrated 4.9 GHz public safety broadband network. The
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO), the Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC), and the
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council generally support
primary status for 4.9 GHz permanent fixed links that deliver broadband
service.
We find that it is in the public interest to clarify whether
certain fixed links in the 4.9 GHz band are primary or secondary in
order to facilitate public safety broadband use of the band and to
minimize confusion in the marketplace. In this regard, we modify our
rules to accord primary status to fixed links that connect 4.9 GHz base
and mobile stations that are used to deliver broadband service, as well
as other public safety networks using spectrum designated for broadband
use. We also accord primary status to stand-alone permanent fixed 4.9
GHz links that are used to deliver broadband service, such as a fixed
video surveillance link used to monitor a high-risk target or
environment. In contrast, fixed 4.9 GHz links that only connect
narrowband base stations operating in public safety bands not
designated for broadband (i.e., public safety UHF, VHF, narrowband 700
MHz, and 800 MHz) to other networks, or serve to backhaul narrowband
traffic originating from narrowband base stations, will remain
secondary. We limit primary status to fixed links in this manner to
preserve and ensure the use of the 4.9 GHz public safety band in
serving broadband needs. We believe that proper frequency coordination
among public safety agencies in a given location will ensure that
different services and technologies can operate unimpeded without
causing interference. We want to make certain that public safety can
reliably establish broadband networks (e.g., permanent or temporary
hot-spot networks) to transmit broadband data without concern of
interference. Consistent with existing rules, permanent fixed point-to-
point and to point-to-multipoint links accorded primary status must use
directional antennas with gains over 9 dBi up to 26 dBi. Permanent
fixed links used for traditional backhaul that only carry narrowband
traffic remain secondary and must be licensed separately, as specified
in Sec. 90.1207(d).
We find that this rule change is consistent with the Commission's
vision for the 4.9 GHz band and is supported by public safety
commenters. The Commission endeavored to provide 4.9 GHz band public
safety licensees with the maximum operational flexibility practicable
consistent with its vision for the 4.9 GHz band. We believe that
providing primary status for fixed links as described above will
provide additional flexibility for public safety and thereby lead to
expanded use of 4.9 GHz broadband networks. Finally, we find that the
rule change addresses concerns about the uncertainty that secondary
status may introduce in 4.9 GHz broadband networks utilizing fixed
point-to-point or point-to-multipoint links. In sum, we find that this
rule change serves the public interest by encouraging public safety
users to more fully utilize the 4.9 GHz band in support of broadband
communications.
Next, we address licensing issues for primary permanent fixed
stations. The record in this proceeding contains support for licensing
all permanent fixed stations on an individual, site-by-site basis. This
would ensure that adequate data is readily available to facilitate
interference protection and resolution. Accordingly, we shall license
permanent fixed stations, both designated as primary or secondary, on
an individual, site-by-site basis. However, as we explain in the
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (published elsewhere in this
issue) portion of this document, we have concerns about ensuring
interference protection among primary permanent fixed stations, and we
tentatively conclude therein that a more formal licensee-to-licensee
coordination process may be necessary for such stations. Accordingly,
until the Commission resolves a potential new coordination requirement,
applicants seeking primary status for 4.9 GHz
[[Page 23801]]
permanent fixed stations must ensure that they meet the minimum
requirements of Sec. 90.1209(b).
Further, we believe it prudent to distinguish between primary
permanent fixed stations and secondary stations in our licensing
database. The Commission has established station class codes in the
past to distinguish between licensees that are subject to different
regulatory requirements on the same set of frequencies. Similarly, in
this instance, establishing a new class code for primary permanent
fixed stations will assist interested stakeholders as well as the
Commission's licensing staff to distinguish between primary and
secondary permanent fixed stations. Accordingly, we delegate to the
Chief, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, authority to issue a
public notice announcing the establishment of a new 4.9 GHz primary
permanent fixed station class code. The public notice also will provide
licensees holding permanent fixed stations with instructions for
modifying their authorizations to reflect the new station class code.
Measurement Procedures. In the NPRM, the Commission also proposed,
as suggested by M/A-COM, to amend Sec. 90.1215 to reflect the same
measurement procedures adopted by the Commission for devices that use
digital modulation techniques and are regulated by part 15 of the
rules. Specifically, in 2004, the Commission modified part 15 to permit
the determination of a device's output power by using average power
measurements in addition to the existing peak output power measurement
method. M/A-COM proposed replacing the term ``peak transmit power''
with ``maximum conducted output power,'' and adding a peak excursion
ratio limit. These changes would make the measurement procedures in
Sec. Sec. 90.1215 and 15.407(a) virtually identical.
We agree with the majority of commenters who believe that the
proposed measurement procedures should be adopted to harmonize the
measurement procedures for similar unlicensed devices that use digital
modulation techniques and operate in nearby frequency bands under part
15. Given that manufacturers are considering technologies similar to
those covered by part 15 for use in the 4.9 GHz band, and because
parallel treatment will speed deployment of new technologies in this
band for the benefit of public safety users, we conclude that
measurement procedures under the part 15 rules and the 4.9 GHz rules
should be consistent.
Miscellaneous 4940-4990 MHz Band Technical Matter. Motorola
believes that the NPRM contains a typographical error in the proposed
revision to the text of Sec. 90.1215(a). Specifically, Motorola
observes that the text of the proposed change to Sec. 90.1215(a)
referred to a peak power spectral density limit of 20 dBm per
megahertz, rather than 21 dBm per megahertz, which had been the
existing requirement. Motorola urges the Commission to retain the
existing 21 dBm per megahertz limit in order to maximize coverage and
robustness of public safety transmissions. The Commission did not
intend to propose a change to the 21 dBm per megahertz limit, as
evidenced by a lack of related discussion in the NPRM text.
Accordingly, we clarify that we are retaining the existing 21 dBm per
megahertz limit.
Miscellaneous Proposals
Part 90 Paging on Public Safety VHF Frequencies. VHF public safety
frequencies (150-174 MHz) are used primarily for two-way voice
communications (e.g., mobile dispatch). The Commission's rules,
however, also allow for paging operations on these frequencies. As the
Commission observed in the NPRM, experience has shown that paging and
two-way voice operations can generally co-exist on the same channel in
the same area without interference, provided the paging transmissions
are infrequent (low traffic volume) and the paging licensee monitors
the channels before transmitting. Experience also has shown that the
potential for paging to interfere with voice operations tends to
increase as the amount of paging traffic increases.
The Commission previously expressed concern about the potential
incompatibility between high-volume paging operations and public safety
two-way voice communications operating on VHF frequencies. To address
the possibility of interference in these situations, the Commission
sought comment on whether paging operations conducted pursuant to Sec.
90.22 on VHF public safety frequencies should be restricted, especially
on those frequencies reserved under the rules for mutual aid/
interoperability communications.
The majority of commenters expressed support for continuing to
permit paging operations on all VHF public safety frequencies. They
assert that restrictions on paging operations on VHF public safety
frequencies would result in a significant, negative impact on the
ability of public safety agencies to provide mission-critical
notifications. Other commenters note that search and rescue operations
have experienced similar intolerable interference from hospital paging
operations, or support an elimination of paging on certain shared or
mutual aid frequencies that are monitored by public safety and medical
personnel.
We take seriously the potential for interference that may result
from paging operations to two-way public safety voice communications.
However, the record demonstrates substantial reliance by fire and EMS
departments on the use of paging on VHF frequencies. The Commission did
not receive any specific reports in the comments that hospital paging
systems' disruption of two-way voice communications is a continuing
problem. Accordingly, based on the record before us, we cannot conclude
that paging operations conducted on VHF frequencies pursuant to Sec.
90.22, including on specific mutual aid channels, represent an
interference risk to VHF public safety frequencies at this time.
In reaching this decision, we note that many of the concerns raised
by commenters appear to concern paging operations permitted under Sec.
90.20(d)(10), which was not the subject of the Commission's inquiry in
the NPRM. In other words, the Commission did not intend to propose
limiting operations conducted by public safety licensees for one-way
paging to ambulance and rescue squad personnel. Regardless, we take no
action to restrict paging operations in the VHF bands, whether
conducted pursuant to Sec. 90.22 or Sec. 90.20(d)(10). The record
shows paging transmissions to be a proven and cost-effective way to
recall first responders when emergency incidents occur. We also find
persuasive comments from the public safety community that prohibiting
or otherwise restricting paging operations on VHF public safety
frequencies would have a disruptive impact on a number of local
communities that currently rely heavily on existing VHF paging
operations as integral to their public safety operations. We are
particularly concerned with the potential disruptive effects that
paging restrictions would have on limiting the availability of
emergency communications or hampering the ability of public safety
entities to provide services in a timely manner to the public.
Rather than impose restrictions on paging at this time, we find
that applications for future paging operations should continue to be
licensed on a case-by-case basis in tandem with the frequency
coordination process. In the absence of a more
[[Page 23802]]
significant likelihood of harmful interference involving paging and
two-way operations, we are not inclined to amend our rules where we
believe the existing mechanisms provide adequate safeguards. We also
encourage users of VHF public safety frequencies, including the mutual
aid/interoperability channels, to develop and rely on frequency sharing
and priority access protocols to facilitate local and regional
emergency coordination efforts.
While we decline to place new restrictions on paging operations on
VHF public safety frequencies, including mutual aid/interoperability
channels, we remain mindful of the potential for paging transmissions
to cause harmful interference to voice operations. Accordingly, should
specific instances of paging interference to two-way voice operations
arise on the VHF public safety frequencies, including the mutual aid/
interoperability channels, we retain our discretion to revisit this
issue in the future and to take appropriate action as warranted.
Cross-Banding. Section 90.243(b)(1) states that ``in the Public
Safety Pool, medical services systems in the 150-160 MHz band are
permitted to be cross-banded for mobile and central stations operations
with mobile relay stations authorized to operate in the 450-470 MHz
band.'' Because one could interpret this rule to mean that only medical
services systems are permitted to use cross-band repeaters, the NPRM
sought comment on a proposal to modify the rule to state specifically
that cross-band repeaters are permitted for all public safety systems.
All commenters who addressed this issue agree that Sec.
90.243(b)(1) should be amended to clarify that cross-band repeaters are
permitted for all public safety systems. Because the purpose of the
rule is not limited to medical services systems but rather applies to
all eligible users of the Public Safety Pool, we amend the rule
accordingly. In this respect, we ensure that all users of public safety
systems may confidently employ cross-band repeaters and thus enhance
communications among public safety agencies operating in various
frequency bands.
Transit Systems and Toll Roads. Under the current rules, only state
and local governmental entities are eligible to hold authorizations in
the Public Safety Pool. Thus, to the extent metropolitan transit
systems and toll roads are publicly-operated services, they are
eligible to hold authorizations in the Public Safety Pool. However, the
Commission noted in the NPRM that not all metropolitan transit systems
and toll roads are publicly-owned. Some are privately-owned, and
operate under contracts or similar arrangements with governmental
entities. Because non-governmental entities are ineligible to hold
authorizations for Public Safety Pool frequencies, the NPRM sought
comment on whether Sec. 90.20 should be amended to authorize
privately-run metropolitan transit systems and toll road systems to
hold authorizations to use frequencies in the Public Safety Pool.
The majority of commenters on this issue state that private
operators of transit systems and toll roads should not be eligible to
hold licenses to operate on public safety frequencies. For example,
according to AASHTO, while private operators of transit systems and
toll roads should be able to use public safety frequencies licensed to
governmental entities via contractual agreement, public safety
frequencies must remain within the control of public entity licensees.
LMCC points out that the Commission's rules already allow a licensee to
designate an agent or third-party contractor of the licensee as the
control operator of its station, provided that the licensee retains
ultimate control over the use of the spectrum. On the other hand, the
U.S. Department of Transportation observes that, given the ``role
played and services offered by private sector operators of public
transit systems are indistinguishable from their traditional public
sector counterparts * * * the public or private sector origin of the
operator of the affected infrastructure is immaterial.''
In view of the record before us, we are not persuaded to amend
Sec. 90.20 to permit privately-run metropolitan transit systems to be
authorized on frequencies in the Public Safety Pool. Such an amendment
to our rules would undermine the rationale of the Commission in
restricting eligibility to hold a license in the Public Safety Pool in
the first place. A chief reason for establishing such eligibility in
the first instance was to assure that those public safety entities
specifically charged with the protection of the life and property of
the general public have access to spectrum.
The Commission's other reasons for establishing its eligibility
requirements in the Public Safety Pool were to promote interoperability
between all entities involved in ensuring the safety of life by
allowing them to communicate with one another, and remain consistent
with other Commission definitions of public safety radio services. The
Commission indicated that restricting Public Safety Pool eligibility in
this manner was not only consistent with the Commission's definition of
public safety services in other contexts, but also with the Public
Safety Wireless Advisory Committee's definition of public safety,
reflected in its Final Report.
Because state and local public agencies share similar
responsibilities when it comes to safety of life and protection of
property, it is critical that, especially during times of emergencies,
the deployment and use of Public Safety Pool frequencies remain within
the control of these public safety agencies. Control is best assured
when such licenses are held by public safety eligibles only. The
current rule ensures that the continuity and expertise underlying the
coordination and expansion of public safety communications systems
appropriately remain with a region's state and local agencies.
Consistent with the view of the majority of commenters on this issue,
we find that the current rule ensures that a local or State
governmental entity exercises responsibility and accountability for the
use of the Public Safety Pool spectrum, even if the contract with the
private entity either expires or terminates, or if the private entity
itself ceases to exist by way of bankruptcy, merger, or other
organizational change. We therefore decline to amend our rules with
respect to Public Safety Pool eligibility. Because we decline to amend
Sec. 90.20, we need not address the outstanding issues raised in the
NPRM on this issue regarding the administrative criteria to be used in
the event we decided to amend the rule.
Procedural Matters
Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission
has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis of the possible
impact of the rule changes contained in the Report and Order portion of
this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on
small entities. The Final Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis is set
forth in Appendix D of the Report and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau,
Reference Information Center, will send a copy of this Report and Order
and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Final
Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
of the Small Business Administration.
[[Page 23803]]
Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
This document does not contain new or modified information
collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, this document does not
contain any new or modified ``information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
Congressional Review Act Analysis
The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in a report to be sent to
Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Ordering Clauses
Accordingly, It is ordered, pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(r), and
403 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), and
403, that this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking is hereby adopted.
It is further ordered that part 90 of the Commission's rules is
amended as set forth in Appendix B of the Report and Order, and that
these rules shall be effective June 22, 2009.
It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer Information
Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Report
and Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 90
Communications equipment, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR part 90 as follows:
PART 90--PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES
0
1. The authority citation for part 90 continues to read as follows:
Sections 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r) and 332(c)(7) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161,
303(g), 303(r) and 332(c)(7).
0
2. Section 90.243 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 90.243 Mobile relay stations.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) In the Public Safety Pool, systems operating on any of the
public safety frequencies listed in Sec. 90.20(c) are permitted to be
cross-banded for mobile stations operations with mobile relay stations
where such stations are authorized.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 90.1207 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 90.1207 Licensing.
* * * * *
(d) Permanent fixed point-to-point and point-to-multipoint stations
in the 4940-4990 MHz band must be licensed individually on a site-by-
site basis. Such fixed stations that connect 4940-4990 MHz band base
and mobile stations that are used to deliver broadband service, as well
as other public safety networks using spectrum designated for broadband
use, are accorded primary status. Primary status is also accorded to
stand-alone permanent fixed 4940-4990 MHz band links that are used to
deliver broadband service. Primary permanent fixed point-to-point and
point-to-multipoint stations must use directional antennas with gains
greater than 9 dBi up to 26 dBi. Permanent fixed point-to-point
stations that do not meet the criteria for primary status will be
authorized only on a secondary, non-interference basis to base, mobile,
temporary fixed, and primary permanent fixed operations.
0
4. Section 90.1215 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b) and (c)
and adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 90.1215 Power limits.
* * * * *
(a)(1) The maximum conducted output power should not exceed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low power High power
maximum maximum
conducted conducted
Channel bandwidth (MHz) output output
power power
(dBm) (dBm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................... 7 20
5............................................... 14 27
10.............................................. 17 30
15.............................................. 18.8 31.8
20.............................................. 20 33
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) High power devices are also limited to a peak power spectral
density of 21 dBm per one MHz. High power devices using channel
bandwidths other than those listed above are permitted; however, they
are limited to peak power spectral density of 21 dBm/MHz. If
transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 9 dBi are used,
both the maximum conducted output power and the peak power spectral
density should be reduced by the amount in decibels that the
directional gain of the antenna exceeds 9 dBi. However, high power
point-to-point and point-to-multipoint operations (both fixed and
temporary-fixed rapid deployment) may employ transmitting antennas with
directional gain up to 26 dBi without any corresponding reduction in
the maximum conducted output power or spectral density. Corresponding
reduction in the maximum conducted output power and peak power spectral
density should be the amount in decibels that the directional gain of
the antenna exceeds 26 dBi.
(b) Low power devices are also limited to a peak power spectral
density of 8 dBm per one MHz. Low power devices using channel
bandwidths other than those listed above are permitted; however, they
are limited to a peak power spectral density of 8 dBm/MHz. If
transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 9 dBi are used,
both the maximum conducted output power and the peak power spectral
density should be reduced by the amount in decibels that the
directional gain of the antenna exceeds 9 dBi.
(c) The maximum conducted output power is measured as a conducted
emission over any interval of continuous transmission calibrated in
terms of an RMS-equivalent voltage. If the device cannot be connected
directly, alternative techniques acceptable to the Commission may be
used. The measurement results shall be properly adjusted for any
instrument limitations, such as detector response times, limited
resolution bandwidth capability when compared to the emission
bandwidth, sensitivity, etc., so as to obtain a true maximum conducted
output power measurement conforming to the definitions in this
paragraph for the emission in question.
* * * * *
(e) The ratio of the peak excursion of the modulation envelope
(measured using a peak hold function) to the maximum conducted output
power shall not exceed 13 dB across any 1 MHz bandwidth or the emission
bandwidth whichever is less.
[FR Doc. E9-11908 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P