Travelers' Information Stations, 50340-50345 [2013-20000]
Download as PDF
50340
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
3. In § 168.05, add, in alphabetical
order, the definition of the term ‘‘Double
hull tanker’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 168.05
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Double hull tanker means any selfpropelled tank vessel that is constructed
with both double bottom and double
sides in accordance with the provisions
of 33 CFR 157.10d.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Revise § 168.20 to read as follows:
§ 168.20
Applicable vessels.
The requirements of this part apply to
the following laden tankers of 5,000
gross tons or more:
(a) All single hull tankers on the
waters listed in § 168.40(a) and (b); and
(b) All double hull tankers on the
waters listed in § 168.40(a).
Dated: August 9, 2013.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and
Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2013–20075 Filed 8–16–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 90
[PS Docket No. 09–19; RM–11514 and RM–
11531; FCC 13–98]
Travelers’ Information Stations
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission clarifies and amends its
rules pertaining to public safety
Travelers’ Information Stations (TIS),
which Public Safety Pool-eligible
entities operate to transmit
noncommercial, travel-related
information over AM band frequencies
to motorists on a localized basis. First,
the Commission clarifies that
permissible content under the TIS rules
must continue to have a nexus to travel,
an emergency, or an imminent threat of
danger. Second, the Commission
clarifies that TIS licensees may transmit
any communications related directly to
the imminent safety-of-life or property,
and may transmit emergency
communications during a period of
emergency in which the normal
communication facilities are disrupted
as a result of hurricane, flood,
earthquake or similar disaster. Third,
the Commission partially removes the
present restriction on so-called ‘‘ribbon’’
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Aug 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
networks of TIS transmitters (i.e.,
multiple simulcast transmitters),
requiring only that simulcast TIS
transmissions be relevant to travelers in
the vicinity of each transmitter in the
network. Finally, the Commission
updates the definition of TIS in the
rules to replace the reference to the
former Local Government Radio Service
with a reference to the Public Safety
Pool. These rule changes will remove
confusion about what type of content is
permissible on the TIS, thus improving
administrative efficiency for the both
the Commission and TIS licensees.
DATES: Effective September 18, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Eng, Policy and Licensing
Division, Public Safety and Homeland
Security Bureau, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th
Street SW., Washington, DC 20554, at
(202) 418–0019, TTY (202) 418–7233, or
via email at Thomas.Eng@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
and Order in PS Docket No. 09–19; RM–
11514 and RM–11531; adopted July 18,
2013 and released on July 23, 2013. 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 email
at FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Alternative
formats (computer diskette, large print,
audio cassette, and Braille) are available
to persons with disabilities or by
sending an email 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.
Introduction
Currently, the Commission authorizes
Public Safety Pool-eligible entities to
use Travelers’ Information Stations (TIS)
to transmit noncommercial, travelrelated information over AM band
frequencies to motorists on a localized
basis. In this proceeding, we address the
scope of permissible operations under
our TIS rules in response to petitions
filed by Highway Information Systems
(HIS), the American Association of
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Information Radio Operators (AAIRO),
and the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO). The Commission invited
comment on the issues raised in these
three petitions in a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) adopted in 2010.
In today’s Report and Order, we both
clarify and amend our TIS rules in order
to promote a more efficient and effective
service. First, we clarify that permissible
content under the TIS rules must
continue to have a nexus to travel, an
emergency, or an imminent threat of
danger. Second, we amend § 90.242 of
our rules, which defines and authorizes
TIS, to cross-reference §§ 90.405(a)(1)
and 90.407 of the rules, which
respectively allow the use of all part 90
facilities, including TIS, for the
transmission of ‘‘any communications
related directly to the imminent safetyof-life or property,’’ and for emergency
communications ‘‘during a period of
emergency in which the normal
communication facilities are disrupted
as a result of hurricane, flood,
earthquake or similar disaster.’’ Third,
we partially remove the present
restriction on so-called ‘‘ribbon’’
networks of TIS transmitters (i.e.,
multiple simulcast transmitters),
requiring only that simulcast TIS
transmissions be relevant to travelers in
the vicinity of each transmitter in the
network. Finally, we update the
definition of TIS in § 90.7 to replace the
reference to the former Local
Government Radio Service with a
reference to the Public Safety Pool.
The rule changes in the Report and
Order serve either to clarify or to
modestly expand the operating
parameters of the TIS service. The costs
associated with these rule changes are
negligible because the changes impose
no investment or expenditure
requirements on any affected entities to
achieve compliance. The rule changes
will also remove confusion about what
type of content is permissible on the
TIS, thus improving administrative
efficiency for the both the Commission
and TIS licensees. Moreover, by
permitting the simulcasting of TIS
transmissions, the rule changes will
lower licensees’ operating costs because
licensees will no longer need to create
individual TIS transmissions for each
transmitter in a network.
Background
The Commission established TIS in
1977 in order to ‘‘establish an efficient
means of communicating certain kinds
of information to travelers over low
power radio transmitters licensed to
Local Government entities.’’ The
Commission specifically noted that such
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
stations had been used to reduce traffic
congestion and to transmit ‘‘road
conditions, travel restrictions, and
weather forecasts to motorists.’’ Further,
the Commission anticipated that TIS
also would be used to ‘‘transmit travel
related emergency messages concerning
natural disasters (e.g., forest fires,
floods, etc.), traffic accidents and
hazards, and related bulletins affecting
the immediate welfare of citizens.’’
Commercial broadcasters opposed the
creation of TIS, claiming that it would
duplicate information provided by
commercial broadcasts, including
‘‘comprehensive weather reports,
reports of traffic conditions, names of
gasoline stations, restaurants, and
lodging conveyed through advertising.’’
Some broadcasters contended that this
would siphon off advertising revenues,
while others argued that TIS operations
would cause impermissible interference
with their operations.
To address these concerns, the
Commission prohibited TIS operators
from transmitting commercial messages
and emphasized that strict limits would
be placed on other operational aspects
of TIS licenses, including limits on
authorized power levels. The
Commission also adopted power and
transmitter location limitations to
ensure that TIS operations typically
would be confined to the immediate
vicinity of specified, travel-related
areas. The Commission imposed the
transmitter location restriction with the
objective of limiting service to ‘‘the
traveler in the immediate vicinity of the
station.’’ Although the Commission did
not preclude TIS operations from using
multiple transmitters, the Commission
did not allow multiple TIS transmitters
to operate as a network, but instead
required each TIS site to provide
specifically targeted information
restricted to the immediate vicinity of
the area served by that site.
The Commission authorizes TIS
stations on a primary basis on 530 kHz
and on a secondary basis in the 535–
1705 kHz band, all of which can be
received on a conventional AM radio.
TIS stations operate at low power:
Maximum output power is 50 watts
with a cable antenna and 10 watts with
a traditional radiating antenna. TIS
stations may only transmit
‘‘noncommercial voice information
pertaining to traffic and road conditions,
traffic hazard and travel advisories,
directions, availability of lodging, rest
stops and service stations, and
descriptions of local points of interest.’’
Finally, the rule restricts TIS
transmitting sites to ‘‘the immediate
vicinity of . . . [a]ir, train, and bus
transportation terminals, public parks
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Aug 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
and historical sites, bridges, tunnels,
and any intersection of a Federal
Interstate Highway with any other
Interstate, Federal, State, or local
highway.’’
The Commission has not undertaken
a major amendment of the TIS rules
since their inception in 1977. However,
in an effort to address apparent
operational limitations imposed by the
current TIS rules, a few TIS operators
have acted on their own accord to
expand the scope of TIS content and
operations. This has resulted in at least
one Commission enforcement action.
Other TIS operators and their sponsors
have sought to expand the scope of TIS
operations through rule waiver requests.
On July 16, 2008, HIS filed a petition
for rulemaking (HIS Petition) to amend
the TIS rules. The HIS Petition
requested that the Commission: (1) Retitle TIS as the ‘‘Local Government
Radio Service;’’ (2) expand the
permissible use rule in § 90.242(a)(7) to
‘‘provide that stations in the local
government radio service may be used
to broadcast information of a noncommercial nature as determined by the
government entity licensed to operate
the station and other government
entities with which the licensee
cooperates;’’ and (3) ‘‘eliminate the
limitation on the sites for local
government radio stations that confines
such stations to areas near roads,
highways and public transportation
terminals.’’
On September 9, 2008, AAIRO filed a
petition for declaratory ruling (AAIRO
Petition). The AAIRO Petition asked for
(1) a ‘‘[r]uling that any message
concerning the safety of life or
protection of property that may affect
any traveler or any individual in transit
or soon to be in transit, may be
transmitted on Travelers’ Information
Stations, at the sole discretion of
officials authorized to operate such
stations;’’ and (2) ‘‘a clear directive that
such messages, by definition, are
expressly included in the permissible
content categories defined by 47 CFR
90.242(a)(7).’’ In its petition, AAIRO
stated that such a declaration would
allow the broadcast of a wide range of
information over TIS, including
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Weather Radio
retransmissions, AMBER Alerts,
alternate phone numbers when local
911 systems fail, terror threat alert
levels, public health warnings ‘‘and all
manner of civil defense
announcements.’’ AAIRO, however, did
not seek any expansion of TIS
operational limitations currently
imposed by the Commission’s rules.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50341
On March 16, 2009, AASHTO filed a
petition for rulemaking seeking revision
of the TIS rules to permit the
transmission of AMBER Alerts and
information regarding the availability of
511 traffic and transportation
information services.
On February 13, 2009, the Public
Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
(Bureau) released a public notice
seeking comment on the HIS and
AAIRO Petitions, and received 61
comments. On April 23, 2009, the
Bureau released a public notice seeking
comment on the AASHTO Petition, and
received 11 comments.
On December 30, 2010, the
Commission released its Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in this proceeding
consolidating the substantive and
operational issues raised in the three
petitions and related records. The
NPRM received ten comments and 28
reply comments (five late-filed). On
December 18, 2012 and December 28,
2012, AAIRO made supplemental ex
parte filings, which included further
correspondence in support of its
petition from public safety entities and
others.
Report and Order
We now consider the record in this
proceeding with respect to two major
categories: (1) What constitutes
permissible information that may be
transmitted over TIS stations, and (2)
what geographic and operational
limitations apply to TIS.
Permissible TIS Content
The NPRM sought comment on a
variety of issues related to expansion of
permissible TIS content. It asked
whether the Commission should expand
the scope of the TIS rules to allow a
broader array of government
information and alerts; whether the
Commission should identify specific
services, such as AMBER Alerts and
NOAA weather broadcasts, as
permissible under the TIS services
rules; what limits, if any, the
Commission should place on
information allowed to be transmitted
over TIS; and whether expansion of the
TIS rules as proposed by HIS, AAIRO,
and AASHTO would have any adverse
effect on commercial broadcasting. The
NPRM also sought specific comment on
whether continuing to require a travelerrelated nexus served the public interest;
and if the travel-related nexus were
retained, the extent, if any, to which the
type of information broadcast over the
TIS service might be broadened without
‘‘diluting’’ the value of the service to
travelers. The NPRM also sought
comment on AASHTO’s position and
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
50342
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
the distinction it made between the
rebroadcast over TIS of routine versus
non-routine NOAA weather reports.
Finally, the NPRM sought comment on
whether the name of the service should
be changed.
As a threshold matter, we note that
the current TIS rules already permit
transmission of much of the information
cited by AAIRO and other commenters.
§ 90.242 expressly allows TIS
transmission of, inter alia,
‘‘noncommercial voice information
pertaining to traffic and road conditions,
traffic hazards and travel advisories,
directions [and] rest stops.’’ Thus, under
this provision of the rule, TIS operators
may transmit weather alerts regarding
difficult or hazardous conditions
(whether or not ‘‘tone alerted’’), as well
as information regarding motor vehicle
crashes, emergency points of assembly,
road closures and construction, parking,
current driving travel times, air flight
status, truck weigh stations, driver rest
areas, locations of truck services, and
road closures.
511 Service. The NPRM sought
comment on AASHTO’s request to
allow TIS stations to provide
information about the availability of 511
service. All commenters support this
request, although San Francisco opposes
as duplicative allowing TIS stations to
repeat the same information that is
available on 511. AAIRO, however,
advises that ‘‘TIS and 5–1–1 systems
can co-exist and complement each
other.’’ We agree with AAIRO and
therefore clarify that information on the
availability of 511 service is already
allowed under our TIS rules, because
such information directly relates to the
provision of travel-related information.
Non-Commercial Content. In its
petition, HIS asked the Commission to
revise the TIS rules to allow the
broadcast of any non-commercial
content. Although this proposal
garnered some support in the initial
comment cycle related to the HIS
Petition, most NPRM commenters
oppose the proposal, reasoning that
allowing TIS to broadcast any type of
non-commercial content would dilute
the public safety value of the TIS
service. APCO retains a ‘‘neutral’’
position, but remains concerned about
dilution of ‘‘the emergency purposes of
TIS and [the possibility to] potentially
confuse travelers accustomed to finding
time-sensitive safety and traffic
information on TIS.’’ We agree with the
majority of commenters who believe
that TIS should retain its historical
focus on serving the needs of the
traveling public. The record indicates
that such a dedicated service continues
to serve the public interest in that it
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Aug 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
contributes both to public safety and
convenience. Accordingly we decline to
implement this change to the TIS
content rules.
Non-Travel Related Emergency and
Imminent Threat Information. In the
NPRM, the Commission sought
comment on whether TIS stations
should be allowed to transmit
emergency information and information
related to imminent threats to safety and
property, even if such information is not
directly travel-related. Most commenters
support allowing TIS to transmit
emergency and imminent threat
information, e.g., AMBER and Silver
Alerts. Several commenters note that
TIS serves as a platform of last resort
with regard to the broadcast of
emergency information. For example,
during Hurricane Sandy, the town of
North Plainfield, New Jersey’s TIS
transmitter made it possible for the
town to provide updates of local
emergency information both at the
height of the storm and throughout the
power outage that followed. However,
AASHTO contends that transmission of
such information by TIS stations is
already permitted under rules that allow
all part 90 licensees, including TIS
operators, to transmit emergency
information.’’
We agree with AASHTO that TIS
broadcasting of emergency information
and information related to imminent
threats to safety and property, whether
travel-related or not, is already allowed
under our part 90 rules. § 90.405(a)(1)
allows all part 90 licensees, which
includes TIS licensees, to transmit ‘‘any
communications related directly to the
imminent safety-of-life or property.’’ For
example, this allows use of TIS for
AMBER and Silver Alerts, as well as
transmission of information about other
imminent threats. Similarly, § 90.407
allows part 90 licensees to transmit
emergency communications ‘‘during a
period of emergency in which the
normal communication facilities are
disrupted as a result of hurricane, flood,
earthquake or similar disaster.’’ In an
emergency context, this clearly could
include transmission by TIS stations of
information regarding evacuation routes
and the location of shelters, health care,
and other emergency facilities. To
further clarify that TIS transmitters may
be used to transmit non-travel related
emergency information in accordance
with those rules, we add the following
sentence at the end of § 90.242(a)(7):
‘‘Travelers Information Stations may
also transmit information in accordance
with the provisions of §§ 90.405(a)(1)
and 90.407.’’
Non-Emergency Non-Travel-Related
Public Health and Safety Information. A
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
number of commenters propose
allowing TIS operators to transmit
‘‘public health’’ and/or ‘‘public safety’’
messages even if they do not have a
travel-related nexus, are not emergencyrelated, or do not relate directly to an
imminent threat. NAB, on the other
hand, opposes TIS broadcast of
‘‘routine, non-emergency information’’
and argues that TIS operators should be
limited to providing information that
will promote ‘‘situational awareness.’’
NPR endorses the broadcast of ‘‘highly
localized travel- and public safetyrelated information that is largely
unavailable elsewhere’’ but supports
‘‘maintaining the existing travel and
public safety nexus.’’ AASHTO
similarly states there is no need for TIS
to transmit any non-commercial
information beyond ‘‘non-routine
information that may uniquely affect
[travelers] as they travel through an
area.’’ SHA agrees that any expansion
should be ‘‘limited to travel-related
messages.’’ San Francisco takes the most
restrictive view, stating that ‘‘TIS should
be confined to emergency alerts only,
especially in areas without cellular
coverage.’’
Commenters differ on whether TIS
stations should be allowed to broadcast
weather information originated by
NOAA. While no commenter disputes
that TIS may broadcast emergency
NOAA weather announcements, AAIRO
contends that TIS rules should also
allow broadcast of ‘‘routine, detailed
weather announcements.’’ AAIRO
reasons that ‘‘only a fraction of the
population’’ has NOAA weather
receivers, that routine NOAA weather
broadcasts give information about road
surface conditions, and that extended
forecasts help travelers to plan their
routes. AAIRO also states that ‘‘NOAA
Radio ‘All-Hazard’ information . . .
provide[s] pertinent lifesaving
information to travelers.’’ AAIRO
contends that broadcast of routine
NOAA weather information would not
‘‘dilute TIS content or prove
superfluous to its mission.’’ AAIRO
considers it ‘‘likely that NOAA
broadcasts will be excerpted by TIS, not
run in their entirety, thus not replicating
all NOAA content or duplicating
broadcast news reports. Many other
commenters support this proposal
AASHTO, on the other hand, argues
that other options exist for accessing
routine NOAA weather information and
that ‘‘TIS transmissions should continue
to be reserved for location and timelimited weather related and other
emergency information.’’ AASHTO
suggests that ‘‘expansion of information
beyond this basic core will dilute the
value of TIS transmissions and travelers
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
will be dissuaded from tuning to TIS
transmissions unless they know that
important emergency information is
being transmitted.’’ Several other
commenters agree. Gropper notes that
‘‘[t]ravelers now have many sources of
up to the minute weather and traffic
information beyond traditional AM and
FM broadcast sources, including cell
phone, mobile internet, automobile
based information systems, and satellite
radio. Therefore, due to technological
advances, TIS is no longer the primary
alternative to AM/FM broadcasts for this
information.’’ Nevertheless, Gropper
supports integrating NOAA Weather
Radio into TIS, short of continuous
rebroadcast, arguing that this will allow
for full automation of such broadcasts
during an emergency and that not all
information regarding dangerous
weather conditions is ‘‘tone alerted’’
(e.g. severe weather statements, dense
fog and snow advisories).
We find that expanding the TIS rules
to allow the transmission of nonemergency, non-travel-related
information would dilute the
effectiveness of TIS in assisting travelers
and providing geographically focused
emergency information. Routine
weather information is widely available
on commercial radio stations and
increasingly available over cell phone,
mobile internet, automobile based
information systems, and satellite radio.
While motorists should not access
weather information from cell phones
and the mobile internet while driving,
they may safely do so through the other
foregoing means. By limiting TIS
weather information to potentially
hazardous conditions, drivers and other
travelers will know immediately that
they are receiving non-routine weather
information that could negatively
impact driving conditions. Moreover,
prohibiting the routine retransmission
of NOAA weather radio broadcasts does
not thereby prohibit the ‘‘integration’’ of
NOAA weather radio or NOAA radio
all-hazards information into TIS during
times of hazardous or potentially
hazardous conditions. TIS stations may
transmit NOAA broadcasts, whether
‘‘tone alerted’’ or not, so long as they
relate to an existing or potential hazard.
Similarly, we find that allowing routine
TIS broadcast during non-emergency
periods of terrorist threat levels, public
health alerts, emergency preparedness
messages, conservation messages, and
the like, is not in the public interest, as
such routine broadcasts also would
dilute situational awareness pertinent to
the traveling motorist. The primary
purpose of the TIS is to assist motorists
in the process of traveling and to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Aug 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
provide emergency and imminent threat
information in covered areas. Therefore,
we will continue to disallow messages
that do not have a travel nexus, are not
emergency-related, or do not relate
directly to an imminent threat because
such messages would dilute the
convenience and efficacy of TIS.
Determination of what constitutes
allowable information. Beyond the issue
of defining the allowable scope of TIS
content, commenters also express
divergent views on who should
determine whether any particular
content complies with the applicable
definition. Some commenters argue for
detailed rule-based definitions of what
is permissible. AASHTO argues that
‘‘TIS licensees would be better served
with rule-based criteria that specify the
information that may be transmitted
over TIS facilities and the mechanism
by which a TIS operator may determine
when the transmission of emergency
information should begin and end.’’
AASHTO suggests allowable emergency
information is that which is ‘‘officially
recognized by the Federal government.’’
SHA agrees that there should be
‘‘nationwide consistency’’ in messaging
in order to meet ‘‘the expectations of the
traveling public.’’ However, SHA
suggests that 47 CFR 90.405(a)(1) and
90.407 ‘‘provide sufficient guidance
related to the broadcast of routine and
non-routine information during
emergency situations.’’
Other commenters argue for giving
discretion to TIS licensees to determine
what is and is not permissible under the
applicable rules. AAIRO suggests that
the Commission ‘‘defer to TIS operators
on a general basis’’ on which content to
air. Similarly, Gropper advises the
Commission to ‘‘not choose the
permitted content on TIS, but instead
. . . set broad areas of permitted
activities and leave it to the licensees to
implement the FCC’s policy.’’ George
states that local governments are best
‘‘qualified to make the decision on what
information should be distributed.’’
Auburn similarly states that TIS
operators should be allowed to use TIS
‘‘regardless of the exact nature of the life
safety message that we choose to
broadcast.’’ AAIRO states that the
Commission must achieve a balance
between ‘‘too strict definitional criteria
[which] would be impractical,’’ and
sufficient clarity ‘‘to avoid the chilling
effect of uncertainty in the current
rule.’’
We are persuaded by those
commenters that argue that the part 90
rules should allow for discretion on the
part of TIS licensees regarding use of the
TIS service. Given their intimate
knowledge of local conditions and
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50343
considering the limited area of
operation of TIS base stations, TIS
licensees are in the best position to
determine what constitutes an
‘‘imminent [threat to] safety-of-life or
property,’’ as well as when emergency
conditions reach the level of a
‘‘hurricane, flood, earthquake or similar
disaster.’’ Again, permissible use of the
TIS in such conditions could include
the transmission of evacuation routes
and the location of shelters, health care
and other emergency facilities, as well
as weather or other conditions that may
negatively impact driving conditions.
These clarifications are consistent with
the Commission’s longstanding
recognition of the public interest in
ensuring that TIS stations timely inform
traveling motorists about emergency
events and situations that may have a
bearing on the immediate welfare and
safety of the public. Nevertheless, we
also emphasize that local authorities
only have discretion within the scope of
the part 90 rules, and that with that
discretion comes responsibility for
compliance. The discretion afforded to
local authorities therefore does not in
any way limit our authority to take
enforcement action to the extent a TIS
station operates in violation of this
Report and Order or the part 90 rules.
Service Name Change. Commenters
are divided on whether to adopt a new
name for TIS. AASHTO suggests
changing the name to ‘‘Highway
Advisory Service.’’ Gropper suggests
‘‘Transportation and Government
Information AM Radio Service,’’ which
he contends would ‘‘reflect the new
potential scope of the service.’’ Snyder
supports a name change along with the
lifting of restrictions to use by
government agencies only. SHA opposes
the name ‘‘Local Government Radio
Service,’’ proposed in the HIS Petition,
on the grounds that many TIS operators
are not local government organizations
and that such a name change could
promote broadcasting of information
‘‘already covered by commercial radio
stations.’’ AAIRO opposes a name
change as it does not favor changing the
fundamental nature of the service.
We will retain the present name of the
service. Given our determination above
that the primary purpose of TIS is to
assist motorists in the process of
traveling and to provide emergency and
imminent threat information in covered
areas, we see no reason to adopt a new
service name.
We also take this opportunity to
update the definition of TIS in § 90.7 by
replacing the reference to the former
Local Government Radio Service with a
reference to the Public Safety Pool. This
change recognizes that the Local
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
50344
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Governmental Radio Service is an
anachronism (since that Service was
folded into the Public Safety Pool) and
conforms the definition of TIS to the
relevant substantive authorizing rules,
which assign to the Public Safety Pool
the operation of TIS. While we did not
specifically request comment on
updating the definition of TIS, under
section 553(b)(B) of the Administrative
Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B),
notice and comment procedures do not
apply ‘‘when the agency for good cause
finds (and incorporates the finding and
a brief statement for reasons therefore in
the rules issued) that notice and public
procedures thereon are . . .
unnecessary.’’ The ‘‘unnecessary’’
exception to the notice requirement is
‘‘confined to those situations in which
the administrative rule is a routine
determination, insignificant in nature
and impact, and inconsequential to the
industry and to the public.’’
‘‘‘Unnecessary’ refers to the issuance of
a minor rule or amendment in which
the public is not particularly
interested.’’ We find that updating the
definition of ‘‘Travelers’ information
station’’ in § 90.7 meets the
requirements for the good cause
exception because notice and comment
are ‘‘unnecessary’’ in these respects; the
amendment of the rule defining TIS
constitutes an editorial change that
simply reflects Commission action taken
in 1997. In that action, the Commission
eliminated the Local Governmental
Radio Service as a stand-alone service
by folding it into the broader Public
Safety Pool, and extended eligibility for
each of the Pool’s component services to
any entity that had been eligible for any
one of those services. Accordingly, since
1997, TIS licenses could be held by any
entity eligible for a license within the
Public Safety Pool, not just entities that
had been eligible for the superseded
Local Government Radio Service
referenced by the definition of TIS in
§ 90.7.
Geographic and Operational
Limitations
With regard to TIS operational
limitations, the NPRM asked a series of
technical questions: Whether the
§ 90.242 interference protection
standards adequately protect AM
stations; whether the Commission
should adopt specific second and thirdadjacent channel protection standards to
ensure lack of interference to AM
stations; to what extent TIS broadcast
locations could be expanded without
resulting in harmful interference to
other licensees; to what extent those
changes would be of any practical
usefulness given the limitations on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Aug 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
power output presently established in
the TIS rules; whether those power
output limitations would also need to be
relaxed in order to provide local
governments with any benefits; if power
output limitations were relaxed, what
rule changes would be necessary to
ensure that AM stations are adequately
protected; and whether there any other
technical rules that would need to be
changed.
In general, AAIRO argues that no
revision to the technical or siting
provisions of the rules is necessary
aside from lifting the filtering restriction
in § 90.242(b)(8) (discussed in the
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
below). HIS proposed elimination of all
TIS site transmitter locations, but its
successor entity, Vaisala, merely states
that it supports ‘‘more operational
flexibility’’ without requesting specific
changes. AASHTO calls for adjustment
of ‘‘power levels and other technical
criteria to improve the service while
ensuring that TIS facilities will not
cause harmful interference to AM
broadcast stations.’’ Several comments
were directed to particular technical
issues.
Field Strength. § 90.242(b)(4)(iv) of
the Commission’s rules specifies that
the field strength of TIS stations may
‘‘not exceed 2 mV/m when measured
with a standard strength meter at a
distance of 1.50 km (0.93 miles) from
the transmitting antenna system.’’ The
NPRM asked whether the existing TIS
field strength limit was necessary to
protect AM broadcast stations and other
TIS stations from interference when
other technical limitations exist in the
rules; whether the field strength limit
was only needed because of the present
requirement to provide specific
information to the ‘‘immediate vicinity’’
of areas listed in § 90.242(a)(5); whether
this limit would be unnecessary if TIS
stations were to be permitted to provide
more general information that is
applicable to broader areas; what, if the
Commission allows TIS stations to serve
broader areas, the new field strength
limit should be, if any; whether a
relaxed field strength limit frustrates the
purpose of the Commission’s spacing
requirements between co-channel TIS
stations as set forth in § 90.242(b)(5) of
the Commission’s rules; and whether
additional technical or operational
changes would be necessary if the field
strength limits were amended.
There was limited comment on these
issues. SHA opposes increasing the
maximum field strength of TIS, arguing
that if it is increased, ‘‘risks of
interference will be present and the FCC
will then have to adopt specific second
and third level channel protection
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
standards’’ necessitating ‘‘a research
project to determine the effects on AM
stations, under a variety of scenarios
(power output, spacing, field strength,
etc.)’’ prior to any rule change. We find
that the record provides no substantial
support for changing the field strength
limit. We encourage licensees to
continue to work together to resolve
interference issues that occur under our
existing technical rules. We also note
that the Commission may modify a TIS
authorization if a legally-operating TIS
station causes interference.
Site Location Restrictions. Our rules
restrict TIS transmitting sites to ‘‘the
immediate vicinity of . . . [a]ir, train,
and bus transportation terminals, public
parks and historical sites, bridges,
tunnels, and any intersection of a
Federal Interstate Highway with any
other Interstate, Federal, State, or local
highway.’’ The NPRM sought comment
on HIS’s request that we remove these
siting restrictions. Gropper supports
‘‘[r]elaxed siting of AM transmitters . . .
to provide for maximum utilization of
the TIS system.’’ AASHTO, however,
suggests only minimal expansion of
location requirements, if any, and a
reevaluation of appropriate power levels
and other technical criteria for TIS
stations due to the long passage of time
since the regulations were promulgated.
Both AAIRO and SHA oppose
eliminating site restrictions due to
interference concerns. NAB adds that
eliminating such restrictions ‘‘would
delink TIS operations from its intended
purpose.’’
We believe the record provides
insufficient support for any
modification of present TIS site
restrictions since it does not establish
whether elimination or even expansion
of these restrictions would lead to
harmful interference with non-TIS
stations. Accordingly, we find that
retaining these restrictions is in the
public interest, and thus we leave them
in place as well.
Other Rule Changes to Protect Other
AM Stations. Pavlica states that in order
to protect other AM stations from
interference at night, TIS transmitters
must ‘‘be prepared to change [their]
frequency +/¥ 30 KHz in the event of
night time skywave interference
reported by the public.’’ While we
appreciate this concern, we encourage
licensees to continue to work together to
resolve interference issues that occur
under our existing technical rules. We
note that the Commission may modify a
TIS authorization if a legally-operating
TIS station causes interference. The
Commission will also take enforcement
action, as appropriate, where there are
violations of the Commission’s rules.
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Accordingly, we do not believe the
record indicates the need for further
action on our part on this issue at
present.
Ribbon Systems. The 1977 TIS Report
and Order prohibited ‘‘setting up a
‘network,’ or ‘ribbon’ of transmitting
stations along a highway for the purpose
of continuously attracting a motorist
with what could be superfluous
information.’’ In response to a proposal
from AASHTO to relax this restriction,
the NPRM asked for commenters’ views
on either (1) allowing ribbon systems
but requiring them to transmit unique
information applicable to each
transmitter’s immediate area, or (2)
allowing ribboned stations to transmit
in a synchronized mode, where all TIS
stations transmit the same message in
unison. With respect to the latter
scenario, the NPRM further asked if
synchronized use of ribbon systems
could provide benefits that would
outweigh the Commission’s original
intent to prevent use of TIS to transmit
superfluous information.
AAIRO supports allowing
synchronized ribboning of TIS stations,
contending that it would be ‘‘useful in
alleviating congestion along a route and
to manage the flow of traffic during
widespread emergencies.’’ AASHTO
says such ribboning would ‘‘allow
travelers to receive updated information
before reaching the location of a traffic
condition or other incident.’’ Several
other commenters support lifting the
restriction for the same reasons.
However, San Francisco opposes
ribboning as ‘‘duplicative of a 511
service.’’
We disagree that ribbon systems are
duplicative of 511 service. TIS and 511
systems can coexist and complement
each other by providing information
about other means of obtaining traffic
information. We also find that the
public interest lies in allowing
simulcast systems of transmitters, which
commenters indicate can help to
manage traffic flow or provide a means
of broadcasting relevant information
over complex geographic terrain. Our
actions today will also lower
operational costs for TIS licensees
without diminishing benefits to the
traveling public. However, we will
permit ribbon systems to be used only
for transmission of travel and
emergency information that is relevant
to travelers in the vicinity of each
transmitter in the network. While we
leave it to the discretion of the TIS
license holders to determine relevancy,
licensees should not view this
relaxation of the ribboning restriction as
carte blanche for the simulcasting of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Aug 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
50345
Procedural Matters
Federal Communications Commission.
Sheryl D. Todd,
Deputy Secretary.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Final Rules
As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, see 5 U.S.C. 603,
the Commission has prepared a Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
of the possible significant economic
impact on small entities of the policies
and rules addressed in this document.
The FRFA is set forth in Appendix C of
the Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, will send a copy of
the Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
including this FRFA, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration (SBA). See 5
U.S.C. 603(a).
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR part 90 as
follows:
irrelevant content over a large
geographic area.
Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
This Report and Order does not
contain new or modified information
collection requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Public Law 104–13. In addition,
therefore, the Report and Order 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).
Ordering Clauses
Accordingly, it is ordered that
pursuant to sections 4(i) and 303 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i) and 303, that
this Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is
adopted.
It is further ordered that the
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
this Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
including the Initial and Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analyses, to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
It is further ordered that the
Commission shall send a copy of this
Report and Order in a report to be sent
to Congress and the General Accounting
Office pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 90
Communications equipment; Radio.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
PART 90—PRIVATE LAND MOBILE
RADIO SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 90
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 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) OCC and Title VI
of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Jobs
Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112–96, 126
Stat. 156.
2. Section 90.7 is amended by revising
the definition of ‘‘Travelers’ information
station’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 90.7
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Travelers’ information station. A base
station in the Public Safety Pool used to
transmit non-commercial, voice
information pertaining to traffic and
road conditions, traffic hazard and
traveler advisories, directions,
availability of lodging, rest stops, and
service stations, and descriptions of
local points of interest.
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 90.242 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(7) to read as
follows:
■
§ 90.242
Travelers’ information stations.
(a) * * *
(7) Travelers’ Information Stations
shall transmit only noncommercial
voice information pertaining to traffic
and road conditions, traffic hazard and
travel advisories, directions, availability
of lodging, rest stops and service
stations, and descriptions of local points
of interest. It is not permissible to
identify the commercial name of any
business establishment whose service
may be available within or outside the
coverage area of a Travelers’ Information
Station. However, to facilitate
announcements concerning departures/
arrivals and parking areas at air, train,
and bus terminals, the trade name
identification of carriers is permitted.
Travelers’ Information Stations may also
transmit information in accordance with
the provisions of §§ 90.405 and 90.407.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–20000 Filed 8–16–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 160 (Monday, August 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50340-50345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20000]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 90
[PS Docket No. 09-19; RM-11514 and RM-11531; FCC 13-98]
Travelers' Information Stations
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission clarifies and amends its
rules pertaining to public safety Travelers' Information Stations
(TIS), which Public Safety Pool-eligible entities operate to transmit
noncommercial, travel-related information over AM band frequencies to
motorists on a localized basis. First, the Commission clarifies that
permissible content under the TIS rules must continue to have a nexus
to travel, an emergency, or an imminent threat of danger. Second, the
Commission clarifies that TIS licensees may transmit any communications
related directly to the imminent safety-of-life or property, and may
transmit emergency communications during a period of emergency in which
the normal communication facilities are disrupted as a result of
hurricane, flood, earthquake or similar disaster. Third, the Commission
partially removes the present restriction on so-called ``ribbon''
networks of TIS transmitters (i.e., multiple simulcast transmitters),
requiring only that simulcast TIS transmissions be relevant to
travelers in the vicinity of each transmitter in the network. Finally,
the Commission updates the definition of TIS in the rules to replace
the reference to the former Local Government Radio Service with a
reference to the Public Safety Pool. These rule changes will remove
confusion about what type of content is permissible on the TIS, thus
improving administrative efficiency for the both the Commission and TIS
licensees.
DATES: Effective September 18, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Eng, Policy and Licensing
Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554,
at (202) 418-0019, TTY (202) 418-7233, or via email at
Thomas.Eng@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
and Order in PS Docket No. 09-19; RM-11514 and RM-11531; adopted July
18, 2013 and released on July 23, 2013. 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 email at FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Alternative formats
(computer diskette, large print, audio cassette, and Braille) are
available to persons with disabilities or by sending an email 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.
Introduction
Currently, the Commission authorizes Public Safety Pool-eligible
entities to use Travelers' Information Stations (TIS) to transmit
noncommercial, travel-related information over AM band frequencies to
motorists on a localized basis. In this proceeding, we address the
scope of permissible operations under our TIS rules in response to
petitions filed by Highway Information Systems (HIS), the American
Association of Information Radio Operators (AAIRO), and the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The
Commission invited comment on the issues raised in these three
petitions in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) adopted in 2010.
In today's Report and Order, we both clarify and amend our TIS
rules in order to promote a more efficient and effective service.
First, we clarify that permissible content under the TIS rules must
continue to have a nexus to travel, an emergency, or an imminent threat
of danger. Second, we amend Sec. 90.242 of our rules, which defines
and authorizes TIS, to cross-reference Sec. Sec. 90.405(a)(1) and
90.407 of the rules, which respectively allow the use of all part 90
facilities, including TIS, for the transmission of ``any communications
related directly to the imminent safety-of-life or property,'' and for
emergency communications ``during a period of emergency in which the
normal communication facilities are disrupted as a result of hurricane,
flood, earthquake or similar disaster.'' Third, we partially remove the
present restriction on so-called ``ribbon'' networks of TIS
transmitters (i.e., multiple simulcast transmitters), requiring only
that simulcast TIS transmissions be relevant to travelers in the
vicinity of each transmitter in the network. Finally, we update the
definition of TIS in Sec. 90.7 to replace the reference to the former
Local Government Radio Service with a reference to the Public Safety
Pool.
The rule changes in the Report and Order serve either to clarify or
to modestly expand the operating parameters of the TIS service. The
costs associated with these rule changes are negligible because the
changes impose no investment or expenditure requirements on any
affected entities to achieve compliance. The rule changes will also
remove confusion about what type of content is permissible on the TIS,
thus improving administrative efficiency for the both the Commission
and TIS licensees. Moreover, by permitting the simulcasting of TIS
transmissions, the rule changes will lower licensees' operating costs
because licensees will no longer need to create individual TIS
transmissions for each transmitter in a network.
Background
The Commission established TIS in 1977 in order to ``establish an
efficient means of communicating certain kinds of information to
travelers over low power radio transmitters licensed to Local
Government entities.'' The Commission specifically noted that such
[[Page 50341]]
stations had been used to reduce traffic congestion and to transmit
``road conditions, travel restrictions, and weather forecasts to
motorists.'' Further, the Commission anticipated that TIS also would be
used to ``transmit travel related emergency messages concerning natural
disasters (e.g., forest fires, floods, etc.), traffic accidents and
hazards, and related bulletins affecting the immediate welfare of
citizens.''
Commercial broadcasters opposed the creation of TIS, claiming that
it would duplicate information provided by commercial broadcasts,
including ``comprehensive weather reports, reports of traffic
conditions, names of gasoline stations, restaurants, and lodging
conveyed through advertising.'' Some broadcasters contended that this
would siphon off advertising revenues, while others argued that TIS
operations would cause impermissible interference with their
operations.
To address these concerns, the Commission prohibited TIS operators
from transmitting commercial messages and emphasized that strict limits
would be placed on other operational aspects of TIS licenses, including
limits on authorized power levels. The Commission also adopted power
and transmitter location limitations to ensure that TIS operations
typically would be confined to the immediate vicinity of specified,
travel-related areas. The Commission imposed the transmitter location
restriction with the objective of limiting service to ``the traveler in
the immediate vicinity of the station.'' Although the Commission did
not preclude TIS operations from using multiple transmitters, the
Commission did not allow multiple TIS transmitters to operate as a
network, but instead required each TIS site to provide specifically
targeted information restricted to the immediate vicinity of the area
served by that site.
The Commission authorizes TIS stations on a primary basis on 530
kHz and on a secondary basis in the 535-1705 kHz band, all of which can
be received on a conventional AM radio. TIS stations operate at low
power: Maximum output power is 50 watts with a cable antenna and 10
watts with a traditional radiating antenna. TIS stations may only
transmit ``noncommercial voice information pertaining to traffic and
road conditions, traffic hazard and travel advisories, directions,
availability of lodging, rest stops and service stations, and
descriptions of local points of interest.'' Finally, the rule restricts
TIS transmitting sites to ``the immediate vicinity of . . . [a]ir,
train, and bus transportation terminals, public parks and historical
sites, bridges, tunnels, and any intersection of a Federal Interstate
Highway with any other Interstate, Federal, State, or local highway.''
The Commission has not undertaken a major amendment of the TIS
rules since their inception in 1977. However, in an effort to address
apparent operational limitations imposed by the current TIS rules, a
few TIS operators have acted on their own accord to expand the scope of
TIS content and operations. This has resulted in at least one
Commission enforcement action. Other TIS operators and their sponsors
have sought to expand the scope of TIS operations through rule waiver
requests.
On July 16, 2008, HIS filed a petition for rulemaking (HIS
Petition) to amend the TIS rules. The HIS Petition requested that the
Commission: (1) Re-title TIS as the ``Local Government Radio Service;''
(2) expand the permissible use rule in Sec. 90.242(a)(7) to ``provide
that stations in the local government radio service may be used to
broadcast information of a non-commercial nature as determined by the
government entity licensed to operate the station and other government
entities with which the licensee cooperates;'' and (3) ``eliminate the
limitation on the sites for local government radio stations that
confines such stations to areas near roads, highways and public
transportation terminals.''
On September 9, 2008, AAIRO filed a petition for declaratory ruling
(AAIRO Petition). The AAIRO Petition asked for (1) a ``[r]uling that
any message concerning the safety of life or protection of property
that may affect any traveler or any individual in transit or soon to be
in transit, may be transmitted on Travelers' Information Stations, at
the sole discretion of officials authorized to operate such stations;''
and (2) ``a clear directive that such messages, by definition, are
expressly included in the permissible content categories defined by 47
CFR 90.242(a)(7).'' In its petition, AAIRO stated that such a
declaration would allow the broadcast of a wide range of information
over TIS, including National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Weather Radio retransmissions, AMBER Alerts, alternate phone
numbers when local 911 systems fail, terror threat alert levels, public
health warnings ``and all manner of civil defense announcements.''
AAIRO, however, did not seek any expansion of TIS operational
limitations currently imposed by the Commission's rules.
On March 16, 2009, AASHTO filed a petition for rulemaking seeking
revision of the TIS rules to permit the transmission of AMBER Alerts
and information regarding the availability of 511 traffic and
transportation information services.
On February 13, 2009, the Public Safety and Homeland Security
Bureau (Bureau) released a public notice seeking comment on the HIS and
AAIRO Petitions, and received 61 comments. On April 23, 2009, the
Bureau released a public notice seeking comment on the AASHTO Petition,
and received 11 comments.
On December 30, 2010, the Commission released its Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in this proceeding consolidating the substantive
and operational issues raised in the three petitions and related
records. The NPRM received ten comments and 28 reply comments (five
late-filed). On December 18, 2012 and December 28, 2012, AAIRO made
supplemental ex parte filings, which included further correspondence in
support of its petition from public safety entities and others.
Report and Order
We now consider the record in this proceeding with respect to two
major categories: (1) What constitutes permissible information that may
be transmitted over TIS stations, and (2) what geographic and
operational limitations apply to TIS.
Permissible TIS Content
The NPRM sought comment on a variety of issues related to expansion
of permissible TIS content. It asked whether the Commission should
expand the scope of the TIS rules to allow a broader array of
government information and alerts; whether the Commission should
identify specific services, such as AMBER Alerts and NOAA weather
broadcasts, as permissible under the TIS services rules; what limits,
if any, the Commission should place on information allowed to be
transmitted over TIS; and whether expansion of the TIS rules as
proposed by HIS, AAIRO, and AASHTO would have any adverse effect on
commercial broadcasting. The NPRM also sought specific comment on
whether continuing to require a traveler-related nexus served the
public interest; and if the travel-related nexus were retained, the
extent, if any, to which the type of information broadcast over the TIS
service might be broadened without ``diluting'' the value of the
service to travelers. The NPRM also sought comment on AASHTO's position
and
[[Page 50342]]
the distinction it made between the rebroadcast over TIS of routine
versus non-routine NOAA weather reports. Finally, the NPRM sought
comment on whether the name of the service should be changed.
As a threshold matter, we note that the current TIS rules already
permit transmission of much of the information cited by AAIRO and other
commenters. Sec. 90.242 expressly allows TIS transmission of, inter
alia, ``noncommercial voice information pertaining to traffic and road
conditions, traffic hazards and travel advisories, directions [and]
rest stops.'' Thus, under this provision of the rule, TIS operators may
transmit weather alerts regarding difficult or hazardous conditions
(whether or not ``tone alerted''), as well as information regarding
motor vehicle crashes, emergency points of assembly, road closures and
construction, parking, current driving travel times, air flight status,
truck weigh stations, driver rest areas, locations of truck services,
and road closures.
511 Service. The NPRM sought comment on AASHTO's request to allow
TIS stations to provide information about the availability of 511
service. All commenters support this request, although San Francisco
opposes as duplicative allowing TIS stations to repeat the same
information that is available on 511. AAIRO, however, advises that
``TIS and 5-1-1 systems can co-exist and complement each other.'' We
agree with AAIRO and therefore clarify that information on the
availability of 511 service is already allowed under our TIS rules,
because such information directly relates to the provision of travel-
related information.
Non-Commercial Content. In its petition, HIS asked the Commission
to revise the TIS rules to allow the broadcast of any non-commercial
content. Although this proposal garnered some support in the initial
comment cycle related to the HIS Petition, most NPRM commenters oppose
the proposal, reasoning that allowing TIS to broadcast any type of non-
commercial content would dilute the public safety value of the TIS
service. APCO retains a ``neutral'' position, but remains concerned
about dilution of ``the emergency purposes of TIS and [the possibility
to] potentially confuse travelers accustomed to finding time-sensitive
safety and traffic information on TIS.'' We agree with the majority of
commenters who believe that TIS should retain its historical focus on
serving the needs of the traveling public. The record indicates that
such a dedicated service continues to serve the public interest in that
it contributes both to public safety and convenience. Accordingly we
decline to implement this change to the TIS content rules.
Non-Travel Related Emergency and Imminent Threat Information. In
the NPRM, the Commission sought comment on whether TIS stations should
be allowed to transmit emergency information and information related to
imminent threats to safety and property, even if such information is
not directly travel-related. Most commenters support allowing TIS to
transmit emergency and imminent threat information, e.g., AMBER and
Silver Alerts. Several commenters note that TIS serves as a platform of
last resort with regard to the broadcast of emergency information. For
example, during Hurricane Sandy, the town of North Plainfield, New
Jersey's TIS transmitter made it possible for the town to provide
updates of local emergency information both at the height of the storm
and throughout the power outage that followed. However, AASHTO contends
that transmission of such information by TIS stations is already
permitted under rules that allow all part 90 licensees, including TIS
operators, to transmit emergency information.''
We agree with AASHTO that TIS broadcasting of emergency information
and information related to imminent threats to safety and property,
whether travel-related or not, is already allowed under our part 90
rules. Sec. 90.405(a)(1) allows all part 90 licensees, which includes
TIS licensees, to transmit ``any communications related directly to the
imminent safety-of-life or property.'' For example, this allows use of
TIS for AMBER and Silver Alerts, as well as transmission of information
about other imminent threats. Similarly, Sec. 90.407 allows part 90
licensees to transmit emergency communications ``during a period of
emergency in which the normal communication facilities are disrupted as
a result of hurricane, flood, earthquake or similar disaster.'' In an
emergency context, this clearly could include transmission by TIS
stations of information regarding evacuation routes and the location of
shelters, health care, and other emergency facilities. To further
clarify that TIS transmitters may be used to transmit non-travel
related emergency information in accordance with those rules, we add
the following sentence at the end of Sec. 90.242(a)(7): ``Travelers
Information Stations may also transmit information in accordance with
the provisions of Sec. Sec. 90.405(a)(1) and 90.407.''
Non-Emergency Non-Travel-Related Public Health and Safety
Information. A number of commenters propose allowing TIS operators to
transmit ``public health'' and/or ``public safety'' messages even if
they do not have a travel-related nexus, are not emergency-related, or
do not relate directly to an imminent threat. NAB, on the other hand,
opposes TIS broadcast of ``routine, non-emergency information'' and
argues that TIS operators should be limited to providing information
that will promote ``situational awareness.'' NPR endorses the broadcast
of ``highly localized travel- and public safety-related information
that is largely unavailable elsewhere'' but supports ``maintaining the
existing travel and public safety nexus.'' AASHTO similarly states
there is no need for TIS to transmit any non-commercial information
beyond ``non-routine information that may uniquely affect [travelers]
as they travel through an area.'' SHA agrees that any expansion should
be ``limited to travel-related messages.'' San Francisco takes the most
restrictive view, stating that ``TIS should be confined to emergency
alerts only, especially in areas without cellular coverage.''
Commenters differ on whether TIS stations should be allowed to
broadcast weather information originated by NOAA. While no commenter
disputes that TIS may broadcast emergency NOAA weather announcements,
AAIRO contends that TIS rules should also allow broadcast of ``routine,
detailed weather announcements.'' AAIRO reasons that ``only a fraction
of the population'' has NOAA weather receivers, that routine NOAA
weather broadcasts give information about road surface conditions, and
that extended forecasts help travelers to plan their routes. AAIRO also
states that ``NOAA Radio `All-Hazard' information . . . provide[s]
pertinent lifesaving information to travelers.'' AAIRO contends that
broadcast of routine NOAA weather information would not ``dilute TIS
content or prove superfluous to its mission.'' AAIRO considers it
``likely that NOAA broadcasts will be excerpted by TIS, not run in
their entirety, thus not replicating all NOAA content or duplicating
broadcast news reports. Many other commenters support this proposal
AASHTO, on the other hand, argues that other options exist for
accessing routine NOAA weather information and that ``TIS transmissions
should continue to be reserved for location and time-limited weather
related and other emergency information.'' AASHTO suggests that
``expansion of information beyond this basic core will dilute the value
of TIS transmissions and travelers
[[Page 50343]]
will be dissuaded from tuning to TIS transmissions unless they know
that important emergency information is being transmitted.'' Several
other commenters agree. Gropper notes that ``[t]ravelers now have many
sources of up to the minute weather and traffic information beyond
traditional AM and FM broadcast sources, including cell phone, mobile
internet, automobile based information systems, and satellite radio.
Therefore, due to technological advances, TIS is no longer the primary
alternative to AM/FM broadcasts for this information.'' Nevertheless,
Gropper supports integrating NOAA Weather Radio into TIS, short of
continuous rebroadcast, arguing that this will allow for full
automation of such broadcasts during an emergency and that not all
information regarding dangerous weather conditions is ``tone alerted''
(e.g. severe weather statements, dense fog and snow advisories).
We find that expanding the TIS rules to allow the transmission of
non-emergency, non-travel-related information would dilute the
effectiveness of TIS in assisting travelers and providing
geographically focused emergency information. Routine weather
information is widely available on commercial radio stations and
increasingly available over cell phone, mobile internet, automobile
based information systems, and satellite radio. While motorists should
not access weather information from cell phones and the mobile internet
while driving, they may safely do so through the other foregoing means.
By limiting TIS weather information to potentially hazardous
conditions, drivers and other travelers will know immediately that they
are receiving non-routine weather information that could negatively
impact driving conditions. Moreover, prohibiting the routine
retransmission of NOAA weather radio broadcasts does not thereby
prohibit the ``integration'' of NOAA weather radio or NOAA radio all-
hazards information into TIS during times of hazardous or potentially
hazardous conditions. TIS stations may transmit NOAA broadcasts,
whether ``tone alerted'' or not, so long as they relate to an existing
or potential hazard. Similarly, we find that allowing routine TIS
broadcast during non-emergency periods of terrorist threat levels,
public health alerts, emergency preparedness messages, conservation
messages, and the like, is not in the public interest, as such routine
broadcasts also would dilute situational awareness pertinent to the
traveling motorist. The primary purpose of the TIS is to assist
motorists in the process of traveling and to provide emergency and
imminent threat information in covered areas. Therefore, we will
continue to disallow messages that do not have a travel nexus, are not
emergency-related, or do not relate directly to an imminent threat
because such messages would dilute the convenience and efficacy of TIS.
Determination of what constitutes allowable information. Beyond the
issue of defining the allowable scope of TIS content, commenters also
express divergent views on who should determine whether any particular
content complies with the applicable definition. Some commenters argue
for detailed rule-based definitions of what is permissible. AASHTO
argues that ``TIS licensees would be better served with rule-based
criteria that specify the information that may be transmitted over TIS
facilities and the mechanism by which a TIS operator may determine when
the transmission of emergency information should begin and end.''
AASHTO suggests allowable emergency information is that which is
``officially recognized by the Federal government.'' SHA agrees that
there should be ``nationwide consistency'' in messaging in order to
meet ``the expectations of the traveling public.'' However, SHA
suggests that 47 CFR 90.405(a)(1) and 90.407 ``provide sufficient
guidance related to the broadcast of routine and non-routine
information during emergency situations.''
Other commenters argue for giving discretion to TIS licensees to
determine what is and is not permissible under the applicable rules.
AAIRO suggests that the Commission ``defer to TIS operators on a
general basis'' on which content to air. Similarly, Gropper advises the
Commission to ``not choose the permitted content on TIS, but instead .
. . set broad areas of permitted activities and leave it to the
licensees to implement the FCC's policy.'' George states that local
governments are best ``qualified to make the decision on what
information should be distributed.'' Auburn similarly states that TIS
operators should be allowed to use TIS ``regardless of the exact nature
of the life safety message that we choose to broadcast.'' AAIRO states
that the Commission must achieve a balance between ``too strict
definitional criteria [which] would be impractical,'' and sufficient
clarity ``to avoid the chilling effect of uncertainty in the current
rule.''
We are persuaded by those commenters that argue that the part 90
rules should allow for discretion on the part of TIS licensees
regarding use of the TIS service. Given their intimate knowledge of
local conditions and considering the limited area of operation of TIS
base stations, TIS licensees are in the best position to determine what
constitutes an ``imminent [threat to] safety-of-life or property,'' as
well as when emergency conditions reach the level of a ``hurricane,
flood, earthquake or similar disaster.'' Again, permissible use of the
TIS in such conditions could include the transmission of evacuation
routes and the location of shelters, health care and other emergency
facilities, as well as weather or other conditions that may negatively
impact driving conditions. These clarifications are consistent with the
Commission's longstanding recognition of the public interest in
ensuring that TIS stations timely inform traveling motorists about
emergency events and situations that may have a bearing on the
immediate welfare and safety of the public. Nevertheless, we also
emphasize that local authorities only have discretion within the scope
of the part 90 rules, and that with that discretion comes
responsibility for compliance. The discretion afforded to local
authorities therefore does not in any way limit our authority to take
enforcement action to the extent a TIS station operates in violation of
this Report and Order or the part 90 rules.
Service Name Change. Commenters are divided on whether to adopt a
new name for TIS. AASHTO suggests changing the name to ``Highway
Advisory Service.'' Gropper suggests ``Transportation and Government
Information AM Radio Service,'' which he contends would ``reflect the
new potential scope of the service.'' Snyder supports a name change
along with the lifting of restrictions to use by government agencies
only. SHA opposes the name ``Local Government Radio Service,'' proposed
in the HIS Petition, on the grounds that many TIS operators are not
local government organizations and that such a name change could
promote broadcasting of information ``already covered by commercial
radio stations.'' AAIRO opposes a name change as it does not favor
changing the fundamental nature of the service.
We will retain the present name of the service. Given our
determination above that the primary purpose of TIS is to assist
motorists in the process of traveling and to provide emergency and
imminent threat information in covered areas, we see no reason to adopt
a new service name.
We also take this opportunity to update the definition of TIS in
Sec. 90.7 by replacing the reference to the former Local Government
Radio Service with a reference to the Public Safety Pool. This change
recognizes that the Local
[[Page 50344]]
Governmental Radio Service is an anachronism (since that Service was
folded into the Public Safety Pool) and conforms the definition of TIS
to the relevant substantive authorizing rules, which assign to the
Public Safety Pool the operation of TIS. While we did not specifically
request comment on updating the definition of TIS, under section
553(b)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B),
notice and comment procedures do not apply ``when the agency for good
cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement for
reasons therefore in the rules issued) that notice and public
procedures thereon are . . . unnecessary.'' The ``unnecessary''
exception to the notice requirement is ``confined to those situations
in which the administrative rule is a routine determination,
insignificant in nature and impact, and inconsequential to the industry
and to the public.'' ```Unnecessary' refers to the issuance of a minor
rule or amendment in which the public is not particularly interested.''
We find that updating the definition of ``Travelers' information
station'' in Sec. 90.7 meets the requirements for the good cause
exception because notice and comment are ``unnecessary'' in these
respects; the amendment of the rule defining TIS constitutes an
editorial change that simply reflects Commission action taken in 1997.
In that action, the Commission eliminated the Local Governmental Radio
Service as a stand-alone service by folding it into the broader Public
Safety Pool, and extended eligibility for each of the Pool's component
services to any entity that had been eligible for any one of those
services. Accordingly, since 1997, TIS licenses could be held by any
entity eligible for a license within the Public Safety Pool, not just
entities that had been eligible for the superseded Local Government
Radio Service referenced by the definition of TIS in Sec. 90.7.
Geographic and Operational Limitations
With regard to TIS operational limitations, the NPRM asked a series
of technical questions: Whether the Sec. 90.242 interference
protection standards adequately protect AM stations; whether the
Commission should adopt specific second and third-adjacent channel
protection standards to ensure lack of interference to AM stations; to
what extent TIS broadcast locations could be expanded without resulting
in harmful interference to other licensees; to what extent those
changes would be of any practical usefulness given the limitations on
power output presently established in the TIS rules; whether those
power output limitations would also need to be relaxed in order to
provide local governments with any benefits; if power output
limitations were relaxed, what rule changes would be necessary to
ensure that AM stations are adequately protected; and whether there any
other technical rules that would need to be changed.
In general, AAIRO argues that no revision to the technical or
siting provisions of the rules is necessary aside from lifting the
filtering restriction in Sec. 90.242(b)(8) (discussed in the Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking below). HIS proposed elimination of all
TIS site transmitter locations, but its successor entity, Vaisala,
merely states that it supports ``more operational flexibility'' without
requesting specific changes. AASHTO calls for adjustment of ``power
levels and other technical criteria to improve the service while
ensuring that TIS facilities will not cause harmful interference to AM
broadcast stations.'' Several comments were directed to particular
technical issues.
Field Strength. Sec. 90.242(b)(4)(iv) of the Commission's rules
specifies that the field strength of TIS stations may ``not exceed 2
mV/m when measured with a standard strength meter at a distance of 1.50
km (0.93 miles) from the transmitting antenna system.'' The NPRM asked
whether the existing TIS field strength limit was necessary to protect
AM broadcast stations and other TIS stations from interference when
other technical limitations exist in the rules; whether the field
strength limit was only needed because of the present requirement to
provide specific information to the ``immediate vicinity'' of areas
listed in Sec. 90.242(a)(5); whether this limit would be unnecessary
if TIS stations were to be permitted to provide more general
information that is applicable to broader areas; what, if the
Commission allows TIS stations to serve broader areas, the new field
strength limit should be, if any; whether a relaxed field strength
limit frustrates the purpose of the Commission's spacing requirements
between co-channel TIS stations as set forth in Sec. 90.242(b)(5) of
the Commission's rules; and whether additional technical or operational
changes would be necessary if the field strength limits were amended.
There was limited comment on these issues. SHA opposes increasing
the maximum field strength of TIS, arguing that if it is increased,
``risks of interference will be present and the FCC will then have to
adopt specific second and third level channel protection standards''
necessitating ``a research project to determine the effects on AM
stations, under a variety of scenarios (power output, spacing, field
strength, etc.)'' prior to any rule change. We find that the record
provides no substantial support for changing the field strength limit.
We encourage licensees to continue to work together to resolve
interference issues that occur under our existing technical rules. We
also note that the Commission may modify a TIS authorization if a
legally-operating TIS station causes interference.
Site Location Restrictions. Our rules restrict TIS transmitting
sites to ``the immediate vicinity of . . . [a]ir, train, and bus
transportation terminals, public parks and historical sites, bridges,
tunnels, and any intersection of a Federal Interstate Highway with any
other Interstate, Federal, State, or local highway.'' The NPRM sought
comment on HIS's request that we remove these siting restrictions.
Gropper supports ``[r]elaxed siting of AM transmitters . . . to provide
for maximum utilization of the TIS system.'' AASHTO, however, suggests
only minimal expansion of location requirements, if any, and a
reevaluation of appropriate power levels and other technical criteria
for TIS stations due to the long passage of time since the regulations
were promulgated. Both AAIRO and SHA oppose eliminating site
restrictions due to interference concerns. NAB adds that eliminating
such restrictions ``would delink TIS operations from its intended
purpose.''
We believe the record provides insufficient support for any
modification of present TIS site restrictions since it does not
establish whether elimination or even expansion of these restrictions
would lead to harmful interference with non-TIS stations. Accordingly,
we find that retaining these restrictions is in the public interest,
and thus we leave them in place as well.
Other Rule Changes to Protect Other AM Stations. Pavlica states
that in order to protect other AM stations from interference at night,
TIS transmitters must ``be prepared to change [their] frequency +/- 30
KHz in the event of night time skywave interference reported by the
public.'' While we appreciate this concern, we encourage licensees to
continue to work together to resolve interference issues that occur
under our existing technical rules. We note that the Commission may
modify a TIS authorization if a legally-operating TIS station causes
interference. The Commission will also take enforcement action, as
appropriate, where there are violations of the Commission's rules.
[[Page 50345]]
Accordingly, we do not believe the record indicates the need for
further action on our part on this issue at present.
Ribbon Systems. The 1977 TIS Report and Order prohibited ``setting
up a `network,' or `ribbon' of transmitting stations along a highway
for the purpose of continuously attracting a motorist with what could
be superfluous information.'' In response to a proposal from AASHTO to
relax this restriction, the NPRM asked for commenters' views on either
(1) allowing ribbon systems but requiring them to transmit unique
information applicable to each transmitter's immediate area, or (2)
allowing ribboned stations to transmit in a synchronized mode, where
all TIS stations transmit the same message in unison. With respect to
the latter scenario, the NPRM further asked if synchronized use of
ribbon systems could provide benefits that would outweigh the
Commission's original intent to prevent use of TIS to transmit
superfluous information.
AAIRO supports allowing synchronized ribboning of TIS stations,
contending that it would be ``useful in alleviating congestion along a
route and to manage the flow of traffic during widespread
emergencies.'' AASHTO says such ribboning would ``allow travelers to
receive updated information before reaching the location of a traffic
condition or other incident.'' Several other commenters support lifting
the restriction for the same reasons. However, San Francisco opposes
ribboning as ``duplicative of a 511 service.''
We disagree that ribbon systems are duplicative of 511 service. TIS
and 511 systems can coexist and complement each other by providing
information about other means of obtaining traffic information. We also
find that the public interest lies in allowing simulcast systems of
transmitters, which commenters indicate can help to manage traffic flow
or provide a means of broadcasting relevant information over complex
geographic terrain. Our actions today will also lower operational costs
for TIS licensees without diminishing benefits to the traveling public.
However, we will permit ribbon systems to be used only for transmission
of travel and emergency information that is relevant to travelers in
the vicinity of each transmitter in the network. While we leave it to
the discretion of the TIS license holders to determine relevancy,
licensees should not view this relaxation of the ribboning restriction
as carte blanche for the simulcasting of irrelevant content over a
large geographic area.
Procedural Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, see 5 U.S.C.
603, the Commission has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small
entities of the policies and rules addressed in this document. The FRFA
is set forth in Appendix C of the Report and Order and Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, will send a copy of the
Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including
this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration (SBA). See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
This Report and Order does not contain new or modified information
collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, the Report and Order
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).
Ordering Clauses
Accordingly, it is ordered that pursuant to sections 4(i) and 303
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i) and
303, that this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking is adopted.
It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a
copy of this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, including the Initial and Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analyses, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of this
Report and Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the General
Accounting Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 90
Communications equipment; Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Sheryl D. Todd,
Deputy Secretary.
Final Rules
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:
Authority: 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) OCC and Title VI of the Middle Class
Tax Relief and Jobs Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96, 126 Stat.
156.
0
2. Section 90.7 is amended by revising the definition of ``Travelers'
information station'' to read as follows:
Sec. 90.7 Definitions.
* * * * *
Travelers' information station. A base station in the Public Safety
Pool used to transmit non-commercial, voice information pertaining to
traffic and road conditions, traffic hazard and traveler advisories,
directions, availability of lodging, rest stops, and service stations,
and descriptions of local points of interest.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 90.242 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(7) to read as
follows:
Sec. 90.242 Travelers' information stations.
(a) * * *
(7) Travelers' Information Stations shall transmit only
noncommercial voice information pertaining to traffic and road
conditions, traffic hazard and travel advisories, directions,
availability of lodging, rest stops and service stations, and
descriptions of local points of interest. It is not permissible to
identify the commercial name of any business establishment whose
service may be available within or outside the coverage area of a
Travelers' Information Station. However, to facilitate announcements
concerning departures/arrivals and parking areas at air, train, and bus
terminals, the trade name identification of carriers is permitted.
Travelers' Information Stations may also transmit information in
accordance with the provisions of Sec. Sec. 90.405 and 90.407.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-20000 Filed 8-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P