**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| POOL WELL SERVICES COMPANY,      | ** |                              |
| PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC and     |    |                              |
| SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Petitions to Set Aside Grant of  | ** |                              |
| License of Fresno Mobile Radio,  |    |                              |
| Inc. for New Industrial/Business | *  |                              |
| Private Land Mobile Radio        | *) |                              |
| Station at Meadow Lakes,         | ** |                              |
| California                       |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
| and                              | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
| FRESNO MOBILE RADIO, INC.        |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
| Licensee of Trunked              | *) |                              |
| Industrial/Business Pool Radio   | ** |                              |
| Service Station WPPA630, Meadow  |    |                              |
| Lakes, California                | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  | )\ |                              |
|                                  | )\ |                              |
|                                  | )\ |                              |
|                                  | )  |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+

**MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER**

**Adopted: August 22, 2001 Released: August 24, 2001**

By the Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau:

**I. INTRODUCTION**

1\. On September 19, 2000, Pool Well Services Co. (PWSC) and Pacific Gas
and Electric (PG&E) each submitted a petition seeking revocation of the
above-captioned authorization granted to Fresno Mobile Radio, Inc.
(Fresno).[^1] On October 4, 2000, Southern California Gas Company (SCGC)
submitted a petition seeking revocation of the above-captioned
authorization.[^2] For the reasons set forth below, we deny each of the
petitions. However, on our own motion, we initiate a proceeding to
modify Fresno's license to remove the frequencies 153.215/159.600 MHz
and 153.515/159.660 MHz.

**II. BACKGROUND**

2\. Frequency coordination in the Private Land Mobile Radio (PLMR)
Services is the process by which a private entity certified by the
Commission recommends the most appropriate frequencies for applicants in
their designated radio services.[^3] In 1986, the Commission adopted
frequency coordination rules and procedures in an effort to maximize
service to the public by assuring that the assignment and management of
the PLMR spectrum is performed in an efficient and effective manner.[^4]
The Commission has stated that accurate information is fundamental to
its ability to review effectively the frequency recommendations made by
frequency coordinators prior to licensing.[^5] A fundamental aspect of
frequency coordination, in any radio service, is an accurate
determination by the frequency coordinator of whether the proposed
operations potentially will cause harmful interference to existing
co-channel or adjacent channel licensees.[^6]

3\. In 1997, the Commission allowed centralized trunking in the PLMR
bands between 150 MHz and 512 MHz.[^7] The Commission emphasized that
trunking would be permitted only in those areas where exclusivity is
recognized by the Commission or where an applicant/licensee has obtained
the consent of all licensees whose service areas overlap a circle with a
radius of 70 miles from the proposed trunked system's base station.[^8]
In 1999, the Commission provided applicants with an alternate means of
obtaining an authorization for a trunked system by obtaining concurrence
whenever the 19 dBu (UHF) or 22 dBu (VHF) interference contour from a
proposed trunked station intersects the 37 dBu service contour (UHF) or
39 dBu service contour (VHF) of any existing co-channel or adjacent
channel station.[^9] In 2000, the Commission modified the definition of
trunked systems authorized in the 150-512 MHz bands.[^10]

4\. Fresno filed an application for authorization to operate an
Industrial/Business Pool trunked station in the Meadow Lakes, California
area.[^11] The Personal Communications Industry Association (PCIA), a
FCC-certified PLMR frequency coordinator, submitted Fresno's
application, with a frequency recommendation, to the Licensing and
Technical Analysis Branch (Branch) of the Public Safety and Private
Wireless Division.[^12] On September 24, 1999, the Branch granted
Fresno's application to operate trunked Industrial/Business Station
WPPA630 on frequencies 153.215/159.600 MHz and 153.515/159.660 MHz.[^13]

5\. By letters received September 19, 2000, both PWSC and PG&E requested
that the Commission set aside the Fresno license grant.[^14] By letter
received October 17, 2000, SCGC requested that the Commission set aside
the Fresno license grant.[^15] PWSC, PG&E, and SCGC each alleged
procedural flaws in the filing of Fresno's application and cited
concerns over potential interference to their respective operations.
PWSC cited concerns over potential interference to operation of its
Station KCD569 on frequencies 153.215/159.600 MHz at Bakersfield,
California, and frequencies 153.515/159.600 MHz at Coalinga,
California.[^16] PG&E cited concerns over potential interference to its
operations on frequency 153.5150 MHz at Stations KMD565, Sonora,
California, KME282, Oakdale, California, and KME687, Newman,
California.[^17] SCGC cited concerns over potential interference to its
operations by SCGC on frequency 153.5300 MHz at Stations WPMB647,
Visalia, California, KMF278, Visalia, California, and WNQN782, Coalinga,
California.[^18] PWSC, PG&E, and SCGC contended that Fresno's Station
WPPA630 does not afford the required co-channel and adjacent-channel
interference protection to their facilities. In support of their
interference arguments, they each included an interference analysis of
the Fresno license as granted, from the International Telecommunications
Association, Inc., another FCC-certified PLMR frequency
coordinator.[^19] Specifically, PWSC, PG&E, and SCGC each argued that
the subject authorization was granted in error because Fresno's
operation on frequencies 153.215/159.600 MHz and 153.515 MHz does not
provide adequate protection to co-channel and adjacent channel
licensees. Therefore, they each urged the Commission to set aside the
license grant.

6\. On January 31[^20] and February 15, 2001,[^21] the Branch requested
that PCIA respond to ITA's interference analysis of the Fresno station
and propose a solution, if the Fresno application had been incorrectly
coordinated. By three separate letters, each dated March 12, 2001, PCIA
stated that it was possible that it had incorrectly coordinated the
Fresno application and proposed as a solution that the Fresno license
for Station WPPA630 be modified by removing frequencies 153.215/159.600
MHz and 153.515/159.660 MHz.[^22]

**III. DISCUSSION**

7\. We believe that the requests of PWSC, PG&E and SCGC (Petitioners)
are most properly characterized as informal requests for Commission
action under Section 1.41 of the Commission's Rules.[^23] PWSC, PG&E,
and SCGC argue that license set aside is warranted because Fresno's
license was granted in violation of Section 90.187 of the Commission's
Rules.[^24] Specifically, PWSC, PG&E and SCGC argue that the Fresno
station does not afford the required co-channel and adjacent-channel
interference protection. Under these circumstances, they contend, the
grant of Fresno's license should be set aside pursuant to Section 90.187
of the Commission's Rules. PCIA admits that there may be licenses not
accounted for and recommends modifying Fresno's license by removing the
frequencies 153.215/159.600 MHz and 153.515/159.660 to resolve the
problem.

8\. Based upon our analysis, we conclude that the Fresno application
should not have been coordinated because the proposed operations did not
provide the requisite interference protection to the operations of PWSC,
PG&E, or SCGC. We find that initiation of revocation proceedings against
Fresno's station is unnecessary in the instant matter because PCIA has
proposed changes to the Fresno license designed to eliminate
interference to the earlier-licensed stations. We believe that Section
316 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,[^25] provides the
appropriate vehicle for resolving this matter. Section 316(a) permits
the Commission to modify a station license if the action will promote
the public interest, convenience, and necessity.[^26] In this
connection, we note that the proposed modification would serve the
public interest by preserving the existing coverage areas of affected
parties and prevent harmful interference, while not unduly disrupting
Fresno's operations.

9\. As discussed above, the coordination of Fresno's application was
defective. Thus, we believe that a modification of the Fresno license to
remove the operating frequencies 153.215/159.600 MHz and 153.515/159.660
MHz is appropriate to prevent harmful interference to PWSC, PG&E, and
SCGC. In accordance with Section 1.87(a) of the Commission's Rules,[^27]
we will not issue a modification order until Fresno has received notice
of our proposed action and has had an opportunity to interpose a
protest. To protest the modification, Fresno must, within thirty days of
the release date of this *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, submit a
written statement with sufficient evidence to show that the modification
would not be in the public interest. The protest must be filed with the
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth
Street, S.W., Room TW-A325, Washington, D.C. 20554. If no protest is
filed, Fresno will have waived its right to protest the modification and
will be deemed to have consented to the modification.

**IV. CONCLUSION**

10\. For the reasons stated above, we conclude that the grant of
Fresno's application was defective. As a result, we believe that the
license grant to Fresno was defective. Accordingly, we propose to modify
Fresno's license for Station WPPA630 to remove frequencies
153.215/159.600 MHz and 153.515/159.660 MHz in order to protect
co-channel and adjacent channel licensees from harmful interference.

**V. ORDERING CLAUSES**

11\. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 4(i) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 154(i), and Section
1.41 of Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.41, the Petitions to set aside
grant of the license for Station WPPA630, submitted by Pool Wells
Services Co. and Pacific Gas and Electric on September 19, 2000 and
Southern California Gas Co. on October 4, 2000 ARE DENIED.

12\. IT IS PROPOSED, that, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 316 of the
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 316(a), and Section
1.87 of the Commission\'s Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.87, the license for
Private Radio Mobile Services Station WPPA630 held by Fresno Mobile
Radio, Inc., BE MODIFIED by removing the frequencies 153.215/159.600 MHz
and 153.515/159.600 MHz.

13\. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this *Memorandum Opinion and Order*
shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested to Fresno
Mobile Radio, Inc., 160 N. Broadway, Fresno, CA 93701.

14\. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections
0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.131, 0.331.

> FEDERAL COMMUNICATION COMMISSION

D'wana R. Terry

Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

# 

[^1]: Letter dated Sept. 13, 2000, received Sept. 19, 2000 from Jill
    Gregory, PWSC, to the Office of the Secretary, FCC (PWSC Petition);
    Letter dated Sept. 18, 2000, received Sept. 19, 2000 from Marilou
    Ehrenberg, PG&E, to Mary Shultz, Chief, Licensing and Technical
    Analysis Branch, PSPWD, WTB (PG&E Petition).

[^2]: Letter dated Oct. 4, 2000, received Oct. 17, 2000 from B.W.
    Schupbach, SCGC, to Mary Shultz, Chief, Licensing and Technical
    Analysis Branch, PSPWD, WTB (SCGC Petition).

[^3]: Frequency Coordination in the Private Land Mobile Radio Services,
    *Report and Order,* PR Docket No. 83-737, 103 FCC 2d 1093 (1986).

[^4]: *Id.* at 1094-95 ¶ 2.

[^5]: *Id.* at 1148 ¶ 111, 1150 ¶ 116.

[^6]: *See generally* American Mobile Telecommunications Association,
    Inc. and American Trucking Association, Inc., *Report and Order*, DA
    01-1411, ¶¶ 13-15 (WTB PSPWD rel. June 11, 2001).

[^7]: Replacement of Part 90 by Part 88 to Revise the Private Land
    Mobile Radio Services and Modify the Policies Governing Them,
    *Second Report and Order*, PR Docket No. 92-235, 12 FCC Rcd 14307,
    14337-38 ¶¶ 56-59 (1997).

[^8]: *Id.*

[^9]: Replacement of Part 90 by Part 88 to Revise the Private Land
    Mobile Radio Services and Modify the Policies Governing Them, *Third
    Memorandum Opinion and Order*, PR Docket No. 92-235, 14 FCC Rcd
    10922, 10926-27 ¶¶ 6-9 (1999).

[^10]: 47 C.F.R. § 90.187. The Commission's amendment did not change the
    substance of the rule provision at issue here. *See* 1998 Biennial
    Regulatory Review, 47 C.F.R Part 90, Private Land Mobile Radio
    Services, *Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule
    Making*, WT Docket No. 98-182, 15 FCC Rcd 16673 (2000).

[^11]: File No. A041559.

[^12]: *See* FAC \# 991870514.

[^13]: *See* License for Station WPPA630.

[^14]: PWSC Petition, *supra*, and PG&E Petition, *supra*.

[^15]: SCGC Petition, *supra.*

[^16]: PWSC Petition, *supra*.

[^17]: PG&E Petition, *supra.*

[^18]: *Id.*

[^19]: *See,* PWSC and PG&E's petitions, *supra*.

[^20]: The January 31, 2001 Letters from Mary Shultz, Chief, LTAB, to
    PCIA concerned the complaints of PWSC and SCGC.

[^21]: The February 15 2001 Letter from Mary Shultz, Chief, LTAB, to
    PCIA dealt only with the complaint of PG&E.

[^22]: Letters from Don Andrew, Communications Specialist, PCIA to
    Branch (March 12, 2001) (PCIA Letters).

[^23]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.41.

[^24]: *See* Petitions of PWSC, PG&E, and SCGC, *supra.*

[^25]: 47 U.S.C. § 316.

[^26]: 47 U.S.C. § 316(a). Section 316(a) requires that we notify the
    affected station(s) of the proposed modification(s), the public
    interest reasons for the action, and afford at least 30 days to
    respond.

[^27]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.87(a).