3064 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 98 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Greenhouse gases, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: January 12, 2011. 

Elizabeth Craig, 

Acting Director, Office of Atmospheric 

Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–996 Filed 1–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 90 

[PS Docket No. 09–19; RM–11514; RM– 

11531; FCC 10–203] 

Travelers Information Stations 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) solicits comment 

on whether to modify the existing rules 

governing the licensing and operation of 

Travelers’ Information Stations (TIS) to 

expand the scope of permitted 

operations. By initiating this 

proceeding, the Federal 

Communications Commission (the 

Commission) grants petitions for 

rulemaking filed by Highway 

Information Systems, Inc. (HIS) and the 

American Associations of State 

Highway and Transportation Officials 

(AASHTO) requesting the 

commencement of a proceeding to 

amend the TIS rules. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

February 18, 2011. Submit reply 

comments March 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 

1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 

1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments. 

Comments may be filed using: (1) the 

Commission’s Electronic Comment 

Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal 

Government’s eRulemaking Portal, or (3) 

by filing paper copies. See Electronic 

Filing of Documents in Rulemaking 

Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1 (1998). 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

four copies of each filing. If more than 

one docket or rulemaking number 

appears in the caption of this 

proceeding, filers must submit two 

additional copies for each additional 

docket or rulemaking number. 

• Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th St., SW., Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries 

must be held together with rubber bands 

or fasteners. Any envelopes must be 

disposed of before entering the building. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 

East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, 

MD 20743. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric 

Ehrenreich, Public Safety and 

Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 

418–1726, Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20554; or via the 

Internet to Eric.Ehrenreich@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Order 

and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in 

PS Docket No. 09–19, adopted on 

December 29, 2010, and released on 

December 30, 2010. The complete text 

of this document is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th 

Street, SW., Room CY–A257, 

Washington, DC 20554. This document 

may also be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc., in person 

at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, via telephone at 

(202) 488–5300, via facsimile at (202) 

488–5563, or via e-mail at 

FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Alternative 

formats (computer diskette, large print, 

audio cassette, and Braille) are available 

to persons with disabilities or by 

sending an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or 

calling the Consumer and Governmental 

Affairs Bureau at (202) 418–0530, TTY 

(202) 418–0432. This document is also 

available on the Commission’s Web site 

at http://www.fcc.gov. 

I. Introduction 

1. In this NPRM, the Commission 

solicits comment on whether to modify 

the existing rules governing the 

licensing and operation of TIS to 

expand the scope of permitted 

operations. Since the inception of TIS in 

1977, the Commission has authorized 

TIS operations to permit Public Safety 

Pool eligible entities to transmit 

noncommercial travel-related 

information to motorists on a localized 

basis. However, certain parties and 

licensees have sought to expand the 

scope of TIS operations in order to 

transmit more general alerts and public 

safety-related information to the public, 

including non-motorists. By initiating 

this proceeding, the Commission grants 

petitions for rulemaking filed by HIS 

and the AASHTO requesting the 

commencement of a proceeding to 

amend the TIS rules. The Commission 

denies the petition for declaratory ruling 

regarding TIS filed by American 

Association of Information Radio 

Operators (AAIRO), but incorporate the 

issues raised in AAIRO’s petition into 

this rulemaking proceeding. 

II. Background 

2. The Commission promulgated TIS 

operations 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 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 such 

stations 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.’’ 

3. 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.’’ The 

broadcasters worried that this would 

siphon off advertising revenues. Other 

licensees averred that TIS operations 

would cause impermissible interference 

with their operations. 

4. 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, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 3065 

including authorized power levels. 

Regarding the former, the Commission 

stated that: ‘‘No commercial operation of 

these stations is intended or permitted.’’ 

The Commission also adopted power 

and transmitter coverage limitations to 

ensure that TIS operations typically 

would be confined to the immediate 

vicinity of specified, travel-related 

areas. The Commission imposed this 

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 

multiple transmitters, each TIS site is 

expected to provide specifically targeted 

information restricted to the immediate 

vicinity of certain areas specified by the 

rules. Multiple TIS site operations 

working on a network concept would 

not be allowed. Additionally, TIS 

licensees operate predominantly on a 

secondary basis, and their operations 

may ‘‘be suspended, modified, or 

withdrawn by the Commission without 

prior notice or right to hearing if 

necessary to resolve interference 

conflicts.’’ 

5. TIS stations are authorized on a 

primary basis on 530 kHz and on a 

secondary basis in the 535–1705 kHz 

band, all of which is receivable with an 

AM radio. TIS operates on a low power 

basis: 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, TIS transmitting sites are 

restricted 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.’’ 

6. The Commission has not 

undertaken a major amendment of the 

TIS rules since their inception. 

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. In this 

proceeding, the Commission considers 

the petitions filed by HIS, AAIRO, and 

AASHTO that seek rule changes or 

clarification of the scope of the 

Commission’s current TIS rules. 

7. On July 16, 2008, HIS filed a 

petition for rulemaking (HIS Petition) to 

amend the TIS rules. The HIS Petition 

requests that the Commission: (1) Retitle TIS as the ‘‘Local Government 

Radio Service;’’ (2) expand the 

permissible use rule in section 

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.’’ 

8. On September 9, 2008, AAIRO filed 

a petition for declaratory ruling (AAIRO 

Petition). The AAIRO Petition asks 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 

states that such a declaration would 

allow the broadcast of a wide range of 

information over TIS, including 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 announcement.’’ 

AAIRO, however, does not seek any 

expansion of TIS operational limitations 

currently imposed by the Commission’s 

rules. 

9. 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 services. 

10. On February 13, 2009, the Public 

Safety and Homeland Security Bureau 

(Bureau) released a public notice 

seeking comment on the HIS and 

AAIRO Petitions. The comment period 

on those petitions closed on March 30, 

2009, with 61 comments received. On 

April 23, 2009, the Bureau released a 

public notice seeking comment on the 

AASHTO Petition. The comment period 

on that petition closed on June 8, 2009, 

with 11 comments received. 

III. Order 

11. The Commission first addresses 

the AAIRO petition for declaratory 

ruling. As noted above, AAIRO seeks (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).’’ Under AAIRO’s 

proposed interpretation the current TIS 

rules would allow the broadcast of a 

wide range of information over TIS, 

including NOAA Weather Radio 

retransmissions, AMBER Alerts, 

alternate phone numbers when local 

911 systems fail, terror threat alert 

levels, public health warnings, and 

other civil defense announcements. 

12. The Commission concludes that a 

declaratory ruling is not the appropriate 

vehicle to decide the issues raised by 

AAIRO, and it therefore denies the 

AAIRO Petition. Pursuant to section 1.2 

of the Commission’s rules, the 

Commission may issue a declaratory 

ruling for purposes of ‘‘terminating a 

controversy or removing uncertainty.’’ 

However, a declaratory ruling may not 

be used to substantively change a 

policy. Section 90.242(a)(7) states that 

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.’’ 

The Commission concludes that 

accepting AAIRO’s proposed 

interpretation of the current rules would 

expand the scope of permitted 

communications so significantly as to 

constitute a change in policy. While 

some of the types of communications 

AAIRO cites could arguably fall within 

the scope of the existing rules, other 

examples cited in the petition—such as 

NOAA transmissions, alternate phone 

numbers to 911, terror threat alert 

levels, and public health warnings—do 

not appear to be ‘‘travel related’’ as 

contemplated by the plain language of 

the TIS rules. Indeed, the Commission 

previously issued a notice of violation 

for retransmission of NOAA broadcasts 

over a TIS transmitter. 

13. For these reasons, the Commission 

denies AAIRO’s petition. AAIRO’s 

petition, however, raises matters that are 

relevant to the general thrust of this 

proceeding to consider expanding the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
3066 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

travel-related scope of the TIS rules. In 

fact, these issues overlap with issues 

raised by the HIS and AASHTO 

petitions concerning possible changes to 

the scope of information content 

transmitted by TIS. Accordingly, the 

Commission finds that it is in the public 

interest to address the issues raised by 

the AAIRO Petition and, on its own 

motion, it does so as part of the NPRM 

below. 

IV. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

14. In this NPRM, the Commission 

seeks to determine whether expansion 

of the content and location restrictions 

in the TIS rules would create significant 

public benefit. To varying degrees, 

AAIRO, HIS, and AASHTO all contend 

that conditions have sufficiently 

changed since the Commission 

promulgated the TIS rules in 1977 that 

some expansion of the rules would be 

in the public interest. However, the 

changes proposed by the three 

organizations differ from one another in 

scope. The Commission therefore seeks 

comment on the specific changes to the 

TIS rules proposed by each petitioner, 

and on the overall approach that the 

Commission should take. Should the 

Commission significantly expand the 

scope of permitted communications and 

alerts by local governments on TIS 

stations, or should it adopt more limited 

changes that are consistent with the 

traditional travel-related focus of TIS? 

A. Issues Raised by the AAIRO Petition 

15. Initially, the Commission seeks 

comment on AAIRO’s suggestion that 

the Commission should allow TIS 

stations to broadcast information 

including NOAA Weather Radio 

retransmissions, AMBER Alerts, 

alternate phone numbers when local 

911 systems fail, terror threat alert 

levels, public health warnings, and civil 

defense announcements. Many 

commenters, most of them emergency 

managers and first responders, 

supported the AAIRO petition. Many of 

these commenters also indicate their 

desire to utilize TIS transmitters for the 

uses suggested by AAIRO, as well as a 

number of other uses. The Commission 

seeks comment on expanding the scope 

of the TIS rules to allow a broader array 

of government information and alerts. 

Should the Commission identify 

specific services, such as AMBER Alerts 

and NOAA weather broadcasts, in the 

TIS services rules? What limits, if any, 

should the Commission place on 

information allowed to be transmitted 

over TIS? 

16. The Commission also seeks 

comment on whether expansion of the 

TIS rules as proposed by AAIRO would 

have any adverse effect on commercial 

broadcasting. AAIRO states that 

allowing the uses it proposes will not 

lead to any competition with 

commercial broadcasters. The National 

Association of Broadcasters (NAB), 

however, opposes the uses proposed by 

AAIRO, stating that the AAIRO petition 

does ‘‘not provide sufficient evidence to 

justify approval of their requests for a 

fundamental transformation of [TIS] 

operations.’’ 

17. AASHTO also raises concerns 

about expanding the scope of 

information transmitted over TIS. 

AASHTO notes that since the original 

TIS rules were adopted in 1977, ‘‘there 

has been an explosion in the amount of 

information to which travelers may have 

access,’’ and proposes that the 

Commission should re-focus the type of 

information that should be permitted on 

TIS stations to include information 

intended to promote situational 

awareness * * *.’’ 

18. AASHTO also asserts that routine 

rebroadcast of NOAA weather 

information would ‘‘have a severe affect 

on the [TIS] service’s ability to carry 

official urgent information in the event 

of an emergency.’’ AASHTO, however, 

states that it ‘‘supports the ability of a 

TIS licensee to transmit information 

regarding [non-routine] adverse 

conditions.’’ In that regard, AASHTO 

urges the Commission to clarify that 

current FCC rules allow rebroadcast of 

NOAA weather radio on TIS only if 

‘‘initiated through the reception of an 

encoded SAME transmission containing 

a weather message event code’’ which 

will terminate on the earlier of (1) 

receipt of an encoded SAME message 

canceling the event code, or (2) the 

passage of six hours. 

19. The Commission seeks comment 

on AASHTO’s position and the 

distinction it makes between the 

rebroadcast over TIS of routine versus 

non-routine NOAA weather reports. The 

Commission asks commenters to frame 

their comments in the context of: (1) 

The TIS service rules and whether they 

should be expanded to make a clear 

accommodation for non-routine NOAA 

reports; and (2) sections 90.405(a)(1) 

and 90.407 of the Commission’s rules, 

which allow for, respectively, the 

transmission over the TIS service of 

‘‘emergency communications’’ under 

certain circumstances and ‘‘any 

communications related directly to the 

imminent safety-of-life or property.’’ Are 

the existing part 90 rules sufficient for 

the Commission to clarify that nonroutine NOAA reports over TIS 

permitted, as AASHTO requests? The 

Commission clarifies that it is not 

proposing to declare permissible under 

its existing rules anything that would be 

within the scope of its previous 

enforcement action against 

retransmission of NOAA broadcasts. 

B. HIS Petition 

20. The HIS Petition asks that the 

Commission (1) Re-title the TIS service 

rules as ‘‘Local Government Radio 

Service,’’ (2) expand the permissible use 

rule in section 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.’’ 

21. In support of these proposed 

changes to the TIS rules, HIS states that 

the Commission actively promotes 

policies to ‘‘enhance the reliability, 

resiliency, and security of emergency 

alerts to the public by requiring that 

alerts be distributed over diverse 

communications platforms,’’ and that 

‘‘TIS stations provide a means of 

communicating with all Americans 

since only an AM radio is necessary to 

receive these communications. * * * 

TIS stations provide a communications 

channel that is diverse and redundant.’’ 

HIS further notes that many ‘‘TIS 

stations are solar-powered and/or have 

battery backup systems and as a result 

they continue to operate during a power 

blackout.’’ 

22. Eleven of seventeen commenters 

supported the HIS Petition. The 

majority of the supporting commenters 

provide additional perspectives on how 

the TIS service could be used should the 

Commission determine to revise the 

rules per the HIS petition. 

23. ‘‘Local Government Radio 

Service.’’ HIS urges the Commission to 

re-title the TIS service rules as ‘‘Local 

Government Radio Service,’’ because it 

is ‘‘more consistent with the broader 

interests and responsibilities of the 

government.’’ HIS states that given ‘‘the 

highly localized nature of these stations, 

the particular content broadcast on a 

station will be best determined by the 

government entity with jurisdiction over 

that specific location.’’ Middletown 

Township also supports a change of the 

service’s name to reflect ‘‘less restrictive 

transmitter siting’’ as well as expanded 

content. 

24. APCO opposes the proposed name 

change to ‘‘Local Government Radio 

Service,’’ as this was the previous name 

of a part 90, land mobile radio service. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 3067 

As an alternative, APCO suggests ‘‘Local 

Government AM Radio Service.’’ Texas 

DOT states that ‘‘we do not support 

changing the radio service name to 

‘Local Government Radio Service’ as 

* * * some agencies may be tempted to 

broadcast programming which may 

belong on news media broadcasts rather 

than a government warning or alert 

system.’’ The Commission seeks 

comment on whether it should retain or 

change the name of the TIS service. 

Could a name change inadvertently 

induce TIS licensees to broadcast 

messages more appropriately delivered 

by local media broadcasters? 

25. Section 90.242(a)(7)(permissible 

use rule). Given the highly localized 

content of TIS broadcasts, HIS also 

urges amendment of section 90.242(a)(7) 

to ensure that editorial control over the 

content of TIS broadcasts rests squarely 

with the government entity licensed to 

operate the station. HIS states that the 

government entity licensed to operate 

the station should have discretion to use 

the TIS service to broadcast any 

information of a noncommercial nature. 

HIS’s proposal would appear to expand 

the existing scope of TIS to encompass 

information pertinent to non-travelers. 

26. Middletown Township supports 

the HIS Petition and notes possible 

benefits to an expansion of section 

90.242(a)(7): 

While the primary purpose of the TIS 

station is for emergency travel notifications 

and evacuation information when other 

media are limited or unavailable, the station 

also could effectively provide, to nontraveling residents, emergency readiness 

information related to the county-wide 

programs noted above, advice on preparation 

for emergencies, local-area relevant safety 

announcements related to approaching 

weather and developing hazards, power 

outage and restoration information, 

community announcements, tourist 

information, and information about the 

township’s history, environment and parks. 

This latter public interest information would 

serve to develop listener awareness of the 

station so that when an emergency develops, 

the public is already attuned to this valuable 

information source. 

Conversely, NAB opposes the HIS 

Petition, stating that, ‘‘HIS Inc. cites only 

two instances in which licensees sought 

unsuccessfully to use TIS operations for 

prohibited purposes [energy 

conservation message and NWS forecast 

loop]. * * * Two examples do not 

establish that the Commission’s longstanding regulations on TIS operations 

are unwarranted and certainly do not 

justify wholesale changes to this 

service.’’ NAB further argues that given 

the ‘‘low-power service with an 

extremely limited, highly targeted 

reception area * * * contrary to HIS 

Inc.’s suggestion that [its proposed 

amendments] would improve 

emergency alerting, [they] would not 

have any significant benefit for the 

public.’’ Similarly, AASHTO opposes 

the HIS Petition, stating that ‘‘the 

changes proposed by * * * HIS would 

inadvisably broaden the type of 

information that TIS licensees may 

transmit, potentially diluting the value 

of the service.’’ 

27. The Commission seeks comment 

on whether and to what extent the 

changes proposed by HIS would or 

should alter the Commission’s 

requirement for a nexus between TIS 

transmissions and traveling motorists. 

Several commenters contend that the 

changes proposed by HIS would amount 

to a de facto elimination of the TIS 

service as presently constituted. The 

Commission seeks comment on whether 

the public interest would be served by 

expanding the scope to include the 

broadcast of all non-commercial 

information or whether it is preferable 

to limit the scope of the changes to 

emergency alerts only, or some other 

subset of permissible content. Would it 

be possible to expand the scope of TIS 

as proposed by HIS while retaining the 

travel-nexus requirement? If not, would 

any subsequent restrictions placed on 

the scope of permissible TIS 

transmissions by government entities 

licensed to use TIS diminish their 

ability to communicate information of 

local concern to travelers? Would an 

expansion of the TIS service to include 

all non-commercial information affect 

the reliability of emergency alerts 

transmitted via TIS? Does continuing to 

require a traveler-related nexus serve 

the public interest? With respect to 

Middletown Township’s argument that 

TIS stations could provide tourist 

information and information on local 

landmarks, the Commission notes that 

the TIS rules already expressly allow for 

the broadcasting of tourist information, 

such as directions, availability of 

lodging, and points of interest. If the 

travel-related nexus should be retained, 

the Commission seeks comment on 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. 

28. Operational Limitations. HIS asks 

that ‘‘the Commission eliminate the 

limitation on the sites for local 

government radio stations that confines 

such stations to areas near roads, 

highways and public transportation 

terminals.’’ HIS states that the local 

government licensee should have the 

discretion to determine site locations, 

provided that the interference criteria 

are met with respect to commercial AM 

radio station. 

29. Hatfield & Dawson Consulting 

Engineers raise interference concerns 

regarding HIS’s proposal to eliminate 

the TIS transmitter site limitation, 

claiming that it: 

seeks a change in the rules which almost 

surely would result in substantial numbers of 

additional TIS facilities. The result would be 

a general increase in the background or 

ambient radio frequency noise levels in the 

medium wave ‘‘AM’’ broadcast band. This has 

a potential for increasing the overall level of 

interference to nighttime operation in the 

medium wave ‘‘AM’’ broadcasting band. 

With regard to interference concerns 

from expanded TIS operations, HIS 

indicates that there has been ‘‘[no] 

showing of harmful interference’’ were 

the Commission to implement its 

requested changes to the TIS service. 

The Commission seeks comment on 

HIS’s assertion. Do the section 90.242 

interference protection standards 

adequately protect AM stations? Should 

the Commission adopt specific secondand third-adjacent channel protection 

standards to ensure lack of interference 

to AM stations? To what extent could 

TIS broadcast locations be expanded 

without resulting in harmful 

interference to other licensees? Even if 

the risk of harmful interference resulting 

from expanded TIS broadcast operations 

is minimal, to what extent would those 

changes be of any practical usefulness 

given the limitations on power output 

presently established in the TIS rules? 

Would those power output limitations 

also need to be relaxed in order to 

provide local governments with any 

benefits? If power output limitations are 

relaxed, what rule changes are necessary 

to ensure that AM stations are 

adequately protected? Are there any 

other technical rules that would need to 

be changed? 

30. Ribbon Systems. AASHTO 

suggests that ‘‘instead of changing the 

geographic limitations as HIS suggest, 

the FCC should consider the elimination 

of the TIS rules’ restriction on ‘ribbon 

systems.’ ’’ AASHTO argues that ‘‘such 

ribbon systems could be useful in 

providing alternative route information 

to alleviate congestion and manage the 

flow of traffic during emergencies,’’ such 

as ‘‘in the event of an evacuation due to 

a natural or manmade disaster.’’ 

AASHTO continues, ‘‘[t]emporary TIS 

stations could be installed along 

evacuation routes to provide critical 

information regarding the availability of 

temporary emergency facilities and 

information regarding evacuation areas.’’ 

The Commission seeks comment on 

AASHTO’s suggestion regarding ribbon 

systems in response to the HIS Petition. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
3068 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

31. The Commission notes that it 

currently ‘‘precludes an applicant from 

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.’’ Do users 

envision a ribbon system of TIS stations 

transmitting unique information 

applicable to each transmitter’s 

immediate area, or a system of stations 

transmitting in a synchronized mode, 

where all TIS stations transmit the same 

message in unison? In the latter 

scenario, it would not be possible for 

information to be tailored to the 

immediate area of each TIS transmitter. 

How is the latter scenario justified in 

light of the Commission’s intent to 

ensure that the TIS service is not used 

to attract travelers with what could be 

superfluous or redundant information? 

On the other hand, could AASHTO’s 

examples and other potential uses for 

ribbons systems provide benefits that 

outweigh the Commission’s original 

intent? 

32. AASHTO argues that ‘‘the 

Commission should recognize that the 

rules should be modified to permit 

transmission over broader areas than 

now permitted.’’ It notes, for example, 

that ‘‘the area encompassed by NOAA 

SAME [Specific Area Message Encoder] 

broadcasts generally exceeds the current 

coverage area of a TIS station.’’ Section 

90.242(b)(4)(iv) specifies that the field 

strength of TIS stations may ‘‘not exceed 

2 mV/m when measured with a 

standard field strength meter at a 

distance of 1.50 km (0.93 miles) from 

the transmitting antenna system.’’ 

AASHTO notes that, ‘‘[w]hen the 

Commission set the field strength 

requirements for this service, the 

national speed limit was 55 miles per 

hour.’’ AASHTO contends that ‘‘[a] 

vehicle traveling at this speed would be 

within the effective service area for 

approximately two (2) minutes.’’ 

AASHTO notes that ‘‘[s]ince 1977, the 

national speed limit was rescinded with 

the last states reverting to 65–70 mile 

per hour speed limits.’’ Given higher 

speeds, vehicles would be within TIS 

service areas for shorter durations. 

AASHTO asserts that ‘‘the 2mV/M 

radiated power limitation effectively 

limits the amount of information that 

may be transmitted by a single location 

to approximately 90 seconds including 

station identification.’’ 

33. The Commission notes that its 

Public Safety and Homeland Security 

Bureau has issued waivers of the field 

strength limit to permit TIS transmitters 

to reach broader areas. The Commission 

seeks comment on AASHTO’s 

suggestion regarding field strength in 

response to the HIS Petition. Is the field 

strength limit necessary to protect AM 

broadcast stations and other TIS stations 

from interference when other technical 

limitations exist in the rules, such as 

power limits, antenna height limits, and 

minimum spacing requirements 

between TIS transmitters and AM 

broadcaster contours? Is the field 

strength limit only needed because of 

the present requirement to provide 

specific information to the ‘‘immediate 

vicinity’’ of areas listed in section 

90.242(a)(5)? Would this limit be 

unnecessary if TIS stations were to be 

permitted to provide more general 

information that is applicable to broader 

areas? If the Commission allows TIS 

stations to serve broader areas, what 

should the new field strength limit be, 

if any? Would a relaxed field strength 

limit frustrate the purpose of the 

Commission’s spacing requirements 

between co-channel TIS stations as set 

forth in section 90.242(b)(5) of the 

Commission’s rules? Would additional 

technical or operational changes be 

necessary if the field strength limits 

were amended? 

34. Low-Power FM. In comments, the 

Local Government Licensees 

(Wilmington, Delaware; Fairfax, 

Virginia; and Hanover County, Virginia) 

contend that the Commission’s rules 

should be expanded to permit TIS 

stations to transmit a broader scope of 

noncommercial information, such as 

‘‘official notices and related 

communications,’’ similar to 

government-operated low-power FM 

stations. The Commission seeks 

comment on this viewpoint. 

C. AASHTO Petition 

35. AASHTO’s petition seeks 

expansion of the present scope of the 

TIS rules to allow the broadcasting of 

AMBER Alerts and information about 

the availability of 511 services. The 

Commission received eleven comments 

on the AASHTO Petition. Nine 

comments were in full support, and one 

was neutral. AAIRO was the sole 

commenter in opposition, contending 

that the relief sought by AASHTO could 

be obtained by granting AAIRO’s 

declaratory ruling petition. 

36. The Commission seeks further 

comment on AASHTO’s proposal to 

allow AMBER alerts and 511 service 

information. As noted above in denying 

AAIRO’s petition, these issues are not 

appropriate for resolution by declaratory 

ruling, but they are suitable for action 

by rulemaking. The Commission 

therefore seeks comment on whether it 

should amend the TIS rules to allow 

these specific applications. 

V. Procedural Matters 

A. Paperwork Reduction Act 

37. This document does not contain 

proposed information collection(s) 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. In 

addition, therefore, it 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 47 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). 

B. Ex Parte Presentations 

38. The inquiry this Notice initiates 

shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-butdisclose’’ proceeding in accordance with 

the Commission’s ex parte rules. 

Persons making oral ex parte 

presentations are reminded that 

memoranda summarizing the 

presentations must contain summaries 

of the substance of the presentations 

and not merely a listing of the subjects 

discussed. More than a one or two 

sentence description of the views and 

arguments presented generally is 

required. Other requirements pertaining 

to oral and written presentations are set 

forth in section 1.1206(b) of the 

Commission’s rules. 

C. Comment Filing Procedures 

39. Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of 

the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments on or 

before the dates indicated on the first 

page of this document. Comments may 

be filed using: (1) The Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System 

(ECFS), (2) the Federal Government’s 

eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing 

paper copies. See Electronic Filing of 

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 

63 FR 24121, May 1 (1998). 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

four copies of each filing. If more than 

one docket or rulemaking number 

appears in the caption of this 

proceeding, filers must submit two 

additional copies for each additional 

docket or rulemaking number. 

• Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules 3069 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th St., SW, Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries 

must be held together with rubber bands 

or fasteners. Any envelopes must be 

disposed of before entering the building. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 

East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, 

MD 20743. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., 

Washington DC 20554. 

40. People with Disabilities: To 

request materials in accessible formats 

for people with disabilities (Braille, 

large print, electronic files, audio 

format), send an e-mail to 

fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202– 

418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (tty). 

VI. Ordering Clauses 

41. 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, this 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is 

adopted. 

42. It is further 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, the 

petitions for rulemaking filed by 

Highway Information Systems, Inc., on 

July 16, 2008, and the American 

Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials on March 16, 

2009, are granted to the extent indicated 

herein. 

43. It is further 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, the 

petition for ruling filed by the American 

Association of Information Radio 

Operators filed on September 9, 2008, is 

denied. 

44. It is further ordered that the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 

Information Center, shall send a copy of 

this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 

including the Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. 

45. It is further ordered that pursuant 

to applicable procedures set forth in 

§§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s 

rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested 

parties may file comments on this 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on or 

before 30 days after publication in the 

Federal Register, and interested parties 

may file reply comments on or before 45 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. 

Bulah P. Wheeler, 

Deputy Manager, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–938 Filed 1–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2011–0005; 

92220–1113–0000–C5] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To Delist or Reclassify From 

Endangered to Threatened Six 

California Species 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition 

findings and initiation of status reviews. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 

90-day finding on a petition to delist 

Oenothera californica (avita) subsp. 

eurekensis (Eureka Valley eveningprimrose) and Swallenia alexandrae 

(Eureka Valley dunegrass), and 

reclassify the tidewater goby 

(Eucyclogobius newberryi), Acmispon 

dendroideus (Lotus scoparius subsp.) 

var. traskiae (San Clemente Island 

broom), Malacothamnus clementinus 

(San Clemente Island bush-mallow), and 

Castilleja grisea (San Clemente Island 

Indian paintbrush) from endangered to 

threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). 

Based on our review, we find that the 

petition presents substantial scientific 

or commercial information indicating 

that the petitioned actions may be 

warranted. Therefore, with the 

publication of this notice, we are 

initiating status reviews of these taxa to 

determine if the respective actions of 

delisting and reclassifying are 

warranted. Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act 

also requires a status review of listed 

species at least once every 5 years. We 

are therefore electing to conduct these 

reviews simultaneously. To ensure that 

these status reviews are comprehensive, 

we are requesting scientific and 

commercial data and other information 

regarding these species and subspecies. 

Based on these status reviews, we will 

issue 12-month findings on the petition, 

which will address whether the 

petitioned actions are warranted under 

section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. 

DATES: To allow us adequate time to 

conduct this review, we request that we 

receive information on or before March 

21, 2011. Please note that if you are 

using the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

(see ADDRESSES section, below), the 

deadline for submitting an electronic 

comment is Eastern Standard Time on 

this date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit 

information by one of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. In the box that 

reads ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter the 

Docket number for this finding, which 

is [insert docket number]. Check the box 

that reads ‘‘Open for Comment/ 

Submission,’’ and then click the Search 

button. You should then see an icon that 

reads ‘‘Submit a Comment.’’ Please 

ensure that you have found the correct 

rulemaking before submitting your 

comment. 

U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: [FWSinsert docket number]; Division of 

Policy and Directives Management; U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. 

Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington, VA 

22203. 

We will post all information we 

receive on http://www.regulations.gov. 

This generally means that we will post 

any personal information you provide 

us (see the Request for Information 

section below for more details). 

After March 21, 2011, you must 

submit information directly to the Field 

Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT). Please note that we might not 

be able to address or incorporate 

information that we receive after the 

above requested date. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information regarding Acmispon 

dendroideus (Lotus scoparius subsp.) 

var. traskiae, Malacothamnus 

clementinus and Castilleja grisea, 

contact Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, by 

mail at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010 

Hidden Valley Road, Carlsbad, CA 

92009; by telephone at (760–431–9440); 

or by facsimile at (760–431–9624). 

For information regarding Oenothera 

californica (avita) subsp. eurekensis, 

Swallenia alexandrae, and the tidewater 

goby, contact Diane Noda, by mail at 

Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 

Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 

93003; by telephone (805–644–1766); or 

by facsimile (805–644–3958). If you use 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1