[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 193 (Monday, October 6, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52036-52044]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26415]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 90

[PR Docket No. 93-61, FCC 97-305]


Automatic Vehicle Monitoring Systems

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Commission addresses 
the remaining issues raised by petitioners for reconsideration of its 
Report and Order in PR Docket No. 93-61, 60 FR 15248 (March 23, 1995), 
which established rules governing the licensing of the Location and 
Monitoring Service (LMS) in the 902-928 MHz band. The Commission 
resolved other issues raised by petitioners in an Order on 
Reconsideration in this docket. 61 FR 18981 (April 30, 1996). This item 
clarifies interconnection limitations for multilateration LMS, as well 
as other issues raised on reconsideration, such as operational 
parameters for non-multilateration systems, treatment of other users of 
the 902-928 MHz band, the structure of the spectrum allocation plan, 
the geographic service area for licensing multilateration LMS, and the 
licensing of wideband forward links. The intended effect of this action 
is to minimize potential interference within and among users of the 
902-928 MHz band.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 5, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Furth or Linda Chang at (202) 
418-0620.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Memorandum Opinion and Order in PR 
Docket No. 93-61, adopted August 28, 1997, and released September 16, 
1997, is available for public inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Dockets Branch, Room 239, 1919 M Street N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20554. The complete text may be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service, 
Inc., 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 (telephone number: 
(202) 857-3800).

Synopsis of Memorandum Opinion and Order

Introduction and Background

    1. LMS refers to advanced radio technologies designed to support 
the nation's transportation infrastructure and to facilitate the growth 
of Intelligent Transportation Systems. In the LMS Report and Order, the 
Commission created a new subpart M in part 90 of the Commission's Rules 
for Transportation Infrastructure Radio Services (TIRS). LMS, which 
encompasses the 20-year-old Automatic Vehicle Monitoring Service as 
well as developing transportation-related services, was deemed to be 
the first service included within the TIRS category. Parties have 
requested that the Commission redesignate TIRS as ITSRS, or 
``Intelligent Transportation Systems Radio Service.'' These parties 
contend that the term ``Intelligent Transportation System'' has become 
widely accepted by other government agencies and in the private sector, 
and would be more descriptive of the types of services contemplated for 
subpart M of part 90. The Commission is persuaded that it would be 
appropriate to refer to LMS and like services as Intelligent 
Transportation Systems Radio Services, and the Commission changes its 
rules accordingly.
    2. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission defined two types of 
LMS systems--multilateration and non-multilateration. Multilateration 
LMS systems are designed to locate vehicles or other objects by 
measuring the difference of time of arrival, or difference in phase, of 
signals transmitted from a unit to a number of fixed points, or from a 
number of fixed points to the unit to be located. Such systems 
generally use spread-spectrum technology to locate vehicles throughout 
a wide geographic area. The Commission defined non-multilateration 
systems as LMS systems that employ any technology other than 
multilateration technology. The Commission noted that unlike a 
multilateration system, which determines the location of a vehicle or 
object over a wide area, a typical non-multilateration system uses 
narrowband technology whereby an electronic device placed in a vehicle 
transfers information to and/or from that vehicle when the vehicle 
passes near one of the system's stations.
    3. LMS operates in the 902-928 MHz frequency band. The band is 
allocated for primary use by Federal Government radiolocation systems. 
Next in order of priority are Industrial, Scientific and Medical (ISM) 
devices. Federal Government fixed and mobile and LMS systems are 
secondary to both of these uses. The remaining uses of the 902-928 MHz 
band include licensed amateur radio operations and unlicensed part 15 
equipment, both of which are secondary to all other uses of the band. 
Part 15 low power devices include, but are not limited to, those used 
for automatic meter reading, inventory control, package tracking and 
shipping control, alarm services, local area networks, internet access 
and cordless telephones. The amateur radio service is used by 
technically inclined private citizens to engage in self-training, 
information exchange and radio experimentation. In the LMS Report and 
Order, the Commission recognized the important contribution to the 
public provided by part 15 technologies and amateur radio operators and 
sought to develop a band plan that would maximize the ability of these 
services to coexist with LMS systems.
    4. The Commission adopted the LMS Report and Order with an eye 
toward minimizing potential interference within and among the various 
users of

[[Page 52037]]

the 902-928 MHz band. The Commission's band plan accordingly permits 
secondary operations across the entire band by users of unlicensed part 
15 devices and amateur licensees. At the same time, the band plan 
separates non-multilateration from multilateration LMS systems in all 
but one subband so as to avert interference. The LMS Report and Order 
also established limitations on LMS systems' interconnection with the 
public switched network and set forth a number of technical 
requirements intended to ensure successful coexistence of all the 
services authorized to operate in the band.
    5. This Memorandum Opinion and Order for the most part affirms 
decisions made by the Commission in the LMS Report and Order as an 
appropriate balancing of the interests of the different uses authorized 
in the band. Where appropriate, the Commission clarifies particular 
aspects of those decisions. First, the Commission reviews petitioners' 
objections to its interconnection restrictions and clarifies that the 
regulatory classification of LMS operators will be determined on a 
case-by-case basis. Next, the Commission addresses petitioners' 
concerns regarding the definition and scope of the non-multilateration 
LMS service. The Commission then discusses issues raised by petitioners 
regarding the ``safe harbor'' within which part 15 devices and amateur 
operators will be deemed not to cause interference to multilateration 
LMS providers. The Commission next addresses petitioners' suggested 
changes to the band plan adopted in the LMS Report and Order, as well 
as its decision to license multilateration LMS systems on a major 
trading area (MTA) basis. The Commission further considers the 
propriety of allowing multilateration wideband forward links to operate 
in the 902-928 MHz band.
A. Eligibility and Permissible Uses
    6. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission recognized that 
multilateration systems may have some need for interconnection with the 
public switched telephone network (PSTN). At the same time, however, 
the Commission recognized that unlimited interconnection by 
multilateration operators would be incompatible with the unique 
technical environment created by different types of services sharing 
the 902-928 MHz band. The Commission was concerned that such activity 
would not only increase the potential for harmful interference to other 
users of the band, but also detract from the location and monitoring 
purposes of the LMS allocation. Accordingly, the Commission adopted 
operational restrictions on multilateration LMS operators to minimize 
interference to all users of the spectrum. These restrictions include 
limitations on messaging services and interconnection with the PSTN, 
and a prohibition against message and data transmissions to fixed units 
and units for which location and monitoring is not being provided.
    7. Of the restrictions listed above, the most discussed by 
petitioners were the Commission's limitations on interconnection. 
Specifically, the Commission in the LMS Report and Order permitted 
``store and forward'' interconnection where either (1) transmissions 
from a vehicle or object being monitored are stored by the 
multilateration LMS provider for later transmission over the PSTN, or 
(2) transmissions received by the multilateration LMS provider from the 
PSTN are stored for later transmission to the vehicle or object being 
monitored. The rules adopted in the LMS Report and Order do not permit 
``real-time'' interconnection between vehicles and the PSTN except for 
emergency communications related to a vehicle or a passenger in a 
vehicle.
    8. In the Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Commission notes that 
only one petitioner supported unrestricted interconnection while the 
majority of parties addressing the issue support at least some 
restriction on LMS interconnection. One commenter suggests a minimum 
time delay of transmission to prevent two way person-to-person 
conversation. Some petitioners who were against permitting any 
multilateration LMS interconnection to the PSTN argue that the 
restrictions adopted by the Commission present substantial enforcement 
problems. They argue that by limiting transmission of messages to 
emergency communications related to the location and monitoring 
functions of the system, the Commission will place multilateration LMS 
operators in the position of having to become substantially involved 
with the content of their customers' communications. Nonetheless, some 
parties, even those that generally oppose interconnection, recognize 
that some interconnected service is needed in the event of an 
emergency.
    9. After revisiting this issue and considering petitioners' 
concerns, the Commission continues to believe that its decision 
regarding limitations on multilateration LMS interconnection reflects a 
necessary balancing of the interests of LMS providers and other users 
of the 902-928 MHz band. Relaxing restrictions on interconnection could 
increase the potential for interference in the band by allowing for 
additional message traffic. The Commission believes that requiring 
messages to be sent on a store-and-forward basis will reduce message 
traffic in the band by making it difficult to conduct a real-time 
conversation using LMS spectrum. However, the Commission concludes that 
real-time interconnection is necessary and appropriate in emergency 
situations. The Commission therefore rejects the arguments of 
commenters asking that the Commission forbid real-time interconnection 
in emergency situations. The Commission believes that to do otherwise 
could impede the development of LMS, to the detriment of Intelligent 
Transportation Systems and, more importantly, would raise significant 
public safety concerns.
    10. The Commission clarifies that ``store and forward'' 
communications as described in the LMS Report and Order refers to a 
storage of voice or data messages for subsequent delivery to the 
recipient. The Commission declines to adopt a specific minimum delay, 
as requested by some petitioners. As a guideline, however, the 
Commission adopts a ``safe harbor'' approach whereby a particular 
message will be considered an acceptable store-and-forward message 
pursuant to its rules if the LMS service provider incorporates at least 
a thirty-second delay between the time a message is stored and the time 
that message is forwarded. This is not to say that a delay of less than 
30 seconds will be unacceptable in all cases, but use of a 30-second 
delay will ensure that the communication will be deemed to fit within 
the definition of a store and forward message with respect to LMS. 
While the Commission considered using a one-minute delay, the 
Commission believes that a thirty-second delay is sufficient to ensure 
that two-way conversation is impractical and will thereby discourage 
use of multilateration LMS for general messaging. The Commission also 
clarifies that emergency communications, for which real-time 
interconnection may be utilized, is equivalent to a 911 or 311 call. 
Such communication must have a direct relation to the immediate safety 
of life or for communications to render assistance to a motorist. If no 
immediate action is necessary, it is not an emergency. All other 
communications should use ``store and forward'' technology.
    11. The Commission recognizes petitioners'' concerns that limiting 
interconnection based on the character

[[Page 52038]]

of the message would be difficult to enforce and therefore raises the 
possibility of abuse. The Commission believes, however, that setting 
forth specific examples of what is or is not an emergency would serve 
no useful purpose and that such a rule could be unduly restrictive. The 
Commission does not intend to monitor the content of messages but 
expects that multilateration operators will be able to demonstrate 
compliance with the interconnection limitations if requested. 
Compliance may be accomplished by equipment that will permit voice 
calls in real time only to 311, 911, and an automobile road service 
provider. Compliance might also be accomplished by multilateration LMS 
operators monitoring transmissions over their facilities and providing 
information regarding their transmissions to the Commission if 
requested. The Commission believes that this type of monitoring will 
not violate section 705 of the Communications Act because it fits 
within the exception for providing information regarding a transmission 
``on demand of other lawful authority.'' The Commission also notes that 
it will, on a case-by-case basis, consider requests for confidential 
treatment of such information. Moreover, the interconnection 
limitations are not tantamount to a restriction on free speech but, 
rather, the interconnection limitations are necessary to define the 
parameters of multilateration LMS service pursuant to the Commission's 
authority under the Communications Act to prescribe the type of service 
to be offered by a particular class of radio stations. 47 U.S.C. 
Sec. 303(b).
    12. The interconnection issues raised by petitioners lead to the 
question of whether multilateration LMS is a Commercial Mobile Radio 
Service (CMRS). Pursuant to section 332(d) of the Communications Act, a 
service is classified as CMRS if it is (1) provided for profit, (2) 
interconnected with the PSTN, and (3) available to the public or 
effectively available to a substantial portion of the public. In the 
CMRS Second Report and Order, GN Docket No. 93-252, 59 FR 1285 (January 
10, 1994), the Commission classified LMS as a Private Mobile Radio 
Service (PMRS). The Commission indicated, however, that should LMS 
systems offer interconnected service in the future, they would be 
subject to reclassification as a presumptively Commercial Mobile Radio 
Service (CMRS). At this juncture, it is unclear to what extent 
multilateration LMS providers will offer any interconnected service, 
notwithstanding their ability to offer some limited interconnection 
capabilities as discussed above. To accommodate the specific service 
offerings anticipated by each multilateration LMS provider, the 
Commission will use a case-by-case approach in determining whether a 
particular service offering is CMRS or PMRS.
B. Other Issues Raised on Reconsideration
    Definition and licensing of nonmultilateration systems antenna 
height and power limitations. 13. In the LMS Report and Order, the 
Commission limited the peak effective radiated power (ERP) of non-
multilateration systems to 30 watts over the licensee's authorized 
bandwidth. The Commission also limited the antenna height above ground 
of these systems to 15 meters. The LMS Report and Order concluded that 
the power and antenna height restrictions will allow non-
multilateration systems to share spectrum more easily with other non-
multilateration systems and with part 15 users. It also concluded that 
the power and antenna height limitations will permit greater frequency 
reuse. The Commission continues to believe that the definition and 
technical specifications of non-multilateration LMS systems adopted in 
the LMS Report and Order reflect a reasoned balancing of the interests 
of the various users of the 902-928 MHz band, and no new information 
has been introduced into the record of this proceeding to persuade us 
otherwise. The restrictions advocated by some of the commenters would 
unduly limit non-multilateration operations, jeopardizing future 
technological developments that could be crucial to the advancement of 
Intelligent Transportation Systems. On the other hand, the higher 
limitations suggested by other commenters could increase the potential 
for interference within the band. The Commission believes that its 
requirements are most conducive to continued sharing of this band, and 
thus the Commission declines to modify the power and antenna height 
restrictions the Commission adopted in the LMS Report and Order. The 
Commission believes that the antenna height and transmitting power 
limits in the current rule accommodate most of the common non-
multilateration applications that would be appropriate for operation in 
this shared spectrum. However, in the event that unique practical 
considerations of a particular installation necessitate a higher 
antenna mounting height, the Commission would consider waiving the rule 
on a case-by-case basis to allow the higher antenna height (but not 
higher power), provided that other comparable technical trade-offs, 
such as reduced power or confined antenna radiation patterns, are 
employed to limit the interference potential.
    Licensing issues. 14. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission 
decided to license non-multilateration LMS systems on a shared basis 
because these systems generally cover relatively short distances, and 
because of its belief that licensing based on a fixed mileage 
separation would limit re-use of spectrum and thereby limit the 
potential uses of non-multilateration systems. The Commission declined 
to adopt a blanket licensing scheme for non-multilateration systems 
whereby, for example, a licensee would be permitted to locate 
transmitter sites anywhere within a given geographic area. The 
Commission instead decided to require non-multilateration systems to 
acquire licenses for each site, concluding that a blanket licensing 
approach would make it difficult for the Commission and the public to 
ascertain the exact location of LMS transmitters.
    15. However, the Commission is persuaded by suggestions from 
commenters that it would be administratively expedient to establish a 
mechanism by which public agencies and other entities can file joint 
applications for non-multilateration systems for purposes of deploying 
a single, region-wide system with multiple sites and multiple readers 
at individual sites. While the Commission anticipates that this 
mechanism will be used primarily by municipalities and government 
agencies, the Commission also believes that other entities seeking to 
establish multiple-site systems should also be able to use a 
streamlined application procedure. The Commission will thus permit 
applicants to file a single application for a non-multilateration 
license covering multiple sites within a given U.S. Department of 
Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis Economic Area (EA). Such an 
application may also be filed jointly by multiple users of a single 
system. In order to avoid uncertainty for other users of the band, the 
application must identify all planned sites and, after receiving the 
license, the licensee must notify the Commission if sites are deleted 
or if new sites are added before those sites become operational. The 
Commission will revise its rules accordingly. The Commission declines, 
however, to revise its rules to specify that the transmissions of non-
multilateration systems are limited to a confined area. The Commission 
believes that this could unnecessarily limit such

[[Page 52039]]

systems' flexibility to configure their facilities for particular uses.
    Accommodation of secondary users in the 902-928 MHz band. 16. To 
accommodate the concerns of part 15 interests regarding their secondary 
status vis-a-vis LMS, the LMS Report and Order adopted a ``safe 
harbor'' within which part 15 devices may operate without fear of being 
deemed to cause interference to LMS operators. Specifically, a part 15 
device will, by definition, not be considered to be causing 
interference to a multilateration LMS system if it is otherwise 
operating in accordance with the provisions of part 15 and meets at 
least one of the following conditions:
    (a) it is a part 15 field disturbance sensor operating in 
compliance with Sec. 15.245 of the rules and it is not operating in the 
904-909.750 or 919.750-928.000 MHz sub-bands; or
    (b) it does not employ an outdoor antenna; or,
    (c) if it does employ an outdoor antenna, then if
    (1) the directional gain of the antenna does not exceed 6 dBi, or 
if the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi, it reduces its 
transmitter output power below 1 watt by the proportional amount that 
the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi; and,
    (2) either
    (A) the antenna is 5 meters or less in height above ground; or,
    (B) the antenna is more than 5 meters in height above ground but 
less than or equal to 15 meters in height above ground and either:
    (i) adjusts its transmitter output power below 1 watt by 20 log (h/
5) dB, where h is the height above ground of the antenna in meters; or,
    (ii) is providing the final link for communications of entities 
eligible under subparts B or C of part 90 of the rules.
    17. In its Order on Reconsideration in this proceeding, the 
Commission denied requests by petitioners that the part 15 safe harbor 
instead be treated as a rebuttable presumption, i.e., that LMS 
licensees be permitted to file complaints of interference regarding 
part 15 devices operating within the safe harbor if the LMS licensees 
believe those part 15 devices are causing harmful interference. The 
Commission concluded that the safe harbor approach represented an 
appropriate balancing of the interests of the various parties sharing 
the 902-928 MHz band. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the 
Commission addresses petitioners' other contentions regarding the safe 
harbor. Specifically, petitioners also challenged the technical 
parameters of the safe harbor and argued that the Commission acted in 
violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. Sec. 551, 
et seq. In addition, some petitioners ask that the safe harbor apply to 
non-multilateration LMS operators as well as multilateration operators.
    Parameters of safe harbor. 18. The Commission believes that the 
safe harbor rule, which was adopted after careful study of the 
extensive record in this proceeding, appropriately balances the 
interests of the various parties operating in the 902-928 MHz band so 
as to limit the potential for harmful interference. In the LMS Report 
and Order, the Commission affirmed that unlicensed part 15 devices in 
the band, as in any other band, may not cause harmful interference to 
and must accept interference from all other operations in the band. It 
also reiterated that unlicensed part 15 operations have no vested or 
recognizable right to continued use of any given frequency. 
Nonetheless, the Commission recognized the concerns of part 15 and 
amateur interests with respect to their secondary status. Accordingly, 
in order to alleviate such concerns and to provide all operators in the 
band with a greater degree of certainty in configuring their systems, 
thereby promoting competitive use of the band, the Commission adopted 
the safe harbor definition of non-interference.
    19. The safe harbor rule is intended to identify part 15 and 
amateur operations that will, in all cases, be deemed not to cause 
harmful interference to LMS operators. The Commission emphasized in the 
LMS Report and Order that part 15 and amateur operations are not 
restricted from operating beyond the parameters of the safe harbor. 
Rather, the safe harbor specifications provide a threshold beyond which 
part 15 and amateur operators will not be insulated from LMS operators' 
claims of harmful interference. The Commission therefore does not 
believe it necessary to add exemptions to the safe harbor as urged by 
some petitioners.
    20. Moreover, the technical specifications of the rule were clearly 
explained in the LMS Report and Order. In general, amateur operators or 
part 15 devices using outdoor antennas that are between five and 15 
meters above the ground must reduce their output power concomitant with 
the height of their antennas in order to fit within the safe harbor. 
The Commission observed that an antenna less than five meters in height 
driven by a transmitter with one watt or less of output power (the 
general power limitation for part 15 devices) will only affect LMS 
operations that are geographically close. A higher antenna, however, 
has the potential to affect a larger number of LMS operations. The 
Commission concluded that the power adjustment assures that between 5 
and 15 meters, an outdoor antenna has the equivalent effect on 
multilateration LMS operations of an antenna five meters high using no 
more than 1 watt transmitter output power. The Commission continues to 
believe that these specifications appropriately balance the interests 
of all the parties in minimizing interference.
    21. The Commission does not believe, as one commenter suggests, 
that the term ``final link'' in Sec. 90.361(c)(2)(ii)(B) of the 
Commission's rules requires much clarification. The term ``final link'' 
is that link in a communications system which terminates with the part 
15 device used by or within the control of the subpart B or C eligible 
entity. The term does not apply to other links in the system used to 
support such communications, e.g., intermediate links or links used by 
non-subpart B or C entities. Therefore, the Commission declines to 
redefine or expand the list of operations included under ``final 
link.''
    22. The Commission is persuaded by petitioners, however, that the 
Commission should expand Sec. 90.361(c)(2)(ii)(B) of the Commission's 
Rules to include schools, libraries and rural health care providers 
within the safe harbor, permitting them to employ full power with 
antennas up to 15 meters. It is apparent from the record that many such 
institutions, particularly schools, may wish to use part 15 devices 
that operate in this band, as well as similar devices that operate in 
the 5 GHz National Information Infrastructure (NII) band, to connect to 
the Internet and other on-line resources. The Commission believes that 
inexpensive access to the national information infrastructure by its 
nation's educational institutions is of sufficiently significant 
benefit to the public to warrant special protection for this limited 
class of part 15 devices. Further, the universal service provisions of 
section 254 of the Communications Act, as amended by the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996, single out schools, libraries and 
public or nonprofit health care providers serving residents of rural 
areas as deserving of special attention so as to enable them to satisfy 
their communications needs. 47 U.S.C. Sec. 254. Accordingly, the 
Commission will include within the safe harbor elementary and secondary 
schools, libraries and health care providers for rural areas as defined 
by section 254.
    23. Further, the Commission recognizes that unlike part 15 devices,

[[Page 52040]]

the vast majority of which could operate within the safe harbor, 
amateur radio operations typically would not fit within the safe harbor 
provisions. Nevertheless, to the extent that amateur operators wish to 
employ the 902-928 MHz band and to operate within the safe harbor 
provisions, they should have the same protection as part 15 devices. 
Further, the Commission reiterates that failure to fit within the safe 
harbor provisions does not prevent operations; such operations may 
continue exactly as before, but are not protected from LMS operators' 
claims of interference.
    24. In addition, the Commission has been asked to clarify whether 
video links are included in the category of ``unprotected'' part 15 
devices for purposes of determining eligibility for the safe harbor. 
They are not. The LMS Report and Order specifically provided that long-
range video links will not be permitted to take advantage of the safe 
harbor. The Commission stated that ``because multilateration entities 
concur that most part 15 interference to multilateration LMS systems is 
likely to be from field disturbance sensors and long range video links, 
the Commission will not make any presumption of interference-free 
operations for these devices when they operate in the exclusive-use 
bands.'' LMS Report and Order at 4717.
    Extend safe harbor to non-multilateration. 25. The Commission has 
also been asked to extend the safe harbor definition to non-
multilateration systems. The safe harbor was intended as a way to 
reduce interference conflicts between multilateration LMS operators and 
part 15 devices and amateur operators in the 902-928 MHz band. 
Specifically, it was designed to provide parameters within which a part 
15 device or amateur operator could operate without being subject to a 
claim that it was interfering with the signal of a multilateration LMS 
operator. Because non-multilateration systems generally employ 
narrowband technology and operate at lower power levels, it is less 
likely that part 15 devices and amateur operators will interfere with 
them, as compared with multilateration LMS systems, which use wider 
bandwidth emissions and operate at higher power levels. Because the 
range of non-multilateration devices is relatively small, there is less 
chance of part 15 and amateur radio devices being located within their 
area of operation. Moreover, the record does not reveal actual or 
potential interference between non-multilateration and part 15 devices. 
To the contrary, there appears to be substantial evidence that there is 
little likelihood of interference. For these reasons, the Commission 
does not believe that it is either necessary or appropriate to extend 
the definition of the safe harbor so as to insulate part 15 and amateur 
operators from claims of interference by non-multilateration systems.
    Administrative Procedure Act. 26. Some petitioners contend that the 
Commission's adoption of a safe harbor was a violation of the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), because it was not proposed in the 
Notice in this proceeding and was therefore adopted without the 
required notice and opportunity for public comment. The Commission does 
not agree that the safe harbor setting forth conditions that will not 
be considered harmful interference from amateurs and part 15 devices 
violated the APA. The APA requires an agency to provide the public with 
``either the terms or the substance of a proposed rule or a description 
of the subject and issues involved.'' 5 U.S.C. Sec. 553(B)(3). The APA, 
however, ``does not require an agency to publish in advance every 
precise proposal which it may ultimately adopt as a rule.'' California 
Citizens Band Association v. United States, 375 F.2d 43, 48 (9th 
Cir.1967). Rather, the notice is sufficient if the final rule is a 
``logical outgrowth'' of the underlying proposal. United Steelworkers 
v. Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189, 1221 (D.C. Cir.1980). The Commission 
believes that the safe harbor was a logical outgrowth of the Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making in this proceeding, PR Docket No. 93-61, 58 FR 
21276 (April 20, 1993), which sought comment on ways to accommodate the 
various users of the 902-928 MHz band and identified specifically the 
problems surrounding coexistence of part 15 and licensed users of the 
band. Moreover, the suggestion of a part 15 safe harbor was discussed 
in publicly-filed ex parte submissions.
    Spectrum Allocation Plan. 27. The LMS Report and Order allocated 
the entire 902-928 MHz frequency band for LMS systems, generally 
separating multilateration and non-multilateration operations, as 
follows:

A: 902.000-904.000  Non-Multilateration
B: 904.000-909.750  Multilateration
C: 909.750-919.750  Non-Multilateration
D: 919.750-921.750  Multilateration and Non-Multilateration
E: 921.750-927.250  Multilateration
F: 927.250-927.500  Narrow band associated with sub-band E
G: 927.500-927.750  Narrow band associated with sub-band D
H: 927.750-928.000  Narrow band associated with sub-band B

Thus, the Commission concluded that bands B and E will be assigned to 
multilateration systems. Bands A and C will be assigned to non-
multilateration systems. Band D will be subject to both multilateration 
and non-multilateration use. Licensees of bands B, D and E will be 
assigned narrow bands H, G and F, respectively. Operators requiring 
additional spectrum will be permitted to aggregate bands to obtain up 
to eight MHz in a given region through the aggregation of bands D and G 
and bands E and F. The Commission concluded that licensees may not 
otherwise be authorized to operate on more than one of the 
multilateration bands in a given geographic area.
    28. As the Commission stated in the LMS Report and Order, the 
Commission believes that both multilateration and non-multilateration 
LMS systems will play an important role in achieving a nationwide 
intelligent highway infrastructure. The Commission accordingly devised 
a band plan that, for the most part, creates separate allocations for 
the two types of LMS systems and takes into consideration the 
interference concerns of non-LMS users of the 902-928 MHz band. Upon 
review of parties' responses to its Notice of Proposed Rule Making in 
this proceeding, however, the Commission decided to allocate the 2 MHz 
of subband D to be shared by multilateration and non-multilateration 
users so as to provide non-multilateration users with the possibility 
of obtaining additional contiguous spectrum.
    29. The Commission does not agree with comments that its band plan 
was illogical or that sharing between multilateration and non-
multilateration operators is not feasible. Because the Commission 
agrees that it is preferable that multilateration and non-
multilateration facilities do not operate in the same spectrum, the 
Commission adopted a band plan that, for the most part, allocated 
separate blocks of spectrum for multilateration and non-multilateration 
systems. Its modification to the proposed band plan represented an 
effort to respond to the concern that some non-multilateration systems 
might need additional spectrum, without taking any spectrum away from 
multilateration users. The Commission concluded that it would be 
appropriate to permit those few multilateration users the opportunity 
to obtain additional spectrum by permitting them to share the 2 MHz of 
subband D.
    30. In addition, the Commission declines to adopt the proposal that 
it allocate an additional 2 MHz of contiguous spectrum for non-

[[Page 52041]]

multilateration providers. The Commission believes that the band plan 
adopted in the LMS Report and Order appropriately balances the needs 
and interests of multilateration and non-multilateration operators, as 
well as part 15 and amateur users of the band. For this reason, the 
Commission also declines to adopt exclusive subbands for parties 
willing to time share, or for part 15 users. Doing so would upset the 
equilibrium among users of the band. Such an allocation would also 
ignore the secondary status of part 15 providers in that it would 
afford unlicensed devices co-primary status vis-a-vis licensed 
operators.
    Geographic areas for exclusive licenses. 31. Rand McNally organizes 
the 50 states and the District of Columbia into 47 Major Trading Areas 
(MTAs) and 487 Basic Trading Areas (BTAs). In the LMS Report and Order, 
the Commission concluded that MTAs and fits additional MTA-like service 
areas provide a more suitable regulatory construct for multilateration 
licensing than the smaller BTAs. The Commission determined that use of 
MTAs, as defined in the Rand McNally Commercial Atlas and Marketing 
Guide, will give systems greater capacity to accommodate large number 
of prospective users which, in turn, will promote competition and 
encourage advancement of new technologies. The rules adopted in the LMS 
Report and Order provide for one exclusive multilateration system 
license in each MTA in each of the sub-bands identified for exclusive 
assignments (B and H, D and G, E and F).
    32. After a thorough review of the record in this proceeding and 
upon further reflection regarding this issue, the Commission concludes 
that the relevant geographic areas for multilateration LMS licenses 
should be based on U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic 
Analysis Economic Areas (EAs). There are 172 EAs covering the 
continental United States.
    33. Because EAs have not been established for the five U.S. 
possessions (Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin 
Islands, American Samoa), the Commission will create additional 
licensing regions for systems operating in these territories as well as 
for the Gulf of Mexico. Specifically, the Commission will designate the 
following additional licensing regions: (1) Guam and the Northern 
Mariana Islands (to be licensed as a single area); (2) Puerto Rico and 
the U.S. Virgin Islands (to be licensed as a single area); and (3) 
American Samoa. In addition, Alaska will be licensed as a single area. 
The Commission believes that EAs are large enough to give systems 
sufficient capacity to accommodate large numbers of prospective users, 
which will promote competition, encourage new technologies and result 
in superior service to the public. At the same time, EAs are small 
enough to alleviate any BTA/MTA warehousing concerns noted in the 
comments. Further, use of smaller geographic units could result in a 
more diverse group of prospective licensees because EA-based licenses 
may be more affordable for small and medium-sized businesses than would 
MTA-based licenses. The Commission concludes that such an outcome not 
only is desirable but furthers the public interest and one of the goals 
enunciated in section 309(j) of the Communications Act. 47 U.S.C. 
309(j). Moreover, EAs are better suited than MTAs to a service aimed at 
improving the nation's transportation infrastructure because EAs are 
based on urban, suburban and rural traffic patterns. Further, use of 
EAs solves the copyright problem raised by Rand McNally, because EAs 
are published by the U.S. Department of Commerce.
    Multilateration system operations--wideband forward links
    34. In the LMS Report and Order the Commission allowed LMS 
multilateration systems to use wideband forward links. A forward link 
refers to the signal path from the LMS system's fixed base site to its 
mobile units. The Commission noted that unlike a narrowband forward 
link, a wideband forward link can operate over a multilateration 
system's entire authorized sub-band. This concerned part 15 interests, 
who, the Commission pointed out, opposed authorization of wideband 
forward links because they believed that wideband forward links are 
likely to cause interference to part 15 devices. The Commission 
emphasized that grant of multilateration licenses will be conditioned 
on the applicant's ability to demonstrate through field testing that 
its system does not cause unacceptable levels of interference to part 
15 devices. It also limited the maximum power of wideband forward links 
to 30 watts ERP.
    35. The Commission believes that elimination of wideband forward 
links would preclude certain LMS technology options from being 
developed, to the detriment of consumers. At the same time, the 
Commission continues to believe that the power limitation of 30 watts 
ERP is necessary and appropriate to minimize interference to other 
operators sharing the 902-928 MHz band. As the Commission noted in the 
LMS Report and Order, limiting base and mobile stations' power levels 
will lessen the potential for interference between co-channel 
multilateration systems and will reduce the likelihood of interference 
to other operations in the 902-928 MHz band. Further, pre-authorization 
testing will be a condition on the license of multilateration LMS 
operators seeking to employ wideband forward links. The Commission does 
not agree with with comments that adoption of a duty cycle limitation 
would allow increased power for wideband forward links without 
increasing the interference potential. With wideband forward link 
technology, each vehicular unit to be located must be able to receive 
transmissions from at least four different forward link transmitters. 
These transmitters operate sequentially, passing a ``token'' packet. 
Consequently, although a duty cycle limitation could be applied to each 
individual forward link transmitter, considered collectively, there 
would almost always be at least one transmitter transmitting in an area 
at any given time. Taking into consideration the greater range of a 
base transmitter, as compared to a mobile transmitter, and the amount 
of spectrum occupied by the wideband forward link, the Commission 
believes allowing higher power for wideband forward links would 
unacceptably increase band congestion.
    36. Also, the Commission declines to permit grandfathered systems 
to deploy additional transmitters on the basis of a 30-mile radius. The 
rationale for this is essentially to allow comparable coverage for its 
particular technology as compared to technologies using narrowband 
forward links. The Commission has found that, in the 902-928 MHz band, 
it is necessary to have a common set of technical limits in order to 
facilitate co-occupancy among the various band users. Each different 
technology operating within these limits, however, will likely have 
advantages and disadvantages as compared to the others, including the 
matter of coverage. The Commission does not have sufficient experience 
with operating LMS systems to craft a rule that would be appropriate 
for all potential LMS technologies. To the extent that grandfathered 
systems seek to add fill-in sites that do not increase their coverage 
footprint, the Commission believes such requests should be handled on a 
case-by-case basis.
    37. The comments have raised the issue of whether LMS technology 
may be used to track individuals as well as vehicles. The rules adopted 
in the LMS Report and Order permit a

[[Page 52042]]

multilateration LMS system to provide non-vehicular location services 
as long as the system's primary operations involve the provision of 
vehicle location services. 47 CFR 90.353(a)(7). The Commission does not 
share the concern that LMS will become a paging service. The rule 
clearly provides that such non-vehicular location functions may not be 
an LMS operation's primary function. To afford multilateration LMS 
operators maximum flexibility in designing their systems, the 
Commission also declines to adopt a specific cap on non-vehicular 
location services. Non-multilateration LMS operators, on the other 
hand, are specifically prohibited from offering non-vehicular location 
services. The Commission adopted this restriction because the spectrum 
occupied by non-multilateration LMS operators has a heavier 
concentration of amateur radio operators, part 15 devices and federal 
government radiolocation operations than do other portions of the band. 
The Commission continues to believe that this approach minimizes the 
potential for interference and the Commission therefore declines to 
revise its rules.
    Petitions for reconsideration of Order on Reconsideration. 38. On 
May 30, 1996, three parties filed petitions for reconsideration of the 
Order on Reconsideration, which, as noted above, had resolved certain 
issues regarding grandfathering of existing LMS systems that had been 
raised on reconsideration of the LMS Report and Order. Those 
petitioners, Amtech Corporation, Pinpoint Communication Networks, Inc., 
and Teletrac License, Inc., seek reconsideration of different aspects 
of the Order on Reconsideration. For the reasons detailed below, each 
of these petitions is denied, except that the Commission will make a 
technical correction to the rules requested by Amtech.
    39. Amtech Petition. Amtech, a non-multilateration LMS provider, 
asserts that the Commission should revise the emission mask 
specifications of section 90.209 as applied to transmitters with less 
than two watts output power. Specifically, Amtech proposes that the 
attenuation for out-of-band emissions produced by non-multilateration 
transmitters of two watts or less be specified as 43+10 Log(P) rather 
than 55+10 Log(P). Amtech contends that it has employed this limit for 
a number of years and that it is the same limit applied in other 
contexts for systems that can have greater height and power than non-
multilateration systems. Amtech argues that use of the stricter 55+10 
Log(P) standard imposes significant costs and is not necessary due to 
the limited interference potential of non-multilateration systems. The 
Commission is not persuaded that Amtech has presented sufficient 
evidence to support its contention that the standard adopted in the LMS 
Report and Order is overly restrictive. The Commission continues to 
believe that that standard is the most appropriate given the disparate 
users of the 902-928 MHz band.
    40. Amtech also urges the Commission to revise the relevant 
emission mask rule (formerly section 90.209, now section 90.210) to 
conform with the rule as originally adopted in the LMS Report and 
Order, wherein the attenuation applied at the edge of the licensee's 
LMS subband rather than at the edge of the ``authorized bandwidth.'' 
The Commission did not intend in the Order on Reconsideration to revise 
the emission mask for non-multilateration LMS licensees and the 
Commission will make appropriate changes to section 90.210 to make that 
clear.
    41. Pinpoint Petition. Pinpoint, a multilateration LMS licensee, 
takes issue with the statement in the Order on Reconsideration that
    [T]he Commission seeks to ensure not only that part 15 operators 
refrain from causing harmful interference to LMS systems, but also that 
LMS systems are not operated in such a manner as to degrade, obstruct 
or interrupt part 15 devices to such an extent that part 15 operations 
will be negatively affected.
    Pinpoint contends that this language is inconsistent with part 15 
devices' secondary status in the LMS band and that it constitutes a 
``new standard'' with respect to LMS operators' obligations vis-a-vis 
part 15 devices. Pinpoint argues that this ``new standard'' conflicts 
with the statement in the LMS Report and Order that unlicensed part 15 
devices ``may not cause harmful interference to and must accept 
interference from all other operations in the band.''
    42. The language in the Order on Reconsideration cited by Pinpoint 
does not mean that part 15 devices are entitled to protection from 
interference. They are not. Rather, the Commission was explaining its 
decision to place a testing condition on multilateration LMS licenses. 
The purpose of the testing condition is to insure that multilateration 
LMS licensees, when designing and constructing their systems, take into 
consideration a goal of minimizing interference to existing deployments 
or systems of part 15 devices in their area, and to verify through 
cooperative testing that this goal has been served.
    43. Teletrac Petition. Teletrac seeks reconsideration of the 
restriction in Sec. 90.363(a) of the Commission's Rules, originally 
adopted in the LMS Report and Order and affirmed in the Order on 
Reconsideration, that limits site relocation for grandfathered LMS 
licensees to within two kilometers of their authorized site. Teletrac 
submits that removing this restriction would be in the public interest 
because it would permit grandfathered multilateration LMS operators to 
improve the efficiency of their systems. The Commission is not 
persuaded that Teletrac has raised any new arguments to justify its 
further reconsideration of this rule. The Commission notes that it has 
granted Teletrac waivers of this rule with respect to three specific 
sites.
    44. Teletrac also urges the Commission to clarify that the part 15 
safe harbor only applies to part 15 operations authorized pursuant to 
the part 15 rules in effect at the time the safe harbor rule was 
adopted. Teletrac submits that the presumption of non-interference in 
the safe harbor rule assumes that the part 15 rules as they existed 
when the safe harbor rule was adopted will remain in place. Teletrac 
notes that the Commission has proposed changes to the rules. Since the 
time Teletrac raised this point, the Commission has adopted changes to 
the part 15 rules. The Commission does not believe that the modified 
rules conflict with the safe harbor. Amendment of parts 2 and 15 of the 
Commission's Rules Regarding Spread Spectrum Transmitters, Report and 
Order, ET Docket 96-8, 62 FR 26239 (May 13, 1997). To the extent 
Teletrac continues to have concerns that the new rules are incompatible 
with the safe harbor, it should detail those concerns with the 
Commission.

II. Procedural Matters

Ex Parte Rules--Non-Restricted Proceeding
    45. This is a non-restricted notice and comment rulemaking 
proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the 
Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in 
Commission Rules. See generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, 1.1206.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
    46. The Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for this Memorandum 
Opinion and Order, as required by section 604 of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. Secs. 604, is as follows:
Need For and Purpose of the Action
    47. The revised rules adopted in this Memorandum Opinion and Order 
will enhance use of the 902-928 MHz band

[[Page 52043]]

for the Location and Monitoring Service. The revised rules will create 
a more stable environment for LMS licensees and will provide much 
needed flexibility for operators of such systems. The two changes made 
to the LMS rules in this item (1) change the basis for wide-area 
licensing of LMS systems to EAs rather than MTAs, and (2) add schools, 
libraries and rural health care providers to the list of entities 
exempt from the antenna height and operating power requirements of the 
part 15 safe harbor.
    48. Issues raised in response to the IRFA: No comments were 
submitted in response to the IRFA.
    49. Description and number of small entities involved: The 
Commission has not adopted a definition of small business specific to 
LMS systems, which are defined in Sec. 90.7 of the Commission's Rules. 
Accordingly, we will use the SBA's definition applicable to 
radiotelephone companies, i.e., an entity employing fewer than 1,500 
persons. We anticipate that most LMS licensees will fit the definition 
of small business provided by the SBA. No auctions have been held for 
the LMS service.
    The Commission expects to award three licenses in each of 176 EAs 
or EA-like areas, for a total of 528 licenses.
    50. Reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements: The 
rules adopted in this do not impose any additional reporting, 
recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements.
    51. Steps taken to minimize burdens on small entities: This 
Memorandum Opinion and Order concludes that the relevant geographic 
areas for multilateration LMS licenses should be based on U.S. 
Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis Economic Areas (EAs) 
rather than Major Trading Areas (MTAs). The record indicates that 
existing and planned multilateration systems better approximate an EA 
than the geographically larger MTA. Use of smaller geographic units 
could ultimately result in a more diverse group of prospective bidders 
by creating more opportunities for small businesses. The Memorandum 
Opinion and Order also modifies the ``part 15 safe harbor'' by 
expanding the list of entities exempt from applicable height and power 
restrictions, to include health care providers in rural areas, schools 
and libraries. In many instances, the rooftop antennas of these 
entities would not fit within the parameters of the safe harbor. The 
record of this proceeding indicates that such institutions use part 15 
technology as a low-cost means to connect to the Internet and other 
valuable on-line resources; this rule change would facilitate their 
ability to do so without raising concerns about interference to LMS 
providers in the same area.
    52. Significant alternatives considered and rejected: The 
Memorandum Opinion and Order considers the remaining issues raised in 
petitions for reconsideration of the Report and Order in PR Docket No. 
93-61 that established licensing and operational rules for the Location 
and Monitoring Services (LMS). An Order on Reconsideration adopted in 
March 1996 resolved a limited set of issues relating to rights and 
obligations of existing multilateration LMS licensees. This Memorandum 
Opinion and Order resolves the remaining issues raised by petitioners. 
The Memorandum and Order concludes that restrictions on the ability of 
multilateration LMS licensees to offer interconnected service should be 
maintained to minimize interference between LMS and part 15 and amateur 
operations. The Memorandum Opinion and Order also denies requests that 
antenna height and power limitations for non-multilateration operators 
be either relaxed or further restricted, and denies a request that we 
adopt a blanket authorization procedure for extensive non-
multilateration LMS systems licensed to local government or public 
safety eligibles.
    53. In addition, the Memorandum Opinion and Order denies requests 
to modify the ``safe harbor'' provisions for part 15 devices and 
amateur operators, and denies requests to extend the definition of the 
safe harbor to apply to claims of interference by non-multilateration 
systems. The Memorandum Opinion and Order does, however, adopt a rule 
provision specifically including schools, libraries and rural health 
care providers within the safe harbor regardless of their antenna 
height and operating power. The item also denies requests to change the 
band plan for LMS, but does conclude that multilateration LMS systems 
will be licensed on an EA basis rather than an MTA basis. Finally, the 
Memorandum Opinion and Order denies requests that wideband forward 
links be prohibited.
    54. Report to Congress: The Commission shall send a copy of this 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis with this Memorandum Opinion and 
Order in a report to Congress pursuant to section 251 of the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 
Sec. 801(a)(1)(A).
    55. Paperwork Reduction. This matter has been analyzed with respect 
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and was found to impose no new 
or modified information collection requirement on the public. 
Implementation of any new or modified requirement will be subject to 
approval by the Office of Management and Budget, as prescribed by the 
Act.

III. Ordering Clauses

    56. It is ordered that, pursuant to the authority of Sections 4(i), 
302, 303(r), and 332(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. Secs. 154(i), 302, 303(r), and 332(a), the rule 
changes specified in this Memorandum Opinion and Order are adopted.
    57. It is further ordered that the rule changes set forth in this 
Memorandum Opinion & Order will become effective December 5, 1997.
    58. It is further ordered that the petitions for reconsideration 
filed by the parties listed in the original text of the Memorandum 
Opinion & Order are granted to the extent discussed herein, and are 
otherwise denied.
    59. It is further ordered that the petitions for reconsideration of 
the Order on Reconsideration filed by Pinpoint Communication Networks, 
Inc. and Teletrac License, Inc., are denied.
    60. It is further ordered that the petition for reconsideration of 
the Order on Reconsideration filed by Amtech Corporation is granted to 
the extent specified herein and is otherwise denied.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 90

    Common carriers, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.

Rule Changes

    Part 90 of Chapter I of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
is amended as follows:

PART 90--PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

    1. The authority citation for part 90 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 4, 251-2, 303, 309, and 332, 48 Stat. 1066, 
1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 251-2, 303, 309 and 332, unless 
otherwise noted.

    2. The heading for subpart M of part 90 is revised to read 
``Intelligent Transportation Systems Radio Service.''
    3. Section 90.7 is amended by revising the definition for ``EA-
based or EA license'' to read as follows:


Sec. 90.7  Definitions.

* * * * *

[[Page 52044]]

    EA-based or EA license. A license authorizing the right to use a 
specified block of SMR or LMS spectrum within one of the 175 Economic 
Areas (EAs) as defined by the Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic 
Analysis. The EA Listings and the EA Map are available for public 
inspection at the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau's public reference 
room, Room 5608, 2025 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20554 and Office of 
Operations--Gettysburg, 1270 Fairfield Road, Gettysburg, PA 17325.
* * * * *
    4. Section 90.155 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 90.155  Time in which station must be placed in operation.

* * * * *
    (d) Multilateration LMS systems authorized in accordance with 
Section 90.353 must be constructed and placed in operation within 
twelve (12) months from the date of grant or the authorization cancels 
automatically and must be returned to the Commission. EA-licensed 
multilateration LMS systems will be considered constructed and placed 
in operation if such systems construct a sufficient number of base 
stations that utilize multilateration technology (see paragraph (e) of 
this section) to provide multilateration location service to at least 
\1/3\ of the counties in the EA.
* * * * *
    5. Section 90.210 is amended by revising paragraph (k)(3) and 
adding paragraph (k)(6) to read as follows:


Sec. 90.210  Emission masks.

* * * * *
    (k) * * *
    (3) Other transmitters. For all other transmitters authorized under 
Subpart M, the peak power of any emission shall be attenuated below the 
power of the highest emission contained within the licensee's LMS sub-
band in accordance with the following schedule:
    (i) On any frequency within the authorized bandwidth: Zero dB;
    (ii) On any frequency outside the licensee's LMS sub-band edges: 
55+10log(P) dB where (P) is the highest emission (watts) of the 
transmitter inside the licensee's LMS sub-band.
* * * * *
    (6) The LMS sub-band edges for non-multilateration systems for 
which emissions must be attenuated are 902.00, 904.00, 909.5 and 921.75 
MHz.


Sec. 90.350  [Amended]

    6. Section 90.350 is amended by replacing the two occurrences of 
the phrase ``Transportation Infrastructure Radio Service'' with 
``Intelligent Transportation Systems Radio Service.''
    7. Section 90.353 is amended by revising paragraphs (d), (e) and 
(f) and by adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:


Sec. 90.353  LMS operations in the 902-928 MHz band.

* * * * *
    (d) Multilateration LMS systems will be authorized on a primary 
basis within the bands 904-909.75 MHz and 921.75-927.25 MHz. 
Additionally, multilateration and non-multilateration systems will 
share the 919.75-921.75 MHz band on a co-equal basis. Licensing will be 
on the basis of Economic Areas (EAs) for multilateration systems, with 
one exclusive EA license being issued for each of these three sub-
bands. Except as provided in paragraph (f) of this section, 
multilateration EA licensees may be authorized to operate on only one 
of the three multilateration bands within a given EA. Additionally, EA 
multilateration LMS licenses will be conditioned upon the licensee's 
ability to demonstrate through actual field tests that their systems do 
not cause unacceptable levels of interference to 47 CFR part 15 
devices.
    (e) Multilateration EA-licensed systems and grandfathered AVM 
systems (see Sec. 90.363) are authorized on a shared basis and must 
cooperate in the selection and use of frequencies in accordance with 
Section 90.173(b).
    (f) Multilateration EA licensees may be authorized to operate on 
both the 919.75-921.75 MHz and 921.75-927.25 MHz bands within a given 
EA (see Sec. 90.209(b)(10)).
* * * * *
    (i) Non-multilateration LMS licenses will be issued on a site-by-
site basis, except that municipalities or other governmental operatives 
may file jointly for a non-multilateration license covering a given 
U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis Economic Area 
(EA). Such an application must identify all planned sites. After 
receiving the license, the non-multilateration EA licensee must notify 
the Commission if sites are deleted or if new sites are added, before 
those sites may be put into operation.
    8. Section 90.359 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 90.359  Field strength limits for EA-licensed LMS systems.

    EA-licensed multilateration systems shall limit the field strength 
of signals transmitted from their base stations to 47 dBuV/m at their 
EA boundary.
    9. Section 90.361 is amended by revising the introductory text and 
paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(B) to read as follows:


Sec. 90.361  Interference from part 15 and Amateur operations.

    Operations authorized under Parts 15 and 97 of this chapter may not 
cause harmful interference to LMS systems in the 902-928 MHz band. 
These operations will not be considered to be causing harmful 
interference to a multilateration LMS system operating in one of the 
three EA sub-bands (see Sec. 90.357(a)) if they are non-video links 
operating in accordance with the provisions of Parts 15 or 97 of this 
chapter and at least one of the following conditions are met:
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (B) Is providing the final link for communications of entities 
eligible under subpart B or C of this Part, or is providing the final 
link for communications of health care providers that serve rural 
areas, elementary schools, secondary schools or libraries.

[FR Doc. 97-26415 Filed 10-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P