[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 97 (Thursday, May 21, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23799-23803]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11908]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 90

[WP Docket No. 07-100; FCC 09-29]


Private Land Mobile Radio Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document addresses revisions to the Commission's rules 
and policies regarding private land mobile radio (PLMR) services and 
particularly public safety operations. In the Report and Order portion 
of this document, the Commission accords primary status to 4.9 GHz band 
permanent fixed stations that are used to deliver broadband service; 
harmonizes output power measurement procedures for 4.9 GHz technology 
with procedures for similar devices that are regulated by part 15 of 
the Commission's rules; and clarifies that cross-band repeaters are 
permitted for all public safety systems. The Commission makes these 
changes to reduce uncertainty in the rules and harmonize the rules. The 
intended effect for public safety licensees is to allow additional 
flexibility, create opportunities for public safety users to benefit 
from speedier deployment of new technologies in the 4.9 GHz band, and 
lead to expanded use of 4.9 GHz broadband networks. The intended effect 
for manufacturers is to allow technologies similar to those covered by 
part 15 to be used in the 4.9 GHz band, resulting in speedier 
deployment of new technologies in this band. The intended effect of the 
cross-banding rule change is to enhance communications among public 
safety agencies operating in various frequency bands.

DATES: Effective June 22, 2009.

ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for locations where the public 
may inspect, copy, or purchase hardcopies of the Report and Order and 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Eng, Policy Division, Public 
Safety and Homeland Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 
Washington, DC 20554, at (202) 418-0019, TTY (202) 418-7233, via e-mail 
at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e7b38f888a8694c9a28980a7818484c9808891"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="99cdf1f6f4f8eab7dcf7fed9fffafab7fef6ef">[email protected]</span></a>, or via U.S. Mail at Federal Communications 
Commission, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, 445 12th 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Report and Order 
portion of the Commission's Report and Order and Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking in WP Docket No. 07-100, adopted on April 7, 2009 
and released on April 9, 2009. The complete text of this document is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased 
from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, 
Inc., in person at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554, via telephone at (202) 488-5300, via facsimile at (202) 488-
5563, or via e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cf898c8c8f8d8c9f86988a8de1aca0a2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5016131310121300190715127e333f3d">[email protected]</span></a>. Alternative formats (computer 
diskette, large print, audio cassette, and Braille) are available to 
persons with disabilities or by sending an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#34727777010400745257571a535b42"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="773134344247433711141459101801">[email protected]</span></a> 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.
    The major decisions in the Report and Order are as follows:
    <bullet> Amends Sec.  90.1207 of the Commission's rules, which 
governs licensing of the 4.9 GHz band, to grant primary status to 
stand-alone permanent fixed links that are used to deliver broadband 
service and permanent fixed links that connect 4.9 GHz base and mobile 
stations that are used to deliver broadband services, as well as other 
public safety networks using spectrum designated for broadband use.
    <bullet> Amends Sec.  90.1215 of the Commission's rules to require 
the same output power measurement procedures for 4.9 GHz technology as 
those required for devices that use digital modulation techniques and 
are regulated by part 15 of the Commission's rules.
    <bullet> Continues to permit paging operations on Very High 
Frequency (VHF) public safety frequencies.
    <bullet> Modifies the existing language in Sec.  90.243(b)(1) to 
clarify that cross-band repeaters are permitted for all public safety 
systems.
    <bullet> Declines to amend Sec.  90.20 to authorize privately-run 
metropolitan transit systems to use frequencies in the Public Safety 
Pool.

4.9 GHz Band

    In the earlier Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), 72 FR 35190, 
June 27, 2007, in this proceeding, the Commission sought comment on two 
proposals by M/A-COM to modify the Commission's rules regarding the 4.9 
GHz band. First, M/A-COM asks the Commission for an amendment to Sec.  
90.1207(c) that would ``clarify that

[[Page 23800]]

point-to-point and point-to-multipoint fixed links in the 4.9 GHz 
public safety networks are co-primary with mobile links'' and ``grant 
primary status to fixed links connecting public safety networks with 
each other using the 4940-4990 MHz band.'' Second, M/A-COM proposes to 
add a new Sec.  90.1215(d) thereby updating this section ``consistent 
with changes the Commission * * * made to Sec.  15.407(a) of its 
rules'' (i.e., reflecting the same revised measurement procedures 
adopted by the Commission for devices that use digital modulation 
techniques regulated by part 15).
    Primary Status to Certain Fixed Links. Sec.  90.1207 currently 
provides 4.9 GHz licensees with authority to ``operate base and mobile 
units (including portable and handheld units) and operate temporary (1 
year or less) fixed stations,'' but not to ``operate permanent fixed 
point-to-point stations.'' Further, Sec.  90.2107 provides that 
``[l]icensees choosing to operate [permanent fixed point-to-point 
stations] must license them individually on a site-by-site basis'' and 
``will be authorized only on a secondary, non-interference basis to 
base, mobile and temporary fixed operations.'' In its petition seeking 
clarifications regarding the 4.9 GHz band rules, M/A-COM states that 
``the Commission did not define * * * [the] allocation status of hot 
spots or temporary fixed links, i.e., whether such hot spots and links 
have primary or secondary status, and the Commission's part 90 rules do 
not address the allocation status of such links.'' Therefore, M/A-COM 
states that the ``present part 90 rules create regulatory uncertainty--
as they are vague or potentially inconsistent with the 4.9 GHz Third 
Report and Order, 68 FR 38635, June 30, 2003--and could discourage 
public safety users and first responders from deploying * * * broadband 
networks.'' M/A-COM states that ``public safety users and first 
responders will need integrated networks with scalable network 
architectures that allow for dynamic routing of traffic over both fixed 
and mobile links,'' and thus proposes that the Commission amend its 
part 90 rules to ``grant primary status to point-to-point and point-to-
multipoint fixed links that are part of a 4.9 GHz public safety 
network.'' M/A-COM adds that ``the Commission should continue to grant 
secondary status to traditional, stand-alone point-to-point links for 
purposes such as backhaul.''
    The Commission sought comment on ``M/A-COM's proposal to expressly 
afford primary status to certain permanent fixed links,'' while also 
asking if, ``given the limited amount of spectrum in the 4.9 GHz band, 
permitting fixed operations on a primary basis may result in severely 
limiting the spectral availability and reliability of both permanent 
and ad hoc mobile networks.'' The Commission asked whether ``adoption 
of M/A-COM's proposal would compromise the ability of public safety 
agencies to utilize the band for temporary `incident scene' operations, 
a use that received overwhelming support in the record of WT Docket No. 
00-32.'' Finally, the Commission asked if the M/A-COM proposal would 
``provide more flexible use of this band,'' and whether ``such 
flexibility would come at the expense of maintaining adequate spectrum 
for mission-critical public safety mobile operations.''
    Most commenters, including several public safety organizations, 
indicate that the Commission should clarify its rules to afford primary 
status to fixed point-to-point and point-to-multipoint links operating 
as part of an integrated 4.9 GHz public safety broadband network. The 
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 
(AASHTO), the Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC), and the 
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council generally support 
primary status for 4.9 GHz permanent fixed links that deliver broadband 
service.
    We find that it is in the public interest to clarify whether 
certain fixed links in the 4.9 GHz band are primary or secondary in 
order to facilitate public safety broadband use of the band and to 
minimize confusion in the marketplace. In this regard, we modify our 
rules to accord primary status to fixed links that connect 4.9 GHz base 
and mobile stations that are used to deliver broadband service, as well 
as other public safety networks using spectrum designated for broadband 
use. We also accord primary status to stand-alone permanent fixed 4.9 
GHz links that are used to deliver broadband service, such as a fixed 
video surveillance link used to monitor a high-risk target or 
environment. In contrast, fixed 4.9 GHz links that only connect 
narrowband base stations operating in public safety bands not 
designated for broadband (i.e., public safety UHF, VHF, narrowband 700 
MHz, and 800 MHz) to other networks, or serve to backhaul narrowband 
traffic originating from narrowband base stations, will remain 
secondary. We limit primary status to fixed links in this manner to 
preserve and ensure the use of the 4.9 GHz public safety band in 
serving broadband needs. We believe that proper frequency coordination 
among public safety agencies in a given location will ensure that 
different services and technologies can operate unimpeded without 
causing interference. We want to make certain that public safety can 
reliably establish broadband networks (e.g., permanent or temporary 
hot-spot networks) to transmit broadband data without concern of 
interference. Consistent with existing rules, permanent fixed point-to-
point and to point-to-multipoint links accorded primary status must use 
directional antennas with gains over 9 dBi up to 26 dBi. Permanent 
fixed links used for traditional backhaul that only carry narrowband 
traffic remain secondary and must be licensed separately, as specified 
in Sec.  90.1207(d).
    We find that this rule change is consistent with the Commission's 
vision for the 4.9 GHz band and is supported by public safety 
commenters. The Commission endeavored to provide 4.9 GHz band public 
safety licensees with the maximum operational flexibility practicable 
consistent with its vision for the 4.9 GHz band. We believe that 
providing primary status for fixed links as described above will 
provide additional flexibility for public safety and thereby lead to 
expanded use of 4.9 GHz broadband networks. Finally, we find that the 
rule change addresses concerns about the uncertainty that secondary 
status may introduce in 4.9 GHz broadband networks utilizing fixed 
point-to-point or point-to-multipoint links. In sum, we find that this 
rule change serves the public interest by encouraging public safety 
users to more fully utilize the 4.9 GHz band in support of broadband 
communications.
    Next, we address licensing issues for primary permanent fixed 
stations. The record in this proceeding contains support for licensing 
all permanent fixed stations on an individual, site-by-site basis. This 
would ensure that adequate data is readily available to facilitate 
interference protection and resolution. Accordingly, we shall license 
permanent fixed stations, both designated as primary or secondary, on 
an individual, site-by-site basis. However, as we explain in the 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (published elsewhere in this 
issue) portion of this document, we have concerns about ensuring 
interference protection among primary permanent fixed stations, and we 
tentatively conclude therein that a more formal licensee-to-licensee 
coordination process may be necessary for such stations. Accordingly, 
until the Commission resolves a potential new coordination requirement, 
applicants seeking primary status for 4.9 GHz

[[Page 23801]]

permanent fixed stations must ensure that they meet the minimum 
requirements of Sec.  90.1209(b).
    Further, we believe it prudent to distinguish between primary 
permanent fixed stations and secondary stations in our licensing 
database. The Commission has established station class codes in the 
past to distinguish between licensees that are subject to different 
regulatory requirements on the same set of frequencies. Similarly, in 
this instance, establishing a new class code for primary permanent 
fixed stations will assist interested stakeholders as well as the 
Commission's licensing staff to distinguish between primary and 
secondary permanent fixed stations. Accordingly, we delegate to the 
Chief, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, authority to issue a 
public notice announcing the establishment of a new 4.9 GHz primary 
permanent fixed station class code. The public notice also will provide 
licensees holding permanent fixed stations with instructions for 
modifying their authorizations to reflect the new station class code.
    Measurement Procedures. In the NPRM, the Commission also proposed, 
as suggested by M/A-COM, to amend Sec.  90.1215 to reflect the same 
measurement procedures adopted by the Commission for devices that use 
digital modulation techniques and are regulated by part 15 of the 
rules. Specifically, in 2004, the Commission modified part 15 to permit 
the determination of a device's output power by using average power 
measurements in addition to the existing peak output power measurement 
method. M/A-COM proposed replacing the term ``peak transmit power'' 
with ``maximum conducted output power,'' and adding a peak excursion 
ratio limit. These changes would make the measurement procedures in 
Sec. Sec.  90.1215 and 15.407(a) virtually identical.
    We agree with the majority of commenters who believe that the 
proposed measurement procedures should be adopted to harmonize the 
measurement procedures for similar unlicensed devices that use digital 
modulation techniques and operate in nearby frequency bands under part 
15. Given that manufacturers are considering technologies similar to 
those covered by part 15 for use in the 4.9 GHz band, and because 
parallel treatment will speed deployment of new technologies in this 
band for the benefit of public safety users, we conclude that 
measurement procedures under the part 15 rules and the 4.9 GHz rules 
should be consistent.
    Miscellaneous 4940-4990 MHz Band Technical Matter. Motorola 
believes that the NPRM contains a typographical error in the proposed 
revision to the text of Sec.  90.1215(a). Specifically, Motorola 
observes that the text of the proposed change to Sec.  90.1215(a) 
referred to a peak power spectral density limit of 20 dBm per 
megahertz, rather than 21 dBm per megahertz, which had been the 
existing requirement. Motorola urges the Commission to retain the 
existing 21 dBm per megahertz limit in order to maximize coverage and 
robustness of public safety transmissions. The Commission did not 
intend to propose a change to the 21 dBm per megahertz limit, as 
evidenced by a lack of related discussion in the NPRM text. 
Accordingly, we clarify that we are retaining the existing 21 dBm per 
megahertz limit.

Miscellaneous Proposals

    Part 90 Paging on Public Safety VHF Frequencies. VHF public safety 
frequencies (150-174 MHz) are used primarily for two-way voice 
communications (e.g., mobile dispatch). The Commission's rules, 
however, also allow for paging operations on these frequencies. As the 
Commission observed in the NPRM, experience has shown that paging and 
two-way voice operations can generally co-exist on the same channel in 
the same area without interference, provided the paging transmissions 
are infrequent (low traffic volume) and the paging licensee monitors 
the channels before transmitting. Experience also has shown that the 
potential for paging to interfere with voice operations tends to 
increase as the amount of paging traffic increases.
    The Commission previously expressed concern about the potential 
incompatibility between high-volume paging operations and public safety 
two-way voice communications operating on VHF frequencies. To address 
the possibility of interference in these situations, the Commission 
sought comment on whether paging operations conducted pursuant to Sec.  
90.22 on VHF public safety frequencies should be restricted, especially 
on those frequencies reserved under the rules for mutual aid/
interoperability communications.
    The majority of commenters expressed support for continuing to 
permit paging operations on all VHF public safety frequencies. They 
assert that restrictions on paging operations on VHF public safety 
frequencies would result in a significant, negative impact on the 
ability of public safety agencies to provide mission-critical 
notifications. Other commenters note that search and rescue operations 
have experienced similar intolerable interference from hospital paging 
operations, or support an elimination of paging on certain shared or 
mutual aid frequencies that are monitored by public safety and medical 
personnel.
    We take seriously the potential for interference that may result 
from paging operations to two-way public safety voice communications. 
However, the record demonstrates substantial reliance by fire and EMS 
departments on the use of paging on VHF frequencies. The Commission did 
not receive any specific reports in the comments that hospital paging 
systems' disruption of two-way voice communications is a continuing 
problem. Accordingly, based on the record before us, we cannot conclude 
that paging operations conducted on VHF frequencies pursuant to Sec.  
90.22, including on specific mutual aid channels, represent an 
interference risk to VHF public safety frequencies at this time.
    In reaching this decision, we note that many of the concerns raised 
by commenters appear to concern paging operations permitted under Sec.  
90.20(d)(10), which was not the subject of the Commission's inquiry in 
the NPRM. In other words, the Commission did not intend to propose 
limiting operations conducted by public safety licensees for one-way 
paging to ambulance and rescue squad personnel. Regardless, we take no 
action to restrict paging operations in the VHF bands, whether 
conducted pursuant to Sec.  90.22 or Sec.  90.20(d)(10). The record 
shows paging transmissions to be a proven and cost-effective way to 
recall first responders when emergency incidents occur. We also find 
persuasive comments from the public safety community that prohibiting 
or otherwise restricting paging operations on VHF public safety 
frequencies would have a disruptive impact on a number of local 
communities that currently rely heavily on existing VHF paging 
operations as integral to their public safety operations. We are 
particularly concerned with the potential disruptive effects that 
paging restrictions would have on limiting the availability of 
emergency communications or hampering the ability of public safety 
entities to provide services in a timely manner to the public.
    Rather than impose restrictions on paging at this time, we find 
that applications for future paging operations should continue to be 
licensed on a case-by-case basis in tandem with the frequency 
coordination process. In the absence of a more

[[Page 23802]]

significant likelihood of harmful interference involving paging and 
two-way operations, we are not inclined to amend our rules where we 
believe the existing mechanisms provide adequate safeguards. We also 
encourage users of VHF public safety frequencies, including the mutual 
aid/interoperability channels, to develop and rely on frequency sharing 
and priority access protocols to facilitate local and regional 
emergency coordination efforts.
    While we decline to place new restrictions on paging operations on 
VHF public safety frequencies, including mutual aid/interoperability 
channels, we remain mindful of the potential for paging transmissions 
to cause harmful interference to voice operations. Accordingly, should 
specific instances of paging interference to two-way voice operations 
arise on the VHF public safety frequencies, including the mutual aid/
interoperability channels, we retain our discretion to revisit this 
issue in the future and to take appropriate action as warranted.
    Cross-Banding. Section 90.243(b)(1) states that ``in the Public 
Safety Pool, medical services systems in the 150-160 MHz band are 
permitted to be cross-banded for mobile and central stations operations 
with mobile relay stations authorized to operate in the 450-470 MHz 
band.'' Because one could interpret this rule to mean that only medical 
services systems are permitted to use cross-band repeaters, the NPRM 
sought comment on a proposal to modify the rule to state specifically 
that cross-band repeaters are permitted for all public safety systems.
    All commenters who addressed this issue agree that Sec.  
90.243(b)(1) should be amended to clarify that cross-band repeaters are 
permitted for all public safety systems. Because the purpose of the 
rule is not limited to medical services systems but rather applies to 
all eligible users of the Public Safety Pool, we amend the rule 
accordingly. In this respect, we ensure that all users of public safety 
systems may confidently employ cross-band repeaters and thus enhance 
communications among public safety agencies operating in various 
frequency bands.
    Transit Systems and Toll Roads. Under the current rules, only state 
and local governmental entities are eligible to hold authorizations in 
the Public Safety Pool. Thus, to the extent metropolitan transit 
systems and toll roads are publicly-operated services, they are 
eligible to hold authorizations in the Public Safety Pool. However, the 
Commission noted in the NPRM that not all metropolitan transit systems 
and toll roads are publicly-owned. Some are privately-owned, and 
operate under contracts or similar arrangements with governmental 
entities. Because non-governmental entities are ineligible to hold 
authorizations for Public Safety Pool frequencies, the NPRM sought 
comment on whether Sec.  90.20 should be amended to authorize 
privately-run metropolitan transit systems and toll road systems to 
hold authorizations to use frequencies in the Public Safety Pool.
    The majority of commenters on this issue state that private 
operators of transit systems and toll roads should not be eligible to 
hold licenses to operate on public safety frequencies. For example, 
according to AASHTO, while private operators of transit systems and 
toll roads should be able to use public safety frequencies licensed to 
governmental entities via contractual agreement, public safety 
frequencies must remain within the control of public entity licensees. 
LMCC points out that the Commission's rules already allow a licensee to 
designate an agent or third-party contractor of the licensee as the 
control operator of its station, provided that the licensee retains 
ultimate control over the use of the spectrum. On the other hand, the 
U.S. Department of Transportation observes that, given the ``role 
played and services offered by private sector operators of public 
transit systems are indistinguishable from their traditional public 
sector counterparts * * * the public or private sector origin of the 
operator of the affected infrastructure is immaterial.''
    In view of the record before us, we are not persuaded to amend 
Sec.  90.20 to permit privately-run metropolitan transit systems to be 
authorized on frequencies in the Public Safety Pool. Such an amendment 
to our rules would undermine the rationale of the Commission in 
restricting eligibility to hold a license in the Public Safety Pool in 
the first place. A chief reason for establishing such eligibility in 
the first instance was to assure that those public safety entities 
specifically charged with the protection of the life and property of 
the general public have access to spectrum.
    The Commission's other reasons for establishing its eligibility 
requirements in the Public Safety Pool were to promote interoperability 
between all entities involved in ensuring the safety of life by 
allowing them to communicate with one another, and remain consistent 
with other Commission definitions of public safety radio services. The 
Commission indicated that restricting Public Safety Pool eligibility in 
this manner was not only consistent with the Commission's definition of 
public safety services in other contexts, but also with the Public 
Safety Wireless Advisory Committee's definition of public safety, 
reflected in its Final Report.
    Because state and local public agencies share similar 
responsibilities when it comes to safety of life and protection of 
property, it is critical that, especially during times of emergencies, 
the deployment and use of Public Safety Pool frequencies remain within 
the control of these public safety agencies. Control is best assured 
when such licenses are held by public safety eligibles only. The 
current rule ensures that the continuity and expertise underlying the 
coordination and expansion of public safety communications systems 
appropriately remain with a region's state and local agencies. 
Consistent with the view of the majority of commenters on this issue, 
we find that the current rule ensures that a local or State 
governmental entity exercises responsibility and accountability for the 
use of the Public Safety Pool spectrum, even if the contract with the 
private entity either expires or terminates, or if the private entity 
itself ceases to exist by way of bankruptcy, merger, or other 
organizational change. We therefore decline to amend our rules with 
respect to Public Safety Pool eligibility. Because we decline to amend 
Sec.  90.20, we need not address the outstanding issues raised in the 
NPRM on this issue regarding the administrative criteria to be used in 
the event we decided to amend the rule.

Procedural Matters

Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission 
has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis of the possible 
impact of the rule changes contained in the Report and Order portion of 
this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on 
small entities. The Final Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis is set 
forth in Appendix D of the Report and Order and Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, will send a copy of this Report and Order 
and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy 
of the Small Business Administration.

[[Page 23803]]

Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    This document does not contain new or modified information 
collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 
Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, this document does not 
contain any new or modified ``information collection burden for small 
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small 
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

Congressional Review Act Analysis

    The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order and 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in a report to be sent to 
Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Ordering Clauses

    Accordingly, It is ordered, pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(r), and 
403 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), and 
403, that this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking is hereby adopted.
    It is further ordered that part 90 of the Commission's rules is 
amended as set forth in Appendix B of the Report and Order, and that 
these rules shall be effective June 22, 2009.
    It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer Information 
Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Report 
and Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 90

    Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications 
Commission amends 47 CFR part 90 as follows:

PART 90--PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 90 continues to read as follows:

    Sections 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r) and 332(c)(7) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 
303(g), 303(r) and 332(c)(7).

0
2. Section 90.243 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  90.243  Mobile relay stations.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) In the Public Safety Pool, systems operating on any of the 
public safety frequencies listed in Sec.  90.20(c) are permitted to be 
cross-banded for mobile stations operations with mobile relay stations 
where such stations are authorized.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 90.1207 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  90.1207  Licensing.

* * * * *
    (d) Permanent fixed point-to-point and point-to-multipoint stations 
in the 4940-4990 MHz band must be licensed individually on a site-by-
site basis. Such fixed stations that connect 4940-4990 MHz band base 
and mobile stations that are used to deliver broadband service, as well 
as other public safety networks using spectrum designated for broadband 
use, are accorded primary status. Primary status is also accorded to 
stand-alone permanent fixed 4940-4990 MHz band links that are used to 
deliver broadband service. Primary permanent fixed point-to-point and 
point-to-multipoint stations must use directional antennas with gains 
greater than 9 dBi up to 26 dBi. Permanent fixed point-to-point 
stations that do not meet the criteria for primary status will be 
authorized only on a secondary, non-interference basis to base, mobile, 
temporary fixed, and primary permanent fixed operations.

0
4. Section 90.1215 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) 
and adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  90.1215  Power limits.

* * * * *
    (a)(1) The maximum conducted output power should not exceed:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Low power  High power
                                                    maximum     maximum
                                                   conducted   conducted
             Channel bandwidth (MHz)                output      output
                                                     power       power
                                                     (dBm)       (dBm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................................           7          20
5...............................................          14          27
10..............................................          17          30
15..............................................        18.8        31.8
20..............................................          20          33
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) High power devices are also limited to a peak power spectral 
density of 21 dBm per one MHz. High power devices using channel 
bandwidths other than those listed above are permitted; however, they 
are limited to peak power spectral density of 21 dBm/MHz. If 
transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 9 dBi are used, 
both the maximum conducted output power and the peak power spectral 
density should be reduced by the amount in decibels that the 
directional gain of the antenna exceeds 9 dBi. However, high power 
point-to-point and point-to-multipoint operations (both fixed and 
temporary-fixed rapid deployment) may employ transmitting antennas with 
directional gain up to 26 dBi without any corresponding reduction in 
the maximum conducted output power or spectral density. Corresponding 
reduction in the maximum conducted output power and peak power spectral 
density should be the amount in decibels that the directional gain of 
the antenna exceeds 26 dBi.
    (b) Low power devices are also limited to a peak power spectral 
density of 8 dBm per one MHz. Low power devices using channel 
bandwidths other than those listed above are permitted; however, they 
are limited to a peak power spectral density of 8 dBm/MHz. If 
transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 9 dBi are used, 
both the maximum conducted output power and the peak power spectral 
density should be reduced by the amount in decibels that the 
directional gain of the antenna exceeds 9 dBi.
    (c) The maximum conducted output power is measured as a conducted 
emission over any interval of continuous transmission calibrated in 
terms of an RMS-equivalent voltage. If the device cannot be connected 
directly, alternative techniques acceptable to the Commission may be 
used. The measurement results shall be properly adjusted for any 
instrument limitations, such as detector response times, limited 
resolution bandwidth capability when compared to the emission 
bandwidth, sensitivity, etc., so as to obtain a true maximum conducted 
output power measurement conforming to the definitions in this 
paragraph for the emission in question.
* * * * *
    (e) The ratio of the peak excursion of the modulation envelope 
(measured using a peak hold function) to the maximum conducted output 
power shall not exceed 13 dB across any 1 MHz bandwidth or the emission 
bandwidth whichever is less.

 [FR Doc. E9-11908 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>