[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 84 (Tuesday, April 30, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18981-18987]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10498]



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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 90

[PR Docket No. 93-61, FCC 96-115]


Automatic Vehicle Monitoring

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This Order on Reconsideration resolves issues raised by 
petitions for reconsideration of the Commission's Report and Order in 
PR Docket No. 93-61, which established rules governing the licensing of 
the Location and Monitoring Service (LMS) in the 902-928 MHz band. 
Specifically, the Order on Reconsideration resolves issues regarding 
existing LMS licensees that are being afforded grandfathered status. 
These issues involve interference testing, accommodation of secondary 
uses in the 902-928 MHz band, emission masks, frequency tolerance, type 
acceptance and site relocation, as well as extension of the 
construction deadline for grandfathered licensees to September 1, 1996. 
The actions taken in the Order on Reconsideration are needed to provide 
such grandfathered licensees with certainty as they construct their 
systems.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This final rule is effective May 30, 1996, except that 
Secs. 90.203(b)(7) and 90.363(d) became effective March 18, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane Hinckley Halprin, Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau, Commercial Wireless Division, (202) 418-
0620.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Order 
on Reconsideration in PR Docket No. 93-61, adopted March 18, 1996, and 
released March 21, 1996. The complete text of this Order on 
Reconsideration is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Dockets Branch (Room 230), 1919 M Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C., and also may be purchased from the Commission's 
copy contractor, ITS, Inc., 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140, Washington, 
D.C., (202) 857-3800.

Synopsis of Order on Reconsideration

I. Introduction and Background

    1. LMS encompasses both the Automatic Vehicle Monitoring (AVM) 
service established in 1974 and future advanced transportation-related 
services. Existing AVM systems were authorized in the 903-912 and 918-
927 MHz bands, as well as in several bands below 512 MHz. Existing LMS 
systems in these bands generally fall into one of two broad 
technological categories: multilateration systems and non-
multilateration systems. Multilateration systems use spread-spectrum 
technology to locate vehicles (and other moving objects) with great 
accuracy throughout a wide geographic area. Non-multilateration systems 
typically use narrowband technology to transmit data to and from 
vehicles passing through a particular location.
    2. LMS systems, both multilateration and non-multilateration, and 
Part 15 devices will play an important role in providing many valuable 
services to the public in the future. In Report and Order, PR Docket 
No. 93-61, 10 FCC Rcd 4695 (1995), 60 FR 15248 (March 23, 1995) (LMS 
Report and Order), the Commission developed a spectrum plan that is 
designed to accommodate these service providers' requirements to the 
extent possible. Aspects of the spectrum plan include: (1) continuing 
to permit secondary operations by unlicensed Part 15 devices across the 
entire band; (2) providing a ``safe harbor'' in which Part 15 devices 
may operate, along with a testing requirement to determine questions of 
interference from multilateration systems; (3) authorizing additional 
spectrum in the 902-928 MHz band in order to enable non-multilateration 
LMS systems to operate on spectrum separate from multilateration 
systems; and (4) permitting only one new multilateration provider in 
each sub-band of spectrum allocated for multilateration operations.
    3. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission decided to stop 
accepting applications for the operation of multilateration LMS systems 
in the 904-912 and 918-926 MHz bands under our current rules as of 
February 3, 1995. In addition, the Commission adopted certain 
grandfathering provisions that allowed existing, operating 
multilateration LMS systems until April 1, 1998, to complete the 
transition to the rules adopted in the LMS Report and Order. These 
grandfathering provisions were adopted to prevent any undue hardship on 
existing, operating multilateration LMS systems. The Commission also 
conferred grandfathered status on multilateration LMS licensees who had 
not constructed their systems so that such licensees may construct and 
operate their licensed stations under the rules adopted in the LMS 
Report and Order. The Commission concluded, however, that such systems 
must be constructed and

[[Page 18982]]

operational by April 1, 1996, and must comply with the rules adopted in 
the LMS Report and Order by that date. The LMS Report and Order 
directed existing licensees to file applications to modify their 
licenses to reflect operations consistent with the new band plan for 
multilateration systems.
    4. In addition to adopting a new spectrum plan and grandfathering 
provisions, the Commission resolved other technical issues in the LMS 
Report and Order. The Commission established conditions under which 
Part 15 operations would not be considered to cause interference to 
multilateration licensees. It allowed multilateration licensees to 
commence operations only after demonstrating efforts to minimize 
interference with Part 15 operations.
    5. In the Order on Reconsideration, the Commission clarifies its 
decision in the LMS Report and Order regarding the treatment of 
grandfathered LMS systems with respect to Part 15 interference testing. 
In addition, it clarifies that the rule regarding non-interference by 
Part 15 devices set out in Sec. 90.361 applies to grandfathered LMS 
licensees that did not construct as of February 3, 1995, as well as 
future LMS licensees. It also considers modification of various 
technical rules, including emission mask specification, frequency 
tolerance, and site relocation, and we clarify our rules regarding type 
acceptance of LMS equipment. Any remaining issues raised in the 
petitions for reconsideration will be addressed in a later Memorandum 
Opinion and Order.
    6. The Order on Reconsideration also extends the build-out deadline 
for grandfathered LMS licensees by five months, to September 1, 1996. 
It also notes that because the 902-928 MHz frequency band is shared 
with federal government users, LMS operators are required to coordinate 
with the Interdepartmental Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC) concerning 
any proposed modifications to their systems. The Commission expresses 
concern that if existing licensees must await the completion of such 
frequency coordination process before commencing modifications to their 
systems, licensees may not have sufficient time to complete their 
system modifications by the build-out deadline. As a result, the 
Commission concludes that these licensees should be permitted to begin 
modifications to their systems provided they have initiated the 
frequency coordination process with IRAC and on the condition that the 
Commission's final approval of such modifications will be contingent 
upon the successful completion of such frequency coordination.
    7. In addition, On May 22, 1995, Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems 
(SBMS) filed a request for waiver of Section 90.363 of the Commission's 
Rules to grandfather SBMS applications that were pending as of the date 
the LMS Report and Order was adopted. The Commission concludes that 
pending LMS applications should not be eligible for grandfathering. The 
Commission notes that its stated purpose in adopting grandfathering 
provisions was ``[t]o ensure that our new licensing scheme does not 
impose undue hardship on existing, operating multilateration [LMS] 
systems,'' and to allow already-licensed systems the opportunity to 
construct and operate pursuant to the LMS rules adopted in the LMS 
Report and Order. LMS Report and Order, 10 FCC Rcd at 4728. The 
Commission concludes that if some licensees are warehousing spectrum, 
as alleged by SBMS, then they will likely not construct in the time 
allotted so as to attain grandfathered status. That spectrum will then 
be available for competitive bidding by all prospective licensees, 
including SBMS if they so choose.
    8. Further, the Commission notes the argument of SBMS that in the 
SMR context, the Commission adopted a grandfathering provision awarding 
certain secondary sites in the 900 MHz SMR service primary status so as 
to entitle them to full interference protection and decided to 
grandfather pending applications for these secondary sites, concluding 
that this would promote service to the public, that the additional 
amount of protected spectrum would be de minimis and that such action 
would be equitable in light of processing delays. The Commission 
distinguishes the SMR situation from the case of pending LMS 
applications in that the 900 MHz SMR secondary sites were extensions of 
primary sites that were already licensed and constructed, while the LMS 
facilities at issue are unbuilt. Thus, it is questionable how service 
to the public would be facilitated by extending grandfathered status to 
sites that have not even been licensed, much less constructed. 
Moreover, grant of the pending applications could materially alter the 
LMS landscape by adding a number of additional sites and would thus not 
be a de minimis change. Accordingly, the Commission declines SBMS's 
request and clarifies that LMS applications filed prior to February 3, 
1995, will not be eligible for grandfathering. SBMS also asks for an 
extension of the construction deadline for its pending applications. 
Because the Commission is not affording SBMS grandfathered status with 
respect to these applications, this issue is moot. In addition, SBMS 
seeks a waiver to permit relocation of grandfathered sites by more than 
two kilometers and to add sites within a 75-mile radius. This same 
suggestion was made by petitioners for reconsideration and, for the 
reasons discussed infra, the Commission denies SBMS's request.

II. Discussion

A. Multilateration System Operations (Part 15 Testing)

    9. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission adopted a spectrum 
band plan and established technical criteria for the operators of the 
various systems designed to minimize the potential for interference and 
provide a more conducive environment for sharing of the band by 
disparate services. In an effort to ensure that the coexistence of the 
various services in the band would be as successful as possible, the 
Commission decided to condition the grant of each MTA multilateration 
license on the licensee's ability to demonstrate through actual field 
tests that their systems do not cause unacceptable levels of 
interference to Part 15 devices.
    10. On reconsideration, Part 15 users requested that grandfathered 
multilateration LMS systems be required to demonstrate through testing 
that their systems will not cause unacceptable interference to Part 15 
devices. Further, some Part 15 petitioners suggested that the 
Commission establish uniform guidelines for the testing of LMS systems 
and the demonstration of non-interference to Part 15 devices. Some LMS 
providers, on the other hand, argues that testing of LMS systems is not 
necessary. Further, some parties contended that the testing requirement 
violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because testing 
procedures were not contemplated in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making 
in this proceeding, Notice of Proposed Rule Making, PR Docket No. 93-
61, 8 FCC Rcd 2502 (1993), 58 FR 21276 (April 20, 1993), and/or because 
testing requirements materially alter the Part 15 rules, which was not 
previously proposed.
    11. In the Order on Reconsideration, the Commission clarifies that 
as a condition of grandfathering, it will require all multilateration 
LMS operators who did not construct stations prior to February 3, 1995, 
to demonstrate through testing that their LMS systems will not cause 
unacceptable interference to Part 15

[[Page 18983]]

devices. The Commission reiterates that multilateration licensees may 
employ any one of a number of technical refinements, i.e., limiting 
duty cycle, pulse duration power, etc., to facilitate band sharing and 
minimize interference to Part 15 operations. Further, the 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.
    12. The Order on Reconsideration declines to establish specific 
guidelines for Part 15 testing at this time. The Commission states that 
it recognizes that LMS systems employ different methods to provide 
location and monitoring that are constantly changing to keep up with 
consumer demand. Moreover, the Part 15 industry has an even greater 
array of technologies that fluctuate in response to the needs of the 
public. It thus concludes that it would be inappropriate to apply 
uniform testing parameters to those varied technologies, as no one 
testing method would adequately address the needs of either LMS or Part 
15 operations. Instead, the Commission believes that the more prudent 
course of action would be for LMS and Part 15 operators to work closely 
together to reach consensus on testing guidelines that satisfy their 
respective requirements.
    13. Further, the Commission does not agree that its adoption of the 
testing requirement violated the APA. The Commission believes that the 
testing requirement was a logical outgrowth of the Notice of Proposed 
Rule Making in this proceeding, which sought comment on ways to 
accommodate the various users of the 902-928 MHz band. Moreover, it 
concludes that the rules adopted in the LMS Report and Order do not 
modify our Part 15 rules by elevating the status of Part 15 providers, 
as alleged by some petitioners. Part 15 operation remain secondary; the 
testing requirement is merely an attempt to achieve the most efficient 
coexistence possible among the various users of the band.

B. Accommodation of Secondary Users in the 902-928 MHz Band

    14. The LMS Report and Order affirmed that unlicensed Part 15 
devices in the 902-928 MHz band are secondary and, as in other bands, 
may not cause harmful interference to and must accept interference from 
all other operations in the band. To accommodate the concerns of Part 
15 users about their secondary status in light of multilateration LMS 
and our authorizing LMS to use the additional 8 MHz of the band (902-
903, 912-918 and 927-928 MHz), however, the Commission in the LMS 
Report and Order adopted rules that describe a ``safe harbor'' within 
which a Part 15 operation would be deemed not to cause interference to 
a multilateration LMS system.
    15. On reconsideration, many petitioners agreed that a safe harbor 
provision is necessary to provide Part 15 technologies protection 
against claims of interference from existing LMS licensees. On the 
other hand, most LMS petitioners argued that they should be able to 
rebut any presumption of non-interference by Part 15 operators. If not, 
they argued, a large class of Part 15 devices will be immune from 
complaints of interference to multilateration licensees. They also 
contended that such a result would be contrary to the secondary status 
of Part 15 devices.
    16. In the Order on Reconsideration, the Commission clarifies that 
if Part 15 devices operate within the ``safe harbor'' provision they 
will be deemed not to cause harmful interference to LMS operators. In 
addition, this provision applies to all LMS licensees, including 
existing and grandfathered licensees. The Commission notes that in the 
LMS Report and Order, it stated that a definition of what shall 
constitute harmful interference from amateur operations or unlicensed 
Part 15 devices to multilateration LMS systems would promote the 
cooperative use of the 902-928 MHz band. It also noted that this ``safe 
harbor'' approach would promote effective use of the 902-928 MHz band 
by the various services through establishing the parameters under which 
such devices may operate without risk of receiving complaints of 
interference from service providers with a higher allocation status. 
Based on the technical diversity of the numerous existing LMS systems 
and the multiplicity of Part 15 devices that eventually will be placed 
in operation, the Commission concluded in the LMS Report and Order that 
some interference problems would remain unresolved. As a result, the 
Commission determined that by providing multilateration LMS system 
operators a means of recourse by way of complaint to the Commission 
only when a Part 15 device is not operating in the ``safe harbor,'' the 
vast majority of equipment and services would be able to operate 
successfully in this band. The Commission concludes in the Order on 
Reconsideration that although the multilateration LMS system operators 
will not be able to file a complaint with the Commission where the Part 
15 user has satisfied the ``safe harbor'' provisions, the Commission 
encourages LMS operators to resolve the interference by modifying their 
systems or by obtaining the voluntary cooperation of the Part 15 user. 
The Commission disagrees that such a result is inconsistent with the 
secondary status of Part 15 devices under our Rules and believes that 
its approach will assure the efficient and equitable use of the 902-928 
MHz band.

C. Technical Issues

1. Emission Mask Specification
    In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission required that 
licensees' emissions be attenuated by at least 55 + 10 log(P) dB at the 
edges of the specified LMS subbands. The band edges for multilateration 
systems where emissions must be attenuated are 904, 909.75, 919.75, 
921.75, 927.50, 927.75 and 928 MHz. If the 919.75-921.75 and 921.75-
927.25 MHz subbands were aggregated by a single licensee, the emission 
mask limitations at the band edges at 921.75 and 927.50 MHz may be 
ignored. The band edges for non-multilateration systems where emissions 
must be attenuated are 902, 904, 909.75 and 921.75 MHz.
    18. On reconsideration, a group of LMS providers contended that the 
emission mask adopted in the LMS Report and Order is flawed. They 
propose a modification of the emission mask specification that they 
believe should not inhibit the operation of non-multilateration 
systems, and the emission levels outside of the multilateration LMS 
sub-bands would be below the field strength levels permitted under Part 
15 of the Commission's Rules for operation within the 902-928 MHz band. 
The proposed emission mask specification is as follows:

    For LMS wideband emissions, operating in the 902-928 MHz band, 
in any 100 kHz band, the center frequency of which is removed from 
the center of authorized sub-band(s) by more than 50 percent up to 
and including 250 percent of the authorized bandwidth: The mean 
power of emissions shall be attenuated below the maximum permitted 
output power, as specified by the following equation but in no case 
less than 31dB:

A=16+0.4 (P-50)+10logB (attenuation greater than 66dB is not 
required)
Where:

A=attenuation (in decibels) below the maximum permitted output power 
level
P=percent removed from the center of the authorized sub-band(s)
B=authorized bandwidth in megahertz

    19. On the other hand, CellNet, a Part 15 operator, objected to the 
relaxation of the emission mask specification,

[[Page 18984]]

contending that the potential for interference to Part 15 devices will 
be increased if the emission mask requirements are relaxed. Hughes 
contended that the attenuation used in the formula proposed by the LMS 
Providers would be insufficient to protect adequately against 
interference in the portion of the spectrum band set aside for non-
multilateration systems. Thus, Hughes proposed a variation of the LMS 
multilateration parties' formula that requires greater attenuation. The 
Part 15 Coalition contended that there is no justification for relaxing 
the emission mask standard. TIA opposed the justification used by the 
LMS Providers to modify the emission mask specification. TIA pointed 
out that the LMS Providers' proposal is very similar to Sections 
21.106(a)(2) and 94.71(c)(2) of our rules, which specify emission 
limits for the Domestic Public Fixed Radio Services and Private 
Operational Fixed Microwave Service, respectively. Further, TIA 
contended that in fixed services, the emission is but one of several 
ways to prevent interference, while in mobile services emission masks 
and power limits are the primary forms of interference control. It 
contended that while it may be appropriate to base the limits of LMS 
wideband emissions on the limits that apply to high-speed digital 
microwave transmissions, it is not reasonable that the LMS 
specification should be less strict than the fixed microwave 
specification.
    20. In the Order on Reconsideration, the Commission finds that the 
LMS providers have shown that the single emission mask adopted in the 
LMS Report and Order to cover all LMS operations in the 902-928 MHz 
band is not appropriate for multilateration LMS systems. It notes that 
the LMS providers stated that none of their various multilateration 
systems, either existing or proposed, can comply with the existing mask 
and still achieve a commercially marketable level of locating accuracy. 
Additionally, the Commission states that it is persuaded by the LMS 
providers that an emission mask similar to the one applicable to 
narrowband PCS channels is more appropriate for narrowband forward link 
equipment operating in the spectrum between 927.250 MHz and 928 MHz.
    21. Therefore, the Commission states that it will not apply the 
existing mask to equipment used for wideband multilateration links, 
either forward or reverse, in the three subbands 904-909.75 MHz, 
921.75-927.25 MHz and 919.75-921.75 MHz, or to equipment used for 
narrowband forward links in the spectrum between 927.25 and 928 MHz. 
Instead, it will adopt two additional emission masks, both essentially 
the same as proposed by the LMS providers, that will apply to this 
equipment. All other equipment to operate in the LMS will remain 
subject to the emission mask adopted in the Report and Order.
    22. Although these new emission masks are less stringent than the 
one adopted in the Report and Order, they do require a greater 
attenuation of out-of-band emissions than was considered to be required 
for multilateration systems operating under the interim rules. The 
Commission states its belief that these masks are adequate to prevent 
interference to non-multilateration systems. The Commission indicates 
that while TIA is correct that these new masks are less stringent than 
those for fixed microwave links, it does not agree with TIA that the 
masks for LMS multilateration systems must necessarily be more strict 
than for fixed microwave links. These two services are very different 
and the expectations of potential interference must also be 
considerably different--one is a highly coordinated fixed microwave 
service in exclusively allocated spectrum and the other is a mobile 
multilateration system operating in spectrum shared with a multitude of 
other users. Also, the Commission states that it is not persuaded that 
the refinement suggested by Hughes (increasing the slope of the 
wideband mask) is necessary to prevent interference, and that adopting 
it might unnecessarily preclude the use of some technologies or favor 
one type of system over another.
2. Frequency Tolerance
    23. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission adopted a frequency 
tolerance of 0.00025 percent (2.5 parts per million (ppm)) for both 
multilateration and non-multilateration systems. It noted that tighter 
frequency tolerances were justified to help reduce the potential for 
interference to systems operating on adjacent frequencies.
    24. On reconsideration, Hughes, TI/MFS, and AMTECH requested that 
the Commission relax the frequency tolerance. Hughes argued that the 
0.00025 percent frequency tolerance is overly restrictive for non-
multilateration systems. It contended that a frequency tolerance of 2.5 
ppm does not add significantly to existing means of avoiding 
interference between non-multilateration systems within designated 
subbands. Hughes submitted that since non-multilateration systems 
operate over relatively short ranges, the instances of coverage overlap 
between facilities on adjacent channels will be rare.
    25. Hughes further alleged that the present frequency tolerance 
level would necessitate a significant and expensive design modification 
for their Vehicle to Roadside Communications (VRC) system readers. In 
addition, they contended that equipment changes required to conform 
their VRC mobile transponders to the present frequency tolerance level 
would be economically prohibitive. If the Commission decides to 
maintain the present frequency tolerance level for non-multilateration 
systems, Hughes requested that the Commission apply the frequency 
tolerance level only to the reader transmitters and not to the mobile 
transponders, which are designed to transmit with extremely low power 
and only while passing in close proximity to a reader.
    26. According to TI/MFS there are no current LMS non-
multilateration systems in operation that conform to the 2.5 ppm 
frequency tolerance. They noted that most of the non-multilateration 
technology operates at frequency tolerance levels no greater than 50 
ppm. TI/MFS stated its belief that the imposition of the present 
frequency tolerance level will have the negative effect of decreasing 
both available technology and potential players in the market.
    27. In response to the concerns raised by the non-multilateration 
system operators, the Commission in the Order on Reconsideration 
imposes the present frequency tolerance level of 2.5 ppm on high power 
fixed reader transmitters operating near the band edges, but not on 
mobile transponders or hand-held portable readers. The Commission is 
persuaded that the significant cost of tightening the frequency 
tolerance for mobile transponders and hand-held readers could severely 
raise the cost of the devices beyond the realm of economic feasibility. 
The Commission is not changing the tolerance requirement for other non-
multilateration LMS systems or for multilateration LMS systems.
3. Type Acceptance
    28. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission determined that the 
mobile nature of most LMS transmitters and the new advanced technology 
that will be employed by this equipment justified strict regulatory 
oversight of having equipment type accepted rather than continuing to 
use the notification procedure. Therefore, it decided that all LMS 
equipment imported or marketed after April 1, 1996, including the 
``transmitting tags'' used in certain non-

[[Page 18985]]

multilateration systems, must be type accepted for use under Part 90. 
If, however, these units met the requirements under Part 15, they may 
have been authorized under that part and do not need to be type 
accepted.
    29. On reconsideration, the LMS providers requested that for 
systems constructed after February 3, 1995, that the type acceptance 
requirement for multilateration LMS be extended from the current date 
of April 1, 1996, until 12 months after any rule on reconsideration 
concerning the emission mask (the ``1996 Effective Date''). They also 
requested that all LMS transmitters imported or manufactured 
domestically prior to the 1996 Effective Date be exempt from type 
acceptance regardless of whether they are used before or after the 1996 
Effective Date. In addition, they asked the Commission to clarify that 
LMS providers may indefinitely continue to use equipment deployed prior 
to the 1996 Effective Date provided that it is not marketed after that 
date (whether the deadline is April 1, 1996 or a later date), unless 
the equipment is first type accepted.
    30. The LMS providers further requested that for systems 
constructed before February 3, 1995, the installation of non-type 
accepted multilateration LMS transmitters imported or manufactured 
domestically on or before the 1996 Effective Date should be permitted 
through April 1, 1998. They urged that such equipment need not be type-
accepted at any time unless such a step is necessary in order to 
resolve interference problems that cannot otherwise be accommodated, 
but that such equipment must comply with the emission mask requirements 
by April 1, 1998. In addition, for systems constructed and placed into 
operation before February 3, 1995, the LMS providers would mandate that 
transmitters imported or manufactured after the 1996 Effective Date 
must be type accepted. Similarly, AMTECH requests that the Commission 
delay the type-acceptance date at least until 12 months after final 
technical requirements have been adopted.
    31. In the Order on Reconsideration, the Commission states its 
belief that the type acceptance requirements it adopted in the LMS 
Report and Order are necessary to ensure efficient deployment of LMS to 
the public without causing significant interference. The Commission 
provides that it recognizes the concern of multilateration LMS 
operators that they may experience difficulty in meeting the 
construction deadline if they must comply with type acceptance 
requirements. To alleviate this concern, the Commission's Office of 
Engineering and Technology has committed to process type acceptance 
applications within 40 days of receipt. Further, the Commission notes 
that it has extended the construction deadline. The Commission 
therefore concludes that compliance with these type acceptance 
requirements should not impede a licensee's efforts to meet the build-
out deadline. It also notes that constructed multilateration LMS 
systems must also meet type acceptance requirements after September 1, 
1996.
    32. The Commission further notes that non-multilateration systems 
contain a substantial amount of embedded equipment with numerous users, 
particularly state and local governments. Thus, non-multilateration 
system operators will be able to continue operation of current 
equipment until replacement is needed. However, if non-multilateration 
system operators decide either to build new systems or replace existing 
equipment on or after September 1, 1996, the Commission states, the new 
equipment must comply with type acceptance by April 1, 1998.
4. Site Relocation
    33. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission allowed LMS 
licensees to modify their applications to comply with the new band 
plan, and stated that an alternate site must be within two kilometers 
(km) of the site specified in the original license. On reconsideration, 
the LMS providers contended that the two kilometer restriction is 
unworkable due to the upcoming April 1, 1996, deadline for preserving 
grandfathered status. They argued that competition for wireless 
facilities has caused many sites to become unavailable or unsuitable 
for LMS use. They also noted that site surveys and negotiations are 
time-consuming and in many cases replacements within the 2 km radius 
either do not exist or are unavailable. Thus, the LMS providers 
proposed that the Commission instead allow replacement sites within a 
ten-mile radius.
    34. The Commission declines to modify the site relocation 
restriction in the Order on Reconsideration. It notes that the Third 
Report and Order in GN Docket No. 93-252 utilized two kilometers as the 
benchmark for determining whether an application for a site change of a 
CMRS facility is to be treated as a modification application or an 
``initial'' application for the purpose of determining eligibility for 
competitive bidding procedures. Implementation of Sections 3(n) and 332 
of the Communications Act--Regulatory Treatment of Mobile Services, 
Third Report and Order, GN Docket No. 93-252, 9 FCC Rcd 7988, 59 FR 
59945 (Nov. 21, 1994) (CMRS Third Report and Order). The Commission 
concludes that the LMS providers have failed to demonstrate adequately 
that a different benchmark should apply in the LMS context and that it 
will continue to place a 2 km restriction on replacement sites for LMS 
systems.

III. Procedural Matters and Ordering Clauses

    35. The Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, as required by 
Section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 
Sec. 604 is as follows:
    36. Need and Purpose of this Action: The rules adopted herein will 
enhance use of the 902-928 MHz band for location and monitoring 
systems. The new rules create a more stable environment for LMS system 
licensees and provides much needed flexibility for operators of such 
systems.
    37. Issues Raised in Response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis: There were no comments submitted in response to the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
    38. Significant Alternatives Considered and Rejected: All 
significant alternatives regarding grandfathering issues are discussed 
in this Order on Reconsideration. Other issues raised on 
reconsideration will be addressed in a forthcoming Memorandum Opinion 
and Order.
    39. 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 below are adopted.
    40. It is further ordered that the rule changes set forth below 
will become effective May 30, 1996, except for Secs. 90.203(b)(7) and 
90.363(d). Sections 90.203(b)(7) and 90.363(d) were effective March 18, 
1996.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Sections 90.203(b)(7) and 90.363(d) extend the type 
acceptance and construction deadlines, respectively, from April 1, 
1996, to September 1, 1996. As such, these rules relieve a 
restriction and are not subject to the 30 days' notice requirement 
of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). 
Moreover, the Commission finds good cause to make these rules 
effective on less than 30 days' notice to prevent the former type 
acceptance and construction deadline of April 1, 1996, from taking 
effect. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    41. It is further ordered that the petitions for reconsideration 
filed by the parties listed in the attachment below are granted to the 
extent discussed herein, and denied to the extent discussed herein. 
Those issues not resolved by this Order on

[[Page 18986]]

Reconsideration will addressed in a future Memorandum Opinion and 
Order.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 90

    Radio.

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, 303, 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 
U.S.C. 154, 303, and 332, unless otherwise noted.

    2. Section 90.203 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(7) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 90.203  Type acceptance required.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (7) Transmitters imported and marketed prior to September 1, 1996 
for use by LMS systems.
* * * * *
    3. Section 90.210 is amended by revising paragraph (k) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 90.210  Emission masks.

* * * * *
    (k) Emission Mask K. (1) Wideband multilateration transmitters. For 
transmitters authorized under Subpart M to provide forward or reverse 
links in a multilateration system in the subbands 904-909.75 MHz, 
921.75-927.25 MHz and 919.75-921.75 MHz, and which transmit an emission 
occupying more than 50 kHz bandwidth: in any 100 kHz band, the center 
frequency of which is removed from the center of authorized sub-band(s) 
by more than 50 percent of the authorized bandwidth, the power of 
emissions shall be attenuated below the transmitter output power, as 
specified by the following equation, but in no case less than 31 dB:

A=16+0.4 (D-50)+10 log B (attenuation greater than 66 dB is not 
required)
Where:

A=attenuation (in decibels) below the maximum permitted output power 
level
D=displacement of the center frequency of the measurement bandwidth 
from the center frequency of the authorized sub-band, expressed as a 
percentage of the authorized bandwidth B
B=authorized bandwidth in megahertz.

    (2) Narrowband forward link transmitters. For LMS multilateration 
narrowband forward link transmitters operating in the 927.25-928 MHz 
frequency band the power of any emission shall be attenuated below the 
transmitter output power (P) in accordance with following schedule:
    On any frequency outside the authorized sub-band and removed from 
the edge of the authorized sub-band by a displacement frequency 
(fd in kHz): at least 116 log ((fd+10)/6.1) dB or 50 + 10 log 
(P) dB or 70 dB, whichever is the lesser attenuation.
    (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 authorized channel 
bandwidth in accordance with the following schedule:
    (i) On any frequency within the authorized bandwidth: Zero dB;
    (ii) On any frequency outside of the authorized bandwidth: 
55+10log(P) dB where (P) is the highest emission (watts) of the 
transmitter inside the authorized bandwidth.
    (4) The resolution bandwidth of the instrumentation used to measure 
the emission power shall be 100 kHz, except that, in regard to 
paragraph (2) of this section, a minimum spectrum analyzer resolution 
bandwidth of 300 Hz shall be used for measurement center frequencies 
within 1 MHz of the edge of the authorized subband. If a video filter 
is used, its bandwidth shall not be less than the resolution bandwidth.
    (5) Emission power shall be measured in peak values.
    4. Section 90.213 is amended by revising the entry for the 902-928 
MHz band and adding footnote 13 to the table in paragraph (a) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 90.213  Frequency stability.

    (a) * * *

                       Minimum Frequency Stability                      
                        [Parts per million (ppm)]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Mobile stations    
                                    Fixed and  -------------------------
      Frequency range (MHz)            base       Over 2W     2W or less
                                     stations      output       output  
                                                   power        power   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
*                *                *                *                *   
                                   *              *                     
902-928 \13\.....................          2.5          2.5          2.5
                                                                        
*                *                *                *                *   
                                  *              *                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Fixed non-multilateration transmitters operating within 40 kHz from
  the band edge, intermittently operated hand-held readers, and mobile  
  transponders are not subject to frequency tolerance restrictions.     

* * * * *
    5. Section 90.363 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 90.363  Grandfathering provisions for existing AVM Licensees.

* * * * *
    (d) Multilateration AVM licensees for stations that were not 
constructed and placed in operation on or before February 3, 1995 must 
construct their LMS systems and place them in operation on the spectrum 
identified in their LMS system license on or before September 1, 1996, 
or their licenses will cancel automatically (see Section 90.155 (e)). 
Also, these licenses will cancel automatically on July 1, 1996 unless 
timely modification applications are filed on or before this date (see 
paragraph (a) of this section).
* * * * *

Attachment--Petitions for Reconsideration

    Note: This attachment will not be published in the Code of 
Federal Regulations.

1. Ad Hoc Gas Distribution Utilities Coalition (Ad Hoc Gas)
2. AirTouch Teletrac (Teletrac)


[[Page 18987]]

3. The American Radio Relay League, Inc. (ARRL)
4. AMTECH Corporation (AMTECH)
5. CellNet Data Systems, Inc. (CellNet)
6. Connectivity for Learning Coalition
7. Hughes Transportation Management Systems (Hughes)
8. Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITSA)
9. Metricom, Inc. and Southern California Edison Company (Metricom/
SCE)
10. MobileVision, L.P. (MobileVision)
11. The New Jersey Highway Authority, the New Jersey Turnpike 
Authority, the New York State Thruway Authority, the Pennsylvania 
Turnpike Commission, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority 
Bridges and Tunnels, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 
the South Jersey Transportation Authority and the Delaware River 
Port Authority (``the Interagency Group'').
12. The Part 15 Coalition (Part 15 Coalition)
13. Pinpoint Communications (Pinpoint)
14. Rand McNally & Company (Rand McNally)
15. Safetran Systems Corporation (Safetran)
16. Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc. (SBMS)
17. Texas Instruments, Inc. and MFS Network Technologies, Inc. (TI/
MFS)
18. Uniplex Corporation (Uniplex)
19. UTC
20. Wireless Transactions Corporation (Wireless Transactions)

[FR Doc. 96-10498 Filed 4-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P