Report and Plan Of the Federal Communications Commission Meeting State and Local Government Public Safety Agency Spectrum Needs Through The Year 2010 February 9, 1995 FCC 95-55 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. In the Matter of: Report and Plan for Meeting State and Local Government Public Safety Agency Spectrum Needs Through the Year 2010 REPORT and PLAN Adopted: February 9, 1995 Released: February 9, 1995 By the Commission: Table of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 A. Objective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 B. Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 C. Summary of Comments from Public Safety Community . . . . . . . . . 6 D. Summary of Analysis and Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 E. The Commission Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 II. BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 A. Public Safety Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 B. Current Public Safety Frequency Allocations. . . . . . . . . . . . 14 C. Previous Commission Actions To Meet Spectrum Demand. . . . . . . . 19 D. Pending Commission and Industry Actions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 1. Refarming. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 2. New York City Public Safety Petition . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3. Advanced Technologies and APCO-25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 III. PROJECTED PUBLIC SAFETY SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A. Spectrum Requirements Projected by Public Safety Community . . . . 24 1. Conventional Voice and Data Spectrum Requirements. . . . . . . 24 2. New Wideband Technologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 B. Analysis of Projected Spectrum Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 1. Conventional Voice and Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2. New Wideband Technologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 IV. THE COMMISSION PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 A. Data Collection Proceeding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 B. Public Safety Liaison Officer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 C. Options for Efficient Spectrum Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 1. Technical Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 a. Refarming Proceeding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 b. Digital Technologies/Access Techniques. . . . . . . . . . 35 c. Sectored Antenna Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 2. Economic Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 a. Use of Commercial Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . . 37 b. Exclusivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 c. Leasing of Excess Public Safety Spectrum Capacity . . . . 38 d. New Spectrum Allocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 3. Regulatory Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 a. Consolidation of Smaller Services into Broader Service Pools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 b. Federal/Non-Federal Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 c. Increased State Role in Spectrum Planning . . . . . . . . 40 D. Other Actions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 V. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 APPENDIX Private Radio Bureau Letters To APCO and PSCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Objective The objective of this Report is to present the results of a Commission study of the current and future spectrum needs of public safety agencies. The information and alternatives contained in this Report are the basis for the Commission's plan to ensure that the spectrum requirements of public safety agencies are accommodated. This Report was produced pursuant to Section 6002 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (the Budget Act). Title VI of the Budget Act requires the Commission to determine (1) the extent to which issuing licenses through competitive bidding can be used to increase Federal revenues; (2) the future spectrum requirements for public and private uses, including State and local government public safety agencies; (3) the spectrum allocation actions necessary to accommodate those uses; and (4) the actions necessary to promote the efficient use of the spectrum, including spectrum management techniques to promote increased shared use of the spectrum that does not cause harmful interference as a means of increasing commercial access. Section 6002 of the Budget Act specifically addresses the needs of the public safety services and mandates that the Commission, by February 9, 1995, submit to Congress a study of current and future spectrum needs of state and local government public safety agencies through the year 2010, and develop a specific plan to ensure that adequate frequencies are made available to public safety licensees. The Budget Act also requires that, at least biannually, NTIA and the Commission conduct joint spectrum planning with respect to the future spectrum requirements for public safety agencies and spectrum allocation actions necessary to accommodate those needs. B. Approach In conducting its study of public safety spectrum requirements the Commission solicited comment from the major public safety communications associations. These organizations were asked to: (1) review licensing data by band and geographic area and compare the results with the projections from a 1985 study of future public safety licensing and spectrum needs; (2) identify factors, such as increases in population, increased mobility, increased crime, and new services like mobile video and the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS), that may affect future needs; (3) develop spectrum needs projections to the year 2010, by geographic area and band, based on historical data and identified growth factors; and (4) discuss the potential to increase the channel capacity of existing allocations as a result of increased technical flexibility and more stringent spectrum efficiency standards. The following associations contributed to this Report through submissions on the record: The Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials International, Inc. (APCO), the Public Safety Communications Council (PSCC), the American Public Transit Association (APTA), and the ITS AMERICA Advanced Public Transit Systems Committee (ITS). C. Summary of Comments from Public Safety Community Public safety requirements can be separated into two categories. The first category consists of channels for the conventional one-way and two-way voice and data communications requiring relatively narrow spectrum bandwidth per channel. The second category consists of future systems that will offer advanced applications such as high-speed transmission of full motion video and transmission of high resolution images, such as mug shots and fingerprints, that may require substantially wider spectrum bands. We refer to these future systems as ``new wideband technologies.'' APCO contends that for conventional voice and data communications alone, the public safety community needs a new spectrum allocation of 6 megahertz for nationwide use, plus an additional spectrum allocation of 12 megahertz for use in metropolitan areas. APCO projects that for new wideband technologies the public safety community will need an allocation of at least 25 megahertz by the year 2000, and an additional 50 megahertz by the year 2010. APCO's total projected spectrum need of 75 megahertz for new wideband technologies is in addition to the total 18 megahertz projected for conventional voice and data communications. In its comments, PSCC provided a substantial amount of public safety licensing statistics as well as anecdotal evidence of spectrum shortages in particular geographic areas. The PSCC comments, however, did not focus on quantitative projections of additional spectrum allocation needs. APTA stated that the demand for public transit services is growing and it anticipates the spectrum requirements for communications essential to operating our nation's public transportation systems will increase by as much as a factor of 2 in the 450 MHz and 800 MHz bands. APTA did not specify whether these needs could be met by simply obtaining licenses for additional channels using current spectrum resources or if an additional spectrum allocation would be needed. ITS also indicated a doubling of required spectrum capacity due to growth in use of public transportation and adoption of ``intelligent transportation system technologies.'' ITS stated that at least 50 percent of this increased capacity would be accommodated by technological improvements. It is unclear from ITS's filing whether these needs could be met by obtaining additional licenses to use currently available spectrum or whether an additional spectrum allocation would be required. D. Summary of Analysis and Conclusions The public safety community representatives submitting comments in this proceeding all maintain that their communications needs are increasing. We agree that communications play a vital role in the services provided by public safety agencies, and we recognize that the increasing demands placed on these agencies' communications systems will pose difficult challenges in coming years. We have concluded that the Commission must address these challenges and have developed a Plan to ensure that adequate spectrum capacity is available to meet the needs of the public safety community. A summary of this Plan is presented in the next Section of this Report. Our review of the comments filed in this proceeding, however, leads us to conclude that more information from public safety agencies and other interested parties is necessary to enable us to formulate with any precision the scope of the public safety community's spectrum needs. With regard to conventional voice and data communications, for example, APCO has provided evidence of spectrum shortages in particular areas of the nation, but has not submitted technical analyses to support its projected need for additional conventional voice and data spectrum allocations. With regard to wideband communications, we agree with APCO that additional spectrum may be needed for new wideband technologies, but we conclude that specific, quantified assessments of the scope of this need have yet to be undertaken. As discussed below, the Commission concludes that spectrum needed for the new wideband technologies could be shared with Federal users who will be using similar equipment for identical applications. Our study of the current and future spectrum needs of state and local government public safety agencies, which has been undertaken pursuant to the Budget Act and which forms the basis for this Report, has led us to conclude that two principal steps should be taken to ensure that these spectrum needs are addressed. First, we plan to initiate a proceeding in the near future that will be targeted to the development of the type of specific, quantified data necessary to enable us better to evaluate the spectrum needs of public safety agencies. In this connection, we intend to work closely with all interested parties involved in public safety communications issues in order to ensure that the necessary information and data are developed in a comprehensive and systematic manner, so that these materials form a sufficient record upon which our future decisions can rely. Upon the completion of this data collection proceeding we will take the formal step of deciding whether to initiate a spectrum allocation proceeding. Second, we have identified several technical, economic, and regulatory alternatives that the public safety community should consider utilizing to increase the communications capacity of current spectrum allocations. We conclude that implementation of these alternatives by public safety agencies may meet at least some of the public safety agencies' requirements. E. The Commission Plan Part of the Commission's mandate under Title VI of the Budget Act is to develop a specific plan to ensure that adequate frequencies are made available to public safety licensees. The Commission will take the following steps to ensure that the public safety community's spectrum needs are met through the year 2010. These steps are discussed in greater detail in Section IV of this Report. þ The Commission will initiate a data collection proceeding in the near term to collect the detailed information necessary for the Commission to make informed decisions regarding additional spectrum allocations that may be necessary to meet the communications needs of state and local government public safety agencies. þ The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau has recently appointed a Public Safety Liaison Officer to work with public safety agencies and their representatives, including APCO Project 25. The Public Safety Liaison Officer will solicit informal comments on potential improvements to the public safety licensing process, such as allowing frequency coordinators or regional planners to take more responsibility for frequency assignments, and creating an advisory committee to oversee public safety communications issues. þ The Commission, in this subsequent proceeding, will also seek comment on the options for increased spectrum efficiency outlined in Section IV of this Report. These options are as follows: Technical options ¯ Further development of the type of spectrum efficiency proposals initiated in the refarming proceeding ¯ Use of digital technologies and digital access techniques ¯ Use of sectored antenna systems Economic options ¯ Greater use of commercial service providers ¯ Provision for increased use of exclusive channel assignments in bands below 470 MHz ¯ Leasing of excess public safety spectrum capacity for other wireless services ¯ Allocation of new spectrum for use only by efficient radio systems Regulatory options ¯ Consolidation of smaller services into broader service pools ¯ Increased sharing of spectrum and systems among state, local, and Federal public safety agencies ¯ Increased State role in public safety spectrum planning and management þ The Commission will consider the spectrum that is to be released by the Federal Government for private sector use when assessing alternatives for addressing the spectrum needs of the public safety services, particularly the new wideband technologies. þ The Commission will continue to respond to emergency spectrum shortages on a case-by-case basis. þ The Commission will continue to work with NTIA and other interested parties to determine to what extent sharing of Federal and non-Federal spectrum is feasible. II. BACKGROUND A. Public Safety Communications Spectrum management authority in the United States is shared between the Federal Communications Commission and the President. The Communications Act of 1934 established the Commission and gave it authority to assign frequencies to radio stations in the United States, its territories and possessions, except for those frequencies allocated to the Federal Government. The NTIA, an administration within the Department of Commerce, assigns frequencies to Federal Government stations under delegated authority of the President. The Commission allocates and assigns frequencies for use by entities other than the Federal Government. The public safety community is one of the most important users of the non-Federal radio spectrum. Sufficient mobile communication capacity for agencies charged with protecting the public welfare is of critical importance to the overall well-being of this nation. Every person in the country is dependent, directly or indirectly, on the many services provided by public safety and emergency medical entities. Wireless communication provides a vital component in the nation's public safety and emergency medical infrastructure. Agencies involved in the protection of life and property are able to do their jobs effectively and efficiently only by making extensive use of a wide array of wireless communications options available to them. Full use of these options requires that sufficient spectrum capacity be available and that spectrum use be well planned and coordinated to assure that the diverse needs of public safety entities can be satisfied. The public safety services considered in this Report include the Local Government, Police, Fire, Highway Maintenance, Forestry-Conservation, Emergency Medical, and Special Emergency Radio Services. These services were created over a number of years as individual public safety groups petitioned the Commission for spectrum allocations, starting with the Police Radio Service in 1937. Each of these services is described briefly below. The Police Radio Service is used for mobile communications to handle both police operations such as dispatching vehicular units and coordinating tactical operations (e.g., stakeouts) and administrative matters (deployment of patrols, status of units). Any non-federal governmental entity or institution authorized by law to provide its own police protection is eligible in this service. The Fire Radio Service uses mobile communications for both administrative and operational purposes. In those localities where the fire department has responsibility for providing rescue squad and ambulance service, the Fire Radio Service frequencies are used for the dispatch of ambulances, the communication of medical information to personnel at the site of an emergency, and the transmission of biomedical telemetry from the emergency site or the ambulance to hospital emergency room personnel. Any non-federal governmental entity (typically a firefighting organization) is eligible in this service with the permission of the local government having jurisdiction over the area to be served. The Highway Maintenance Radio Service provides communications related to the highway activities of any non-federal governmental entity requiring communications essential to its official highway activities. Licensees use this service in performing a wide range of functions, including road maintenance and paving operations. Frequencies in this service are also used for communications related to ice and snow removal, removal of disabled vehicles, and patrol of tunnels, bridges and turnpikes. Two-way mobile radio is often used in this service to recall or reroute highway crews and vehicles to meet changing priorities due to highway and weather emergencies. The Forestry-Conservation Radio Service has responsibility for law enforcement (e.g., park police and rangers who enforce fish, game, and environmental statutes), fire prevention control, and emergency medical service. Licensees in this service provide fire detection and control for one-half billion acres of non-federal forest lands. Any non-federal governmental entity is eligible in this service. Also, persons or organizations charged with specific forestry- conservation activities are eligible to operate in this service with the support of the local government having jurisdiction over the area to be served. The Local Government Radio Service is for communications involving the day-to-day operations of governmental entities other than the Federal Government. Entities eligible to operate in this service include states, U.S. territories and possessions, counties, cities, towns, and many other types of specialized governmental districts and authorities (e.g., flood control, water, sanitation) for a variety of public safety and welfare uses. All public safety entities are permitted to use this service and often include law enforcement, fire protection, highway maintenance, lifeguard and rescue service users. The Emergency Medical Radio Service provides radio communications for the actual delivery of emergency medical treatment including (1) transmission between rescuers at the scene of an accident or disaster and physicians at a hospital; and (2) the dispatch of emergency medical providers transporting injured persons to hospitals and trauma centers. Persons or entities engaged in the provision of basic or advanced life-support services on an ongoing basis are eligible to operate in this service. The Special Emergency Radio Service may be used by medical services, rescue organizations, veterinarians, handicapped persons, disaster relief organizations, school buses, beach patrols, communications standby facilities, and emergency repair of public communications facilities. Entities not meeting these eligibility criteria may also be licensed in this service solely to provide service to Special Emergency Radio Service eligibles on one- way paging-only frequencies below 800 MHz, as specified in Sections 90.33 and 90.53(b)(4) or (26), 47 CFR  90.33 and 90.53(b)(4) or (26). Mobile radio communications have become vital tools for all aspects of public safety operations. The most well-known example of the use of radio communications for public safety is in the police service. Over a half-century ago, police officers patrolled city neighborhoods on foot. To communicate with headquarters, they walked to special call-boxes that were dedicated telephone circuits to headquarter dispatchers. Improvements in technology led to mobile radios becoming standard equipment in police and other public safety vehicles. Initially, the radio equipment was of a size and weight that made it suitable only for vehicular use. The use of such radio equipment in police vehicles enabled police to respond more quickly to requests for help, and cover larger areas with fewer officers. A significant change in law enforcement communications over the last ten years has been the wide-spread use of portable radios made possible by the development of micro- miniaturization. New portable radios enable local authorities to go back to ``neighborhood policing'' on foot and bicycles; this trend has received renewed interest due to its effectiveness in crime prevention and community awareness and involvement. Portable radios provide officers on foot or on bicycles with instant command and control ability as well as the capability to call for assistance from other officers at any time. Portable radios have also become essential for firefighters for on-scene coordination, forestry conservation personnel addressing forest fires and other emergencies in remote locations, highway maintenance agencies coordinating emergency road repairs and snow removal, and for EMS teams communication with hospitals. For all of these public safety services, radio communicating is a vital tool which enables them to fulfill their obligations to protect the safety of life and property in a modern society. A critical element of public safety communications systems is the need to accommodate peaks in service demand that occur during multiple emergencies. There must be sufficient capacity to handle not only normal day-to-day communications needs, but also large scale emergencies such as civil disturbances, storms, major fires, earthquakes, and other natural and man-made disasters. The demand for land mobile wireless communications, including that used for the public safety services, has grown rapidly in recent years. There are several factors that reflect the growth in demand for public safety wireless communications. These factors include the increasing reliance on wireless communications by public safety personnel, rising demands on public safety services as measured by increases in crime and other factors, and anticipated growth in the number of public safety personnel. Another factor that is leading to an explosive demand in all communications services, including public safety, is the improvement in semiconductor technology that has led to the introduction of increasingly advanced, economically viable information access and communications services. In the near future, the content of public safety communications will include not just voice, but also fingerprints, mug shots, building diagrams, full motion video, and a host of other high speed data applications. These new services will require additional radio spectrum and, in some cases, wide bandwidths to facilitate high speed transmission. These new technologies and their spectrum requirements are discussed in greater detail later in this Report. Radio spectrum, a valuable but limited resource, has become vitally important to the nation's economic well-being. Advances in telecommunications technologies are spurring economic growth and generally improving the quality of life. Some of these technological advances could assist the public safety community significantly in performing its functions. B. Current Public Safety Frequency Allocations Public safety mobile service operations, other than radio paging, are usually two-way communications between a base and mobile station or between mobile stations. A mobile station is intended to be used while in motion or during stops at unspecified locations. The equipment used for mobile service includes base, repeater, vehicular, and handheld, portable stations. Public safety land mobile systems are sometimes multi-purpose systems; for example, law enforcement, natural resource, medical, and fire control services may be supported by the same radio system or network. The radio systems are purchased from commercial vendors and are often similar to those employed by federal entities for similar purposes. Conventional voice and data systems use a single frequency or a pair of frequencies. Typically, a base station with a tall tower and an omnidirectional antenna is used to cover a large area. The base station uses a transmitter power of 50 to 100 watts. The Commission's licensing staff reports that the mobile units installed in vehicles typically use transmitter power of 100 watts and smaller antennas. Portable, hand-held units have very small antennas and use typically only 2 to 6 watts. Users communicate in a dispatch/supervisory mode (one- to-many) or communicate in a one-to-one mode while other users sometimes monitor communications and take action as appropriate. Typical communications messages from mobile sources are of relatively short duration and typical channel hold times are quite short, usually less than one minute. Under these circumstances, one or more channels can often be shared by several independent users. Specific audio or sub-audio tones known as ``tone-coded squelch'' are used to permit any combination of the mobile radios to receive the radio transmission. A more advanced and efficient system is a trunked system that uses several frequency pairs integrated into a single system. When a user wants to transmit a message, the trunked system will automatically select a currently unused channel pair and assign it to the user. The user has the immediate use of a channel whenever any one of the trunked channel pairs is available. The following table describes the specific frequency bands allocated to the public safety radio services, including the number of channels and approximate quantity of spectrum in each band. Immediately following this table are two charts. The first chart illustrates the various frequency bands allocated to the public safety radio services. The second chart illustrates the amount of spectrum allocated to each of the various wireless radio services, including public safety. CURRENTLY ALLOCATED PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO SPECTRUM Frequency Band (MHz) Number of Channels MHz (Approximate) 25-50 (VHF low band) 315 6.3 150-174 (VHF high band) 242 3.6 220-222 (220 band) 10 0.1 450-470 (UHF band) 74 3.7 806-821/851-866 (800 bands) 70 3.5 821-824/866-869 (800 public safety bands) 230 6 TOTAL* 941 23.2 * Various amounts of spectrum have also been allocated in the 470-512 MHz band in 11 markets: Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C., ranging from 6 to 18 MHz. Microwave spectrum in the bands above 1000 MHz is also available for public safety use. NOTE: Graph in original version of this document not available in wordperfect format NOTE: Graph in original version of this document not available in wordperfect format; information contained in graph is included below: ALLOCATED LAND MOBILE SPECTRUM SERVICE MHZ CELLULAR 50 SMR 19 PCS 123 PUBLIC SAFETY* 23.2 OTHER PLMR* 36.5 * Various amounts of spectrum have also been allocated in the 470-512 MHz band in 11 markets, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C., ranging from 6 to 18 MHz. The VHF low and high bands and the UHF band are used primarily for non- trunked, conventional, dispatch voice communications. The VHF low band is subject to ionospherically propagated interference from distant stations during periods of high sun spot levels, and man-made noise, especially in urban areas, and is therefore not the most desirable band. The VHF high band and the UHF bands are more popular due to better noise and propagation properties. The 800 MHz bands are used for conventional and trunked systems. In the UHF and 800 MHz bands, channels are paired to allow use of repeater stations. Signals from a control station or mobile unit are transmitted on one frequency. The repeater retransmits the communication on another channel for reception by other control or mobile units. This system can provide greater geographic coverage than land mobile systems not employing repeaters. Public safety entities also use fixed services to provide communications between specified fixed points. These are usually point-to-point systems operating in the microwave bands where the transmission of a radio frequency signal involves a single fixed transmitting location and a single fixed receiving location. A more complex type of fixed service is the point-to-multipoint system in which multiple transmitting or receiving fixed stations are involved. Fixed microwave services are licensed and regulated under Part 94 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR Part 94. The microwave spectrum is shared with other Part 90 private land mobile users, Part 74 and Part 78 broadcast service users, Part 21 and Part 22 common carrier users, and Part 80 and Part 87 aviation and marine service users. C. Previous Commission Actions To Meet Spectrum Demand The Commission has consistently been responsive to public safety spectrum needs. For example, in response to a 1983 congressional mandate to study public safety spectrum needs, the Commission took a number of actions. We issued a Notice of Inquiry to solicit public comment on public safety spectrum needs. We subsequently released a Private Radio Bureau report entitled Future Public Safety Telecommunications Requirements that projected growth of public safety communications requirements through the year 2000, estimated the impact of new technologies on these projections, and presented a number of alternative means to meet future communications needs of the public safety radio services. Prior to the August, 1985 release of the Future Public Safety Telecommunications Requirements report, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in response to 1) a petition filed by the Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC), and 2) an August, 1983 study by the Commission's Private Radio Bureau of the need for additional private land mobile spectrum through the year 2000, that proposed to allocate 32 megahertz of land mobile reserve spectrum and to apportion it among the Public Safety, Industrial/Land Transportation, Business Radio, and Specialized Mobile Radio Services. The public safety community argued that the 3.6 megahertz of spectrum proposed in the NPRM was inadequate to meet its needs. Therefore, in the Report and Order in this proceeding, the Commission allocated six megahertz of spectrum exclusively for public safety use anywhere in the nation. Twenty two megahertz of spectrum was divided among the Cellular, Private Land Mobile (other than public safety), and General Purpose Mobile Radio Services. The six megahertz reallocation to public safety in the GEN Docket No. 84- 1233 and the 1985 Public Safety Study converged in a subsequent proceeding (National Plan proceeding) that developed and established rules and technical standards for the implementation of the national plan incorporating this six megahertz of public safety spectrum. The National Plan proceeding established an advisory committee to develop a national public safety plan to govern the use of the six megahertz allocation, and defined 55 public safety regions in the U.S. The National Plan was intended to facilitate interoperability among communications systems to permit local, state, and federal agencies to coordinate their activities and to ensure efficient use of the spectrum allocated for public safety radio systems. While it is the Commission's belief that certain technical concerns must be addressed at the national level, the great diversity of needs in different areas of the country demand that input also be obtained at the state and local levels. Therefore, the National Plan focussed on general spectrum management issues while providing a framework that allowed regional public safety planning committees to develop plans tailored to their own particular communications needs. By using a two-pronged approach of regional and national planning, the Commission hoped to provide spectrum for all the country's public safety and special emergency entities, while also providing sufficient flexibility to allow regional planners to develop efficient and effective solutions to local public safety problems. The last of the 55 regional safety plans, for the state of Idaho, was approved on August 3, 1993. While a few regions that completed their plans several years ago have made significant progress in implementing their plans, most of the regions are still in the very early stages of implementing their plans. Therefore, it is still too early to judge how well these plans are working to satisfy the spectrum needs of the public safety community. D. Pending Commission and Industry Actions There are several pending proceedings under the Commission's jurisdiction and one industry standard-setting effort whose outcomes may influence greatly the ability of public safety users to use the current spectrum more efficiently. Within the Commission, the Refarming rule making proceeding could, if implemented, greatly increase channel capacity for public safety services. The Commission is considering a petition filed by the New York City Public Safety Agencies to use UHF-TV Channel 16 in New York City, which would also enable them to implement spectrum efficient technologies in current frequency allocations. The APCO Project- 25 industry standard-setting effort may also have a positive impact in improving channel capacity. These efforts are discussed in detail below. 1. Refarming In July of 1991, the Commission released a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) that sought information on any new technical, operational, or regulatory techniques that could promote more efficient use of the frequency bands below 512 MHz used by the private land mobile radio services, including the public safety services. The Commission used this NOI to adopt a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) proposing certain spectrum efficiency standards that require systems to be at least as efficient as some narrowband technologies, while providing technical flexibility. This NPRM also proposed to phase out type acceptance of, and thereby ultimately prohibit, spectrum inefficient technologies. Refarming proposals include plans to narrow channel bandwidths over time; to provide for exclusive channel use below 470 MHz; to encourage technical flexibility and spectrum efficiency; to reduce maximum allowable power levels and antenna heights; and to allow trunking in bands below 800 MHz. One aspect of the refarming proposal that is of special interest for purposes of future public safety needs is the possibility of doubling or even tripling the present communications capacity by migration from 25 kHz channel bandwidth to 12.5 kHz, 6.25 kHz and 5 kHz channel bandwidths. Refarming of the private land mobile spectrum by implementing narrowband channels appears to be readily achievable from an engineering prospective. Implementation of narrowband technologies would result in at least a two- to three-fold increase in available voice channels for existing public safety systems. We emphasize, of course, that the refarming rulemaking proceeding currently remains pending and no final action has been taken. Our discussion here seeks to illustrate the implications of the proposals in the NPRM, but is not intended to suggest any particular outcome in the rulemaking proceeding. 2. New York City Public Safety Petition On April 6, 1992, the New York City Public Safety Agencies (Agencies) filed a Request for Waiver with the Commission, seeking waiver of Parts 2 and 90 of the Rules to permit the use of UHF-TV Channel 16 for public safety operations in New York City. The agencies filed a supplement to the original request on April 14, 1994, and a new Conditional Waiver Request on November 21, 1994. The latest request includes a comprehensive agreement reached between a coalition of television broadcasters operating in the metropolitan New York area, and a coalition of metropolitan New York public safety agencies. The agreement calls for the use of UHF-TV Channel 16 in the metropolitan New York area by public safety agencies for at least five years while these agencies work to convert their existing radio systems to more spectrum efficient technologies and modes of operation. The Commission solicited public comment on the latest waiver request on December 14, 1994, with final comments due by January 20, 1995, and we expect to take prompt action on this request. 3. Advanced Technologies and APCO-25 On September 7, 1988, the Commission released a Notice of Inquiry (Notice) to obtain comment on trunking compatibility protocol standards for radio equipment operating in the 821-824/866-869 MHz public safety bands. In that Notice, the Commission examined the possibility of establishing standards to increase interoperability among licensees using different types of trunked radio systems. The Commission concluded that trunking standards were not necessary to permit interoperability because users of analog-based radio systems can communicate with one another if they transmit on the same frequency and operate in the non-trunked (conventional) mode. We also recognized, however, that the next generation of radios is likely to use digital modulation and transmission techniques, and that digital systems may require some degree of standardization to enable system interoperability. The Commission initiated a Further Inquiry to explore the important issue of standards as well as the many other technical, economic, and regulatory issues that relate to the use of advanced technologies in the public safety services. APCO formed a working group (APCO Project 25) to explore the issues raised by the Commission in the Further Notice and to develop technical standards for the next generation of public safety radios. The benefits that public safety agencies anticipate from the standards being developed by APCO Project 25 include interoperability between agencies and between different levels of government, and competitive procurement of radio equipment. Other issues being discussed are how to achieve a graceful migration to digital technology and how to make more efficient use of public safety radio spectrum. According to APCO, when Project 25 technology is implemented, it will initially provide twice as many channels in the 450-512 MHz and 800 MHz bands by halving channels from their current 25 kHz bandwidth to 12.5 kHz. APCO also asserts that in the VHF high band, a reduction from the current 15 kHz channels to 12.5 kHz channels will provide at least a six-for-five gain, in addition to allowing use of adjacent channels in the same geographic areas. Project 25's ultimate goal is 6.25 kHz channels, or a four-to-one gain over current 25 kHz channels. The outcome of Project 25 may increase channel capacity for certain users and should be considered in future spectrum planning. III. PROJECTED PUBLIC SAFETY SPECTRUM REQUIREMENTS A. Spectrum Requirements Projected by Public Safety Community 1. Conventional Voice and Data Spectrum Requirements The Commission requested that APCO and PSCC project their spectrum needs to the year 2010 by geographic area and frequency band. In response APCO contends that the public safety community needs 6 megahertz nationwide and an additional 12 megahertz in metropolitan areas for basic voice and data communications. APCO does not, however, provide a detailed analysis supporting these projected needs, nor does it identify which metropolitan areas need an additional 12 megahertz of spectrum. Its report instead echoes the frustrations of PSCC regarding the difficulty in making such determinations given the dynamic state of land mobile radio technology, and changes in land mobile licensing and licensing data recordkeeping. APCO states that licensing data alone does not provide a reliable picture of frequency demand. There are a finite number of radio frequencies available for licensing in a particular band or service. APCO states that ``once all of the frequencies in a particular geographic area have been assigned, the number of new licenses issued will necessarily be very small, notwithstanding what may be extraordinary demand for new licenses.'' This is demonstrated, APCO suggests, by looking at the number of unmet channel requests received by frequency coordinators. APCO's local frequency advisors in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles report backlogs of long-pending requests for approximately 200 channels that they have been unable to satisfy. APCO further contends that many public safety agencies in those and other major metropolitan areas have simply given up requesting channels, knowing that none are available. APCO states that there is a ceiling on the number of frequencies that can be assigned until new spectrum is made available. When the ceiling is lifted (as when the 800 MHz band became available) there is usually a flood of applications seeking those channels, reflecting pent up demand. For example, the number of applications coordinated by APCO from July 1, 1993, to June 30, 1994, for ``new stations'' or ``new transmitters'' was more than double the previous twelve months. Most of that increase was for new 800 MHz systems. APCO cites numerous statistics that reflect the growth in demand of public safety radio communications for various jurisdictions across the country. APCO does not, however, provide detailed analysis to explain how it used these statistics to determine the amount of conventional-use spectrum it requested. In response to our request to justify its projection of public safety needs, APCO filed additional information that consisted primarily of examples of specific states that have depleted, or nearly depleted, the available VHF and UHF channels. APCO also indicated that part of the spectrum congestion problem is caused by the number of individual public safety departments in close proximity that want their own systems. For example, the state of Georgia ``has 159 counties, each with its own sheriff's department and government agencies.'' Another example is Oklahoma, where ``[f]ew agencies are able to afford 800 MHz systems and many small, rural agencies depend upon low cost used VHF equipment 'passed down' by larger agencies.'' A discussion of ways to alleviate spectrum congestion for these types of situations through more efficient spectrum usage, as opposed to frequency allocations, follows in the analysis of projected spectrum needs, infra. In its response to our request for needs projections, PSCC does not project spectrum requirements. Instead, PSCC focuses on the difficulty of projecting needs based on historical data and states that: the Commission's license data base is a ``paper'' data base that shows only what the licensee is authorized to use, not what the licensed entity actually has in operation. The country's Public Safety communications facilities change every working day as licenses are issued, renewed, amended, cancelled or revoked, but all these actions are not always timely and accurately reflected in the data base. Although PSCC does not provide specific spectrum projections, it does make several suggestions concerning administrative changes that may aid in future attempts to make such projections. For example, PSCC recommends that an ``FCC Office of Public Safety'' be established and also makes general suggestions about ``changes in licensing methodology.'' These suggestions will be explored as part of a new proceeding that we will initiate. This proceeding will focus on developing an information collection process to assure that the Commission is able, on an on-going basis, to evaluate public safety spectrum needs objectively. APTA projects that its spectrum utilization in the 450 MHz and 800 MHz bands into the year 2010 will double. APTA states that this projection assumes that transit communications operators will continue to take advantage of spectrum conservation measures such as using ``alternate means (wire or spread spectrum), the use of techniques such as trunking when practical, and the application of emerging spectrum efficient communication protocols.'' ITS predicts that by the year 2010 public transit will require more than double the amount of spectrum it has today. It bases these projected needs on (1) growth in fleet size, (2) an increase in ``demand-responsive services'' due to suburbanization and population aging, and (3) the adoption of ``smart bus,'' intelligent transportation system technologies. ITS states that at least 50 percent of the growth in channel demand will be satisfied by refarming, trunking, and the GPS Automatic Vehicle Location service. 2. New Wideband Technologies A myriad of new technologies is envisioned for use by the public safety services. These new technologies will allow police officers to perform in the field most of the functions currently tied to the permanent district station. This will encourage the community policing that seems to be increasingly embraced by the public. ``By breaking the technological bands that tie the officers to the station, and to the police vehicle, we can encourage the beat team officers to spend their time working directly with the customers, using their communications `tool kits' to set up `mobile offices' in the community. The implementation of this type of technology is highly dependent upon both hard-wired and wireless data links.'' These new technologies are likely to require a large portion of spectrum due to the large amount of high density data to be transmitted at high-speed. Portable or laptop computer with wireless data transmission capabilities will allow police crime reports to be recorded in the field, make crime information instantly available and provide precise positioning data. Portable computers with wireless connections also will provide access to mainframe records management systems, allowing officers to conduct investigations without needing to return to a fixed location. Also envisioned are optical scanners that enable an officer to instantaneously compare fingerprints against those in an automated fingerprint identification system. This technology also might be extended to comparisons of prints found at crime scenes, thus expediting the investigative process. APCO projects that implementation of these future technologies will require at least 25 megahertz of spectrum by the year 2000, and an additional 50 megahertz by the year 2010. These estimates are based on a paper compiled by the APCO Spectrum Needs Task Force and information solicited from equipment manufacturers and others. These estimates take into consideration the data rate for various technologies, the number of estimated users for particular services, and the estimated usage per user per mobile/portable unit. B. Analysis of Projected Spectrum Needs 1. Conventional Voice and Data The public safety community representatives that submitted comments for this Report all agreed that their communications needs are increasing. A significant portion of APCO's comments concentrated on the special requirements of public safety agencies that mandate primary reliance on radio systems owned and operated by each agency. APCO states that commercial systems, such as cellular and PCS systems, may be useful for routine administrative communications, but are of little value for most public safety emergency communications because public safety agencies have critical needs for reliability, immediate response, universal coverage, signal quality and encryption. The Commission does not question the need of public safety agencies to have ready access to wireless communications, particularly in situations involving imminent danger to life or property. We also understand that the special reliability and functionality requirements of public safety communications may not be fully realizable on commercially available systems designed to serve the public. We are not convinced, however, that the only way to achieve this access is on systems individually owned and operated by individual public safety agencies. In fact, there have been a number of cases where communities have maximized efficiency and minimized expenses by joining with other nearby communities to create a shared communications system. For example, in Hattiesburg, Alabama, with a shared system, ``duplication of effort is eliminated, cost efficiencies are enhanced and political intervention is maintained at an acceptable level.'' Another example is a trunked communications system that uses the frequencies of several municipalities to provide complete interagency communications in the Fort Bend County, Texas, system. According to the Texas Sheriff's office, this system offers a ``seamless and transparent communications system throughout the majority of southeast Texas.'' There are numerous other examples of communities that have implemented trunking systems that serve several public safety departments and agencies, eliminating the need for the inefficient use by individually owned and operated systems. In addition to technologies readily available to the public safety community, commercial services can accommodate the special needs of public safety services through various software applications. Mobile satellite services provide commercially available wireless communications systems for safety of life and property operations. In this example, technology has provided at least part of the answer to the problem of obtaining ready access to a communications system in emergency situations. inmarsat uses priority signalling for distress and safety communications in the maritime services while American Mobile Satellite Corporation (AMSC) has proposed dynamic frequency pooling to ensure availability to high priority users. These systems also provide privacy through encryption. The same smart technology used in the satellite services could be explored for use in the terrestrial services. Trunked radio systems offer another example of how priority access can be achieved on a commercially available wireless communications system. The sophisticated computer controls on multi-channel trunked radio systems permit these systems to provide just the type of priority channel access, which allows safety of life and property transmissions to preempt non-emergency administrative transmissions, that public safety agencies want and need. ``With trunking, a single radio system shared by several agencies provides each agency with communications service virtually equivalent to having its own communications system. Shared trunked communications integrates dispatch, secure voice, data and telephone interconnect functions and coordinates communications among the sharing agencies.'' In fact, this single capability of trunked systems is probably largely responsible for the big increase in the use of trunked systems by public safety agencies in recent years. The Orleans County, New York, system, which serves the Orleans County Sheriff, the New York State Police, three town police departments, 14 town highway departments, and other public service departments, such as mental health, public health, and emergency preparedness has implemented trunking. Other municipalities that have implemented trunking include Martin County, Florida, the City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii, and the City of Oakland, California. This same type of capability would enable public safety agencies to obtain priority access using commercial systems like SMRs, cellular, or PCS. It is also important to note that the Federal Government's public safety agencies, which have the same needs for priority access and encryption, are taking a serious look at commercially available technologies. NTIA is required by the 1993 Budget Act to produce a ``plan for Federal agencies with existing mobile radio systems to use more spectrum-efficient technologies that are at least as spectrum efficient and cost-effective as readily available commercial mobile radio systems.'' We conclude that more information is needed in order for us to determine whether additional spectrum allocations are necessary to satisfy the conventional voice and relatively low-speed data wireless communications requirements of public safety agencies. Although APCO, for example, has quantified its spectrum needs, it has not provided any explanation as to how these projections were developed and how they relate to current and projected spectrum shortages. PSCC shared the concerns of the other public safety communications representatives that spectrum needs are growing, but it has provided no projections of additional needed spectrum allocations. The insufficiencies in the current record have led us to conclude that a further proceeding is necessary to enable us to make informed decisions regarding the spectrum needs of public safety agencies. As we discuss elsewhere in this Report, we believe that there are a number of alternatives that state and local agencies can pursue in order to achieve more efficient utilization of their current spectrum. We also acknowledge, however, that some of these options involve expenditures that many state and local governments may find difficult to afford. Our responsibilities under the Communications Act include the duty to make a public interest assessment of the extent to which spectrum -- a valuable, scarce, public resource -- should be made available to state and local governments in quantities that are designed to be sufficient to offset, at least to some degree, the costs that would be incurred by these governments introducing greater efficiencies in their use of current spectrum allocations. We believe that our obligation to make such an assessment is particularly important here because matters of public safety are at stake. It is because of the serious dimensions of this assessment that we have decided to defer any definitive determination of the spectrum needs of state and local public safety agencies until we have collected more complete data. It is better, we believe, to delay our decision if this additional time can be used to gather the information necessary for informed judgments. We intend that the data collection proceeding that we propose to initiate will serve to fill the vacuum in the current record, thus enabling us to reach reasonable and defensible conclusions regarding the adequacy of frequency allocations for state and local public safety agencies. In the next section of this Report, we discuss technical options, economic incentives, and regulatory actions that should be considered and implemented to the extent possible in conjunction with any efforts to allocate additional spectrum to the public safety services for conventional wireless voice and low-speed data communications. 2. New Wideband Technologies The Commission agrees with the commenters that the new wideband technologies, which will allow the transmission of fingerprints, mug shots, and other high speed data applications, are likely to require a new spectrum allocation. We also recognize that these high speed data applications are the potential harbingers of a new generation of law enforcement techniques that will strengthen government's hand in providing public safety. Because of the importance of these potential applications, we are assigning a priority to our assessment of the amount of spectrum needed for these wideband technologies. The data collection proceeding which we will be initiating will draw attention to this issue. We will continue to work with the public safety community and NTIA to better define the amount of spectrum needed for these purposes. IV. THE COMMISSION PLAN Increasing demands are being placed on public safety wireless communications systems, especially in major metropolitan areas. It is therefore incumbent on the Commission, in its capacity as manager of non-Federal uses of the radio spectrum, including public safety uses, to alleviate shortages where they exist. Because the spectrum is a scarce natural resource it is also imperative that the Commission strive to ensure that the spectrum is used efficiently. This section lays out options that attempt to strike the appropriate balance between the wireless communications needs of the public safety community and recognition of the scarcity of the radio spectrum. The Budget Act requires the Commission to plan for the long term as well as the immediate needs of the public safety community. Therefore, it is important that we consider all alternatives that will enable public safety entities to satisfy their obligations to the American public while recognizing the need to use the increasingly scarce and valuable spectrum resource efficiently. In order to fulfill our mandate under the Communications Act, and under the more recent requirements established in the Budget Act, we are adopting a Plan consisting of two major components. First, we will initiate in the near future a data collection proceeding intended to enable us to gather sufficient information regarding the spectrum needs of state and local government public safety agencies. This information will play an important role in our ability to make informed spectrum allocation decisions. An outline of our objectives in this data collection proceeding is presented in Part A of this Section. Second, we have considered a variety of options to ensure that public safety spectrum is used efficiently and that public safety wireless communications needs are satisfied. The options we have considered are discussed in Part C of this Section. A. Data Collection Proceeding The difficulty we have had in defining state and local public safety agencies spectrum needs has convinced us of the need to create a mechanism to identify and collect data relevant for such a determination. Therefore, we plan to issue a Notice in the near future that will have two primary objectives. First, it will solicit information from public safety licensees about how they are using their current frequencies and any measures they are taking or plan to take to use them more efficiently in the future. Second, it will solicit information from the public safety community about anticipated wireless communications demands between now and the year 2010 that cannot be met using current public safety spectrum. The first area on which the data collection proceeding will focus is the present and anticipated use of available and emerging wireless communications technologies to expand the capacity of existing wireless communications systems. In this section of the Notice we will attempt to determine the extent to which we can reasonably expect state and local public safety agencies to migrate to more efficient wireless communications systems. For example, agencies will be asked to evaluate their ability to finance such a migration. Agencies will also be asked to identify the specific geographic area in which they need to operate their wireless communications systems, identify those other agencies with whom they need to communicate, and evaluate the feasibility of establishing and sharing a multi-agency wireless communications system. These questions will help the Commission determine what further steps we must take to support the need for interoperability among various state and local public safety agencies. The second area on which the data collection proceeding will focus is the need for additional spectrum to meet needs anticipated through the year 2010. In this section of the Notice, we will solicit input from state and local public safety agencies about their anticipated needs and the extent to which these needs can best be met with additional spectrum. For example, agencies will be asked to divide their projected needs between existing voice and relatively slow-rate data communication and needs for services such as high-speed data and full-motion video. Agencies will also be asked to identify the assumptions they make to estimate future spectrum requirements. These assumptions should cover areas such as projected population growth in their areas, the crime rate, their financial resources, and the cost tradeoff between implementing more efficient technologies and obtaining additional spectrum. The data collected from this portion of the Notice should help us identify not only how much spectrum may be needed, but also the most desirable frequency band or bands. It should also provide enough information to enable us to determine whether another nationwide allocation is needed or whether spectrum needs are more localized in specific highly congested geographic areas. B. Public Safety Liaison Officer PSCC suggests in its comments that the Commission establish an Office of Public Safety. PSCC states that this new Office would be an expert proponent of the public safety services to accumulate and organize public safety positions and disseminate them to other Commission staff and other Federal agencies, while at the same time conveying to the public safety community the Commission's positions on matters affecting the community. In response to this suggestion, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau has recently appointed a Public Safety Liaison Officer to work with the public safety community, including APCO Project 25, and other concerned Federal agencies on matters affecting public safety communications needs. Among other things, the Public Safety Liaison Officer will solicit informal comments on potential improvements to the public safety communications licensing process, such as allowing frequency coordinators or regional planners to take over the responsibility of assigning frequencies to the public safety agencies. The establishment of an advisory committee to oversee the public safety licensing function will also be considered. C. Options for Efficient Spectrum Use 1. Technical Options There are a number of technical options available, based on existing and emerging technologies, that should provide public safety agencies with more reliable and sophisticated wireless communications systems. These technical options -- refarming, digital technologies/access techniques, and sectored antenna systems -- are discussed below. a. Refarming Proceeding As discussed in Section II of this Report, pending refarming proposals include plans to adopt a spectrum efficiency standard based on narrow channel bandwidths; to encourage and to facilitate technical flexibility; to reduce maximum allowable power levels and antenna heights; and to allow trunking in bands below 800 MHz. If adopted, the spectrum efficiency standard proposed would lead to an eventual doubling or even tripling of the current communications channels by migrating from 25 kHz channel bandwidth to 12.5 kHz, 6.25 kHz and 5 kHz channel bandwidths. In addition, the proposal to permit trunking on existing public safety channels in the bands below 512 MHz could result in at least a tripling of the present communications capacity. Finally, the proposal to restrict more tightly system coverage to the smallest possible geographic area should enable more public safety agencies to obtain licenses. b. Digital Technologies/Access Techniques Digital voice systems are rapidly being deployed in mobile services such as SMRs and cellular. Radios that operate on 12.5 kHz channels and use digital technology are becoming available for public safety applications. Two promising digital technologies are currently available, Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA). The cellular industry has adopted a standard for each of these technologies and enhanced SMR systems have deployed TDMA systems in several major markets. TDMA is a technology that increases the number of communications channels by dividing each available channel pair into multiple time slots. The TDMA system being used by many cellular licensees splits the 30 kHz channel into three time slots, potentially enabling as many as three users to share the channel at any one time. The TDMA system being implemented by enhanced SMR licensees splits the 25 kHz channel into six time slots, potentially enabling as many as six users to share the channel at any one time. Besides increasing capacity, TDMA has the advantage of allowing complete privacy through digital encryption, as well as facilitating access to advanced digital data services. CDMA is a technology that employs spread spectrum modulation techniques and coding schemes to permit many separate communications to share a single wideband communications channel. With CDMA, each radio transmission is spread over a large band of spectrum at relatively low power. Each transmission is uniquely coded so that CDMA receivers can extract the correct message. The wider the communications channel the greater the advantages of CDMA in increasing communications capacity. The current cellular CDMA standard specifies a 1.25 megahertz channel scheme. CDMA systems being used in cellular systems have the potential to provide 7 to 10 times the capacity of existing analog systems. CDMA has a theoretical potential to provide up to 20 times the capacity of current analog systems. Both TDMA and CDMA technologies continue to develop and are becoming more robust and reliable. These technologies could be employed to increase the communications capacity of wireless public safety communication systems significantly. As discussed above in Section II (D) (3), APCO Project 25 is developing standards for the use of digital technology in the public safety radio services. The digital standards being developed by APCO Project 25 could, among other things, ultimately provide for interoperability among public safety agencies using digital technology, and encryption for secure communications. We anticipate that the efficiency and operational advantages of digital technology will contribute significantly to the ability of public safety agencies to meet their wireless communications needs. c. Sectored Antenna Systems Cellular and enhanced SMR licensees routinely use sectored antenna systems to expand the capacity of their current channels. This technology uses phased antenna arrays to divide the base station coverage area into three independent 120ø sectors or even smaller 60ø sectors. Each sector has an individual dedicated antenna array that receives and transmits communications only within its sector. The overall antenna system is designed to prevent interference and overlap from adjacent sectors. By employing a 120ø sectored antenna system the capacity of the system is increased by a factor of three. Adoption of this technology by public safety licensees could increase the capacity of these systems as well. 2. Economic Options Historically, forecasting demand for spectrum has been extremely problematic. Most licensees have not paid for spectrum and, therefore, do not experience the full costs associated with using that spectrum. If a licensee has a choice between spending $1 million for a new radio system or $2 million for a system with equivalent features that uses one-third as much spectrum, it clearly would choose the less expensive system as long as it could freely obtain access to the necessary spectrum. The result is that many users may not be motivated to utilize spectrum efficiently. The Commission clearly recognizes that the public safety community has certain unique characteristics that distinguish it from other users of the electromagnetic spectrum. First, public safety entities typically must satisfy clearly defined public interest obligations and do not seek to maximize profits. Second, state and local public safety radio users have significant requirements for immediate channel access because of their primary responsibility to protect life and property. Finally, public safety radio users typically face a much longer planning cycle to acquire new systems with public funding, as compared to other non-Federal radio users. These factors may conflict with the Commission's responsibility to ensure efficient spectrum use, particularly when increased spending may be required to improve spectrum efficiency. In light of these distinguishing characteristics, we recognize that public safety radio users need certain concessions to make sure they can satisfy their radio communications requirements. For example, over the years the Commission has attempted to satisfy public safety needs by allocating additional spectrum and by providing public safety licensees with additional time to plan and implement new radio systems. However, as unoccupied spectrum becomes more valuable, and as demand for a broad array of wireless communications services rapidly grows, it is clear that it will be increasingly difficult for the Commission to allocate or reallocate spectrum to satisfy expanding spectrum needs of existing users while at the same time satisfying the needs of new users and services. There are several ways in which economic incentives can be used to encourage state and local public safety agencies to seek more spectrum efficient means of satisfying their growing wireless communications requirements. Four options are discussed below -- greater use of commercial service providers; providing exclusive rights to spectrum space; allowing the leasing of excess public safety spectrum capacity for other wireless services; and allocating spectrum to public safety use on an exclusive basis only for spectrum efficient technologies. a. Use of Commercial Service Providers One option to reduce the demand of state and local public safety agencies for dedicated spectrum is to encourage greater use of current and future commercial wireless radio systems by providing commercial operators with incentives to provide public safety agencies with priority access. For example, the Commission could offer new PCS licensees the option to obtain additional blocks of spectrum, either free or at a significant discount from their true market value. In return, the PCS licensee would commit to provide service to public safety agencies in its market area. This service would have to be tailored to meet all the requirements of public safety agencies such as priority access and the ability to stay on the air at all times. Such an approach may provide a viable wireless communications option for many public safety agencies throughout the country. It would enable them to use a cutting-edge technology, obtain relatively inexpensive radios, and have access to a very costly and sophisticated wireless communications infrastructure that in all likelihood they could not afford to implement on their own. In addition, if service were obtained from a PCS licensee, the public safety agency would generally have wireless communications access over a wide geographic area. As more users migrated to PCS systems, interoperability problems would be reduced as such users could easily communicate with each other, given compatible system technologies. b. Exclusivity Exclusivity is another option by which the Commission could create economic incentives for licensees of this spectrum to use their assigned channels more efficiently. By this mechanism, licensees of systems of a specified minimum size would be able to apply to the Commission to stop licensing new users on their channels, and thereby create a more stable and predictable operating environment. We anticipate that licensees would then be able to rely on exclusive channel use to make mutually beneficial arrangements with co-channel licensees in their geographic area. These arrangements could include such things as establishing a new radio system that all current licensees could use, or dividing the channel into several smaller channels that could be used on an exclusive basis by each of the current licensees. Our experience with exclusive channel assignments in the 800 and 900 MHz private land mobile bands and in the Cellular Radio Service suggests that, with the appropriate incentives like exclusive use and technical and operational flexibility, public safety licensees with exclusive channel assignments would be likely to make more intensive use of the increasingly scarce spectrum resources in the bands below 470 MHz. c. Leasing of Excess Public Safety Spectrum Capacity In addition to granting exclusive licenses for public safety spectrum, we may want to consider allowing licensees to lease excess capacity on their systems for other wireless services. Revenue from leasing could be used to offset the cost of implementing more efficient technology in currently allocated spectrum. Also, by permitting the leasing of public safety spectrum capacity for other uses, any concern about the opportunity cost of additional public safety allocations would be reduced. This, in turn, would reduce the need for detailed spectrum requirements projections and justifications for such allocations. This option may be particularly attractive if combined with the option, discussed below, in which public safety spectrum would be licensed in blocks to the states. d. New Spectrum Allocations Although we do not at this time have the information necessary to initiate a nationwide allocation proceeding for additional public safety spectrum, we would consider an allocation for the express purpose of encouraging more efficient spectrum use. The Commission recognizes that any migration of public safety radio users to new, more efficient technologies will take many years to accomplish, both because of the significant number of licensees on current public safety channels, and because of the need to provide sufficient time for licensees to amortize equipment purchased prior to any rule changes. One way to help speed up the introduction and implementation of new, more efficient technologies would be to make available a band of vacant spectrum that could be used for such technologies. Such a band would be reserved for public safety licensees that will use technologies that meet or exceed a Commission spectrum efficiency standard. Licensees would be given exclusive rights to use their assigned channel(s) as an incentive to invest in new equipment. The reservation of such a band for innovative technologies should encourage and accelerate the introduction of new, more efficient radio equipment. It should also make it easier for public safety agencies that may be operating under severe spectrum constraints to migrate to the new band under a transition that they themselves determine. The obvious difficulty in implementing such an approach is that there is no spectrum controlled by the Commission that is both available for allocation and adjacent to or quite close to existing public safety radio bands. Nevertheless, if there is sufficient interest in this option by the public safety community, the Commission will work with NTIA to attempt to identify spectrum that could be shared by NTIA and the Commission. 3. Regulatory Options There are several options to help meet public safety's wireless communications needs through the year 2010 that require structural changes in Commission regulation of the Public Safety Radio Services. These options -- consolidating the six public safety services into broader service pools; increasing federal/non-federal spectrum and system sharing; and increasing the role of the states in planning and managing spectrum use, are discussed below. a. Consolidation of Smaller Services into Broader Service Pools One option for helping meet public safety wireless communications needs is to consolidate many of the smaller radio services into broader service pools. With respect to the Public Safety and Special Emergency Radio Services, we could, for example, consolidate the six component radio services into a single Public Safety Radio Service. The rationale for this proposal is two-fold. First, in its allocations of 800 and 900 MHz spectrum for land mobile services, the Commission used broad service pools, including one in which all agencies eligible in the public safety and special emergency radio services could obtain licenses. This approach has successfully blended eligible public safety service entities into common pools of frequencies. Second, the number of channels allocated to each radio service may not reflect the current demand for radio channels by a particular category of public safety agencies. Most spectrum allocations to the individual public safety services were made over 25 years ago. Typically, the size of the allocations to each service was a function of the perceived relative importance of that service at the time of the spectrum allotment. Although we have implemented rules to permit applicants to be licensed to use channels in a radio service for which they are not eligible, a more flexible approach involving broader eligibility pools may be a preferable solution. Our favorable experience with such pools in the 470-512 MHz and 800 MHz bands certainly argues for strong consideration of such an approach. Although the radio service consolidation proposal has received mixed reviews in the refarming comments, there is wide support for at least some level of consolidation. A consolidated Public Safety Radio Service pool should help ensure that all public safety agencies have equal access to available public safety radio channels. b. Federal/Non-Federal Sharing An alternative to additional allocations for public safety wireless communications services would be spectrum and/or system sharing among Federal, state and local public safety entities. The functions of many Federal, state and local public safety services are similar. Examples of similar services include law enforcement, fire protection, and rescue services. Indeed, in emergency situations such as natural disasters, Federal and non-Federal public safety groups work side-by-side, often using identical equipment. These types of joint activities could be enhanced through the use of common wireless communications spectrum or systems. In fact, this type of sharing has already been proposed in a report accompanying the National Performance Review that proposed the establishment of a National Law Enforcement/Public Safety Wireless Network. This new network would enable Federal, state and local officials to communicate with each other over tactical mobile radio systems to share resources and better coordinate investigations. Also, the Federal Law Enforcement Wireless Users Group (FLEWUG), a joint Treasury-Justice Department initiative, has been formed to study interoperability problems and other obstacles to developing such a network. A likely use of such a network would be access by Federal, state, and local law enforcement groups to the National Crime Information Center's NCIC 2000, a system that will, for example, enable instantaneous fingerprint identification and transmission of stolen property descriptions. APCO has estimated that 75 megahertz of spectrum will be required to implement new wideband technologies, like access to NCIC 2000. We believe that all law enforcement agencies should use the same frequencies to implement future systems that require significantly wider bandwidths than traditional voice and low-speed data systems. Spectrum to implement such wideband wireless communications systems might be found within the spectrum to be transferred by NTIA to private sector use or in other spectrum found suitable for Federal and non-Federal sharing. This approach should have the dual benefits of conserving scarce spectrum while promoting cooperation and coordination among Federal, state, and local public safety agencies, thus enhancing the ability of all public safety agencies to meet their obligations to the American public. c. Increased State Role in Spectrum Planning Another means of increasing access to spectrum is to encourage public safety agencies in the same or neighboring geographic areas to develop consolidated wireless communications systems. For example, many small agencies that could not individually purchase a sophisticated and spectrum efficient trunked radio system could combine their resources to jointly purchase and implement a trunked system. This type of cooperation was encouraged by the Commission in the Report and Order in Gen. Docket No. 87-112 (3 FCC Rcd 905 (1987) at para. 51), the proceeding that implemented a National Public Safety Plan. In response to this encouragement, a growing number of public safety agencies have invested considerable time and money to develop wide-area multi-agency trunked public safety radio systems. We will continue to encourage all public safety agencies to consider this option to help them better meet their wireless communications requirements. Although voluntary cooperation among public safety agencies to create larger consolidated radio systems has been increasing, the Commission may need to take a more active role in this process by changing the way it assigns radio channels to public safety agencies. One approach would be to assign all the channels within the existing Public Safety, Special Emergency and Emergency Medical Radio Services to each state. Under such a licensing scheme, no additional licenses would be granted by the Commission to individual public safety agencies. Each state would then be able to act as the public safety spectrum manager and work to get the maximum communications capacity out of the limited spectrum resource available. With the exception of the Emergency Medical Radio Service, current Commission rules for public safety services do not recognize any role for state governments distinct from the role of state and local agencies as radio users. Greater state participation in public safety spectrum management could have several benefits from the Federal and state perspective. It could promote autonomous decision-making by state and local governments on questions of their day-to-day operation. Such a licensing approach would enable the public safety users closest to the specific communications problems being faced, to develop and implement solutions to those problems. Another benefit is that it should facilitate interoperability and coordination among the various public safety agencies within each state. Well-coordinated state-wide systems could be developed to efficiently and effectively meet a broad range of wireless communications needs. This licensing approach could also help ensure that the spectrum allocated to the Public Safety Radio Services is used as efficiently and effectively as possible by providing state and local authorities greater latitude to implement spectrum saving technologies. Finally, this approach should give state and local public safety agencies easier access to spectrum necessary for system architecture redesign, while still accommodating current needs. A potential problem with this approach is that some local communications needs could be subordinated to state needs. Even though this approach would give local governments less control over access to the radio spectrum, we believe that, on balance, it could improve use of scarce public safety spectrum as the state determines how this spectrum should be used to best protect the lives and property within the state. Although increased state participation in spectrum management could provide many benefits, there are many complex issues to be addressed before the Commission could proceed with this concept. Changes that may be required in the current Rules and in the Communications Act of 1934 concerning spectrum management roles and other legal constraints would have to be studied. The public costs and benefits in terms of service quality and other important considerations would also have to be studied before proceeding with this concept. As this section demonstrates, there is a wide range of possible options to ensure that the public safety community has adequate wireless communications capacity. Implementation of these options could increase current public safety wireless communications capacity dramatically. Many of the options presented here are already available to the public safety user community. Therefore, if public safety agencies can improve their wireless communications systems by adopting options now available to them, they should do so. They should also carefully review the other options presented. As part of the data collection proceeding discussed in Section IV(A) of this report, we will solicit public comment on this report to assist the Commission to identify those options that it should pursue. D. Other Actions In addition to initiating the data collection proceeding discussed in Part A of this Section and pursuing the options discussed in Part B of this Section, we propose to take the following specific short-term and long-term actions to ensure that spectrum allocated for public safety is sufficient to serve the public interest through 2010. þ The Federal Government is to release to the private sector 200 megahertz of spectrum over the next 15 years. On February 10, 1994, the Department of Commerce released its report making a preliminary identification of spectrum for reallocation. In response, the Commission prepared a Report that, among other things, made an alternative proposal to release the 380-400 MHz for private sector use. The ultimate availability of this spectrum will depend on Department of Defense agreement. If this spectrum becomes available for private sector use, because of its proximity to the frequencies already used by public safety, it would be a candidate for allocation to public safety services if a spectrum allocation is deemed necessary. þ The Commission will continue to handle critical spectrum shortages on a case-by-case basis. Public safety entities have always had the option to petition the Commission to use, on a local basis, spectrum that is allocated for other services. For example, the Commission is currently considering a request by public safety users in the New York City area to share use of UHF television channels 16 or 19 to provide spectrum relief to a variety of public safety entities that operate in that area. A similar request was granted in 1985 to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department to operate a 55 duplex channel system in the 470- 512 MHz band by sharing with UHF-TV Channel 16. These public safety agencies had to demonstrate in detail why the only solution to their wireless communications problems was to be authorized to use additional spectrum. Any future public safety allocations made to specific geographic areas will likely include minimum spectrum efficiency requirements that could be met, for example, by trunking or other efficiency enhancing technologies. The Commission will expedite review and action in these cases. þ The Commission will continue to work with NTIA and other interested parties to determine the extent to which sharing of Federal and non-Federal spectrum is feasible. As mentioned above, sharing appears to be a promising solution to the problem of finding a large portion of spectrum for new wideband technologies. Also, sharing of spectrum for conventional voice and data services may prove to be viable for certain joint operations, for example, disaster relief and drug enforcement. V. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS This Report is issued pursuant to authority contained in Section 6002(j)(10)(B)(iv) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-66, and Sections 4(i) and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 403. It is ORDERED that the Secretary shall send copies of this Report to the appropriate committees and subcommittees of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William F. Caton Secretary APPENDIX Private Radio Bureau Letters To APCO and PSCC Mr. Ronnie Rand, Executive Director Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials International, Inc. 2040 South Ridgewood Avenue South Daytona, Florida 32119-8337 Dear Mr. Rand: I am writing to you to formally request APCO's assistance in the Commission's analysis of public safety spectrum needs through the year 2010, mandated last August in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. My staff has developed a tentative outline for the final report and has identified specific areas where input from the public safety community would be particularly useful. The specific areas on which we would appreciate your input are as follows: (1) review licensing data by band and geographic area and compare where we are now to where we thought we would be based on the 1985 Docket 84-232 projections of future public safety licensing and spectrum needs; (2) identify factors, such as increases in population, increased mobility, more crime, and new services like mobile video and IVHS, that may affect future needs; (3) develop spectrum needs projections to the year 2010, by area and band, based on historical data and identified growth factors; and (4) discuss the potential to increase the channel capacity of existing allocations from refarming as a result of increased technical flexibility and more stringent spectrum efficiency standards. We encourage you to provide information to the Commission on these areas or any area that you think may be useful to complete this important project. In addition to input about spectrum needs, we hope you will be able to provide specific detailed suggestions on the approach we should take to develop the required public safety plan and on how this new plan should relate to the current planning process for 800 MHz public safety spectrum. In addition to APCO, we are soliciting input from the Public Safety Communications Council and NTIA. In order for the Commission to meet the February, 1995 deadline to submit a report to Congress on public safety spectrum needs and a plan to satisfy those needs, we must move quickly to collect, analyze, and assemble all pertinent information. You should be aware that our schedule for this project must include time to permit public comment on any input from the public safety community. Therefore, we are asking that you provide whatever information you wish to contribute to this effort no later than July 29, 1994. I understand that APCO has already convened a committee to work on this project, chaired by Ross Morris. I look forward to working with APCO and the rest of the public safety community to successfully complete this important undertaking. If you or Mr. Morris have any specific questions about this request, please do not hesitate to contact me at (202) 632-6940, or Joe Levin, Chief of the Policy & Planning Branch at (202) 632- 6497. Thanks for your cooperation. Sincerely, Ralph A. Haller Chief, Private Radio Bureau Mr. Larry Miller American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 444 North Capitol Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Dear Mr. Miller: I am writing to you in your capacity as Chairman of the Public Safety Communications Council to formally request PSCC's assistance in the Commission's analysis of public safety spectrum needs through the year 2010, mandated last August in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. My staff has developed a tentative outline for the final report and has identified specific areas where input from the public safety community would be particularly useful. The specific areas on which we would appreciate your input are as follows: (1) review licensing data by band and geographic area and compare where we are now to where we thought we would be based on the 1985 Docket 84-232 projections of future public safety licensing and spectrum needs; (2) identify factors, such as increases in population, increased mobility, more crime, and new services like mobile video and IVHS, that may affect future needs; (3) develop spectrum needs projections to the year 2010, by area and band, based on historical data and identified growth factors; and (4) discuss the potential to increase the channel capacity of existing allocations from refarming as a result of increased technical flexibility and more stringent spectrum efficiency standards. We encourage you to provide information to the Commission on these areas or any area that you think may be useful to complete this important project. In addition to input about spectrum needs, we hope you will be able to provide specific detailed suggestions on the approach we should take to develop the required public safety plan and on how this new plan should relate to the current planning process for 800 MHz public safety spectrum. In addition to PSCC, we are soliciting input from APCO and NTIA. In order for the Commission to meet the February, 1995 deadline to submit a report to Congress on public safety spectrum needs and a plan to satisfy those needs, we must move quickly to collect, analyze, and assemble all pertinent information. You should be aware that our schedule for this project must include time to permit public comment on any input from the public safety community. Therefore, we are asking that you provide whatever information you wish to contribute to this effort no later than July 29, 1994. I look forward to working with PSCC and the rest of the public safety community to successfully complete this important undertaking. If you have any specific questions about this request, please do not hesitate to contact me at (202) 632-6940, or Joe Levin, Chief of the Policy & Planning Branch at (202) 632-6497. Thanks for your cooperation. Sincerely, Ralph A. Haller Chief, Private Radio Bureau