******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Replacement of Part 90 by Part 88 to) PR Docket No. 92-235 Revise the Private Land Mobile Radio) Services and Modify the Policies) Governing Them ) ) and ) ) Examination of Exclusivity and ) Frequency Assignment Policies of) the Private Land Mobile Radio Services) ) ) ) Amendment of the Commission's Rules) PR Docket No. 92-257 Concerning Maritime Communications) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: December 23, 1996 Released: December 30, 1996 By the Commission: TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Paragraph I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 III. DISCUSSION A. Channel Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 B. Transition Period. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 1. Timetable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 2. Public Safety Users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 C. Spectrum Efficiency Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 1. Alternative Showings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 2. Clarifications and Explanations . . . . . . . . . . .23 Title Paragraph D. Power/Antenna Height Limits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 1. Power/Antenna Height Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 2. Classification of Base Stations . . . . . . . . . . .35 3. New Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4. Paging Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 5. Type Acceptance Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . .43 E. Frequency Stability Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 F. Emission Mask 1. Authorized Bandwidth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 a. Measurement Technique. . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 G. FM Modulation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 H. Former Low Power Offset Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 1. New Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 2. Operation and Licensing Requirements. . . . . . . . .67 I. New Low Power Offset Channels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 J. Emergency Medical Radio Service/Special Emergency Radio Service. . . . . 73 1. Paging Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 2. MED Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 K. Exemption from Technical Standards . . . . . . . . . . . .79 L. Transient Frequency Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82 M. Section 90.271 Narrowband Operations . . . . . . . . . . .88 N. Shared Use of Industrial/Land Transportation and Maritime Public Correspondence Frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 1. Integration with Refarming. . . . . . . . . . . . . .92 2. Power/Antenna Height Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . .94 O. Miscellaneous Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . .96 IV. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 V. FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 A. Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rule . . . . . . 112 B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by the Public Comments in Response to the IRFA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114 C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which Rule Will Apply. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .115 D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 E. Steps Taken By Agency to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities Consistent with Stated Objectives . . . . 121 F. Commission's Outreach Efforts to Learn of and Respond to the Views of Small Entities Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.  609 . . . . . .122 G. Report to Congress. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .123 VI. ORDERING CLAUSES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Page APPENDICES A. List of Petitioners. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 B. Reallocated Former Low Power Offset Channels . . . . . . .51 C. Comparison of Channels Available Before and After Refarming. . . . . . . 66 D. Part 90 Rules. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1. On June 15, 1995, the Commission adopted the Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in PR Docket No. 92-235 which provides the private land mobile radio (PLMR) community with a regulatory framework that promotes efficient use of spectrum, increases technical flexibility, enhances the deployment of new technologies, and promotes a competitive and robust marketplace for product development. We concluded that changes in the PLMR bands were necessary due to an increasing demand for PLMR services and its associated spectrum congestion. The R&O provides PLMR users with a large choice of options for upgrading existing radio systems and designing future radio systems. Specifically, the R&O sets forth a new channel plan that accommodates a broad range of equipment and a transition schedule that requires manufacturers to meet increasingly efficient equipment standards, but does not require users to buy new radios or to change out entire systems. Further, the R&O provides a regulatory framework which addressed the diverse communications requirements of both large and small private land mobile users. 2. We received twenty-four petitions, as well as five oppositions and three replies, requesting that we reconsider or clarify various decisions and technical rules adopted in the R&O. This Memorandum Opinion and Order (MO&O) addresses issues and concerns in the petitions. This MO&O also addresses a petition for reconsideration filed in PR Docket No. 92-257 regarding the shared use of industrial/land transportation and maritime public correspondence frequencies. We address this petition here because it concerns technical requirements which were the subject of the R&O. While we have reviewed all of the suggested changes carefully, only the significant issues raised by the petitioners are discussed in the MO&O. We note, however, that those suggestions and requests for clarification which required minor modifications to our rules have been directly incorporated into the final rules without extensive discussion. Specific rule changes are contained in Appendix D. We further note that the action taken in this MO&O relates solely to the rules and policies adopted in the R&O. The issues of market-based incentives, such as exclusivity with the right to lease excess capacity, spectrum user fees, and competitive bidding, which were the subject of the Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making will be addressed in a separate Order. II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3. We initiated this proceeding in order to explore ways to promote more effective and efficient use of PLMR spectrum. Although the immediate problem we sought to address was frequency congestion, our broader objective was to develop a regulatory strategy that promotes more efficient use of the existing spectrum allocations to satisfy future private land mobile telecommunications requirements. 4. Consistent with our objective of increasing the efficiency of the PLMR frequency bands and in response to the petitions for reconsideration we received, this MO&O clarifies our decisions in the R&O, and where necessary, makes appropriate modifications to the rules. We also address several issues raised by petitioners that would have a major impact on the implementation of the R&O. The significant decisions in this MO&O are as follows:  We maintain the adopted channel plan because we conclude that this plan provides the most flexibility for and least hardship to existing users, while still accomplishing our goal of increasing spectrum efficiency. We will, however, permit frequency coordinators to recommend frequencies for any technology with lesser bandwidth, including 5 kHz, provided that interference is not caused to other systems.  We extend the first transition date for the type acceptance of narrowband equipment from August 1, 1996, to the effective date of the rule amendments of this MO&O, and retain the second transition date of January 1, 2005.  We clarify the rules regarding type acceptance to provide greater flexibility for manufacturers to support existing equipment and, where appropriate, to provide alternatives to our efficiency standards.  We clarify a variety of technical rules including, but not limited to, those pertaining to new power/antenna height limits, the emission mask, and frequency stability requirements. III. DISCUSSION A. Channel Plan 5. The Commission set forth a channel plan which allows the spectrum to be "cultivated" by new, more efficient narrowband (NB) technologies. The Commission adopted a channel plan in the R&O based on 7.5 kHz channel spacing in the 150-174 MHz VHF band and 6.25 kHz channel spacing in the 421-430 MHz, 450-470 MHz, and 470-512 MHz UHF bands. Flexibility is provided to licensees by permitting them to aggregate up to four narrowband channels to employ spectrum efficient wideband technology. Additionally, licensees are provided with a simple migration path because they will be able to remain on their currently assigned center frequencies and can continue to use existing equipment while they upgrade to new equipment. 6. Petitions. Securicor Radiocoms Limited and Linear Modulation Technology Limited (Securicor), Midland International Corporation (Midland), E.F. Johnson Company (E.F. Johnson), and Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Company (NTT) request reconsideration of the new channel plan. They request that we adopt a channel plan based on 5 kHz channel spacing. Both Securicor and E.F. Johnson state that the Commission's decision to space channels at 7.5 kHz creates inefficient "white spaces" in the VHF band. Additionally, they assert that the ability to use wideband equivalent technologies by aggregating narrowband channels is not taken into account in our rationale for rejecting 5 kHz spacing. Securicor, a manufacturer of 5 kHz equipment, states that 5 kHz channel spacing would provide a smooth transition to advanced technologies by allowing existing users to remain on their current channel centers and accommodating a layering of many different technologies. Securicor further contends that the adopted band plans are not technology- neutral because they do not allow licensees to realize the most critical competitive advantage associated with use of narrowband technologies -- namely, spectrum efficiency. Additionally, Securicor submitted an economic analysis which concludes that a 5 kHz channel plan would generate greater economic benefits than the adopted channel plan because it creates more channels. 7. The Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International, Inc. (APCO), in opposition to a 5 kHz channel spacing plan, states that the Commission's plan permits private radio users to phase in new technology while retaining critical forward and backward interoperability. Additionally, APCO asserts that requiring 5 kHz channel spacing "... would undermine years of ongoing work by the public safety community to develop interoperability and greater spectrum efficiency at the same time." UTC, The Telecommunications Association (UTC), contends that no new substantive arguments have been raised that should persuade the Commission to reconsider the adopted plan. UTC adds that the adopted channel plan will not preclude the widespread use of 5 kHz. 8. Discussion. We have considered these petitions and conclude that the adopted channel plan, based on 7.5 and 6.25 kHz channel spacing, provides the best solution to this complex issue. A prime consideration in our decision was an overwhelming desire among current PLMR users to have flexibility when choosing a migration path to emerging narrowband technology. Users stated that critical components of any new channel plan are the ability to stay on currently assigned center frequencies and the option of implementing a two-step transition through 12.5 kHz equipment. Proponents of a 5 kHz plan argue that because we are allowing narrowband channels to be aggregated, these goals can be attained just as easily with 5 kHz channel spacing. We disagree. In a 5 kHz channel plan, a user would need to identify three contiguous channels to obtain a 12.5 kHz channel, but only two are required in a 7.5/6.25 kHz plan. As users migrate to narrower channels and these bands become characterized by a mix of different bandwidth equipment, we believe it will become increasingly difficult to identify suitable contiguous channels. Thus, the 7.5/6.25 kHz plan eases the transition for current users, such as businesses and public safety organizations, who desire to implement a two-step transition to narrowband through 12.5 kHz equipment. 9. Petitioners also assert that inefficient white spaces are created by our adopted channel plan, since 12.5 kHz VHF equipment would actually use 15 kHz of spectrum by aggregating two 7.5 kHz VHF channels. However, to use 12.5 kHz equipment in a plan based on 5 kHz channels would also require licensees to use 15 kHz of spectrum because they would have to aggregate three 5 kHz channels. In the UHF band, 12.5 kHz equipment also would use 15 kHz of spectrum in a 5 kHz channel plan, but only 12.5 kHz of spectrum in the adopted plan. Furthermore, a 5 kHz channel plan would require users who choose to implement 6.25 kHz equipment to acquire the same 15 kHz of spectrum needed for 12.5 kHz equipment. Thus, a 5 kHz channel plan would create as much or more white space than the channel plan we adopted. 10. Finally, with respect to the economic analysis submitted by Securicor, we do not dispute the general contention that smaller channels will lead to more potential users. However, we find that Securicor has not provided a comprehensive analysis because it only looks at the benefits of transitioning to narrower equipment and fails to address the associated costs, such as the cost and availability of radios. We believe that once such costs are taken into account, the channel plan we adopted is the more well-reasoned approach because it accommodates a variety of technologies. Thus, users are provided more choices to implement new systems within their own technical and budgetary constraints. 11. Consequently, we conclude that our adopted 7.5/6.25 kHz channel plan is more flexible than a 5 kHz plan because it will accommodate users of 25, 12.5, 6.25, and 5 kHz equipment while accomplishing our goal of increasing spectrum efficiency. Further, this channel plan creates a flexible migration path, which is considered a critical factor by current users. For these reasons, we decline to modify the channel plan as adopted in the R&O. However, we are mindful of the fact that some users may want to implement 5 kHz technology within their existing 25 kHz bandwidth. For example, a licensee could fit five 5 kHz channels within its existing 25 kHz bandwidth. Such a channelization, however, would require the licensee to deviate from the adopted band plan. Therefore, we will permit frequency coordinators to recommend frequencies inconsistent with the adopted band plan, for any technology, including 5 kHz, provided that such a system will not cause harmful interference to any existing system. B. Transition Period 12. In the R&O, we decided to manage the transition to narrowband channels through the type acceptance process. This decision requires that new equipment type accepted after August 1, 1996, and January 1, 2005, meet specified efficiency guidelines. We note, however, that this approach does not impose a strict transition timetable upon individual users. Instead, our decision allows users to choose a transition schedule that best fulfills their technical and financial needs while ensuring that new narrowband equipment will be available. We believe that this decision achieves an appropriate balance between the economic and operational impact of transition on existing users and the need for relief from congested radio spectrum. (1) Timetable 13. Petitions. Kenwood Communications Corporation, Uniden America Corporation, and Maxon America, Inc. (Joint Petitioners) argue that the conversion timetable for the type acceptance of narrowband equipment is too short and fails to account for normal product development cycles. They state that "[t]he most aggressive track suggested in the Notice in this proceeding ... would have provided a two-year period of conversion ...". Additionally, they argue that the transition date for conversion to 6.25 kHz equipment should be extended because "... there is not an established or proven narrowband technology readily available ...". To remedy this situation, the Joint Petitioners request that the first transition date be extended to August 1, 1998, and that the second transition date be extended to January 1, 2014. Additionally, License Communication Services, Inc. (LCS) requests that the Commission not make any rule changes to Part 90 regarding technical requirements until assurance that all required equipment has been developed and thoroughly tested. 14. NTT and Securicor oppose the Joint Petitioners' arguments. NTT states that the position of the Joint Petitioners "... reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the R&O, which does not mandate the production or use of any particular type of technology according to a fixed timetable." Regarding narrowband technology, Securicor states that the current state-of-the-art is defined by 5 kHz systems operating in the 220-222 MHz band. Securicor contends that "[t]he suggestion of the Joint Petitioners that very narrowband systems are unproven simply ignores reality to the detriment of the public interest." 15. Discussion. We disagree with the Joint Petitioners. As noted by NTT, the transition dates established in the R&O do not require manufacturers to take any specific action. While our transition plan sets standards that manufacturers must meet in order to type accept new equipment, each manufacturer decides when it will actually introduce new narrowband equipment. Consequently, we believe it is unnecessary to make extensive changes to the adopted transition dates and, thus, deny the Joint Petitioners' request to do so. Additionally, we note that a number of manufacturers have already type accepted equipment that is compliant with the new rules. However, in consideration of the time elapsed between the R&O and adoption of this MO&O, and because this MO&O modifies rules which affect the type acceptance of equipment, we are extending the first transition date from August 1, 1996, to the effective date of the rule amendments of this MO&O. Further, because users are not required to replace existing systems, we find no reason to require equipment that meets the new type acceptance standards to be in place prior to the effective date of the rules. Therefore, we deny LCS's request. However, to remove the uncertainty in trying to anticipate the amount of time necessary to attain a type acceptance grant, we are amending Section 90.203 of our rules to clarify that the transition dates refer to type acceptance application filing deadlines, rather than type acceptance grants. (2) Public Safety Users 16. Petitions. APCO asks that we reconsider our decision not to adopt specific deadlines for public safety users to transition from the current 25/30 kHz channels. It states that the measures being considered in the FNPRM do not provide sufficient incentives for public safety users to expeditiously transition to narrower equipment because the objectives, concerns, and economic status of public safety users are quite different from other private spectrum users. In order to relieve congestion in public safety spectrum allocations, APCO requests that we implement the following schedule for public safety users: January 1, 1997 - All new systems must operate at no more than 12.5 kHz bandwidth to attain primary status. January 1, 2005 - All urban systems must operate at no more than 12.5 kHz bandwidth to retain primary status. 17. APCO further believes that rather than identifying, at this time, a specific date for transition to 6.25 kHz equipment, the Commission should monitor developments in the marketplace and revisit the issue at a later date. NTT is opposed to APCO's abandonment of a transition to 6.25 kHz channels, stating that if the Commission fails to impose narrowband technology requirements on public safety users, the objectives and goals of the R&O could be severely compromised. 18. Discussion. We decline to adopt the transition schedule for public safety users as recommended by APCO. The imposition of a mandate on any user, particularly public safety entities, to replace existing equipment and systems, is contrary to one of our basic goals in this proceeding of providing maximum flexibility to individual users. Also, since public safety entities are funded by local tax dollars, and are often constrained by limited financial resources, subjecting these entities to such a mandate could be unduly burdensome. Further, in light of the work of the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee and the Commission's overall evaluation and assessment of public safety wireless communications in WT Docket No. 96-86, it would be premature at this time to make decisions regarding transition dates for public safety users. Finally, because we are not adopting a transition schedule for public safety users, we will not address the merits of APCO's request to only transition to 12.5 kHz channels. C. Spectrum Efficiency Standards 19. In the R&O, we adopted spectrum efficiency standards for newly type accepted equipment at each transition date. Specifically, we require at least one voice channel per 12.5 kHz of channel bandwidth for equipment type accepted after August 1, 1996, and at least one voice channel per 6.25 kHz of channel bandwidth for equipment type accepted after January 1, 2005. Additionally, after August 1, 1996, equipment designed for data operation must be capable of supporting a minimum data rate of 4800 bits per second per 6.25 kHz of bandwidth. (1) Alternative Showings 20. Petitions. Advanced Meter Reading Technologies (AMRT), Schlumberger Meter Communication Systems (Schlumberger), and UTC request that the type acceptance rules be amended to allow alternative showings of spectrum efficiency for low power frequency reuse systems. AMRT contends that multiple low-power, low-speed transmitters can serve more homes than a single high-power, high-speed transmitter and with less impact to adjacent channel operations. It suggests a formula to compute a minimum data rate for these systems based on antenna height, channel bandwidth, and a frequency reuse ratio. Finally, Metroplex asks the Commission to consider the efficiencies that can be obtained using bit rates slower than specified in the efficiency standard. Metroplex contends that the efficiency standard is arbitrary and that the effective information throughput using the efficiency standard may be lower than can be accomplished with a more efficient non multi-level modulation technique. No oppositions were filed in response to any of these requests. 21. Discussion. Our adopted approach has the benefit of being easy to measure and therefore simple to enforce. While AMRT's approach has the benefit of tailoring the minimum bit rate to individual system parameters, it would place unreasonable burdens upon manufacturers as well as the Commission because of the requirement to type accept many radios, each corresponding to a particular combination of parameters. In contrast, under our adopted approach, manufacturers could type accept one radio which meets the minimum efficiency standard for all conditions. It is evident from the petitions, and the comments to the Refarming Notice, that developing a spectral efficiency standard to cover all contingencies is extremely difficult. Nevertheless, we agree with AMRT and Schlumberger that there is a place within the PLMR environment for spectrum efficient low-power, frequency reuse systems. Therefore, rather than setting a spectral efficiency standard for these radios, we will instead exempt all transmitters that operate with less than 500 mW output power from the bit rate requirement for type acceptance. 22. Regarding Metroplex's request, we will not alter the efficiency standard. We recognize, however, that this standard addresses only one facet of the spectral efficiency of a system. Therefore, we will provide manufacturers with additional flexibility to design spectrally efficient transmitters. The Commission's Equipment Authorization Division may, on a case by case basis, grant type acceptance to equipment with slower bit rates than specified in Sections 90.203(j)(3) and 90.203(j)(5) of our rules, provided that an acceptable technical analysis is submitted with the application which demonstrates that the slower data rate will provide more spectral efficiency than the standard data rate. (2) Clarifications and Explanations 23. We agree with and are incorporating certain clarifications recommended by SEA into our rules. First, in order to be consistent with terminology used in Sections 90.203 and 90.210 of our rules, we have changed the term "overall bandwidth" to "channel bandwidth" in Sections 90.203(j)(3) and 90.203(j)(5). Second, in order to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the voice channel requirement we have inserted the word "additionally" prior to the last sentence in Sections 90.203(j)(3) and 90.203(j)(5). This will clarify the referenced rule sections to ensure that radios type accepted for both voice and data meet the efficiency standards by precluding claims that digital voice is actually data. For example, after August 1, 1996, a radio that meets the data rate standard, such as a 25 kHz, 19,200 bits per second (bps) digital radio, must provide at least two voice channels to be type accepted for telephony. Likewise, after January 1, 2005, a 12.5 kHz, 9,600 bps or a 25 kHz, 19,200 bps digital radio must provide at least two or four voice channels, respectively, to be type accepted for telephony. 24. To clarify further the distinction between digital voice and data, we refer to the definitions in Part 2 of the rules. In general, radios that operate under Part 90 are type accepted for telephony, telegraphy, telemetry, or telecommand. We agree with Motorola, Inc. (Motorola) that radios type accepted for telephony must meet the voice channel standard, and those type accepted for telegraphy or telemetry must meet the data rate standard. We further agree that radios that are type accepted for both telephony and telegraphy or telemetry must meet both standards. Additionally, because Section 90.207(b) of our rules allows stations authorized for telephony to use emissions for telecommand, the telecommand function of such radios will not be subject to the data rate standard. 25. Also, Motorola contends that data transmitted through an external microphone port should not be subject to the data rate standard since such transmissions are limited by an audio filter. Dataradio, in opposition to this view, contends that the benefits of refarming will be considerably less than expected if users are able to circumvent the data rate rules by attaching slow speed modems to the microphone connections of analog radios. Because transmissions made via modem through the external microphone port of an analog radio are limited to audio, the data rate standard will not be applied to such uses. We believe that such use will not undermine the benefits of refarming. These analog radios transmit data essentially on an ancillary basis. Thus, the ever increasing demand by users for data capacity would not be met by this method. 26. Finally, on our own motion, we clarify the rules regarding paging systems. In the R&O, we did not impose narrowband requirements on any of the paging-only channels in the PLMR bands. Implied, but not stated explicitly, in Section 90.203(j)(7) of our rules is an exemption from the spectrum efficiency requirements imposed by the R&O. We are modifying our rules to state explicitly this exemption. D. Power/Antenna Height Limits 27. In the R&O, we adopted new power and antenna height limitations based on the "safe harbor" tables submitted by the Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC) in its comments to the Refarming Notice. These new limits, as set forth in Section 90.205 of our rules, allow various combinations of effective radiated power (ERP) and antenna height above average terrain (HAAT) based upon the size of an applicant's desired service area and the applicant's operating frequency. In general, the rules allow for a maximum ERP of 500 watts and maximum service area radii of 40 km in the VHF band and 32 km in the UHF band. The rules state that larger areas, up to 80 km, will be authorized provided that the applicant demonstrates that the requested station parameters will not produce coverage in excess of that which is required. However, areas larger than 80 km will be authorized on a secondary basis. Finally, these new rules only apply to new stations, which were defined as stations not functionally integrated with an earlier-installed system. (1) Power/Antenna Height Tables 28. Petitions. APCO, Automobile Association of America (AAA), Alarm Industry Communications Committee (AICC), Personal Communications Industry Association (PCIA), and UTC assert that the power/antenna height tables are based on the assumption of average terrain conditions and may not be accurate as they do not account for extreme terrain. In this connection, they argue that special separation criteria should be developed for systems that operate in the 150-174 MHz and 421-512 MHz bands under conditions of extreme terrain. Such consideration would be similar to the special separation tables developed to prevent harmful interference between co-channel users who operate in extreme terrain in the 800 MHz band. Further, they, as well as LMCC, advocate that a streamlined process for deviating from the power/antenna height tables be considered for applicants that operate in areas of non-uniform terrain. Additionally, they request that applicants be permitted to use any commonly accepted propagation model to demonstrate radio system coverage, as long as the model is properly identified and the applicant explains why the model will provide more accurate results than the power/antenna height tables. Finally, to avoid needless expense and delay, and because requests for service areas greater than 40 km in the VHF band and 32 km in the UHF band will be reviewed by the frequency coordinators, the petitioners ask that a formal waiver not be required for such requests. 29. In addition, LMCC seeks clarification regarding whether applicants may operate at power levels in excess of the reference ERP in the tables set forth in Sections 90.205(d) and 90.205(g) of our rules if the antenna height above average terrain is reduced. LMCC also requests clarification on whether the Commission will permit systems to be licensed for ERPs in excess of 500 watts. LMCC points out that while the R&O states that the maximum allowable ERP is 500 watts, Sections 90.205(d)(2) and 90.205(g)(2) of our rules permit the frequency coordinators to recommend ERP levels in excess of those specified in the safe harbor tables. Finally, LCS contends that the power reduction rules do not take into account changing weather and atmospheric conditions which can cause variable path fading. 30. Discussion. We agree that special consideration should be given to the power/antenna heights in areas of extreme terrain. We recognize that in these areas, average terrain calculations may not provide accurate depictions of the actual terrain over which a system will operate and therefore our tables may not provide an appropriate antenna height/power combination for a desired service area size. Although Sections 90.205(d)(2) and 90.205(g)(2) of our rules provide a method by which applicants can deviate from the tables, they do not clearly indicate that this option is applicable to systems operating in areas of extreme terrain. In this connection, we modify Sections 90.205(d)(2) and 90.205(g)(2) to reflect this policy. Additionally, Sections 90.205(d)(2) and 90.205(g)(2) allow the use of generally accepted engineering practices and standards, including models that are widely accepted by the engineering community, as producing outputs representative of real world results. However, we will not routinely accept analyses based on these propagation models. We believe that this option should be available only in isolated instances where applicants need to deviate from the tables due to special circumstances. 31. Applicants who demonstrate special circumstances (e.g., extreme terrain conditions or need for a larger service area) will not be required to submit a waiver request to the Commission. Rather, the required engineering analysis should be submitted to the frequency coordinator and as an attachment to the license application, FCC Form 600. Additionally, a waiver request will be unnecessary for applicants who request service areas greater than 40 km in the VHF band and 32 km in the UHF band. These applications, however, pursuant to footnote 4 in Tables 1 and 2 of Section 90.205 of our rules, must be accompanied by a justification for the larger service area and include a technical analysis demonstrating that the signal strength at the edge of the service area is within the specified guidelines. We will rely heavily on the recommendations of the frequency coordinators in considering such requests. 32. Regarding the maximum allowable ERP and antenna height, we will allow applicants to exceed the reference antenna height limits if they correspondingly lower their power. In these cases, applicants must demonstrate that their signal strength at the edge of the service area is within the specified guidelines. This approach is consistent with the requirements we have adopted for systems operating above 800 MHz. However, we affirm that the maximum allowable ERP is 500 watts as specified in footnote 2 of the tables provided in Sections 90.205(d) and 90.205(g) of our rules. This power limitation is intended to reduce the incidence of over-powered stations and promote frequency reuse. 33. UTC requests clarification that the load shedding frequency, 154.46375 MHz, is not subject to the power/antenna height tables of Section 90.205 of our rules. We note that the tables in Section 90.205 only apply in instances when a power level is not otherwise specifically provided in the rules. Thus, pursuant to Section 90.63(d)(6) of our rules, operations on the load shedding frequency may continue to be authorized with up to 300 watts output power. 34. We are not persuaded by LCS's argument that changes in the power/antenna height tables are necessary to account for changing weather and atmospheric conditions. As an initial matter, we note that the power/antenna height tables adopted in the R&O only apply to new stations. Thus, contrary to LCS's contentions, the operation of existing stations will not be affected by our adoption of these power/antenna height restrictions. We further note that the tables are based on F(50,50) curves which estimate the field strength exceeded at 50 percent of the potential receiver locations for at least 50 percent of the time. These parameters are sufficient for most systems to provide adequate signal levels to most receiver locations. Additionally, weather effects, such as those due to water vapor, are negligible below microwave frequencies. We recognize, however, that vegetation effects, such as those associated with forests, are very real below microwave frequencies and may dictate more power. When conditions dictate that a station require more power than the tables allow, remedies already exist under our rules, as discussed above. (2) Classification of Base Stations 35. Petitions. UTC and LMCC seek clarification of the rules that would classify all base stations with service areas greater than 80 km as secondary. Both petitioners note that certain geographic areas, particularly in western regions, warrant special consideration because the terrain in those areas provide few suitable transmitter sites. UTC further adds that, "[i]t would ill-serve the public interest if, for example, a public service utility were forced to accept secondary status for its PLMR base station facilities simply because the utility optimized the use of available transmitter sites ...". UTC suggests changing Sections 90.205(d)(3) and 90.205(g)(3) of our rules to confer primary status on stations where there is a demonstration that a greater service area is needed and that the use of additional transmitter sites is not practicable. 36. Discussion. We find merit in UTC's argument, and believe that some clarification of our rules is necessary. We note that licensees who need to communicate over large distances generally employ systems that make extensive use of mobile relay stations, which are afforded the protection of primary status under our rules. Thus, because mobile relay stations would typically be within 80 km of another base station, primary status would be conferred on the entire area that a licensee needs to cover. We believe that coverage areas up to 80 km around a single base station will serve the vast majority of licensees. Further, we do not believe it unreasonable to expect that suitable base station sites can be found within 80 km of another base station. Therefore, we will modify Sections 90.205(d)(3) and 90.205(g)(3) of our rules to confer primary status for communications within 80 km from a base station. We also recognize that some licensees' operations may require primary status within a region larger than 80 km. Because we anticipate that a limited number of licensees will have such needs, we will entertain waiver requests for those instances where a licensee requests coverage by one base station for an area greater that 80 km. If the licensee makes a sufficient showing, including but not limited to the ability to provide coverage with the proposed facilities, we will grant the waiver request and make that base station primary over the entire coverage area. (3) New Stations 37. Petitions. Many petitioners, including AICC, LMCC, Page Hawaii, Inc. (Page Hawaii), AzCOM Paging, Inc. (AzCOM), AAA, and UTC, seek clarification on what constitutes a new station. AICC states that our definition is ambiguous and, based on its plain language, permits existing licensees to modify and expand their systems without being subject to the new power/antenna height rules. LMCC contends that "new stations" should not include existing stations that modify their authorizations to change parameters such as location, frequency, or emissions. Further, AAA urges the Commission to treat currently operating facilities that are being converted for use on narrower channels as existing stations. In this connection, AAA argues that existing licensees who elect to use more spectrally efficient equipment should not have to add stations in order to maintain their current coverage. 38. Page Hawaii and AzCOM request that additional transmitters and relocations not be considered "new stations." They request that the Commission allow full power operation, as defined under the previous rules, if applicants indicate that proposed sites expand an existing operation. In addition, AAA and LMCC ask the Commission to confirm that grandfathering rights will be extended to stations whose ownership changes through transfer or assignment. Finally, LMCC and UTC request that the term "new stations" not include base stations and mobile relay stations that are added to an existing system even if they are authorized to operate on different frequencies. 39. Discussion. As a general matter, we elected to exempt existing stations from complying with the power/antenna height tables adopted in the R&O in order to afford licensees flexibility to modify, expand, or upgrade their facilities without adversely affecting their current operations. Section 90.135 of our rules provides examples of permissible modifications to authorized stations. Stations that modify their existing authorization in accordance with one of the listed modifications will not be subject to the new power/antenna height rules. Thus, modifications to frequency, emissions, power, antenna height, location and number of transmitters, class of station, ownership, control, or corporate structure will be permitted. We decline to grant the request of UTC and LMCC to characterize the addition of base and mobile relay facilities that operate on different frequencies from an existing system as an existing system. We believe that such an approach would allow a licensee to effectively create a new system by adding new facilities on frequencies not previously authorized and not be subject to the new power/antenna height tables. This result would be contrary to the underlying purpose of our exemption for existing stations. 40. Because Section 90.135(a) of the Commission's rules allows licensees to modify their authorizations due to a change in emissions, the new power/antenna height limits will not apply to systems that are modified by converting to equipment designed for narrower channel bandwidths. Furthermore, if the only modification that a licensee makes to a system is a narrowing of its emission, a formal application for modification need not be filed with the Commission. However, the licensee will be required to notify the Commission of this change immediately, either by filing FCC Form 405-A or submitting a letter in accordance with Section 90.135(d) of the Commission's rules. We have modified Sections 90.135(a)(2) and 90.135(b) of our rules accordingly. (4) Paging Channels 41. Petitions. Page Hawaii, AzCOM, and PCIA seek reconsideration of the power/antenna height tables as they relate to private carrier paging channels. Page Hawaii contends that rules promulgated in the R&O did not contain the proposed exception to the antenna height/power limits for operators on certain private carrier paging frequencies. PCIA states that "[s]ince paging systems are not required to specify area of operation ... it would appear that the safe harbor table does not apply to such systems ..." Further, PCIA originally suggested that the Commission not change any of the technical rules for the paging channels and allow these systems to operate with up to 350 watts. Finally, Page Hawaii and AzCOM state that the antenna height/power tables are based on the propagation of signal levels necessary for communication with mobiles in average terrain (not within buildings) and are not appropriate to determine signal levels for paging systems. APCO opposes the request by Page Hawaii and AzCOM to raise the power levels for paging channels and states that "[p]aging systems operating from the same (or nearby) high-level sites as public safety and other land mobile operations often cause desensitizations and intermodulation. Increasing the power of the paging systems would greatly exacerbate the problem." In response, Page Hawaii and AzCOM acknowledge that a higher potential for interference exists at higher power levels, but assert that it can be controlled through the frequency coordination process. 42. Discussion. We find the arguments of the paging companies persuasive. We believe that our rules should reflect the differences between paging systems and the majority of two-way mobile systems in the PLMR bands. In this connection, we will allow new one-way paging operations to operate at the same power levels that applied prior to the adoption of the R&O, i.e., for most stations, 350 watts output power with no limit on ERP, on the frequencies specifically reserved for one-way paging. We have amended our rules to allow this type of operation. Lower power limits will continue to apply in the Special Emergency Radio Service on 157.450 MHz, which is limited to an output power of 30 watts, and in the Business Radio Service on 154.625 MHz and 158.460, which are limited to an output power of 20 watts, and 465.000 MHz, which is limited to an output power of 35 watts. Further, in the Business Radio Service, 462.9375 MHz, 464.9875 MHz, and 465.0125 MHz will be available only for low power operations in order to prevent incidences of harmful interference between paging channels and channels on which traditional two-way communications are permitted. Additionally, we note that the Commission is considering changes to the paging rules in a separate proceeding. E. Type Acceptance Requirements 43. The R&O allows manufacturers to continue producing and supporting 25 kHz equipment through upgrades and permissive changes. To this end, Section 90.203(j)(6) of our rules permits permissive changes to transmitters designed to operate on channel bandwidths wider than 12.5 kHz until August 1, 1996, except for transmitters that have the inherent capability for multi-mode or narrowband operation. 44. Petitions. The Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA), Motorola, APCO, and UTC request that we reconsider our decision. TIA and Motorola argue that it is unnecessary to prohibit manufacturers from making minor design changes to existing 25 kHz equipment because our rules already ensure a transition to more narrowband equipment. Motorola adds that "... it is important to maintain our flexibility to modify and improve these radios in response to customer requirements, from changes in manufacturing technique, as a result of efforts to reduce costs and from the necessity of making changes in components in order to accommodate the availability of parts and subcomponents." 45. Securicor, however, opposes this request. It asserts that the Commission has provided flexibility to manufacturers by allowing them to continue manufacturing spectrally inefficient equipment as it is currently configured, or allowing upgrades and modifications provided that a multi-mode feature is added. Securicor contends that granting this request is inconsistent with the primary goal in this proceeding since it would excuse "... in perpetuity compliance with the multi-mode requirement." Finally, Securicor argues that if we grant this request, we should "sunset" or extend any exception to no more than five years from the date of adoption of the R&Oso that the availability of inefficient wideband equipment will not be facilitated indefinitely. 46. Discussion. Our intent is to allow only those modifications which would provide a multi-mode capability or a narrowband mode to existing equipment. In these instances, manufacturers must obtain a new FCC Identifier for their equipment. Modifications which entail the redesign of existing equipment will not be allowed. Our intention, however, is not to prevent manufacturers from supporting their existing equipment. Therefore, we are revising Section 90.203(j)(6) of our rules to clarify that we will continue to allow permissive changes to existing equipment. We recognize that the life of some inefficient wideband equipment may be extended through the use of permissive changes. However, we believe most users, especially those in congested urban areas, will have a strong incentive to transition to narrowband equipment, thus shrinking the market for wideband equipment. Therefore, because the number of permissive changes will decline as a result of market forces, there is no need for specific action by the Commission. F. Frequency Stability Limits 47. When compared to wideband channels, i.e., 25 kHz channels, the rules adopted in the R&O allow emissions on narrowband channels to occupy a larger percentage of the channel. This combination of increased channel occupancy and narrower channel spacing increases the importance of frequency stability to reduce adjacent channel interference. Therefore, the Commission adopted stringent frequency stability requirements as recommended by TIA. 48. Petitions. SEA contends that the frequency stability limits for mobile radios designed to operate with channel bandwidths of 6.25 kHz are too restrictive. It states that in the 421-512 MHz band, the emission masks adopted for 6.25 kHz and 12.5 kHz channels overlap when placed 6.25 kHz apart. Therefore, "[t]ight stability limits ... achieve nothing with regard to adjacent channel protection, since adjacent channels cannot coexist in the same area." In the 150-174 MHz band, SEA states that emission mask will allow same-area adjacent channel use, but the frequency stability limits need not be as tight as those adopted. Motorola, in support of SEA, states that the stability requirements can be eased because adjacent channels will be protected through the frequency coordination process. Further, Motorola states that the TIA projections on which the adopted standards are based have "... proven to be overly ambitious ..." Securicor recommends a "brickwall" approach at the channel edge, i.e., the Commission should not impose any in-band restrictions, but should instead focus on out-of-band emissions. Securicor contends that this approach would result in greater bandwidth utilization, would be technology neutral, and would sufficiently address problems cited by SEA. 49. Additionally, SEA requests that the Commission allow mobile radios in the 150-174 MHz and 421-512 MHz bands to use the signal from associated base stations to achieve the specified frequency stability. SEA notes that such a provision would be similar to the rules for the 220-222 MHz band. 50. Discussion. We find the arguments of SEA and Motorola for easing the frequency stability requirements to be persuasive. We agree that, in the VHF band, a less stringent requirement can be tolerated because of the presence of a small guard band created by our rules which limits emissions on the 7.5 kHz channels to an authorized bandwidth of 6 kHz. Further, we believe that the frequency coordination process can compensate for less stringent requirements in the UHF band. Therefore, as suggested by SEA, we modify Section 90.213 of our rules to permit mobile radios that operate on narrowband channels to achieve minimum frequency stabilities of 2 parts per million (ppm) in the VHF band and 1 ppm in the UHF band. We also amend Section 90.213 of our rules to correct two minor errors in the frequency stability requirements for the 150-174 MHz, 421-512 MHz, and 800 MHz band allocations. We, however, reject the recommendation of Securicor to adopt a "brickwall" approach at the channel edge. This issue was addressed in the R&O and Securicor has not provided any new substantive information. 51. In the 220-222 MHz band, mobiles may use the signal from the associated base station to attain the specified frequency stability. However, in contrast to the Refarming bands, licensees in the 220-222 MHz band have exclusivity and operate with duplex transmissions. Therefore, we believe that the rules pertaining to the 220-222 MHz band are not appropriate for comparison to the refarming bands which have a radio environment characterized by sharing and many simplex systems. Because it is not apparent if these shared simplex channels can support this function, we will not, at this time, permit mobiles to use the signal from the associated base station to attain the specified frequency stability. If, in fact, it can be shown that these channels can support such a function, we will reconsider our decision. G. Emission Mask (1) Authorized Bandwidth 52. In order to accommodate our new channel plan, we adopted new guidelines for authorized bandwidth. For equipment designed to operate on 7.5 kHz or 6.25 kHz channels, the authorized bandwidth is 6 kHz and for equipment designed to operate on 12.5 kHz channels the authorized bandwidth is 11.25 kHz. 53. Petitions. SEA requests that the authorized bandwidth for 6.25 kHz channels in the UHF and VHF bands be reduced to 5 kHz. It states that our emission mask makes the benefit of a 6 kHz authorized bandwidth "... illusory, since same-area operation is simultaneously made impossible." Further, SEA argues that a 5 kHz authorized bandwidth "... will not jeopardize the successful development of data and digital modulation technologies on narrowband channels." 54. Discussion. We decline to reduce the authorized bandwidth from 6 kHz to 5 kHz. The 6 kHz authorized bandwidth was chosen to provide manufacturers with flexibility to implement a wide range of modulation techniques. We note, however, that the emission mask only serves as an upper limit and thus, manufacturers can employ any emission they desire as long as they do not exceed the specified limits. Therefore, if a manufacturer determines that same-area operations cannot be achieved on adjacent narrowband channels, it can design its equipment with narrower emissions. (2) Measurement Technique 55. When determining the shape of a frequency mask, it is essential that instrumentation requirements and measurement procedures are defined. In general, transmitter emissions are measured using established industry standards. In this connection, EIA/TIA Standard 603 instructs radio manufacturers to use a resolution bandwidth of 300 Hz or less. Consistent with this standard, in the R&O, we determined that emissions of equipment designed to operate in the Refarming bands should be measured using a resolution bandwidth of 100 Hz with the measuring instrument in a peak hold mode. 56. Petitions. Motorola and SEA seek reconsideration of the measurement requirements. Motorola contends that using a resolution bandwidth of 100 Hz, rather than the 300 Hz recommended by TIA, adds 5 dB of energy to the adjacent channel. As a result, Motorola argues that spectrum efficiency will be reduced by requiring greater separation distances between systems operating on adjacent channels. SEA agrees with Motorola, but recommends that the resolution bandwidth be left at 100 Hz, and that the attenuation of the emission masks be adjusted 5 dB. 57. Discussion. We decline to adjust the measurement technique adopted in the R&O. The current industry trend for measuring digital emissions just outside the channel, i.e., the adjacent channel, is to use measuring instrumentation having a resolution capability of 1% of the bandwidth of the carrier emission. This is evidenced by measurement procedures and interpretations that have been developed in our rules for the licensed Personal Communications Services (PCS) and unlicensed PCS devices. A resolution bandwidth of 1% of the carrier emission bandwidth provides a reasonable compromise where the emission's interference potential can be measured and the instrumentation will not detrimentally affect the measurement. Using a 100 Hz resolution bandwidth for equipment in the Refarming bands approximates the 1% standard that has been accepted by the affected industries in other rule makings. Finally, we believe the claim of a 5 dB increase in energy to the adjacent channel to be overstated because it assumes a uniform level of energy across the measurement window without taking into account the roll-off of energy at the band edges that results from the emission mask. Therefore, we conclude that any effects on the adjacent channel will be less than 5 dB. H. FM Modulation Requirements 58. In order to promote flexibility for manufacturers to introduce new and innovative modulation techniques in the PLMR bands below 512 MHz, we revised Section 90.211 of our rules to eliminate those requirements that were primarily applicable to radios that use frequency modulation (FM). 59. Petitions. While TIA supports our objective, it disagrees with our decision to remove specified deviation limits for FM. It states that compatibility among different FM technologies is ensured by maintaining FM modulation deviation limits and filter characteristics. Therefore, TIA recommends that the modulation limits for F3E emissions be reinserted into the rules with their respective low pass post limiter transmitter filter characteristics. 60. Discussion. We disagree with TIA's contention. In the R&O, we revised Section 90.211 of the Commission's rules to remove specifications for filter characteristics and to require that equipment meet the emission masks specified in Section 90.210. Additionally, we eliminated FM deviation requirements from Section 90.209 of our rules. Our rationale for each of these decisions was to provide manufacturers flexibility in designing and implementing radio specifications. In this connection, we believe that setting specifications for FM would be inconsistent with such rationale. In response to TIA's desire for compatibility, we believe that if users place a high value on compatibility, then the marketplace will dictate that manufacturers include it in their product specifications. Further, we believe that it is more appropriate for compatibility to be achieved as a result of marketplace forces rather than regulatory requirements. I. Former Low Power Offset Channels 61. With the adoption of a new channel plan, many frequency allocations and assignments were altered, particularly those of the former low power offset channels. Our method for assigning new narrowband frequency assignments in the 421-512 MHz band consisted of creating three new narrowband channels at frequencies above each existing wideband assignment. These narrowband channels were given the same limitation restrictions as the channel immediately below them in frequency. One result of the new channel plan is that channels formally available as low power offset channels under Section 90.267 of our rules are now available as regularly assignable channels for high power operations. Additionally, the new channel plan resulted in a reallocation of some of these channels from one radio service to another by allocating channels that were between allocations for two different radio services to the radio service or services where the lower of the channels was allocated. For example, since 452.100 MHz is allocated to the Forest Products and Taxicab Radio Services, the channel at 452.1125 MHz, previously available as a low power offset channel in the Special Industrial and Taxicab Radio Services, was reallocated by the new channel plan to the Forest Products and Taxicab Radio Services. In this connection, we grandfathered licensees on their existing channel if, due to this reallocation, the channel for which they were licensed was no longer available in the radio service for which they were eligible. These grandfathered channels were identified in the frequency listing of each radio service with a limitation that prevents future licensing, but allows renewal and modification of existing systems. (1) New Limitations 62. Petitions. The Hewlett-Packard Company (HP) states that several new high power channels in the Business Radio Service which were previously available as low power offset channels under former Section 90.267 of our rules have new restrictions that appear to have been added to protect operations on adjacent channels. Specifically, HP asks that we reexamine permissible uses for former offset channels that, under the new channel plan, are now subject to Limitation 25. Limitation 25 specifies certain frequencies for use on a primary basis only in and around specific airports, and allows on a secondary basis, low power, i.e., 2 watt, use at least 16 km removed from each airport. HP also requests that we reconsider permissible uses of former low power offset channels that, under the new channel plan, are now subject to Limitation 46, which freezes licensing until August 18, 1996, and limits the authorized bandwidth to 6 kHz. Finally, HP questions whether 466.0125 MHz, which was previously available as a low power offset to all eligibles in the Business Radio Service, should now be subject to Limitation 28. Limitation 28 restricts licensees to central station commercial protection systems. HP believes that these new restrictions are neither necessary, nor intended to restrict uses, such as low power medical telemetry, which were authorized under former Section 90.267 of our rules. 63. Several other petitioners express concern regarding the allocation and use of certain former low power offset frequencies. APCO requests clarification as to why certain "mobile only" channels in the 450-470 MHz band have a limitation which prohibits licensing new stations after August 18, 1995. PCIA contends that the former Business Radio Service offset frequencies 462.0125 MHz through 462.1875 MHz, which are now allocated to the Special Emergency Radio Service (SERS), should be allocated to the Business Radio Service. The Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Health (Virginia) states that the Special Emergency Radio Service frequency table in Section 90.53(a) of our rules lists 467.9625 MHz and 467.9875 MHz, but fails to include their associated 462 MHz frequencies. Finally, Virginia expresses concern that the elimination of Section 90.555 of our rules, which contained a comprehensive list of frequencies assignable under Part 90, has obscured the reallocation of existing and new frequencies. 64. Discussion. In the R&O, we imposed restrictions on some former low power offset channels in order to protect primary users on the same and adjacent channels from harmful interference. Because communications on the grounds of an airport could affect the safety of aircraft, crew members, passengers, and ground personnel, and the specified separation distances of Limitation 25 protect against harmful interference, we will not alter such restrictions. However, we do agree with HP regarding the use of medical telemetry devices on certain frequencies. Due to the low operating power of medical telemetry devices, we believe that their interference potential to airport operations is minimal. Therefore, we will allow their use on a secondary, non-interference basis on former low power offset channels now subject to Limitation 25, provided that their output powers do not exceed 20 milliwatts. Additionally, we will allow low power medical telemetry on a secondary, non-interference basis on 466.0125 MHz, which under the new channel plan is reserved for central station commercial protection systems. We are revising the frequency table in Section 90.75(b) of our rules to reflect these changes. 65. In the Business Radio Service, channels adjacent to the "color dot" channels were restricted to 6.25 kHz channels by Limitation 46 in order to minimize adjacent channel interference from new high power users. Upon reexamination of the channel plan, we find this restriction to be unnecessary. If emissions on these adjacent channels are permitted to occupy a 12.5 kHz channel, users will avoid adjacent channel interference because emissions within the authorized bandwidth of the "color dot" channel and its adjacent channel will not overlap. Thus, adequate protection exists between the "color dot" channel and an adjacent 12.5 kHz channel. Accordingly, these channels, similar to the bandwidth restrictions imposed on most other former low power offset channels, will be subject to limitation 24, rather than Limitation 46. 66. In response to requests for clarification regarding specific channels, we reexamined all channels that were reallocated from one radio service to another and made several changes to the frequency tables to correct errors. Additionally, in the Police Radio Service, eligibility for use of 460.0125 MHz, which is currently restricted to current licensees only, has been modified to allow use by new low power licensees. New high power stations on 460.0125 MHz will continue to be prohibited in order to protect adjacent Domestic Public Radio users who operate under Part 22 of our rules. Finally, we have added 467.9375 MHz to the Business Radio Service but restricted it to low power use in order to protect an adjacent 12.5 kHz color dot channel. Appendix B is a table of the reallocated channels in each radio service. (2) Operation and Licensing Requirements 67. The R&O provided several operational alternatives for licensees authorized on the former low power offset channels. One option is to remain on their current channels and achieve primary status by providing sufficient justification to raise power. A second option is to migrate to designated low power channels and achieve primary status on those channels. A third option is to remain on their current channel at low power and continue to have secondary status. 68. Petitions. AICC contends that licensees should be able to attain primary status without raising power because "[m]aking licensees increase power for the sole purpose of achieving primary status on the channel runs counter to the Commission's desire to obtain maximum use of the channels ...". Additionally, AICC asks whether stations wishing to increase power need to file a letter notification or an application to provide coordinates. Finally, AICC suggests that the Commission continue to allow the current practice for alarm transmitters of providing coordinates for the center of an operating area and the radius around these coordinates in which transmitters will operate rather than requiring each fixed transmitter to be individually licensed. 69. Decision. As an initial matter, recognizing that any decision regarding changes in power requirements on former low power offset channels will be affected by our resolution of the exclusivity issues raised in the FNPRM in this proceeding, we defer decisions on this matter to a future Order. Regarding the requirement to furnish coordinates, we note that situations exist where it is neither feasible nor desirable for a licensee to furnish coordinates of all transmitters in their system. For example, central station alarm systems have a very large subscriber base which is continually changing. Moreover, because the Commission's records are open to public inspection, disclosure of coordinates for alarm system subscribers could provide burglars with a list of attractive properties. Therefore, we will allow licensees to supply only coordinates of the center of an operating area and a radius when all stations are fixed, low power, i.e., not to exceed 2 watts, stations. J. New Low Power Offset Channels 70. When we eliminated the low power offset channels in the R&O, we established new low power offset channels because low power operations have been beneficial to private land mobile radio operations. These new low power offset channels are 3.125 kHz removed from regularly assignable channels and are authorized only on a secondary, non-interference basis. 71. Petitions. PCIA opposes our creation of these channels. First, PCIA contends that low power users will be accommodated through coordinator designated exclusive low power channels and the color dot channels. Second, PCIA argues that these new low power offset channels will recreate difficulties which existed with the former low power offset channels due to the lack of a requirement for licensees to furnish the geographic coordinates of their systems. And third, PCIA states that these new low power offset channels may have the unintended effect of preventing the use of primary channels by wideband, spectrally efficient systems. There were no oppositions to PCIA's petition. 72. Discussion. We agree with PCIA that these low power offset channels could potentially have a detrimental effect on the operations on primary channels. Therefore, we will remove the new low power offset channels from Section 90.267(b) of our rules. However, in light of technological advances and usage patterns in these bands, we reserve the right to revisit this issue in the future. K. Emergency Medical Radio Service/Special Emergency Radio Service 73. In the Report and Order in PR Docket 91-72, where we established the Emergency Medical Radio Service (EMRS), we assigned the 453 MHz and 458 MHz frequencies used for medical paging systems in the SERS to the Emergency Medical Radio Service. SERS users were permitted to continue operating on these channels as primary users for a period of five years. In the R&O, the SERS frequencies reassigned to the EMRS were rechannelized at the new narrowband spacings. (1) Paging Channels 74. Petitions. The International Municipal Signal Association and International Association of Fire Chiefs, Inc. (IMSA/IAFC) and Virginia request removal of the new channels that arose from splitting the 453 MHz and 458 MHz channels from the SERS. IMSA/IAFC contends that "there is no reason to expand SERS use of these frequencies by designating split channels in the SERS." 75. Discussion. We agree with IAFC/IMSA and Virginia and will remove the 453 MHz narrowband channels from the SERS frequency table in Section 90.53(a) of our rules. The 453 MHz channels, by rule, are not available for new licensees in the SERS. Similar action is not necessary on the 458 MHz channels because they were removed from Section 90.53 of our rules when the EMRS was created. (2) MED Channels 76. In the EMRS, MED channels are used for emergency medical communications. Prior to adoption of the R&O, there were 10 MED channels, designated as MED-1 through MED-10. The new channel plan created 3 new MED channels higher in frequency than each existing MED channel. These new channels, designated as MED-A through MED-X, were assigned as follows: MED-A, MED-B, and MED-C were assigned between MED-1 and MED-2, MED-D, MED-E, and MED-F were assigned between MED-2 and MED-3. The new MED channels higher in frequency than MED-9 and MED-10 were not labeled. 77. Petitions. Virginia and The State of Florida Division of Communications (Florida) propose changing our approach to labeling the MED channels to one that is entirely numeric. Under Virginia's proposal, the channel 12.5 kHz above MED-1 would be denoted as MED-11, the channel 6.25 kHz above MED-1 as MED-21, and the channel 18.75 kHz above MED-1 as MED-31. Virginia states that their plan "would show solid relationships between new assignments and existing users, allow an orderly assignment of the channels, and allow similarly numbered channels to be aggregated for 'equivalent efficiencies.'" Virginia further states that since alphabetic characters are already used to denote sites, regions, and subaudible tones, its plan would minimize confusion. Florida's plan would denote the channels 6.25 kHz, 12.5 kHz, and 18.75 kHz above MED-1 as MED-11, MED-21, and MED-31, respectively. 78. Discussion. We agree with Virginia and Florida that a different labeling approach is needed for the new MED channels because any confusion regarding their designation could potentially interfere with the communication of messages necessary to ensure public safety. We believe, however, that both the plans proposed by Virginia and Florida also have the potential to create confusion if implemented. For example, the channel 12.5 kHz above MED-3 would be denoted as MED-13 under Virginia s plan and as MED-23 under Florida s plan. We believe that these channel designations could easily be interpreted as the third new channel, i.e., 18.75 kHz, above MED-1 or the third new channel above MED-2, respectively. We believe a more logical labeling approach would be to use a trailing 1, 2, or 3 to designate the position of the new MED channels in relation to the existing MED channels. For example, the channel 6.25 kHz above MED-3 will be designated as MED-31, the channel 12.5 kHz above MED-3 as MED-32, and the channel 18.25 kHz above MED-3 as MED-33. Thus, we will adopt this labeling approach for designating the channel positions accorded to each of the 10 MED channels. We are revising Sections 90.27(c)(11) and 90.27(c)(13) of our rules consistent with this new labeling approach. L. Exemption From Technical Standards 79. Currently, Section 90.217 of our rules exempts transmitters used in the Business Radio Service that have an output power not exceeding 120 milliwatts from the technical requirements imposed by our rules, provided that they meet minimum emission limitations. 80. Petitions. HP, AMRT, and Schlumberger, supported by UTC, request that the current exemption be expanded to include all private land mobile radio services. Schlumberger states that this rule "ceases to have relevance in view of the Commission's decision to consolidate the separate radio services." AMRT asserts that an expansion of the current exemption to include all transmitters operating under 120 milliwatts would "provide manufacturers with additional design flexibility without increasing potential interference." 81. Discussion. We agree that limiting this technical exemption to one class of users no longer seems reasonable nor practical. Accordingly, we are expanding the current exemption to include all private land mobile radio services. M. Transient Frequency Response 82. In order to assure that transient frequencies do not cause excessive interference to land mobile licensees and television receivers in adjacent bands, the Commission adopted standards for transient frequency behavior. These standards are based on EIA/TIA standard 603, which sets allowable transient response for radios that operate in three frequency bands: 30-300 MHz, 300-500 MHz, and 500-1000 MHz. 83. Petitions. TIA and Motorola request that we clarify the new rules by declaring that they are only applicable to equipment type accepted after a specific date. TIA states that "[t]his will help insure that existing and operational radios are grandfathered under the rules in which they were authorized." 84. Also, Motorola notes that our rules for radios operating with a 25 kHz channel bandwidth are inconsistent with EIA/TIA standard 603 because the rules provide one standard for base and portable radios and a different standard for mobile radios. Additionally, TIA states that we inadvertently omitted standards for transmitters designed to operate in the 421-430 MHz band. 85. Finally, Motorola recommends that the three frequency band columns listed in section 90.214 of our rules be replaced by two frequency band columns, one for 150-174 MHz and one for 421-512 MHz. In this connection, Motorola argues that "[t]here is no need to distinguish between radios operating at 470-500 MHz and 500-512 MHz as the Commission's adopted rules provide." 86. Discussion. We decline to modify the implementation date of Section 90.214 of our rules. Since the new rules took effect on August 18, 1995, the Commission's Equipment Authorization Division has been granting type acceptance based on transmitters meeting all of the new technical requirements. Therefore, because there have been no objections to the transient frequency requirements of Section 90.214, we see no reason to grant type acceptance to transmitters that do not meet the new requirements. Further, given that we are not rescinding any type acceptance grants, radios type accepted prior to August 18, 1995 are grandfathered for use in the refarming bands. Additionally, granting type acceptance to radios that do not meet the new requirements would be administratively burdensome because it would create two categories of transmitters which would be difficult to track and identify in the future. We are, however, modifying the rules by rectifying the error noted by Motorola and by correcting the omission of standards for radios that operate in the 421-430 MHz band. 87. In addition, we adopt Motorola's recommendation to apply the standards for radios that operate in the 421-500 MHz band to radios that operate in the 500-512 MHz band. Given that the standard for the 421-500 MHz band is the more stringent one and radios are not type accepted for operation in just the 500-512 MHz band, we conclude that separate standards for the 500-512 MHz band are not necessary. N. Section 90.271 Narrowband Operations 88. In accordance with our proposal in the Refarming Notice, we eliminated Section 90.271 of our rules. This rule section provided for 5 kHz narrowband channels that were offset either 2.5 kHz or 7.5 kHz from regularly assignable channels in the 150-170 MHz band. Additionally, the R&O provides that licensees on these channels will be permitted to remain on their currently authorized frequency until August 1, 2001 if interference is not experienced. After such date, licensees will be required to move to one of the new VHF channels. 89. Petitions. Securicor asserts that users of these 5 kHz channels, who operate the most spectrally-efficient equipment in the PLMR bands, are being treated unfairly because they must modify their systems to comply with the new channel plan even if they do not experience or cause interference. 90. Discussion. We share Securicor's concern about unnecessarily causing disruption to existing operations. Therefore, to accommodate the needs of our licensees and to prevent the premature obsolescence of narrowband systems that are already operating in the 150-174 MHz band, we will extend by two years, until August 1, 2003, the date by which these licensees must migrate to one of the new VHF channels. Additionally, licensees may remain on their currently assigned channels after August 1, 2003, on a secondary, non-interference basis. Because the number of licensees operating these narrowband systems is small and many of them are already compatible with the new channel plan, only a limited number of licensees will be impacted by these changes. We believe that this course of action will minimize disruption to existing systems in the 150-174 MHz band during migration to narrowband channels. O. Shared Use of Industrial/Land Transportation and Maritime Public Correspondence Frequencies 91. We recently adopted rules in PR Docket No. 92-257 to allow industrial and land transportation entities to use nine VHF maritime public correspondence channel pairs for standard two-way base/mobile operations. Section 90.283 of our rules provides that eligible industrial and land transportation entities can only be assigned VHF maritime public correspondence frequencies when VHF frequencies available under Part 90 are unavailable due to congestion. Section 90.283 also imposes power/antenna height restrictions on these frequencies and requires minimum separation distances from the following protected entities: co-channel public coast stations licensed under Part 80; the coastline of any navigable waterway; and grandfathered public safety licensees operating on 157.35 MHz or 161.85 MHz frequencies. (1) Integration with Refarming 92. Petitions. LMCC requests that the 25 kHz wide channels listed in Section 90.283 of our rules be integrated into the new 6.25 kHz narrowband channel plan. 93. Discussion. As an initial matter, we note that new 25 kHz Part 90 radios will no longer be type accepted in the 150-174 MHz band after the effective date of the rule amendments of this MO&O; thus, we find it unreasonable to require their use. Additionally, we believe that the current restrictions are sufficient to ensure that PLMR licensees operating on narrowband channels will not cause harmful interference to the protected entities. Therefore, we modify Section 90.283 of our rules to provide narrowband channel spacings for PLMR users on the shared maritime public correspondence frequencies similar to those adopted in the R&O for the UHF bands, i.e., 6.25 kHz channels spaced 6.25 kHz apart. As a result, these narrowband channels will be subject to the following restrictions: (1) only equipment designed to operate with a channel bandwidth of 6.25 kHz or less may be used on channels 6.25 kHz removed from a maritime public correspondence frequency; and (2) only equipment designed to operate with a channel bandwidth of 12.5 kHz or less may be used on channels 12.5 kHz removed from a maritime public correspondence frequency. Additionally, for the purpose of resolving interference to a protected entity, channels separated 12.5 kHz or less from a maritime public correspondence frequency will be considered co-channel to that maritime public correspondence frequency. Finally, in order to protect users in adjacent bands, such as the Government maritime mobile service, we will only provide narrowband channel spacings between currently listed frequencies in Section 90.283. (2) Power/Antenna Height Limits 94. Petitions. ITA, in a Petition for Reconsideration filed in PR Docket No. 92-257, requests that we adopt changes in the power/antenna height tables of Sections 90.283(c) and 90.283(d) of our rules to accommodate users that need to exceed the imposed limits due to circumstances such as terrain effects or coverage requirements. 95. Discussion. We are not persuaded that the circumstances described by ITA warrant a change to the general rule. Rather, we believe that these are more appropriately characterized as the exceptional cases. As a result, for these instances we will require a request for waiver of the power/antenna height limits of Section 90.283 of our rules. These waiver requests must include a justification for exceeding the table limits and be accompanied by an interference analysis based upon generally-accepted terrain-based propagation models, showing that co-channel protected entities would receive the same or greater interference protection than provided in the table. We will review these waiver requests on a case-by-case basis. P. Miscellaneous Issues. 96. Effective Date of new VHF Channels. LMCC requests clarification regarding the effective date of the new VHF channels. As stated in the R&O and as indicated by the limitations in each radio service's frequency list, no license applications for any VHF channel that is 7.5 kHz removed from a channel that was available prior to August 18, 1995 will be accepted until August 18, 1996. 97. Measurement Requirements. In Section 90.211 of our rules, we require analog equipment to meet the emission limitations under all possible conditions. Motorola and TIA request that this requirement be amended to refer to the type acceptance procedures under Part 2 of our rules. Otherwise, Motorola states that the current rule "places a nearly impossible measurement on both manufacturers and on the Commission." Motorola alternatively suggests that the phrase, "under all possible conditions", be deleted. We agree with Motorola and TIA and thus amend Section 90.211(a) to refer to the type acceptance procedures specified in Part 2 of the rules. 98. Frequency Coordinator Responsibilities. Several entities request that the Commission clarify the role and responsibilities of frequency coordinators in light of the technical changes adopted in the R&O and our decision to consolidate the frequency pools of the radio services. Others request that we consider allowing frequency coordinators more authority regarding the expansion of low power operations. We will defer action on these requests until a later date. 99. Migration of Low Power Stations. PCIA recommends that the Commission allow a six-month transition period for licensees to convert their systems before accepting any new applications on these designated channels. Schlumberger and HP state that the Commission needs to impose adjacent channel protection criteria for low power channels. HP and Spacelabs urge the Commission to establish blocks of contiguous spectrum based on functional requirements and technical compatibility for the exclusive use of low power systems. The issues regarding low power stations and the migration to designated low power channels will be affected by the outcome of the effort to consolidate the radio services. Therefore, resolution of these issues will be the subject of a future Order. Additionally, we note that several blocks of low power spectrum already exist in the Business Radio Service and there is a proposal in OET Docket No. 95-177 to permit the operation of low power unlicensed biomedical telemetry devices on TV channels 7 - 13 and on UHF TV channels. 100. Emission Designators. Since the designator "W7W" has been authorized for technology designed to provide data, voice, and facsimile, Motorola and Securicor recommend that Sections 90.207(a) and 90.207(c) of our rules be modified to include the symbol "W" as a valid emission designator under Part 90. The list of the most common emission designator symbols provided in Section 90.207 of our rules was intended as an informal guide for applicants, many of whom do not have a copy of Part 2 of our rules, 47 C.F.R. Part 2. The complete list of valid symbols for all rule parts continues to remain in Section 2.201 of our rules. We are modifying the introductory text in Section 90.207 of our rules to clarify this point. Additionally, since radios that deliver multiple types of information are becoming more common, we add the symbol W to the list of designators in Sections 90.207(a) and 90.207(c) of our rules. 101. Wide-Area Systems. The Forestry Conservation Communications Association (FCCA) requests that certain VHF high-band channels in the Forestry-Conservation Radio Service be designated for statewide use and have the same protection as similar channels in the Police Radio Service. APCO supports this recommendation, stating that many state public safety agencies need wide-area channels to cover their entire area of jurisdiction. In light of the work of the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee and the Commission's overall evaluation and assessment of public safety wireless communications in WT Docket No. 96-86, it would be premature at this time to make decisions regarding the designation of channels for wide-area operation. Thus, we decline to act on the requests of FCCA and APCO at this time. 102. Interference Protection Standards. FCCA expresses the need for interference protection standards that are common to public safety entities. It stresses, however, that these standards should be set by manufacturers and users. To that end, LMCC states that it is working to develop tables and standards which could be used by frequency coordinators. We agree with FCCA that the user community would benefit from a common set of interference protection standards. We also encourage industry efforts in the PLMR community, such as those described by LMCC, aimed at the development of such standards. 103. New Channels. FCCA requests that we allow licensees to use a new channel when they are already licensed for both of its adjacent channels. This issue was discussed in the outstanding FNPRM in this proceeding. Therefore, we defer the decision on the treatment of new channels until a future Report and Order responding to the FNPRM. 104. Fixed Operational Use. APCO requests clarification regarding whether fixed operational use will be permitted for new stations on the former 25 kHz primary channels and the former 12.5 kHz offset channels. Fixed operational use is permitted on a secondary basis pursuant to Sections 90.261 and 90.419 of our rules. This type of use, unless specifically prohibited, will continue to be permitted in accordance with the referenced rule sections and applicable channel bandwidth limitations. 105. 470-512 MHz Band. LCS states that the new rules in this band are unnecessary in the Los Angeles area because 12.5 kHz channel spacing already exists in many cases and the new rules add extreme expense and hardship to existing users. Florida requests clarification that the portion of this band available in Miami, Florida is channelized at 6.25 kHz. We disagree with LCS and decline to make any changes in the 470-512 MHz band or to provide rules specific to Los Angeles. By providing licensees that migrate to narrowband technology relief from current congestion, they will benefit, not suffer, from narrowband channels. Further, because there is no mandate for licensees to replace their systems now, or at any time in the future, there is no expense or hardship forced on existing users. We clarify Section 90.311(b) of our rules to state explicitly that the portions of the 470-512 MHz band available in Miami, Florida, Dallas, Texas, and Houston, Texas are channelized with 6.25 kHz channel spacings. 106. Spectrum Comparison. Florida requests that the Commission ensure that each radio service has the same amount of spectrum available now as they did prior to the adoption of the R&O. Florida requests that we show a comparison of the PLMR spectrum allocations before and after the channel splits. A comparison of the total number of channels available for licensing in each service before and after implementation of the new channel plan is provided in Appendix C. This comparison shows that each radio service's share of the total number of available channels closely approximates its share prior to the adoption of the R&O. 107. Technician Certification. Florida notes that the R&O gives manufacturers or their representatives the authority to retrofit existing equipment with conversion kits to make them compatible with narrower channel bandwidths. In the absence of mandated certification, Florida asserts that there is no assurance that the equipment will be modified correctly and therefore requests that the Commission revisit technician certification mandates. We conclude that the subject of technician certification is beyond the scope of this proceeding, and thus, we will not address Florida's request. 108. Station Identification. LMCC requests that the Commission modify Section 90.425 of our rules to allow licensees transmitting in digital format to transmit a station identifier by digital transmission of the call sign. In its request, LMCC notes that the rules allow digital transmission of station identification on frequencies above 800 MHz when licensees have exclusive use of a channel. Because the radio environment of the Refarming bands is characterized by sharing, the rules pertaining to exclusive use channels above 800 MHz are not appropriate for comparison. Therefore, we decline, at this time, to grant LMCC's request. 109. Stolen Vehicle Recovery. LoJack Corporation requests clarification that the type acceptance requirements of Section 90.203 of our rules do not apply to equipment operating on 173.075 MHz. This frequency is used in the Police Radio Service for Stolen Vehicle Recovery on a shared basis with the Federal Government. The type acceptance requirements of Section 90.203 of our rules apply in the absence of frequency specific technical requirements. Therefore, the relevant technical specifications for equipment used in stolen vehicle recovery systems on 173.075 MHz are listed in Section 90.19(f)(7) of our rules. We are amending Section 90.203(j) of our rules to clarify this point. IV. CONCLUSION 110. With the adoption of this Memorandum Opinion and Order, we finalize the new channel plan and incorporate certain modifications to our regulatory and technical framework for the PLMR services in Part 90 of the Commission's Rules. These new rules will provide greater technical flexibility for PLMR licensees and equipment manufacturers, promote the highly effective and efficient use of the PLMR spectrum, and create an environment which will provide users the opportunity to introduce advanced technologies into the private land mobile radio services. V. FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS 111. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.  603 (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making in PR Docket 92-235. The Commission sought written public comments on the proposals in the Refarming Notice, including on the IRFA. The Commission's Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) in this Memorandum Opinion and Order conforms to the RFA, as amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996. A. Need For and Objective of the Proposed Rule 112. Our objective is to increase spectrum efficiency and facilitate the introduction of advanced technologies into the 150-174 MHz, 421-430 MHz, 450-470 MHz, and 470-512 MHz PLMR bands. The Report and Order in this proceeding modified the Commission's rules to resolve many of the technical issues which inhibited the use of spectrally efficient technologies in these frequency bands. This MO&O address petitions for reconsideration and clarification received in response to the Report and Order. 113. We find that the potential benefits to the PLMR community exceed any negative effects that may result from the promulgation of rules for this purpose. Thus, we conclude that the public interest is served by modifying our rules to increase the spectral efficiency of the PLMR bands. B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by the Public Comments in Response to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 114. No comments were submitted in direct response to the IRFA. We have, however, reviewed general comments that may impact small businesses. C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities Subject to which the Rules Apply 115. The rules adopted in this Memorandum Opinion and Order will apply to small business that choose to use, manufacture, or design radios that operate in the PLMR bands below 512 MHz. The are no Commission imposed requirements, however, for any entity to use or produce these products. Estimates for PLMR Manufacturers 116. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities specifically applicable to PLMR manufacturers. Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, the applicable definition of small entity is the definition under the Small Business Administration (SBA) rules applicable to radio and television broadcasting and communications equipment manufacturers. The SBA defines a small entity in this category as one in which less than 750 persons are employed. 117. Because the Regulatory Flexibility Act amendments were not in effect until the record in this proceeding was closed, the Commission was unable to request information regarding the number of small entities that manufacture PLMR equipment and is unable at this time to determine the number of manufacturers which are small businesses. However, the 1992 Census of Manufacturers, conducted by the Bureau of Census, which is the most comprehensive and recent information available, shows that approximately 925 out of the 948 entities manufacturing radio and television transmitting equipment in 1992 employed less than 750 persons. We are unable to discern from the Census data precisely how many of these manufacturers produce private land mobile radios. Further, any entity may choose to manufacture such radio equipment. Therefore, for purposes of our evaluations and conclusions in this Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, we estimate that there are at least 925 manufacturers and potential manufacturers of PLMR equipment which are small businesses, as that term is defined by the SBA. Estimates for PLMR Licensees 118. Private land mobile radio system serve an essential role in a vast range of industrial, business, land transportation, and public safety activities. These radios are used by companies of all sizes operating in all U.S. business categories. Because of the vast array of PLMR users, the Commission has not developed nor would it be possible to develop a definition of small entities specifically applicable to PLMR users. For the purpose of determining whether a licensee is a small business as defined by the SBA, each licensee would need to be evaluated within its own business area. 119. Because the Regulatory Flexibility Act amendments were not in effect until the record in this proceeding was closed, the Commission was unable to request information regarding the number of small entities that are private land mobile radio licensees. Therefore, the Commission is unable at this time to determine the number of small businesses which could be impacted by the rules. However, the Commission's fiscal year 1994 annual report indicates that at the end of fiscal year 1994 there were 1,101,711 licensees operating 12,882,623 transmitters in the PLMR bands below 512 MHz. Further, because any entity engaged in a commercial activity is eligible to hold a PLMR license, these rules could potentially impact every small business in the U.S. D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements of the Rules 120. There are no general reporting or recordkeeping requirements. However, for certain requests we have substituted a new, less burdensome reporting requirement in place of a requirement for applicants to file applications for waiver or modification. (1) In order to obtain a type acceptance grant, PLMR radios that transmit data must meet a specified spectrum efficiency standard -- measured in bits per second per Hertz. For radios that transmit bit rates slower than the specified standard, our rules permit manufacturers an alternative to requesting a waiver of the technical rules. Type acceptance grants may be obtained, provided that the applicant submits a technical analysis which demonstrates that the slower data rate will provide more spectral efficiency than the standard data rate. (2) Our rules provide allowable combinations of antenna height and effective radiated power (ERP) based on the size of the area an applicant intends to serve and a certain signal strength at the edge of this service area. Rather than filing a waiver request, we are allowing applicants to exceed the reference antenna height, provided they correspondingly lower their ERP and demonstrate that the signal strength of their system at the edges of their service area meets the general limits. (3) Licensees, when making changes to their radio systems, are normally required to file an application for modification. However, in instances where the only modification to a radio system is a narrowing of its operating bandwidth, we will not require an application for modification. Instead, we are only requiring that licensees notify the Commission of the change. E. Steps Taken By Agency to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities Consistent with Stated Objectives 121. The Commission, in this MO&O, has considered petitions to reconsider the rules adopted in the R&O in this proceeding. In doing so, the Commission has adopted several alternatives which minimize burdens placed on small entities. First, the Commission reaffirms its decision to implement the transition to narrowband equipment through the type acceptance process. Users are not required to replace their existing systems, rather they are provided flexibility to choose a transition schedule that best fulfills their needs while balancing technical capabilities and financial considerations. Second, private paging systems, many of which are operated by small entities, will not be subject to many of the new rules. This approach, by not imposing new requirements on private paging licensees, will lower the cost of expanding such systems. Third, we provide applicants the ability to deviate from the new power/antenna height restrictions, which only apply to new stations, without applying for a waiver. This approach eliminates the need for small entities to remit waiver fees of $125 per rule section per station. Additionally, it eliminates the need for small entities to expend clerical support to prepare these waiver requests. Fourth, we allow manufacturers to make permissive changes to previously type accepted equipment. This will allow small entities to continue supporting their existing equipment and customer base in advance of changing their production facilities to manufacture radios compliant with the new spectrum efficiency rules. Fifth, we ease the frequency stability requirements for narrowband radios and extend the exemption from technical standards for low power transmitters to all radio services. These changes will lower development and production costs for small entities. Sixth, we will not require licensees operating on 5 kHz channels under former Section 90.271 of our rules to comply with the new channel plan by August 1, 2001. Instead, these licensees can continue operating on their current frequency as long as they do not cause interference to other users. This approach will lower costs to small entities by not requiring those who operate such systems to modify them sooner than necessary or at all. F. Commission's Outreach Efforts to Learn of and Respond to the Views of Small Entities pursuant to 5 U.S.C.  609 122. The Commission has, in this proceeding, taken several steps to learn and respond to the views of small entities. In response to the Refarming Notice, we held two public forums. On November 14, 1991, the Private Radio Bureau, in cooperation with the Annenberg Washington Program, Communications Policy Studies of Northwestern University, sponsored a conference on Refarming and on May 16, 1993, the Private Radio Bureau held a Refarming technology Roundtable. Additionally, throughout the course of this proceeding the representatives of the Private Wireless Division (PWD) of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau have had numerous ex partediscussions with small entities or their representatives. For example, the PWD has met with many of the frequency coordinators for the nineteen PLMR services. G. Report to Congress 123. The Commission shall send a copy of this final Regulatory Flexibility analysis, along with the Memorandum Opinion and Order, in a report to Congress pursuant to the SBREFA. A copy of this FRFA will also be published in the Federal Register. VI. ORDERING CLAUSES 124. In view of the foregoing and pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 4(i), 303(r), and 405 or the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 303(r), and 405, and Section 1.429(i) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.429(i), IT IS ORDERED that the Petitions for Reconsideration described above ARE GRANTED as indicated herein and ARE DENIED in all other respects. 125. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  4(i) and 303(r), Part 90 of the Commission's Rules IS AMENDED as set forth below effective [30 days after publication in the Federal Register]. 126. Contact. For further information concerning this Memorandum Opinion and Order, contact Ira Keltz, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554, at (202) 418-0616. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William F. Caton Acting Secretary APPENDIX A LIST OF PETITIONERS Petitions for Reconsideration Advanced Meter Reading Technologies (AMRT) Alarm Industry Communications Committee (AICC) Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International, Inc. (APCO) Automobile Association of America (AAA) AzCOM Paging, Inc. (AzCOM) Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Health (Virginia) E.F. Johnson Company (E.F. Johnson) Forestry Conservation Communications Association (FCCA) Hewlett-Packard Company (HP) International Municipal Signal Association and International Association of Fire Chiefs, Inc. (IMSA/IAFC) Kenwood Communications Corporation, Uniden America Corporation, Maxon America, Inc. (Joint Petitioners) Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC) License Communication Services, Inc. (LCS) Midland International Corporation (Midland) Motorola, Inc. (Motorola) Page Hawaii, Inc. (Page Hawaii) Personal Communications Industry Association (PCIA) Schlumberger Meter Communication Systems (Schlumberger) SEA Inc. (SEA) Securicor Radiocoms Limited and Linear Modulation Technology Limited (Securicor) Spacelabs Medical, Inc. (Spacelabs) State of Florida, Division of Communications (Florida) Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) UTC, The Telecommunications Association (UTC) Oppositions and Comments to Petitions for Reconsideration Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International, Inc. (APCO) Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Company (NTT) SEA, Inc. (SEA) Securicor Radiocoms Limited and Linear Modulation Technology Limited (Securicor) UTC, The Telecommunications Association (UTC) Responses to Oppositions for Reconsideration AzCOM Paging, Inc. (AzCOM) Page Hawaii, Inc. (Page Hawaii) Securicor Radiocoms Limited and Linear Modulation Technology Limited (Securicor) APPENDIX B REALLOCATED FORMER LOW POWER OFFSET CHANNELS Symbol Definition PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES PF - Fire PH - Highway Maintenance PL - Local Government PO - Forestry-Conservation PP - Police PS - Special Emergency PM - Emergency Medical INDUSTRIAL SERVICES IB - Business IF - Forest Products IM - Film and Video Production IP - Petroleum IS - Special Industrial IT - Telephone Maintenance IW - Power IX - Manufacturers IY - Relay Press LAND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES LA - Automobile Emergency LM - Motor Carrier LI - Interurban Passenger LJ - Interurban Property LU - Urban passenger LV - Urban Property LR - Railroad LX - Taxicab Local Government Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 453.0125 PL, PS IY Police Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 453.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.2375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.2875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.3375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.3875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.4375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.4875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.5375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.5875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.6375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.6875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.7375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.7875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.8375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.8875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.9375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.2375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.2875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.3375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.3875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.4375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.4875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.5375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.5875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.6375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.6875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.7375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.7875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.8375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.8875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.9375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 465.0125 PP IB Fire Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 453.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.2375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.2875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.3375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.3875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.4375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.4875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.5375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.5875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.6375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.6875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.7375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.7875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.8375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.8875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.9375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.2375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.2875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.3375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.3875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.4375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.4875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.5375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.5875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.6375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.6875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.7375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.7875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.8375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.8875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.9375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 460.5125 PF, PP, PS PP 465.5125 PF, PP, PS PP Highway Maintenance Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 453.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.2375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.2875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.3375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.3875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.4375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.4875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.5375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.5875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.6375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.6875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.7375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.7875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.8375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.8875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.9375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.2375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.2875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.3375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.3875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.4375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.4875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.5375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.5875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.6375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.6875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.7375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.7875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.8375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.8875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.9375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL Forestry-Conservation Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 453.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL, PS, PM 453.2375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.2875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.3375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.3875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.4375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.4875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.5375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.5875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.6375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.6875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.7375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.7875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.8375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.8875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 453.9375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.2375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.2875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.3375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.3875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.4375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.4875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.5375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.5875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.6375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.6875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.7375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.7875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.8375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.8875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL 458.9375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP PL Special Emergency Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 453.0125 PL, PS IY 458.0375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.0625 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PM 458.0875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1125 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PM 458.1375 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 458.1625 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PM 458.1875 PF, PH, PL, PO, PP, PS PL, PM 460.5125 PF, PP, PS PP 460.5375 PF, PP, PS PF, PP 460.5625 PF, PP, PS PF, PP 462.9375 PS IB 462.9625 PS PM 462.9875 PS PM 463.0125 PS PM 463.0375 PS PM 463.0625 PS PM 463.0875 PS PM 463.1125 PS PM 463.1375 PS PM 463.1625 PS PM 463.1875 PS PM 465.5125 PF, PP, PS PP 465.5375 PF, PP, PS PF, PP, PM 465.5625 PF, PP, PS PF, PP, PM 467.9375 PS IB 467.9625 PS PM 467.9875 PS PM 468.0125 PS PM 468.0375 PS PM 468.0625 PS PM 468.0875 PS PM 468.1125 PS PM 468.1375 PS PM 468.1625 PS PM 468.1875 PS PM Power Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 451.3625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.4125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.5625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 451.6125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 451.6625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 456.3625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.4125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.5625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 456.6125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 456.6625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 462.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 462.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 467.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 467.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX Petroleum Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 451.1625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.2125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.2625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.3625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.4125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.7375 IF, IP, IS IS 456.1625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.2125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.2625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.3625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.4125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.7375 IF, IP, IS IS 462.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 462.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 467.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 467.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX Forest Products Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 451.1625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.2125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.2625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.3625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.4125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.7375 IF, IP, IS IS 456.1625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.2125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.2625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.3625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.4125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.7375 IF, IP, IS IS 462.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 462.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 467.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 467.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX Relay Press Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 452.9625 IY, LR LR 457.9625 IY, LR LR Special Industrial Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 451.7125 IF, IP, IS IF, IP 451.7625 IF, IP, IS IF, IP 452.0625 IS, LX LX 452.1125 IS, LX LX 452.1625 IS, LX LX 456.7125 IF, IP, IS IF, IP 456.7625 IF, IP, IS IF, IP 457.0625 IS, LX LX 457.1125 IS, LX IF, LX 457.1625 IS, LX LX Business Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 457.5125 IB, LX LX Manufacturers Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 451.1625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.2125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.2625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.3625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.4125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 451.5625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 451.6125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 451.6625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 456.1625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.2125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.2625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.3625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.4125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IT 456.5625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 456.6125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 451.6625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 462.1875 IB, IX IB 467.1875 IB, IX IB Telephone Maintenance Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 451.1625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.2125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.2625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 451.5625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 451.6125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 451.6625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 456.1625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.2125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.2625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IW 456.5625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 456.6125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 451.6625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IF, IP 462.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 462.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 467.4625 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX 467.5125 IF, IP, IT, IW, IX IX Motor Carrier Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 452.3125 LM, LR, LX LX 452.3625 LM, LR, LX LX 452.4125 LM, LR, LX LX 452.4625 LM, LR, LX LX 452.6125 LA, LM LA 457.3125 LM, LR, LX LX 457.3625 LM, LR, LX IF, LX 457.4125 LM, LR, LX IF, LX 457.4625 LM, LR, LX IF, LX 457.6125 IB, LM IB Railroad Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 452.3125 LM, LR, LX LX 452.3625 LM, LR, LX LX 452.4125 LM, LR, LX LX 452.4625 LM, LR, LX LX 452.7625 LM, LR LM 452.8125 LM, LR LM 452.8625 LM, LR LM 457.3125 LM, LR, LX LX 457.3625 LM, LR, LX IF, LX 457.4125 LM, LR, LX IF, LX 457.4625 LM, LR, LX IF, LX 457.7625 LM, LR LM 457.8125 LM, LR LM 457.8625 LM, LR LM Taxicab Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 452.0375 IS, LX IS 452.0875 IS, LX IS 452.1375 IS, LX IS 452.1875 IS, LX IS 452.3375 LM, LR, LX LM, LR 452.3875 LM, LR, LX LM, LR 452.4375 LM, LR, LX LM, LR 452.4875 LM, LR, LX LM, LR 457.0375 IS, LX IS 457.0875 IS, LX IS 457.1375 IS, LX IS 457.1875 IS, LX IS 457.3375 LM, LR, LX LM, LR 457.3875 LM, LR, LX LM, LR 457.4375 LM, LR, LX LM, LR 457.4875 LM, LR, LX LM, LR Automobile Emergency Radio Service Allocation Frequency (MHz) Allocation under 90.267 after Refarming 452.5125 LA, LX LX APPENDIX C Comparison of Number of Channels Available Before and After Refarming VHF UHF Radio Service New % Old % New % Old % Local Government 130 8.3 68 8.0 296 7.8 78 8.0 Police 134 8.6 67 7.9 337 8.9 86 8.8 Fire 58 3.7 30 3.5 197 5.2 49 5.0 Highway Maintenance 64 4.1 35 4.1 152 4.0 38 3.9 Forestry-Conservation 87 5.6 50 5.9 152 4.0 38 3.9 Emergency Medical 15 1.0 7 0.8 270 7.1 70 7.2 Special Emergency 19 1.2 11 1.3 4 0.1 4 0.4 Power 82 5.3 50 5.9 158 4.2 40 4.1 Petroleum 132 8.5 76 8.9 134 3.5 36 3.7 Forest Products 132 8.5 79 9.3 196 5.2 50 5.1 Film and Video Production 17 1.1 10 1.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 Relay Press 4 0.3 4 0.5 16 0.4 4 0.4 Special Industrial 90 5.8 54 6.3 120 3.2 30 3.1 Business 159 10.2 92 10.8 1123 29.6 289 29.6 Manufacturers 74 4.7 34 4.0 188 5.0 48 4.9 Telephone Maintenance 4 0.3 2 0.2 139 3.7 36 3.7 Motor Carrier 96 6.2 48 5.6 120 3.2 30 3.1 Railroad 181 11.6 92 10.8 81 2.1 21 2.2 Taxicab 54 3.5 28 3.3 96 2.5 24 2.5 Automobile Emergency 26 1.7 15 1.8 16 0.4 4 0.4 Totals 1558 100.0 852 100.0 3795 100.0 975 100.0 APPENDIX D Part 90 of Chapter I of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 90 - PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES 1. The authority citation for Part 90 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303, and 332, unless otherwise noted. 2. Section 90.17 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (31) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.17 Local Government Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 29, 31 * * * * * (c) * * * (31) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 3. Section 90.19 is amended by revising the entries for 150 to 170 MHz, and 460.0125 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (d) and adding limitations (35) and (36) in paragraph (e) to read as follows:  90.19 Police Radio Service. (d) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 33, 35 * * * 460.0125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 26, 36 * * * * * (e) * * * (35) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. (36) Use of this frequency is on a secondary basis and subject to the provisions of  90.267(a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(5), and (a)(7) 4. Section 90.21 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (23) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.21 Fire Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 21, 23 * * * * * (c) * * * (23) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 5. Section 90.23 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (24) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.23 Highway Maintenance Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 21, 24 * * * * * (c) * * * (24) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 6. Section 90.25 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (28) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.25 Forestry-Conservation Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 25, 28 * * * * * (c) * * * (28) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 7. Section 90.27 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b), by replacing the tables in paragraphs (c)(11) and (c)(13)(i), and by adding limitation (29) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.27 Emergency Medical Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 28, 29 * * * * * (c) * * * (11) * * * Frequencies base and mobile (Megahertz) Mobile only (MHz) Channel name 462.950 467.950 MED-9 462.95625 467.95625 MED-91 462.9625 467.9625 MED-92 462.96875 467.96875 MED-93 462.975 467.975 MED-10 462.98125 467.98125 MED-101 462.9875 467.9875 MED-102 462.99375 467.99375 MED-103 * * * * * (13) * * * (i) * * * Frequencies base and mobile (Megahertz) Mobile only (MHz) Channel name 463.000 468.000 MED-1 463.00625 468.00625 MED-11 463.0125 468.0125 MED-12 463.01875 468.01875 MED-13 463.025 468.025 MED-2 463.03125 468.03125 MED-21 463.0375 468.0375 MED-22 463.04375 468.04375 MED-23 463.050 468.050 MED-3 463.05625 468.05625 MED-31 463.0625 468.0625 MED-32 463.06875 468.06875 MED-33 46.075 46.075 MED-4 463.08125 468.08125 MED-41 463.0875 468.0875 MED-42 463.09375 468.09375 MED-43 463.100 468.100 MED-5 463.10625 468.10625 MED-51 463.1125 468.1125 MED-52 463.11875 468.11875 MED-53 463.125 468.125 MED-6 463.13125 468.13125 MED-61 463.1375 468.1375 MED-62 463.14375 468.14375 MED-63 463.150 468.150 MED-7 463.15625 468.15625 MED-71 463.1625 468.1625 MED-72 463.16875 468.16875 MED-73 463.175 468.175 MED-8 463.18125 468.18125 MED-81 463.1875 468.1875 MED-82 463.19375 468.19375 MED-83 * * * * * (29) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 8. Section 90.53 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz and removing the entries for 453.03125 MHz, 453.03750 MHz, 453.04375 MHz, 453.08125 MHz, 453.08750 MHz, 453.09375 MHz, 453.13125 MHz, 453.13750 MHz, 453.14375 MHz, 453.18125 MHz, 453.18750 MHz, 453.19375 MHz, 462.0125 MHz, 462.0375 MHz, 462.0625 MHz, 462.0875 MHz, 462.1125 MHz, 462.1375 MHz, 462.1625 MHz, 462.1775 MHz, 467.0125 MHz, 467.0375 MHz, 467.0625 MHz, 467.0875 MHz, 467.1125 MHz, 467.1375 MHz, 467.1625 MHz, 467.1875 MHz, adding entries for 458.0125 MHz, 463.0125 MHz, 463.0375 MHz, 463.0625 MHz, 463.0875 MHz, 463.1125 MHz, 463.1375 MHz, 463.1625 MHz, 463.1875 MHz, 468.0125 MHz, 468.0375 MHz, 468.0625 MHz, 468.0875 MHz, 468.1125 MHz, 468.1375 MHz, 468.1625 MHz, and 468.1875 MHz, and revising the entry for 458.0375 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (a), and adding limitation (39) in paragraph (b).  90.53 Frequencies available. (a) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 36, 39 * * * 458.0125. . . . . . . . Mobile. . . . 38 458.0375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 * * * 463.0125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 463.0375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 463.0625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 463.0875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 463.1125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 463.1375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 463.1625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 463.1875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 * * * 468.0125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 468.0375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 468.0625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 468.0875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 468.1125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 468.1375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 468.1625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 468.1875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 38 * * * * * (39) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 9. Section 90.63 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (c) and adding limitation (31) in paragraph (d) to read as follows:  90.63 Power Radio Service. (c) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 29, 31 * * * * * (d) * * * (31) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 10. Section 90.65 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz, removing the second occurrence of 456.5125 MHz, and adding entries for 456.7375 MHz and 462.5125 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (48) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.65 Petroleum Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 45, 48 * * * 456.7375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 46 * * * 462.5125. . . . . . . . Mobile. . . . 46 * * * * * * * * (c) * * * (48) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 11. Section 90.67 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (43) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.67 Forest Products Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 39, 43 * * * * * (c) * * * (43) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 12. Section 90.69 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (16) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.69 Film and Video Production Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 15, 16 * * * * * (c) * * * (16) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 13. Section 90.73 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (c) and adding limitation (42) in paragraph (d) to read as follows:  90.73 Special Industrial Radio Service. (c) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 39, 42 * * * * * (d) * * * (42) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 14. Section 90.75 is amended by revising the entries for 150 to 170 MHz, 150.830 MHz, 150.920 MHz, 151.070 MHz, 151.190 MHz, 151.310 MHz, 152.480 MHz, 157.740 MHz, 460.6625 MHz, 460.6875 MHz, 460.7125 MHz, 460.7375 MHz, 460.7625 MHz, 460.7875 MHz, 460.8125 MHz, 460.8375 MHz, 460.8625 MHz, 460.8875 MHz, 462.750 MHz, 462.775 MHz, 462.800 MHz, 462.825 MHz, 462.850 MHz, 462.875 MHz, 462.900 MHz, 462.925 MHz, 462.9375 MHz, 462.94375 MHz, 463.200 MHz, 464.4875 MHz, 464.5125 MHz, 464.5375 MHz, 464.5625 MHz, 464.9875 MHz, 465.0125 MHz, 465.650 MHz, 465.6625 MHz, 465.6875 MHz, 465.7125 MHz, 465.7375 MHz, 465.7625 MHz, 465.7875 MHz, 465.8125 MHz, 465.8375 MHz, 465.8625 MHz, 465.8875 MHz, 469.4875 MHz, 469.5125 MHz, 469.5375 MHz, and 469.5625 MHz, and adding entries for 154.585 MHz and 467.9375 MHz in the table in paragraph (b) and adding limitations (53), (54), and (55) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.75 Business Radio Service. * * * * * (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 48, 54 * * * 150.830 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 8, 10, 12, 49, 55 * * * 150.920 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 8, 10, 12, 49, 55 * * * 151.070 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 8, 10, 12, 49, 55 * * * 151.190 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 8, 10, 12, 49, 55 * * * 151.310 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 8, 10, 12, 49, 55 * * * 152.480 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 11, 12, 49, 55 * * * 154.585 . . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 4, 13, 22, 38, 24 * * * 157.740 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 11, 12, 49, 55 * * * 460.6625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.6875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.7125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.7375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.7625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.7875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.8125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.8375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.8625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 460.8875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 15, 24, 25, 26, 53 * * * 462.750 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 49, 55 * * * 462.775 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 49, 55 * * * 462.800 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 49, 55 * * * 462.825 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 49, 55 * * * 462.850 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 49, 55 * * * 462.875 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 49, 55 * * * 462.900 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 49, 55 * * * 462.925 . . . . . . . . Base. . . . . 10, 49, 55 462.9375. . . . . . . . Mobile. . . . 52 462.94375 . . . . . . . Base or mobile . . . . . . . 46 463.200 . . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 26 * * * 464.4875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 26, 29 * * * 464.5125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 26, 29 * * * 464.5375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 26, 29 * * * 464.5625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 26, 29 * * * 464.9875. . . . . . . . Mobile. . . . 52 * * * 465.0125. . . . . . . . Mobile. . . . 52 * * * 465.650 . . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 25, 26, 31 * * * 465.6625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.6875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.7125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.7375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.7625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.7875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.8125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.8375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.8625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 465.8875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 2, 4, 24, 25, 26, 31, 53 * * * 466.0125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 28, 39, 53 * * * 467.9375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 24, 52 * * * 469.4875. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 26 * * * 469.5125. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 26 * * * 469.5375. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 26 * * * 469.5625. . . . . . . . .do. . . . . 1, 2, 24, 26 * * * * * (c) * * * (53) This frequency may be used on a secondary, non-interference basis by a hospital or health care institution holding a license to operate a radio station under this part to operate a medical radio telemetry device with an output power not to exceed 20 milliwatts without specific authorization from the Commission. (54) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. (55) One-way paging transmitters on this frequency may operate with an output power of 350 watts. 15. Section 90.79 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (c) and adding limitation (32) in paragraph (d) to read as follows:  90.79 Manufacturers Radio Service. (c) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 30, 32 * * * * * (d) * * * (32) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 16. Section 90.81 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (c) and adding limitation (19) in paragraph (d) to read as follows:  90.81 Telephone Maintenance Radio Service. (c) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 17, 19 * * * * * (d) * * * (19) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 17. Section 90.89 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (27) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.89 Motor Carrier Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 24, 27 * * * * * (c) * * * (27) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 18. Section 90.91 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (25) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.91 Railroad Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 23, 25 * * * * * (c) * * * (25) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 19. Section 90.93 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (b) and adding limitation (20) in paragraph (c) to read as follows:  90.93 Taxicab Radio Service. (b) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 18, 20 * * * * * (c) * * * (20) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 20. Section 90.95 is amended by revising the entry for 150 to 170 MHz in the frequency table in paragraph (c) and adding limitation (24) in paragraph (d) to read as follows:  90.95 Automobile Emergency Radio Service. (c) * * * Frequency or band Class of station(s) Limitations * * * Megahertz: * * * 150 to 170. . . . . . . Base or Mobile . . . . . . . 21, 24 * * * * * (d) * * * (24) Licensees as of August 18, 1995 who operate systems that are 2.5 kHz removed from regularly assignable frequencies may continue to operate on a secondary, non-interference basis after August 1, 2003. 21. Section 90.135 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2), redesignating existing paragraph (b)(5) as (b)(6), adding a new paragraph (b)(5), revising the first and last sentences in paragraph (d) and revising the first sentence in paragraph (e) to read as follows:  90.135 Modification of license. (a) * * * (2) Change in the type of emission, except under the conditions specified in paragraph (b)(5) of this Section. * * * * * (b) * * * (5) Change in the type of emission when: (i) Operation is in the 150-174 MHz or 421-512 MHz bands; and (ii) The modification will be for a narrower emission than specified in the current authorization. * * * * * (d) In case of a change listed in paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(5) of this section, the licensee must notify the Commission immediately. * * * Licensees whose licenses are due for renewal and who have received the renewal Form 574-R in the mail from the Commission must use the appropriate boxes on that form to notify the Commission of a change listed in paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(5) of this section. (e) In the case of a change listed in paragraphs (b)(3), (b)(4), and (b)(6) of this section, the licensee must notify the Commission within 30 days of the change. * * * * * * * * 22. Section 90.173 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:  90.173 Policies governing the assignment of frequencies. (a) The frequencies which ordinarily may be assigned to stations in the services governed by this part are listed in subparts B, C, D, E, and F of this part. Frequencies other than those listed in subparts B, C, D, and E may be assigned in the 150-174 MHz, 421-430 MHz, 450-470 MHz, and 470-512 MHz bands, provided such applications are accompanied by a showing of frequency coordination in accordance with the requirements of Section 90.175 of this Part. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Part, frequencies assigned to land mobile stations are available on a shared basis only and will not be assigned for the exclusive use of any licensee. * * * * * 23. Section 90.203 is amended by revising paragraph (j) to read as follows:  90.203 Type acceptance. * * * * * (j) Except where otherwise specifically provided for, transmitters operating on frequencies in the 150-174 MHz and 421-512 MHz bands must comply with the following. (1) Applications for type acceptance received prior to[30 days after publication in the Federal Register], will be granted for equipment with channel bandwidths up to 25 kHz. (2) Applications for type acceptance received on or after[30 days after publication in the Federal Register] will only be granted for equipment with the following channel bandwidths: (i) 12.5 kHz or less for single bandwidth mode equipment or multi-bandwidth mode equipment with a maximum channel bandwidth of 12.5 kHz. (ii) 25 kHz for multi-bandwidth mode equipment with a maximum channel bandwidth of 25 kHz if it is capable of operating on channels of 12.5 kHz or less. (iii) 25 kHz if the equipment meets the efficiency standard of paragraph (j)(3) of this section. (3) Applications for Part 90 type acceptance of transmitters designed to operate on frequencies in the 150-174 MHz and /or 421-512 MHz bands, received on or after[30 days after publication in the Federal Register], must include a certification that the equipment meets a spectrum efficiency standard of one voice channel per 12.5 kHz of channel bandwidth. Additionally, if the equipment is capable of transmitting data, has transmitter output power greater than 500 mW, and has a channel bandwidth of 6.25 kHz or more, the equipment must be capable of supporting a minimum data rate of 4800 bits per second per 6.25 kHz of channel bandwidth. (4) Applications for type acceptance received on or after January 1, 2005, except for hand-held transmitters with an output power of two watts or less, type acceptance will only be granted for equipment with the following channel bandwidths: (i) 6.25 kHz or less for single bandwidth mode equipment. (ii) 12.5 kHz for multi-bandwidth mode equipment with a maximum channel bandwidth of 12.5 kHz if it is capable of operating on channels of 6.25 kHz or less. (iii) 25 kHz for multi-bandwidth mode equipment with a maximum channel bandwidth of 25 kHz if it is capable of operating on channels of 6.25 kHz or less. (iv) Up to 25 kHz if the equipment meets the efficiency standard of paragraph (j)(5) of this section. (5) Applications for Part 90 type acceptance of transmitters designed to operate on frequencies in the 150-174 MHz and/or 421-512 MHz bands, received on or after January 1, 2005, must include a certification that the equipment meets a spectrum efficiency standard of one voice channel per 6.25 kHz of channel bandwidth. Additionally, if the equipment is capable of transmitting data, has transmitter output power greater than 500 mW, and has a channel bandwidth of 6.25 kHz or more, the equipment must be capable of supporting a minimum data rate of 4800 bits per second per 6.25 kHz of channel bandwidth. (6) Modification and permissive changes to type acceptance grants. (i) The Commission's Equipment Authorization Division will not allow adding a multi- mode or narrowband operation capability to single bandwidth mode transmitters, except under the following conditions: (A) Transmitters that have the inherent capability for multi-mode or narrowband operation allowed in paragraphs (j)(2) and (j)(4) of this section, may have their grant of Type Acceptance modified (reissued) upon demonstrating that the original unit complies with the technical requirements for operation. (B) New FCC Identifiers will be required to identify equipment that needs to be modified to comply with the requirements of paragraphs (j)(2) and (j)(4) of this section. (ii) All other applications for modification or permissive changes will be subject to the Rules of Part 2 of this chapter. (7) Transmitters designed for one-way paging operations will be type accepted with a 25 kHz channel bandwidth and are exempt from the spectrum efficiency requirements of paragraphs (j)(3) and (j)(5) of this section. (8) The Commission's Equipment Authorization Division may, on a case by case basis, grant type acceptance to equipment with slower data rates than specified in paragraphs (j)(3) and (j)(5) of this section, provided that a technical analysis is submitted with the application which describes why the slower data rate will provide more spectral efficiency than the standard data rate. (9) Transmitters used for stolen vehicle recovery on 173.075 MHz must comply with the requirements of Section 90.19(f)(7) of this part. 24. Section 90.205 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(2) and (g)(2), the last sentence in paragraph (d)(3), and the last sentence in paragraph (g)(3), and adding a new paragraph (n) to read as follows:  90.205 Power and antenna height limits. * * * * * (d) * * * (2) Applications for stations where special circumstances exist that make it necessary to deviate from the ERP and antenna heights in Table 1 will be submitted to the frequency coordinator accompanied by a technical analysis, based upon generally accepted engineering practices and standards, that demonstrates that the requested station parameters will not produce a signal strength in excess of 37 dBu at any point along the edge of the requested service area. The coordinator may then recommend any ERP appropriate to meet this condition. (3) * * * For base stations with service areas greater than 80 km, all operations 80 km or less from the base station will be on a primary basis and all operations outside of 80 km from the base station will be on a secondary basis and will be entitled to no protection from primary operations. * * * * * (g) * * * (2) Applications for stations where special circumstances exist that make it necessary to deviate from the ERP and antenna heights in Table 2 will be submitted to the frequency coordinator accompanied by a technical analysis, based upon generally accepted engineering practices and standards, that demonstrates that the requested station parameters will not produce a signal strength in excess of 39 dBu at any point along the edge of the requested service area. The coordinator may then recommend any ERP appropriate to meet this condition. (3) * * * For base stations with service areas greater than 80 km, all operations 80 km or less from the base station will be on a primary basis and all operations outside of 80 km from the base station will be on a secondary basis and will be entitled to no protection from primary operations. * * * * * (n) The output power shall not exceed by more than 20 percent either the output power shown in the Radio Equipment List [available in accordance with  90.203(a)(1)] for transmitters included in this list or when not so listed, the manufacturer's rated output power for the particular transmitter specifically listed on the authorization. 25. Section 90.207 is amended by revising the introductory text of paragraph (a) and adding the symbol W to the list in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(3) to read as follows:  90.207 Types of emissions. * * * * * (a) Most common emission symbols. For a complete listing of emission symbols allowable under this Part, see  2.201 of this chapter. (1) * * * W - Cases not covered above, in which an emission consists of the main carrier modulated, either simultaneously or in a pre-established sequence, in a combination of two or more of the following modes: amplitude, angle, pulse. * * * * * (3) * * * W - Combination of the above. * * * * * 26. Section 90.211 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:  90.211 Modulation requirements. * * * * * (a) Transmitters utilizing analog emissions that are equipped with an audio low-pass filter must meet the emission limitations specified in  90.210. Testing must be in accordance with the rules specified in Part 2 of this chapter. * * * * * 27. Section 90.213 is amended by revising the entries for 150-174 MHz, 421-512 MHz, 806-821 MHz, 821-824 MHz, and 896-901 MHz, revising footnotes 6, 7, and 8, and adding footnote 14 to the table of paragraph (a) to read as follows:  90.213 Frequency stability. (a) * * * Minimum Frequency Stability parts per million (ppm) Frequency range (MHz) Fixed and base stations Mobile stations Over 2 watts output power 2 watts or less output power * * * * * 150 - 174 * * * * * 421 - 512 806 - 821 821 - 824 * * * * * 896 - 901 * * * * * * * * * * 5 5, 11 * * * * * 2.5 7, 11, 14 1.5 14 1.0 14 * * * * * 0.1 14 * * * * * * * * * * 5 6 * * * * * 5 8 2.5 1.5 * * * * * 1.5 * * * * * * * * * * 50 4, 6 * * * * * 5 8 2.5 1.5 * * * * * 1.5 * * * * * * * * * *4 Stations operating in the 154.45 to 154.49 MHz or the 173.2 to 173.4 MHz bands must have a frequency stability of 5 ppm. 5 In the 150-174 MHz band, fixed and base stations with a 12.5 kHz channel bandwidth must have a frequency stability of 2.5 ppm. Fixed and base stations with a 6.25 kHz channel bandwidth must have a frequency stability of 1.0 ppm. 6 In the 150-174 MHz band, mobile stations de signed to operate with a 12.5 kHz channel bandwidth or designed to operate on a frequency specifically designated for itinerant use or designed for low-power operation of two watts or less, must have a frequency stability of 5.0 ppm. Mobile stations designed to operate with a 6.25 kHz channel bandwidth must have a frequency stability of 2.0 ppm. 7 In the 421-512 MHz band, fixed and base stations with a 12.5 kHz channel bandwidth must have a frequency stability of 1.5 ppm. Fixed and base stations with a 6.25 kHz channel bandwidth must have a frequency stability of 0.5 ppm. 8 In the 421-512 MHz band, mobile stations designed to operate with a 12.5 kHz channel bandwidth must have a frequency stability of 2.5 ppm. Mobile stations designed to operate with a 6.25 kHz channel bandwidth must have a frequency stability of 1.0 ppm. * * * * * 11 Paging transmitters operating on paging-only frequencies must operate with frequency stability of 5 ppm in the 150-174 MHz band and 2.5 ppm in the 421-512 MHz band. * * * * * 14 Control stations may operate with the frequency tolerance specified for associated mobile frequencies. * * * * * 28. Section 90.214 is revised to read as follows:  90.214 Transient Frequency Behavior. Transmitters designed to operate in the 150-174 MHz and 421-512 MHz frequency bands must maintain transient frequencies within the maximum frequency difference limits during the time intervals indicated: Transient Frequency Behavior For Equipment Designed To Operate on 25 kHz Channels Time Intervals 1, 2 Maximum Frequency Difference 3 All Equipment 150 to 174 MHz 421 to 512 MHz t1 4 ñ 25.0 kHz 5.0 ms 10.0 ms t2 ñ 12.5 kHz 20.0 ms 25.0 ms t3 4 ñ 25.0 kHz 5.0 ms 10.0 ms Transient Frequency Behavior For Equipment Designed To Operate on 12.5 kHz Channels Time Intervals 1, 2 Maximum Frequency Difference 3 All Equipment 150 to 174 MHz 421 to 512 MHz t1 4 ñ 12.5 kHz 5.0 ms 10.0 ms t2 ñ 6.25 kHz 20.0 ms 25.0 ms t3 4 ñ 12.5 kHz 5.0 ms 10.0 ms Transient Frequency Behavior For Equipment Designed To Operate on 6.25 kHz Channels Time Intervals 1, 2 Maximum Frequency Difference 3 All Equipment 150 to 174 MHz 421 to 512 MHz t1 4 ñ 6.25 kHz 5.0 ms 10.0 ms t2 ñ 3.125 kHz 20.0 ms 25.0 ms t3 4 ñ 6.25 kHz 5.0 ms 10.0 ms 1 ton is the instant when a 1 kHz test signal is completely suppressed, including any capture time due to phasing. t1 is the time period immediately following ton. t2 is the time period immediately following t1. t3 is the time period from the instant when the transmitter is turned off until toff. toff is the instant when the 1 kHz test signal starts to rise. 2 During the time from the end of t2 to the beginning of t3, the frequency difference must not exceed the limits specified in  90.213. 3 Difference between the actual transmitter frequency and the assigned transmitter frequency. 4 If the transmitter carrier output power rating is 6 watts or less, the frequency difference during this time period may exceed the maximum frequency difference for this time period. 29. Section 90.217 is amended by revising the introductory text and the first sentence in paragraph (a) to read as follows:  90.217 Exemption from technical standards. Except as noted herein, transmitters used at stations licensed in the Business Radio Service and at stations licensed in the 150-174 MHz and 421-512 MHz bands in any Radio Service listed in Subparts B, C, D, and E of this Part which have an output power not exceeding 120 milliwatts are exempt from the technical requirements set out in this subpart, but must instead comply with the following: (a) For equipment designed to operate with a 25 kHz channel bandwidth, * * * * * * * * 30. Section 90.267 is amended by removing paragraph (b). 31. Section 90.283 is amended by revising the table in paragraph (a), revising paragraph (c) and adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:  90.283 Inter-service sharing of maritime frequencies in the 156-162 MHz band. (a) * * * Frequency (MHz) Mobile Station Transmit Base Station Transmit 157.200 161.800 157.20625 1 161.80625 1 157.2125 2 161.8125 2 157.21875 1 161.81875 1 157.225 161.825 157.23125 1 161.83125 1 157.2375 2 161.8375 2 157.24375 1 161.84375 1 157.250 161.850 157.25625 1 161.85625 1 157.2625 2 161.8625 2 157.26875 1 161.86875 1 157.275 161.875 157.28125 1 161.88125 1 157.2875 2 161.8875 2 157.29375 1 161.89375 1 157.300 161.900 157.30625 1 161.90625 1 157.3125 2 161.9125 2 157.31875 1 161.91875 1 157.325 161.925 157.33125 1 161.93125 1 157.3375 2 161.9375 2 157.34375 1 161.94375 1 157.350 161.950 157.35625 1 161.95625 1 157.3625 2 161.9625 2 157.36875 1 161.96875 1 157.375 161.975 157.38125 1 161.98125 1 157.3875 2 161.9875 2 157.39375 1 161.99375 1 157.400 162.000 1 This frequency will be assigned with an authorized bandwidth not to exceed 6 kHz. 2 This frequency will be assigned with an authorized bandwidth not to exceed 11.25 kHz * * * * * (c) Station power, as measured at the output terminals of the transmitter, must not exceed 50 watts for base stations and 20 watts for mobile stations, except in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (g) of this section. Antenna height (HAAT) must not exceed 122 meters (400 feet) for base stations and 4.5 meters (15 feet) for mobile stations, except in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section. Such base and mobile stations must not be operated on board aircraft in flight. * * * * * (g) Applicants seeking to be licensed for stations exceeding the power/antenna height limits of the table in paragraph (d) of this section are required to secure a waiver and must submit with the application, an interference analysis, based upon any of the generally-accepted terrain-based propagation models, that shows that co-channel protected entities, described in paragraph (d) of this section, would receive the same or greater interference protection than provided in the table. 32. Section 90.311 is amended by revising the introductory text in paragraph (b) to read as follows.  90.311 Frequencies. * * * * * (b) Miami, FL, Dallas, TX, and Houston, TX urbanized areas. Only the first and last assignable frequencies are shown. Assignable frequencies will occur in increments of 6.25 kHz. Frequencies listed in paragraph (a)(3) of this section will only be assigned with a maximum authorized bandwidth of 6 kHz. * * * * *