Docket No. 17228; RM-390;
RM-458; RM-906
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
9 F.C.C.2d 839 (1967); 10
Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 628
RELEASE NUMBRE: FCC 67-993
August 30, 1967 Adopted
JUDGES: BY THE COMMISSION: COMMISSIONER COX
DISSENTING AND ISSUING A STATEMENT IN WHICH COMMISSIONER JOHNSON JOINS;
COMMISSIONER WADSWORTH ABSENT.
REPORT AND ORDER
1. On February 21, 1967, the Commission released a notice of
proposed rulemaking (FCC 67-228, 32 F.R. 3301) in the above-entitled
mattter. The proposals contained therein provided for the use by various
Industrial Services of six "splinter" frequencies in the 154- and
173-Mc/s band for telemetering and remote control operations. One
"splinter" channel would be made available to the Local Government Radio
Service for emergency callbox purposes. In addition, the Forest Products
Radio Service would be permitted access to the Business frequency 154.600 Mc/s
for transmission of audio tones to control remote objects and devices as well
as for voice communication. Interested parties were invited to file
comments on or before March 24, 1967, and reply comments on or before April 10,
1967.
2. Comments were received from the Central Committee on
Communication Facilities of the American Petroleum Institute (API),
Forest Industries Radio Communications (FIRC), Land Mobile Section of
Electronic Industries Association (EIA), National Committee for Utilities Radio
(NCUR), Motorola, Inc., Detroit Edison Co., Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co.,
and the Special Industrial Radio Service Association (SIRSA). Reply
comments were received from Spencer-Kennedy Laboratories of California, Inc.,
Bruce C. McCallum (individual), Associated Public Safety Communications Officers,
Inc. (APCO), and the Nevada Department of Highways.
3. In general, the comments supported our proposal to make these
channels available for fixed and mobile tone signaling as the most effective
use of these narrow channels. Bruce C. McCallum opposed the proposal and
argued that we should use the 22.5 kc/s of spectrum in the 154-Mc/s band to
create two 15-kc/s channels and allocate them to base and mobile
operations. We have considered this argument and we are unable to
determine that two 15-kc/s channels could be created and effectively utilized
within the space available.
4. EIA, with APCO and SIRSA concurring, proposes that greater
latitude be permitted for both the maximum modulating frequency and the maximum
frequency deviation or swing to permit full occupancy of the narrow
channels. NCUR proposed that the audio limitation for low-power mobile FM
systems be extended to 1500 c/s. API suggested that equipment would operate
more suitably with an allowable 2-kc/s deviation on the 7.5-kc/s channels.
We are adopting these proposals in certain respects and the standards being
established will permit the use of higher frequency tones if the deviation or
swing is adjusted accordingly. The sum of the maximum audio frequency and
the deviation or swing will be 2800 c/s in the 7.5-kc/s frequency bands and
1700 c/s in the two 5-kc/s frequency bands.
5. Cincinnati Gas & Electric suggests a tighter frequency
tolerance to 0.0002 percent and allowance of modulation frequencies up to 300
c/s in the 7.5-kc/s frequency bands, with a deviation of 1 kc/s. While
this would permit voice operation, the results of developmental operations do
not technically support the use of this type of system in such narrow channels.
6. As suggested by the comments of Spencer-Kennedy Laboratories,
frequency shift keying will be permitted, but the proposed to divide the
7.5-kc/s frequency bands into two channels appears premature.
Accordingly, only one 7.5-kc/s frequency band will be available for callbox use
at this time.
7. A consensus of the comments suggests that the power proposed
for fixed stations is more than necessary for operation, particularly if
directional antennas are required. Accordingly, the rules will provide
for a power of 50 w into the antenna for fixed use other than for local shaving
in the Power Radio Service and emergency callbox use in the Local Government
Radio Service, where powers of 300 and 20 w, respectively, will be provided.
8. EIA and SIRSA recommend provision for omnidirectional antennas
in callbox communications, inasmuch as callboxes are usually scattered, or
multiple monitoring stations may be employed. The two associations
recommended a 20-w imput to the antenna. APCO concurs with EIA in
specifying the input power at 20 w for callboxes with omnidirectional
antennas. Emergency callbox use will be limited to a maximum of 20 w into
the antenna and omnidirectional antennas may be used. Pending further
development of this use, acknowledgment systems will not be authorized in the
callbox frequency band.
9. NCUR urges that the 154.460-154.4675-Mc/s band be made
available for directional fixed and low-power mobile operations in addition to
multiple address fixed use. Since this frequency band is to be
allocated exclusively to the Power Radio Service and will be subject to
frequency coordination, directional fixed and low-power mobile operations will
be permitted. Directional fixed stations will be limited to locations
outside urbanized areas of 200,000 or more population.
10. FIRC requested that on-off carrier tone modulated equipment
used in woods operations be permitted 3 w of output power, inasmuch as 1 w
would not be sufficient for some types of operations. The mobile power
has been changed to permit a maximum of 3 w output in the Forest Products Radio
Service and 1 w output in all the remaining services.
11. In regard to the sharing of the four 173-Mc/s frequencies,
API and SIRSA recommend establishing a method of coordination, or placing the
applications for these frequencies on public notice in accordance with section
309(b)(2)(g) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Interservice
coordination will be required for all fixed station use of the frequency bands
that are shared between radio services. Coordination will also be required
within each service except in the Business Radio Service. While no formal
system of interservice coordination is being established at this time, we
expect users of the shared frequencies to cooperate in maintaining interservice
coordination. Fixed stations will be authorized for operation at
temporary locations where adequate frequency coordination is obtained.
12. The comments received indicate that there are many needs in
the several industries affected for fixed and mobile tone signaling frequencies.
Several of the comments supported the allocation of additional space for the
land mobile services; however, nothing filed suggested ways that the 7.5- and
5-kc/s channels could be used for two-way mobile service communications.
Accordingly, it appears that the proposals set forth in the notice and as
modified on the basis of comments received would provide for efficient
utilization of the subject frequencies.
13. Therefore, pursuant to authority contained in sections 4 (i)
and 303 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, It is ordered, That,
effective October 12, 1967, parts 2, 89, and 91 of the Commission's rules Are
amended. It is further ordered, That the proceedings in docket No. 17228
are hereby Terminated.
14. It is further ordered, That all licensees of developmental
facilities operating on frequencies set forth in the rule changes ordered
herein make necessary frequency changes on or before October 1, 1968.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, BEN F. WAPLE, Secretary.
DISSENTING STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER KENNETH A.
COX IN WHICH COMMISSIONER NICHOLAS JOHNSON JOINS
I must dissent from the decision of the majority in this matter for the
reasons pointed out in my separate statement associated with the notice of
proposed rulemaking issued in this proceeding (FCC 67-228, 32 F.R. 3301).
However, I am further amplifying my position to set forth more clearly what I
believe to be the true import of the Commission's decision.
The frequencies under consideration are really not "splinter
frequencies" as the majority indicates. In the 154-Mc band involved
in this proceeding there are three existing regular land mobile channels
allocated -- 154.445 Mc to the Fire Service, 154.490 Mc to the Special
Industrial Service, and 154.540 Mc to the Business Service. I submit
that, with 95 kc of spectrum space available between the first and last
assignments just mentioned, it is feasible to arrange for several additional
land mobile channels. No one would think of proposing that we take the
Special Industrial channel centered on 154.490 kc and convert it to fixed
usage. Instead, it is suggested that we take 15 kc from the lower edge of
this channel and 7.5 kc from the upper edge of the adjoining channel and divide
the resultant 22.5 kc into three channels. To make it sound innocuous,
the frequencies involved are termed "splinters." However, this
particular channelization is not forced upon us by the laws of nature.
These "splinters" have been manufactured by the Commission to provide
primarily for the specialized fixed service uses of certain industries which
supported the proposal. I recognize that they have been given
developmental authorizations and may have spent substantial funds, but I do not
believe that this justifies intruding fixed operations into this part of the
spectrum. These are not scrap frequencies, as the "splinter"
terminology suggests. They are just like any other frequencies in this
band, and I am convinced that better use can be made of them which would be
more consistent with existing allocations -- and with possible long-range
reallocation of the band for more efficient mobile use.
Throughout the land mobile bands there are certain nonstandard
frequency separations at various band-edges between services. Unless the Commission
does something to make such spectrum useful for land mobile service, I believe
that it will be only a matter of time until someone will want to make
"splinters" out of some of them for specialized fixed uses. I
am sure that someone would like to make such use of any spectrum that can be
found, just as is true of the frequencies here being diverted from purposes
which can only be served by radio. In any event, the carving out of
"splinter" channels for primarily fixed service destroys the capability
of making use of this spectrum band for essential mobile communications.
Similar considerations are involved in the 173.2-173.4-Mc band where
there are now seven 25-kc channels allocated to the mobile service and where,
with reasonable geographical separation, it might be entirely feasible to
operate land mobile systems with 12.5-kc separation. The action of the
majority, therefore, eliminates two potentially usable land mobile
channels, although I understand that Government operations in the adjacent
bands might prevent such mobile use.
Paragraphs 3 and 12 of the Commission's order leave the
impression that the spectrum space that is going to be occupied by the services
on these "splinters" is not feasible for regular land mobile
use. Of course, it would be very difficult to attempt to use single
7.5-kc channels for ordinary two-way land mobile service. But the
potential is not limited to use of three individual 7.5-kc slots -- it is more
accurately a potential land mobile channel which has its assigned frequency
22.5 kc away from the present adjacent channels on each side. I think the
majority stultifies its thinking when it talks of "these narrow
channels" and refers to the lack of suggestions as to ways of using the
proposed 7.5-kc channels for two-way mobile service. This misses the
vital point that in the 154-Mc band we do not have to use 7.5-kc channels, but
have the option of consolidating these so-called "splinters" into an
admittedly usable 22.5-kc channel.
In several of the services 15-kc tertiaries are not only allocated but
are being used regularly. In this regard I think it is significant to
point out the recent action of the Commission authorizing the fire department
of Jersey City to operate on a channel just 15 kc removed from channels used by
the New York and Newark Fire Departments. We pointed out in letters to
the latter two agencies that such use appeared compatible with their existing
operations. If such a mode of operation is feasible in the critical
safety services, surely it is possible to use these valuable frequencies for
the mobile purposes for which they are now assigned.
I think this action is a step backward, and I am afraid it may be the
prelude to further invasion of the mobile bands for fixed purposes.