Recent Posts

The LMCC outlined the procedure for coordinating 6.25 KHz trunked systems.
The link can be found here:

http://www.lmcc.org/Filings/2008/LMCC_Narrowband_Coordination_Consensus_Ltr_to_FCC_080408.pdf

To summarize:

1.) VHF systems will use a 13 dB derating (service = 37 , interfering = 32 dBu)
2.) UHF systems will use a 8 dB derating contour (service = 39 , interfering = 29 dBu) when spaced at 6 KHz
3.) The derating factors will be reviewed in two years (2010)
4.) The interference contour may not overlap the service contour of the incumbent system and the interference contour of the incumbent system may not overlap the service contour of the proposed system.

Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20554


In the Matter of                )
                     )
Petition for Rulemaking to Amend         )   RM-11527
The Land Mobile-TV Sharing Rules         )            
On the 470-512 MHz Bands            )   


REPLY COMMENTS OF THE
LAND MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION

The Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC), pursuant to Section 1.415 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1415, hereby respectfully submits its Reply Comments in the above-captioned proceeding.
I.   INTRODUCTION
   LMCC is a non-profit association of organizations representing virtually all users of land mobile radio systems, providers of land mobile services, and manufacturers of land mobile radio equipment.  LMCC acts with the consensus, and on behalf, of the vast majority of public safety, business, industrial, transportation and private commercial radio users, as well as a diversity of land mobile service providers and equipment manufacturers. Membership includes the following organizations:
      ●   American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
      ●   American Automobile Association (AAA)
      ●   American Petroleum Institute (API)
      ●   Association of American Railroads (AAR)
      ●   Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA)
      ●   Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International, Inc.          (APCO)
      ●   Aviation Spectrum Resources, Inc. (ASRI)
      ●   Central Station Alarm Association (CSAA)
      ●   Enterprise Wireless Alliance (EWA)
      ●   Forest Industries Telecommunications (FIT)
      ●   Forestry-Conservation Communications Association (FCCA)
      ●   Intelligent Transportation Society of America, Inc. (ITSA)
      ●   International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC)
      ●   International Municipal Signal Association (IMSA)
      ●   MRFAC, Inc. (MRFAC)
      ●   National Association of State Foresters (NASF)
      ●   PCIA – The Wireless Infrastructure Association (PCIA)
      ●   Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA)
   ●   Utilities Telecom Council (UTC)


II.   DISCUSSION

   LMCC, as noted in our Comments filed to this proceeding, supports the NPSTC petition and its recommendations for rule changes in the 470-512 MHz band, including expansion of the licensing area from 50 miles to 80 miles around the 11 markets identified in this band where land mobile sharing is allowed for public safety and other land mobile users.   We are pleased that other commenters also filed in support of the NPSTC proposal to allow greater flexibility in these markets for all land mobile users.   LMCC additionally recommended a minor modification to the NPSTC Petition to also make available the first 300 kHz of each available broadcast channel to all land mobile users, not only to public safety entities. 
LMCC strongly opposes, however, the joint Comments of the Association for Maximum Service Television, Inc. (MSTV) and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) in which they argue that these proposed changes should be limited only to public safety users because “the much larger group of other land mobile licensees would create a greater risk of interference to the public’s television service”.    We respectfully question whether the MSTV and NAB have a full appreciation for the types of land mobile systems being used by business enterprises since 1971 when the Commission first made this valuable spectrum available to all private land mobile users, and whether they recognize that these non-public safety licensees use similar, if not identical, land mobile systems under similar coordination procedures as public safety licensees operating in these markets. 
Unlike in the neighboring 450-470 MHz land mobile band, the 470-512 MHz band allows exclusivity based on system loading, resulting in a single license being granted in one given area, regardless of whether that licensee is public safety or a business enterprise.  This means that, regardless of the impression the MSTV and NAB are trying to create that somehow the expansion of the licensing service area by 30 miles will result in a large number of “taxicab operators, manufacturing and industrial concerns, and other commercial entities”  into this enhanced area, the reality is that it is more likely that the proposed rules changes will allow the current exclusive public safety, utility, or business enterprise licensee to expand its system coverage area as needed.   Further, the high prevalence of exclusive channel assignment in these 11 markets means that both public safety and non-public safety licensees are mainly operating higher tiered trunking technology.  As a result, neither type of licensee will cause a greater potential for interference to digital television incumbents.  In fact, LMCC knows of no single instance of interference to broadcast television service by any land mobile licensee in the 470-512 MHz band over the last almost 40 years.
We note that business enterprise licensees include communications service providers that sell land mobile service to both public safety and non-public safety users, so preventing these providers from expanding their systems as the MSTV and NAB urge would also impact enhanced public safety access in the expanded 30 mile area.  LMCC additionally points out that, in order to accomplish what the MSTV and NAB are proposing, the Commission would be required to reallocate the 30 mile additional radius area to only public safety in the 11 markets currently authorized, thereby unnecessarily complicating the coordinated use with licensees in the adjacent 50 miles available to all land mobile users.


II.   CONCLUSION

Currently, LMCC frequency advisors estimate non-public safety users in the 470-512 MHz band to be somewhere between 40% and 60% of the total users.  LMCC believes there is no reason why this current mix would change because of the expanded license area proposed by NPSTC in the 11 markets currently authorized for land mobile sharing.  Nor do we believe there is any greater threat of interference by business enterprise licensees than public safety licensees as the result of the enhanced land mobile sharing use identified by NPSTC in their well thought out Petition.   
As noted in the Introduction, this LMCC position represents the consensus of our membership organizations, representing public safety, business, industrial, transportation and private commercial radio users, land mobile service providers and equipment manufacturers.  LMCC collectively understands land mobile technology, licensee coordination and minimization of interference potential.  We continue to urge the Commission to move quickly on the adoption of the NPSTC Petition, with modifications suggested in our Comments, to allow expanded use of the 470-512 MHz band for all land mobile users. 



Respectfully submitted,
By:    /s/   Al Ittner
Al Ittner
President



Land Mobile Communications Council
8484 Westpark Drive, Suite 630
McLean, VA 22102
703-528-5115



May 22, 2009

The current license term for Part 90 licensees is 10 years. The combination of filing fee and regulatory fee push it to $260. FIT is asking if it makes sense to reduce the 10 year license to a 5 years license thus dropping the fee down to $160. Add your voice to the discussion.

The FCC says that if you have any questions about the CPNI filing you can call 202-418-0940

This certification requires these exhibits:

1) a statement explaining how your company’s operating procedures ensure compliance with the FCC’s CPNI rules.

2)any statement of actions taken against data brokers

3) a summary of customer complaints regarding unauthorized release of CPNI.

4)A company officer with personal knowledge that the company has established operating procedures adequate to ensure compliance with the rules must also execute the certification, and place a copy of the certification and accompanying exhibits in the company’s CPNI Compliance Records.

What is CPNI?

In the United States, CPNI (Customer Proprietary Network Information) is information that telecommunications services acquire about their subscribers. It includes not only what services they use but their amount and type of usage. CPNI includes such information as optional services subscribed to, current charges, directory assistance charges, usage data, and calling patterns.

The CPNI rules do not prohibit the gathering and publishing of aggregate customer information nor the use of customer information for the purpose of creating directories.

On August 30, 2005, EPIC filed a petition with the Commission asking the Commission to investigate telecommunications carriers’ current security practices and to initiate a rulemaking proceeding to consider establishing more stringent security standards for telecommunications carriers to govern the disclosure of CPNI (Customer Proprietary Network Information and Other Customer Information).

In particular, EPIC proposed that the Commission consider requiring the use of consumer-set passwords, creating audit trails, employing encryption, limiting data retention, and improving notice procedures.

On February 14, 2006, the Commission released the EPIC CPNI Notice, in which it sought comment on (a) the nature and scope of the problem identified by EPIC, including pretexting, and (b) what additional steps, if any, the Commission should take to protect further the privacy of CPNI.

Specifically, the Commission sought comment on the five EPIC proposals listed above.  In addition, the Commission tentatively concluded that it should amend its rules to require carriers annually to file their section 64.2009(e) certifications with the Commission.

It also sought comment on whether it should require carriers to obtain a customer’s opt-in consent before the carrier shares CPNI with its joint venture partners and independent contractors; whether to impose rules relating to how carriers verify customers’ identities; whether to adopt a set of security requirements that could be used as the basis for liability if a carrier failed to implement such requirements, or adopt a set of security requirements that a carrier could implement to exempt itself from liability; whether VoIP service providers or other IP-enabled service providers should be covered by any new rules the Commission adopts in the present rulemaking; and other specific proposals that might increase the protection of CPNI.

As a result the rules require carriers to: 

(1) implement a system by which the status of a customer’s CPNI approval can be clearly established prior to the use of CPNI;

(2) train their personnel as to when they are and are not authorized to use CPNI (and establish an express disciplinary process);

(3) maintain a record of instances in which CPNI has been disclosed or provided to third parties, or where third parties have been allowed access to CPNI, and to maintain such records for at least one year;

(4) establish a supervisory review process for “outbound” marketing campaigns under which sales personnel must obtain supervisory approval of proposed “outbound” marketing requests for customer approval;

(5) certify annually regarding its compliance with the Commission’s CPNI requirements and to make this certification publicly available.

The definition below defines who is required to file. I have
also attached links to the full FCC announcement.

Telecommunications service is defined in the Act as "the
offering of telecommunications for a fee directly to the
public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively
available directly to the public, regardless of the
facilities used." 47 U.S.C. S: 153(46).

http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Public_Notices/DA-09-240A1.html

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-240A1.pdf

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-240A1.doc

If you are a commercial wireless communications provider you will have to file your CPNI certification before the March 1st deadline. For a copy of the public notice click http://www.landmobile.com/cpni/cpni.pdf
Its too late to file by mail. Those wanting to complete the filing must do so here http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/

If you want a template go here http://www.landmobile.com/cpni/cpniformfill.doc

Word of warning, be very careful about filling the forms out. Some entities were fined upwards of $6000 for not submitting complete and detailed CPNI information.