WPC: 2J BNLZTimes Roman3|f#&a\  P6G;x&P#"S^2CRddCCCdq2C28dddddddddd88qqqYzoCNzoozzC8C^dCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddCN8ddddY`(`lC2CC!CCCCCCCCCCd8YYYYYYzYzYzYzYC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddodYYYYYYdzYzYzYzYdddddddCdCdCCCdNCdz8zCzCzCz8dddddCCCoNoNoNoNzCzCzCdddddzYzYNF2[dCYddddd7>d<d<$8YYdCCddooCYȾ%7777777777>>>1eOIIOC=OO%+OCbOO=OI=COOhOOC%%47%17171%777V7777%+77O77155<%%%n%%%%%%%%%%7O1O1O1O1O1bII1C1C1C1C1%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O1O7O7O7O7O7=7O1O1I1I1I1I1O7C1C1C1C1O7O7O7O7O7O7O7%7%7%%%7+%O7CC%C%C%CO7O7O7O7O7bOI%I%I%=+=+=+=+C%C%C%O7O7O7O7hOO7C1C1N'27%177777"SS7!TT7S!117n%%77l==n%1ni!t>><<>>mBBs,>[N6-msTN[TTTH_<1CP"- xrules provide for aviation transceiver transmit capability only over the range 118 MHz to 136.975 MHz. See 47 C.F.R.  87.173(b); 87.475(b)(4),(5).  a waiver is needed to obtain certifications for VHF  xaviation transceivers with such an extended range. The waiver request was placed on Public Notice on  S- xSeptember 29, 1998.E\ 3\ {O2&-  ԍxSee RockwellCollins Request for Waiver Concerning TypeAcceptance of Aviation Transceivers Capable  {O&- xof Transmitting Outside the 108 MHz 137 MHz Civil Aviation Band, Public Notice, DA 981984 (rel. September 29, 1998). E We received five comments and three reply comments. For the reasons set out below, we are granting the Rockwell Waiver Request."m, * *,,."Ԍ S-ԙx gII.` ` BACKGROUND (#`  S- ` x2.` ` Section 87.39 of the Commission'sg Rules require that: (1) U.S. registered aircraft employ  x=certified radios; and (2) to be certified, aircraft radios must meet the technical requirements of Subpart D  S4- xof Part 87 of the Commission's Rules.y4-  {O-ԍx47 C.F.R.  87.39.  See also 47 C.F.R.  87.145.y Section 87.173(b) in Subpart D contains a list of assignable  S- xcarrier frequencies or frequency bands and includes carrier frequencies in the civil aviation band. &Z-  {O-  ԍxSee 47 C.F.R.  87.173(b). The United States assignments correspond to those recognized internationally  {O- xwby the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) See International Standards and Recommended Practices,  {O - xjAeronautical Telecommunications, Annex 10 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, Table 41, International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal, 1997.   xRockwell requests that typeacceptance be granted for transceivers with the capability to transmit in both  S-the civil aviation band and in the following bands that fall immediately above the civil aviation band:PH-  {O -ԍxSee 47 C.F.R.  2.106.P  S5-xFrequency Bandhh@United States Allocations  S- h x137 ! 138 MHz` XhhGovernment and nongovernment: Space operation (space to  hXearth); meteorological satellite (space to earth); space research (space to earth) mobile satellite (space to earth).(#h Xx(#  S -x138 ! 144 MHz` XhhGovernment fixed and mobile.E$ -  yO}-  ԍCAPxIn the 138144 MHz band, fixed and mobile services are limited primarily to operations by the military  {OE- xservices. See id. at n. G30. The international table of frequency allocations lists aeronautical mobile operations as  xa permissible use in the frequency band 138 144 MHz in International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Region  {O-1. ITU Region 1 encompasses, generally, Europe, Asia and Africa. See 47 C.F.R.  2.104.E(#h  S -x144 148 MHz` XhhAmateur, Amateur satellite.(#h  S7- h*x148 149.9 MHz hhNongovernment: Mobile Satellite (earth to space). Government: fixed, mobile and mobile satellite (earth to space).(#h  S- hx149.9 150.05 MHz hhGovernment and nongovernment: Radionavigation satellite; Land Mobile Satellite (earth to space).(#h  S-x150.05 150.8 MHz` XhhGovernment fixed and mobile.  -  yOk!-  [ԍ xIn the 150.05150.8 MHz band, fixed and mobile services are limited primarily to operations by the military  {O3"-services. See 47 C.F.R.  2.106 n. G30.(#h  S-x150.8 152 MHzhhNongovernment: Fixed and land mobile.  xIn support of its request, Rockwell submits that there are air traffic control communications conducted by  xmilitary radio facilities in the 138 144 MHz and 150.05 150.8 MHz government bands and in the 148  x149.9 MHz band which is shared by government and nongovernment users. Rockwell notes that included"  ,l(l(,,"  xamong these aeronautical communications, in addition to those of the military, are communications with  S- x/aircraft of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet that, in emergency conditions, serve a military transport role. \-  {O5-  ԍ FOUR xSuch aircraft "fly in both civil and military airspace and under both civil and military jurisdictions." See  {O- x2Rockwell Waiver Request at 2, 5 citing USAF Fact Sheet, Civil Reserve Air Fleet, , August, 1997.  S- xRockwell further notes that civil aircraft that have the occasion to use military airfields, e.g. in connection  xwith the transport of "VIP" passengers such as heads of stat X01Í ÍX01Í Íe, also engage in aeronautical communications  S5-in the subject frequency bands. 5% {O-#]\  PCP#эxSee id.  See also Reply Comments of Rockwell Collins, Inc. (Rockwell Reply Comments) at 3. x  S- ` x3.` ` Rockwell asserts that the transceivers for which certification is sought must be delivered  xto its customers on an expedited basis because, in addition to their extended frequency range, the  Si- xtransceivers are capable of operating with 8.33 kHz channel spacing in the civil aviation band. i~% {O -#]\  PCP#э xSee Rockwell Waiver Request at 1. In this  S6- x[connection, we note that 8.33 kHz channel spacing is being implemented in Europe. 4 6% {O-  >#]\  PCP#эxIn the United States, aviation channels are spaced 25 kHz apart. See 47 C.F.R.  87.173(b), 87.137(a).  x,However, many European countries are implementing a channel plan employing 8.33 kHz channel spacing in order  {Ox- xto derive more channels for air traffic control use. See Plan for the 8.33 kHz Channel Spacing Implementation in  {OB- xEurope, Edition 2.0, European Civil Aviation Conference, Dec. 2, 1996, at 2. Rockwell has received a waiver of  xthe rules to permit typeacceptance of certain models of its aviation transceivers which employ 8.33 kHz channel  {O- xxspacing for use in Europe. See Rockwell Collins, Inc. Request for Waiver of Section 87.173 of the Commission's  {O- xKRules Governing Assignable Carrier Frequencies in the Aviation Services, DA 982753, Order, 13 FCC Rcd 2954  xK(1998). Rockwell received typeacceptance for its models: VHF-700B (typeacceptance no. AJKPN822-1044);  x: 618M-5 (typeacceptance no. AJK8221046); VHF 900B (typeacceptance no. AJKPN822-1047) and VHF-21C, -22C,  x-422C (typeacceptance no. AJL8221116). The instant waiver request seeks to "reincorporate" the extended  xfrequency range in Model 618M5 and in Model VHF21D, 22D and 422D. The VHF 21D 22D 422D models  xwould differ from the VHF-21C, -22C, -422C models only with respect to the extended frequency range sought for  {OP-the "D" versions. See Rockwell Waiver Request at 1, n. 2.  Thus, aircraft that  xmust communicate with military air traffic control facilities and also fly in European airspace require an  S-extended frequency range transceiver capable of operating with 8.33 kHz channel spacing.y % {O|-#]\  PCP#эxSee Rockwell Comments at 3.y x  Sj - ` %x4.` ` Licensees in the 137 138 MHz, 148 149.9 MHz and 149.9 150.05 MHz band  xLsegments used by the NonVoice NonGeostationary (NVNG) Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) and users  xof the 144 148 MHz amateur band oppose certifications of the Rockwell transceivers because the  xtransceivers have transmit capability in the NVNG MSS and amateur band segments. The objecting  xparties assert that the Rockwell extended frequency range transceivers will be improperly operated in band  xsegments where there are no government allocations, causing interference to NVNG MSS and amateur  S8- xLoperations."8% {Ov$-  N#]\  PCP#эxSee Opposition of Orbcomm (Orbcomm); Letter dated October 15, 1998 from Leslie Taylor, Esq. to  xSecretary, FCC on behalf of ESAT, Inc. (ESAT); Comments of Final Analysis Communication Services, Inc. (Final  yO&- xYAnalysis); Comments of the American Radio Relay League, Inc. (ARRL); Reply Comments of Final Analysis; Reply Comments of LeoOne Corp. (LeoOne).  Further, the NVNG MSS interests contend that operation of the extended frequency range"8,l(l(,,"  xtransceivers in band segments shared by government and nongovernment users will reduce the amount  S-of spectrum presently available for NVNG MSS operations.% {O5-#]\  PCP#эxSee Orbcomm Comments at 4; ESat Comments at 2; Leo One Reply Comments at 3.  Sg- xIII.` ` DISCUSSION  S4-  S- ` Bx5.ؠ` ` The Commission's Rules provide that waivers may be granted for good cause shown.uZ% {O-#]\  PCP#эxSee 47 C.F.R.  1.3.u  xThe Commission may exercise its discretion to waive a rule when the attendant facts and circumstances  S- xindicate that required compliance with the rule would be inconsistent with the public interest.(&% {O' -  L#]\  PCP#эx See WAIT Radio v. FCC, 417 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969) (WAIT Radio), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1027  {O - x(1972), citing  Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968) per curiam. See  {O - xalso Thomas Radio v. FCC, 176 F.2d 921 (1983); Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990).( A waiver  Sh- xLproponent must "plead with particularity the facts and circumstances which warrant such action."{h% {O-#]\  PCP#эxWAIT Radio, 417 F.2d at 1157.{ We  xhave evaluated Rockwell's waiver request against this standard and find that grant of the requested waiver  xis warranted. As discussed below, we find that grant of the waiver would not necessarily result in  x|interference to the NVNG MSS and amateur radio service. We also do not believe that grant of Rockwell's waiver request would constrain the capacity of NVNG MSS systems.  S6 - ` x6.ؠ` ` Transmission on VHF Military Frequencies. Section 87.187(a) of the Commission's  S - xMRulesq l % yO-#]\  PCP#эx47 C.F.R.  87.187(a).q permits aircraft stations to use frequencies assigned to government aeronautical stations. We  x=believe that Rockwell has established that the public interest would be served if the Commission waived  S - xSection 87.173 of the Rulesn % yO:-#]\  PCP#эx47 C.F.R.  87.173.n to permit certifications of Rockwell aircraft transceivers capable of operating  x[on government frequencies in addition to the standard VHF civil aviation frequencies specified in Section  xl87.173. We believe that the requested waiver could enhance air safety by allowing civil aircraft to  xycommunicate with military air traffic control personnel when using military airfields. For example, in the  x.case of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet, the requested waiver could contribute to national security when civil aircraft are employed to meet military airlift requirements.  S9- ` Bx7.ؠ` ` Interference to Services in the 137 138 MHz, 144 148 Mhz and 149.9 150.05 MHz  S- xBands. We acknowledge, as Orbcom, Final Analysis, ESat and the ARRL contend, that, if aircraft crews  x[used extended frequency range transceivers in an unauthorized manner there would be some potential for  xinterference on the frequencies that are used by NVNG MSS licensees and amateur radio operators.  xLHowever, we are persuaded by Rockwell's contention that the potential for interference is minimal given  xthat the extended range transceivers are intended for installation in commercial civil aircraft operated by  S - xflight crews well versed in communications techniques.y  % {O5&-#]\  PCP#эxSee Rockwell Comments at 5.y Moreover, Rockwell's contention is bolstered  xjby its reference to an existing large installed base of extended frequency range transceivers with no record",l(l(,,"  S- xof interference arising from improper use of such transceivers.% yOh-  z#]\  PCP#эxRockwell claims that it has supplied extended frequency range transceivers for more than 30,000 aircraft,  {O0-worldwide. See Rockwell Comments at 4. In this connection, we note that those  xopposing grant of the requested waiver have not cited any instances of interference from these existing  xMtransceivers. As a result, the record is devoid of specific evidence that would lead us to conclude that  xkharmful interference in the above band segments would result as a consequence of grant of Rockwell's waiver request.  S- ` x8.ؠ THIRTEEN ` ` Interference to Satellite Services in the 148149.9 MHz SharedUse Band. The 148  x149.9 MHz band is shared between the NVNG MSS and government users, including military aeronautical  Si- x]stations.Zi"% {O+ -  @#]\  PCP#эxSee Rockwell Comments at 5. On September 15, 1998, Rockwell furnished the Commission with  xgovernment tables and charts showing existing air traffic control facilities' use of frequencies in the 148 149.9 Mhz  yO -band in the United States and abroad.Đ Orbcomm, Leo One and ESat assert that type acceptance of Rockwell extended range  xtransceivers will result in increased aeronautical traffic in this shared band, thereby reducing the channel  S-capacity of NVNG MSS systems.D% {O-#]\  PCP#эxSee Orbcomm Comments at 4; ESat Comments at 2; Leo One Reply Comments at 3.  S - ` 2x 9.` ` We note that when the NVNG MSS licensees requested their current spectrum allocation,  xthey represented that they "have designed their systems to coexist with government operations" in the  S7 - xbands that are shared with government users."7 % yO-  #]\  PCP#эxThe existence of military air traffic control facilities was taken into account by the NVNG MSS users who  xYAmendment of Section 2.106 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate Spectrum to the FixedSatellite Service and the  {O=- xhMobile Satellite Service for Low Earth Orbit Satellites, ET Docket No. 91280, Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 1812,  yO-1813 (1993). Hence, we must conclude that the existence of government  xcommunications in this band, including aeronautical communications, was contemplated and accounted  xfor by the NVNG MSS licensees when they sought their allocations and designed their systems. We note,  xfurther, that the Rockwell extended range transceivers will, in large measure, be installed as retrofit  xreplacements for existing extended range transceivers that lack the capability of using 8.33 kHz channel  S8- xspacing.{8 % {O-#]\  PCP#эxSee Rockwell Comments at 56.{ Thus, we believe that granting Rockwell's waiver request would not result in a significant  xincrease in the net number of extended range transceivers in use. Moreover, given Rockwell's  x/characterization of the limited traffic on military frequencies that would be handled over its extended  xfrequency range transceivers air traffic control communication with flights carrying government VIP  xpassengers and with Civil Reserve Air Fleet flights in times of emergency it appears that the incremental increase in spectrum occupancy due to traffic generated by such flights would be inconsequential.  S-x IV.` ` CONCLUSION  Sm- ` x  10.` ` We find that Rockwell has sufficiently demonstrated that grant of the wavier associated  xwith its request for certifications of extended frequency range transceivers is warranted. The record herein  xindicates that certain civil aircraft require the extended frequency range in order to conduct air traffic  xcontrol communications, some of which have been characterized by the United States Air Force as critical"R ,l(l(,,"  S- xLto national security and air safety.t% {Oh-#]\  PCP#эxSee Hogle Letter at 1.t Although the Commission normally does not certify radios that are  x.capable of transmissions outside their related service, we believe that, in this limited instance, the public  xinterest is best served by not applying such restriction, particularly given that the potential for misuse of  xLthe extended frequency range transceivers is slight. Further, we have considered the claims by interested  xjparties that certifications of the Rockwell extended frequency range receivers would result in the creation  x.of interference, but are not persuaded that significant amounts of interference, if any, will occur in either  xthe amateur service or the NVNG MSS. Our conclusion in that regard is bolstered by the fact that a large  xnumber of extended frequency range transceivers are in use and the objecting parties have not cited any  xinstances of interference from such transceivers. Finally, we do not believe that certifications of the  xRockwell extended frequency range transceivers will result in a significant increase in air traffic control communications in the 148 149.9 MHz band shared by government and NVNG MSS users.  S -x V. ` ` ORDERING CLAUSES  S6 - ` x 11. ` ` Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to the authority of Sections 4(i) and 303(i) of  x0the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 303(i), and Section 1.3 of the  xjCommission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, that the Request for Waiver of Sections 2.106 and 87.173(b) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  2.106 and 87.173(b), filed by Rockwell Collins, Inc., IS GRANTED.  S7- ` x 12. MODELS  ` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Sections 2.106 and 87.173(b) of the Rules, 47 C.F.R.  x 2.106 and 87. 173(b), ARE WAIVED to the extent necessary to permit amendment of certifications  xlfor Rockwell Collins' extended frequency range aeronautical transceivers with the following model numbers and FCC identification numbers:  S8-Rockwell Collins' Model Numberhh@FCC Identification Numberpp  S-x  S-618M5` `  hh@hAJK8221046  S-VHF21, 22, 422 D hh@hAJL8221116   S9- ` xk 13. ` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, except for having the capability to transmit on 8.33kHz  xspaced channels outside of U.S. airspace and extended frequency range capability over the range 118  S- x152 MHz, the transceivers listed supra shall conform in all other respects to applicable provisions of Part  x2, Subpart J of the Commission's Rules governing the certification process and to applicable provisions of Part 87 of the Commission's Rules governing Aviation Radio Services.  S- ` x 14. ` ` This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Section 0.331 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.331. x` `  hh@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x x x x` `  hh@D'wana R. Terry x` `  hh@Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division x` `  hh@Wireless Telecommunications Bureau  S$-k Z&{