**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | * | ET Docket No. 98-156         |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Amendment of Part 15 of the      | ) | RM-9189                      |
| Commission's Rules to allow      | * |                              |
| certification of equipment in    | * |                              |
| the 24.05 -- 24.25 GHz band at   |   |                              |
| field strengths up to 2500 mV/m  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+

**REPORT AND ORDER**

**Adopted:** December 11, 2001 **Released:** December 14, 2001

By the Commission:

**INTRODUCTION**

1\. By this action, we are amending Part 15 of our rules to allow the
operation of fixed point-to-point transmitters in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz
band at field strengths of up to 2500 mV/m.[^1] Devices operating at
these higher levels will be required to use highly directional antennas
to minimize the possibility of creating harmful interference to other
services in the band. This action will facilitate the introduction of a
variety of new, innovative products and services in the band, such as
managing the network traffic on a high-speed wireless Internet service
or connecting a multiple building intra-office network.

**BACKGROUND**

2\. The Commission permits operation of non-licensed radio frequency
(RF) devices under Part 15 of the rules. Part 15 equipment operates on a
non-interference basis to licensed radio services. That is, the devices
must not cause interference to licensed radio services and they must
accept any interference received from licensed services.[^2] If a Part
15 device causes harmful interference to a licensed service, operation
of the device must cease until the interference is corrected.[^3] To
decrease the likelihood of interference, Part 15 transmitters are
generally restricted to very low signal levels. Part 15 transmitters
operating in the 24.0 - 24.25 GHz band are currently limited to a field
strength of 250 mV/m.[^4]

3\. This proceeding was initiated in response to a Petition for
Rulemaking filed by Sierra Digital Communications, Inc. (\"Sierra\").
Sierra requested that the Commission amend Section 15.249 of the rules
to permit fixed point-to-point operations in the 24.00 - 24.25 GHz band
at a field strength of 2500 mV/m.[^5] To limit the potential for
interference from such operations, Sierra also proposed that devices
operating at this higher limit be required to use antennas with gains of
at least 33 dBi. It further asked the Commission to permit higher
antenna gains if transmitter output power were reduced to maintain a
maximum field strength of 2500 mV/m. According to Sierra, a directional
antenna with a minimum gain of 33 dBi will produce a smaller area of
potential interference than an omnidirectional antenna operating at 250
mV/m.[^6]

4\. The entire 24.00 -- 24.25 GHz band is allocated for use by
industrial, scientific, and medical (\"ISM\") equipment. Additionally,
the 24.00 -- 24.05 portion of the band is allocated on a primary basis
to Amateur and Amateur-Satellite operations. The 24.05 -- 24-25 GHz
portion is allocated on a secondary basis for Radiolocation in the
Private Land Mobile Radio Services, Amateur, and Earth
exploration-satellite activity. The 24.00 -- 24.25 GHz band is adjacent
to frequencies authorized for satellite earth exploration and radio
astronomy at 23.60 - 24.00 GHz and the Digital Electronic Message
Service (\"DEMS\") at 24.25 - 24.45 GHz.

5\. In the *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* in this proceeding, the
Commission proposed to modify Section 15.249 to allow operation of fixed
point-to-point devices in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band segment of the 24
GHz spectrum in accordance with the field strength limit and antenna
gain requirements requested by Sierra.[^7] The Commission observed that
Part 15 field disturbance sensors are already permitted to operate at
field strengths up to 2500 mV/m in the 24.075 - 24.175 GHz band
segment.[^8] It tentatively concluded that permitting unlicensed devices
to operate at this same power level in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band
segment would not pose an increased interference risk to incumbents.[^9]
The Commission declined to propose the higher power operation in the
24.00 - 24.05 GHz portion of the band in order to protect Amateur
Satellite operations which have a primary allocation in that portion of
the band.[^10]

6\. Three comments and two reply comments were filed in response to the
*Notice*.[^11] Sierra generally supports the proposals contained in the
*Notice*. It further requests that the proposal be extended into a
portion of the 24.00 - 24.05 GHz band segment. The American Radio Relay
League, Incorporated ("ARRL") argues that allowing higher powered
unlicensed devices in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band would have an adverse
effect on licensed amateur operations. Teligent, Inc. ("Teligent")
expresses concerns that unlicensed devices transmitting in the upper
portion of the band might cause interference to DEMS in the adjacent
24.25 -- 24.45 GHz band.

**DISCUSSION**

7\. We are amending Section 15.249 to permit the operation of unlicensed
point-to-point transmitters in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band with field
strengths up to 2500 mV/m, provided that such devices use directional
antennas with gains of at least 33 dBi or a main lobe beamwidth not
exceeding 3.5 degrees.[^12] Using a directional antenna with either the
specified minimum gain or maximum main lobe beamwidth will produce a
narrow radiation pattern thereby minimizing the area over which
interference to other devices may occur.[^13] We find that it is in the
public interest to allow such operations on an unlicensed basis to
supplement the growing demand for licensed point-to-point facilities to
satisfy important communications needs. As Sierra observes, increasing
the field strength limit will promote greater use of Part 15 unlicensed
devices for purposes such as emergency restoration of communications in
disaster situations, low-cost telecommunications delivery in rural
areas, and other beneficial applications.

8\. ARRL argues that the amateur service in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band
uses sensitive receivers that will be threatened by Part 15 devices
operating pursuant to the proposed rules. We do not agree that there
will be an increased risk of interference to amateur operations in the
24.05 - 24.25 GHz band segment. The use of a directional antenna will
change the shape of the radiated radio frequency field but not the
amount of geographic area contained in that field. While signals will
travel further in the intended direction of communication, they will be
limited in all other directions. As Sierra demonstrated in response to
ARRL\'s concerns, the total area encompassed by the radiated field of
the directional antenna will be equal to or less than the area
encompassed by the radiated field of a lower-powered omni-directional
antenna.[^14] We also note that Section 15.245 of the rules allows field
disturbance sensors to operate in the same band at 2500 mV/m. These
devices have been authorized to operate for years with no adverse
affects to other users in the band, including amateur operations. We
thus find that, devices operating with field strengths up to 2500 mV/m
with a directional antenna as prescribed herein will have the same or
less interference potential as other devices currently authorized under
Part 15. Our decision here is also consistent with our earlier ruling in
the *Report and Order* in ET Docket No. 96-8 wherein the Commission
stated that the directional antenna requirement adopted for spread
spectrum transmitters would ensure that the area over which harmful
interference can occur is equivalent to what would be caused by a
transmitter using an omni-directional antenna operating at a lower
output power.[^15]

9\. ARRL also argues that there is no justification for straying from an
earlier Commission decision that denied a request to allow low power,
fixed systems in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band. In Docket No. 79-337[^16],
M/A-COM, Inc. had requested that the Commission permit unlicensed
transmitter operation in the 24 GHz band at power levels up to 100 mW.
The Commission denied that request on the basis that the frequencies
were being used by radar devices and NTIA had recommended that higher
power unlicensed operations not be permitted.[^17] In comparison,
equipment operating pursuant to our decision here will typically have
transmitter power output of less than 1 mW and will be used with
antennas with very narrow beamwidths to maintain the same field strength
contour areas that are currently permitted. Thus, the interference
concerns addressed in Docket No. 79-337 were significantly greater than
those at issue in this proceeding.

10\. In the *Notice*, the Commission did not propose to allow
point-to-point facilities operating with the higher antenna gains
addressed herein to transmit in the 24.00 - 24.05 GHz band due to
potential interference to amateur-satellite operations. Sierra disagrees
and asserts that amateur satellites would be threatened only if a number
of unlikely conditions were satisfied simultaneously.[^18] Accordingly,
it suggests that the Commission allow point-to-point operation
throughout the 24.00 - 24.25 band, with the exclusion of only 24.048 -
24.049 GHz which it argues is the only portion of the band used by
ARRL\'s satellite. We re-affirm our initial decision to exclude the
entire 24.00 - 24.05 sub-band from the field strength provisions adopted
herein. As noted previously, this portion of the spectrum is allocated
on a primary basis to the amateur-satellite service. Sierra based its
assessment that interference would not occur on the operating parameters
of ARRL\'s Phase 3D satellite.[^19] In reply, ARRL contends that amateur
satellites with operating parameters that differ from the Phase 3D are
under development and also will be entitled to protection on a primary
basis. Given the primary status of the amateur-satellite service, and
the uncertain operating characteristics of future satellites in the
band, we conclude that point-to-point operation should not be allowed in
the 24.00 - 24.05 sub-band.

11\. ARRL proposes that the Commission require manufacturers to maintain
detailed records of unlicensed transmitter installations operating at
the expanded operating parameters allowed herein and to supply this
information periodically to ARRL for coordination purposes.[^20] We do
not believe that it is necessary to impose new record keeping or
notification requirements on manufacturers of devices operating in
accordance with the Part 15 rules. Part 15 devices, including those that
will be authorized under the rules adopted here, operate at power levels
that are sufficiently low as to not be an interference threat to much
higher-powered licensed devices. Therefore, coordination procedures that
are common and needed among licensed services are not generally needed
for Part 15 operation. That is the case here in our determination to
allow these devices to operate under the Part 15 rules. The ARRL has
failed to demonstrate a sufficient potential for interference or to
provide any other basis for such a requirement. Furthermore, all Part 15
devices operate under the condition that transmission must cease if the
Part 15 device causes harmful interference.[^21] This operating
condition is an adequate measure to ensure that authorized services will
not receive interference from unlicensed devices. We thus find that
implementing ARRL's suggestion is not necessary for preventing
interference to authorized services.

12\. Finally, ARRL asserts that the Commission must at some point
acknowledge that Part 15 devices, "\[A\]re allowed under the
Communications Act only where they have no interference potential to
licensed services."[^22] We do not agree with this viewpoint. The
Communications Act of 1934 as amended provides that, "\[T\]he Commission
may, consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity,
make reasonable regulations (1) governing the interference potential of
devices which in their operation are capable of emitting radio frequency
energy by radiation, conduction, or other means in sufficient degree to
cause harmful interference to radio communications . . . ."[^23] ARRL\'s
interpretation of this authority is overly conservative. The operating
requirements of Part 15 appropriately provide a means for allowing
unlicensed devices to share spectrum with licensed services with little
risk of interference to licensed services. If interference does occur,
these rules provide adequate protection to licensed services by
requiring the unlicensed device to cease operation until the problem is
corrected. [^24] The rules permit the creation and advancement of new
and innovative unlicensed low power products and services.

13\. Teligent requests that the proposed operation not be allowed at
24.24 -- 24.25 GHz, thus providing a 10 megahertz guard band to protect
DEMS systems in the adjacent 24.25 -- 24.45 GHz band from possible
adjacent-channel interference caused by Part 15 transmitters. Teligent
states that a guard band would be a precautionary measure to ensure that
DEMS systems are fully protected. We conclude that a guard band is not
necessary to protect DEMS equipment operating outside of the 24.05 -
24.25 GHz band. Instead, we are imposing strict frequency stability
requirements as described below that will limit out-of-band emissions to
minimal levels.

14\. In an effort to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that
devices operating in accordance with these regulations will not create
unwanted adjacent band interference, we are imposing more stringent
operating conditions than proposed in the *Notice*. Although the
*Notice* proposed a frequency stability requirement of only 0.003%, we
will require these devices to maintain their transmitting frequency
within 0.001% of nominal.[^25] Requiring 0.001% frequency stability in
lieu of 0.003% will ensure that emissions remain within the authorized
transmission bandwidth and minimize drift into the adjacent bands which
are allocated on a primary basis to the amateur satellite service (24.00
24.05 GHz) and the DEMS (24.25 - 24.45 GHz) both of which are
susceptible to interference from relatively low-level signals.
Additionally, we are requiring, under Section 15.249, that the field
strength of emissions outside of the 24.05 -- 24.25 GHz band, except for
harmonics, be attenuated by at least 50 dB below the fundamental or to
the general emissions limits contained in Section 15.209 of the
Commission's rules, whichever is the lesser attenuation. [^26]

15\. Finally, we will address harmonic emissions. Section 15.209 set the
limit for out-of-band emissions of Part 15 devices, which is 500 uV/m at
3 meters. Harmonic emissions[^27] from transmitters operating under
Section 15.249 are permitted at different levels, generally higher, than
other out-of-band emissions, and those limits are specified in that
section. Section 15.205(b), however, provides that the Section 15.209
limits shall not be exceeded in the restricted bands. All of the
harmonics of the 24 GHz transmitters at issue here fall into the
restricted band above 38.6 GHz,[^28] and thus must observe the 15.209
limits, rather than the less restrictive 15.249 limits. The Commission
is considering in a separate proceeding, the possibility of removing the
Section 15.209 limits for some bands above 38.6 GHz,[^29] among other
issues.

16\. In conclusion, we find that the public interest is served by
permitting unlicensed point-to-point devices to operate at 2500 mV/m,
under the conditions discussed above, in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band. The
band has accommodated unlicensed transmissions, government radar, and
amateur facilities with no major conflicts. By allowing a greater
variety of systems to occupy the band, we will provide the opportunity
for innovative products and services to be made available to the
American public as quickly as demand dictates.

**PROCEDURAL MATTERS**

17\. *Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis*. The Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, required by Section 603 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, as amended by the Contract with America Advancement Act
of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996), is contained in
Appendix A.

**ORDERING CLAUSES**

18\. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Part 15 of the Commission\'s Rules
and Regulations ARE AMENDED as specified in Appendix B. This action is
taken pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 4(i), 301, 302,
303(e), 303(f), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), and
303(r).

19\. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Consumer Information
Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a copy of this Report
and Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification, to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

20\. For further information concerning this proceeding, contact Neal
McNeil, Office of Engineering and Technology at (202) 418-2408, TTY
(202) 418-2989, email <nmcneil@fcc.gov>.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Magalie Roman Salas

Secretary

**APPENDIX A**

**Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis**

As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(\"RFA\"),[^30] an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was
incorporated in the *Notice of Proposed Rule Making* (*Notice*).[^31]
The Commission sought written public on the proposal in the *Notice*,
including comment on the IRFA. The Commission\'s Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (\"FRFA\") in the Report and Order conforms to the
RFA.[^32]

A. Need for and Objective of the Rules.

The rule changes adopted in this *Report and Order* will help satisfy
the growing demand for readily available unlicensed systems in the 24
GHz band.[^33] The rules will allow fixed point-to-point transmitters to
operate in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band at field strengths of up to 2500
mV/m. This action will facilitate the introduction of a variety of new
services to the band. The requirement to use directional antennas will
minimize the possibility of creating harmful interference to existing
services while, at the same time, providing for communication links of
greater distances.

B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response
to the IRFA.

No comments were filed in direct response to the IRFA. Moreover, no
comments in response the NPRM discussed small business-related issues.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rules Will Apply.

The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the rules adopted herein.[^34] The RFA generally defines the
term "small entity" as having the same meaning as the terms "small
business," "small organization," and "small governmental
jurisdiction."[^35] In addition, the term "small business" has the same
meaning as the term "small business concern" under the Small Business
Act.[^36] A "small business concern" is one which: (1) is independently
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA).[^37]

The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities
applicable to unlicensed communications devices. Therefore, we will
utilize the SBA definition applicable to manufacturers of Radio and
Television Broadcasting and Communications Equipment. According to the
SBA regulations, unlicensed transmitter manufacturers must have 750 or
fewer employees on order to qualify as a small business concern.[^38]
Census Bureau data indicates that there are 858 U.S. companies that
manufacture radio and television broadcasting and communications
equipment, and that 778 of these firms have fewer than 750 employees and
would be classified as small entities.[^39]

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other
Compliance Requirements.

Part 15 transmitters are already required to be authorized under the
Commission\'s certification procedure as a prerequisite to marketing and
importation. The changes adopted in this proceeding do not change any of
the current reporting or recordkeeping requirements. Further, the
regulations add permissible methods of operation and do not require the
modification of any existing products.

E. Steps Taken to Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered.

The rule changes adopted in this *Report and Order* will permit
manufacturers, including small entities, to market more diverse products
in the 24 GHz band. The American Radio Relay League filed comments
suggesting that the Commission also require manufacturers to maintain
detailed records of their customers\' installations of these devices.
This information would be given to ARRL periodically to aid in
coordination. The Commission believes that compliance with this
additional regulation would create an undue economic burden for device
manufacturers, especially smaller entities. The Commission noted that
instituting such a rule could lead to more expensive Part 15 equipment
and slower speed to market. Therefore, the Commission declined to adopt
such a requirement.

**F. Report to Congress.**

The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including this
FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act.[^40] In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the
Report and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
of the SBA. A copy of the Report and Order and FRFA (or summaries
thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.[^41]

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Consumer Information Bureau,
Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a copy of this Report and
Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

**APPENDIX B**

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, and 303.

Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 15, is amended as
follows:

Section 15.249 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), re-designating
paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) as (c), (d), (e), and (f);
respectively, adding a new paragraph (b), and revising paragraph (e) to
read as follows:

Section 15.249 [Operation within the bands 902-928 MHz, 2400 - 2483.5
MHz, 5725 - 5875 MHz, and 24.0 - 24.25 GHz.]{.underline}

\(a\) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the field
strength of emissions from intentional radiators operated within these
frequency bands shall comply with the following:

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) Fixed, point-to-point operation as referred to in this paragraph
shall be limited to systems employing a fixed transmitter transmitting
to a fixed remote location. Point-to-multipoint systems, omnidirectional
applications, and multiple co-located intentional radiators transmitting
the same information are not allowed. Fixed, point-to-point operation is
permitted in the 24.05 - 24.25 GHz band subject to the following
conditions:

\(1\) The field strength of emissions in this band shall not exceed 2500
millivolts/meter.

\(2\) The frequency tolerance of the carrier signal shall be maintained
within ±0.001% of the operating frequency over a temperature variation
of -20 degrees to +50 degrees C at normal supply voltage, and for a
variation in the primary supply voltage from 85% to 115% of the rated
supply voltage at a temperature of 20 degrees C. For battery operated
equipment, the equipment tests shall be performed using a new battery.

\(3\) Antenna gain must be at least 33 dBi. Alternatively, the main lobe
beamwidth must not exceed 3.5 degrees. The beamwidth limit shall apply
to both the azimuth and elevation planes. At antenna gains over 33 dBi
or beamwidths narrower than 3.5 degrees, power must be reduced to ensure
that the field strength does not exceed 2500 millivolts/meter.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) As shown in § 15.35(b), for frequencies above 1000 MHz, the field
strength limits in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section are based on
average limits. However, the peak field strength of any emission shall
not exceed the maximum permitted average limits specified above by more
than 20 dB under any condition of modulation. For point-to-point
operation under paragraph (b) of this section, the peak field strength
shall not exceed 2500 millivolts/meter at 3 meters along the antenna
azimuth.

[^1]: Unless otherwise noted, all field strengths are based on average
    field strength values measured at 3 meters.

[^2]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.5.

[^3]: *Id*.

[^4]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.249.

[^5]: Under Sierra\'s proposal, the peak emission limits for the 24.0 -
    24.25 GHz band would remain unchanged at 2500 mV/m. *See* Petition
    at 2.

[^6]: *See* Petition for Rulemaking at footnote 10.

[^7]: *See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, ET Docket 98-156, 13 FCC Rcd.
    16385 (1998).

[^8]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.245.

[^9]: *See Notice* at paragraph 8.

[^10]: *See Notice* at paragraph 11.

[^11]: Sierra; The American Radio Relay League, Incorporated; and
    Teligent, Inc. filed comments. Sierra and ARRL also filed replies.

[^12]: The Commission licenses transmitters in the 24.05- 24.25 GHz band
    under Part 90 of our rules, 47 C.F.R. § 90.103.

[^13]: With conventional antennas, main lobe beamwidth and gain are
    interrelated. One value may be easily calculated given the other.
    Antennas with very narrow beamwidths generally have very high gains.
    A typical dish type antenna designed to produce a main lobe
    beamwidth of 3.5 degrees will have a gain of about 33 dBi.
    Alternative antenna designs, such as planer arrays, however, may
    produce narrow beamwidths without the associated high gain. By
    allowing the antennas to comply with either the specified minimum
    gain or maximum main lobe beamwidth we give Part 15 device
    manufacturers more options in the types of antennas they may employ,
    without the risk of increasing interference potential.

[^14]: *See* Technical Appendix in Reply of Sierra Digital
    Communications, Inc. to Comments of the American Radio Relay League,
    Incorporated, December 22, 1997.

[^15]: *See Report and Order*, Amendment of Parts 2 and 15 of the
    Commission's Rules Regarding Spreading Spectrum Transmitters, ET
    Docket 96-8, 12 FCC Rcd. 7488 (1997) at paragraph 17.

[^16]: *See Second Report and Order* in Gen. Docket No. 79-337, 55 RR 2d
    1676 (1983).

[^17]: *Id*. at paragraph 8.

[^18]: Sierra contends that ARRL\'s satellite receivers will experience
    interference only if the satellite is at the horizon, the amateur
    receiver lies within the Part 15 transmitter\'s beam, the amateur
    receiver is pointed directly towards the Part 15 transmitter, and
    the amateur receiver is in near proximity to the Part 15 transmitter
    with a visible line-of-sight. Sierra comments at 6.

[^19]: The Phase 3D satellite, now officially known as AMSAT-OSCAR 40
    (AO-40), was launched into orbit in November 2000. ARRL successfully
    tested the satellite\'s 24 GHz transmitter in September 2001.

[^20]: ARRL comments at paragraph 13.

[^21]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.5(c).

[^22]: ARRL reply comments at paragraph 6.

[^23]: 47 U.S.C. 302(a)

[^24]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.5.

[^25]: Sierra supports this frequency stability requirement. *See*
    Sierra reply comments at 2.

[^26]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.249.

[^27]: Harmonic emissions occur in bands beyond the immediately adjacent
    bands because harmonic frequencies are integral multiples of the
    fundamental frequency.

[^28]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §15.205.

[^29]: *See* *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, Review of Part 15 and
    other Parts of the Commission\'s Rules, ET Docket 01-278, released
    October 15, 2001, 66 Fed Reg. 59209, November 27, 2001.

[^30]: 5 U.S.C. § 603.

[^31]: *See* ET Docket 98-156, 63 Fed. Reg. 50185 (1998), Appendix A.

[^32]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 604.

[^33]: Unlicensed transmitters are permitted to operate in the 24 GHz
    band pursuant to certain conditions. *See Report and Order* at
    paragraph 2. *See also* 47 C.F.R. § 15.249.

[^34]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3).

[^35]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).

[^36]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of
    "small business concern" in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. §
    632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 601(3), the statutory definition of a
    small business applies "unless an agency, after consultation with
    the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and
    after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more
    definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of
    the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal
    Register."

[^37]: 15 U.S.C. § 632.

[^38]: *See* 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS Code 334220 (SIC Code 3663).
    Although SBA now uses the NAICS classifications, instead of SIC, the
    size standard remains the same.

[^39]: *See* U.S. Dept. of Commerce, *1992 Census of Transportation,
    Communications and Utilities* (issued May 1995), SIC category 3663
    (NAICS Code 334220).

[^40]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A).

[^41]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 604(b).