**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | *  | ET Docket No. 07-113         |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Revision of the Commission's     | ** | RM-11104                     |
| Rules Regarding Operation in the |    |                              |
| 57-64 GHz Band                   | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+

**NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING**

**Adopted: May 25, 2007 Released: June 1, 2007**

By the Commission:

**Comment date:** **\[insert date 90 days from publication in Federal
Register\]**

**Reply comment date:** **\[insert date 120 days from publication in
Federal Register\]**

# Introduction

1.  By this *Notice of Proposed Rule Making* (\"*Notice*\"), we propose
    to amend the requirements in Part 15 of the Commission's rules
    applicable to transmitters operating on an unlicensed basis in the
    57‑64 GHz frequency range ("the 60 GHz band"). Specifically, we
    grant the Petition for Rule Making submitted by the Wireless
    Communications Association (WCA) and propose to increase the
    fundamental radiated emission limit for unlicensed 60 GHz
    transmitters with very high gain antennas, specify the emission
    limit as an equivalent isotropically radiated power ("EIRP") level,
    and eliminate the requirement for a transmitter identification for
    60 GHz transmitters. [^1] In particular, we propose to increase the
    current Part 15 average power EIRP level from 40 dBm to a new level
    of 82 dBm minus 2 dB for every dB that antenna gain is below 51 dBi.
    We also propose to increase the current Part 15 peak power EIRP
    level from 43 dBm to a new level of 85 dBm minus 2 dB for every dB
    that the antenna gain is below 51 dBi. These increases would be
    limited to 60 GHz transmitters located outdoors or those located
    indoors with emissions directed outdoors, *e.g.* through a window.
    The proposed changes would allow longer communication ranges for
    unlicensed point-to-point 60 GHz broadband digital systems and
    thereby extend the ability of such systems to supply very high speed
    broadband service to office buildings and other commercial
    facilities. We believe these proposals would encourage broader
    deployment of point-to-point digital systems in this band without
    increasing the potential for harmful interference, and thereby
    further the Commission's objective of promoting the availability of
    broadband connectivity to all Americans.

# BACKGROUND

2.  Part 15 of the Commission\'s regulations permits the operation of
    radio frequency ("RF") devices without a license from the Commission
    or the need for frequency coordination.[^2] The technical standards
    contained in Part 15 are designed to ensure that there is a low
    probability that such devices will cause harmful interference to
    other users of the radio spectrum.[^3] Unlicensed transmitter
    operation within the 60 GHz band is permitted under Section
    15.255.[^4] The 60 GHz band is part of the spectrum often termed
    "millimeter wave" spectrum.[^5] The propagation of millimeter wave
    radio signals is more limited than that of radio signals at lower
    frequencies, as they are significantly affected by the presence of
    oxygen and water vapor within the atmosphere. Absorption and
    scattering caused by oxygen and water vapor around these frequencies
    limit the useful range of millimeter wave transmission to a few
    kilometers. Attenuation caused by oxygen in particular increases
    dramatically at frequencies around 60 GHz and 120 GHz.[^6] These
    attenuating factors make the 60 GHz band particularly suited for
    general unlicensed devices because they limit the potential for
    interference.

3.  Any type of operation within the 60 GHz band is permitted under Part
    15 of the rules, with the exception of operation onboard aircraft or
    a satellite. Except for fixed field disturbance sensors, the rules
    limit the average power density of any emission in this band to 9
    µW/cm^2^ and the peak power density to 18 µW/cm^2^, both as measured
    at a distance of 3 meters from the radiating structure.[^7] These
    average and peak power density limits are equivalent to average and
    peak EIRP limits of 10 W (40 dBm) and 20 W (43 dBm),
    respectively.[^8] The rules also limit the peak transmitter output
    power to 500 mW.[^9] For emissions by 60 GHz devices that emanate
    from inside a building, the rules also require the transmission of
    an identification signal in order to permit other users experiencing
    interference from indoor wireless local area network ("LAN")
    transmitters to more accurately identify the source of the
    interference.[^10]

4.  Since the rules for unlicensed devices in the 60 GHz band were
    adopted 12 years ago, only a relatively few products have been
    introduced for operation in this spectrum.[^11] All of the devices
    that have been developed thus far for 60 GHz operation have been
    high speed (100 Mbps or greater) short range point-to-point systems
    that are intended to provide connectivity to other distribution
    networks rather than individual users.[^12] These systems are
    particularly suitable for relatively short links (on the order of a
    kilometer or less), where installation barriers and high cost make
    other options less attractive. Applications for such systems include
    extending the reach of fiber optic networks to serve adjacent
    structures; broadband backhaul links between cellular networks base
    stations; and interconnection links between buildings in campus
    environments.[^13]

5.  As indicated above, the Wireless Communications Association
    International, Inc. filed a Petition for Rulemaking requesting that
    the Commission amend its rules for 60 GHz devices to implement
    certain changes related to operation with very high gain antennas.
    WCA requests that the average emission limit for point-to-point
    systems employing very high gain antennas be specified in EIRP and
    that the limits be increased to 82 dBm less 2 dB for every dB that
    the systems' antenna gain is below 51 dBi.[^14] It submits that the
    proposed higher EIRP levels for 60 GHz equipment with an antenna
    exceeding a specific amount of gain would foster the development of
    products with longer operating range that could offer high speed
    communications to compete with, complement, or extend the broadband
    services provided on existing media. It states that under the
    existing rules, outdoor link distances are effectively limited to
    700 meters in most cities.[^15] WCA states that operation at the
    higher EIRP level it requests would enable an increase in operating
    range, on the order of 1.5 kilometers, that would permit the
    delivery of multi-gigabit broadband services to an "exponentially
    larger number of office buildings and other commercial
    properties."[^16] It further submits that specification of the power
    limit in EIRP units would remove confusion in measurements involving
    very high gain antennas. WCA states that 60 GHz devices could comply
    with either the EIRP specification or the existing power density
    standards. In addition, WCA requests that the Commission eliminate
    the transmitter identification requirement for "window links,"
    *i.e.*, for transmitters that are located indoors but direct their
    emissions through a window to the outside, which would reduce
    installation costs for 60 GHz products. In response to the WCA
    petition, six parties filed comments.[^17]

# DISCUSSION

6.  As we discuss in detail below, we propose to allow operation at
    higher power levels by 60 GHz unlicensed equipment with an antenna
    exceeding a specific gain. We believe that this has the potential to
    foster the development of a variety of products with longer
    operating ranges than are achieved under the current rules and
    promote the 60 GHz band's potential as a vehicle for broadband
    transmission links in addition to services offered by incumbent
    providers. This would promote the development of very high speed
    wireless products for environments where obstacles such as highways,
    parking lots, etc., prevent extension of fiber or wireline
    connections, or as a means to serve as broadband link or backhaul
    for an entire building or campus, where adding new cables could
    result in major construction costs. We also propose to adopt for 60
    GHz equipment a radiated emission limit specified in EIRP for 60 GHz
    equipment using very high gain antennas that would facilitate
    emission measurements. We further propose to allow emission
    measurements in EIRP as an alternative for all other 60 GHz devices.
    Finally, we propose to eliminate the transmitter identification
    requirement for indoor 60 GHz transmitters whose emissions are
    directed outdoors, and we seek comment on eliminating the
    transmitter identification requirement for all indoor 60 GHz
    transmitters.[^18] We believe that these proposals would promote
    greater utility for the 60 GHz band without increasing the
    interference risk to existing services in the band and would
    encourage a more flexible development of broadband data products. We
    also note that 60 GHz consumer applications are now being developed
    and our proposals herein would help bring valuable new services to
    consumers, and advance economic opportunities for the American
    public, consistent with the Commission's objectives.[^19]

7.  *Emission Limits.* As indicated above, the Part 15 rules currently
    limit 60 GHz band transmitters to an average power density limit of
    9 µW/cm^2^, which is equivalent to 40 dBm EIRP.[^20] Agilent opposes
    WCA's request for a power increase for devices with very high gain
    antennas, arguing that the current power density limits were
    established to prevent interference between unlicensed devices.
    Further, according to Agilent, the 500 mW peak transmitter power
    limit was established to permit omnidirectional base stations to
    operate at the allowed power densities. Agilent states that the
    intent of the Commission in developing the 60 GHz rules was to
    preserve the band for short range, point-to-point links operating at
    low power levels, and that other bands, such as the 71‑76 GHz
    licensed band,[^21] are more appropriate for achieving the longer
    ranges sought by WCA.[^22] Agilent and SiBEAM also argue that the
    increased power and operating range could raise potential
    interference to low power unlicensed operations within the 60 GHz
    band.[^23] SiBEAM, which manufactures 60 GHz consumer equipment,
    claims that its low cost products can only operate at modest
    radiated power levels.[^24] WCA responds that the absorption and
    scattering of signals at 60 GHz due to oxygen and water vapor limit
    their range and, combined with extremely narrow antenna beamwidths,
    make interference from 60 GHz equipment with very high gain antennas
    to other devices unlikely. Further, WCA notes that since 60 GHz
    signals do not effectively penetrate room walls or partitions, any
    incremental interference will typically be limited to the
    transmitter's vicinity, making interference resolution
    manageable.[^25] Finally, WCA indicates that the manufacturing costs
    and link prices for products using the 70/80/90 GHz band are four
    times higher than for the 60 GHz band, which would adversely affect
    small operators and enterprises users.[^26]

8.  As requested by WCA, we are proposing to increase the average
    emission limit for point-to-point systems employing very high gain
    antennas and for the reasons discussed in the following section, to
    specify this higher limit in EIRP units. Specifically, we are
    proposing to increase the average EIRP power limit for systems
    employing very high gain antennas to 82 dBm less 2 dB for every dB
    that the systems' antenna gain is below 51 dBi. We further propose
    that this increase in the emission level be limited to 60 GHz
    transmitters located outdoors or those located indoors with
    emissions directed outdoors, *e.g.* through a window. This proposal
    would allow eligible devices to operate with as much as a 42 dB
    increase in their emission level. As WCA states, with higher power
    60 GHz devices will be able to increase link distances to provide
    very high speed wireless service to a greater number of locations
    than is currently possible.[^27] We believe that allowing higher
    power operations by systems with very high gain antennas would
    foster the development of high speed communication products with
    longer operating range and lower costs, and thereby promote the
    availability of broadband services.

9.  We believe that several factors will offset any increase in the
    interference potential between equipment with very high gain
    antennas and other devices in the 60 GHz band. First, the very high
    gain antennas used would be highly directional, reducing the
    probability that a low power, omnidirectional system would be
    located within its beamwidth. Second, it is likely that low power
    devices primarily will operate indoors because of their shorter
    range, whereas, very high gain, directional systems, which have a
    longer emission range, primarily will be located outdoors or will
    have their signals directed outdoors. Thus, the emissions from
    directional systems, as seen by lower power indoors devices, will be
    attenuated significantly from intervening objects, such as building
    walls. Third, oxygen and water vapor absorption and scattering
    should further reduce ranges at which the radiated emission levels
    from 60 GHz equipment with very high gain antennas could cause
    interference. To reduce the interference risk between very high gain
    and other of 60 GHz devices, we propose to require that equipment
    with very high gain antennas operating under the proposed high power
    limit only operate outdoors or direct their emissions outdoors,
    *e.g.*, through a window. Thus, we believe that the risk of
    interference from higher power, directional 60 GHz transmission
    systems to lower power, omnidirectional systems will be minimal.
    While we anticipate that consumer applications for wireless
    interconnections in the 60 GHz band are forthcoming, the 60 GHz
    devices are now being marketed are intended for enterprise and
    commercial use, therefore, there is no immediate risk of
    interference to 60 GHz unlicensed consumer devices.

10. We believe however that a limit on the peak radiated emission level
    should continue to apply to 60 GHz emissions. Under the current
    standards, the peak power density may not exceed 18 µW/cm^2^ at
    3 meters (43 dBm EIRP).[^28] This is 3 dB higher than the average
    power density limit. We believe that a similar 3 dB relationship
    between the maximum peak and average emission limits should apply to
    all 60 GHz systems, whether they comply with a limit based on power
    density or on EIRP. Accordingly, we are proposing to apply a peak
    limit of 85 dBm minus 2 dB for every dB that the antenna gain is
    less than 51 dBi to 60 GHz systems operating under the higher
    proposed average power limit. We also are proposing to retain the
    existing limits on spurious emissions and peak transmitter output
    power.

11. Comments are requested on the various aspects of this proposal to
    modify the emission limit for 60 GHz equipment with very high gain
    antennas. We request comments accompanied by analysis on any
    interference concerns along with methods that may be suitable for
    mitigating such concerns. We also request comments on the
    feasibility of using extremely high antenna gains, *e.g.*, greater
    than 51 dBi.

12. *Specifications of Emission Limits in EIRP.* The Part 15 rules
    currently specify that the average power density and the peak power
    density limits shall not be exceeded, for devices operating in the
    60 GHz band, as measured at a distance of 3 meters from the
    radiating structure.[^29] WCA notes that the specified 3 meter
    separation distance is within the near field when a very high gain
    antenna is used.[^30] WCA states that there is substantial
    difficulty in obtaining accurate power density measurements in the
    near field and that such measurements do not necessarily reflect the
    true RF exposure near the antenna.[^31] Further, when measured in
    the near field, the maximum power density is lower from a very high
    gain antenna than it is from a lower gain antenna.[^32] WCA adds
    that because the specified 3 meters measurement distance is within
    the near field, power densities produced by very high gain antennas
    should be measured at longer distances and the measured values
    extrapolated to 3 meters. However, WCA contends that such
    measurements may not approximate the actual power density at
    3 meters and do not necessarily reflect the true RF exposure risk
    near the antenna. Instead, WCA states that the extrapolation to 3
    meters would necessitate that transmitters using very high gain
    antennas operate at power densities far below those permitted under
    the Commission's RF exposure limits and would effectively require
    equipment vendors to reduce the transmitted power well below the
    level permitted under the current rules.[^33] According to WCA, this
    requirement to reduce the peak transmitter output level results in
    shorter transmission link distances than would otherwise be
    permitted and constrains the development of 60 GHz unlicensed
    devices. WCA asserts that this problem will be alleviated if we
    specify the emission limit in EIRP. This EIRP level would be an
    alternative to the current power density specification which WCA
    believes was established to facilitate the operation of indoors,
    lower power local area network deployments.

13. Agilent argues that the existing rules contain provisions to permit
    measurements in the far field for systems employing very high gain
    antennas and that there is no need to modify the existing
    rules.[^34] WCA responds that when it adopted the existing rules,
    the Commission did not anticipate the use of very high gain antennas
    for point-to-point links. WCA indicates that the requirement to
    measure in the far field and extrapolate the power density at 3
    meters always results in transmitters employing very high gain
    antennas having to operate below the maximum transmitter peak power
    output limit.

14. We understand WCA's concern that there is substantial difficulty in
    obtaining accurate power density measurements for very high gain
    antennas in the near field. While we recognize Agilent's point that
    the rules already contain provisions to permit measurements to be
    performed in the far field and extrapolated to the distance
    specified in the rules, such measurements must be made in the far
    field, which can be at a distance much farther than 3 meters. We
    also observe that the distance to the point where the far field
    begins is variable depending on the size and configuration of the
    transmitting antenna. On the other hand, EIRP is easily calculated
    as the antenna input power times the antenna gain. This simplifies
    the determination of radiated emissions by eliminating the need to
    consider near and far field measurement issues, particularly where
    relatively large diameter antennas are employed.[^35] Thus, we
    believe that the specification of emission limits for unlicensed 60
    GHz devices in EIRP units will eliminate possible confusion in
    determining whether such devices comply with those limits. We also
    believe that the measurement concerns that WCA raises are generally
    relevant to measurements of emissions from unlicensed 60 GHz
    transmitters that employ lower gain antennas. That is, specification
    of emission levels in EIRP could simplify the determination of
    radiated emission levels for all unlicensed 60 GHz devices.
    Accordingly, we propose to amend Section 15.255(b)(1) of the rules
    to specify that emission limits for all unlicensed 60 GHz devices in
    EIRP.

15. Because the far field of a 60 GHz device with a very high gain
    antenna begins at a distance much farther than the 3 meters
    measurement distance specified in the rules, we believe it is
    appropriate to specify the emission limits for those devices only in
    EIRP. However, in the case of devices with lower gain antennas, the
    far field distance is generally closer to the 3 meters measurement
    distance. We also recognize that some parties may still wish to
    demonstrate compliance of devices with lower gain antennas under the
    existing power density limits and measurement procedures.[^36] We
    therefore propose to maintain the existing power density limits for
    devices other than very high gain systems as an alternative to the
    EIRP limits. We seek comment on this proposal and on the amount of
    antenna gain above which use of the EIRP limits would be mandatory.
    Comments are requested on the various aspects of this proposal to
    express the emission limits as EIRPs as alternatives to the existing
    power density standards. Comments are also requested on whether we
    should continue to specify measurements using the existing power
    density limits as an alternative to measurements using the proposed
    EIRP limits or if we should delete the power density limits in favor
    of EIRP limits.

16. *Antenna Substitution*. Section 15.204(c)(4) of the rules allows
    intentional radiators to be marketed and used with any antenna that
    is of the same type and of equal or less directional gain as the
    antenna authorized with the equipment.[^37] We note that the
    comments contained considerable discussion regarding the
    Commission's emission limits for the 60 GHz band and their
    relationship to the RF exposure guidelines at the time the emission
    limits were adopted.[^38] We are concerned here that the emission
    levels we are proposing in this proceeding continue to remain below
    the current RF exposure guidelines.[^39] Intentional radiators must
    be designed to ensure that the public is not exposed to RF energy in
    excess of the Commission's guidelines. In some cases, this could
    require that transmitters operate at a lower emission level than the
    maximum limit specified in the rules. We note that the near field
    and antenna surface RF exposure levels may increase as the size of
    the antenna decreases.[^40] Thus, the use of a lower gain antenna
    could result in a transmission system that is more likely to exceed
    the RF exposure guidelines. In addition, the proposed rule changes
    would require that the maximum EIRP decrease as the antenna gain is
    reduced below 51 dBi. Because of these considerations, we believe
    that 60 GHz systems operating under the higher power EIRP standards
    should be marketed and used only with the specific model antenna(s)
    with which the transmitter is certified.[^41] For these reasons, we
    propose to specify that the provisions contained in Section
    15.204(c) of the rules permitting antenna substitutions not apply to
    60 GHz transmission systems operating under the proposed higher EIRP
    limits. We request comment on this proposal.

17. *Transmitter Identification.* Section 15.255(i) of the rules
    requires a transmitter identification on 60 GHz unlicensed emissions
    that emanate from inside a building in order to permit users
    experiencing interference from indoors wireless local area network
    ("LAN") transmitters to more accurately identify the source of the
    interference.[^42] This requirement does not apply to transmitters
    located outdoors.[^43] WCA requests that the Commission clarify that
    this transmitter identification requirement does not apply to indoor
    systems when the emissions from the antennas are directed outdoors
    through a window, *i.e.*, that the transmitter identification
    requirement does not apply to transmitters used as window links. WCA
    believes that there is some confusion over whether the current
    identification requirement applies to window links. It argues that
    window links pose no greater risk of interference than outdoor links
    and should be exempt from the identification requirement applied to
    indoors systems. WCA adds that such a change will accelerate the
    deployment of window links, which significantly reduce installation
    costs for shorter-range outdoor links and are essential for
    providing service where a property owner refuses to give permission
    for rooftop or other common area installations.[^44]

18. Both Agilent and SiBEAM argue that the operation of window link
    systems results in the reflection of emissions from the glass and
    that these reflected signals can cause interference problems.[^45]
    For this reason, Agilent and SiBEAM request that the Commission
    continue to require transmitter identification for window link
    units. WCA responds that 60 GHz signals do not effectively penetrate
    room walls or partitions and that any interference would be limited
    to the transmitter's immediate vicinity which, if necessary, can
    easily be mitigated by the user.

19. We propose not to require transmitter identification for any indoors
    transmitters whose emissions are directed outdoors, *e.g.,* through
    a window, and seek comment on this proposal. We believe that any
    interference potential likely will be localized around a window
    link, and that any 60 GHz emissions that are reflected from the
    glass in a window link will be attenuated by the walls and other
    surrounding objects and will not impact operations in adjacent
    areas, primarily affecting equipment located in the same room as the
    window link. In most cases, all equipment within the same room will
    be under the control of the same user. Thus, potential interference
    to other co-located units appears to be a frequency management
    problem that should be addressed by the equipment user. Because of
    this, it appears that the source of any such interference could be
    easily identified without the need for a transmitter identification
    signal. Further, we believe that it is more likely that any 60 GHz
    emissions that are reflected from the glass in a window link will be
    attenuated by the walls and other surrounding objects and will not
    impact operations in adjacent areas. We seek comment on this
    proposal.

20. We also seek comment on whether the transmitter identification
    requirement should be eliminated for all 60 GHz systems. We believe
    that the proximity of indoors co-located equipment should allow the
    user to identify the interfering transmitter to other indoors
    devices without having to use the transmitter identification
    feature. If interference should be experienced from a transmitter
    that is not co-located, we question whether the 60 GHz receiver
    experiencing the interference would be able to detect and demodulate
    an identification signal from a transmitter that may be operating
    using a different modulation format. Because manufacturers may
    voluntarily choose to incorporate the transmitter identification and
    specifications for transmitter identification could reside in
    industry standards, we question the need to maintain a requirement
    that adds costs to equipment design and installation.[^46]

# PROCEDURAL MATTERS

21. *Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for the Notice of Proposed
    Rule Making.* As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory
    Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. § 603, the Commission has prepared an
    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible
    significant economic impact on small entities of the proposals
    suggested in this document. The IRFA is set forth in Appendix A.

22. *Initial Paperwork Reduction Analysis.* The *Notice of Proposed Rule
    Making* does not contain proposed new or modified information
    collection requirements.

23. *Comments.* Pursuant to Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's
    rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file
    comments on or before **\[ insert date 90 days from publication in
    Federal Register\]**, and reply comments on or before **\[insert
    date 120 days from publication in Federal Register\]**. Comments may
    be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System
    (ECFS) or by filing paper copies. *See Electronic Filing of
    Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings*, 63 Fed. Reg. 24121 (1998).

24. Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file
    via the Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Generally,
    only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. If multiple
    docket or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this
    proceeding, however, commenters must transmit one electronic copy of
    the comments to each docket or rulemaking number referenced in the
    caption. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should
    include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and
    the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit
    an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions
    for e-mail comments, commenters should send an e-mail to
    ecfs@fcc.gov, and should include the following words in the body of
    the message, "get form \<your e-mail address\>." A sample form and
    directions will be sent in reply. Parties who choose to file by
    paper must file an original and four copies of each filing. If more
    than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this
    proceeding, commenters must submit two additional copies for each
    additional docket or rulemaking number.

25. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office
    of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. Filings can be
    sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier,
    or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we
    continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service
    mail). The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive
    hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the
    Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110,
    Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8:00
    a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with
    rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before
    entering the building. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S.
    Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300
    East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service
    first-class mail, Express mail, and Priority Mail should be
    addressed to 445 12^th^ Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.

26. *Further Information.* For further information, contact Anh Wride,
    Office of Engineering and Technology, at (202) 418-0577, or via the
    Internet at anh.wride@fcc.gov.

# Ordering Clauses

27. IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i), 7(a), 301, 303(f),
    303(g), 303(r), 307(e) and 332 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 151, 154(i), 157(a), 301, 303(f),
    303(g), 303(r), 307(e), and 332, this *Notice of Proposed Rule
    Making* IS ADOPTED and the Petition for Rule Making by the Wireless
    Communications Association filed on September 30, 2004, is hereby
    GRANTED to the extent described herein.

28. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Consumer and
    Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL
    SEND a copy of this *Notice of Proposed Rule Making,* including the
    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to the Chief Counsel for
    Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Marlene H. Dortch

Secretary

**APPENDIX A**

**Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis**

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended
(RFA),[^47] the Commission has prepared this present Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules
proposed in this *Notice of Proposed Rule Making* (*NPRM*). Written
public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified
as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments
provided in paragraph 23 of this *NPRM*. The Commission will send a copy
of this *NPRM*, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
of the Small Business Administration (SBA).[^48] In addition, the *NPRM*
and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal
Register.[^49]

**A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules**

This rule making proposal is initiated to obtain comments regarding
proposed changes to the regulations for radio frequency devices that do
not require a license to operate. The Commission seeks to determine if
the standards should be amended to permit an increase in the allowable
emitted signal level for systems using very high gain directional
antennas, to permit the emissions from 60 GHz systems to be measured as
an equivalent isotropically radiated power instead of as a power
density, and to eliminate the need for all 60 GHz systems to emit a
transmitter identification signal.

**B. Legal Basis**.

The proposed action is taken pursuant to Sections 4(i), 301, 302,
303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(r),
304 and 307.

**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 proposed rules, if adopted.[^50] The RFA generally
defines the term \"small entity\" as having the same meaning as the
terms \"small business,\" \"small organization,\" and \"small
governmental jurisdiction.\"[^51] In addition, the term \"small
business\" has the same meaning as the term \"small business concern\"
under the Small Business Act.[^52] 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 SBA.[^53]

We do not expect that the rules proposed in this *Notice of Proposed
Rule Making* will have a significant negative economic impact on small
businesses.

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

Part 15 transmitters already are required to be authorized under the
Commission's certification procedure as a prerequisite to marketing and
importation. The reporting and recordkeeping requirements associated
with these equipment authorizations would not be changed by the
proposals contained in this *Notice*. The changes to the regulations
would permit operation at a higher emission level, would permit a new
method of measuring compliance with the emission limits, and would
eliminate the need for transmitters in the 60 GHz band to incorporate a
transmitter identification system.

**E. Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap or Conflict with the
Proposed Rules.**

None.

**APPENDIX B**

**Proposed Rule Changes**

Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended to
read as follows:

1\. The authority citation for Part 15 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, 202, 303, 304, 307 and 544A.

2\. Section 15.204 is proposed to be amended by revising paragraph (c)
to read as follows:

Section 15.204 External radio frequency power amplifiers and antenna
modifications.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(c\) An intentional radiator may be operated only with the antenna with
which it is authorized. If an antenna is marketed with the intentional
radiator, it shall be of a type which is authorized with the intentional
radiator. An intentional radiator may be authorized with multiple
antenna types. Exceptions to the following provisions, if any, are noted
in the rule section under which the transmitter operates, e.g., see
Section 15.255(b)(1)(ii) of this part.

\* \* \* \* \*

3\. Section 15.255 is proposed to be amended by revising paragraphs
(b)(1), (c)(3), (e) and removing paragraph (i) to read as follows:

Section 15.255 Operation within the band 57-64 GHz.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) Within the 57-64 GHz band, emission levels shall not exceed the
following:

\(1\) Products other than fixed field disturbance sensors shall comply
with one of the following emission limits, as measured during the
transmit interval:

\(i\) The average power density of any emission shall not exceed 9
µW/cm^2^ and the peak power density of any emission shall not exceed 18
µW/cm^2^, both as measured at 3 meters from the radiating structure
provided, however, that 3 meters is in the far field of the emission. If
3 meters is not in the far field, the measurements shall be performed at
whatever greater distance is necessary to result in the measurement
being performed in the far field and the results shall be extrapolated
to a distance of 3 meters, as specified in Section 15.31(f)(1) of this
part. As an alternative to these spectral density emission limits, the
average power density of any emission shall not exceed an equivalent
isotropically radiated power (EIRP) level of 40 dBm and the peak power
density of any emission shall not exceed an EIRP of 43 dBm.

\(ii\) As an alternative to paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, for
transmitters located outdoors or located indoors with emissions directed
outdoors, ***e.g.*** through a window, the average power density of any
emission shall not exceed an EIRP level of 82 dBm minus 2 dB for every
dB that the antenna gain is less than 51 dBi. The peak power density of
any emission shall not exceed 85 dBm minus 2 dB for every dB that the
antenna gain is less than 51 dBi. The provisions of Section 15.204(c) of
this part that permit the use of different antennas of the same type and
of equal or less directional gain do not apply to intentional radiator
systems operating under this provision. In lieu thereof, intentional
radiator systems shall be certified using the specific antenna(s) with
which the system will be marketed and operated. Compliance testing shall
be performed using the highest gain and the lowest gain antennas for
which certification is being sought. Testing shall be performed with the
intentional radiator operated at its maximum available output power
level. The responsible party, as defined in Section 2.909 of this
chapter, shall supply a list of acceptable antennas with the application
for certification.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(c\) \* \* \*

\* \* \* \* \*

\(3\) Between 40 GHz and 200 GHz, the level of these emissions shall not
exceed an EIRP of -10 dBm or, alternatively, a power density of 90
pW/cm^2^ at a distance of 3 meters. If a power density measurement is
performed and 3 meters is not within the far field, the measurements
shall be performed at whatever greater distance is necessary to result
in the measurement being in the far field and the results shall be
extrapolated to a distance of 3 meters as specified in Section
15.31(f)(1) of this part.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) Except as specified below, the total peak transmitter output power
shall not exceed 500 mW. Depending on the gain of the antenna, it may be
necessary to operate the intentional radiator using a lower peak
transmitter output power in order to comply with the power density
limits or EIRP limits specified in paragraph (b) of this section.

\* \* \* \* \*

[^1]: *See* Petition for Rule Making submitted by WCA, RM-11104.

[^2]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 15.1 *et seq*.

[^3]: The primary operating conditions under Part 15 are that the
    operator must accept whatever interference is received and must
    correct whatever harmful interference is caused. Should harmful
    interference occur, the operator is required to immediately correct
    the interference problem, even if correction of the problem requires
    ceasing operation of the Part 15 system causing the interference.
    *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.5.

[^4]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.255; *see also Amendment of Parts 2, 15 and
    97 of the Commission's Rules to Permit Use of Radio Frequencies
    Above 40 GHz for New Radio Applications, First Report and Order and
    Second Notice of Proposed Rule Making*, ET Docket No. 94-124 (*First
    R&O/Second NPRM in ET Docket No. 94-124)*, 11 FCC Rcd 4481 (1995),
    at 5 and 15.

[^5]: The term "millimeter wave" is taken from the fact that the
    wavelength of radio signals for frequencies between 30 GHz and 300
    GHz ranges from 10 millimeters down to 1 millimeter. The 60 GHz band
    is allocated on a primary basis to the Federal Government mobile,
    fixed, inter-satellite and radiolocation services and to non-Federal
    Government include fixed, mobile and radiolocation services.
    Currently there are no licensed Federal Government or non-Federal
    Government services operating in the 60 GHz band. Under Part 18 of
    the rules, unlicensed Industrial, Scientific and Medical (ISM)
    equipment may also operate in the 60 GHz band at 61.25 GHz
    [+]{.underline} 250 MHz.

[^6]: *See Attenuation by Atmospheric Gases*, International
    Telecommunications Union, *Reports of the CCIR*, 1990, Vol V, Report
    719-3, at pg. 189.

[^7]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.255(b).

[^8]: Power density (P~D~), EIRP and field strength (E) are readily
    converted through the following formula:
    P~D~ = E^2^/120(Pi) = EIRP/(4 Pi D^2^), where D is the separation
    distance in meters, provided measurements are performed in the far
    field.

[^9]: The 500 mW peak transmitter output level applies to transmitters
    with an emission bandwidth of at least 100 MHz and is reduced for
    systems that employ narrower bandwidths. *See* 47 C.F.R. §
    15.255(e).

[^10]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.255(i).

[^11]: *See First R&O/Second NPRM in ET Docket No. 94-124.*

[^12]: The Commission's equipment authorization data base shows that
    currently 14 certifications have been granted for unlicensed 60 GHz
    point-to-point transmitter systems.

[^13]: *See, e.g.*, Fiber Leap Series Products User's manual, Telaxis
    Communications Corporation, FCC ID No. P57-FL60-1250, at 5; Fiber
    Connection Series Products, Unique Broadband Systems, Inc., FCC ID
    No. PWL3260, at 1.2.

[^14]: *See* 47 C.F.R § 15.255(b). WCA does not request a limit on peak
    EIRP.

[^15]: WCA petition at 10-11.

[^16]: WCA petition at 7. In the wireless industry, a rule of thumb is
    that the number of building pairs served increases with the square
    of the distance of the link, since the area of a circle increases
    with the square of the radius. *Id.,* at footnote 20.

[^17]: *See Public Notice No. 2679, In the Matter of Amendment of the
    Commission's Rules for the License-Exempt 59-64 GHz band,* RM‑11104,
    released on Oct. 29, 2004. Agilent Technologies (Agilent),
    BridgeWave Communications, CSG Wireless, Inc., and Yipes Enterprise
    Services, Inc. filed comments. SiBEAM, Inc. (SiBEAM), IEEE 802, and
    Agilent filed *ex parte* communications.

[^18]: The specific proposed changes to the regulations are shown in
    Appendix B.

[^19]: Since 2005, IEEE 802 (IEEE Local and Metropolitan Area Networks
    Standards Committee) has been working on a 60 GHz wireless personal
    area network standard to support high bandwidth applications such as
    high definition television connectivity, video gaming and file
    transfer. On April 9, 2007, IEEE 802 filed ex parte comments
    reporting on discussions it has held with WCA and other interested
    parties concerning WCA's rulemaking petition. Although IEEE 802
    states that the parties reached consensual agreement on some issues,
    IEEE 802 continues to be concerned about the effects increased
    transmitter power will have on personal area networks. *See also,
    e.g.,* http://www.wirelesshd.org/technology.html.

[^20]: The existing average power density limit of 9 µW/cm^2^ at 3
    meters is equivalent to an EIRP of 10 W or 40 dBm. 47 C.F.R. §
    15.255(b).

[^21]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 101.1501 *et seq*.

[^22]: Comments of Agilent at 2-3.

[^23]: Comments of Agilent at 3.

[^24]: Comments of SiBEAM at 2.

[^25]: Reply comments of WCA at 4.

[^26]: *Ex parte* presentation of WCA, June 30, 2005. *See also,
    Allocations And Service Rules For The 71-76 GHz, 81-86 GHz And 92-95
    GHz Bands*, *Report and Order*, WTB Docket 02-146, 18 FCC Rcd 23318
    (2004).

[^27]: Petition of WCA at 7.

[^28]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 15.255(b)(4)-(5).

[^29]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.255(b) and (e). These limits apply to
    equipment other than fixed field disturbance sensors.

[^30]: The near field is the region in which the electric and magnetic
    fields do not have a substantially plane-wave character but vary
    considerably from point to point. Conversely, the far field, that
    region of the field of an antenna where the angular field
    distribution is essentially independent of the distance from the
    antenna, has a predominantly plane-wave character where there is a
    locally uniform distribution of electric field strength and magnetic
    field strength in planes transverse to the direction of propagation.
    In the near field of the main beam, the power density can reach a
    maximum before it begins to decrease with distance. The power
    density in the transition region between the near and far fields
    decreases inversely with distance from the antenna and the power
    density in the far field decreases inversely as the square of the
    distance. The near field for a 48 inch (1.22 meter) antenna
    operating at 60 GHz extends to 74 meters, the transition region
    extends from 74 meters to 178 meters, and the far field starts at
    178 meters. For a 12 inch (0.3 meter) antenna, the near field
    extends to 4.6 meters, the transition region extends from 4.6 to 11
    meters and the far field starts at 11 meters. *See* OET Bulletin 65,
    *Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to
    Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields*, August 1997, at 27-29.

[^31]: As described in OET Bulletin 65 and IEEE C95.3, the Maximum
    Permissible Exposure Limits (MPE) for RF exposure are based on plane
    wave equivalent power density limits where measurements may be made
    using instruments calibrated with respect to plane wave equivalent
    power density at distances more than 20 cm from the radiator; in
    some cases, as close as 5 cm. Spatially averaged measurements are
    used to determine RF exposure compliance.

[^32]: For RF exposure as calculated under OET Bulletin 65, the
    calculated maximum on-axis power density in the near field for a 48
    inch antenna operating at 55 dBi and an EIRP of 82 dBm is 0.09
    mW/cm^2^ with a maximum antenna surface power density of 0.17
    mW/cm^2^. The calculated maximum on-axis power density in the near
    field for a 12 inch antenna operating at 42 dBi and an EIRP of 64
    dBm is 0.4 mW/cm^2^ and the maximum antenna surface power density is
    0.8 mW/cm^2^. These exposure levels are based on the use of
    Cassegrain antennas (antennas in which the
    [feed](http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Raw_feed&action=edit)
    radiator is mounted at or near the surface of a concave main
    [reflector](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflector) and is aimed at
    a convex secondary reflector slightly inside the focus of the main
    reflector; in these antennas, energy from the feed unit illuminates
    the secondary reflector, which reflects it back to the main
    reflector, which then forms the desired forward
    [beam](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam)) and the emission levels
    will vary with other antenna configurations. *See* OET Bulletin 65,
    *supra*.

[^33]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.255(e). The level of the RF exposure at a
    specific distance is dependent not only on the output power but also
    on the specific antenna design.  Applicants for certification are
    required to demonstrate that the resultant system, based on its
    operating standards, application, and installation, ensures that the
    public is not exposed to excessive levels of RF energy.

[^34]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 15.31(f)(1).

[^35]: For example, the far field for a four-foot antenna (1.22 meter)
    starts at 178 meters.

[^36]: As permitted under 47 C.F.R. § 15.31(f)(1), measurements may
    continue to be performed at a distance greater than 3 meters when
    necessary to avoid performing measurements within the near field and
    extrapolated to 3 meters using an extrapolation factor of 20
    dB/decade.

[^37]: 47 C.F.R. § 15.204(c)(4).

[^38]: The current RF exposure guidelines for the 60 GHz band had not
    been adopted by the Commission at the time when it adopted the 60
    GHz limits. The 60 GHz emission limits were based on industry
    recommendations that the Commission believed would not expose the
    public to RF fields in excess of the safety standards. *See* *First
    Report and Order and Second Notice of Proposed Rule Making* in ET
    Docket No. 94-124, *supra*, at 18-19. *See*, also,
    47 C.F.R. § 15.255(g).

[^39]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310. *See* *also, Guidelines for Evaluation
    the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation, Report and
    Order,* ET Docket 93-62, 11 FCC Rcd 15123 (1996).

[^40]: When well matched to body tissues impedance, a small antenna has
    the tendency to produce a denser "hot spot" (where energy is
    concentrated) than a larger antenna that covers a larger volume or
    exposure region where the energy is spread out.  In near-field
    exposure conditions where the antenna is in close proximity to
    persons, energy coupling and impedance matching typically play a
    major role in the exposure. 

[^41]: Generally, Part 15 transmitters are permitted to use any antenna
    that is of the same type and of equal or less gain than the antenna
    with which the transmitter was certified*. See* 47 C.F.R. §
    15.204(c).

[^42]: The Commission adopted the transmitter identification requirement
    based on a spectrum etiquette submitted by the Millimeter Wave
    Communications Working Group (MWCWG), to which there was no
    objection. *S**ee Amendment Of Parts 2, 15 And 97 Of The
    Commission\'s Rules To Permit Use Of Radio Frequencies Above 40 GHz
    For New Radio Applications*, *Third Report and Order*, ET Docket
    94-124, 13 FCC Rcd 15074 (1998) at 4. *See* *also,* 47 C.F.R. §
    15.255(i).

[^43]: *See Amendment Of Parts 2, 15 And 97 Of The Commission\'s Rules
    To Allocate Additional Spectrum To The Inter-Satellite, Fixed, And
    Mobile Services And To Permit Unlicensed Devices To Use Certain
    Segments in the 50.2-50.4 GHz and 51.4-71.0 GHz Bands,* *Report and
    Order*, ET Docket 99-261, 15 FCC Rcd 25264 (2000) at 17-18. The
    Commission states that the victim of interference from outdoors
    equipment would not be able to determine the identity of the
    manufacturer in order to get its instructions on how to detect and
    decode its transmitter ID, and thus, the victim could not decode the
    transmitter ID without first identifying the manufacturer. The
    Commission went on to note that with outdoors point-to-point
    systems, the need to identify and decode the transmitter ID is
    unlikely to be a problem. *Id.*, at 18.

[^44]: WCA petition at 15.

[^45]: Agilent calculates that the signal reflected from uncoated window
    glass is about 4 percent of the incident signal level.

[^46]: The Commission decided to retain the transmitter identification
    requirements for indoors systems at the time it decided to exempt
    outdoors systems from the requirement because indoors equipment is
    under the control of the system operator who knows its equipment and
    thus can decode the ID information and find out which transmitter is
    interfering with the rest of its system. *See Amendment Of Parts 2,
    15 And 97 Of The Commission\'s Rules To Allocate Additional Spectrum
    To The Inter-Satellite, Fixed, And Mobile Services And To Permit
    Unlicensed Devices To Use Certain Segments in the 50.2-50.4 GHz and
    51.4-71.0 GHz Bands,* *Report and Order*, ET Docket 99-261, 15 FCC
    Rcd 25264 (2000) at 18-19.

[^47]: ^ ?^ *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA, *see* 5 U.S.C. §§ 601 - 612,
    has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
    Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. No. 104-121, Title II, 110
    Stat. 847 (1996).

[^48]:  *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603(a).

[^49]:  *Id.*

[^50]:  5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3).

[^51]:  5 U.S.C. § 601(6).

[^52]:  5 U.S.C. § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of
    "small business concern" in 15 U.S.C. § 632). Pursuant to the RFA,
    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." 5 U.S.C. § 601(3).

[^53]:   Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 632 (1996).