[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 21, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38431-38432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15578]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 2 and 15

[ET Docket No. 94-124; FCC 00-161]


Use of Radio Frequencies Above 40 GHz for New Radio Applications.

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commision.

ACTION: Final rule; denial.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document denies the Petitions for Reconsideration filed 
by the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (``NRAO'') and New England 
Digital Distribution, Inc., (``NEDD''). These petitions requested 
reconsideration of the Commission's Third Report and Order (``third 
Order'') in this proceeding. This action reaffirms the previous 
Commission decisions on the spurious emission limit for unlicensed 
vehicular radar devices operating in the 76-77 GHz band, and the 
coordination channel and transmitter identification requirements 
contained in the spectrum etiquette for unlicensed operation in the 59-
64 GHz band.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rodney Conway, Office of Engineering 
and Technology, (202) 418-2904.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order, 
ET Docket 94-124, FCC 00-161, adopted May 8, 2000 and May 17, 2000. The 
full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and 
copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information 
Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC, and also 
may be purchased from the Commission's duplication contractor, 
International Transcription Service, (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20036.

Summary of the Memorandum Opinion and Order

    1. The NRAO filed a Petition for Reconsideration requesting a more 
stringent spurious emission limit of 2 pW/cm\2\ rather than the limit 
of 1000 pW/cm\2\ for vehicle radar systems operating in the 76-77 GHz 
band. NEDD filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the coordination 
channel and transmitter identification requirements of the spectrum 
etiquette for unlicensed operation in the 59-64 GHz band. These 
petitions requested reconsideration of the Commission's Third Report 
and Order (``Third Order'') in this proceeding, 63 FR 42276, August 7, 
1998.

Emission Limits Above 200 GHz

    2. The NRAO requests a more stringent spurious emission limit of 2 
pW/cm\2\ as measured at three meters for unlicensed devices operating 
in the 76-77 GHz band. The NRAO petition provides no new information to 
support its request; it instead points to comments filed by the 
National Academy of Sciences Committee on Radio Frequencies (``CORF'') 
earlier in this proceeding as the basis for its request. NRAO alleges 
that, in the Third Order, the Commission did not adequately address the 
specific concerns or calculations set forth by CORF, nor did it explain 
the basis of its beliefs in rejecting CORF's proposed limits in favor 
of those recommended by the National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration (``NTIA''). NRAO believes that such a failure to address 
the key argument is arbitrary and capricious and does not constitute 
reasoned decision-making.
    3. Our review reveals that CORF essentially assumes that the 
vehicular radars will be within boresight of or targeted at the radio 
astronomy receive antenna and be capable of radiating a coherent and 
focused emission directly into a 0 dBi side lobe of a radio astronomy 
antenna without taking into account any attenuation from the 
atmosphere, intervening terrain, angular separation or elevation 
separation that may be present. In addition, we note that IEEE 
Vehicular Radar Standards

[[Page 38432]]

Subcommittee document VRS-96-6 states that radio astronomy 
observatories typically have control over access to a distance of one 
kilometer from the telescopes to provide protection from interference 
caused by automobile spark plugs and other uncontrolled RFI sources. It 
is unclear from reading the comments why CORF selected a distance of 
250 meters as a distance beyond which radio astronomy operations are 
not able to restrict operation of RF devices. We are aware that the 
radio astronomy observatory at Kitt Peak, Arizona may have had a 
controlled distance of less than 1 kilometer due to the public access 
afforded the site. We also note that NRAO has announced that they will 
be closing the millimeter wave telescope at Kitt Peak on July 1, 2000. 
The record in this proceeding has not made us aware of any other radio 
astronomy observatories that offer similar essential public access. We 
note that the IEEE standard implies that radio astronomy observatories 
do have control of areas surrounding their receive antennas. As a 
result there may be interference mitigation procedures, such as 
erecting a fence, that could be utilized to further minimize the 
potential for receiving any interference from the vehicular radars. 
Given the limited number of radio astronomy observatories and the 
potential benefit of these unlicensed devices we encourage the radio 
astronomy community and the automobile industry to work together to 
develop interference mitigation procedures.
    4. We have carefully considered NRAO's petition for reconsideration 
and related comments and determine that the public interest will be 
best served by adopting rules that will permit the introduction of 
these unlicensed vehicular radar devices. We conclude that the public 
interest would best be served by maintaining the spurious emission 
level of 1000 pW/cm\2\, which provides adequate protection to radio 
astronomy observatories without being unreasonably restrictive for 
unlicensed vehicular radar devices. Accordingly, NRAO's petition for 
reconsideration is denied.

Spectrum Etiquette

    5. In the Third Order the Commission adopted a spectrum etiquette 
for unlicensed operation in the 59-64 GHz band. Included in the 
spectrum etiquette is the reservation of the 59.0-59.05 GHz band as a 
designated coordination channel. In addition, the etiquette requires 
that any transmitter operating with a peak power equal to or greater 
than 0.1 mW in the 59.05-64 GHz band must transmit once every second a 
transmitter identification data block that contains the following: (1) 
The FCC identifier, which is programmed at the factory; (2) a 
manufacturer's serial number, also programmed at the factory; and (3) 
at least 24 bytes of user definable data.
    6. In its petition, NEDD states that the requirement for a special 
coordination channel at 59.0-59.05 GHz will impose an unfair burden on 
developers of point to point systems and appears to violate the spirit 
of unencumbered commercial development. NEDD further states that 
because there is no specific protocol or definition for the transmitter 
identification data block and no database for these identifiers, it 
appears that the Millimeter Wave Communications Working Group 
(``MWCWG'') has proposed this etiquette to gain a tactical advantage 
over other innovators. NEDD provides no new facts to support its 
assertions.
    7. The Commission reserved 50 MHz of spectrum and named it a 
coordination channel. However, we believe that the 50 MHz of spectrum 
would be more aptly referred to as a reserve channel. The reserve 
channel was established in order to save a 50 MHz block of spectrum for 
use as a future test bed to determine techniques for mitigating or 
eliminating interference that may occur between different unlicensed 
transmitters operating in the 59-64 GHz band. We believe that NEDD may 
have viewed the coordination channel as a requirement to utilize the 
59.0-59.05 GHz band to coordinate the simultaneous operation of 
multiple unlicensed devices. As indicated in our rules, the 50 MHz of 
spectrum can only be utilized after receiving approval under the 
experimental authorization provisions of part 5 of the Commission's 
rules. As a result, our rules do not require any operation in the 50 
MHz of reserved spectrum.
    8. In order to provide manufacturers with maximum flexibility in 
the design of unlicensed devices that operate in the 59-64 GHz band, no 
specific method of encoding the transmitter identification was included 
in the Commission's rules. In its opposition to the NEDD petition, the 
MWCWG notes that the Commission's rules require each application for 
equipment authorization to specify how interested parties can obtain 
sufficient information, at no cost, to enable them to detect fully and 
decode the transmitter identification information, which can be used to 
identify a source of interference. MWCWG observes that this requirement 
simply provides manufacturers and operators with a tool to mitigate and 
resolve interference among unlicensed users of the 59-64 GHz band, 
without the intervention of the FCC.
    9. We agree with MWCWG's observation that the sharing and 
coordination benefits provided by the transmitter identification 
requirement outweigh any burden it imposes. We find that the 
transmitter identification requirement does not thwart or delay 
development or deployment of unlicensed devices. Nor does the rule 
provide any tactical advantage to any manufacturer because all 
manufacturers of unlicensed devices that operate in the 59-64 GHz band 
have to comply with the requirement. Accordingly, the petition for 
reconsideration filed by NEDD is denied.
    10. Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 4(i), 302, 
303(e), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), and 405 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, It is Ordered that the Petitions for Reconsideration 
filed by National Radio Astronomy Observatory and New England Digital 
Distribution, Inc., Are Denied.

    Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-15578 Filed 6-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U