Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 4649

(e) The Commission staff will advise

owners and architects concerning the

scope and content of particular

submissions. Material relevant to the

functions and policies of the

Commission varies greatly depending

upon the nature, size, and importance of

the project to be reviewed by the

Commission. Also, it is the policy of the

Commission not to impose unnecessary

burdens or delays on persons who make

submissions to the Commission.

However, the Commission at any

meeting may decline to reach a

conclusion about a proposed project if

it deems the submission materials

inadequate for its purposes, or it may

condition its conclusions on the

submission of further information to it

at a later meeting or, in its discretion,

may delegate final action to the staff.

(f) The Commission staff, members of

the Georgetown Board, interested

members of the public, or the

submitting party may augment any

submission by additional relevant

information made available to the

Commission before or at the meeting

where the submission is considered.

The staff should also make information

available concerning prior

considerations or conclusions of the

Commission regarding the same project

or earlier versions of it.

§ 2102.11 Scope and content of

submissions for proposed medals, insignia,

coins, seals, and the like.

Each submission of the design for a

proposed item which is within the

Commission’s purview under § 2101.1

(d) should identify the sponsoring

government unit and disclose the uses

and purpose of the item, the size and

forms in which it will be produced, and

the materials and finishes to be used,

including colors if any, along with a

sketch, model, or prototype.

§ 2102.12 Responses of Commission to

submissions.

(a) The Commission before disposing

of any project presented to it may ask

for the proposed plans or designs to be

changed in certain particulars and

resubmitted, or for the opportunity to

review plans, designs, and

specifications in certain particulars at a

later stage in their development, and to

see samples or mock-ups of materials or

components; and when appropriate in

the matter of a statue or other object of

art, the Commission may ask for the

opportunity to see a larger or full-scale

model. All conclusions, advice, or

comments of the Commission which

lead to further development of plans,

designs, and specifications or to actual

carrying out of the project are made in

contemplation that such steps will

conform in all substantial respects with

the plans or designs submitted to the

Commission, including only such

changes as the Commission may have

recommended; any other changes in

plans or designs require further

submission to the Commission.

(b) In the case of plans for a project

subject to the Old Georgetown Act

(§ 2101.1 (c)), if the Commission does

not respond with a report on such plans

within forty-five days after their receipt

by the Commission, its approval shall be

assumed and a permit may be issued by

the government of the District of

Columbia.

(c) In the case of plans for a project

subject to the Shipstead-Luce Act

(§ 2101.1 (b)), if the Commission does

not respond with a report on such plans

within thirty days after their receipt by

the Commission, its approval shall be

assumed and a permit may be issued by

the government of the District of

Columbia.

(d) In the event that any project or

item within the Commission’s purview

under 2101.1 has not progressed to a

substantial start of construction or

production within four years following

the Commission meeting date on which

the final design was approved, the

Commission’s approval is suspended.

The plans or designs previously

approved or alternative plans or

designs, may thereupon be resubmitted

for Commission review. The

Commission’s subsequent approval, if

granted, shall remain in effect for four

years.

PART 2103—STATEMENTS OF POLICY

§ 2103.1 General approaches to review of

plans by the Commission.

The Commission functions relate to

the appearance of proposed projects

within its purview as specified herein.

These functions are to serve the purpose

of conserving and enhancing the visual

assets which contribute significantly to

the character and quality of Washington

as the nation’s capital and which

appropriately reflect the history and

features of its development over two

centuries. Where existing conditions

detract from the overall appearance of

official Washington or historic

Georgetown—such as conditions caused

by temporary, deteriorated, or

abandoned buildings of little or no

historical or architectural value, by

interrupted developments, or by vacant

lots not devoted to public use as parks

or squares—the Commission will favor

suitable corrections to these conditions.

When changes or additions are

proposed in other circumstances, the

Commission may consider whether the

public need or value of the project or

the private interests to be served thereby

justify making any change or addition,

and it will consider whether the project

can be accomplished in reasonable

harmony with the nearby area, with a

minimum loss of attractive features of

the existing building or site, with due

deference to the historical and

architectural values affected, and

without creating an anomalous

disturbing element in the public view of

the city.

Authority: Pub. L. 81–808, 64 Stat. 903; 40

U.S.C. 72, 104, 106, and 121; E.O. 1259 of

October 25, 1910; E.O. 1862 of November 28,

1913; E.O. 3524 of July 28, 1921.

[FR Doc. 97–2386 Filed 1–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6330–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 2 and 15

[ET Docket No. 96–102; FCC 97–5]

Unlicensed NII Devices in the 5 GHz

Frequency Range

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: By this action, the

Commission amends its radio frequency

devices rules to make available 300

megahertz of spectrum at 5.15–5.35 GHz

and 5.725–5.825 GHz for use by a new

category of unlicensed equipment,

called Unlicensed National Information

Infrastructure (‘‘U–NII’’) devices. These

devices will provide short-range, high

speed wireless digital communications

on an unlicensed basis. We anticipate

that U–NII devices will support the

creation of new wireless local area

networks (‘‘LANs’’) and will facilitate

wireless access to the National

Information Infrastructure (‘‘NII’’). In

order to permit significant flexibility in

the design and operation of these

devices, we are adopting the minimum

technical rules necessary to prevent

interference to other services and to

ensure that the spectrum is used

efficiently. We believe that the rules set

forth herein will foster the development

of a broad range of new devices and

communications options that will

stimulate economic development and

the growth of new industries. We also

expect that this action will promote the

ability of U.S. manufacturers, including

small businesses, to compete globally by

enabling them to develop unlicensed

digital communications products for the

world market.
4650 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

1We note that in the Notice of Proposed Rule

Making in this proceeding, we referred to these

devices as NII/SUPERNet devices. However, on July

2, 1996, we received a letter from Smart &

Thevenet, P.C. on behalf of its client, SuperNet,

Inc., which requests that the Commission refrain

from using the word ‘‘SUPERNet’’ because it would

infringe upon its trademark registration of the name

‘‘Colorado Supernet.’’ Accordingly, we have

adopted the term ‘‘Unlicensed National Information

Infrastructure or U–NII’’ to refer to the devices in

this proceeding.

2See 47 U.S.C. § 257(b) (‘‘the Commission shall

promote the policies and purposes of this Act

promoting * * * vigorous economic competition,

technological advancement, and promotion of the

public interest, convenience, and necessity.’’).

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom

Derenge 418–2451 or Fred Thomas 418–

2449.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Report

and Order, ET Docket 96–102, FCC 97–

5, adopted January 9, 1997, and released

January 9, 1997. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C., and also may be

purchased from the Commission’s

duplication contractor, International

Transcription Service, (202) 857–3800,

2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140,

Washington, D.C. 20037.

Summary of the Report and Order

1. On April 25, 1996, the Commission

adopted a Notice of Proposed Rule

Making (‘‘NPRM’’), 61 FR 24749, May

16, 1996; this proceeding proposed to

make available 350 megahertz of

spectrum at 5.15–5.35 GHz and 5.725–

5.875 GHz for Unlicensed National

Information Infrastructure (‘‘U–NII’’)

devices.1 The NPRM proposed that such

devices be subject to minimum

technical standards, including power

limits, out-of-band emission limits, and

spectrum etiquette. We tentatively

concluded that these standards would

be necessary to ensure that licensed

services in the bands would be

protected from harmful interference,

that the spectrum would be used

efficiently, and that all U–NII devices

would have equal access to the

spectrum. The NPRM also solicited

comments whether we should adopt a

channeling plan, a minimum

modulation efficiency, and whether we

should regulate any U-NII operations as

a licensed service, particularly those

intended for long-range community

network applications. Further, the

NPRM also proposed to establish ‘‘safeharbor’’ rules setting forth conditions

under which unlicensed devices could

operate without risk of being considered

sources of harmful interference.

2. The Commission’s proposal to

provide spectrum to accommodate U–

NII devices is strongly supported by the

majority of the commenters (‘‘U–NII

proponents’’). U–NII proponents argue

that U–NII devices would facilitate

connections among computers,

televisions, appliance automation

products, and on-premises network

cable or telephone company access

points within homes, schools and health

care facilities. Further, they submit that

unlicensed devices could potentially

satisfy a collection of communications

needs that otherwise would probably

remain unmet if free and open

consumer access to spectrum were not

available. In particular, U–NII

proponents argue that existing wireless

allocations and wireline alternatives are

not capable of providing the types of

services that are envisioned for U–NII

devices. However, parties with

incumbent operations on this spectrum

argue that the record does not

sufficiently demonstrate a need for this

new unlicensed spectrum.

3. The Commission finds that there is

a need for unlicensed wireless devices

that will be capable of providing data

rates as high as 20 Mbits/sec to meet the

multimedia communication

requirements envisioned by the U–NII

proponents. To achieve these high data

rates at a reasonable cost, we believe

that these devices must use broad

bandwidths of up to 20 megahertz each

and therefore these devices must have

access to a substantial amount of

spectrum to accommodate a number of

devices within the same area. Further,

we believe that accessibility to a

substantial amount of spectrum is

necessary for these devices to develop

and mature to their full potential. The

record in this proceeding supports the

conclusion that recent developments in

digital technologies have greatly

increased the requirements for

transferring large amounts of

information and data in relatively short

time frames from one network or system

to another. Specifically, we note that

computers have much faster central

processing units and substantially

increased memory capabilities, which

have increased the demand for devices

that can more quickly transfer larger

amounts of data. Further, digital

equipment is capable of switching and

directing large amounts of information

within networks. In addition to these

technical advances in hardware

capability, there has been substantial

growth in the use, size, and complexity

of digital networks as well. Many of

these networks are not only growing

internally in the amount and types of

data they contain, but are also

increasingly being used in combination

and interaction with other such

networks.

4. The Commission finds that it is

appropriate to provide spectrum for

wireless unlicensed digital network

communications devices to meet the

growing communications demands of

multimedia network systems resulting

from developments of new digital

technologies. We believe that this will

facilitate rapid and inexpensive wireless

access to information resources by

educational institutions, business,

industry, and consumers. We also

believe that making this spectrum

available for U–NII devices will further

the Commission’s mandate, in Section

257(b) of the Communications Act, to

promote vigorous competition and

technological advancement.2 For

example, allowing unlicensed devices

access to the 5.15–5.35 GHz and 5.725–

5.825 GHz bands will permit

educational institutions to form

inexpensive broadband wireless

computer networks between classrooms,

thereby facilitating cost-effective access

to an array of multimedia services on

the Internet. In addition, unlicensed

wireless networks could help improve

the quality and reduce the cost of

medical care by allowing medical staff

to obtain on-the-spot patient data, Xrays, and medical charts.

5. The U–NII proponents support

providing 350 megahertz of spectrum in

the 5 GHz range for these devices. They

argue that 350 megahertz of spectrum is

needed to realize the full potential of

today’s broadband information

technologies and to encourage further

innovation in the delivery of new

broadband digital communications.

They claim that providing unlicensed

broadband devices access to this

amount of spectrum will meet the needs

of multiple users at a common location

and should be sufficient to provide for

open entry and equal access by all

unlicensed devices. Further, they claim

that this amount of spectrum is needed

to provide an environment for robust

development and growth, and to permit

the communications infrastructure to

keep pace with future computer

advancements. U–NII proponents

further argue that 350 megahertz is

necessary for wide bandwidth U–NII

networks because these devices will

have to share the spectrum with other

users, such as Mobile Satellite Service

(‘‘MSS’’), Amateur, and Industrial,

Scientific, and Medical (‘‘ISM’’).

Finally, U–NII proponents note that the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 4651

3These power spectral density requirements shall

be measured with a spectrum analyzer having a

resolution bandwidth of 1 megahertz.

proposed bands would align the

spectrum available domestically for U–

NII devices with the spectrum available

for European HIPERLAN systems.

6. The Commission continues to

believe that it is appropriate to provide

unlicensed devices with access to a

substantial amount of spectrum at 5

GHz to accommodate the demand by

educational, medical, business,

industrial and consumer users for

broadband multimedia

communications. We are also cognizant,

however, of the need for U–NII devices

to share the spectrum with primary

services without causing radio

interference to those services. We

believe that both of these concerns can

be accommodated by adopting

appropriate technical restrictions for U–

NII devices, particularly transmit power

and out-of-band emission limits, and by

avoiding portions of the spectrum where

sharing would be particularly difficult.

Accordingly, we will make 300

megahertz of spectrum available for U–

NII devices. Specifically, we are

providing U–NII devices access to three

100 megahertz bands at 5.15–5.25 GHz,

5.25–5.35 GHz and 5.725–5.825 GHz.

We recognize that this is less than the

350 megahertz that was proposed, but

we believe that this amount of spectrum

provides an appropriate balance

between spectrum sharing concerns and

providing sufficient spectrum to satisfy

the needs of U–NII devices.

7. The Commission believes that 300

megahertz of spectrum will provide

sufficient spectrum to allow the full

potential of broadband multimedia

technologies to be realized. This

spectrum should provide for open entry

and equal access by all such devices and

to allow access to the spectrum by

multiple users at a common location

using a variety of different devices. In

this regard, we note that these

broadband devices each may require 20

to 25 megahertz channel bandwidth to

provide the high data rates envisioned

by the petitioners. The Commission also

believes that the 300 megahertz of

spectrum being provided for U–NII

devices avoids the use of spectrum that

would be particularly difficult to share

with primary operations. It believes that

U–NII devices can share with proposed

and existing services in these bands

including the MSS feeder link

operations that may use the 5.15–5.25

GHz band. However, U–NII devices will

not have access to spectrum used by

microwave landing systems (‘‘MLS’’)

operated by the Federal Aviation

Administration in the 5.0–5.15 GHz

band. Additionally, U–NII devices will

not have access to the 5.825–5.875 GHz

band. This will avoid potential

interference with low power Part 15

hearing aid devices and potential

Intelligent Transportation Service

operations in the 5.850–5.875 GHz

band, Fixed Satellite Service operations

in the 5.850–5.925 GHz band, and

amateur operations in the 5.650–5.725

and 5.825–5.925 GHz bands.

8. The 300 megahertz will be available

to U–NII devices into three bands of 100

megahertz each and will establish the

following maximum U–NII device

power limits for each band: a) in the

5.15–5.25 GHz band, the maximum peak

transmitter output power limit will be

50 milliwatts (‘‘mW’’) with up to 6 dBi

antenna gain permitted, which equates

to 200 m Equivalent Isotropically

Radiated Power (‘‘EIRP’’); b) in the 5.25–

5.35 GHz band, the maximum peak

transmitter output power limit will be

250 m with up to 6 db antenna gain

permitted, which equates to 1 W EIRP;

and c) in the 5.725–5.825 GHz band, the

maximum peak transmitter output

power limit will be 1 W with up to 6

db directional antenna gain permitted,

which equates to 4 W EIRP. To permit

manufacturers flexibility in designing

U–NII equipment, we will permit the

use of higher directional antenna gain

provided there is a corresponding

reduction in transmitter output power of

one dB for every dB that the directional

antenna gain exceeds 6 db.

9. Additionally, in all three bands we

are adopting peak power spectral

density limits to ensure that the power

transmitted by U–NII devices is evenly

spread over the emission bandwidth.

Specifically, we will require U–NII

devices to decrease transmitter output

power proportionally to any decrease in

emission bandwidth below 20 MHz. For

U–NII devices operating with less than

20 megahertz of emission bandwidth,

we will limit power spectral density as

follows: a) in the 5.15–5.25 GHz band,

the transmitter peak power spectral

density will be 2.5 m/MHz for an

antenna gain of 6 db; b) in the 5.25–5.35

GHz band, the transmitter peak power

spectral density will be 12.5 m/MHz for

an antenna gain of 6 db; and c) in the

5.725–5.825 GHz band, the transmitter

peak power spectral density will be 50

m/MHz for an antenna gain of 6 db.3

Further, we are adopting out-of-band

emission limits to protect operations

outside the frequency bands of

operation.

10. Another goal in this proceeding is

to provide rules which permit

maximum technical flexibility in the

design and development of U–NII

devices capable of providing high data

rate communications for a variety of

multimedia applications in a shared

spectrum environment. Therefore, the

Commission declined to adopt specific

channelization requirements or a

minimum modulation efficiency

requirement. Additionally, the

Commission declined to adopt a

spectrum sharing etiquette for U–NII

devices, nor will access to the 5 GHz

bands by U–NII devices be delayed until

industry develops an etiquette. We

believe the minimal technical rules we

are adopting, particularly the maximum

power limits discussed above, will

generally allow for equal access and

sharing of these bands by U–NII devices

and thereby accomplish the intent of

our proposed spectrum etiquette.

Finally, our course of action will not

preclude industry from developing any

voluntary standards that it deems

appropriate in the future.

11. Nevertheless, we are adopting a

definition for the type of devices that

will be approved for this band and

regulated under the Part 15 rules.

Specifically, the Part 15 rules will state

that unlicensed U–NII operations in the

5.15–5.35 GHz and 5.725–5.825 GHz

bands will be limited to wide

bandwidth, high data rate digital

operations. Unlicensed devices

accessing the 5.725–5.825 GHz band

under other Part 15 rules would not be

subject to this definition. This will give

equipment manufacturers the flexibility

to design and manufacture a variety of

broadband devices using different

technologies and modulation

techniques, while ensuring that this

spectrum is used for its intended

purpose. This definition will be

enforced through the Commission’s

equipment certification process.

12. The Commission also stated that

the low power U–NII devices and

associated operations are more

amenable to an unlicensed structure and

should be regulated under the Part 15

rules. Specifically, the rules governing

U–NII devices are similar in their low

power and flexible regulatory nature to

those governing Part 15 devices. While

some U–NII devices in the upper band

could have ranges of several kilometers,

we believe that most devices will have

typical communication ranges of a few

meters to a few hundred meters. We also

are unpersuaded by the arguments that

U–NII devices and associated operations

need to be licensed in order to provide

regulatory parity with licensed services.

With regard to unlicensed U–NII

devices that are used for community

networks in the upper band, we note

that these will also be of very limited

range in comparison to the distances of
4652 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

4This equates to a power flux density of ¥124

dBW/MHz/m2 at a satellite with a slant range of

1414 km. See ex parte filing of Airtouch, December

5, 1996; see also, Draft New Recommendation—

Power Flux Density Limits for Wireless Data

Networks In The 5150–5250 MHz Band Sharing

Frequencies With Systems In The Fixed Satellite

Service, to ITU–R Working Party 4–9S, David E.

Weinreich of Globalstar, November 27, 1996.

5See Notice of Proposed Rule Making, ET Docket

No. 96–102, 11 FCC Rcd 7205 (1996).

6See Subtitle II of the CWAAA is ‘‘The Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

1996’’ (‘‘SBREFA’’), codified at 5 U.S.C. 603.

7See Wireless Field Test for Education Project;

Fundamental Research Corporation; Crystal Wind

Communications, Inc.; and Jean Armour Polly.

8See Northern Amateur Relay Council of

California, Inc. Comments at 7.

9See Cylink Reply at 17.

fixed point-to-point operations, will

have to operate in a Part 15 sufferance

mode and may not always be able to

provide the same grade of service as the

licensed operations. That is, they will

receive no protection from other users of

the spectrum. Finally, we believe that

the vast majority of U–NII devices will

provide communications that are

complementary to, rather than

competitive with, the licensed services.

13. We recognize that it is likely that

two new uses of the 5.15–5.25 GHz

band, MSS feeder link operations and

U–NII devices, will be developing at the

same time. In view of this fact, as

indicated above, we are adopting

relatively conservative operating

parameters for U–NII devices utilizing

this band. While we believe that this

approach for U–NII devices is

technically conservative and will fully

protect MSS operations, we note that

MSS interests have also suggested that

we limit the aggregate EIRP density of

emissions from unlicensed devices on

the Earth’s surface to the MSS satellite

to 10 dBW/MHz.4 They argue that MSS

operations could begin to be affected

when emissions from unlicensed

devices approach such a level.

Alternatively, they suggest that the

Commission should review the

technical parameters for U–NII

operations in a future rule making as

such a limit is approached. They state

this would allow the Commission to

review, for example, whether some

future reduction in permitted power of

U–NII devices in this band should be

imposed. They state that all existing U–

NII devices would be grandfathered. We

concur that such an approach would

provide further assurance that future

potential conflicts between U–NII

devices and MSS operations are taken

into account and that MSS operations

are protected appropriately.

Accordingly, we invite MSS parties to

monitor the emissions from U–NII

devices in the 5.15–5.25 GHz band and,

if emissions approach the 10 dBW/MHz

level, to request that we initiate a rule

making to reassess the use of this band.

At that time the Commission could

determine if future U–NII devices

should be required to operate at

different technical standards. In this

regard, we note that it may also be

appropriate to reassess the technical

parameters governing U–NII devices in

light of second generation MSS systems.

For example, second generation MSS

systems may be more sensitive and

therefore more susceptible to

interference from U–NII devices. On the

other hand, if European HIPERLAN

systems proliferate and operate at more

power than U–NII devices, second

generation MSS systems may of

necessity be designed to be more robust

and immune to interference from such

devices.

14. Finally, all U–NII devices will be

required to be authorized under the

Commission’s certification procedure.

The Commission will also require U–NII

devices to comply with the RF Hazard

requirements set forth in Sections

1.1307(b), 1.1310, 2.1091, and 2.1093 of

our rules. For purposes of these rules,

all U–NII equipment will be deemed to

operate in an ‘‘uncontrolled’’

environment. Any application for

equipment certification for these

devices must contain a statement

confirming compliance with these

requirements. Technical information

showing the basis for this statement

must be submitted to the Commission

upon request.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

15. As required by Section 603 of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 603

(‘‘RFA’’), an Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) was

incorporated in the Notice of Proposed

Rule Making (‘‘NPRM’’), ET Docket No.

96–102.5 The Commission sought

written public comment on the

proposals in the NPRM, including the

IRFA. The Commission’s Final

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(‘‘FRFA’’) in this Report and Order

conforms to the RFA, as amended by the

Contract With America Advancement

Act of 1996 (‘‘CWAAA’’), Public Law

No. 104–121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996).6

16. Need for and Objectives of the Rule

By this action, the Commission

provides 300 megahertz of spectrum for

a new category of unlicensed equipment

called ‘‘Unlicensed National

Information Infrastructure’’ (‘‘U–NII’’)

devices. These devices are needed to

provide high speed wireless digital

communications on an unlicensed basis.

The Commission anticipates that these

U–NII devices will support the creation

of new wireless LANs, campus

networks, community networks, and

will facilitate wireless access to the

National Information Infrastructure.

Additionally, the rules set forth herein

will foster the development of a broad

range of new devices and services that

will stimulate economic development

and the growth of new industries.

Finally, this action will promote the

ability of U.S. manufacturers to compete

globally by enabling them to develop

unlicensed digital communications

products for the world market.

17. Summary of Significant Issues

Raised by the Public Comments in

Response to the IRFA

Five parties directly address the IRFA.

In general, comments support the

provision of U–NII devices and argue

that these operations will benefit small

entities. Several comments addressing

the IRFA argue that longer range U–NII

devices will be needed to permit

schools and libraries to access

information on the NII without having

to pay expensive monthly charges, such

as long distance fees, to

telecommunications service providers.

Further, these parties state that longer

range U–NII devices will not only

benefit equipment manufacturers, but

also will benefit Internet service

providers, small entities in rural

communities, and the up to 5 million

small businesses that offer products and

services over the Internet.7 However,

regarding the manufacturers of U–NII

devices, the Northern Amateur Relay

Council of California, Inc. (‘‘NARCC’’)

argues that only established major

players in the microwave radio

community will have the talent and

resources to bring U–NII devices to the

market in a timely manner. Therefore,

NARCC contends that affording small

companies preferential treatment will

not produce anything significant in the

way of a lower cost, more innovative

product.8 Finally, Cylink, Inc. opposes

the adoption of an interim spectrum

etiquette because small entities would

not have the resources to develop

interim equipment and to later redesign

that equipment to comply with any

formally adopted spectrum etiquette.9

18. Description and Estimate of the

Number of Small Entities to Which the

Rules Will Apply

The RFA generally defines the term

‘‘small business’’ as having the same

meaning as the term ‘‘small business

concern’’ under the Small Business Act,

15 U.S.C. 632. Based on that statutory
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 4653

10See 13 CFR 121.201, Standard Industrial

Classification (SIC) Code 3663.

11See U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992

Census of Transportation, Communications and

Utilities (issued May 1995), SIC category 3663.

12See 13 CFR 121.201 (SIC) Code 3571.

13See U.S. Small Business Administration 1995

Economic Census Industry and Enterprise Report,

Table 3, SIC Code 3571, (Bureau of the Census data

adapted by the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small

Business Administration).

14See e.g., Loral/Qualcomm Licensee, Inc.

Comments at 4.

15See e.g., Amateur Radio Relay League, Inc.

Comments at 5.

16See Resound Comments at 7 and FHWA

Comments at 2.

17See e.g., Apple Computer, Inc. Comments at 8.

provision, we will consider a small

business concern 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). The RFA

SBREFA provisions also apply to

nonprofit organizations and to

governmental organizations. Since the

Regulatory Flexibility Act amendments

were not in effect until the record in this

proceeding was closed, the Commission

was unable to request information

regarding the number of small business

that might use this service and is unable

at this time to determine the number of

small businesses that would be affected

by this action. The rules adopted in this

Report and Order will apply to any

entities manufacturing U–NII devices to

operate in the 5 GHz range which could

include computer manufacturers and

unlicensed RF equipment

manufacturers. Although the rules do

not directly affect entities that purchase

this equipment, comments contend that

several million entities, including

consumers, schools, libraries, and small

businesses, could benefit from the use of

these devices.

19. The rules adopted in this Report

and Order will apply to entities engaged

in the manufacturing of U–NII devices.

The Commission has not developed a

definition of small entities applicable to

unlicensed device manufacturers.

Therefore, the applicable definition of

small entity is the definition under the

Small Business Administration (‘‘SBA’’)

rules applicable to manufacturers of

‘‘Radio and Television Broadcasting and

Communications Equipment’’ and

‘‘Computer Manufacturers.’’ According

to the SBA’s regulations, an RF

manufacturer must have 750 or fewer

employees in order to qualify as a small

business.10 Census Bureau data

indicates that there are 858 companies

in the United States 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.11 Further, according to

SBA regulations, a computer

manufacturer must have 1,000 or fewer

employees in order to qualify as a small

entity.12 Census Bureau data indicates

that there are 716 firms that

manufacture electronic computers and

of those, 659 have fewer than 500

employees and qualify as small

entities.13 The remaining 57 firms have

500 or more employees; however, we

are unable to determine how many of

those have fewer than 1,000 employees

and therefore also qualify as small

entities under the SBA definition. The

Census Bureau categories are very broad

and specific figures are not available on

the number of these firms that will

manufacture U–NII devices; however,

we acknowledge the likelihood that

many of them will be small businesses.

20. Description of Projected Reporting,

Recordkeeping and Other Compliance

Requirements

The rules adopted in this Report and

Order will require U–NII manufacturers

to comply with the Commission’s

equipment certification requirements set

forth in Section 15.210(b), prior to

marketing, and the radio frequency

hazard requirements set forth in

Sections 1.1307(b), 1.1310, 2.1091, and

2.1093 of the rules. All equipment will

be deemed to operate in an

‘‘uncontrolled’’ environment. Any

application for equipment certification

for these devices must contain a

statement confirming compliance with

these requirements. Technical

information showing the basis for this

statement must be submitted to the

Commission upon request. The

equipment certification requirement is

necessary to ensure compliance with the

Commission’s rules and promote

electromagnetic compatibility. Further,

compliance with the radio frequency

hazard requirements is necessary to

protect the health of individuals using

the equipment. These requirements are

typically required for all unlicensed

equipment. No further reporting or

recordkeeping requirements will be

imposed. Therefore, the only

compliance costs likely to be incurred

are costs necessary to ensure that

prototype devices comply with our

equipment certification requirements

and radio frequency hazard

requirements.

21. Skills of an application examiner,

radio technician or engineer will be

needed to meet the requirements. If a

device is not categorically excluded, the

manufacturer of the device must make

a determination of whether the device

will comply with the RF radiation

limits. This study can be done by

calculation or measurement, depending

upon the situation. In many cases the

studies can be done by a radio

technician or engineer. Certification

applications are usually done by

application examiners.

22. Significant Alternatives and Steps

Taken By Agency To Minimize

Significant Economic Impact on a

Substantial Number of Small Entities

Consistent With Stated Objectives

Based on comments received in

response to the NPRM, the Commission

considered several significant

alternatives. For example, although the

NPRM proposed to make 350 megahertz

available for U–NII devices, parties with

incumbent or future operations request

that less spectrum be made available in

order to protect their interests.

Specifically, parties with mobile

satellite service (‘‘MSS’’) interests argue

that U–NII devices should not be

permitted in the 5.15–5.25 GHz band

because of potential use of this band by

MSS feeder links.14 Further, amateur

radio parties oppose U–NII operations

in the 5.725–5.875 GHz band because of

amateur operations in this spectrum.15

Resound Corporation (‘‘Resound’’) and

the Federal Highway Administration

(‘‘FHWA’’) oppose U–NII operations in

the 5.850–5.875 GHz band because of

future plans to use this spectrum.16

After considering these alternatives, the

Commission concluded that 300

megahertz of U–NII spectrum at 5.15–

5.35 GHz and 5.725–5.825 GHz is

appropriate for these devices to operate

without interfering with incumbent and

potential operations. This reduction

from the proposed U–NII spectrum is

necessary to protect Part 15 hearing

assistance devices, potential intelligent

transportation system operations, and

amateur operations in the 5.825–5.875

GHz band from interference. This action

should not have a negative impact on

small U–NII businesses and will protect

incumbent and proposed spectrum

users which may be small businesses.

23. Additionally, various parties

recommend different technical

standards for U–NII devices. For

example, some U–NII proponents

support increasing the proposed power

limit and permitting unrestricted

antenna gain for U–NII devices in order

to accomplish longer range

communications.17 However, AT&T and

point-to-point microwave parties

oppose longer range use of U–NII

devices and support short range, low
4654 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

18See e.g., AT&T Comments at 3; Pacific Telesis

Group Comments at 4; and Telecommunications

Industry Association, Fixed Point-to-Point

Communications Section Comments at 4.

19See e.g., Consumer Electronics Manufacturers’

Association Comments at 4.

20See e.g., Hewlett-Packard Comments at 3.

21See e.g., WINForum comments at 21.

22See Metricom Reply at 10.

23See e.g., Loral/Qualcomm Licensee, Inc.

Comments at 15; Metricom Reply at 7; and San

Bernardino Microwave Society Reply at 3.

24See e.g., Apple Computer Comments at 27,

WINForum Reply at 23, and Consumer Electronics

Manufacturers’ Association Comments at 7.

25We also note that it may also be appropriate to

reassess the technical parameters governing U–NII

devices in light of second generation MSS systems.

For example, second generation MSS systems may

be more sensitive and therefore more susceptible to

interference from U–NII devices. On the other hand,

if European HIPERLAN systems proliferate and

operate at more power than U–NII devices, second

generation MSS systems may be required to more

robust and immune to interference from such

devices.

power operations.18 The Commission

has determined that U–NII devices

should be governed by minimal

technical rules which permit maximum

flexibility in the way these devices are

implemented. Specifically, the

Commission has concluded that an

increase in the power limits proposed in

the NPRM is supported by new material

in the record in this proceeding, but

does not believe unrestricted antenna

gain should be permitted due to

interference concerns. The Commission

has determined that the public interest

is best serviced by increasing the

maximum peak power limit as follows:

50 mW peak transmitter output power

with up to 6 dBi antenna gain (equates

to 200 mW EIRP) permitted in the 5.15–

5.25 GHz band; 250 mW peak

transmitter output power with up to 6

dBi antenna gain (equates to 1 W EIRP)

permitted in the 5.25–5.35 GHz band;

and 1 W peak transmitter output power

with up to 6 dBi antenna gain (equates

to 4 W EIRP) permitted in the 5.725–

5.825 GHz band. In addition, to permit

manufacturers flexibility in designing

U–NII equipment, the Commission will

permit the use of higher directional

antenna gain provided there is a

corresponding reduction in transmitter

output power of one dB for every dB

that the directional antenna gain

exceeds 6 dBi. Also, U–NII use of the

5.15–5.25 GHz band is restricted to

indoor operations only. Further, this

action adopts a power spectral density

(‘‘PSD’’) requirement for U–NII devices

that would require that the maximum

power be spread across a bandwidth of

at least 20 megahertz. This PSD

requirement will ensure that U–NII

devices spread its signal energy evenly

across the band and encourages the use

of this spectrum by wideband high data

rate applications, but permits nonwideband operations at reduced powers.

These increased power limits will

permit U–NII equipment manufacturers,

many of which may be small businesses,

more flexibility to develop products to

meet market demands.

24. Further, the Commission

considered several alternatives from the

comments regarding a spectrum

etiquette for U–NII devices. Although

some parties support the proposed

interim ‘‘listen-before-talk’’ (‘‘LBT’’)

spectrum etiquette until industry can

develop a formal spectrum etiquette,19

others oppose the interim etiquette

because it would limit the flexibility of

U–NII devices to use different

technologies.20 Further, several U–NII

proponents support the adoption of an

industry developed spectrum etiquette

to govern unlicensed use of this

spectrum.21 Metricom, however,

suggests that rather than adopting a

complex spectrum etiquette, U–NII

devices should be required to use

spread spectrum techniques.22 The

Commission has now concluded that

the proposed LBT spectrum etiquette

could delay deployment of U–NII

devices and hinder innovation in the

development of these devices. Rather,

the Commission has concluded that

simple technical rules, such as PSD

limits and out-of-band emission

requirements, should be sufficient to

ensure spectrum sharing between

incumbent operations and new U–NII

devices. The Commission declined to

adopt a spectrum etiquette, any

channelization plan, or a minimum

modulation efficiency requirement

because such requirements may

preclude certain technologies or some of

the many different concepts envisioned

by U–NII proponents. We believe this

action will benefit small entities by

permitting these entities to develop

innovative equipment to meet market

demands without having to follow

protocols governing use of the spectrum.

25. Finally, we proposed to establish

parameters in the rules (‘‘safe harbor’’),

under which U–NII devices complying

with these parameters could operate

without being considered sources of

harmful interference. Incumbent parties

oppose ‘‘safe harbor’’ rules or any action

that would provide unlicensed devices

addition spectrum rights.23 However, U–

NII proponents request that these

devices be protected either by ‘‘safe

harbor’’ rules or by providing a primary

allocation status for the unlicensed

operations.24 After considering the

alternatives, the Commission concluded

that ‘‘safe harbor’’ rules are not

necessary at this time to provide

assurances to assurance to U–NII

operators that their communications

will not be prohibited. Rather, the

Commission invited MSS parties to

monitor the emissions from U–NII

devices in the 5.15–5.25 GHz band and

if emissions approach the 10 dBW/MHz

level to request that we reassess the use

of this band through future rule

making.25 At that time the Commission

could determine if future U–NII devices

should be required to operate at

different technical standards. This

approach will provide both MSS feeder

link and U–NII operations with an

appropriate level of protection and

assurance for the continuation of their

operations. While, the Commission is

confident that an interference situation

will not arise, this approach will permit

it to develop regulatory solutions that

will adequately protect the investments

of both services, if such a situation were

to develop.

26. Report to Congress

The Commission shall send a copy of

this Final Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis, along with this Report and

Order, in a report to Congress pursuant

to the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5

U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). A copy of this FRFA

will also be published in the Federal

Register.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 1

Administrative practice and

procedure.

47 CFR Part 2

Communications equipment, Radio.

47 CFR Part 15

Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

Rules Changes

Parts 1, 2 and 15 of title 47 of the

Code of Federal Regulations are

amended as follows:

PART 1—PRACTICE AND

PROCEDURE

1. The authority citation for part 1

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 79 et seq., and 47

U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), and 303(r).

2. Section 1.1307 is amended by

revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as

follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 4655

§ 1.1307 Actions which may have a

significant environmental effect, for which

Environmental Assessments (EAs) must be

prepared.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) Mobile and portable transmitting

devices that operate in the Cellular

Radiotelephone Service, the Personal

Communications Services (PCS), the

Satellite Communications Services, the

Maritime Services (ship earth stations

only) and covered Specialized Mobile

Radio Service providers authorized

under subpart H of part 22, part 24, part

25, part 80, and part 90 of this chapter

are subject to routine environmental

evaluation for RF exposure prior to

equipment authorization or use, as

specified in §§ 2.1091 and 2.1093 of this

chapter. All unlicensed PCS, unlicensed

NII and millimeter wave devices are

also subject to routine environmental

evaluation for RF exposure prior to

equipment authorization or use, as

specified in §§ 15.253(f), 15.255(g),

15.319(i), and 15.407(f) of this chapter.

All other mobile, portable, and

unlicensed transmitting devices are

categorically excluded from routine

environmental evaluation for RF

exposure under §§ 2.1091 and 2.1093 of

this chapter except as specified in

paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section.

* * * * *

PART 2—FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS

AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS;

GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for Part 2

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 4, 302, 303 and 307 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as amended,

47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303 and 307, unless

otherwise noted.

2. Section 2.1091 is amended by

revising paragraphs (c) and (d)

introductory text to read as follows:

§ 2.1091 Radiofrequency radiation

exposure evaluation: mobile and

unlicensed devices.

* * * * *

(c) Mobile devices that operate in the

Cellular Radiotelephone Service, the

Personal Communications Services, the

Satellite Communications Services, the

Maritime Services and the Specialized

Mobile Radio Service authorized under

subpart H of part 22 of this chapter, part

24 of this chapter, part 25 of this

chapter, part 80 of this chapter (ship

earth station devices only) and part 90

of this chapter (‘‘covered’’ SMR devices

only, as defined in the note to Table 1

of § 1.1307(b)(1) of this chapter), are

subject to routine environmental

evaluation for RF exposure prior to

equipment authorization or use if their

effective radiated power (ERP) is 1.5

watts or more. Unlicensed personal

communications service, unlicensed

millimeter wave devices and unlicensed

NII devices authorized under § 15.253,

§ 15.255 and subparts D and E of part 15

of this chapter are also subject to routine

environmental evaluation for RF

exposure prior to equipment

authorization or use, regardless of their

power used, unless they meet the

definition of a portable device as

specified in § 2.1093(b). All other

mobile and unlicensed transmitting

devices are categorically excluded from

routine environmental evaluation for RF

exposure prior to equipment

authorization, except as specified in

§§ 1.1307(c) and 1.1307(d) of this

chapter. Applications for equipment

authorization of mobile and unlicensed

transmitting devices subject to routine

environmental evaluation must contain

a statement confirming compliance with

the limits specified in paragraph (d) of

this section as part of their application.

Technical information showing the

basis for this statement must be

submitted to the Commission upon

request.

(d) The limits to be used for

evaluation are specified in § 1.1310 of

this chapter. All unlicensed personal

communications service (PCS) devices

and unlicensed NII devices shall be

subject to the limits for general

population/uncontrolled exposure.

* * * * *

3. Section 2.1093(c) is revised to read

as follows:

§ 2.1093 Radiofrequency radiation

exposure evaluation: portable devices.

* * * * *

(c) Portable devices that operate in the

Cellular Radiotelephone Service, the

Personal Communications Services, the

Satellite Communications services, the

Maritime Services and the Specialized

Mobile Radio Service authorized under

subpart H of part 22 of this chapter, part

24 of this chapter, part 25 of this

chapter, part 80 of this chapter (ship

earth station devices only), part 90 of

this chapter (‘‘covered’’ SMR devices

only, as defined in the note to Table 1

of § 1.1307(b)(1) of this chapter), and

portable unlicensed personal

communication service, unlicensed NII

devices and millimeter wave devices

authorized under § 15.253, § 15.255 or

subparts D and E of part 15 of this

chapter are subject to routine

environmental evaluation for RF

exposure prior to equipment

authorization or use. All other portable

transmitting devices are categorically

excluded from routine environmental

evaluation for RF exposure prior to

equipment authorization, except as

specified in §§ 1.1307(c) and 1.1307(d)

of this chapter. Applications for

equipment authorization of portable

transmitting devices subject to routine

environmental evaluation must contain

a statement confirming compliance with

the limits specified in paragraph (d) of

this section as part of their application.

Technical information showing the

basis for this statement must be

submitted to the Commission upon

request.

* * * * *

PART 15—RADIO FREQUENCY

DEVICES

1. The authority citation for Part 15

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303, 304,

307 and 544A.

2. Section 15.17(a) is revised to read

as follows:

§ 15.17 Susceptibility to interference.

(a) Parties responsible for equipment

compliance are advised to consider the

proximity and the high power of nonGovernment licensed radio stations,

such as broadcast, amateur, land mobile,

and non-geostationary mobile satellite

feeder link earth stations, and of U.S.

Government radio stations, which could

include high-powered radar systems,

when choosing operating frequencies

during the design of their equipment so

as to reduce the susceptibility for

receiving harmful interference.

Information on non-Government use of

the spectrum can be obtained by

consulting the Table of Frequency

Allocations in § 2.106 of this chapter.

* * * * *

3. Section 15.205(a) is amended in the

table by removing the entry for 4.5–5.25

in the GHz column and adding a new

entry for 4.5–5.15 in its place to read as

follows:

§ 15.205 Restricted bands of operation.

(a) * * *

MHz MHz MHz GHz

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.5–5.15
4656 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

MHz MHz MHz GHz

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

* * * * *

4. A new Subpart E is added to Part

15 to read as follows:

Subpart E—Unlicensed National

Information Infrastructure Devices

Sec.

15.401 Scope.

15.403 Definitions.

15.405 Cross reference.

15.407 General technical requirements.

Subpart E—Unlicensed National

Information Infrastructure Devices

§ 15.401 Scope.

This subpart sets out the regulations

for unlicensed National Information

Infrastructure (U–NII) devices operating

in the 5.15—5.35 GHz and 5.725—5.825

GHz bands.

§ 15.403 Definitions.

(a) U–NII devices (Unlicensed).

Intentional radiators operating in the

frequency bands 5.15—5.35 GHz and

5.725—5.825 GHz that provide a wide

array of wideband, high data rate,

digital, mobile and fixed

communications for individuals,

businesses, and institutions.

(b) Peak transmit power. The peak

power output as measured over an

interval of time equal to the frame rate

or transmission burst of the device

under all conditions of modulation.

Usually this parameter is measured as a

conducted emission by direct

connection of a calibrated test

instrument to the equipment under test.

If the device cannot be connected

directly, alternative techniques

acceptable to the Commission may be

used.

§ 15.405 Cross reference.

(a) The provisions of subparts A, B,

and C of this part apply to unlicensed

U–NII devices, except where specific

provisions are contained in this subpart

E. Manufacturers should note that this

includes the provisions of §§ 15.203 and

15.205.

(b) The requirements of this subpart E

apply only to the radio transmitter

contained in the U–NII device. Other

aspects of the operation of a U–NII

device may be subject to requirements

contained elsewhere in this chapter. In

particular, a U–NII device that includes

digital circuitry not directly associated

with the radio transmitter also is subject

to the requirements for unintentional

radiators in subpart B of this part.

§ 15.407 General technical requirements.

(a) Power limits:

(1) For the band 5.15–5.25 GHz, the

peak transmit power over the frequency

band of operation shall not exceed 50

mW. In addition, the peak power

spectral density shall not exceed 2.5

mW/MHz. If transmitting antennas of

directional gain greater than 6 dBi are

used, both the peak transmit power and

the peak power spectral density shall be

reduced by the amount in dB that the

directional gain of the antenna exceeds

6 dBi.

(2) For the band 5.25–5.35 GHz, the

peak transmit power over the frequency

band of operation shall not exceed 250

mW. In addition, the peak power

spectral density shall not exceed 12.5

mW/MHz. If transmitting antennas of

directional gain greater than 6 dBi are

used, both the peak transmit power and

the peak power spectral density shall be

reduced by the amount in dB that the

directional gain of the antenna exceeds

6 dBi.

(3) For the band 5.725–5.825 GHz, the

peak transmit power over the frequency

band of operation shall not exceed 1 W.

In addition, the peak power spectral

density shall not exceed 50 mW/MHz. If

transmitting antennas of directional gain

greater than 6 dBi are used, both the

peak transmit power and the peak

power spectral density shall be reduced

by the amount in dB that the directional

gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi.

(4) The peak transmit power must be

measured over any interval of

continuous transmission using

instrumentation calibrated in terms of

an rms-equivalent voltage. The

measurement results shall be properly

adjusted for any instrument limitations,

such as detector response times, limited

resolution bandwidth capability when

compared to the emission bandwidth,

sensitivity, etc., so as to obtain a true

peak measurement for the emission in

question over the full bandwidth of the

channel.

(5) The peak power spectral density is

measured as a conducted emission by

direct connection of a calibrated test

instrument to the equipment under test.

Measurements are made using a

resolution bandwidth of 1 MHz. If the

device can not be connected directly,

alternative techniques acceptable to the

Commission may be used.

(b) The peak levels of emissions

outside of the frequency band of

operation shall be attenuated below the

maximum peak power spectral density

contained within the band of operation

in accordance with the following limits:

(1) For transmitters operating in the

band 5.15–5.25 GHz: all emissions

within the frequency range 5.14–5.15

GHz and 5.35–5.36 GHz must be

attenuated by a factor of at least 27 dB;

within the frequency range outside

these bands by a factor of at least 37 dB.

(2) For transmitters operating in the

5.25–5.35 GHz band: all emissions

within the frequency range from the

band edge to 10 MHz above or below the

band edge must be attenuated by a

factor of at least 34 dB; for frequencies

10 MHz or greater above or below the

band edge by a factor of at least 44 dB.

(3) For transmitters operating in the

5.725–5.825 GHz band: all emissions

within the frequency range from the

band edge to 10 MHz above or below the

band edge must be attenuated by a

factor of at least 40 dB; for frequencies

10 MHz or greater above or below the

band edge by a factor of at least 50 dB.

(4) The above emission measurements

shall be performed using a minimum

resolution bandwidth of 1 MHz. A lower

resolution bandwidth may be employed

near the band edge, when necessary,

provided the measured energy is

integrated to show the total power over

1 MHz. Regardless of the attenuation

levels shown above, emissions outside

the frequency range of operation do not

need to be attenuated below the general

radiated emission limits in § 15.209.

(5) Unwanted emissions must comply

with the general field strength limits set

forth in § 15.209. Further, any U–NII

devices using an AC power line are

required to comply also with the

conducted limits set forth in § 15.207.

(6) The provisions of § 15.205 of this

part apply to intentional radiators

operating under this section.

(7) When measuring the emission

limits, the nominal carrier frequency

shall be adjusted as close to the upper

and lower frequency block edges as the

design of the equipment permits.

(c) The device shall automatically

discontinue transmission in case of

either absence of information to

transmit or operational failure. These

provisions are not intended to preclude

the transmission of control or signalling

information or the use of repetitive

codes used by certain digital

technologies to complete frame or burst

intervals.

(d) Any U–NII device that operates in

the 5.15–5.25 GHz band shall use a
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 4657

transmitting antenna that is an integral

part of the device.

(e) Within the 5.15–5.25 GHz band,

U–NII devices will be restricted to

indoor operations to reduce any

potential for harmful interference to cochannel MSS operations.

(f) U–NII devices are subject to the

radio frequency radiation exposure

requirements specified in §§ 1.1307(b),

2.1091 and 2.1093 of this chapter, as

appropriate. All equipment shall be

considered to operate in a ‘‘general

population/uncontrolled’’ environment.

Applications for equipment

authorization of devices operating under

this section must contain a statement

confirming compliance with these

requirements for both fundamental

emissions and unwanted emissions.

Technical information showing the

basis for this statement must be

submitted to the Commission upon

request.

(g) The frequency stability of the

carrier frequency of an intentional

radiator operating under this section

shall be ±10 ppm over 10 milliseconds.

The frequency stability shall be

maintained over a temperature variation

of ¥20 degrees to +50 degrees Celsius

at normal supply voltage, and over a

variation in the primary supply voltage

of 85 percent to 115 percent of the rated

supply voltage at a temperature of +20

degrees Celsius. For equipment that is

capable of operating only from a battery,

the frequency stability tests shall be

performed using a new battery without

any further requirement to vary supply

voltage.

[FR Doc. 97–2007 Filed 1–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

47 CFR Parts 61 and 69

[CC Docket No. 94–1; FCC 96–488]

Price Cap Performance Review for

Local Exchange Carriers

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final Rule.

SUMMARY: On September 14, 1995, the

Commission adopted a Second Further

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this

docket, seeking comment on how its

price cap regulation of local exchange

carriers should be revised as the

competition faced by those carriers

grows. In particular, the Commission

sought comment on relaxing the

procedural requirements for establishing

new rate elements for new switched

access services, and eliminating the

lower boundaries of the service band

indices. In this Third Report and Order,

the Commission adopts the rules it

proposed. These rule revisions are

intended to make it easier for local

exchange carriers to introduce new

services, and to lower rates.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective June 30, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Lerner, Attorney, Common

Carrier Bureau, Competitive Pricing

Division, (202) 418–1530. For additional

information concerning the information

collections contained in this Report and

Order contact Dorothy Conway at 202–

418–0217, or via the Internet at

dconway@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Report

and Order adopted December 23, 1996,

and released December 24, 1996. The

full text of this Report and Order is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919

M St., NW., Washington, DC. The

complete text also may be obtained

through the World Wide Web, at http:/

/www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/

CommonlCarrier/Notices/fcc96488.wp,

or may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M St., NW.,

Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037. The

Commission released a Second Further

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CC

Docket No. 94–1, Further Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No.

93–124, and Second Further Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking CC Docket No.

93–197 (all three published at 60 FR

49539 (September 25, 1995)) (Price Cap

Second FNPRM) to seek comment on

the rules adopted in the Third Report

and Order.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis: As

required by the Regulatory Flexibility

Act, the Third Report and Order

contains a Final Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis which is set forth in Section

XI.F of the Third Report and Order. The

Commission concluded that the

Regulatory Flexibility Act is not

applicable because the rules adopted in

the Third Report and Order will not

have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act: Public

burden for the collection of information

is estimated as follows:

OMB Approval Number: None.

Title: Third Report and Order, Price

Cap Performance Review for Local

Exchange Carriers.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: New collection.

Information collection Number of

respondents

Annual hour

burden per

response

Total annual

burden

Elimination of the lower Service Band Index and Petition to offer new switched access services ........ 13 10 130

Total Annual Burden: 130 hours.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Estimated costs per respondent: $0.

Needs and Uses: The agency will use

the data submission to review Local

Exchange Carriers’ proposed new

switched access services. Public

reporting burden for the collection of

information is estimated to average 10

hours per response. Send comments on

the agency’s need for this information,

the accuracy of the provided burden

estimates, and any suggested methods

for minimizing respondent burden,

including through the use of automated

collection techniques to the Federal

Communications Commission, Records

Management Branch, Washington, D.C.

20554.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Act

Certification

In the Price Cap Second FNPRM, we

certified that the Regulatory Flexibility

Act did not apply to this rulemaking

proceeding because none of the rule

amendments under consideration would

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

We concluded that the proposed rules

would apply only to carriers subject to

price cap regulation for local exchange

access, and such carriers are generally

large corporations or affiliates of such

corporations. No comments were

received concerning the proposed

certification. Since our initial

certification, certain changes occurred.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act was

amended by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

1996 (‘‘SBREFA’’), and Citizens elected

price cap regulation. Nonetheless, we

certify that the rules adopted herein will

not have a significant economic impact