[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 166 (Wednesday, August 27, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45330-45334]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22550]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 15

[ET Docket No. 94-124; FCC 97-267]


Use of Radio Frequencies Above 40 GHz for New Radio Applications

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: By this Memorandum Opinion and Order the Commission grants the 
petition for reconsideration of Cutler-Hammer by amending the 
regulations to permit operation of lower power fixed radar systems in 
the 59-64 GHz band, permits interim equipment approval and operation of 
unlicensed services in the 59-64 GHz band provided that the equipment 
complies with the proposed spectrum etiquette contained in the Fourth 
Notice or Proposed Rule Making, denies Vorad Safety Systems, Inc.'s 
petition for reconsideration requesting relaxation of the spurious 
emission limits for vehicle radar systems operating in the 46.7-46.9 
GHz band, and corrects two typographical errors contained in the First 
Report and Order (``Order'') in this proceeding.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 26, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John A. Reed (202) 418-2455 or Rodney 
P. Conway (202) 418-2904. Via electronic mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e58f97808081a5838686cb828a93"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="adc7dfc8c8c9edcbcece83cac2db">[email protected]</span></a> or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cfbdaca0a1b8aeb68fa9acace1a8a0b9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5c2e3f33322b3d251c3a3f3f723b332a">[email protected]</span></a>, Office of Engineering and Technology, Federal 
Communications Commission.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET Docket 94-124, FCC 97-267 adopted July 
28, 1997, and released August 14, 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, 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20036.

Summary of the Memorandum Opinion and Order

    1. Cutler-Hammer, a manufacturer of sensors used in industrial 
applications, filed a petition for reconsideration requesting the 
Commission amend its rules to permit the operation of lower power, 
fixed field disturbance sensors (radar) in the 59-64 GHz frequency 
band. Cutler-Hammer states that lower frequency sensors of the type 
currently being manufactured have performance limitations that 
millimeter wave sensors can overcome and improve on sensor performance 
with the 5 GHz of frequency bandwidth.
    2. Cutler-Hammer recognizes that a number of parties participating 
in this proceeding expressed concern about suggestions that vehicle 
radar systems be permitted to operate in the 60-61 GHz band. It agrees 
that the potential for interference from mobile field disturbance 
sensors to fixed operations is hard to predict and to avoid. Fixed 
field disturbance sensors operating characteristics are much more 
predictable and the potential for causing and receiving interference is 
more easily determined, while the operating characteristics of mobile 
field disturbance sensors are very difficult to predict due to the 
inherently variable nature of the system, which results in 
unpredictable radiation patterns and potentials for causing and 
receiving interference. Cutler-Hammer indicates that, in contrast, the 
low power fixed field disturbance sensors it desires to employ would 
operate with very little power and would create a predictable radiation 
pattern, permitting them to be designed and installed in such a way 
that they would neither be susceptible to, nor likely to cause, 
interference. Accordingly, Cutler-Hammer believes that the prohibition 
against the use of fixed field disturbance sensors is unnecessarily 
broad and is not supported by the record.
    3. The Commission agrees with Cutler-Hammer that fixed field 
disturbance sensors at the proposed output level of 9 nW/cm<SUP>2</SUP> 
as measured at 3 meters from the transmit antenna would not be likely 
to be a source of interference to other communications systems 
operating with an output level of up to 9 <greek-m>W/cm<SUP>2</SUP> as 
measured at 3 meters from the transmit antenna in the 59-64 GHz band. 
This is the only unlicensed frequency band under the Commission's 
regulations that provides a bandwidth this wide and at a power level 
that makes operation practical. Accordingly, the Commission is granting 
the request from Cutler-Hammer to remove the prohibition against fixed 
field disturbance sensors. The Commission also recognizes that, in many 
cases, the manufacturing process may require that the sensor be capable 
of movement, even though the equipment in which the sensor is installed 
is fixed. Thus, the Commission will clarify in its rules that the 
permission to operate fixed field disturbance sensors applies to 
sensors installed in fixed equipment, even if the sensor itself moves 
within the equipment. However, this action does not affect the 
Commission's existing prohibition on mobile field disturbance sensors 
in the 59-64 GHz frequency band.
    4. Although the Commission stated previously in this proceeding 
that operation in the 59-64 GHz band would be permitted only after 
adoption of a spectrum etiquette, we now believe that this prohibition 
no longer is necessary and would be detrimental to the introduction of 
new products and services. Therefore, the Commission will permit 
operation in the 59-64 GHz band, of any authorized, unlicensed 
communications devices, including fixed field disturbance sensors, on 
an interim basis pending consideration of the Spectrum Etiquette 
proposed in the Fourth Notice of Proposed Rule Making. The Commission 
believes that permitting interim operation will serve the public 
interest by permitting early rollout of new and innovative technologies 
and services. The Commission will require, however, that

[[Page 45331]]

equipment approved for such interim operation comply with the proposed 
Spectrum Etiquette. The Commission stresses that any spectrum etiquette 
finally adopted in this proceeding may differ significantly from the 
proposed Spectrum Etiquette contained in the Fourth NPRM and that 
manufacture and operation of equipment under this interim provision is 
at the risk of the manufacturer and operator exclusively. The 
Commission also stresses that initial operation which complies with the 
proposed Spectrum Etiquette does not guarantee continued operation if 
any changes in that etiquette are adopted.
    5. Vorad Safety Systems, Inc. (``Vorad''), a manufacturer of field 
disturbance sensors used for vehicle collision avoidance systems, 
requests reconsideration of the spurious emission limit for sensors 
operating in the 46 GHz band. Vorad requests that the limits on 
spurious emissions applicable to field disturbance sensors operating in 
the 76 GHz band also be applied to sensors operating in the 46 GHz 
band. The limits on spurious emissions from transmitters in the 76 GHz 
band are 300 pW/cm<SUP>2</SUP> at 3 meters for side or rear looking 
sensors and 600 pW/cm<SUP>2</SUP> at 3 meters for forward looking 
sensors. The limit for spurious emissions from transmitters operating 
in the 46 GHz band is 2 pW/cm<SUP>2</SUP> at 3 meters.
    6. Vorad adds that the Commission relaxed the standard for vehicle 
radar systems in the 76 GHz band but adhered to its strict proposal for 
radar operating in the 46 GHz band. Vorad states that the adopted limit 
conflicts with the Commission's stated goal of encouraging expeditious 
development of an important safety product. Vorad adds that meeting the 
stricter limit using current technology would be possible only by 
reducing operating power, which would significantly degrade the 
performance of the system.
    7. Vorad argues that the limit on spurious emissions adopted by the 
Commission for the 46 GHz band is not technically justified. It states 
that the Commission based its decision on the need to protect existing 
and future U.S. Government uses of the 94 GHz and 140 GHz bands. 
However, Vorad indicates that the evidence in the record does not 
demonstrate that there is a real threat of interference to such uses by 
vehicle radar systems, since vehicle radar systems use highly 
directionalized antennas and will primarily be used on the nation's 
highways. It adds that it has operated vehicle radar systems in the 24 
GHz band for several years and has been experimenting with operations 
in the 47 GHz band for over a year. Vorad indicates that the spurious 
emissions from its 24 GHz and 47 GHz transmissions were suppressed by 
only 50 dB, and that no complaints of interference were received. Thus, 
Vorad states that its experience with these systems demonstrates that 
an attenuation standard of 50 dB is sufficient to protect other 
spectrum users. Vorad adds that there is no evidence that operations in 
the 46 GHz band will present more of an interference risk than do 
operations in the 76 GHz band, for which a much more reasonable 
standard was adopted. The limits on spurious emissions from 
transmitters in the 76 GHz band are 300 pW/cm<SUP>2</SUP> at 3 meters 
for side or rear looking sensors and 600 pW/cm<SUP>2</SUP> at 3 meters 
for forward looking sensors. If the transmitter is operated at its 
maximum permitted output levels, spurious emissions must be attenuated 
by at least 50 dB.
    8. Finally, Vorad argues that vehicle radar systems in the 76 GHz 
band will create spurious emissions over a much larger range of 
spectrum than will operations in the 46 GHz band. It states that the 
narrow 200 MHz bandwidth employed by transmitters in the 46 GHz band 
will limit the bandwidth of harmonic emissions. In contrast, the 
permissible bandwidth of the 76 GHz radar is 1000 MHz, resulting in 
spurious emissions over much more of the spectrum due to 
intermodulation frequency products.
    9. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration 
(NTIA) was the only party to file comments in response to the Vorad 
petition. NTIA strongly opposes VORAD's request to relax the spurious 
emission limit. It states that the majority of U.S. Government 
operations occur in the propagation windows centered at 94 GHz, 140 GHz 
and 220 GHz. The band centered at 220 GHz is centered at a null for 
water absorption, while still having relatively low attenuation 
properties due to absorption from dry air. Since the bands being 
addressed in this proceeding did not exceed 155 GHz and spurious 
emissions were addressed only below 200 GHz, the 220 GHz band was not 
addressed in the Commission's earlier considerations. It adds that new 
radio receiver technologies using wide bandwidth (typically 4-10 GHz) 
and improved sensitivities have resulted in greater resolution and 
precision for detection and guidance systems and remote sensing of the 
environment. NTIA points out that a joint Federal Aviation 
Administration/Department of Defense/Industry program is currently 
underway to develop and test ``synthetic vision'' systems intended for 
use in airport environments during poor visibility. Further, it states 
that recent analysis indicates that the noise threshold of these 
receivers can be more than 30 dB below the threshold assumed by the 
Commission in its Order for this type of equipment, so further 
relaxation of the limit on spurious emissions could have serious 
consequences on the effectiveness of systems in these bands. Finally, 
NTIA states that it invited Vorad to present its views to the 
Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC), but that Vorad did not 
respond to this offer. NTIA adds that it remains willing to assist 
Vorad should it decide to pursue an effort to demonstrate compatibility 
of its equipment, but in the interim urges the Commission not to relax 
the limit on spurious emissions.
    10. The Commission is denying Vorad's petition to relax the limits 
on spurious emissions from field disturbance sensors operating in the 
46 GHz band. The Commission recognized in the Order that its decision 
might have an adverse economic impact on manufacturers but concluded 
that the limit was appropriate to protect present and future U.S. 
Government operations in the 94 and 140 GHz bands. It stated that the 
94 GHz and 140 GHz bands share many potential uses, since these bands 
are in the only two atmospheric transmission windows between 60 GHz and 
300 GHz. The 94 GHz band is employed for radio astronomy, U.S. 
Government passive imaging systems, and Department of Defense 
classified applications. The 140 GHz band is used for radio astronomy 
and Government military passive imaging systems. In particular, the 
Commission noted that the Advanced Research Projects Agency's MIMIC 
program to develop lower-cost millimeter wave components has involved 
technology in the 94 GHz area and is likely to increase the use of this 
and other millimeter wave bands. The Commission, in the Order, added 
that, while it appreciated the arguments in the comments from General 
Motors Corporation and GM Hughes Electronics for relaxing the spurious 
emission limits, it did not agree that directional antennas and the use 
of vehicle radar systems on highways would be sufficient to eliminate 
interference to airborne passive sensors. Further, as noted by NTIA in 
its comments on Vorad's petition, current development of a passive 
imaging system used as an aircraft landing aid in adverse weather 
conditions involves resolution capabilities which are directly related 
to the amount of RF signal noise in the

[[Page 45332]]

band. Thus, we continue to believe that the presence of excessive 
spurious emissions from other signal sources, e.g., harmonic emissions 
from vehicle radar systems in the 46 GHz band, would degrade the 
usefulness of these bands for passive imaging and other possible 
functions.
    11. While Vorad indicates that its previous experience with field 
disturbance sensors operating at 24 GHz and at 47 GHz and employing a 
spurious emission suppression of 50 dB has not resulted in complaints 
of interference, the Commission does not find this sufficiently 
conclusive to relax the spurious emission requirements. First, 
operations in the 94 GHz and 140 GHz bands are only now being 
developed. As U.S. Government and other operations increase in these 
bands, along with the proliferation of field disturbance sensors in the 
46 GHz band, the potential for interference would also increase. 
Second, Vorad's argument does not address the cumulative effects of 
multiple transmitters operating simultaneously within a service area. 
Finally, 50 dB attenuation of the spurious emissions from transmitters 
operating in the 24 GHz band results in an emission level that is 
relatively close to the emission limit adopted in the Order for 
spurious emissions from the 46 GHz band.
    12. The Commission does not agree with Vorad's claims that harmonic 
emissions from the 76 GHz system present the same, or greater, 
interference potential to 94 GHz and 140 GHz systems as sensors 
operating in the 46 GHz band, even if the 76 GHz devices use frequency 
doublers or triplers to achieve the fundamental emission. If, as 
suggested by Vorad, the 76 GHz systems generate their fundamental 
emissions through the use of a 25.5 GHz oscillator, the third harmonic 
is at 76.5 GHz, the fourth harmonic is at 102 GHz, the fifth harmonic 
is at 127.5 GHz, and the sixth harmonic is at 153 GHz. If the 76 GHz 
systems generate their fundamental emissions through the use of a 38.25 
GHz oscillator, the second harmonic is at 76.5 GHz, the third harmonic 
is at 114.75 GHz, and the fourth harmonic is at 153 GHz. In every case, 
the harmonic emissions from the 76 GHz system are well removed from the 
94 GHz and 140 GHz bands. While Vorad also argues that the wider 
bandwidth of the 76 GHz system will result in spurious emissions 
covering a larger bandwidth, as compared to systems in the 46 GHz band, 
this wider bandwidth is not sufficient to cause the harmonic emissions 
to fall within the 94 GHz or 140 GHz bands.
    13. We decline to permit a higher spurious emission level for field 
disturbance sensors operating in the 46 GHz band. Accordingly, the 
Petition for Reconsideration of Vorad Safety Services, Inc. is denied.
    14. The Commission is taking this opportunity to correct two 
typographical errors contained in the Order in this proceeding. Section 
15.215(a) is being amended to reflect the two new rule Secs. 15.253 and 
15.255 covering operations above 40 GHz. Section 15.215 notes the 
exceptions to the general emission limits contained in Sec. 15.209 and 
should have been amended in the Order. Section 15.31(f)(1) is also 
being corrected to reflect that the inverse linear-distance-squared 
extrapolation factor (40 dB per decade) for measurements above 40 GHz 
applies only to measurements performed in the near field. In response 
to the Second Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 61 FR 14041, March 29, 
1996, in this proceeding, Epsilon Lambda, General Motors and Vorad 
expressed concern that measurements at the specified distance of 3 
meters could result in measurements in the near field, requiring the 
use of an inverse linear-distance-squared extrapolation factor (40 dB 
per decade) instead of inverse linear-distance (20 dB per decade), as 
previously specified in the rules. The Commission agreed with these 
comments but inadvertently stated that all measurements above 40 GHz 
could be made at a distance greater than 3 meters using an inverse 
linear-distance-squared extrapolation factor, even if the measurements 
were not being performed in the near field. However, the inverse 
linear-distance-squared factor correctly extrapolates the change in 
signal level versus distance when measurements are made in the near 
field, whereas the inverse linear-distance factor correctly 
extrapolates the change in signal level versus distance when 
measurements are made in the far field. The use of the inverse linear-
distance-squared extrapolation factor under all measurement conditions 
could permit a manufacturer to increase measurement distance until the 
results demonstrated compliance, even though the emissions exceed the 
limit when the product is measured at a shorter distance. Accordingly, 
the rules are being amended to indicate that the use of an inverse 
linear-distance-squared extrapolation factor applies only to near-field 
measurements. Measurements in the far field will continue to be 
extrapolated employing an inverse linear-distance extrapolation factor.
    15. In accordance with the above discussion and 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 Petition for Reconsideration filed by Cutler-Hammer, 
Inc., as supplemented, to permit operation of low power, fixed field 
disturbance sensors in the 60 GHz band is granted as described below by 
the amendments to part 15 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations are 
amended as shown below, effective September 26, 1997.
    16. It is further ordered That the Petition for Reconsideration 
filed by Vorad Safety Systems, Inc., is denied.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    17. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 
U.S.C. 603 (``RFA''), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(``IRFA'') was incorporated into the Notice of Proposed Rule Making 
(``NPRM'') in ET Docket No. 94-124.<SUP>1</SUP> The Commission sought 
written public comments on the proposals in the NPRM, including the 
IRFA. The Commission's Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``FRFA'') 
in this Memorandum Opinion and Order conforms to the RFA, as amended by 
the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (CWAAA), Public Law 
104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996).<SUP>2</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 9 FCC Rcd 7078 (1994), 59 FR 61304, November 30, 1994.
    \2\ Subtitle II of the CWAAA is ``The Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996'' (SBREFA), codified at 5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. Need for and Objective of the Rules. Our objectives are to 
permit the operation within the 59-64 GHz band of fixed field 
disturbance sensors in an industrial environment. These products were 
prohibited under the Order in ET Docket No. 94-124.<SUP>3</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 11 FCC Rcd 4481 (1995), 61 FR 14041, March 29, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    19. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in 
Response to the IRFA. No comments were submitted in direct response to 
the IRFA. However, Cutler-Hammer, Inc. filed a Petition for 
Reconsideration requesting that the Commission amend its rules to 
permit the operation within the 59-64 GHz band of fixed field 
disturbance sensors in an industrial environment. No comments were 
filed in response to this petition.
    20. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to 
Which the Rules Will Apply. For the purposes of this Memorandum Opinion 
and Order, the RFA defines a ``small business'' to be the same as a 
``small business concern'' under the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632, 
unless the Commission

[[Page 45333]]

has developed one or more definitions that are appropriate to its 
activities.<SUP>4</SUP> Under the Small Business Act, a ``small 
business concern'' is one that: (1) Is independently owned and 
operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) meets 
any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).<SUP>5</SUP> Since the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
amendments were not in effect until the record in this proceeding was 
closed, the Commission did not request information regarding the number 
of small businesses 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 in addition to Cutler-Hammer, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the 
definition of ``small business concern'' in 5 U.S.C. 632).
    \5\ See 15 U.S.C. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    21. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities 
applicable to unlicensed communications devices. Therefore, we will 
utilize the SBA definition applicable to manufacturers of Radio and 
Television Broadcasting and Communications Equipment. According to the 
SBA regulations, unlicensed transmitter manufacturers must have 750 or 
fewer employees in order to qualify as a small business 
concern.<SUP>6</SUP> Census Bureau data indicates that there are 858 
U.S. companies that manufacture radio and television broadcasting and 
communications equipment, and that 778 of these firms have fewer than 
750 employees and would be classified as small entities.<SUP>7</SUP> 
The Census Bureau category is very broad, and specific figures are not 
available as to how many of these firms will manufacture unlicensed 
communications devices. However, we believe that many of them may 
qualify as small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 13 CFR 121.201, (SIC) Code 3663.
    \7\ See U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1992 Census of Transportation, 
Communications and Utilities (issued May 1995), SIC category 3663.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    22. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements. Our new rules permit the introduction of a new 
type of equipment which will operate in the 59-64 GHz band. As with 
other communications equipment already permitted to operate within this 
frequency band, the transmitter must be authorized under the 
Commission's certification procedure. No changes were made to the 
standards that must be met by the equipment or the reporting or 
recordkeeping requirements.
    23. Significant Alternatives and Steps Taken to Minimize 
Significant Economic Impact on a Substantial Number of Small Entities 
Consistent with Stated Objectives. No alternatives or other steps were 
addressed in this proceeding.
    24. Report to Congress. The Commission shall send a copy of this 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, along with this Memorandum 
Opinion 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).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15

    Communications equipment, Highway safety, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.

Rule Changes

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

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 15.31 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 15.31  Measurement standards.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) At frequencies at or above 30 MHz, measurements may be 
performed at a distance other than that specified provided: 
Measurements are not made in the near field, and it can be demonstrated 
that the signal levels to be measured at the distance employed can be 
detected by the measurement equipment. Measurements shall not be 
performed at a distance greater than 30 meters unless it can be 
demonstrated that measurements at a distance of 30 meters or less are 
impractical. When performing measurements at a distance other than that 
specified, the results shall be extrapolated to the specified distance 
using one of the following formulas: For measurements above 30 MHz that 
are not performed in the near field, an inverse linear-distance 
extrapolation factor (20 dB/decade); for measurements performed in the 
near field, an inverse linear-distance-squared extrapolation factor (40 
dB/decade).
* * * * *
    3. Section 15.215 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 15.215  Additional provisions to the general radiated emission 
limitations.

    (a) The regulations in Secs. 15.217 through 15.255 provide 
alternatives to the general radiated emission limits for intentional 
radiators operating in specified frequency bands. Unless otherwise 
stated, there are no restrictions as to the types of operation 
permitted under these sections.
* * * * *
    4. Section 15.255 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 15.255  Operation within the band 59.0-64.0 GHz.

    (a) Operation under the provisions of this section is not permitted 
for the following products:
    (1) Equipment used on aircraft or satellites; and
    (2) Field disturbance sensors, including vehicle radar systems, 
unless the field disturbance sensors are employed for fixed operation. 
For the purposes of this section, the reference to fixed operation 
includes field disturbance sensors installed in fixed equipment, even 
if the sensor itself moves within the equipment.
    (b) Within the 59-64 GHz band, emission levels shall not exceed the 
following:
    (1) For products other than fixed field disturbance sensors, the 
power density of any emission shall not exceed 9 <greek-m>W/cm \2\ at a 
distance of 3 meters;
    (2) For fixed field disturbance sensors that occupy 500 MHz or less 
of bandwidth and that are contained wholly within the frequency band 
61.0-61.5 GHz, the power density of any emission within the band 61.0-
61.5 GHz shall not exceed 9 <greek-m>W/cm\2\ at a distance of 3 meters 
and the power density of any emission outside of the 61.0-61.5 GHz 
band, but still within the 59-64 GHz band, shall not exceed 9 nW/cm\2\ 
at a distance of 3 meters; and
    (3) For fixed field disturbance sensors other than those operating 
under the provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the peak 
transmitter output power shall not exceed 0.1 mW and the peak power 
density shall not exceed 9 nW/cm\2\ at a distance of 3 meters.

    Note to paragraph (b): Equipment may be authorized and operated 
on an interim basis under the provisions of this section provided it 
complies with the Spectrum Etiquette parameters contained in the 
December 13, 1996 submission from the Millimeter Wave Communications 
Working Group in ET Docket 94-124. Copies of the submission are 
available for inspection at the Federal Communications Commission 
Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., 
and may also be purchased from the Federal Communications

[[Page 45334]]

Commission's duplication contractor, International Transcription 
Service, (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20036. The submission is also available for viewing on the FCC's 
internet website [http://www.fcc.gov/oet/dockets/et94-124/].
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-22550 Filed 8-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>