Notice2024-07428
Use of the 5.850-5.925 Band
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 9, 2024
Issuing agencies
Federal Communications Commission
Abstract
In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) rejects a Petition for Reconsideration and a Petition for Partial Reconsideration of the First Report and Order filed by the Alliance for Automotive Innovation (Auto Innovators) and the 5G Automotive Association (5GAA), respectively. In the First Report and Order, the Commission repurposed the 5.850-5.895 GHz portion of the 5.850-5.925 GHz (5.9 GHz) band (lower 45 megahertz) from intelligent transportation system (ITS) use to provide more flexible unlicensed use, while continuing to dedicate the 5.895-5.925 GHz portion of the 5.9 GHz band (upper 30 megahertz) for vital ITS applications. It also adopted technical and operating rules to minimize the potential for unlicensed operations in the lower 45 megahertz to cause harmful interference to incumbent 5.9 GHz band services--including federal incumbents and ITS operations. Auto Innovators, through its petition, sought reconsideration of the Commission's decision to redesignate the lower 45 megahertz for unlicensed use. 5GAA, through its petition, sought reconsideration of the unlicensed device out-of-band emissions (OOBE) limits into the upper 30 megahertz retained for ITS operations. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission denied the petitions and affirmed the Commission's decision to repurpose spectrum previously designated for ITS services to provide more flexibility for unlicensed device uses to help meet the burgeoning demand for wireless broadband in the United States.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 9, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24835-24840]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-07428]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
[ET Docket No. 19-138; FR ID 212490]
Use of the 5.850-5.925 Band
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) rejects a Petition for Reconsideration and a Petition for
Partial Reconsideration of the First Report and Order filed by the
Alliance for Automotive Innovation (Auto Innovators) and the 5G
Automotive Association (5GAA), respectively. In the First Report and
Order, the Commission repurposed the 5.850-5.895 GHz portion of the
5.850-5.925 GHz (5.9 GHz) band (lower 45 megahertz) from intelligent
transportation system (ITS)
[[Page 24836]]
use to provide more flexible unlicensed use, while continuing to
dedicate the 5.895-5.925 GHz portion of the 5.9 GHz band (upper 30
megahertz) for vital ITS applications. It also adopted technical and
operating rules to minimize the potential for unlicensed operations in
the lower 45 megahertz to cause harmful interference to incumbent 5.9
GHz band services--including federal incumbents and ITS operations.
Auto Innovators, through its petition, sought reconsideration of the
Commission's decision to redesignate the lower 45 megahertz for
unlicensed use. 5GAA, through its petition, sought reconsideration of
the unlicensed device out-of-band emissions (OOBE) limits into the
upper 30 megahertz retained for ITS operations. For the reasons
discussed below, the Commission denied the petitions and affirmed the
Commission's decision to repurpose spectrum previously designated for
ITS services to provide more flexibility for unlicensed device uses to
help meet the burgeoning demand for wireless broadband in the United
States.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Howard Griboff, Office of Engineering
and Technology, (202) 418-0657 or Howard <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3473465d565b5252745257571a535b42"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c681b4afa4a9a0a086a0a5a5e8a1a9b0">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order
on Reconsideration--Use of the 5.850-5.925 GHz Band, ET Docket No. 19-
138; FCC 24-32, adopted March 15, 2024, and released March 18, 2024.
The full text of this document is available at: <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-affirms-repurposing-59-ghz-band-between-wi-fi-and-auto-safety">https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-affirms-repurposing-59-ghz-band-between-wi-fi-and-auto-safety</a>. The full text of this document is also available for public
inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC
Reference Center, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. Alternative
formats are available for people with disabilities (Braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format) by sending an email to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9fd9dcdcaaafabdff9fcfcb1f8f0e9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4d0b0e0e787d790d2b2e2e632a223b">[email protected]</span></a> or calling the Commission's Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
Procedural Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis. In this present Order on
Reconsideration, the Commission promulgates no additional final rules.
Our present action is, therefore, not an RFA matter.
Paperwork Reduction Act. This Order on Reconsideration does not
contain any new or modified information collection requirements subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. Thus,
it does not contain any new or modified information collection burden
for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to
the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198,
see 44 U.S.C. 3506 (c)(4).
Congressional Review Act. The Commission will not send a copy of
this Order on Reconsideration to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because no rule was adopted or amended.
Synopsis
Background
In 1999, in consultation with the Department of Transportation
(DOT), the Commission designated 75 megahertz of spectrum in the 5.9
GHz band for Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) systems in the
ITS radio service, setting forth the rules and protocols for the radio
systems designed to enable transportation and vehicle safety-related
communications. A subsequent order in 2003 established licensing and
service rules for DSRC operations. Under the adopted service rules,
DSRC licensees shared the 5.9 GHz band with several other services,
including amateur radio service and fixed-satellite service (for
uplinks) as well as with federal radiolocation service (radar) systems.
When the Commission designated the 5.9 GHz band for ITS, it was
expected that the band would support widespread deployment of systems
that would improve efficiency and promote safety within the nation's
transportation infrastructure. However, in the time since the
Commission designated the 5.9 GHz band for ITS service, DSRC deployment
was minimal. Many automotive safety functions originally contemplated
for the 5.9 GHz band over 20 years ago--such as alerting drivers to
vehicles or other objects, lane-merging alerts, and emergency braking--
are being met in other spectrum bands (e.g., 76-81 GHz) or by other
technologies like radar, light detection and ranging (LiDAR), cameras,
and other sensors.
Given the technological shift for delivering automotive safety
functions and the public interest benefits that would be gained by
repurposing spectrum lying fallow, the Commission adopted the First
Report and Order, wherein it removed the lower 45 megahertz from ITS
use and adopted rules expanding unlicensed national information
infrastructure (U-NII) operations such as Wi-Fi into that spectrum. The
Commission made this decision partially because the DSRC services once
contemplated for the 5.9 GHz band had not come to fruition in the 20
years since it allocated the spectrum for the ITS service. It concluded
that rather than reserving the entire 75 megahertz of the 5.9 GHz band
for vehicle-safety features that can be or are already being provided
using other spectrum bands or alternative technology, 30 megahertz
would be sufficient for ITS licensees to effectively use the spectrum
for vehicle safety-related applications. The Commission found
unconvincing claims about future plans for advanced DSRC-based ITS
services and indicated that the future ITS services were too uncertain
or remote to justify retaining the full 75 megahertz of the 5.9 GHz for
ITS. Accordingly, the Commission concluded that reserving the entire
5.9 GHz band for possible additional ITS services would not be the most
efficient or effective use of that band, nor in the public interest to
continue to do so.
The Commission determined that its action modifying all existing
ITS authorizations to transition such operations to only the upper 30
megahertz was well within the Commission's statutory authority under 47
U.S.C. 316, section 316 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
consistent with prior Commission practice, and furthers the promotion
of the public interest, convenience, and necessity. The Commission
found that this modification was manifestly in the public interest
because it would make room for additional valuable unlicensed use in
the lower 45 megahertz of the band, while allowing existing ITS
operations sufficient spectrum to continue to provide substantially the
same basic vehicular safety services. The Commission also found that
its decision to repurpose the lower 45 megahertz to provide more
flexible unlicensed use was not in conflict with any role assigned to
it by Congress.
In making the lower 45 megahertz available for more flexible
unlicensed use, the Commission found that, when added to U-NII spectrum
in the adjacent 5.725-5.850 GHz (denoted as U-NII-3) band, the 45
megahertz of spectrum from the 5.850-5.895 GHz (denoted as U-NII-4)
band would provide for increased high-throughput broadband applications
in spectrum that is a core component of today's unlicensed ecosystem,
thereby providing the American public with the most efficient and
effective use of this valuable mid band spectrum. At the same time, the
Commission recognized the importance of maintaining some spectrum to
[[Page 24837]]
support ITS applications, even though DSRC had sparsely been deployed
and failed to become ubiquitously used for the broad range of traffic
safety applications that were originally anticipated in the 5.9 GHz
band. The Commission designated the upper 30 megahertz to improve
automotive safety through ITS applications, and required that, within
one year of the effective date of the First Report and Order, ITS
licensees must cease operations on channels in the lower 45 megahertz
and move to channels in the upper 30 megahertz. To help enhance the
roll-out of ITS services and promote the most efficient and effective
use of this ITS spectrum, the Commission updated the associated service
rules for vehicular communications in the upper 30 megahertz to
transition from the original DSRC protocol adopted in 1999 to a
wireless technology-based protocol known as Cellular Vehicle-To-
Everything (C-V2X), at the end of a transition period to be determined
through the record generated by the FNPRM in this proceeding.
To protect incumbent 5.9 GHz band services, including federal
incumbents and ITS operations, from potential harmful interference by
unlicensed operations, the Commission imposed stringent power limits
and operating requirements on unlicensed devices (i.e., access points,
subordinate devices, and client devices) operating in the lower 45
megahertz, restricting unlicensed use of the lower 45 megahertz to
indoor locations. In addition, to protect the ITS operations during and
after their transition to the upper 30 megahertz, the Commission set
OOBE limits allowed in the upper 30 megahertz for indoor unlicensed
operations in the lower 45 megahertz based on, but not identical to,
the previously-affirmed OOBE limits for unlicensed operations in the
5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band. Since the Commission restricted
unlicensed use of the lower 45 megahertz to indoor use only, the
Commission took advantage of building attenuation, as well as other
factors such as path loss, to increase the OOBE limits allowed in the
upper 30 megahertz from the indoor unlicensed operations by an
additional 20 dB as compared to the 5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band OOBE
limits. The Commission found these OOBE limits from indoor unlicensed
operations mirror the OOBE limits for unlicensed operations in the
5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band after accounting for building
attenuation. The Commission also permitted a root mean square (RMS)
detector, instead of requiring a peak detector, to be used to conduct
all 5.9 GHz band unlicensed device OOBE measurements. The Commission
found that RMS measurement is more appropriate for ensuring that the
potential for U-NII devices to cause harmful interference to adjacent-
band operations is minimized because RMS measurements represent the
continuous power being generated from a device, as opposed to peak
power, which may only be reached occasionally and for short periods of
time.
Discussion
In response to the First Report and Order, Auto Innovators and 5GAA
filed petitions for reconsideration on June 2, 2021. 86 FR 37982 (July
19, 2021) (corrected notice). In its Petition for Reconsideration, Auto
Innovators asks the Commission to reconsider its designation of the
lower 45 megahertz for unlicensed uses and restore that portion of the
5.9 GHz band for ITS. In its Petition for Partial Reconsideration, 5GAA
asks the Commission to reduce the OOBE limits permitted in the upper 30
megahertz designated for ITS services from indoor unlicensed access
points, subordinate devices, and client devices operating in the lower
45 megahertz. The Petitions for Reconsideration were collectively
denied in this Order on Reconsideration.
While the reconsideration process remained pending, the Intelligent
Transportation Society of America (ITS America) and the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to
vacate the part of the First Report and Order repurposing the lower 45
megahertz for unlicensed operations. The Amateur Radio Emergency Data
Network (AREDN) filed a separate petition asking the court to vacate
the entire First Report and Order. As discussed below, many of the
arguments presented by the reconsiderations petitioners overlap with
the court petitioners' arguments. In ITS America v. FCC, the D.C.
Circuit rejected each of those arguments and affirmed the Commission's
decisions in the First Report and Order. 45 F.4th 406 (D.C. Cir. 2022).
Redesignation of the 5.850-5.895 Band for Unlicensed Use
In its Petition for Reconsideration, Auto Innovators asks the
Commission to reconsider its decision to redesignate the lower 45
megahertz for unlicensed uses and to restore the lower 45 megahertz
block to the ITS service. Auto Innovators contends the Commission
exceeded its legal authority in issuing the First Report and Order
``over the objection of DOT [the Department of Transportation] . . . ,
particularly in light of Congress's grant of authority to DOT to
administer a nationwide ITS program.'' Auto Innovators argues in the
alternative that the First Report and Order merits reconsideration
because the DOT and Congressional interests under the Biden
Administration continue to express support for maintaining the entire
5.9 GHz band for automotive safety applications, as they did under the
previous administration. Auto Innovators also claims that the entire 75
megahertz of the 5.9 GHz band is needed to facilitate the future of
transportation (e.g., automated driving, 5G technologies, advanced
vehicle to everything (V2X) applications).
In ITS America v. FCC, the D.C. Circuit considered each of these
arguments in upholding the Commission's First Report and Order. First,
the court rejected the arguments that the Commission exceeded its legal
authority by repurposing the lower 45 megahertz for unlicensed use. The
court recognized that allocating spectrum among competing needs ``is a
difficult, highly technical task,'' that ``figuring out how much of the
spectrum is needed to support a particular activity is exactly what the
FCC does,'' and that ``the FCC is entitled to great deference when
predicting the likelihood of [future] developments.'' As the court
explained, the 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century,
Public Law 105-178, 112 Stat. 107, ``did not transfer away from the FCC
its broad authority to manage the spectrum related to [ITS],'' but
instead ``simply required the FCC to account for the [DOT]'s views and
the needs of [ITS] when it does so,'' which is what the Commission did.
Second, the court rejected the argument that the change in
administration requires the Commission to revisit its decision.
Specifically, the court stated that ``the Department of
Transportation's concerns with the FCC's order are no longer espoused
by the Executive Branch'' and in fact, ``through the Department of
Justice, the Executive Branch--which of course includes the Department
of Transportation--joined the FCC's brief defending the FCC's order.''
Finally, the court also upheld the Commission's conclusion that
retaining the upper 30 megahertz for ITS will be adequate to serve
transportation safety needs. It agreed with the Commission that ``other
[non-5.9 GHz] technologies have alleviated the need for all 75
megahertz of the [5.9 GHz band] to remain dedicated to [ITS].'' In
addition, the
[[Page 24838]]
court refused to require the Commission to hold additional spectrum in
reserve for ``yet-to-arrive technologies'' that the Commission found
``too uncertain and remote to warrant the further reservation of
spectrum.'' The Commission affirms its decision to repurpose the lower
45 megahertz for the reasons discussed in the First Report and Order,
including the cost-benefit analysis therein, because nothing in the
petition by Auto Innovators persuades us otherwise. Moreover, the D.C.
Circuit Court's decision makes clear that the decision to repurpose
that spectrum was well within the Commission's authority.
Out-of-Band Emissions Limits Permitted in the 5.895-5.925 GHz Band From
Unlicensed Operations in the 5.850-5.895 GHz Band
In its Petition for Partial Reconsideration, 5GAA asks the
Commission to reconsider ``the unwanted emission limits permitted from
new indoor unlicensed access points and client devices operating in the
[lower 45 megahertz]'' to better protect ITS operations in the upper 30
megahertz. Specifically, 5GAA asks the Commission to protect ITS
operating in the upper 30 megahertz by ``afford[ing] C-V2X an
additional 20 dB of protection from these [5.850-5.895 GHz] U-NII-4
emissions.'' 5GAA objects to the Commission's decision to base the OOBE
limits for unlicensed devices operating in the 5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-
4) band on the existing OOBE limits for unlicensed devices in the
5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band, as ``the technical realities of [5.850-
5.895 GHz] U-NII-4 operations necessitate greater protection levels
than afforded from [5.725-5.850 GHz] U-NII-3 operations.'' 5GAA rejects
the Commission's assumption of 20 dB building attenuation loss for all
indoor access points, contending that ``[w]hile many unlicensed access
points will experience some building attenuation loss, a 20 dB loss
cannot be assumed in every instance.'' Further, 5GAA claims the
Commission's choice of RMS measurement, rather than peak measurement,
results in an additional 10-20 dB of unwanted emissions into the C-V2X
frequencies. 5GAA concludes that, combined, these decisions permit an
unwanted emission limit into the upper 30 megahertz that is 30-40 dB
more relaxed than the 5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band limit. 5GAA
asserts that its suggestion to reduce the allowed 5.850-5.895 GHz (U-
NII-4) band OOBE limits by 20 dB ``would provide necessary protection
for critical safety services'' in the upper 30 megahertz, while ``still
provid[ing] for robust indoor unlicensed operations.''
5GAA also contends that the Commission's choice of acceptable
5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band OOBE limits based on the existing OOBE
limits for unlicensed devices in the 5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band is
arbitrary and capricious as it fails to satisfy the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551-559) obligation to fully consider the
relevant facts underlying its assumptions and articulate a reasoned
explanation to support its decision. 5GAA argues that C-V2X will have a
``much more robust deployment'' than the ``thinly deployed'' DSRC,
while the ``heavy use of the [5.850-5.895 GHz] U-NII-4 band will result
in longer sustained periods of interference'' to the upper 30
megahertz. Therefore, 5GAA claims that the more extensive C-V2X
operations warrant greater protections than those provided from 5.725-
5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band operations. 5GAA also contends that the
Commission's choice of the RMS measurement standard is arbitrary and
capricious because the First Report and Order offers ``no meaningful
analysis of whether C-V2X operations will be able to tolerate the
additional unwanted emissions that the RMS measurement approach will
permit.'' 5GAA further states that the Commission does not explain why
the RMS measurement technique approved to evaluate the indoor
unlicensed operations' OOBE levels ``is more suitable for assessing the
impact of unwanted emissions on C-V2X services'' than the peak
measurement approach.
In its Petition, 5GAA incorporates by reference a study submitted
with its comments on the FNPRM, referred to here as ``5GAA's
Coexistence Analysis.'' 5GAA claims this study demonstrates the
Commission's OOBE limits adopted in the First Report and Order are
detrimental to C-V2X, i.e., that the adopted OOBE levels for unlicensed
operations ``significantly reduce C-V2X's communications range by more
than 50% when compared against 5GAA's preferred approach.'' 5GAA argues
that ``permitting excessive unwanted emissions could raise concerns
about the viability of safety services in the [upper 30 megahertz],
delaying or even denying the network effects policymakers and
transportation stakeholders hope and expect to achieve.''
5GAA's Coexistence Analysis does not convince us to reconsider the
OOBE limits decision for indoor unlicensed operations adopted in the
First Report and Order. First, 5GAA's Coexistence Analysis assumes an
average activity factor (also known as duty cycle) of 2 percent for the
percentage of time when an individual indoor unlicensed device is
transmitting in the lower 45 megahertz, i.e., adjacent to the lower
edge of the upper 30 megahertz. In contrast, in the 6 GHz First Report
and Order (89 FR 874) (expanding unlicensed operations in 6 GHz U-NII
bands, i.e., adjacent to the upper edge of the upper 30 megahertz), the
Commission assessed the potential for Low Power Indoor unlicensed
devices operating in the 6 GHz U-NII bands to cause harmful
interference and determined that the appropriate activity factor per
unlicensed device is only 0.4%. That activity factor was based on
measurement data for 5 GHz U-NII routers. Therefore, unlicensed 5.850-
5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band devices operating in the lower 45 megahertz
can be assumed to operate with that same activity factor in determining
5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) devices' potential to cause harmful
interference to ITS operations in the upper 30 megahertz. Thus, 5GAA's
assumption leads to approximately 7 dB over-estimation in the average
duty cycle power per unlicensed device's transmissions over time.
Second, 5GAA's Coexistence Analysis uses a relatively low 20 dBm
(100 mW) on-board unit (OBU) transmit power, where under our current
rules, it could have used a higher OBU transmit power limit as
currently permitted in the 47 CFR 95.3189 OBU technical standards.
Section 95.3189 (47 CFR 95.3189) currently requires compliance with the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11p-2010
standard: Amendment 6: Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments. Under
the IEEE standard, OBUs operated by entities other than state and local
governments are allowed up to 33 dBm EIRP, i.e., 20 times as strong as
5GAA used in the Coexistence Study. By using 20 dBm in its analysis,
5GAA artificially sets the OBU EIRP at a level that significantly
increases the potential for 5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band OOBE to
cause harmful interference to ITS operations in the upper 30 megahertz.
5GAA's claims that while ``there may be 20 dB [of building]
attenuation in some cases, [ ] there exist other situations where very
little attenuation would lead to harmful interference to C-V2X
operations'' do not persuade us to reconsider the OOBE limits adopted
in the First Report and Order. 5GAA concedes that 20 dB of building
attenuation as compared to the 5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) OOBE limits is
appropriate ``in some cases.'' 5GAA
[[Page 24839]]
does not take into account other factors the Commission considered that
would accommodate cases with less building attenuation, such as the
path loss due to the separation distance between indoor unlicensed
devices and C-V2X receivers. 5GAA's Coexistence Analysis also fails to
adequately consider the reduction in antenna gain caused by the
directionality of C-V2X receiving antennas. 5GAA assumes the randomness
of peaks and nulls in the real antenna gain patterns of both unlicensed
devices and C-V2X devices to have a zero dB average. However, C-V2X
antennas are typically horizontal in nature in front of and behind
vehicles and positioned to maximize coverage along road surfaces. This
orientation generally will provide some measure of isolation between
unlicensed devices' transmissions and OBU receivers and help reduce
unlicensed devices' OOBE levels received by a C-V2X device in the upper
30 megahertz. Because the antenna patterns and coverage requirements
differ between unlicensed and C-V2X operations, the assumption of a
zero dB average gain is incorrect. C-V2X transmissions received by an
OBU from other OBUs is more likely to occur in or near the main lobe of
the OBU receiving antenna, which will result in a higher average gain
for the reception of C-V2X transmissions than the zero dB average
assumed in 5GAA's Coexistence Analysis. In sum, building attenuation,
coupled with attenuation due to path loss and the C-V2X OBU receiving
antenna angular discrimination, sufficiently support the Commission's
decision that its adopted 5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band OOBE limits
that fall in the upper 30 megahertz will not cause harmful interference
to C-V2X operations.
5GAA notes that in Revision of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules to
Permit Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) Devices
in the 5 GHz Band, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 81 FR 19896 (2016),
the Commission adopted relaxed OOBE limits for 5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-
3) band (which form the basis of the 5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band
OOBE limits adopted in the First Report and Order) to accommodate
unlicensed fixed point-to-point antennas in that band; since 5.850-
5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) indoor unlicensed access points do not use such
antennas, the Commission should not have established even more relaxed
5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band OOBE limits than those for 5.725-5.850
GHz (U-NII-3). However, in 2016, the Commission chose to provide ``a
single, consistent OOBE requirement for all equipment'' that operates
in the 5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band rather than ``apply different
OOBE requirements based on a variety of situations.'' As such, 5GAA's
distinction between types of unlicensed equipment in this case is
inapplicable and thus, the Commission's decision to base OOBE limits
for the 5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band equipment on the OOBE limits for
the 5.725-5.850 GHz (U-NII-3) band was appropriate.
The Commission disagrees with 5GAA's assertion that RMS measurement
of unlicensed devices' OOBE power, as opposed to peak measurement,
permits more power from these OOBE in the adjacent band, resulting in
the receipt of an additional 10-20 dB of unwanted OOBE on the C-V2X
frequencies in the upper 30 megahertz. Measurements of infrequent
worst-case peak OOBE of short duration are not an accurate or realistic
assessment of the potential for a device to cause harmful interference.
As the Commission explained in the First Report and Order, instances of
peak OOBE power in an unlicensed device's transmitted signal only occur
occasionally and are of limited duration; RMS measurement of OOBE will
provide a more accurate assessment of an unlicensed device's potential
to cause harmful interference because RMS measurements represent the
continuous power being generated from a device.
The Commission also disagrees with 5GAA's assertion that the
Commission ``traditionally'' uses a peak measurement for assessing 5
GHz U-NII OOBE. As a general rule, the Commission establishes OOBE
measurement procedures based on the technical and operational
characteristics of the equipment operating in the specific band under
consideration and the design characteristics of equipment used in
adjacent-bands. Peak measurements may be required when the Commission
determines that peak emissions would have significant interference
effects, as was the case for compliance testing of 5.725-5.850 GHz (U-
NII-3) band devices' unwanted emissions to protect federal terminal
Doppler weather radars in the 5.470-5.725 GHz (denoted as U-NII-2C)
band. In contrast, in the 6 GHz Order, the Commission adopted OOBE
levels based on RMS measurement (as well as other appropriate
techniques for measuring average power) to protect ITS operations in
the 5.9 GHz band from the OOBE of unlicensed operations in the adjacent
5.925-6.425 GHz (denoted as U-NII-5) band. Compliance testing of 5.850-
5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band devices' unwanted emissions to protect ITS
operations above the 5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band is comparable to
compliance testing of 5.925-6.425 GHz (U-NII-5) band devices' unwanted
emissions to protect ITS operations below the 5.925-6.425 GHz (U-NII-5)
band, and thus, RMS detection is appropriate in the case of measuring
5.850-5.895 GHz (U-NII-4) band OOBE levels. Moreover, allowing the
flexible RMS measurement technique will help promote shared spectrum
technologies and drive greater productivity and efficiency in spectrum
usage.
Accounting for the above-noted weaknesses in 5GAA's Coexistence
Analysis, as well as considering the restriction on unlicensed use of
the lower 45 megahertz to indoor locations and the requirement for RMS
measurements for analyzing the potential impact of the adopted
unlicensed device OOBE limits, the Commission concludes that the indoor
unlicensed device OOBE limits the Commission adopted in the First
Report and Order will sufficiently protect C-V2X communications in the
upper 30 megahertz from harmful interference. Consequently, the
Commission would not expect that C-V2X operations will experience
reduced communications range from unlicensed OOBE falling within the
ITS band.
In response to 5GAA's claim that the Commission's choices of
acceptable OOBE limits and RMS measurement of OOBE levels are arbitrary
and capricious, the Commission notes that in ITS America v. FCC, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit determined
that the Commission was not acting arbitrarily and capriciously when it
implemented ``restrictions on unlicensed devices using the lower 45
megahertz--such as emissions limits and indoor-use-only rules--to keep
those devices from interfering with intelligent transportation systems
in the upper 30 megahertz.'' The court reiterated its inclination to
``uphold the Commission if it makes a technical judgment that is
supported with even a modicum of reasoned analysis, absent highly
persuasive evidence to the contrary.'' The Commission has explained in
detail its technical judgment that the adopted restrictions will
minimize the potential for harmful interference to the extent
appropriate in this context and 5GAA has not provided highly persuasive
evidence to refute the Commission's judgment. 5GAA's argument that the
Commission was arbitrary and capricious by not increasing OOBE
protections of C-V2X in anticipation of possible heavier uses of both
the lower 45 megahertz by unlicensed operations
[[Page 24840]]
and the upper 30 megahertz via C-V2X deployment is speculative and
similarly fails. Therefore, the Commission rejects 5GAA's claim that
the Commission's decisions regarding protecting ITS operations in the
upper 30 megahertz from unlicensed devices' OOBE are arbitrary and
capricious, and the Commission declines to reconsider the indoor
unlicensed device OOBE limits adopted in the First Report and Order.
Ordering Clauses
Accordingly, it is ordered that pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429, the
Petition for Reconsideration filed on June 2, 2021 by Auto Innovators
and the Petition for Partial Reconsideration filed on June 2, 2021 by
5GAA are denied.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-07428 Filed 4-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 9, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.