Level Probing Radars, 12667-12679 [2014-04733]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 44 (Thursday, March 6, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12667-12679]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04733]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 15

[ET Docket Nos. 10-23 and 10-27; FCC 14-2]


Level Probing Radars

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document modifies the Commission's rules for level 
probing radars (LPRs) operating on an unlicensed basis in the 5.925-
7.250 GHz, 24.05-29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz bands to revise our 
measurement procedures to provide more accurate and repeatable 
measurement protocols for these devices. LPR devices are low-power 
radars that measure the level (relative height) of various substances 
in man-made or natural containments. The new rules will benefit the 
public and industry by improving the accuracy and reliability of these 
measuring tools, and providing needed flexibility and cost savings for 
LPR device manufacturers which should in turn make them more available 
to users, without causing harmful interference to authorized services.

DATES: Effective April 7, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anh Wride, Office of Engineering and 
Technology, 202-418-0577, Anh.Wride@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order and Order, ET Docket Nos.10-23 and 10-27, FCC 14-2, adopted 
January 15, 2014 and released January 15, 2014. The full text of this 
document is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this document also may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and 
Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room, CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554. The full text may also be downloaded at: www.fcc.gov. People 
with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible formats for 
people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio 
format), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 
(tty).

Summary of Report and Order

    1. By this action, the Commission modifies part 15 of its rules for 
level probing radars (LPRs) operating on an unlicensed basis in the 
5.925-7.250 GHz, 24.05-29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz bands to revise our 
measurement procedures to provide more accurate and repeatable 
measurement protocols for these devices. LPR devices are low-power 
radars that measure the level (relative height) of various substances 
in man-made or natural containments. In open-air environments, LPR 
devices may be used to measure levels of substances such as water basin 
levels or coal piles. An LPR device that is installed inside an 
enclosure, which could be filled with liquids or granulates, is 
commonly referred to as a tank level probing radar (TLPR). LPR 
(including TLPR) devices can provide accurate and reliable target 
resolution to identify water levels in rivers and dams or critical 
levels of materials such as fuel or sewer-treated waste, reducing 
overflow and spillage and minimizing

[[Page 12668]]

exposure of maintenance personnel in the case of high risk substances.
    2. On January 14, 2010, the Commission adopted the Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking and Order, (Notice and Order) in this proceeding, 
75 FR 9850, March 4, 2010. The Notice and Order proposed to modify part 
15 of the rules to allow the restricted 77-81 GHz frequency band to be 
used on an unlicensed basis for the operation of LPR equipment 
installed inside closed storage tanks made of metal, concrete, or other 
material with similar attenuating characteristics and also sought 
comment on whether to allow TLPR operation on an unlicensed basis in 
the 75-85 GHz band. The Notice and Order also granted conditional 
waivers of the restriction in Sec.  15.205(a) that bars intentional 
radiators in the 77-81 GHz restricted band to Siemens, VEGA, and any 
other responsible party that can meet the waiver conditions specified 
in that decision. Under the terms of the waivers, these parties could 
employ TLPR devices in this band if installed inside tanks with high 
attenuation characteristics (e.g., metal and concrete tanks), pending 
the conclusion of the concurrently initiated rulemaking.
    3. Since the adoption of the Notice and Order, the Commission 
received an additional waiver request (disposed herein), as well as 
some inquiries, regarding outdoor use on additional frequencies under 
existing part 15 rules. To address the apparent need for a 
comprehensive and consistent approach to LPR devices, on March 26, 
2012, the Commission adopted a Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making 
(FNPRM), 77 FR 25386, April 30, 2012, in this proceeding, it proposed a 
set of common technical rules for the operation of LPRs in any type of 
tanks (i.e., with low RF attenuation characteristics such as 
fiberglass, or high RF attenuation characteristics such as metal) as 
well as in open-air environments in the following frequency bands: 
5.925-7.250 GHz, 24.05-29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz. In the FNPRM, the 
Commission made new proposals that treat LPR and TLPR devices the same 
with respect to emission limits and frequency bands of operation 
without any additional installation limitations. That is, a level 
measuring radar that complies with our proposed rules would be able to 
be used in any application, whether outdoors in the open or inside any 
type of enclosure. In adopting the FNPRM, the Commission held in 
abeyance all waiver requests regarding LPR operations pending final 
action in this rulemaking proceeding.
    4. The FNPRM's technical and operational proposals were based in 
large part on measurements and analytical work conducted in support of 
the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) LPR 
Technical Standard for LPR devices. This standard is based on the 
research, modeling and recommendations provided by the Electronic 
Communications Committee (ECC) within the European Conference of Postal 
and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) in ECC Report 139, a 
study of the co-existence of LPR devices with various authorized 
services in the 6-8.5 GHz, 24.05-26.5 GHz, 57-64 GHz, and 75-85 GHz and 
adjacent frequency bands.
    5. LPR devices have operated for years under the general technical 
standards for intentional radiators in Sec.  15.209 of the Commission's 
rules, primarily inside metal or concrete tanks which substantially 
attenuate radio frequency energy from the LPR antenna. Although the 
Commission will continue to certify LPR under this rule, manufacturers 
have had a difficult time demonstrating compliance with the rule's low 
emission limits for certain types of level-measuring applications in 
fiberglass or polyethylene (plastic) tanks or in open air. Such 
difficulty occurs because reflections off of the surfaces being 
measured attenuate inconsistently due to devices' orientation and the 
material being measured, the physical shape of which can change 
continuously depending on the material and circumstances. Thus, it is 
difficult to make a measurement that will validly apply to all 
installations of a given LPR device when measuring LPR emissions in 
situ for certification purposes. The amended rules adopted in the 
Report and Order establishes a comprehensive and consistent approach 
that would provide simplicity and predictability for authorizing LPRs 
for level-measuring applications in any type of tank or open-air 
environments, in the following frequency bands: 5.925-7.250 GHz, 24.05-
29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz. Certification of LPR equipment under the new 
rules will require measuring emissions in the main beam of the LPR 
antenna, while adjusting the emission limits in part 15 for devices so 
measured to account for the significant attenuation that occurs upon 
reflection of those emissions. These emission limits will protect any 
nearby receivers from encountering any increase in interfering signal 
levels. The new rules will benefit the public and industry by improving 
the accuracy and reliability of these measuring tools, and providing 
needed flexibility and cost savings for LPR device manufacturers which 
should in turn make them more available to users, without causing 
harmful interference to authorized services. To the extent practicable, 
these amended rules harmonize our technical rules for LPR devices with 
similar European standards, thus improving the competitiveness of U.S. 
manufacturers in the global economy.
    6. The Order, also dismissed as moot a request by VEGA Americas, 
Inc. (formerly Ohmart/VEGA Corporation) (VEGA) to waive the use 
restrictions in Sec.  15.252 so that it can operate an LPR device in 
the 26 GHz band.
    7. In the Report and Order (R&O), the Commission adopted a 
comprehensive set of technical and operational rules for authorizing 
LPR devices operating on an unlicensed basis in the 5.925-7.250 GHz, 
24.05-29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz in any RF level-measuring application, 
whether in an open-air environment or inside any type of enclosure. 
Section 5.256 will allow for the introduction of more diverse 
applications of LPR in several frequency bands and improve the accuracy 
and reliability of these level-measuring tools beyond what is 
achievable under Sec.  15.209. The new rules will also help to 
streamline equipment development and certification of LPR devices, 
allowing manufacturers to take advantage of economies of scale by 
marketing the same LPR device for a variety of RF level-measuring 
applications, as well as provide a simplified method for measuring the 
radiated emissions from these devices.
    8. The Commission's action here addresses a significant obstacle to 
authorizing LPR devices under the current rules, namely, the difficulty 
of obtaining repeatable and accurate radiated emission measurements. 
Unlike most part 15 devices that operate with the emitter/transmitter 
pointing horizontally, LPR devices must operate in a downward-pointing 
position such that their emissions are directed toward the substance to 
be measured located. The Commission's current rules are designed for 
devices with horizontal emitters or transmitters, and require measuring 
radiated emissions at a 3-meter horizontal distance from the radiating 
source, with the radiating source pointed directly at the measurement 
antenna (boresighted), while varying the measurement antenna height 
from 1 meter to 4 meters to obtain worst-case emissions. This 
compliance measurement practice does not yield repeatable results when 
LPR emissions are measured in situ, i.e., with the radar pointing down 
toward a representative substance. This difficulty arises because the 
current measurement

[[Page 12669]]

procedures are optimized for directly measuring device emissions, 
whereas in situ measurements for LPRs would essentially only measure 
reflected emissions, which can vary erratically, depending on the 
nature of the surface at the precise moment(s) of measurement. To 
obtain repeatable and accurate emission test results, manufacturers can 
measure LPR emissions directly in the main beam of the antenna for 
certification compliance purposes. However, when so measured, the 
general emission limit in Sec.  15.209 constrains LPR emissions to such 
a low level that the device cannot be used for most high-precision, 
high-accuracy applications, such as measuring volatile liquids inside 
non-corrosive fiberglass tanks or water level in rivers, for which LPR 
devices need higher power than a main-beam measurement permits under 
our current rules to achieve the necessary precision in these 
applications. The part 15 rules that permit higher power for similar 
wideband devices, such as Sec. Sec.  15.250 and 15.252, contain 
frequency and operational restrictions which preclude the certification 
of LPR devices absent a waiver, which some LPR manufacturers have 
sought.
    9. Due to the normal operating condition of an LPR where it 
radiates in a downward direction, potential victims of interference 
from LPRs are unlikely to be located in the main beam and subject to 
the maximum radiated power from the device. Rather, it is the reflected 
emissions from LPRs--which will be lower than the main-beam emissions--
that present the greatest potential for harmful interference. Because 
of this, and the difficulty in measuring reflected emissions discussed 
in the R&O, the Commission amended part 15 to add new Sec.  15.256 to 
increase the (main-beam) emissions limit for LPRs to a level that will 
still ensure that the reflected emissions remain within the maximum 
permitted level. This will allow LPR devices to achieve better accuracy 
in certain applications while not increasing the potential of causing 
harmful interference to other devices. The Commission also requires 
that all spurious or unwanted emissions from LPR devices not exceed the 
general emission limits in Sec.  15.209. Measuring a main beam emission 
limit rather than measuring reflected emissions will make certification 
measurements simpler, repeatable and more reliable, and allow certified 
LPR devices to be used either in tanks or in open-air environments 
without increasing interference to any authorized services. LPRs will 
have the higher power and bandwidth needed without manufacturers having 
to request waivers of operational restrictions in Sec. Sec.  15.250 and 
15.252 for similar wideband devices as they have in the past. To 
further protect authorized services operating in the same and adjacent 
frequency bands, the Commission will (1) require the LPR antenna to be 
dedicated or integrated as part of the transmitter and installed in a 
downward position; (2) limit installations of LPR devices to fixed 
locations; and (3) prohibit hand-held applications of LPR and the 
marketing of LPR devices to residential consumers.
    10. The Commission will continue to permit certification of LPR 
devices under the provisions of Sec.  15.209 of its rules as unlicensed 
intentional radiators. Certification of LPRs under Sec.  15.209 
provides an alternative for those manufacturers who may not need higher 
power or who want to operate in frequency bands that are not covered by 
the new LPR rules. The Commission modified Sec.  15.31 of the rules to 
provide compliance testing guidance for those manufacturers who choose 
to certify LPR under Sec.  15.209.

Certification Under Section 15.209

    11. The Commission will continue to certify LPRs under Sec.  
15.209. Although the new LPR rules are intended to simplify measurement 
procedures and permit certification of LPR devices that could be used 
both in any type of tank and outdoors in specific frequency bands, 
including the restricted band 75-85 GHz, the Commission recognizes that 
the new rules' frequency and technical requirements may limit options 
for some applications. LPR certified under Sec.  15.209 may operate in 
any non-restricted band at much lower emission limits than permitted 
under the new LPR rule and, would demonstrate compliance by measuring 
their worst-case emissions in the main beam of the antenna; peak 
emissions for pulsed LPRs may be reduced further because the rules 
require that peak power output use a pulse desensitization correction 
factor (PDCF). The Commission observes that legacy LPR operations 
certified under Sec.  15.209 have primarily operated in enclosed tanks 
with high attenuation levels and have not caused harmful interference 
over the years, but manufacturers have had difficulty in demonstrating 
compliance with Sec.  15.209 for other types of applications (e.g., 
open-air operation).
    12. While TLPRs are currently receiving certification under Sec.  
15.209 using in situ measurement procedures, the Commission will 
provide specific measurement guidelines for certifying LPRs that are 
intended for installation inside enclosed tanks made of metal or 
concrete to promote consistency and repeatability. Some manufacturers 
who have operated LPRs inside metallic and concrete tanks for many 
years request that, for these uses, they continue to be permitted to 
demonstrate compliance with Sec.  15.209 general emission limits by 
measuring radiated emissions outside a representative test tank with 
the LPR installed inside, as they have in the past. These parties point 
out that a tank wall made of metal or concrete provides a substantial 
RF shield, and they request that LPRs intended for this type of 
application not be subject to any further restriction on antenna 
beamwidth or main-beam emission limits, as long as emissions measured 
at 3 meters outside of the tank meet the general emission limit as 
currently required by Sec.  15.209.
    13. The Commission finds that there is good reason for providing 
specific measurement procedures that allow more flexibility for 
certifying, under Sec.  15.209, LPRs intended for installation inside 
enclosures made of metal or concrete. At the same time, the rules will 
continue to permit manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with the 
Sec.  15.209 general emission limits as they have in the past, by 
measuring radiated emissions outside a representative enclosure with 
the LPR installed inside. As observed in the Notice and Order, TLPR 
emissions outside of enclosed tanks with very high RF attenuation 
characteristics, e.g., steel or concrete, will likely be minimal when 
considering the enclosure's attenuation coefficient in addition to the 
absorption characteristics of the target material (liquid or solid), 
and thus, any reflected signal will be mostly contained within the 
tank. Because metal and concrete enclosures provide substantial RF 
attenuation, the power in the main beam of the antenna installed within 
such tanks can be increased beyond the limits required for unenclosed 
devices, thus permitting better measurement performance in LPR 
applications (e.g., higher power may permit the LPR to better focus and 
receive accurate echoes from the substance to be measured below the 
LPR), but the potential for harmful interference is significantly 
diminished because the signal can be substantially attenuated by the 
enclosure itself. The Commission also notes that this addresses MCAA's 
concerns regarding the difficulties of accommodating some antennas in 
existing openings of some metal and concrete tanks. Because other 
materials do not provide the same attenuation, the Commission limits 
these measurement procedures to LPR devices intended to

[[Page 12670]]

be used only in completely enclosed metal or concrete tanks. The 
Commission modified Sec.  15.31 of the rules to provide compliance 
testing guidance for those manufacturers who choose to certify LPR 
under Sec.  15.209.

New Section 15.256

Frequency Bands of Operation

    14. As discussed most LPR devices on the U.S. market currently 
operate on an unlicensed basis in frequencies around 6 GHz, 24 GHz, or 
26 GHz under the general emission limits of Sec.  15.209 of the 
Commission's rules. These operating frequency ranges are chosen by the 
different LPR manufacturers to accommodate various level-measuring 
applications. As proposed in the FNPRM, the Commission will allow LPR 
devices certified under the new technical rules adopted herein to 
operate both in any type of enclosure and in open air, in the following 
frequency bands: 5.925-7.250 GHz, 24.05-29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz. The 
new rules addresses the specific spectrum needs and restrictions in the 
U.S., and to the extent practicable, harmonize our technical rules for 
LPR devices with similar European standards.

1. 5.925-7.250 GHz Frequency Band

    15. The Commission authorizes unlicensed wideband transmitter 
operation within the 5.925-7.250 GHz band under Sec.  15.250 of its 
rules. LPR devices seeking higher power and wider bandwidths than 
provided therein in order to improve their performance cannot be 
authorized under this rule absent a waiver of certain usage 
restrictions in the rule. In this band, licensed users include non-
Federal fixed, fixed satellite, and mobile services from 5.925 GHz to 
7.125 GHz; and Federal fixed and space research services (deep space & 
Earth-to-space) from 7.125 GHz to 7.250 GHz. Part 15 transmitters 
operating in this band are prohibited from being used in toys or 
operating on board an aircraft or satellite. They cannot utilize fixed 
outdoor infrastructure, including outdoor-mounted transmit antennas, to 
establish a wide area communications network. The Commission observed 
in the FNPRM that it would consider LPR operation in the 5.925-7.250 
GHz band, including permitting limited fixed outdoor installations, 
consistent with the intent underlying the usage restrictions in Sec.  
15.250, because in this regard, LPRs are single, i.e., relatively 
isolated, transmitters whose individual operations outdoors would not 
result in the establishment of a local area network of transmitters.
    16. The Commission declines to expand the frequency band for LPR 
devices under the new rules at this time. First, the technical and 
operational requirements that it adopted under the new rules are based 
on analytical work that encompasses frequencies from 6.0-8.5 GHz for 
LPR operations; therefore, the Commission finds that compatibility of 
these limits with authorized services below 6 GHz has not been studied. 
Neither, Sutron nor any other commenter provided technical analyses or 
studies to support compatibility of LPR operating at the proposed 
higher emission limit with incumbent operations below 5.925 GHz. 
Although Sutron argues that greater bandwidth would yield greater level 
measurement resolution, neither it nor any other party indicated with 
any specificity, much less demonstrated, how permitting a higher 
resolution than that which can be attained under the rules adopted 
herein would further the public interest. The Commission concludes 
that, without further analyses, it would be imprudent to permit a wider 
bandwidth than what it proposed in the FNPRM and to expose incumbent 
services unnecessarily to additional radio noise. Further, the 
Commission and the NTIA are involved in active discussions relating to 
the 5.850-5.925 GHz bands. Pending the outcome of these activities, the 
Commission finds that LPR devices should be confined to the 5.925-7.250 
GHz band when operating at the higher emission limit it adopted herein 
for LPR devices. Manufacturers requiring wider bandwidth than permitted 
under new Sec.  15.256 may seek authorization, by demonstrating 
compliance under Sec.  15.209.

2. 24.05-29.0 GHz Frequency Band

    17. In the FNPRM, the Commission proposed to permit LPR operation 
in the 24.05-29.00 GHz band to provide expanded flexibility for 
optimizing LPR applications and to enhance global marketing 
opportunities by more closely harmonizing with ETSI in this frequency 
range. Currently, the Commission authorizes unlicensed wideband 
operation in the 23.12-29.0 GHz band under Sec.  15.252 of its rules. 
LPR devices seeking higher power and wider bandwidths to improve their 
performance cannot be authorized under this rule absent a waiver of 
certain usage restrictions in the rule. While some LPRs currently 
operate in this band, their utility is limited by the restrictions of 
Sec.  15.252. This band is shared between Federal and non-Federal 
services. Authorized licensed operations include radiolocation, Earth 
exploration satellite service (EESS) (active), amateur, fixed, inter-
satellite, radionavigation, radiolocation satellite (Earth-to-space), 
fixed satellite (Earth-to-space), mobile, standard frequency and time 
signal satellite (Earth-to-space), space research (space-to-Earth), and 
EESS (space-to-Earth) services. Unlicensed transmitters operating in 
the 23.12-29.0 GHz band subject to this rule must be mounted on 
vehicles and cannot be used in aviation applications. Finally, in the 
FNPRM, the Commission observed that the proposed frequency band is 
wider than that which ETSI has adopted; however, it believes that the 
risk of interference to incumbent authorized services from LPR devices 
will be no greater than it is from part 15 vehicular radars currently 
operating in this band because LPR devices operate in a fixed downward-
looking position, and because there have been no interference 
complaints related to the operation of these part 15 radars, which 
unlike LPRs do not always operate in a downward position. There were no 
comments related to our proposals in this band, and for the reasons 
stated, the Commission will allow LPRs to operate within the 24.05-29 
GHz frequency band at the radiated emission limits under Sec.  15.256.

3. 75-85 GHz Frequency Band

    18. Apart from a handful of specified frequency bands, spectrum 
above 38.6 GHz, including most of the 75-85 GHz band, is designated as 
``restricted'' in Sec.  15.205 of the rules. Unless expressly permitted 
by rule or waiver, unlicensed devices are not allowed to intentionally 
radiate energy into a restricted band, in order to protect sensitive 
radio services from harmful interference. The Commission has permitted 
unlicensed operation within specific frequency bands above 38.6 GHz, 
i.e., 46.7-46.9 GHz, 57-64 GHz, 76-77 GHz, and 92-95 GHz.
    19. The 75-85 GHz band is shared between Federal and non-Federal 
services. Authorized operations in this band currently include radio 
astronomy, fixed/mobile/fixed satellite, mobile satellite, broadcast 
and broadcast satellite, radiolocation, space research (space-to-
Earth), amateur and amateur satellite services. In addition, unlicensed 
vehicular radars are currently permitted to operate in the 76-77 GHz 
band. In the FNPRM, the Commission observed that the services in this 
band typically employ highly directional antennas to overcome the 
relatively higher propagation loss that occurs at these frequencies. 
The Commission stated its belief that LPR

[[Page 12671]]

operation in the 75-85 GHz band would not adversely affect incumbent 
authorized users, because this band is currently sparsely used and the 
propagation losses are significant at these frequencies, making harmful 
interference unlikely beyond a short distance from the LPR device.
    20. The Commission has authorized vehicular radar operation, 
including Foreign Object Debris (FOD) detection fixed radar operations 
at airports, in the 76-77 GHz band under its part 15 unlicensed rules; 
and a rulemaking petition is now pending asking that it permit 
unlicensed vehicular radars to operate in the 77-81 GHz band as well. 
It is further noted that the Commission has modified Sec.  90.103 of 
the rules to permit the certification, licensing and use of FOD 
detection radars in the 78-81 GHz band. The Commission finds that FOD 
radars and LPR devices would most likely not operate in the same 
geographical location, because the FOD radars are only authorized to 
operate at airports whereas LPR typically operate in industrial or 
remote areas. However, even if they were co-located, at these 
frequencies, the potential for harmful interference to FOD radars from 
LPR is extremely unlikely, given the substantial free-space propagation 
losses and the extremely narrow beamwidths of the FOD radar. As for 
spectrum sharing between vehicular radars and LPR, the Commission 
believes that LPR devices will be able to co-exist successfully with 
vehicular radars because the LPR is installed in a downward-looking 
position at fixed locations and the main-beam emission limits have been 
carefully calculated to avoid harmful interference to other radio 
services. The Commission further finds that the extreme propagation 
losses of radio signals at these frequencies would mitigate any 
potential harmful interference beyond a very short distance from the 
LPR device.
    21. Accordingly, the Commission will allow LPR to operate within 
the 75-85 GHz frequency band, at the radiated emission limits specified 
in Sec.  15.256. To permit LPR operation in the 75-85 GHz band, it also 
modified Sec.  15.205 of the rules to remove the prohibition on 
intentional emissions in this band for LPR devices authorized under the 
new rules.

Technical Requirements

    22. To maintain the existing interference protection criteria to 
authorized services in the frequency bands covered by Sec.  15.256 for 
LPR operations, the FNPRM invited comment on establishing requirements 
for the following interdependent parameters: Main-beam radiated 
emission limits, antenna beamwidth, and antenna side-lobe gain. Main-
beam emissions must be measured with the LPR antennas ``boresighted'' 
to produce the maximum realizable antenna coupling. The main-beam 
emission limits adopted will allow an LPR device to operate at higher 
peak levels than part 15 currently permits but would continue to 
provide the same level of interference protection to authorized 
services as any other part 15 device operating under the general 
emission limits, provided that the LPR antenna always maintains a 
downward position and utilizes a relatively narrow beamwidth. Because 
the LPR is always pointing downward and direct emissions from the LPR 
antenna are focused by a narrow beamwidth toward the substance being 
measured, it is unlikely that emissions reflected from this material or 
from the ground surface would cause interference to a potential victim 
receiver located at any height relative to the LPR due to the 
significant attenuation of the reflected signal.
    23. The technical and operational requirements proposed in the 
FNPRM and discussed below are based on analytical work performed by the 
ECC in support of the ETSI Technical Standard for LPR devices. This 
standard specifies compliance measurements based on main-beam emission 
limits. To determine the maximum allowable radiated emission limits for 
LPR devices operating in each authorized frequency band, the ECC 
studied the interference potential of an LPR by taking into account 
reflected emissions within a hemispherical boundary around the LPR 
device. The ECC assumed a worst-case material reflectivity coefficient 
and determined the main-beam emission level that correlates to the 
appropriate reflected emission level. The Commission finds that the 
analytical work of ETSI/ECC provides a reliable correlation between 
main-beam emissions and emissions at 3 meters from the LPR that is 
sufficiently conservative to conclude that the use of a main-beam 
emission limit rather than limits based on reflected emissions will not 
create a greater interference potential, thus providing strong support 
for the approach we are taking here. Moreover, a main-beam emission 
limit would represent a more realistic evaluation of interference 
potential and permit higher power, thus increasing the accuracy and 
utility of LPRs. At the same time, it will simplify compliance 
measurements of LPR emissions, because emissions from the LPR would be 
measured directly in the main beam of the antenna where maximum 
emissions are found, thus avoiding the measurement of reflected 
emissions that can be highly variable due to the variable site-related 
factors involved with in situ testing. Under this approach, 
certification measurements will be simpler, repeatable and more 
reliable. Accordingly, the Commission amended the rules to require that 
LPR radiated emissions be measured in the main beam of the LPR antenna. 
The Commission notes that no party opposes the use of main-beam 
emission measurement or the general measurement principles in the FNPRM 
proposed rules.

Radiated Emission Limits

    24. The Commission adopted distinct radiated emission limits for 
LPR devices operating in each of the frequency bands, as set forth in 
Table 1 in the R&O. The emission limits for main-beam emissions were 
derived by mathematically correlating the reflected emissions from an 
LPR with the existing part 15 average emission limit at -41.3 dBm EIRP 
for devices operating above 960 MHz -or lower levels (at -55 dBm EIRP 
for frequencies below 8.5 GHz). The LPR main-beam emission limits 
therefore would maintain the existing level of interference protection 
to incumbent radio services. As the Commission tentatively concluded in 
the FNPRM, the LPR emission limits for each of the specified operating 
frequency bands as measured in the main beam of the LPR antenna will 
adequately protect against harmful interference to incumbent authorized 
services in any of the proposed frequency bands, based on several 
factors. First, LPR devices will be required to utilize downward-
focused narrow-beam transmit antennas, which are also needed to 
optimize level-measuring performance; therefore, the only LPR emissions 
likely to be incident on an incumbent receiver within proximity will be 
reflected from the target material and thus significantly attenuated. 
Second, the LPR emission limits are consistent with the results 
expected from application of the existing limits in radiated in situ 
measurements and therefore will maintain the existing level of 
protection afforded to incumbent authorized services under existing 
rules and their attendant measurement procedures. Third, as the 
operating frequency increases, the propagation path loss also increases 
as a result of the increased attenuating effects on radio waves from 
intervening objects and atmospheric conditions, and the Commission 
accounts for this by varying the

[[Page 12672]]

permitted radiated emission limit for each frequency band. None of the 
commenters took issue with any of these factors or with the conclusion 
that the proposed limits will provide adequate protection against 
harmful interference. Moreover, adoption of several operational 
restrictions, in addition to these emission limits, provides further 
assurance that authorized services will not be subject to harmful 
interference.
    25. The Commission agrees with MCAA that because STL links are 
installed high off the ground with highly directional receive antennas, 
received interference from LPRs that point downward toward the measured 
substance is highly unlikely. It does not believe that EIBASS is 
correct in comparing LPR devices to other unlicensed narrowband part 15 
devices that operate under Sec. Sec.  15.209 and 15.35(b) of its rules 
because LPR devices are wideband devices that are more similar to 
unlicensed devices operating under Sec.  15.250 of the rules. While it 
is true that the proposed main-beam peak emission limit for LPR is 7 dB 
higher than the peak emission limit in Sec.  15.250, i.e., 0 dBm peak 
EIRP, with the LPR antenna pointing down toward the substance being 
measured, only reflected emissions (which typically are already 
attenuated from the direct emission levels) would be expected. Because 
of reflection losses, LPR emission levels are therefore lower than 
other unlicensed wideband devices operating in the same frequency 
range. Further, because STL antennas are also directional in nature, 
there are additional antenna losses in the potential STL victim receive 
antenna, unless the LPR emissions are in the STL antenna main beam, 
which is a highly unlikely circumstance. The Commission further notes 
that the number used to derive the LPR equivalent main-beam emission 
limit at 6 GHz is actually 14 dB lower (at -55 dBm EIRP) than the 
average emission limit in Sec.  15.250 (at -41.3 dBm EIRP) for part 15 
devices operating in the same bands as STLs. Therefore, in the 6 GHz 
frequency range, the proposed main-beam emission limit is constraining 
any potential reflected emissions from an LPR to a level lower than the 
existing interference protection level for authorized services from 
unlicensed devices, resulting in a 14 dB additional interference 
protection margin for authorized services as compared to that provided 
by other part 15 devices. Furthermore, there has not been any case of 
harmful interference to STL links from other part 15 devices that 
currently operate in the same frequency band (devices that do not even 
have the interference-avoiding characteristic of being pointed 
downward). The Commission further notes that LPR devices are not by 
their nature used to establish local or wide area networks because LPRs 
are designed to measure the level of a substance at a single, 
circumscribed site (e.g., a pile of coal or gravel, or water in a tank 
or under a bridge).
    26. Aggregate emissions of LPR devices. The Commission observes 
that in calculating the LPR main-beam emission limits, the ECC Report 
139 did take into account the co-existence between LPRs and EESS 
operating in the EESS allocated frequencies. ECC simulations show that 
in the most critical scenarios, there are wide margins of safety 
against harmful interference to EESS, even when using a very 
conservative number for the possible future growth of LPR devices in 
the long-term. CORF did not dispute these ECC analyses. The Commission 
therefore finds that there would be minimal or no effect on EESS or 
non-GSO satellite services from LPRs operating in the 24-26 GHz 
frequency range, and thus the Commission does not adopt aggregate 
emission limits for LPR in these bands. The Commission also observed 
that LPR, as all unlicensed devices operating under part 15 of the 
Commission rules, are subject to the non-interference rules in Sec.  
15.5.
    27. Unwanted (harmonic and spurious) emissions of LPR devices. The 
Commission notes that similar part 15 equipment operating under Sec.  
15.250 in the 5.925-7.250 GHz band and under Sec.  15.252 in the 23.12-
29 GHz band are subject to unwanted emission limits that are much more 
stringent than what the Commission proposed for LPR devices, because it 
expects that LPRs will have a low interference potential as they 
operate in a fixed downward position. However, the Commission does not 
believe that LPR unwanted emissions should be allowed to be as high as 
-34 dBm EIRP as Hach requests for LPRs operating in the 26 GHz 
frequency range, because, the Commission goal is to maintain the 
existing interference protection criteria (i.e., the part 15 general 
limit of less than -41.3 dBm EIRP) to authorized services from LPR' 
unwanted emissions. Further, the same principle of establishing an 
unwanted emissions limit at 20 dB below the fundamental limit would 
allow unwanted emissions from LPRs operating in the 80 GHz range to be 
as high as -23 dBm EIRP. The Commission finds that the -41.3 dBm EIRP 
general emission limit of Sec.  15.209 is appropriate so as to 
constrain any LPR unwanted emissions to the existing level of 
interference protection for incumbent users of the spectrum and Hach 
has not presented evidence that this is an inappropriately strict level 
for part 15 devices in general or for LPRs in particular. The 
Commission therefore denies Hach's request for LPR unwanted emissions 
to be 20 dB below the fundamental emissions.

Antenna Requirements

    28. An antenna converts electrical signals traveling along a 
transmission line into electromagnetic energy that is radiated into the 
environment. Antennas such as those used in LPR devices are 
directional, in that the energy being transmitted is concentrated into 
one direction. If the gain characteristics of the antenna are plotted, 
a pattern is formed that consists of a single main lobe in the 
direction in which the majority of the energy is transmitted. In 
addition to the main lobe, there are multiple side lobes in undesired 
directions. The magnitude of the main lobe is called the gain of the 
antenna, and is compared to the magnitude of an isotropic antenna that 
transmits energy equally in every direction. Because an antenna can 
only focus energy, but cannot create additional energy, a higher gain 
(more energy) in the main lobe of the antenna can be realized only when 
the beamwidth of the main lobe is narrowed, accordingly reducing the 
gain in the side lobes (lessening the energy in other directions). In 
other words, the beamwidth, main-beam gain, and side-lobe gain of the 
antenna are all interdependent. Since the Commission is specifying a 
maximum antenna beamwidth, for any given antenna, there is necessarily 
a minimum antenna gain that corresponds to the maximum beamwidth and a 
corresponding maximum side-lobe gain as well.
(i) Antenna Beamwidth
    29. In the FNPRM, the Commission proposed an antenna beamwidth no 
greater than 12 degrees for frequencies below 57 GHz and no greater 
than 8 degrees in the 75-85 GHz bands. Because the main source of the 
scattering of LPR emissions is the interaction with the surface being 
measured, the proposed maximum antenna beamwidth for LPRs was 
restricted to limit emission scattering in order to control the 
interference potential of LPRs to other radio services. The Commission 
also observed that maintaining a narrow antenna beamwidth could enhance 
LPR performance because a narrower beam reduces false echoes from 
objects other than the desired target material.

[[Page 12673]]

    30. The Commission adopted its proposed antenna beamwidth 
limitations of no greater than 12 degrees for frequencies below 57 GHz 
and no greater than 8 degrees in the 75-85 GHz bands. First, the 
antenna beamwidth limits proposed in the FNPRM were designed to be 
consistent with the proposed main-beam emission limits, which in turn 
were based on ETSI standards. As noted, harmonization of our emission 
limits with the ETSI limits serves to expand global marketing 
opportunities for U.S. manufacturers. The Commission concludes that any 
benefits that might result from Sutron's proposed beamwidth limits 
would be outweighed by the potential benefits of harmonization with 
European standards. Moreover, the Commission notes that a wider main 
beam could result in greater reflected emissions, and increase the 
potential for harmful interference to other spectrum users. The 
Commission further observes that other waterways level-measuring LPR 
manufacturers such as Hach state in their comments that their devices 
use planar antennas which have outer dimensions much smaller than a 
horn antenna, are less obtrusive and less susceptible to vandalism and 
can still meet the proposed rule for antenna beamwidth. In addition, 
the Commission does not find Sutron's argument about wind/snow effects 
on the LPR antenna compelling, because this problem could be addressed 
by judiciously choosing an installation location that would shield the 
LPR antenna from weather conditions. Accordingly, the Commission denies 
Sutron's request to increase the antenna beamwidth limit to 35 degrees.
(ii) Antenna Side-Lobe Gain
    31. In the FNPRM, the Commission proposed a fixed side-lobe gain 
limit of -10 dBi for off-axis angles greater than 60 degrees. The 
Commission also sought comment on the necessity of establishing limits 
on the gain of the antenna in the side lobe region and off-axis angles.
    32. The Commission agrees with Delphi that, in some cases, an LPR 
operating at the maximum main-beam power as proposed in the FNPRM could 
have side-lobe emissions that exceed the -41.3 dBm EIRP interference 
protection criteria in Sec.  15.209, depending on the efficiency of the 
antenna used and the power at which the LPR is operated. The Commission 
noted in the FNPRM that it did not intend any rule revisions adopted in 
this proceeding to permit the gain of any LPR side lobe to exceed the 
EIRP limit in Sec.  15.209. Therefore, it will modify the side-lobe 
gain limits from those proposed in the FNPRM. The Commission notes that 
antenna side-lobe gains correlate to main-beam gains; as the antenna 
main-beam gain varies, the side-lobe gain also varies. Therefore, to 
ensure that LPRs provide the same interference protection to authorized 
radio services as other part 15 devices (i.e., maintain the general -
41.3 dBm EIRP limit from Sec.  15.209 on horizontal transmissions from 
LPRs), the Commission adopted a side-lobe gain limits relative to the 
main-lobe gain, as shown in Table 3 of the R&O. The calculations for 
those limits are found in Appendix C of the R&O.

Automatic Power Control

    33. In the FNPRM, the Commission noted that as a consequence of its 
proposed main-beam emission limits, all reflected emissions from the 
LPR device will be kept at or below the Sec.  15.209 general emission 
limits, and thus it did not to propose to adopt automatic power control 
(APC) requirements for LPR devices. The Commission sought technical 
analyses from parties advocating a requirement for APC to show the 
inadequacy of the emission limit in Sec.  15.209. No party provided 
comments on APC. Accordingly, the Commission did not adopt APC 
requirements for LPR devices.

Other Requirements

Operational and Marketing Restrictions

    34. In the FNPRM, the Commission proposed, for LPR devices 
authorized under the higher emission limits in the new rule, that the 
antenna of an LPR device be dedicated or integrated as part of the 
transmitter and professionally installed in a downward position; to 
limit installations of LPR devices to fixed locations; to prohibit 
hand-held applications of LPR devices; and to prohibit the marketing of 
LPR devices to residential consumers. It stated that these restrictions 
are intended to protect incumbent authorized services operating in the 
same and adjacent frequency bands from potential harmful interference 
from LPRs. The Commission will require the antenna of an LPR device to 
be dedicated or integrated as part of the transmitter; limit 
installations of LPR devices to fixed locations; prohibit hand-held 
applications of LPR devices; and prohibit the marketing of LPR devices 
to residential consumers. A requirement for professional installation 
appears unnecessary as the Commission is requiring LPRs to be installed 
in a downward position and LPRs would not function correctly if they 
are not pointed down toward the substance to be measured. Accordingly, 
the Commission is not adopting a requirement for professional 
installation.
    35. The Commission concludes that the LPR antenna must be dedicated 
or integrated as part of the transmitter. It does so because, antennas 
used in LPR devices must satisfy the requirements for main-beam 
radiated emissions, beamwidth and side-lobe gain, which are 
interdependent, to demonstrate compliance with Sec.  15.256. By 
requiring a dedicated or integrated antenna as part of the transmitter, 
the Commission will ensure that the LPR when operated will meet the 
emission limits necessary to protect authorized users. The Commission 
also concludes that there is no need to adopt a rule to require 
professional installation of LPR. The Commission has not adopted a 
specific definition for ``professional installation'' in any of its 
rules for unlicensed devices but has rather left it to be assessed on a 
case-by-case basis as a certification grant condition. Here, LPR 
devices are commercial products intended to measure industrial types of 
materials such as coal, gravel, sand piles or waterways such as rivers 
or dams, and the rules adopted herein prohibit their marketing to 
residential consumers. The Commission also finds that the installation 
of these devices is relatively simple, and because they are commercial 
products, they will typically be handled by people with product 
knowledge, unlike many part 15 devices that have consumer-oriented 
applications. Further, the Commission prohibits the marketing of LPR 
devices to residential consumers. It therefore finds that the 
operational and marketing restrictions placed on LPR devices are 
sufficient to avoid harmful interference to authorized radio services 
without imposing the requirement for professional installation on LPR 
devices. The Commission also observes that by its operating nature, an 
LPR device must be directed toward the substance being measured; the 
device would not operate correctly if there are too many false echoes 
caused by reflections from various neighboring physical objects. Thus, 
installation errors or unintentional misuse of the product will require 
correction to operate effectively and would need no additional hardware 
or software safeguard. The Commission also requires in the rules 
adopted herein that LPRs be installed in a downward position. However, 
the Commission finds that additionally requiring built-in circuits to 
prevent transmission in case

[[Page 12674]]

of installation errors as recommended by EIBASS an unnecessary cost 
without correlating benefits.
    36. The Commission concludes that LPR devices should only be 
operated when installed in fixed locations, and thus it prohibits hand-
held and mobile applications to prevent interference to authorized 
services in the same or adjacent frequency bands. The record supports 
this conclusion. YSI Incorporated (YSI) urges us to confirm that 
``fixed'' also means temporary fixed installations, to allow users the 
flexibility to operate an LPR at different locations to meet diverse 
measurement needs, without requiring it to remain permanently at a 
specific fixed location. The Commission clarifies that an LPR may be 
temporarily affixed to a structure, so long as it operates only when at 
a fixed location as required by the rules. The Commission prohibits 
hand-held applications since these could increase the potential for 
harmful interference to authorized radio services; they could easily be 
moved, operated while in motion, or operated when not pointed straight 
downward. The same concerns apply to operating an LPR while it is 
moving (e.g., while being transported inside a tanker truck), and the 
rules will prohibit such use. Because the Commission believes that 
misuse of an LPR will render it ineffective and thus is quite unlikely 
to be pursued or to occur, it finds that requiring built-in circuits to 
detect motion as recommended by EIBASS is an unnecessary cost without 
sufficient correlating benefits.
    37. The Commission disagrees with EIBASS' assertion that the 
Commission lacks authority to prohibit marketing of LPR devices to 
certain types of customers or for certain types of applications. It 
notes that Congress granted the Commission authority to regulate the 
marketing, offering for sale, sale or use of RF devices in Sec.  302 of 
the Communications Act, and the Commission implemented that authority 
in Sec.  2.803 of its rules. Further, as an unlicensed part 15 device, 
an LPR is subject to the provisions of Sec.  15.5 of the rules, which 
require the user of a transmitter that causes interference to 
authorized radio communications to stop operating the transmitter or 
correct the problem causing the interference. The Commission has the 
authority to investigate part 2 and part 15 violations and take action 
accordingly, including imposing fines and penalties through its 
Enforcement Bureau's actions. Therefore, the rules provide several 
safeguards against the improper use of an LPR (e.g., using it for hand-
held applications), that could result in harmful interference to 
authorized spectrum services.

Equipment Certification

    38. In the FNPRM, the Commission proposed to permit 
Telecommunications Certification Bodies (TCBs) to certify LPR devices 
operating under the proposed rules. The Commission noted that the FNPRM 
proposals specify direct measurement of emissions within the main beam 
of the LPR antenna and are consistent with compliance measurement 
methodologies currently used by TCBs with other types of unlicensed 
transmitters. The Commission continues to hold this view, and it will 
allow LPR equipment certification by TCBs in addition to the 
Commission.
    39. In the FNPRM, the Commission recognized that, currently, a 
certified TLPR device could be approved to operate under other 
conditions, e.g., outdoor installations in open-air environments, in an 
enclosure with low RF attenuation characteristics, or with higher 
power. To allow previously-certified devices to take advantage of any 
changes proposed in the FNPRM and adopted in this Order, the Commission 
proposed to allow the responsible party to file for a permissive change 
in accordance with the existing rules and practices, provided that: (1) 
The LPR device operates only within the frequency bands authorized by 
rules proposed herein; (2) measurement data taken in accordance with 
the measurement procedure proposed above is provided to demonstrate 
compliance with the new emission limits specified in these proposed 
rules; and (3) operational changes to the device are being implemented 
by software upgrade without any hardware change. The Commission 
continues to believe that these provisions are appropriate because, 
consistent with our existing practice, they minimize additional 
certification burdens on applicants without causing an increased 
potential for harmful interference to authorized services. The 
Commission will implement the changes in our equipment certification 
guidelines for LPRs.

Additional Protection for the Radio Astronomy Service (RAS)

    40. Distance Separation and Height Restrictions. As noted above, 
CORF notes that RAS has primary allocations at 76-77.5 GHz and 78-85 
GHz and does not oppose sharing these bands with LPRs provided the 
Commission adopts certain protections designed to ensure that RAS can 
operate in the interference-free environment that the service requires 
for picking up extremely weak signals. More specifically, CORF and NRAO 
request that these protections include exclusion zones around RAS 
stations, restrictions on the height of LPR antennas, requirements for 
antenna installation, a restriction of operations to fixed 
installations only, and the deployment of a publicly accessible 
database of all LPR installations. CORF and NRAO state that the ECC 
Report 139 recommends a geographical region in which LPRs cannot be 
installed within 4 km from RAS locations and a limit of 15 meters above 
ground level on LPR antenna height within 40 km of these locations. 
They request that the Commission require the same distance separation 
and height restrictions to protect RAS stations, particularly in the 
6650-6675.2 MHz (part of the 5.925-7.250 GHz band) and 75-85 GHz bands. 
MCAA, which represents the LPR industry, agrees with the separation 
distance and height restrictions to protect RAS sites.
    41. The Commission did not propose these restrictions in the FNPRM 
because interference to RAS observatories from downward-looking LPRs is 
unlikely. First, the ETSI/ECC distance and antenna height limitation 
requirements are based on the RAS operating environment in Europe where 
RAS sites are typically found in urban areas; this is a different 
environment than in the United States, where RAS receivers are commonly 
located in remote or rural areas, not the industrial areas where LPRs 
are likely to be found. Second, in the FNRPM, the Commission proposed 
radiated emission limits for LPRs, designed to ensure that, at 3 meters 
from the LPR, the reflected emission level is less than the existing 
general limit of -41.3 dBm EIRP of Sec.  15.209, which is the limit 
currently applicable to part 15 devices, such as computers and video 
monitors, which are likely being used inside a RAS site, apparently 
without harm. Third, RAS receivers discriminate against off-beam 
signals and are pointed skyward, discriminating against reflected 
signals that would be reflected from the side or below. Even in the 
case of LPRs installed over waterways in remote areas, because the 
radio astronomy observatories typically have control over access to a 
distance of one kilometer from the telescopes to provide protection 
from interference caused by uncontrolled RFI sources, the potential for 
interference caused by LPRs at that distance (one kilometer) would be 
infinitesimal, when also taking into account the variability in 
propagation characteristics due to terrain, weather

[[Page 12675]]

and other factors. Given these factors and the additional operational 
and marketing restrictions on LPR devices that the Commission adopted 
herein (e.g., integrated antennas, downward operation, prohibition on 
marketing to consumers), the Commission does not find that it is 
necessary to also prohibit LPRs by rule to avoid operating in the line 
of sight of RAS stations as NRAO requested. While the MCAA does not 
oppose the restrictions proposed by CORF and NRAO, MCAA represents only 
a segment of current LPR users of the band and does not necessarily 
anticipate future uses. Accordingly, the Commission denies CORF and 
NRAO's requests for separation distances from radio astronomy 
observatories and for a limitation on LPR antenna height within certain 
distances of the line of sight of RAS stations.
    42. LPR Installation Database. The Commission declines to require a 
publicly available LPR installation database or to require 
manufacturers to maintain lists of LPR installation sites. We note that 
it is customary for the Commission to proceed in a very cautious manner 
in a waiver proceeding by imposing specific conditions on operations 
that typically involve new technology products or new applications of 
existing technologies and with which the Commission may have little or 
no prior experience regulating. In the case of the waiver grant for 
TLPR devices operating in the 77-81 GHz band, the Commission requires 
manufacturers to maintain a list of LPR installation sites as an 
additional safeguard to permitting LPR operations in a restricted band, 
even though it expected that TLPR devices would not be operating in 
close proximity to radio astronomy sites and thus not likely to cause 
harmful interference to them. As discussed in the Report and Order, the 
Commission adopted new rules based on ETSI/ECC's analysis which derived 
the limits for LPR main-beam emissions by mathematically correlating 
them with reflected emissions from an LPR; the resulting values are the 
same as the existing part 15 average emission limit. The LPR main-beam 
emission limits therefore would maintain the existing level of 
interference protection to incumbent radio services, including RAS 
sites--a level that has already proven to be adequate. The Commission 
finds that NRAO's recommendation that the NSF be notified of each LPR 
installation site is an unnecessary cost without countervailing 
benefits, and agrees with the LPR industry that this could give rise to 
confidentiality issues. The Commission concludes that the downward-
looking operation of LPRs at such emission limits, when combined with 
the various operating/marketing restrictions, is extremely unlikely to 
cause harmful interference to radio astronomy telescopes, thereby 
making a database or list of LPR installation sites, or notification to 
authorized users unnecessary. Further, the Commission finds that its 
decision not to require a publicly available database addresses the LPR 
industry's concern over potential security risks from the disclosure of 
LPR locations.
    43. Cost Benefit Analysis. In the FNPRM, the Commission provided an 
analysis on the potential costs of the proposed LPR regulation versus 
its potential benefits. The Commission stated that, because LPR devices 
need higher power and wider bandwidth than that which is permitted 
under the existing part 15 rules to fully achieve the potential of this 
measuring technology, the proposed rules would tender a necessary 
remedy for LPR devices to operate at the power levels and in the 
appropriate frequency bands required to deliver the needed accuracy for 
diverse applications, thereby promoting the expanded development and 
use of this technology to the benefit of businesses, consumers, and the 
economy. The Commission tentatively concluded that the proposed higher 
power levels in the proposed frequency bands would further the 
development of better and improved level-measuring tools, but these 
changes would not increase the potential for interference to authorized 
users beyond what is permitted under the current rules. The Commission 
also considered how the proposed rules would help to simplify equipment 
development and certification of LPR devices, as well as provide a 
simplified method for measuring the radiated emissions from these 
devices.
    44. Except for a comment from EIBASS, none of the commenters took 
issue with any of these factors or with our tentative conclusion. 
EIBASS argues that the FNPRM cost-benefit analysis fails to consider 
the costs to incumbent TV BAS licensees in the 6 GHZ frequency range in 
tracking down harmful interference caused by unlicensed high power 
LPRs. The Commission does not anticipate, however, that BAS licensees 
will incur costs to investigate interference from LPR; it does not find 
that LPRs will cause harmful interference to BAS or any other licensed 
user in any of the adopted frequency bands for LPR operation, as 
discussed at length. The Commission concludes that the rules adopted 
herein will provide significant benefits to LPR manufacturers and users 
with no apparent cost to any party.

Order

    45. In the Order, the Commission dismissed a waiver request from 
VEGA to operate LPR devices in the 24.6-27 GHz frequency band under 
Sec.  15.252 as moot. The Commission previously held this request in 
abeyance pending final action in this rulemaking proceeding because 
this waiver raises issues that are, in part, similar to those raised in 
the FNPRM.
    46. VEGA requested a waiver of Sec.  15.252(a) to operate LPR 
devices in the 24.6-27 GHz frequency band under this section as a fixed 
structure, either in tanks or in open air. Section 15.252(a) permits 
the use of field disturbance sensors within the frequency bands 16.2-
17.7 GHz and 23.12-29.0 GHz but requires them to be mounted in 
terrestrial transportation vehicles, whereas VEGA's LPR devices would 
only be installed at fixed locations. The waiver request also proposed 
an emission method of measurement that does not take into account 
boresight emissions. After the release of the FNPRM, VEGA amended this 
waiver request on June 6, 2012 for permission to market its 6 GHz and 
26 GHz LPRs that would comply with the proposed rules. Because the 
rules the Commission adopted in the Report and Order enables VEGA to 
operate LPR devices in the 24.6-27 GHz frequency band without a waiver 
of the usage restrictions in Sec.  15.252(a), VEGA will be able to 
apply for LPR certification under Sec.  15.256 for both in tank and 
open air applications. Accordingly, the Commission dismissed VEGA's 
waiver request as moot.

Procedural Matters

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    47. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),\1\ an 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated in the 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) in ET Docket No. 10-
23.\2\ The Commission sought written public comment on the

[[Page 12676]]

proposals in the FNPRM, including comment on the IRFA. This present 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996), 
and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, Public Law 111-240, 124 
Stat. 2504 (2010).
    \2\ Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in ET Docket No. 10-23 
(In the Matter of Amendment of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules To 
Establish Regulations for Tank Level Probing Radars in the Frequency 
Band 77-81 GHz and Amendment of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules To 
Establish Regulations for Level Probing Radars and Tank Level 
Probing Radars in the Frequency Bands 5.925-7.250 GHz, 24.05-29.00 
GHz and 75-85 GHz), 27 FCC Rcd. 3660 (2012) (FNPRM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order

    48. In this Report and Order, we modify our rules to provide a set 
of new technical and operational rules to govern the operation of level 
probing radar (LPR) devices installed both in open-air environments and 
inside storage tanks (TLPR applications) in the following frequency 
bands: 5.925-7.250 GHz, 24.05-29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz. To permit LPR 
operation in the 75-85 GHz band, we also modify the existing Sec.  
15.205 of the rules to remove the prohibition on intentional emissions 
in this band. The amended rules will allow devices with accurate and 
reliable target resolution to identify water levels in rivers and dams 
or critical levels of materials such as fuel or sewer-treated waste, 
reducing overflow and spillage and minimizing exposure of maintenance 
personnel in the case of high risk substances. The amended rules would 
also, to the extent practicable, harmonize our technical rules for LPR 
devices with similar European standards and would improve the 
competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers in the global economy, leading to 
potential cost savings for small businesses, all without causing 
harmful interference to authorized spectrum users in the affected 
frequency bands.

B. Statement of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in 
Response to the IRFA

    49. There were no public comments filed that specifically addressed 
the rules and policies proposed in the IRFA.

C. Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration

    50. Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, the Commission 
is required to respond to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, and to provide a 
detailed statement of any change made to the proposed rules as a result 
of those comments. The Chief Counsel did not file any comments in 
response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.

D. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Rules Will Apply

    51. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, 
where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.\3\ The RFA defines the term 
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small business concern'' 
under Section 3 of the Small Business Act.\4\ 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 operations; and 
(3) meets may additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
    \4\ Id. 601(3).
    \5\ Id. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    52. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at 
the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size standards 
that encompass entities that could be directly affected by the 
proposals under consideration.\6\ As of 2009, small businesses 
represented 99.9% of the 27.5 million businesses in the United States, 
according to the SBA.\7\ Additionally, a ``small organization'' is 
generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned 
and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' \8\ Nationwide, as of 
2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small organizations.\9\ 
Finally, the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is defined 
generally as ``governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, 
villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of 
less than fifty thousand.'' \10\ Census Bureau data for 2007 indicate 
that there were 89,527 governmental jurisdictions in the United 
States.\11\ We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88,761 entities 
may qualify as ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' \12\ Thus, we 
estimate that most governmental jurisdictions are small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(3)-(6).
    \7\ See SBA, Office of Advocacy, ``Frequently Asked Questions,'' 
available at https://web.sba.gov/faqs/faqindex.cfm?areaID=24 (last 
visited Aug. 31, 2012).
    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \9\ Independent Sector, The New Nonprofit Almanac & Desk 
Reference (2010).
    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \11\ U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE UNITED 
STATES: 2011, Table 427 (2007).
    \12\ The 2007 U.S Census data for small governmental 
organizations are not presented based on the size of the population 
in each such organization. There were 89,476 local governmental 
organizations in 2007. If we assume that county, municipal, 
township, and school district organizations are more likely than 
larger governmental organizations to have populations of 50,000 or 
less, the total of these organizations is 52,095. If we make the 
same population assumption about special districts, specifically 
that they are likely to have a population of 50,000 or less, and 
also assume that special districts are different from county, 
municipal, township, and school districts, in 2007 there were 37,381 
such special districts. Therefore, there are a total of 89,476 local 
government organizations. As a basis of estimating how many of these 
89,476 local government organizations were small, in 2011, we note 
that there were a total of 715 cities and towns (incorporated places 
and minor civil divisions) with populations over 50,000. CITY AND 
TOWNS TOTALS: VINTAGE 2011--U.S. Census Bureau, available at https://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2011/. If we 
subtract the 715 cities and towns that meet or exceed the 50,000 
population threshold, we conclude that approximately 88,761 are 
small. U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE UNITED STATES 
2011, Tables 427, 426 (Data cited therein are from 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    53. The adopted rules pertain to manufacturers of unlicensed 
communications devices. The appropriate small business size standard is 
that which the SBA has established for radio and television 
broadcasting and wireless communications equipment manufacturing. The 
Census Bureau defines this category as follows: ``This industry 
comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and 
television broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of 
products made by these establishments are: Transmitting and receiving 
antennas, cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular 
phones, mobile communications equipment, and radio and television 
studio and broadcasting equipment.'' \13\ The SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for firms in this category, which is: all such 
firms having 750 or fewer employees.\14\ According to Census Bureau 
data for 2007, there were a total of 939 establishments in this 
category that operated for part or all of the entire year. Of this 
total, 784 had less than 500 employees and 155 had more than 100 
employees.\15\ Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms 
can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions, ``334220 Radio 
and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment 
Manufacturing''; https://www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/ND334220.HTM#N334220.
    \14\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 334220.
    \15\ https://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-fds_name=EC0700A1&-geo_id=&-_skip=300&-ds_name=EC0731SG2&-_lang=en.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

    54. Unlicensed devices operating in the 5.925-7.250 GHz and 24.05-
29.00 GHz band are already required to be authorized under the 
Commission's certification procedure as a prerequisite to marketing and 
importation, and the

[[Page 12677]]

Report and Order makes no change to that requirement. See 47 CFR 
15.101, 15.201, 15.250, and 15.252. Currently, the 75-85 GHz band is a 
restricted band in which unlicensed device may not only transmit 
spurious (unintentional) emissions. The Report and Order modifies the 
existing Sec.  15.205, 47 CFR 15.205, of the rules to remove the 
prohibition on intentional emissions in this band and adopt the same 
certification procedures for level probing radars operating in this 
band as for the other above-listed frequency bands. The technical 
requirements adopted in this Report and Order, do not impose 
significant burden and will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities that are, or may be, subject to 
the requirements of the rules in the item.

F. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered

    55. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) 
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; 
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an 
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small 
entities.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    56. In this Report and Order, we modify our rules to provide a set 
of new technical and operational rules to govern the operation of LPR 
devices installed both in open-air environments and inside storage 
tanks (TLPR applications) in the following frequency bands: 5.925-7.250 
GHz, 24.05-29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz. To permit LPR operation in the 75-
85 GHz band, we also modify the existing Sec.  15.205 of the rules to 
remove the prohibition on intentional emissions in this band. These 
rule changes will provide needed flexibility and cost savings for LPR 
devices, benefiting the U.S. consumers and manufacturers without 
causing harmful interference to authorized services. The amended rules 
will allow devices with accurate and reliable target resolution to 
identify water levels in rivers and dams or critical levels of 
materials such as fuel or sewer-treated waste, reducing overflow and 
spillage and minimizing exposure of maintenance personnel in the case 
of high risk substances. The amended rules would also, to the extent 
practicable, harmonize our technical rules for LPR devices with similar 
European standards and would improve the competitiveness of U.S. 
manufacturers in the global economy, leading to potential cost savings 
for small businesses. We find that the benefits of the above changes to 
the rules outweigh their regulatory costs. We believe that the adopted 
rules will apply equally to large and small entities. Therefore, there 
is no inequitable impact on small entities.

Ordering Clauses

    57. Pursuant to sections 4(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(g), 
and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 
154(i), 301, 302a, 303(e), 303(f), 303(g), and 303(r), this Report and 
Oder is hereby adopted and part 15 of the Commission's Rules ARE 
amended as set forth in the Appendix, effective April 7, 2014.
    58. Pursuant to authority in Sec.  1.3 of the Commission's rules, 
47 CFR 1.3, and 4(i), 302, and 303(e), of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 302, and 303(e), the Request for 
Waiver filed by VEGA Americas, Inc. (formerly Ohmart/VEGA Corporation) 
filed on December 3, 2009, ET Docket No. 10-27, is dismissed, 
consistent with the terms of this Order. This action is effective upon 
release of this Order.
    59. Report to Congress: The Commission will send a copy of the 
Report and Order, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to 
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act.\17\ In addition, the 
Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including this 
FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15

    Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rule Changes

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
part 15 to read as follows:

PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 15 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. Section 15.3 is amended by adding paragraph (ii) to read as follows:


15.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (ii) Level Probing Radar (LPR): A short-range radar transmitter 
used in a wide range of applications to measure the amount of various 
substances, mostly liquids or granulates. LPR equipment may operate in 
open-air environments or inside an enclosure containing the substance 
being measured.

0
3. Section 15.31 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) and (g) and 
adding paragraph (q) to read as follows:


Sec.  15.31  Measurement standards.

* * * * *
    (c) Except as otherwise indicated in Sec.  15.256, for swept 
frequency equipment, measurements shall be made with the frequency 
sweep stopped at those frequencies chosen for the measurements to be 
reported.
* * * * *
    (g) Equipment under test shall be positioned and adjusted, using 
those controls that are readily accessible to or are intended to be 
accessible to the consumer, in such a manner as to maximize the level 
of the emissions. For those devices to which wire leads may be attached 
by the operator, tests shall be performed with wire leads attached. The 
wire leads shall be of the length to be used with the equipment if that 
length is known. Otherwise, wire leads one meter in length shall be 
attached to the equipment. Longer wire leads may be employed if 
necessary to interconnect to associated peripherals.
* * * * *
    (q) As an alternative to Sec.  15.256, a level probing radar (LPR) 
may be certified as an intentional radiator by showing compliance with 
the general provisions for operation under part 15 subpart C of this 
chapter, provided that the device is tested in accordance with the 
provisions in either paragraphs (q)(1) or (2) of this section. 
Compliance with the general provisions for an intentional radiator may 
require compliance with other rules in this part, e.g., Sec. Sec.  
15.5, 15.31, and 15.35, etc., when referenced.
    (1) An LPR device intended for installation inside metal and 
concrete enclosures may show compliance for radiated emissions when 
measured outside a representative enclosure with the LPR installed 
inside, in accordance with the measurement guidelines established by 
the Commission for these

[[Page 12678]]

devices. LPR devices operating inside these types of enclosures shall 
ensure that the enclosure is closed when the radar device is operating. 
Care shall be taken to ensure that gaskets, flanges, and other openings 
are sealed to eliminate signal leakage outside of the structure. The 
responsible party shall take reasonable steps to ensure that LPR 
devices intended for use in these types of enclosures shall not be 
installed in open-air environments or inside enclosures with lower 
radio-frequency attenuating characteristics (e.g., fiberglass, plastic, 
etc.). An LPR device approved under this subsection may only be 
operated in the type of enclosure for which it was approved.
    (2) Except as provided in paragraph (q)(1) of this section, an LPR 
device shall be placed in testing positions that ensure the field 
strength values of the radiated emissions are maximized, including in 
the main beam of the LPR antenna.

0
4. Section 15.35 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  15.35  Measurement detector functions and bandwidths.

* * * * *
    (b) Unless otherwise specified, on any frequency or frequencies 
above 1000 MHz, the radiated emission limits are based on the use of 
measurement instrumentation employing an average detector function. 
Unless otherwise specified, measurements above 1000 MHz shall be 
performed using a minimum resolution bandwidth of 1 MHz. When average 
radiated emission measurements are specified in this part, including 
average emission measurements below 1000 MHz, there also is a limit on 
the peak level of the radio frequency emissions. Unless otherwise 
specified, e.g., see Sec. Sec.  15.250, 15.252, 15.253(d), 15.255, 
15.256, and 15.509 through 15.519 of this part, the limit on peak radio 
frequency emissions is 20 dB above the maximum permitted average 
emission limit applicable to the equipment under test. This peak limit 
applies to the total peak emission level radiated by the device, e.g., 
the total peak power level. Note that the use of a pulse 
desensitization correction factor may be needed to determine the total 
peak emission level. The instruction manual or application note for the 
measurement instrument should be consulted for determining pulse 
desensitization factors, as necessary.
    (c) Unless otherwise specified, e.g., Sec. Sec.  15.255(b), and 
15.256(l)(5), when the radiated emission limits are expressed in terms 
of the average value of the emission, and pulsed operation is employed, 
the measurement field strength shall be determined by averaging over 
one complete pulse train, including blanking intervals, as long as the 
pulse train does not exceed 0.1 seconds. As an alternative (provided 
the transmitter operates for longer than 0.1 seconds) or in cases where 
the pulse train exceeds 0.1 seconds, the measured field strength shall 
be determined from the average absolute voltage during a 0.1 second 
interval during which the field strength is at its maximum value. The 
exact method of calculating the average field strength shall be 
submitted with any application for certification or shall be retained 
in the measurement data file for equipment subject to notification or 
verification.

0
5. Section 15.205 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  15.205  Restricted bands of operation.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) Any equipment operated under the provisions of Sec.  15.253, 
15.255, and 15.256 in the frequency band 75-85 GHz, or Sec.  15.257 of 
this part.
* * * * *

0
6. Section 15.256 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  15.256  Operation of level probing radars within the bands 5.925-
7.250 GHz, 24.05-29.00 GHz, and 75-85 GHz.

    (a) Operation under this section is limited to level probing radar 
(LPR) devices.
    (b) LPR devices operating under the provisions of this section 
shall utilize a dedicated or integrated transmit antenna, and the 
system shall be installed and maintained to ensure a vertically 
downward orientation of the transmit antenna's main beam.
    (c) LPR devices operating under the provisions of this section 
shall be installed only at fixed locations. The LPR device shall not 
operate while being moved, or while inside a moving container.
    (d) Hand-held applications are prohibited.
    (e) Marketing to residential consumers is prohibited.
    (f) The fundamental bandwidth of an LPR emission is defined as the 
width of the signal between two points, one below and one above the 
center frequency, outside of which all emissions are attenuated by at 
least 10 dB relative to the maximum transmitter output power when 
measured in an equivalent resolution bandwidth.
    (1) The minimum fundamental emission bandwidth shall be 50 MHz for 
LPR operation under the provisions of this section.
    (2) LPR devices operating under this section must confine their 
fundamental emission bandwidth within the 5.925-7.250 GHz, 24.05-29.00 
GHz, and 75-85 GHz bands under all conditions of operation.
    (g) Fundamental emissions limits. (1) All emission limits provided 
in this section are expressed in terms of Equivalent Isotropic Radiated 
Power (EIRP).
    (2) The EIRP level is to be determined from the maximum measured 
power within a specified bandwidth.
    (i) The EIRP in 1 MHz is computed from the maximum power level 
measured within any 1-MHz bandwidth using a power averaging detector;
    (ii) The EIRP in 50 MHz is computed from the maximum power level 
measured with a peak detector in a 50-MHz bandwidth centered on the 
frequency at which the maximum average power level is realized and this 
50 MHz bandwidth must be contained within the authorized operating 
bandwidth. For a RBW less than 50 MHz, the peak EIRP limit (in dBm) is 
reduced by 20 log(RBW/50) dB where RBW is the resolution bandwidth in 
megahertz. The RBW shall not be lower than 1 MHz or greater than 50 
MHz. The video bandwidth of the measurement instrument shall not be 
less than the RBW. If the RBW is greater than 3 MHz, the application 
for certification filed shall contain a detailed description of the 
test procedure, calibration of the test setup, and the instrumentation 
employed in the testing.
    (3) The EIRP limits for LPR operations in the bands authorized by 
this rule section are provided in Table 1. The emission limits in Table 
1 are based on boresight measurements (i.e., measurements performed 
within the main beam of an LPR antenna).

[[Page 12679]]



                    Table 1--LPR EIRP Emission Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Average
                                          emission limit   Peak emission
    Frequency band of operation (GHz)      (EIRP in dBm   limit (EIRP in
                                           measured in 1   dBm measured
                                               MHz)         in 50 MHz)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.925-7.250.............................             -33               7
24.05-29.00.............................             -14              26
75-85...................................              -3              34
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (h) Unwanted emissions limits. Unwanted emissions from LPR devices 
shall not exceed the general emission limit in Sec.  15.209 of this 
chapter.
    (i) Antenna beamwidth. (A) LPR devices operating under the 
provisions of this section within the 5.925-7.250 GHz and 24.05-29.00 
GHz bands must use an antenna with a -3 dB beamwidth no greater than 12 
degrees.
    (B) LPR devices operating under the provisions of this section 
within the 75-85 GHz band must use an antenna with a -3 dB beamwidth no 
greater than 8 degrees.
    (j) Antenna side lobe gain. LPR devices operating under the 
provisions of this section must limit the side lobe antenna gain 
relative to the main beam gain for off-axis angles from the main beam 
of greater than 60 degrees to the levels provided in Table 2.

                 Table 2--Antenna Side Lobe Gain Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Antenna side
                                                             lobe gain
                  Frequency range (GHz)                   limit relative
                                                           to main beam
                                                             gain (dB)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.925-7.250.............................................             -22
24.05-29.00.............................................             -27
75-85...................................................             -38
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (k) Emissions from digital circuitry used to enable the operation 
of the transmitter may comply with the limits in Sec.  15.209 of this 
chapter provided it can be clearly demonstrated that those emissions 
are due solely to emissions from digital circuitry contained within the 
transmitter and the emissions are not intended to be radiated from the 
transmitter's antenna. Emissions from associated digital devices, as 
defined in Sec.  15.3(k) of this part, e.g., emissions from digital 
circuitry used to control additional functions or capabilities other 
than the operation of the transmitter, are subject to the limits 
contained in subpart B, part 15 of this chapter. Emissions from these 
digital circuits shall not be employed in determining the -10 dB 
bandwidth of the fundamental emission or the frequency at which the 
highest emission level occurs.
    (l) Measurement procedures. (1) Radiated measurements of the 
fundamental emission bandwidth and power shall be made with maximum 
main-beam coupling between the LPR and test antennas (boresight).
    (2) Measurements of the unwanted emissions radiating from an LPR 
shall be made utilizing elevation and azimuth scans to determine the 
location at which the emissions are maximized.
    (3) All emissions at and below 1,000 MHz except 9-90 kHz and 110-
490 kHz bands are based on measurements employing a CISPR quasi-peak 
detector.
    (4) The fundamental emission bandwidth measurement shall be made 
using a peak detector with a resolution bandwidth of 1 MHz and a video 
bandwidth of at least 3 MHz.
    (5) The provisions in Sec.  15.35(b) and (c) of this part that 
require emissions to be averaged over a 100 millisecond period and that 
limits the peak power to 20 dB above the average limit do not apply to 
devices operating under paragraphs (a) through (l) of this section.
    (6) Compliance measurements for minimum emission bandwidth of 
frequency-agile LPR devices shall be performed with any related 
frequency sweep, step, or hop function activated.
    (7) Compliance measurements shall be made in accordance with the 
specific procedures published or otherwise authorized by the 
Commission.

[FR Doc. 2014-04733 Filed 3-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P