Use of the 5.850-5.925 Band, 24835-24840 [2024-07428]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 9, 2024 / Notices
technologies, new stand-alone CMRS
providers are permitted to exclude up to
15 percent of the counties or PSAP areas
they serve due to heavy forestation that
limits handset-based technology
accuracy in those counties or areas but
are required to file a an initial list of the
specific counties or portions of counties
where they are utilizing their respective
exclusions.
A. Updated Exclusion Reports. Under
this information collection and pursuant
to current rule section 9.10(h) new
stand-alone CMRS providers and
existing CMRS providers that have filed
initial exclusion reports are required to
file reports informing the Commission
of any changes to their exclusion lists
within thirty days of discovering such
changes. The permitted exclusions
properly but narrowly account for the
known technical limitations of either
the handset-based or network-based
location accuracy technologies chosen
by a CMRS provider, while ensuring
that the public safety community and
the public at large are sufficiently
informed of these limitations.
B. Confidence and Uncertainty Data.
Under this information collection and
pursuant to current rule section 9.10(h),
all CMRS providers and other entities
responsible for transporting confidence
and uncertainty data between the
wireless carriers and PSAPs, including
LECs, CLECs, owners of E911 networks,
and emergency service providers
(collectively, System Service Providers
(SSPs)) must continue to provide
confidence and uncertainty data of
wireless 911 calls to Public Safety
Answering Points (PSAP) on a per call
basis upon a PSAP’s request. New
stand-alone wireless carriers also incur
this obligation. The transport of the
confidence and uncertainty data is
needed to ensure the delivery of
accurate location information with E911
service.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–07426 Filed 4–8–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
[OMB 3060–1113; FR ID 212430]
Information Collection Being Reviewed
by the Federal Communications
Commission
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Apr 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
As part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork burdens, and as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC or
the Commission) invites the general
public and other Federal agencies to
take this opportunity to comment on the
following information collection.
Comments are requested concerning:
whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
the accuracy of the Commission’s
burden estimate; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; and ways to
further reduce the information
collection burden on small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
DATES: Written PRA comments should
be submitted on or before June 10, 2024.
If you anticipate that you will be
submitting comments, but find it
difficult to do so within the period of
time allowed by this notice, you should
advise the contact listed below as soon
as possible.
ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to
Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email PRA@
fcc.gov and to nicole.ongele@fcc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information about the
information collection, contact Nicole
Ongele, (202) 418–2991.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FCC
may not conduct or sponsor a collection
of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number. No
person shall be subject to any penalty
for failing to comply with a collection
of information subject to the PRA that
does not display a valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number.
OMB Control Number: 3060–1113.
Title: Election Whether to Participate
in the Wireless Emergency Alerts.
Form Number: N/A.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions; State,
Local or Tribal Government.
Number of Respondents and
Responses: 1,253 respondents; 5,176
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.50–
12 hours.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24835
Frequency of Response: On occasion
and semi-annual reporting
requirements.
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits. Statutory
authority for this collection is contained
in 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154, 301, 303,
307, 309, 403, and 606, of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, and 1201, 1203, 1204, and
1206 of the Warning Alert and Response
Network Acts.
Total Annual Burden: 106,943 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $ 7,050,800.
Needs and Uses: This modification to
an existing collection will require all
CMS providers to file their election
regarding participation in the WEA
system by submitting the information to
an FCC-created and maintained WEA
database that will be accessible to the
FCC, FEMA, alerting authorities and the
public. This will refresh CMS provider
WEA-elections that were last required
over a decade ago and provide a single
source of information on WEA
availability. The modifications proposed
herein will also provide WEA messages
to be made available by Participating
CMS providers in English and the 13
most commonly spoken languages in the
U.S., as well as American Sign
Language. This will make these alerts
available for the first time to the
millions of Americans who are not
native English speakers and to our
hearing impaired population.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–07427 Filed 4–8–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
[ET Docket No. 19–138; FR ID 212490]
Use of the 5.850–5.925 Band
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
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)
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
24836
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 9, 2024 / Notices
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 Griboff@fcc.gov.
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:
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fccaffirms-repurposing-59-ghz-bandbetween-wi-fi-and-auto-safety. 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 FCC504@fcc.gov or
calling the Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432
(TTY).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Apr 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 safetyrelated 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
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 9, 2024 / Notices
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-ToEverything (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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Apr 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24837
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
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
24838
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 9, 2024 / Notices
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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Apr 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 9, 2024 / Notices
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Apr 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24839
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
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
24840
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 9, 2024 / Notices
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
FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
EXAMINATION COUNCIL
[Docket No. AS24–09]
Appraisal Subcommittee Notice of
Meeting
Appraisal Subcommittee of the
Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council
AGENCY:
Notice of Special Closed
Meeting.
ACTION:
Description: In accordance with
Section 1104(b) of Title XI of the
Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery,
and Enforcement Act of 1989, as
amended, notice is hereby given that the
Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) met for
a Special Closed Meeting on this date.
Location: Virtual meeting via Webex.
Date: April 3, 2024.
Time: 10:55 a.m. ET.
Action and Discussion Item
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Personnel Matter
The ASC convened a Special Closed
Meeting to discuss a personnel matter
pursuant to section 1104(b) of Title XI
(12 U.S.C. 3333(b)). No action was taken
by the ASC.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Change in Bank Control Notices;
Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or
Bank Holding Company
Formations of, Acquisitions by, and
Mergers of Bank Holding Companies
The notificants listed below have
applied under the Change in Bank
Control Act (Act) (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and
§ 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12
CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank
or bank holding company. The factors
that are considered in acting on the
applications are set forth in paragraph 7
of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
The public portions of the
applications listed below, as well as
other related filings required by the
Board, if any, are available for
immediate inspection at the Federal
Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at
the offices of the Board of Governors.
This information may also be obtained
on an expedited basis, upon request, by
contacting the appropriate Federal
Reserve Bank and from the Board’s
Freedom of Information Office at
https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/
request.htm. Interested persons may
express their views in writing on the
standards enumerated in paragraph 7 of
the Act.
Comments received are subject to
public disclosure. In general, comments
received will be made available without
change and will not be modified to
remove personal or business
information including confidential,
contact, or other identifying
information. Comments should not
include any information such as
confidential information that would not
be appropriate for public disclosure.
Comments regarding each of these
applications must be received at the
Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of
the Board of Governors, Ann E.
Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20551–0001, not later
than April 24, 2024.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of
Minneapolis (Stephanie Weber,
Assistant Vice President) 90 Hennepin
Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota
55480–0291. Comments may also be
sent electronically to MA@mpls.frb.org:
1. Frederick C. Lewis II, Duluth,
Minnesota; to retain voting shares of
North Shore Financial Corporation and
thereby indirectly retain voting shares of
North Shore Bank of Commerce, both of
Duluth, Minnesota.
James R. Park,
Executive Director.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2024–07472 Filed 4–8–24; 8:45 am]
[FR Doc. 2024–07506 Filed 4–8–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6700–01–P
BILLING CODE P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Apr 08, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The companies listed in this notice
have applied to the Board for approval,
pursuant to the Bank Holding Company
Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.)
(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part
225), and all other applicable statutes
and regulations to become a bank
holding company and/or to acquire the
assets or the ownership of, control of, or
the power to vote shares of a bank or
bank holding company and all of the
banks and nonbanking companies
owned by the bank holding company,
including the companies listed below.
The public portions of the
applications listed below, as well as
other related filings required by the
Board, if any, are available for
immediate inspection at the Federal
Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at
the offices of the Board of Governors.
This information may also be obtained
on an expedited basis, upon request, by
contacting the appropriate Federal
Reserve Bank and from the Board’s
Freedom of Information Office at
https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/
request.htm. Interested persons may
express their views in writing on the
standards enumerated in the BHC Act
(12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
Comments received are subject to
public disclosure. In general, comments
received will be made available without
change and will not be modified to
remove personal or business
information including confidential,
contact, or other identifying
information. Comments should not
include any information such as
confidential information that would not
be appropriate for public disclosure.
Comments regarding each of these
applications must be received at the
Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of
the Board of Governors, Ann E.
Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20551–0001, not later
than May 9, 2024.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
(Erien O. Terry, Assistant Vice
President) 1000 Peachtree Street NE,
Atlanta, Georgia 30309. Comments may
also be submitted at
Applications.Comments@atl.frb.org:
1. Volunteer State Bancshares, Inc.,
Portland, Tennessee; to merge with
Fourth Capital Holdings, Inc., and
therefore indirectly acquire Fourth
Capital Bank, both of Nashville,
Tennessee.
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24835-24840]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[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 [email protected].
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: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-affirms-repurposing-59-ghz-band-between-wi-fi-and-auto-safety. 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
[email protected] 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
