Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 26 and 97

[ET Docket No. 93-62; FCC 97-303]

Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of

Radiofrequency Radiation

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This Second Memorandum Opinion and Order amends the

Commission's rules to refine and clarify the decisions adopted in the

Report and Order, regarding the use of new guidelines and methods in

the evaluation of the environmental effects of RF electromagnetic

fields or emissions produced by FCC-regulated transmitters. The

Commission believes its decisions provide a proper balance between the

need to protect the public and workers from exposure to potentially

harmful RF electromagnetic fields and the requirement that industry be

allowed to provide telecommunications services to the public in the

most efficient and practical manner possible.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 15, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert F. Cleveland, Office of

Engineering and Technology, Federal

[[Page 47961]]

Communications Commission, (202) 418-2464.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Second

Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET Docket 93-62, FCC 97-303, adopted

August 25, 1997, and released August 25, 1997. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and also may be purchased from the

Commission's duplication contractor, International Transcription

Service, (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140, Washington,

D.C. 20037.

Summary of the Memorandum Opinion and Order

1. In this Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, we are amending our

rules to refine and clarify the decisions adopted August 1, 1996, in

the Report and Order, 61 FR 41006, August 7, 1996, regarding the use of

new guidelines and methods in the evaluation of the environmental

effects of RF electromagnetic fields or emissions produced by FCC-

regulated transmitters. This Second Memorandum Opinion and Order

responds to petitions for reconsideration and/or clarification filed in

this proceeding. In reaching our decisions, we have considered

carefully the petitions and comments that were received in this

proceeding. We believe our decisions provide a proper balance between

the need to protect the public and workers from exposure to potentially

harmful RF electromagnetic fields and the requirement that industry be

allowed to provide telecommunications services to the public in the

most efficient and practical manner possible. Specifically, we are: (1)

Affirming the RF exposure limits that were previously adopted; (2)

modifying in a few areas our policy that categorically excludes certain

transmitters from routine environmental evaluation; and (3) revising

and clarifying our guidelines regarding RF emissions involving multiple

transmitter facilities. We are also adopting a number of minor changes

and clarifications.

2. In the Report and Order, the Commission adopted limits for

Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) and localized, partial-body exposure

of humans based on criteria published by the National Council on

Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) and by the American

National Standards Institute/Institute of Electrical and Electronics

Engineers, Inc. (ANSI/IEEE). The Report and Order also modified the

Commission's policy on categorical exclusions that exempts many radio

services and transmitters from routine environmental evaluation for RF

exposure. In accordance with Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act

of 1996, the Report and Order followed Congressional direction with

respect to completion of the docket in this proceeding. The new rules

became effective immediately; however, a transition period (originally

to January 1, 1997) was provided for implementation of the new

requirements for transmitters other than portable and mobile devices.

3. A First Memorandum Opinion and Order, adopted on December 23,

1996, 62 FR 3232, January 22, 1997, addressed comments in those

petitions requesting extension of the transition provisions of the

Report and Order and extended the transition period to September 1,

1997 (January 1, 1998 for amateur stations). This Second Memorandum

Opinion and Order addresses the other issues raised in the petitions,

including whether we should: (1) Reconsider the RF exposure limits

originally adopted; (2) reconsider our policy on categorical exclusion

of certain transmitters from routine evaluation for compliance with our

guidelines; (3) modify our policy with respect to evaluation of RF

exposure at multiple transmitter sites; (4) revise our policy with

respect to routine evaluation for SMR transmitters; and (5) broaden our

authority to preempt state and local regulations concerning RF

exposure.

4. Some petitioners ask that we reconsider our previous decision

not to adopt ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 in its entirety. Several other

petitioners claim that the limits we adopted were not protective

enough. The staff believes that no new and compelling justifications

have been provided that would warrant a modification of the limits

adopted in the Report and Order. Those limits were crafted to address

concerns about ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 that had been raised by several

agencies of the Federal Government with responsibility for health and

safety. Furthermore, all of these agencies have written letters to the

Commission supporting our new guidelines. We believe that the limits

adopted in the Report and Order provide a proper balance between the

need to protect the public and workers from exposure to excessive RF

electromagnetic fields and the need to allow communications services to

readily address growing marketplace demands.

5. The Commission's environmental rules identify particular

categories of existing or proposed transmitters or facilities for which

licensees and applicants are required to conduct routine environmental

evaluations to determine whether these transmitters or facilities

comply with our RF guidelines. Other transmitting facilities are

categorically excluded from these rules because we have judged them to

offer little potential for causing exposures in excess of the

applicable guidelines. In the Report and Order, we revised our rules

related to this policy of categorical exclusion based on our own

calculations and analyses of the implications of the new limits, along

with information and data acquired during the proceeding. Whereas

previously we had categorically excluded entire service categories,

such as paging and cellular transmitters, the Report and Order

concluded that some transmitting facilities, regardless of service, may

offer the potential for causing exposures in excess of MPE limits.

6. Several petitioners ask that we return to our earlier policy of

categorical exclusion for entire services. However, these petitioners

present no new evidence that would lead us to change our basic premise

for categorical exclusion. We continue to believe that it is desirable

and appropriate to categorically exclude from routine environmental

evaluation only those transmitting facilities that offer little or no

potential for exposure in excess of our limits. However, some

transmitting facilities, regardless of service, offer the potential for

causing exposures in excess of MPE limits because of such factors as

their relatively high operating power, location or relative

accessibility, and these facilities should not be categorically

excluded from routine evaluation.

7. Except in a few limited areas, we do not believe it is

appropriate to modify the categorical exclusion policies adopted in the

Report and Order. We are modifying our policy related to unlicensed

millimeter-wave devices that do not meet the definition of a portable

device and unlicensed and licensed PCS and other mobile devices

operating above 1.5 GHz. Secondly, we are revising the 50-watt

threshold for routine evaluation of amateur radio stations so that it

reflects the manner in which the RF exposure limits change in the

different amateur frequency bands. We are also revising categorical

exclusions currently based on the height of the antenna radiation

center above ground so that they are based on the height of the lowest

portion of the antenna above ground. In addition to these areas, we are

revising our policy

[[Page 47962]]

on categorical exclusions for SMR transmitters so that all SMR

operations are covered, and we are changing our definition of

``rooftop'' so that antennas that are mounted on the sides of buildings

or otherwise don't fit the previous definition will be considered, if

appropriate.

8. Several petitioners argue that our policy regarding evaluation

at sites with multiple FCC-regulated transmitters is overly burdensome.

Our rules state that when the RF exposure limits are exceeded in an

accessible area due to the RF fields of multiple fixed transmitters,

actions necessary to bring the area into compliance are the shared

responsibility of all licensees whose transmitters produce power

densities in excess of 1% of the exposure limit applicable to their

transmitter. After considering the various arguments, we conclude that

the 1% level should be changed. We concur that a 1% level is difficult

to measure or calculate. We believe that a 5% threshold represents a

more reasonable and supportable compromise, by offering relief to

relatively low-powered site occupants who do not contribute

significantly to areas of non-compliance and, at the same time, by

providing for the appropriate allocation of responsibility among major

site emitters.

9. Some petitioners request that the Commission broaden its

preemptive authority beyond the category of ``personal wireless

services'' authorized in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Based upon

the current record in this proceeding, we find that there is

insufficient evidence at this time to warrant our preempting state and

local actions that are based on concerns over RF emissions for services

other than those defined by Congress as ``personal wireless services.''

However, additional issues concerning preemption of state and local

regulations involving advanced television facilities have been raised

in a Petition for Further Rulemaking filed by the National Association

of Broadcasters which will be considered in a separate proceeding.

10. Several additional petitions were received in response to our

earlier First Memorandum Opinion and Order extending the transition

period for fixed stations and transmitters. Some petitioners request

that we end the transition period immediately because of the potential

for large scale exposure of the public to harmful RF emissions. Others

argue that additional time is needed to consider the Commission's

response to earlier petitions relating to OET Bulletin 65 on RF

compliance. This bulletin will be released simultaneously with this

Order. In order to provide applicants and licensees with sufficient

time to review the final version of the bulletin, we will extend the

initial transition period to October 15, 1997. The transition period

for the Amateur Radio Service, only, will remain the same, and will end

on January 1, 1998.

11. Finally, we are revising our rules to require that existing

sites and transmitters come into compliance with the new guidelines as

of a date certain. Accordingly, we will require all existing

facilities, operations and devices to comply with the new FCC RF

guidelines no later than September 1, 2000.

Revised Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Second Memorandum Opinion and Order

12. As required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5

U.S.C. Sec. 603 (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(IRFA) was incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in

ET Docket 93-62. The Commission sought written public comments on the

proposals in the NPRM, including on the IRFA. In the Report and Order

in this proceeding, the Commission adopted a Final Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (FRFA). Petitions for reconsideration were filed

in response to the Report and Order by seventeen parties. Several

technical and legal issues have been raised in the petitions and

subsequent comments. In addition, several petitions have raised

questions about the original FRFA. The First Memorandum Opinion and

Order in this proceeding, and the associated FRFA, addressed those

petitions and comments requesting extension of the transition period

specified in the Report and Order as well as the comments that were

made on the original FRFA contained in the Report and Order. This

Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, including this FRFA, addresses the

other issues raised in the petitions. The FRFA conforms to the RFA, as

amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996 (CWAAA),

Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996).

I. Need for and Purpose of This Action

13. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 requires

agencies of the Federal Government to evaluate the effects of their

actions on the quality of the human environment. To meet its

responsibilities under NEPA, the Commission has adopted revised

radiofrequency (RF) exposure guidelines for purposes of evaluating

potential environmental effects of RF electromagnetic fields produced

by FCC-regulated facilities. The new guidelines reflect more recent

scientific studies of the biological effects of RF electromagnetic

fields. Use of these new guidelines will ensure that the public and

workers receive adequate protection from exposure to potentially

harmful RF electromagnetic fields. This Second Memorandum Opinion and

Order addresses a number of concerns that were raised in petitions and

comments received in response to the Report and Order.

II. Summary of Issues Raised by the Public Comments in Response to the

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IFRA)

14. No comments were filed in direct response to the IRFA. In

general comments on the NPRM, however, some commenters raised issues

that might affect small entities. These issues were discussed in the

FRFA contained in the Report and Order in this proceeding.

III. Summary of Issues Raised Regarding the Final Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) by the Petitions, Motions, and Comments in

Response to the Report and Order

15. The American Radio Relay League, Inc., Paging Network, Inc.,

and the Personal Communications Industry Association raised concerns in

their petitions, motions and comments regarding the FRFA that was

associated with the Report and Order. Those concerns were addressed in

the revised FRFA contained in the First Memorandum Opinion and Order in

this proceeding.

IV. Description and Estimate of the Small Entities Subject to the

Rules

16. The rules being adopted in this Second Memorandum Opinion and

Order apply to twelve industry categories and services. All but one of

these industry categories and services was described in the FRFA

accompanying the First Memorandum Opinion and Order in this proceeding.

The RFA generally defines the term ``small business'' as having the

same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small

Business Act, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 632. Based on that statutory provision, we

will consider a small business concern one which (1) is independently

owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and

(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business

Administration (SBA). The RFA SBREFA provisions also apply to nonprofit

organizations and to governmental organizations. Since the Regulatory

Flexibility Act amendments

[[Page 47963]]

were not in effect until the record in this proceeding was closed, the

Commission was unable to request information regarding the number of

small businesses within each of these services or the number of small

businesses that would be affected by this action. We have, however,

made estimates based on our knowledge about applications that have been

submitted in the past. To the extent that a government entity may be a

licensee or an applicant, the impact on those entities is included in

the estimates for small businesses below.

17. Under the new rules adopted in the Report and Order and in this

Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, many radio services are

categorically excluded from having to determine compliance with the new

RF exposure limits. This exclusion is based on a determination that

there is little potential for these services causing exposures in

excess of the limits. Within the following services that are not

categorically excluded in their entirety, many transmitting facilities

are categorically excluded based on antenna location and power. These

categorical exclusions significantly reduce the burden associated with

these rules, and may reduce the impact of these rules on small

businesses. Furthermore, the extension of the transition periods

contained in the First Memorandum Opinion and Order will reduce the

impact on applicants, particularly small businesses, by allowing them

adequate time to understand the new requirements and ensure that their

facilities are in compliance with them in a orderly and reasonable

manner.

18. As noted above, descriptions and estimates of all of the

categories and services for small entities subject to our rules, except

one, were previously given in the FRFRA that accompanied the First

Memorandum Opinion and Order. Therefore, that document should be

consulted for this information. Information on the one additional

category not included in the earlier FRFA, radiofrequency devices, is

given below. Minor edits were also made in the section of the previous

FRFA for satellite communications services, and the revised section is

also given below.

A. Satellite Communications Services

19. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities

applicable to satellite communications licensees. Therefore, the

applicable definition of small entity is the definition under the Small

Business Administration (SBA) rules applicable to Communications

Services, Not Elsewhere Classified. This definition provides that a

small entity is expressed as one with $11.0 million or less in annual

receipts.

20. Because the Regulatory Flexibility Act amendments were not in

effect until the comment period for this proceeding was closed, the

Commission was unable to request information regarding the number of

licensees in the international services discussed below that meet this

definition of a small business. Thus, we are providing an estimate of

licensees that constitute a small business.

21. Fixed Satellite Earth Stations. Fixed satellite earth stations

include international and domestic earth stations operating in the 4/6

GHZ, 11/12/14 GHZ and 20/30 GHZ bands.

There are approximately 4200 earth station authorizations, a portion of

which are Fixed Satellite Earth Stations. Although we were unable to

request the revenue information, we estimate that some of the licensees

of these earth stations would constitute a small business under the SBA

definition.

22. Fixed Satellite Small Earth Stations. Small transmit/receive

earth stations operate in the 4/6 GHZ frequency bands with

antennas that are two meters or less in diameter. There are 4200 earth

station authorizations, a portion of which are Fixed Satellite Small

Earth Stations. Although we were unable to request the revenue

information, we estimate that some of the fixed satellite small earth

stations would constitute a small business under the SBA definition.

23. Fixed Satellite Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT) Systems.

VSAT systems operate in the 12/14 GHZ frequency bands.

Although various size small aperture antenna earth-stations may be

used, all stations of a particular size must be technically identical.

Because these stations operate on a primary basis, frequency

coordination with terrestrial microwave systems is not required. Thus,

a single ``blanket'' application may be filed for a specified number of

small antennas and one or more hub stations. The Commission has

processed 377 applications for fixed satellite VSAT systems. At this

time, we are unable to make a precise estimate of the number of small

businesses that are VSAT system licensees and could be impacted by this

action.

24. Mobile Satellite Earth Stations. Mobile satellite earth

stations are intended to be used while in motion or during halts at

unspecified points. These stations operate as part of a network that

includes a fixed hub station or stations. The network may provide a

variety of land, maritime and aeronautical voice and data services.

There are 8 mobile satellite licensees. At this time, we are unable to

make a precise estimate of the number of small businesses that are

mobile satellite earth station licensees and could be impacted by this

action.

25. Radio Determination Satellite Earth Stations. A radio

determination satellite earth station is used in conjunction with a

radio determination satellite service (rdss) system for the purpose of

providing position location information. These stations operate as part

of a network that includes a fixed hub station or stations and operate

in the frequency bands (1610-1626.5 MHZ and 2483.5-2500

MHZ) allocated to rdss. At this time, we are unable to make

a precise estimate of the number of small businesses that are radio

determination satellite earth station licensees and could be impacted

by the forfeiture guidelines.

26. It should be noted that in most of the satellite areas

discussed above, the Commission issues one license to an entity but

generally issues blanket license authority for thousands or even

hundreds of thousands of earth stations or hand held transceivers.

Overall, the Commission receives about 600 applications for satellite

facilities per year. All applicants for satellite earth stations

(except for receive-only stations) must make a determination of

compliance with the RF exposure limits, based on calculations or

measurements.

B. Radiofrequency Devices

27. The radiofrequency devices affected by this rulemaking are low

power, unlicensed transmitters that will be used to provide, on

millimeter wave frequencies, a variety of services, including vehicle

collision avoidance and high data rate/short range wireless data

communications. Unlicensed personal communications service (PCS)

transmitters are also radiofrequency devices. Radiofrequency devices

are subject to compliance with the new RF radiation requirements at the

time of equipment authorization. Therefore, it will be the equipment

manufacturers and importers who will be affected by this action.

28. We expect most of the firms that would be interested in

producing millimeter wave and unlicensed PCS devices will be large

businesses. We note that Ford Motor and Hewlett Packard have expressed

interest in millimeter wave devices and filed comments in this

proceeding. In addition, Motorola and Ericsson, both large equipment

manufacturers, have expressed interest in manufacturing unlicensed PCS

devices. Nevertheless, it is conceivable that small businesses will

also want to manufacture these devices.

[[Page 47964]]

29. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities

applicable to radiofrequency devices. Therefore, the applicable

definition of small entity is the definition under the SBA applicable

to the ``Communications Services, Not Elsewhere'' category. A small

millimeter wave device or unlicensed PCS entity under this definition

is one with less than $11.0 million in annual receipts.

30. The Commission has not yet authorized any millimeter wave

devices, and has authorized fewer than fifteen unlicensed PCS devices.

Both these services are new, so we really don't know how many

applications for equipment authorization we may receive, nor how many

small manufacturers may be interested in producing these products.

Since the Regulatory Flexibility Act amendments were not in effect

until the record in this proceeding was closed, the Commission was

unable to request information regarding the number of small businesses

in this category. The Census Bureau estimates indicate that of the 848

firms in the ``Communications Services, Not Elsewhere'' category, 775

are small businesses. Based on this information, as well as our past

experience in granting equipment authorization for other types of

radiofrequency devices, we estimate that 50 percent of the applications

for millimeter wave and unlicensed PCS devices will be from small

businesses.

31. The Commission anticipates that approximately 30 applications

will be filed annually for devices that operate in the millimeter band

and unlicensed PCS spectrum. An initial determination of compliance

with our new RF guidelines will be required for: (1) Applications for

unlicensed PCS devices that do not meet our definition for a portable

device contained in 47 CFR Sec. 2.1093(b) and that operate with 1.5

watts effective radiated power (ERP) or more; (2) applications for

portable unlicensed PCS devices; (3) applications for unlicensed

millimeter wave devices that do not meet our definition for a portable

device and that operate with 3 watts ERP or more; and (4) applications

for portable unlicensed millimeter wave devices. We anticipate that 20

of the 30 applications filed will meet these requirements and need to

undergo an initial determination of compliance. Of these devices, ten

will require specific absorption rate (SAR) modeling or measurement,

which adds cost to the authorization process.

V. Summary of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other

Compliance Requirements

32. No new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance

requirements are contained in this Second Memorandum Opinion and Order.

VI. Steps Taken to Minimize the Economic Impact on Small Entities

33. We have made every effort to devise ways to minimize the impact

of the new RF exposure requirements on small entities, while protecting

the health and safety of the public. We have incorporated substantial

flexibility in the procedures to make compliance as minimally

burdensome as possible.

In particular, we took the following steps in the Report and Order

to ease the impact on small businesses:

a. We created categorical exclusions that require only those

transmitters that appear to have the highest potential to create a

significant environmental effect to perform an environmental

evaluation.

b. We indicated that we would revise OST Bulletin No. 65 in the

near future to provide guidance for determining compliance with FCC-

specified RF limits. This should be of particular assistance to small

businesses since it will provide straightforward information that

should allow a quick understanding of the requirements and a quick

assessment of the potential for compliance problems without the need

for an expensive consultant or measurement.

c. We allowed various methods for ensuring compliance with RF

limits such as fencing, warning signs, labels, and markings, locked

doors in roof-top areas, and the use of personal monitors and RF

protective clothing in an occupational environment.

d. We rejected our initial proposal to adopt induced and contact

currents limits due to the lack of reliable equipment available.

e. We specified a variety of acceptable testing methods and

procedures that may be used to determine compliance. This will allow

each small business to choose a procedure that best meets its needs in

the manner that is least burdensome to it.

f. We have always allowed multiple transmitter sites, i.e., antenna

farms, to pool their resources and have only one study done for the

entire site. This is very common at sites that have multiple entities

such as TV, FM, paging, cellular, etc. In most circumstances, rather

than each licensee hiring a separate consultant and submitting a study

showing their compliance with the guidelines, one consulting radio

technician or radio engineer can be hired by the group of licensees.

The consultant surveys the entire site for compliance and gives his

recommendations and findings to each of the licensees at the site. The

licensees can then use the findings to show their compliance with the

guidelines. In this way the cost of compliance is minimized as no one

licensee has to pay the entire consulting fee, rather just a portion of

it.

34. In this First Memorandum Opinion and Order, we took the

following additional steps to reduce the burden on small businesses and

organizations:

a. We extended the transition period for station applicants to come

into compliance with the new requirements. This will give licensees,

and applicants for new stations many of which may be small businesses,

more time to learn the nature of the new requirements, make studies to

determine whether they comply, and take steps to come into compliance

if necessary.

b. We decided to permit the required changes in the ARS

examinations to be made as the examinations are being routinely

revised. This ensures that a minimal burden is put on the small

organizations acting as VECs.

35. In this Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, we have taken

these additional steps to reduce the burden on small businesses and

organizations:

a. We categorically excluded from routine environmental evaluation

certain non-portable, unlicensed millimeter wave and PCS devices. This

eliminates the need for these devices to undergo detailed evaluation

before the devices undergo equipment authorization.

b. We increased the responsibility threshold, above which licensees

at multiple transmitter locations must share responsibility for

addressing RF exposure non-compliance problems, from 1% to 5%. We

believe that a 5% responsibility threshold will offer relief to

relatively low-powered site occupants who do not contribute

significantly to the non-compliance and, at the same time, provide for

the appropriate allocation of responsibility among major site emitters.

Similarly, we are raising the filing thresholds, above which applicants

must file an EA if emissions from the applicant's transmitter or

facility would result in a field strength or power density in excess of

our limits, from 1% to 5%. Report to Congress: The Commission shall

send a copy of this Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, along with

this Report and Order, in a report to Congress pursuant to the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

[[Page 47965]]

Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801(a)(1)(A). A copy of this FRFA

will also be published in the Federal Register.

(c) Before causing or allowing an amateur station to transmit from

any place where the operation of the station could cause human exposure

to RF electromagnetic field levels in excess of those allowed under

Sec. 1.1310 of this chapter, the licensee is required to take certain

actions.

(1) The licensee must perform the routine RF environmental

evaluation prescribed by Sec. 1.1307(b) of this chapter, if the

transmitter PEP exceeds the following limits:

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 1

Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

47 CFR Part 2

Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

47 CFR Part 26

Radio.

47 CFR Part 97

Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Rule Changes

Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 1, 2, 26 and 97,

are amended as follows:

PART 1--PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

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

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 303 and 309(j), unless otherwise

noted, and Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

2. Section 1.1307 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2),

(b)(3) and (b)(4) introductory text and by adding paragraph (b)(5) to

read as follows:

Sec. 1.1307 Actions that may have a significant environmental effect,

for which Environmental Assessments (EAs) must be prepared.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(1) The appropriate exposure limits in Sec. 1.1310 and Sec. 2.1093

of this chapter are generally applicable to all facilities, operations

and transmitters regulated by the Commission. However, a determination

of compliance with the exposure limits in Sec. 1.1310 or Sec. 2.1093 of

this chapter (routine environmental evaluation), and preparation of an

EA if the limits are exceeded, is necessary only for facilities,

operations and transmitters that fall into the categories listed in

table 1, or those specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. All

other facilities, operations and transmitters are categorically

excluded from making such studies or preparing an EA, except as

indicated in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section. For purposes of

table 1, ``building-mounted antennas'' means antennas mounted in or on

a building structure that is occupied as a workplace or residence. The

term ``power'' in column 2 of table 1 refers to total operating power

of the transmitting operation in question in terms of effective

radiated power (ERP), equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP),

or peak envelope power (PEP), as defined in Sec. 2.1 of this chapter.

For the case of the Cellular Radiotelephone Service, subpart H of part

22 of this chapter; the Personal Communications Service, part 24 of

this chapter and the Specialized Mobile Radio Service, part 90 of this

chapter, the phrase ``total power of all channels'' in column 2 of

table 1 means the sum of the ERP or EIRP of all co-located

simultaneously operating transmitters owned and operated by a single

licensee. When applying the criteria of table 1, radiation in all

directions should be considered. For the case of transmitting

facilities using sectorized transmitting antennas, applicants and

licensees should apply the criteria to all transmitting channels in a

given sector, noting that for a highly directional antenna there is

relatively little contribution to ERP or EIRP summation for other

directions.

Table 1.--Transmitters, Facilities and Operations Subject to Routine

Environmental Evaluation

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

Service (title 47 CFR rule

part) Evaluation required if

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

Experimental Radio Services Power > 100 W ERP (164 W EIRP).

(part 5).

Multipoint Distribution Non-building-mounted antennas: height

Service (subpart K of part above ground level to lowest point of

21). antenna 1640 W EIRP.

Building-mounted antennas: power > 1640 W

EIRP.

Paging and Radiotelephone Non-building-mounted antennas: height

Service (subpart E of part above ground level to lowest point of

22). antenna 1000 W ERP

(1640 W EIRP).

Building-mounted antennas: power > 1000 W

ERP (1640 W EIRP).

Cellular Radiotelephone Non-building-mounted antennas: height

Service (subpart H of part above ground level to lowest point of

22). antenna 1000 W ERP (1640 W EIRP).

Building-mounted antennas: total power of

all channels > 1000 W ERP (1640 W EIRP).

Personal Communications (1) Narrowband PCS (subpart D): non-

Services (part 24). building-mounted antennas: height above

ground level to lowest point of antenna

1000 W ERP (1640 W EIRP).

Building-mounted antennas: total power of

all channels > 1000 W ERP (1640 W EIRP).

(2) Broadband PCS (subpart E): non-

building-mounted antennas: height above

ground level to lowest point of antenna

2000 W ERP (3280 W EIRP).

Building-mounted antennas: total power of

all channels > 2000 W ERP (3280 W EIRP).

Satellite Communications All included.

(part 25).

General Wireless Total power of all channels > 1640 W

Communications Service (part EIRP.

26).

Wireless Communications Total power of all channels > 1640 W

Service (part 27). EIRP.

Radio Broadcast Services All included.

(part 73).

Experimental, auxiliary, and Subparts A, G, L: power > 100 W ERP.

special broadcast and other Subpart I: non-building-mounted antennas:

program distributional height above ground level to lowest

services (part 74). point of antenna 1640

W EIRP.

Building-mounted antennas: power > 1640 W

EIRP.

Stations in the Maritime Ship earth stations only.

Services (part 80).

[[Page 47966]]

Private Land Mobile Radio Non-building-mounted antennas: height

Services Paging Operations above ground level to lowest point of

(part 90). antenna 1000 W ERP

(1640 W EIRP).

Building-mounted antennas: power > 1000 W

ERP (1640 W EIRP).

Private Land Mobile Radio Non-building-mounted antennas: height

Services Specialized Mobile above ground level to lowest point of

Radio (part 90). antenna 1000 W ERP (1640 W EIRP).

Building-mounted antennas:

Total power of all channels > 1000 W ERP

(1640 W EIRP).

Amateur Radio Service (part Transmitter output power > levels

97). specified in Sec. 97.13(c)(1) of this

chapter.

Local Multipoint Distribution Non-building-mounted antennas: height

Service (subpart L of part above ground level to lowest point of

101). antenna 1640 W EIRP.

Building-mounted antennas: power > 1640 W

EIRP.

LMDS licensees are required to attach a

label to subscriber transceiver antennas

that:

(1) provides adequate notice regarding

potential radiofrequency safety hazards,

e.g., information regarding the safe

minimum separation distance required

between users and transceiver antennas;

and

(2) references the applicable FCC-adopted

limits for radiofrequency exposure

specified in Sec. 1.1310 of this

chapter.

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

(2) Mobile and portable transmitting devices that operate in the

Cellular Radiotelephone Service, the Personal Communications Services

(PCS), the Satellite Communications Services, the General Wireless

Communications Service, the Wireless Communications Service, the

Maritime Services (ship earth stations only) and the Specialized Mobile

Radio Service authorized under subpart H of parts 22, 24, 25, 26, 27,

80, and 90 of this chapter are subject to routine environmental

evaluation for RF exposure prior to equipment authorization or use, as

specified in Secs. 2.1091 and 2.1093 of this chapter. Unlicensed PCS,

unlicensed NII and millimeter wave devices are also subject to routine

environmental evaluation for RF exposure prior to equipment

authorization or use, as specified in Secs. 15.253(f), 15.255(g), and

15.319(i) and 15.407(f) of this chapter. All other mobile, portable,

and unlicensed transmitting devices are categorically excluded from

routine environmental evaluation for RF exposure under Secs. 2.1091 and

2.1093 of this chapter except as specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of

this section.

(3) In general, when the guidelines specified in Sec. 1.1310 are

exceeded in an accessible area due to the emissions from multiple fixed

transmitters, actions necessary to bring the area into compliance are

the shared responsibility of all licensees whose transmitters produce,

at the area in question, power density levels that exceed 5% of the

power density exposure limit applicable to their particular transmitter

or field strength levels that, when squared, exceed 5% of the square of

the electric or magnetic field strength limit applicable to their

particular transmitter. Owners of transmitter sites are expected to

allow applicants and licensees to take reasonable steps to comply with

the requirements contained in Sec. 1.1307(b) and, where feasible,

should encourage co-location of transmitters and common solutions for

controlling access to areas where the RF exposure limits contained in

Sec. 1.1310 might be exceeded.

(i) Applicants for proposed (not otherwise excluded) transmitters,

facilities or modifications that would cause non-compliance with the

limits specified in Sec. 1.1310 at an accessible area previously in

compliance must submit an EA if emissions from the applicant's

transmitter or facility would result, at the area in question, in a

power density that exceeds 5% of the power density exposure limit

applicable to that transmitter or facility or in a field strength that,

when squared, exceeds 5% of the square of the electric or magnetic

field strength limit applicable to that transmitter or facility.

(ii) Renewal applicants whose (not otherwise excluded) transmitters

or facilities contribute to the field strength or power density at an

accessible area not in compliance with the limits specified in

Sec. 1.1310 must submit an EA if emissions from the applicant's

transmitter or facility results, at the area in question, in a power

density that exceeds 5% of the power density exposure limit applicable

to that transmitter or facility or in a field strength that, when

squared, exceeds 5% of the square of the electric or magnetic field

strength limit applicable to that transmitter of facility.

(4) Transition Provisions. For applications filed with the

Commission prior to October 15, 1997, (or January 1, 1998, for the

Amateur Radio Service only), Commission actions granting construction

permits, licenses to transmit or renewals thereof, equipment

authorizations, or modifications in existing facilities require the

preparation of an Environmental Assessment if the particular facility,

operation or transmitter would cause human exposure to levels of

radiofrequency radiation that are in excess of the requirements

contained in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through (b)(4)(iii) of this section.

These transition provisions do not apply to applications for equipment

authorization or use of mobile, portable and unlicensed devices

specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.

* * * * *

(5) Existing transmitting facilities, devices and operations: All

existing transmitting facilities, operations and devices regulated by

the Commission must be in compliance with the requirements of

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of this section by September 1, 2000,

or, if not in compliance, file an Environmental Assessment as specified

in Sec. 1.1311.

* * * * *

PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS GENERAL

RULES AND REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

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

1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 302, 303 and 307, unless

otherwise noted.

2. Section 2.1091 is amended by revising the section heading,

paragraphs (b), (c) and (d)(3) and adding new paragraph (d)(4) to read

as follows:

Sec. 2.1091 Radiofrequency radiation exposure evaluation: mobile

devices.

* * * * *

[[Page 47967]]

(b) For purposes of this section, a mobile device is defined as a

transmitting device designed to be used in other than fixed locations

and to generally be used in such a way that a separation distance of at

least 20 centimeters is normally maintained between the transmitter's

radiating structure(s) and the body of the user or nearby persons. In

this context, the term ``fixed location'' means that the device is

physically secured at one location and is not able to be easily moved

to another location. Transmitting devices designed to be used by

consumers or workers that can be easily re-located, such as wireless

devices associated with a personal computer, are considered to be

mobile devices if they meet the 20 centimeter separation requirement.

(c) Mobile devices that operate in the Cellular Radiotelephone

Service, the Personal Communications Services, the Satellite

Communications Services, the General Wireless Communications Service,

the Wireless Communications Service, the Maritime Services and the

Specialized Mobile Radio Service authorized under subpart H of part 22

of this chapter, part 24 of this chapter, part 25 of this chapter, part

26 of this chapter, part 27 of this chapter, part 80 of this chapter

(ship earth stations devices only) and part 90 of this chapter are

subject to routine environmental evaluation for RF exposure prior to

equipment authorization or use if they operate at frequencies of 1.5

GHz or below and their effective radiated power (ERP) is 1.5 watts or

more, or if they operate at frequencies above 1.5 GHz and their ERP is

3 watts or more. Unlicensed personal communications service devices,

unlicensed millimeter wave devices and unlicensed NII devices

authorized under Sec. 15.253, Sec. 15.255, and subparts D and E of part

15 of this chapter are also subject to routine environmental evaluation

for RF exposure prior to equipment authorization or use if their ERP is

3 watts or more or if they meet the definition of a portable device as

specified in Sec. 2.1093 (b) requiring evaluation under the provisions

of that section. All other mobile and unlicensed transmitting devices

are categorically excluded from routine environmental evaluation for RF

exposure prior to equipment authorization or use, except as specified

in Secs. 1.1307(c) and 1.1307(d) of this chapter. Applications for

equipment authorization of mobile and unlicensed transmitting devices

subject to routine environmental evaluation must contain a statement

confirming compliance with the limits specified in paragraph (d) of

this section as part of their application. Technical information

showing the basis for this statement must be submitted to the

Commission upon request.

(d) * * *

(3) If appropriate, compliance with exposure guidelines for devices

in this section can be accomplished by the use of warning labels and by

providing users with information concerning minimum separation

distances from transmitting structures and proper installation of

antennas.

(4) In some cases, e.g., modular or desktop transmitters, the

potential conditions of use of a device may not allow easy

classification of that device as either mobile or portable (also see

Sec. 2.1093). In such cases, applicants are responsible for determining

minimum distances for compliance for the intended use and installation

of the device based on evaluation of either specific absorption rate

(SAR), field strength or power density, whichever is most appropriate.

3. Section 2.1093 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (c) and

(d) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec. 2.1093 Radiofrequency radiation exposure evaluation: portable

devices.

* * * * *

(b) For purposes of this section, a portable device is defined as a

transmitting device designed to be used so that the radiating

structure(s) of the device is/are within 20 centimeters of the body of

the user.

(c) Portable devices that operate in the Cellular Radiotelephone

Service, the Personal Communications Services, the Satellite

Communications services, the General Wireless Communications Service,

the Wireless Communications Service, the Maritime Services and the

Specialized Mobile Radio Service authorized under subpart H of part 22

of this chapter, part 24 of this chapter, part 25 of this chapter, part

26 of this chapter, part 27 of this chapter, part 80 of this chapter

(ship earth station devices only), part 90 of this chapter, and

portable unlicensed personal communication service, unlicensed NII

devices and millimeter wave devices authorized under Sec. 15.253,

Sec. 15.255 or subparts D and E of part 15 of this chapter are subject

to routine environmental evaluation for RF exposure prior to equipment

authorization or use. All other portable transmitting devices are

categorically excluded from routine environmental evaluation for RF

exposure prior to equipment authorization or use, except as specified

in Secs. 1.1307(c) and 1.1307(d) of this chapter. Applications for

equipment authorization of portable transmitting devices subject to

routine environmental evaluation must contain a statement confirming

compliance with the limits specified in paragraph (d) of this section

as part of their application. Technical information showing the basis

for this statement must be submitted to the Commission upon request.

(d) The limits to be used for evaluation are based generally on

criteria published by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

for localized specific absorption rate (``SAR'') in Section 4.2 of

``IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to

Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz,'' ANSI/IEEE

C95.1-1992, Copyright 1992 by the Institute of Electrical and

Electronics Engineers, Inc., New York, New York 10017. These criteria

for SAR evaluation are similar to those recommended by the National

Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) in ``Biological

Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic

Fields,'' NCRP Report No. 86, Section 17.4.5. Copyright NCRP, 1986,

Bethesda, Maryland 20814. SAR is a measure of the rate of energy

absorption due to exposure to an RF transmitting source. SAR values

have been related to threshold levels for potential biological hazards.

The criteria to be used are specified in paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2)

of this section and shall apply for portable devices transmitting in

the frequency range from 100 kHz to 6 GHz. Portable devices that

transmit at frequencies above 6 GHz are to be evaluated in terms of the

MPE limits specified in Sec. 1.1310 of this chapter. Measurements and

calculations to demonstrate compliance with MPE field strength or power

density limits for devices operating above 6 GHz should be made at a

minimum distance of 5 cm from the radiating source.

* * * * *

PART 26--GENERAL WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE

1. The authority citation for part 26 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. Secs. 154,

303. Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105, as amended;

47 U.S.C. Secs. 151-155, 301-609, unless otherwise noted.

2. Section 26.51 is amended by removing paragraph (d).

3. Section 26.52 is revised to read as follows:

[[Page 47968]]

Sec. 26.52 RF safety.

Licensees and manufacturers are subject to the radiofrequency

radiation exposure requirements specified in Sec. 1.1307(b),

Sec. 2.1091 and Sec. 2.1093 of this chapter, as appropriate.

Applications for equipment authorization of mobile or portable devices

operating under this section must contain a statement confirming

compliance with these requirements for both fundamental emissions and

unwanted emissions. Technical information showing the basis for this

statement must be submitted to the Commission upon request.

PART 97--AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE

1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. Secs. 154,

303. Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105, as amended;

47 U.S.C. Secs. 151-155, 301-609, unless otherwise noted.

2. Section 97.13 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as

follows:

Sec. 97.13 Restrictions on station location.

* * * * *

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

Transmitter

Wavelength band power

(watts)

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

MF

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

160 m...................................................... 500

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

HF

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

80 m....................................................... 500

75 m....................................................... 500

40 m....................................................... 500

30 m....................................................... 425

20 m....................................................... 225

17 m....................................................... 125

15 m....................................................... 100

12 m....................................................... 75

10 m....................................................... 50

VHF (all bands)............................................ 50

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

UHF

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

70 cm...................................................... 70

33 cm...................................................... 150

23 cm...................................................... 200

13 cm...................................................... 250

SHF (all bands)............................................ 250

EHF (all bands)............................................ 250

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

(2) If the routine environmental evaluation indicates that the RF

electromagnetic fields could exceed the limits contained in Sec. 1.1310

of this chapter in accessible areas, the licensee must take action to

prevent human exposure to such RF electromagnetic fields. Further

information on evaluating compliance with these limits can be found in

the FCC's OET Bulletin 65, ``Evaluating Compliance with FCC-Specified

Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic

Fields.''

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97-24165 Filed 9-11-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P