[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-182445-105":59,"doc-detail-182445-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","federal-communications-commission-resolution-of-notice-of-inquiry-second-report-and-order-notice-of-proposed-rulemaking-and-memorandum-opinion-and-order-introduction","Federal Communications Commission - Resolution of Notice of Inquiry, Second Report and Order, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Memorandum Opinion and Order - Introduction","","This resolution sets out the Federal Communications Commission’s actions on radiofrequency (RF) exposure limits for workers and consumers, including compliance rules required under the National Environmental Policy Act. After reviewing public input, the Commission declines to amend existing RF emission exposure limits and streamlines exemption criteria by replacing service-based exemptions with formula-based determinations. For non-exempt licensees, it provides more flexible compliance approaches and specifies mitigation methods such as training, supervision, and signage, while also proposing targeted future limits for additional frequencies and wireless power transfer operations.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/federal-communications-commission-resolution-of-notice-of-inquiry-second-report-and-order-notice-of-proposed-rulemaking-and-memorandum-opinion-and-order-introduction/182445/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/federal-communications-commission-resolution-of-notice-of-inquiry-second-report-and-order-notice-of-proposed-rulemaking-and-memorandum-opinion-and-order-introduction/182445.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Cipher","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document","2026-10-08","2026-09-02",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":52},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"Why does the Commission evaluate human exposure to RF energy?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The Commission must evaluate the effects of its actions on the quality of the human environment, including human exposure to RF energy emitted by Commission-regulated transmitters and facilities under NEPA.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What is the outcome of the Notice of Inquiry regarding amending RF emission exposure limits?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"After reviewing the record submitted in response to the inquiry, the Commission finds no appropriate basis and declines to propose amendments to existing limits at this time.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How does the resolution change exemptions and compliance methods?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It streamlines exemption criteria by replacing service-based exemptions with formula-based rules, and it provides more flexibility for licensees to establish compliance. It also specifies mitigation methods such as training, supervision, and signage.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},182445,1788348690,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":52,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":129,"read_time":144},687208528416,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Before the\nFederal Communications Commission\nWashington, D.C. 20554\nRESOLUTION OF NOTICE OF INQUIRY, SECOND REPORT AND ORDER, NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING, AND MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER\nAdopted:  November 27, 2019\tReleased:  December 4, 2019\nComment Date: [30 days from publication in the Federal Register]\nReply Comment Date: [60 days from publication in the Federal Register]\nBy the Commission:  Commissioner Rosenworcel concurring.\nTable of Contents\nHeading\tParagraph #\nI.\tINTRODUCTION\t1\nII.\tBACKGROUND\t6\nIII.\tRESOLUTION OF NOTICE OF INQUIRY\t10\nIV.\tSECOND REPORT AND ORDER\t17\nA.\tExemptions from the RF Exposure Evaluation Requirement\t20\n1.\tExemption Criteria - Single RF Source\t35\na.\t1-mW Blanket Exemption\t36\nb.\tSAR-Based Exemption\t42\nc.\tMPE-Based Exemption\t48\n2.\tExemption Criteria - Multiple RF Sources\t55\na.\t1-mW Exemption\t56\nb.\tUse of Summation Formulas\t57\n(i)\tMultiple RF Sources with Fixed Physical Relationship\t58\n(ii)\tRF Sources without Fixed Physical Relationships\t66\nB.\tEnvironmental Evaluation\t69\n1.\tConsistency in Usage of Any Valid Method for SAR Computation\t71\n2.\tRemoval of Minimum Evaluation Distance Requirement from Rules for Frequencies above 6 GHz\t73\n3.\tTechnical Evaluation References in Rules\t74\nC.\tMitigation Measures to Ensure Compliance with Exposure Limits\t80\n1.\tTransient Exposure\t82\n2.\tSignage and Access Control\t89\n3.\tTraining to Ensure Compliance\t104\n4.\tResponsibility for Mitigation Measures\t107\nD.\tTransition Periods\t115\nE.\tConforming Edits\t118\nV.\tNOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING\t119\nA.\tExtension of Exposure Limits to Additional Frequencies\t122\n1.\tLocalized Exposure Limit for Higher Frequencies\t127\n2.\tAveraging Area for Higher Frequencies\t129\nB.\tTransmitter-Based and Device-Based Time-Averaging\t131\nC.\tWireless Power Transfer Devices\t137\nVI.\t  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER\t148\nVII.  PROCEDURAL MATTERS\t155\nVIII.\tORDERING CLAUSES\t165\nAppendix A – Final Rules\nAppendix B – Proposed Rules\nAppendix C – Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis\nAppendix D – Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis\nAppendix E – List of Commenters to 2013 RF Order and Further Notice\nINTRODUCTION\nModern communications technologies are an ever-increasingly critical part of our everyday lives and play a vital role in the execution of our businesses and daily affairs.  The number and types of radiofrequency (RF) devices have proliferated, and the ways we interact with them are continuously changing.  As a result, our environment is populated with RF sources, at times located in close proximity to humans.  The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires the Commission to evaluate the effects of our actions on the quality of the human environment, including human exposure to RF energy emitted by Commission-regulated transmitters and facilities.  The Commission has accordingly promulgated rules that set limits for RF exposure and, through the years, has created a framework to ensure compliance with these limits.  Today, we take a number of steps regarding these limits to ensure the health and safety of workers and consumers of wireless technology, while also clarifying and streamlining rules to reduce regulatory burdens on licensees.\nFirst, we resolve a Notice of Inquiry that sought public input on, among other issues, whether the Commission should amend its existing RF emission exposure limits.  After reviewing the extensive record submitted in response to that inquiry, we find no appropriate basis for and thus decline to propose amendments to our existing limits at this time.  We take to heart the findings of the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), an expert agency regarding the health impacts of consumer products, that “[t]he weight of scientific evidence has not linked cell phones with any health problems.”  Despite requests from some to increase and others to decrease the existing limits, we believe they reflect the best available information concerning safe levels of RF exposure for workers and members of the general public, including ","cbCainOypvAkZWif","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainOypvAkZWif","docx",386693,157,"English","# INTRODUCTION\n## Key Findings and Regulatory Approach\n## Streamlined Exemptions and Compliance Flexibility\n## Targeted Proposals for Future Uses\n## Denial of Reconsideration Petition","[{\"question\":\"Why does the Commission evaluate human exposure to RF energy?\",\"answer\":\"The Commission must evaluate the effects of its actions on the quality of the human environment, including human exposure to RF energy emitted by Commission-regulated transmitters and facilities under NEPA.\"},{\"question\":\"What is the outcome of the Notice of Inquiry regarding amending RF emission exposure limits?\",\"answer\":\"After reviewing the record submitted in response to the inquiry, the Commission finds no appropriate basis and declines to propose amendments to existing limits at this time.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the resolution change exemptions and compliance methods?\",\"answer\":\"It streamlines exemption criteria by replacing service-based exemptions with formula-based rules, and it provides more flexibility for licensees to establish compliance. It also specifies mitigation methods such as training, supervision, and signage.\"}]","Federal Communications Commission - Resolution of Notice of Inquiry, Second Report and Order, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Memorandum Opinion and Order - Introduction | DOCX",396]