Electromagnetic Governance: Interference, Spectrum Sharing, and Public Health

Another key aspect of governance is the management of shared resources. In the case of the mechanical world, this means laws and regulations in transportation in connection with traffic laws and the traffic infrastructure. In electronics, it means the management of the shared frequency spectrum and health safety issues. For shared use, in the US, the primary legal basis was the communication act passed in 1934 which created the regulator (Federal Communications Commission [FCC]). The FCC manages the radio spectrum (figure 1) through a range of regulatory and technical actions to ensure its efficient and interference-free use. It allocates specific frequency bands for various services—such as broadcasting, cellular, satellite, public safety, and amateur radio—based on national needs and international agreements. The FCC issues licenses to commercial and non-commercial users, setting terms for power limits, coverage areas, and operating conditions. It also conducts spectrum auctions to assign frequencies for commercial use, such as 5G, while reserving portions for public services and unlicensed uses like Wi-Fi.

In addition, the FCC enforces rules to prevent harmful interference, coordinates spectrum sharing and repurposing efforts, and leads initiatives like dynamic spectrum access and band reallocation to adapt to evolving technological demands. To enforce these standards, the FCC requires many devices to undergo testing and certification before they can be marketed or sold in the United States. This process is carried out by FCC-recognized testing laboratories, known as accredited Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs), which evaluate products against applicable Part 15 or Part 18 regulations, among others. Certified devices must meet limits on emissions, immunity, and specific absorption rate (SAR) when applicable. Once a product passes testing, the lab submits a report to a Telecommunications Certification Body (TCB), which issues the FCC ID and authorizes the product for sale. These labs play a critical role in ensuring compliance, supporting innovation while maintaining spectrum integrity and public safety.

FCC Part 15 and Part 18 differ primarily in the type and purpose of radio frequency (RF) emissions they regulate. Part 15 governs devices that intentionally or unintentionally emit RF energy for communication purposes, such as Wi-Fi routers, Bluetooth devices, and computers. These devices must not cause harmful interference and must accept interference from licensed users. In contrast, Part 18 regulates Industrial, Scientific, and Medical (ISM) equipment that emits RF energy not for communication, but for performing physical functions like heating, welding, or medical treatments—examples include microwave ovens and RF diathermy machines. While both parts limit electromagnetic interference, Part 15 devices operate under stricter emissions limits due to their proximity to communication bands, whereas Part 18 devices are allowed higher emissions in designated ISM frequency bands. Additionally, health and safety regulations for Part 18 equipment are typically overseen by other agencies such as the FDA or OSHA, while the FCC focuses on interference mitigation.

A key instrument for electromagnetic testing is an anechoic chamber (figure 2). An anechoic chamber is a specialized, sound- and radio wave-absorbing enclosure designed to create an environment free from reflections and external interference. Its walls, ceiling, and floor are typically lined with wedge-shaped foam or ferrite tiles that absorb electromagnetic or acoustic waves, depending on the application. For radio frequency (RF) testing, the chamber is constructed with conductive materials (like steel or copper) to form a Faraday cage, isolating it from external RF signals. In acoustic chambers, sound-absorbing foam eliminates echoes and simulates free-field conditions. Anechoic chambers are critical in industries such as telecommunications, defense, aerospace, and consumer electronics, where they are used to test antenna performance, electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), emissions compliance, radar systems, or audio equipment in highly controlled, repeatable conditions. The chamber ensures that test measurements reflect only the characteristics of the device under test (DUT), without environmental interference.

While these testing protocols apply to all electronics, autonomous systems introduce unique electromagnetic challenges that go beyond traditional interference mitigation. In modern autonomous platforms, electronics are no longer confined to infotainment; sensors and communication modules are central to safety. These systems emit and receive electromagnetic energy, which can result in Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) if not properly managed. Specifically, active ranging technologies like radar and LiDAR must not only avoid interference with each other but must also operate within spectrum allocations defined by the FCC and global bodies like the ITU. Poorly shielded cables or high-frequency switching components in electric vehicles can cause data corruption or degraded signal integrity, leading to missed detections.

Maintaining RF harmony is a critical governance challenge. With vehicles packed with Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, GPS, and C-V2X modules, OEMs must ensure communication modules do not emit spurious signals. Regulatory shifts, such as the FCC’s reallocation of the 5.9 GHz band from DSRC to C-V2X, directly impact hardware architecture and require rigorous validation against international standards like CISPR 25 and UNECE R10. Furthermore, where RF energy has the potential to impact human health, additional regulatory oversight is required. While the FCC manages interference, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversees radiation-emitting products to ensure they meet safety standards for human exposure. This is particularly critical for wireless power delivery use-models, where Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) levels must be measured to ensure they do not pose health risks to users or workers near the equipment. Compliance with limits set by OSHA and NIOSH ensures that the high-power electronic environment of an autonomous platform remains safe for human interaction.

Finally, testing labs and services organizations play a critical role in certifying electronics against these standards. Global conformity assessment firms such as UL Solutions, TÜV SÜD, Intertek, and Bureau Veritas provide third-party testing and certification to standards such as IEC 61000 (EMC), ISO 26262 (automotive functional safety), and DO-160 (aerospace environmental conditions). In highly regulated sectors, independent lab validation provides not only compliance evidence but also liability mitigation and market access assurance, making standards-driven testing an essential bridge between engineering validation and commercial deployment.