[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 251 (Monday, December 30, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68698-68702]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-33144]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 5 and 90

[ET Docket No. 96-256; FCC 96-475]


Revision of the Experimental Radio Service Regulations

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: By this Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Notice) the Commission 
proposes to revise the Experimental Radio Service (ERS) rules in order 
to promote technical innovation and new services by encouraging 
experiments; ensure that experimental licenses do not result in abuse 
of the Commission's processes; and reorganize the Part 5 regulatory 
structure, including eliminating unnecessary and burdensome 
experimental regulations. The proposed action should encourage 
experimentation, remove unnecessary regulatory burdens upon ERS 
applicants, and prohibit abuses of the ERS processes.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before February 10, 1997, and reply 
comments February 28, 1997. Written comments by the public on the 
proposed and/or modified information collections are due February 10, 
1997. Written comments must be submitted by the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) on the proposed and/or modified information 
collections on or before February 28, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments and reply comments should be sent to the Office of 
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554. 
In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any 
comments on the information collections contained herein should be 
submitted to Dorothy Conway, Federal Communications Commission, Room 
234, 1919 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554, or via the Internet to 
[email protected], and to Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 
725--17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20503 or via the Internet to 
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Derenge at (202) 418-2451 or 
Rodney Small at (202) 418-2452. Internet: [email protected] or 
[email protected], Office of Engineering and Technology, Federal 
Communications Commission. For additional information concerning the 
information collections contained in this Notice! should contact 
Dorothy Conway at (202) 418-0217, or via the Internet at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rule Making, ET Docket 96-256, FCC 96-475, adopted December 
13, 1996, and released December 20, 1996. The item proposes to: permit 
longer license terms; permit blanket licensing of related multiple 
experiments by a single entity and of fixed and mobile stations that 
are part of the same experiment, and permit electronic filing of 
experimental applications; encourage student experiments by issuing 
licenses to schools, as well as to individual students, and by 
permitting use of additional frequencies; modify the rules regarding 
special temporary authorizations (STAs) to encourage temporary 
experimental demonstrations and experiments at trade shows, while 
limiting STAs to single short-term, non-renewable authorizations; limit 
the size and scope of each market study on a case-by-case basis, and 
immediately terminate any such study that the Commission determines to 
be in excess of this size and scope; and consolidate and reorganize the 
experimental rules structure.
    This Notice contains proposed or modified information collections 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law No. 
104-13. It has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) for review under Section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general 
public, and other Federal agencies are invited to comment on the 
proposed or modified information collections contained in this 
proceeding.
    The full text of this Commission decision, including the proposed 
rules appendix, is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Reference Center

[[Page 68699]]

(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 Notice

    1. By this action, we propose to revise Part 5 of our rules, which 
governs the Experimental Radio Service (ERS). We take this action to 
promote technical innovation and new services by encouraging 
experiments; ensure that experimental licenses do not result in abuse 
of our processes; eliminate unnecessary and burdensome experimental 
regulations; and protect public safety frequencies.
    2. Experimental licenses are currently granted for two years. We 
believe that it may be beneficial to certain segments of the 
communications industry--in particular companies which desire to 
conduct experiments that involve ongoing research and development to 
provide for a longer license period. We believe that permitting such 
entities to obtain long-term experimental licenses may encourage them 
to conduct long-term research and development. Long-term licenses will 
decrease the regulatory burden on our licensees and on our staff which 
processes renewal applications. Therefore, we request comment on the 
establishment of a new class of experimental license, with a five-year 
term, to support long-term operations. This additional option would 
give applicants the flexibility to apply for either a two-year or five-
year license, depending on their needs. We request comment specifically 
on the appropriate length for such an extended license period. We also 
request comment on whether this new class of experimental license 
should be limited to certain parties, such as those involved in long-
term product development, or whether any applicant should be permitted 
to apply for an extended license as long as it provides sufficient 
justification.
    3. We propose to permit blanket licensing of related multiple 
experiments by a single entity and of fixed and mobile stations that 
are part of the same experiment. Currently, we require a separate 
application for fixed and mobile stations; and, under normal 
circumstances, separate licenses for each phase of an experimental 
program. However, many experimental projects involve a system 
containing several fixed stations or combinations of fixed and mobile 
stations, or involve at least loosely-related experiments. Requiring 
separate applications for the components of the experimental systems or 
the different experiments in these cases is a disincentive to the 
filing of applications and is burdensome to the public and to our 
staff.
    4. We also propose to permit electronic filing of experimental 
applications. Our Part 5 rules currently do not accommodate electronic 
filing of experimental applications. Accordingly, we propose to create 
a new section to permit our Office of Engineering and Technology to 
accept electronic signatures. We request comment on this proposal and 
on further steps that would facilitate the electronic filing of 
experimental applications.
    5. We also propose to encourage student experiments by issuing 
licenses to schools, as well as to individual students, and by 
permitting use of additional frequencies. We believe that if there is 
an ongoing experimental radio program at a school, students would be 
more likely to become involved than if they are required to apply for 
an individual license. We also propose to modify the frequency bands 
used for student authorizations. The 2483.5-2500 MHz band is part of 
the currently authorized 2450-2500 MHz band that is used for student 
experimental use, but the 2483.5-2500 MHz band is no longer normally 
assigned for experimental use of any kind because of the need to 
protect satellite allocations in that band. Therefore, we propose to 
delete the 2483.5-2500 MHz band from the set of frequencies designated 
for student authorizations, and replace it with two bands that will 
provide far greater bandwidth. Specifically, we propose to provide the 
new bands 2402-2450 MHz and 10.00-10.50 GHz for such use. We request 
comment on whether student experiments can be accommodated in the 2402-
2450 MHz and 10.00-10.50 GHz bands without causing harmful interference 
to existing users. Additionally, we request comment on whether the 
5725-5825 MHz band should be made available for student authorizations. 
The 5725-5825 MHz band would provide an additional option for student 
experimentation; however, we note that the band is currently under 
consideration for unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-
NII) devices, which are intended to provide wireless wideband 
networking options to the public including schools, libraries, and 
health care facilities. If these U-NII devices achieve a high level of 
deployment in schools, there could eventually be a conflict between U-
NII and student use of this band.
    6. We also encourage special temporary authorizations (STAs) by 
making them independent of other experimental licenses and by 
expediting processing of STAs where circumstances warrant; Currently, 
our rules require that an applicant for an STA already have an 
experimental license prior to receiving an STA. However, it has been 
our experience that in many instances entities that have requirements 
for an STA do not have an experimental license and that the need for an 
STA is independent of the need for such a license. Accordingly, we 
believe that our current rules discourage some entities from obtaining 
STAs. Further, our current rules do not contemplate expedited 
processing of STA applications, even though in some circumstances the 
need for an STA may arise unexpectedly. Therefore, we propose to modify 
the rules to remove the requirement that an applicant have an 
experimental license before applying for an STA, and further propose to 
include a provision for preferential processing of STA applications in 
cases in which an applicant sets forth compelling reasons why such an 
authorization must be granted expeditiously.
    7. Additionally, we propose to limit the size and scope of each 
market study on a case-by-case basis, and to immediately terminate any 
such study that we determine to be in excess of this size and scope. 
During the last several years, a number of parties have obtained 
experimental licenses in order to undertake market studies of new 
services. In 1983, when we last reviewed our experimental rules, we 
believed that limited market experiments would provide us with 
significant useful information about the viability of new products in 
the marketplace. While this has proven to be the case in a number of 
instances, in other instances our processes have been abused by 
companies attempting to establish commercial businesses under the guise 
of experimental licenses. We note that the purpose of limited market 
studies is to obtain information about the viability of new products in 
the marketplace, and not to circumvent our normal licensing processes. 
Accordingly, we propose that as a condition of granting such 
authorizations, licensees must limit the size and scope of each study. 
We shall determine the appropriate limits for market studies on a case-
by-case basis and terminate any such study that exceeds these limits. 
An applicant desiring to perform a limited market study would be 
expected to submit a narrative describing in detail the proposed study 
and its objectives.

[[Page 68700]]

    8. We further propose to limit STAs to single short-term, non-
renewable authorizations. While STAs are granted for a period of no 
more than six months, some licensees have repeatedly sought to extend 
the same STA. This process has been wasteful of our resources. We 
realize that unforeseen delays can in some instances cause a planned 
short term experimental project to exceed six months, but we believe 
that some action is necessary in order to reduce the administrative and 
paperwork burden and to prevent abuse of our STA process. Accordingly, 
we propose to add language to our rules stating that in the absence of 
extenuating circumstances no extensions of STAs will be granted.
    9. We also propose to eliminate the requirement that experimental 
licensees contact our Compliance and Information Bureau (CIB) before 
commencing operation. This notification requirement was intended to 
assist us in investigating any instances of reported interference. 
However, it has been our experience that experimental operations have 
rarely resulted in interference complaints. Further, improvements in 
our experimental license database have made it easier for our staff to 
identify the cause of any interference problem that may arise. Finally, 
in cases in which there is a reasonable chance of interference, we can 
place a condition on the license requiring that the licensee notify our 
Experimental Licensing Branch (ELB) prior to commencement of the 
operation. Accordingly, we believe that the existing notification 
requirements are unnecessary and propose to delete them. However, we 
request comment on this proposal and whether the removal of these 
requirements could result in the potential for increased interference 
from experimental operations.
    10. We further propose to eliminate rules that specify that a 
construction permit be obtained in conjunction with an experimental 
license and that expiration dates of experimental licenses be 
distributed over the 12 calendar months. For a number of years, we have 
accepted a combined application for construction permit and license to 
operate an experimental station and have issued only one instrument of 
authority for the ERS. As a matter of administrative convenience and 
clarification, we propose to remove all references to obtaining a 
construction permit for experimental authorizations. Further, we 
propose to delete the rules that specify that the expiration dates of 
experimental licenses will be distributed over the twelve calendar 
months, in accordance with the alphabetical distribution of the names 
of the licensees. Our experience has been that the constant flow of 
applications results in an acceptable distribution of license 
applications, and for several years it has been our standard operating 
practice to issue a license for a two-year period from the date of 
grant and to act on any renewal requests upon expiration of this 
period. Implementation of a 5-year experimental license also will 
substantially facilitate the renewal process.
    11. We also propose to add language to Part 5 to ensure that 
experiments avoid public safety frequencies and propose to consolidate 
and reorganize the rules. Specifically, we propose to transfer wildlife 
and ocean buoy tracking operations from Part 5 to Part 90, and solicit 
comment on transferring rules governing broadcasting experiments that 
are not directed toward improvement of the technical phases of 
operation and service of licensed broadcast stations from Part 74 to 
Part 5. Currently, Section 5.108 governs wildlife and ocean buoy 
tracking operations in the 40.66-40.70 MHz and 216-220 MHz bands for 
the tracking of, and telemetry of scientific data from, such 
operations. These operations were originally placed under Part 5 
because there was no other appropriate rule section to accommodate 
them. Recently, however, the Commission has established the Location 
and Monitoring Service under Part 90, which provides for regular 
licensing of radio tracking functions. Additionally, the Commission 
recently established under Part 90 the Low Power Radio Service in the 
216-217 MHz band that includes, among other things, tracking of stolen 
goods. Accordingly, we believe that wildlife and ocean buoy tracking 
operations would now be more appropriately governed as Part 90 
services, and we so propose herein to recategorize them. However, we 
note that Part 90 has more specific eligibility requirements than Part 
5. While we do not believe that transferring wildlife and ocean buoy 
tracking operations would create a situation where an entity qualified 
under Part 5 would be ineligible under Part 90, we request comment on 
this issue.
    12. In addition, our Experimental License Branch has also received 
a number of applications for use of broadcast frequencies by 
experimental operations of a broadcast nature. Currently, such 
experiments are accommodated under our Auxiliary Broadcasting rules, 
Part 74, and not Part 5. We believe that a consolidation of all 
experimental rule subparts into Part 5 may be desirable to eliminate 
redundancy, any confusion created by having separate bodies of 
experimental rules, and to increase the efficiency of the Commission's 
processes. Accordingly, we solicit comment on transferring Subpart A of 
Part 74--Experimental Broadcast Operations--to Part 5. We request 
comment on whether such a change is desirable and, if so, on whether 
Subpart A of Part 74 should be made a separate subpart of Part 5 or 
fully integrated with the proposed three subparts of Part 5.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    13. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act,1 the Commission has prepared an Initial Flexibility Analysis 
(IRFA) of the expected significant economic impact on small entities by 
the policies and rules proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rule Making 
(Notice) to ``Amendment of Part 5 of the Commission's Rules to Revise 
the Experimental Radio Service Regulations.'' Written public comments 
are requested on the IRFA. Comments must be identified in response to 
the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the Notice 
provided in paragraph 26. The Secretary shall send a copy of this 
Notice, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration in accordance with paragraph 603(a) of 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 5 U.S.C. Sec. 603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rule. We believe that 
the Experimental Radio Service (ERS) rules have become outdated and 
must change to keep pace with an evolving telecommunications industry. 
The competitive and rapidly developing telecommunications market has 
demonstrated the increased importance and the usefulness of the ERS. 
The ERS continues to be utilized to foster development of new service 
concepts and technologies that stimulate economic growth, create new 
jobs, and increase spectrum utilization and efficiency. The ERS rules 
were last updated in 1983 and contain obsolete practices and 
unnecessary regulations. We propose to modernize the ERS and improve 
the experimental licensing process by encouraging experiments and 
streamlining and updating Part 5 of the rules. Additionally, the 
proposals would eliminate outdated and cumbersome regulatory 
requirements and unnecessary paperwork.
    15. Legal Basis. The proposed action is authorized by Sections 
4(i), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g) and 303(r) of the

[[Page 68701]]

Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 
303(c), 303(f), 303(g) and 303(r). These provisions authorize the 
Commission to make such rules and regulations as may be necessary to 
encourage more effective use of radio in the public interest.
    16. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To 
Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply. For purposes of this Notice, the 
RFA defines a ``small business'' to be the same as a ``small business 
concern'' under the Small Business Act , 15 U.S.C. Sec. 632, unless the 
Commission has developed one or more definitions that are appropriate 
to its activities.2 Under the SBA, a ``small business concern'' is 
one that: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant 
in its field of operation; and (3) meets any individual criteria 
established by the Small Business Administration (SBA).3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 5 U.S.C. Sec. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the 
definition of ``small business concern'' in 5 U.S.C. Sec. 632).
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. Sec. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities 
applicable to experimental licensees. Therefore, the applicable 
definition of small entity is the definition under the Small Business 
Administration (SBA) rules applicable to radiotelephone companies. SBA 
has defined a small business for Standard Industrial Classification 
(SIC) category 4812 (Radiotelephone Communications) to be small 
entities when they have fewer than 1500 employees.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 13 C.F.R. Sec. 121.201 Standard Industrial Classification 
(SIC) Code 4812.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. The Commission processes approximately 1,000 applications a 
year for experimental radio operations. About half of these are 
renewals and the other half are for new licenses. The majority of 
experimental licenses are issued to companies such as Motorola and 
Department of Defense contractors such as Northrop, Lockheed and Martin 
Marietta. Businesses such as these may have as many as 200 licenses at 
one time. The majority of these applications, 70 percent, are from 
entities such as these. Given this fact, the remaining 30 percent of 
applications, we assume, for purposes of our evaluations in the IRFA, 
will be awarded to small entities, as that term is defined by the SBA.
    19. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements. Our proposals are intended to decrease the 
regulatory burden on all experimental license applicants, including 
small entities. For example, we propose to permit applicants the option 
of applying for a five-year experimental license, in addition to 
maintaining the current two-year license. We anticipate that a longer 
term license would reduce the number of renewal applications, and 
thereby decrease the regulatory burden. We are also proposing to remove 
an unnecessary requirement that STA applicants hold experimental 
licenses, and are clarifying the STA rules. We are also proposing to 
replace existing Sections 5.55(a) and 5.55(b) of our rules with a 
single provision that would allow an applicant to apply for all of the 
stations in its experimental system, including fixed stations and 
associated mobile units, on one experimental license application; and 
similarly to modify Section 5.62 to permit the filing of only a single 
application for multiple experiments, when doing so would be 
appropriate for the proposed project. Additionally, this action 
proposes to increase the opportunities for students to obtain 
experimental authorizations, proposes to remove requirements that 
certain licensees notify the FCC's field offices prior to commencing 
operations, and proposes to eliminate obsolete rules. These changes 
should have a positive effect on small entities; however, we are unable 
to quantify all potential effects on such entities. We invite specific 
comments on this point by interested parties.
    20. Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small 
Entities and Consistent with the Stated Objectives. We believe that our 
proposed actions to revise our ERS rules will eliminate unnecessary and 
burdensome regulations for small entities. Section 303(g) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, charges the Commission with 
encouraging the larger and more effective use of radio in the public 
interest. We have considered the alternative of not making the proposed 
revisions; however, we believe that would not serve the public interest 
and would continue to place an unnecessary burden on licensees. We 
solicit comment on specific alternatives to the proposed rule changes 
listed in the Notice. Some or all of the proposals may be adopted or 
altered in future actions in this proceeding.
    21. Federal Rules That Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rule: None.
    22. Paperwork Reduction Act. This Notice contains either a proposed 
or modified information collection. The Commission, as part of its 
continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general 
public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the 
information collections contained in this Notice, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law No. 104-13. Public and 
agency comments are due at the same time as other comments on the 
Notice; OMB comments are due February 28, 1997. Comments should 
address: (a) 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; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) 
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information 
collected; and (d) 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.
    OMB Approval Number: N/A.
    Title: Amendment of Part 5 of the Commission's Rules to Revise the 
Experimental Radio Service Regulations.
    Form No.: N/A.
    Type of Review: New Collection.
    Respondents: Individuals or households, Business or other for-
profit, not-for-profit institutions, and State, Local or Tribal 
Government.
    Number of Respondents: 428.
    Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour.
    Total Annual Burden: 681 hours.
    Needs and Uses: The Third Party requirements are made necessary by 
Sections 5.85(d), 5.85(e), and 5.93(b) of the Notice of Proposed Rule 
Making revising Part 5 of the Commission's Rules governing the 
Experimental Radio Service. They are as follows: (1) pursuant to 
Section 5.85(d), when applicants are using public safety frequencies to 
perform experiments of a public safety nature, the license may be 
conditioned to require coordination between the experimental licensee 
and appropriate frequency coordinator and/or all public safety 
licensees in its area of operation; (2) pursuant to Section 5.85(e), 
the Commission may, at its discretion, condition any experimental 
license or special temporary authority (STA) on the requirement that 
before commencing operation, the new licensee coordinate its proposed 
facility with other licensees that may receive interference as a result 
of the new licensee's operations; and (3) pursuant to Section 5.93(b), 
unless other stated in the instrument of authorization, licenses 
granted for the purpose of limited market studies requires the licensee 
to inform anyone participating in the experiment that the service or 
device is granted under an experimental authorization and is strictly 
temporary. In all cases, it is the responsibility of the licensee to 
coordinate with other users.

[[Page 68702]]

Coordination is necessary to avoid harmful interference, and 
notification to participants of limited market studies is necessary to 
indicate that the experiment is temporary.

List of Subjects in

47 CFR Part 5

    Radio.

47 CFR Part 90

    Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Shirley S. Suggs,
Chief, Publications Branch.
[FR Doc. 96-33144 Filed 12-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P