[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 237 (Wednesday, December 10, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68823-68831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-30540]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 2 and 15

[ET Docket No. 03-201; FCC 03-223]


Modification of the Commission's Rules for Unlicensed Devices and 
Equipment Approval

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to review and update certain rules 
contained in the Commission's rules. We take these actions as part of 
our ongoing process of updating our rules to promote more efficient 
sharing of spectrum used by unlicensed devices and remove unnecessary 
regulations that inhibit such sharing.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before January 9, 2004, and reply 
comments must be filed on or before January 26, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neal McNeil, Office of Engineering and 
Technology, (202) 418-2408, TTY (202) 418-2989, e-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rule Making, ET Docket No. 03-201, FCC 03-223, adopted 
September 10, 2003, and released September 17, 2003. The full text of 
this document is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this document 
also may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex 
International, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554. The full text may also be downloaded at: www.fcc.gov. Alternate 
formats are available to persons with disabilities by contacting Brian 
Millin at (202) 418-7426 or TTY (202) 418-7365.
    Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before 
January 9, 2004, and reply comments on or before January 26, 2004. 
Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing 
System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies. See Electronic Filing of 
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998. Comments 
filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the 
Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Generally, only one 
copy of an electronic submission must be filed.

[[Page 68824]]

If multiple docket or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this 
proceeding, however, commenters must transmit one electronic copy of 
the comments to each docket or rulemaking number referenced in the 
caption. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should 
include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the 
applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an 
electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions for 
e-mail comments, commenters should send an e-mail to [email protected], and 
should include the following words in the body of the message, ``get 
form .'' A sample form and directions 
will be sent in reply. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an 
original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or 
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, commenters 
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number.
    All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office 
of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. Filings can be 
sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or 
by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we 
continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). 
The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive hand-delivered 
or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 
236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The 
filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries 
must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes 
must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial overnight 
mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) 
must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. 
U.S. Postal Service first-class mail, Express mail, and Priority Mail 
should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.

Summary of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Proposed Revisions to Part 15

    1. Advanced Antenna Technologies. Systems employing advanced 
antenna designs such as sectorized antennas and phased array adaptive 
antennas are now being used, or contemplated for use, as part of wide 
area network systems operating in the 2.4 GHz band. Sectorized antenna 
systems take a traditional omnidirectional coverage area and subdivide 
it into fixed sectors that are each covered using a single beam or 
antenna element to transmit desired information to all devices in the 
sector. For example, a sectorized system can be made from two 
individual antennas, each covering 60[deg]of azimuth around the antenna 
structure, resulting in 120[deg] of coverage. Operationally, each 
sector is treated as a different cell, the range of which is greater 
than that of a system using a single omnidirectional antenna. A phased 
array antenna system consists of a group of radiating elements arranged 
and driven in such a way that their radiated fields add in some 
directions and cancel in others. The combined fields can produce a 
single beam, or multiple beams pointing in various directions while 
minimizing radiation in other areas. Properties of the resultant beams 
such as intensity, direction, or beamwidth can be adjusted by altering 
the input signal to each radiating element.
    2. We believe that it is in the public interest to accommodate 
efficiently configured sectorized and phased array antenna 
technologies. To date, the Commission has not generally authorized the 
operation of sectorized antennas by spread spectrum systems, but, by 
individual interpretation of its rules, we have allowed a few phased 
array systems to operate. However, we are receiving an increasing 
number of questions about how to accommodate these multiple beam 
systems in spread spectrum operations. After taking these requests 
under consideration, we tentatively conclude that spread spectrum 
systems using sectorized and/or phased array systems could provide 
important benefits for providing communications to a local area. 
Therefore, we believe that we should revise the rules to clearly 
facilitate broader deployment of advanced antenna designs with spread 
spectrum systems and to provide a stable environment in which to foster 
the continued development and installation of these spectrum efficient 
technologies.
    3. We seek comment regarding the characteristics that a system 
would need to exhibit in order to be classified as a sectorized or 
phased array antenna system. As an initial matter, we propose to 
clarify that sectorized or phased array antenna systems must be capable 
of forming at least two discrete beams. Second, we propose to limit the 
total simultaneous beamwidth radiating from the antenna structure to 
120[deg], regardless of the number of beams formed. The 120[deg] of 
bandwidth need not be continuous and may be divided among various 
independent beams pointing in different directions around the antenna 
structure. Commenting parties should provide detailed suggestions 
regarding any additional modes of operation that should be considered 
acceptable as a definition for sectorized or phased array 
installations.
    4. Sectorized and phased array antenna systems divide the total 
power from a transmitter among various transmission azimuths and the 
power may be distributed equally or at varying levels among those 
azimuths. The radiated emissions are directionalized along each sector 
or azimuth in order to communicate with an associated receiver. 
Accordingly, these antenna systems may resemble point-to-point 
operation at any given moment. Therefore, we propose to allow such 
systems to operate at the same power levels as point-to-point 
directional antennas. Specifically, we propose to limit the total power 
that may be applied to each individual beam to the applicable power 
level specified in 47 CFR 15.247(b), i.e., 0.125 watt or 1 watt, 
depending upon the type of modulation used. This implies that the total 
operating power, the aggregate power in all beams, could exceed the 
output power permitted for a single point-to-point system. We propose, 
therefore, to limit the aggregate power transmitted simultaneously on 
all beams to 8 dB above the limit for an individual beam. For instance, 
the 8 dB limit will enable antenna systems to create up to 6 individual 
beams or sectors, all operating at the point-to-point limit. Finally, 
we propose to require that the transmitter output power be reduced by 1 
dB for each 3 dB that the directional antenna gain of the complete 
system exceeds 6 dBi. We seek comment on these proposals. Further, we 
seek comment with regard to whether the Commission should specify a 
maximum E.I.R.P. limit for each individual beam. If so, what should 
that limit be?
    5. Replacement Antennas for Unlicensed Devices. We wish to develop 
more flexible antenna requirements for unlicensed devices. We propose 
to provide that flexibility by requiring testing only with the highest 
gain antenna of each type that would be used with the transmitter at 
the maximum output power of that transmitter. Any antenna of a similar 
type that does not exceed the antenna gain of tested antennas may be 
used without retesting. Use of an antenna of a different type than the 
tested antenna (i.e. yagi antenna vs. a horn antenna) or one that 
exceeds the gain of a tested antenna would require retesting and new 
approval by either a Telecommunication Certification Body or the 
Commission. Manufacturers would be expected to

[[Page 68825]]

supply a list of acceptable antenna types with applications for 
equipment authorization.
    6. Flexible Equipment Authorization for Radio Transmission Systems. 
We are proposing a number of rule changes to enable WISPs to customize 
their transmission systems without the need to obtain a new equipment 
authorization for every combination of components. Specifically, we 
will allow professional radio system installers and parties that offer 
a commercial radio service under the unlicensed rules to substitute 
technically equivalent components in systems that have been granted 
equipment authorization. We believe such parties have the technical 
competence to ensure that the systems they deploy continue to comply 
with the FCC rules. We invite comment as to whether specific criteria 
are necessary to qualify as a professional radio system installer or 
commercial service provider, and if so, what those criteria should be. 
We also request views as to whether any other parties should be 
afforded similar flexibility. We will require the professional 
installer or commercial service provider to place a label on the 
transmission system that lists the FCC Identification Number of the 
system that was granted equipment authorization, identifies any 
components that were substituted, and designates a point of contact for 
the party that installed the system.
    7. We also propose to allow marketing of separate radio frequency 
power amplifiers on a limited basis. We will restrict such marketing to 
amplifiers that are only capable of operation under the spread spectrum 
rules in Sec.  15.247 and under the U-NII rules for the 5750-5850 MHz 
band. Further, we propose to require that such amplifiers obtain an 
equipment authorization (certification) and demonstrate that they 
cannot operate with an output power of more than 1 Watt, which is the 
maximum permitted under the rules. We believe that this rule change 
would be of benefit not only for WISPs, but also for consumers and 
businesses generally. We invite comment as to whether we should instead 
provide only a more narrow relaxation to allow separate marketing of 
power amplifiers that are designed in a way such that they can only be 
used with a specific system that is covered by an equipment 
authorization, such as through use of a unique connector or via an 
electronic handshake with a host device. We also recognize that 
frequency hopping systems that employ fewer than 75 hops are limited to 
an output power of 125 mW and invite comment as to whether the unique 
connector requirement may be necessary to ensure that 1 Watt amplifiers 
are not used with devices that are limited to 125 mW. We invite comment 
on these proposals and solicit views on other ways the equipment 
authorization rules might be modified to provide added flexibility 
without creating undue risk of interference to radio services or 
unlicensed devices.
    8. Measurement Procedures for Digital Modulation Systems. We 
propose to harmonize the measurement procedures for digital modulation 
devices authorized under Sec.  15.247 with the digital U-NII devices 
authorized under Sec.  15.407. Specifically, we propose to allow 
entities performing compliance testing for Sec.  15.247 devices to use 
an average, rather than overall peak, emission as provided by Sec.  
15.407, paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) when measuring transmit power. We 
propose this change for devices using digital modulation that operate 
in the 915 MHz, 2.4 GHz and 5.7 GHz bands. We seek comment on whether a 
change in measurement procedure for such devices would have any 
detrimental impact on the installed base of products.
    9. Frequency Hopping Channel Spacing Requirements. In its comments 
filed in response to the 2002 Regulatory Flexibility Act Review, the 
Bluetooth Special Interest Group (Bluetooth SIG) suggests a 
modification of the channel separation requirement for frequency 
hopping spread spectrum systems. Section 15.247(a)(1) of the rules 
requires that frequency hopping systems have hopping channel center 
frequencies separated by either a minimum of 25 kHz or the 20 dB 
bandwidth of the hopping channel, whichever is greater. The Bluetooth 
SIG requests that this channel spacing requirement be modified to allow 
hopping channel carrier frequencies to be more closely spaced. In 
particular, it seeks to modify the requirement to allow a separation of 
a minimum of 25 kHz or two-thirds of the 20 dB bandwidth of the hopping 
channel, whichever is greater. Although the request did not specify the 
operating band to which the changes should apply, we interpret the 
request as being applicable to devices operating in the 2.4 GHz band 
because the Bluetooth product line operates in the 2.4 GHz band.
    10. We propose to modify the frequency hopping spacing requirement 
to permit certain systems in the 2.4 GHz band to utilize hopping 
channels separated by either 25 KHz or two-thirds of the 20 dB 
bandwidth, whichever is greater. We recognize that although a single 
device's channels will not overlap in time, the use of multiple devices 
simultaneously in a given area may cause the spectral occupancy and 
power density to increase, leading to an increased risk of 
interference. Therefore, we seek comment on the interference potential 
of new waveforms with more gradual roll-off and potentially higher 
spectral power densities at the channel band edges.
    11. Part 15 Unlicensed Modular Transmitter Approvals. The NPRM 
proposes to codify the requirements for authorization of modular 
transmitters into our rules. These transmitters are self-contained 
devices missing only a power supply and data source to make them 
functional. Once authorized, the transmitters can be installed into a 
number of different devices to provide wireless connectivity. The 
completed combination does not need further Commission approval, saving 
manufacturers the time and expense associated with multiple 
authorizations.
    12. Currently, in order to have modular transmitters authorized, 
manufacturers must follow guidance contained in a public notice issued 
by the Office of Engineering and Technology. A new class of modular 
transmitters is now under development. These new modules consist of two 
or more sub-components, each of which may be incorporated in different 
assemblies. In order to accommodate this new technology, we propose to 
incorporate the guidance contained in the Office of Engineering and 
Technology public notice into the Commission's rules. We also propose 
appropriate changes to facilitate the authorization of developing 
modular transmitter technology.
    13. Improving Sharing in the Unlicensed Bands. We invite comment on 
whether a spectrum sharing etiquette should be considered for devices 
that operate on an unlicensed basis, in addition to Unlicensed PCS 
devices. If so, should the Commission or the industry develop the 
criteria establishing access conditions? What characteristics need to 
be considered (e.g. spectrum monitoring requirements, bandwidth limits, 
variable output power levels)? Could an etiquette be implemented in 
such a way as to ensure continued flexibility for technological 
development, which has been the cornerstone of unlicensed operation? If 
a spectrum sharing etiquette is feasible, we seek comment regarding the 
bands to which the etiquette should apply. Finally, given the number of 
unlicensed devices currently in operation without a sharing etiquette, 
how effective will such an etiquette imposed on new entrants be in 
improving spectrum sharing?

[[Page 68826]]

    14. Special Temporary Authority. We are proposing to delete the 
provisions in Sec.  15.7 of the rules for obtaining a Special Temporary 
Authority (STA). The Office of Engineering and Technology has not 
granted any STAs under part 15 nor had any formal requests for an STA 
under these rules in the last 10 years. We believe that this need is 
being met through the allowances for STAs under the provisions in part 
5 for experimental licenses. We invite comment as to whether there is 
any need to maintain the part 15 provisions for STAs.

B. Proposed Revisions to Part 2

    15. Import Conditions. Section 2.1204 of the rules limits the 
importation of radio frequency devices that have not yet received 
equipment authorization and are not intended for operation within one 
of the Commission's licensed services to 200 or fewer units for testing 
and evaluation, and 10 or fewer units for demonstration at industry 
trade shows, provided the devices will not be offered for sale or 
marketed. Devices intended for use in a licensed service can be 
imported in greater numbers; 2000 or fewer for testing and evaluation 
and 200 or fewer for demonstration purposes.
    16. Hewlett-Packard (``HP'') asks that the Commission increase the 
number of devices, not intended for use in a licensed service, that may 
be imported to 2000 or fewer for testing and evaluation and 100 or 
fewer for demonstration purposes. Furthermore, HP requests that the 
modified rules be expanded to permit demonstration prototypes to be 
used, in addition to trade shows, for any other purpose designed to 
build market awareness. As an alternative to the suggested rule 
changes, HP states that the Commission could consider combining 
Sec. Sec.  2.1204(a)(3) and 2.1204(a)(4) to create a limit of 2100 
devices for all pre-authorized units to be used for, ``design 
refinement, software development, marketing and customer support 
program development, or any other needed product development purpose, 
including promoting market awareness.''
    17. We believe that a relaxation of the import restrictions may be 
appropriate for devices not intended for use in licensed services. 
However, we seek comment on the potential for abuse of a revised 
importation rule. Further, we seek comment on HP's proposal to modify 
our rules to permit demonstration prototype to be used ``for any 
purpose designed to build market awareness.''
    18. Electronic Filing. Section 2.913(c) Submittal of equipment 
authorization application or information to the Commission. Currently, 
the Commission requires applications for equipment certification to be 
filed electronically, but provides a waiver process for manual filing. 
In the five years that this rule has been in place, we have not 
received any waivers requests. Thus we propose to delete the provisions 
for a paper filing of an application for Certification.
    19. Section 2.926(c) FCC Identifier, Grantee Code. The FCC 
Identifier listed on equipment authorizations issued by the Commission 
consists of a grantee code assigned by the Commission and an equipment 
product code assigned by the grantee. Section 2.926(c) permits 
applicants to submit a written request for assignment of a grantee 
code. We propose to modify this section of the rules to require 
electronic filing for all grantee code assignment requests.
    20. Section 2.929(c) and (d) Changes in name, address, ownership or 
control of grantee. The current rules require the grantee of an 
equipment authorization to supply the Commission with a written 
notification whenever a change in name, address, ownership, or control 
of grantee occurs. We believe that notification can be accomplished 
faster and more efficiently electronically. Therefore, we propose to 
modify these sections of the Rules to require electronic filing for all 
changes in address, company name, contact person, and control/sale of 
the grantee.
    21. Accreditation of Test Laboratories. Section 2.948 Description 
of Measurement Facilities. Currently the Commission's rules do not 
address re-evaluation intervals for laboratories that submit part 15 
and part 18 test data for certification. Accrediting bodies that 
evaluate the laboratories generally determine these intervals 
themselves. While domestic laboratories are generally re-evaluated at 
two-year intervals, some Accrediting Bodies reassess foreign 
laboratories only every 7 years. We believe that it is important that 
all laboratories, both foreign and domestic, be re-certified on a 
common interval. Accordingly, we propose to clarify that all test 
sites, both foreign and domestic, must be reassessed by their 
Accrediting Body every two years.
    22. Section 2.962 Requirements for a Telecommunication 
Certification Body. Section 2.962(e)(1) states that the Commission will 
designate as a Telecommunications Certification Body any organization 
that meets the qualification criteria and is accredited by NIST or its 
recognized accreditor. The rule section does not place requirements on 
re-accreditation periods. We believe that it is important that 
Telecommunications Certification Bodies are routinely re-accredited to 
ensure continued compliance with applicable standards. Accordingly, in 
this section, we propose to clarify that every Telecommunications 
Certification Body must be re-accredited every 2 years for continued 
accreditation.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    23. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),\1\ the 
Commission has prepared this present Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small 
entities by the policies and rules proposed in this Notice of Proposed 
Rule Making (NPRM). Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. 
Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed 
by the deadlines for comments on the NPRM provided in paragraph 62 of 
the item. The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including this 
IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq., has 
been amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996, 
Public Law 104-112, 110 Stat. 847 (1996)(CWAAA). Title II of the 
CWAAA is the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA).
    \2\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    24. Section 11 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and 
section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 require the 
Commission (1) to review biennially its regulations pertaining to 
telecommunications service providers and broadcast ownership; and (2) 
to determine whether economic competition has made those regulations no 
longer necessary in the public interest. The Commission is directed to 
modify or repeal any such regulations that it finds are no longer in 
the public interest.
    25. On September 6, 2002, the Commission released a Public Notice 
seeking comments regarding Commission rules which may be outdated and 
in need of revision.\3\ The Public Notice identified a number of rule 
sections in parts 2 and 15 as candidates for review, and encouraged 
interested parties to provide comment on these rules. Subsequently, on 
September 26, 2002, the Commission released a separate Public Notice 
seeking suggestions as to which rule

[[Page 68827]]

parts administered by the Commission's Office of Engineering and 
Technology should be modified or repealed as part of the 2002 biennial 
review.\4\ Some of the comments filed in response to these Public 
Notices are addressed by the NPRM. The NPRM also addresses other issues 
raised as a result of recent changes in technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Public Notice, ``FCC Seeks Comment Regarding Possible 
Revision or Elimination of Rules Under The Regulatory Flexibility 
Act, 5 U.S.C. 610,'' released September 6, 2002, DA 02-2152.
    \4\ See Public Notice, ``The Commission Seeks Public Comment in 
the 2002 Biennial Review of Telecommunications Regulations within 
the Purview of the Office of Engineering and Technology,'' released 
September 26, 2002, ET Docket No. 02-312.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    26. The NPRM proposes several changes to parts 2, 15 and other 
parts of the rules. Specifically, it proposes to:
    (1) Modify the rules to permit the use of advanced antenna 
technologies with spread spectrum devices in the 2.4 GHz band;
    (2) Modify the replacement antenna restriction for part 15 devices;
    (3) Modify the equipment authorization procedures to provide more 
flexibility to configure transmission systems without the need to 
obtain separate authorization for every combination of system 
components;
    (4) Harmonize the measurement procedures for digital modulation 
systems authorized pursuant to Sec.  15.247 of the rules with those for 
similar U-NII devices authorized under Sec. Sec.  15.401-15.407 of the 
rules;\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 47 CFR 15.247.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (5) Modify the channel spacing requirements for frequency hopping 
spread spectrum devices in the 2.4 GHz band in order to remove barriers 
to the introduction of new technology that uses wider bandwidths;
    (6) Clarify the equipment authorization requirements for modular 
transmitters; and
    (7) Make other changes to update or correct parts 2 and 15 of our 
rules.
    27. These proposals, if adopted, will prove beneficial to 
manufacturers and users of unlicensed technology, including those who 
provide services to rural communities. Specifically, we note that a 
growing number of service providers are using unlicensed devices within 
wireless networks to serve the varied needs of industry, government, 
and general consumers alike. One of the more interesting developments 
is the emergence of wireless Internet service providers or ``WISPs.'' 
Using unlicensed devices, WISPs around the country are providing an 
alternative high-speed connection in areas where cable or DSL services 
have been slow to arrive. We believe that the increased flexibility 
proposed herein will help to foster a viable last mile solution for 
delivering Internet services, other data applications, or even video 
and voice services to underserved, rural, or isolated communities.

B. Legal Basis

    28. The proposed action is authorized under sections 4(i), 301, 
302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. sections 154(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), 
303(r), 304 and 307.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply

    29. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, 
where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.\6\ The RFA defines the term 
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small business concern'' 
under section 3 of the Small Business Act.\7\ Under the Small Business 
Act, a ``small business concern'' is one that: (1) Is independently 
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operations; and 
(3) meets many additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
    \7\ Id. 601(3).
    \8\ Id. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    30. A small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit 
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not 
dominant in its field.''\9\ Nationwide, as of 1992, there were 
approximately 275,801 small organizations.\10\ The term ``small 
governmental jurisdiction'' is defined as ``governments of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.''\11\ As of 
1997, there were approximately 87,453 governmental jurisdictions in the 
United States.\12\ This number includes 39,044 counties, municipal 
governments, and townships, of which 27,546 have populations of fewer 
than 50,000 and 11,498 counties, municipal governments, and townships 
have populations of 50,000 or more. Thus, we estimate that the number 
of small governmental jurisdictions is approximately 75,955 or fewer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \10\ 1992 Economic Census, U.S. Bureau of the Census, , Table 6 
(special tabulation of data under contract to Office of Advocacy of 
the U.S. Small Business Administration).
    \11\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \12\ 1995 Census of Governments, U.S. Census Bureau, United 
States Department of Commerce, Statistical Abstract of the United 
States (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    31. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities 
applicable to unlicensed communications devices manufacturers. 
Therefore, we will utilize the SBA definition application to 
manufacturers of Radio and Television Broadcasting and Communications 
Equipment. Under the SBA's regulations, a radio and television 
broadcasting and wireless communications equipment manufacturer must 
have 750 or fewer employees in order to qualify as a small business 
concern.\13\ Census Bureau data indicates that there are 1,215 U.S. 
establishments that manufacture radio and television broadcasting and 
wireless communications equipment, and that 1,150 of these 
establishments have fewer than 500 employees and would be classified as 
small entities.\14\ The remaining 65 establishments have 500 or more 
employees; however, we are unable to determine how many of those have 
fewer than 750 employees and therefore, also qualify as small entities 
under the SBA definition. We therefore conclude that there are no more 
than 1,150 small manufacturers of radio and television broadcasting and 
wireless communications equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 334220.
    \14\ Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of Census, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1997 Economic Census, Industry Series--
Manufacturing, Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless 
Communications Equipment Manufacturing, Table 4 at 9 (1999). The 
amount of 500 employees was used to estimate the number of small 
business firms because the relevant Census categories stopped at 499 
employees and began at 500 employees. No category for 750 employees 
existed. Thus, the number is as accurate as it is possible to 
calculate with the available information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements

    32. Part 15 transmitters are already required to be authorized 
under the Commission's certification procedure as a prerequisite to 
marketing and importation. See 47 CFR 15.101, 15.201, 15.305, and 
15.405. The changes proposed in this proceeding would not change any of 
the current reporting or recordkeeping requirements. Further, the 
proposed regulations add permissible measurement techniques and methods 
of operation. The proposals would not require the modification of any 
existing products.

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

    33. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include

[[Page 68828]]

the following four alternatives: (1) The establishment of differing 
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into 
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the 
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or 
reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use 
of performance, rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption from 
coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
    34. At this time, the Commission does not believe the proposals 
contained in this NPRM will have a significant economic impact on small 
entities. The NPRM does not propose new device design standards. 
Instead, it relaxes the rules with respect to the types of devices 
which are allowed to operate pursuant to the Commission's regulations. 
There is no burden of compliance with the proposed changes. 
Manufacturers may continue to produce devices which comply with the 
former rules and, if desired, design devices to comply with the new 
regulations. The proposed rules will apply equally to large and small 
entities. Therefore, there is no inequitable impact on small entities. 
Finally, this notice does not recommend a deadline for implementation. 
We believe that the proposals are relatively simple and do not require 
a transition period to implement. An entity desiring to take advantage 
of the relaxed regulations may do so at any time.
    35. Unless our views are altered by comments, we find that the 
proposed rule changes contained in this NPRM will not present a 
significant economic burden to small entities. Therefore it is not 
necessary at this time to propose alternative rules. Notwithstanding 
our finding, we request comment on alternatives that might minimize the 
amount of adverse economic impact, if any, on small entities.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rule

    36. None.

Ordering Clauses

    37. Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 4(i), 301, 302, 
303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307 of the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended, 47 USC 154(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304, and 
307, the Notice of Proposed Rule Making is adopted.
    38. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this NPRM, including 
the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 2

    Communications equipment.

47 CFR Part 15

    Communications equipment.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR parts 2 and 15 as 
follows:

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: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303 and 336, unless otherwise 
noted.

    2. Section 2.913 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.913  Submittal of equipment authorization application or 
information to the Commission.

    (a) All applications for equipment authorization must be filed 
electronically via the Internet. Information on the procedures for 
electronically filing equipment authorization applications can be 
obtained from the address in paragraph (c) of this section and from the 
Internet.
    (b) Unless otherwise directed, fees for applications for the 
equipment authorization, pursuant to Sec.  1.1103 of this chapter, must 
be submitted either electronically via the Internet or by following the 
procedures described in Sec.  0.401(b) of this chapter. The address for 
fees submitted by mail is: Federal Communications Commission, Equipment 
Approval Services, P.O. Box 358315, Pittsburgh, PA 15251-5315. If the 
applicant chooses to make use of an air courier/package delivery 
service, the following address must appear on the outside of the 
package/envelope: Federal Communications Commission, c/o Mellon Bank, 
Mellon Client, Service Center, 500 Ross Street--Room 670, Pittsburgh, 
PA 15262-0001.
    (c) Any equipment samples requested by the Commission pursuant to 
the provisions of subpart J of this part shall, unless otherwise 
directed, be submitted to the Federal Communications Commission 
Laboratory, 7435 Oakland Mills Road, Columbia, Maryland, 21046.
    3. Section 2.926 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  2.926  FCC identifier.

* * * * *
    (c) A grantee code will have three characters consisting of Arabic 
numerals, capital letters, or combination thereof. A prospective 
grantee or his authorized representative may receive a grantee code 
electronically via the Internet. The code may be obtained at any time 
prior to submittal of the application for equipment authorization. 
However, the fee required by Sec.  1.1103 of this chapter must be 
submitted and validated within 30 days of the issuance of the grantee 
code, or the code will be removed from the Commission's records and a 
new grantee code will have to be obtained.
* * * * *
    4. Section 2.929 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) and (d) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  2.929  Changes in name, address, ownership or control of grantee.

* * * * *
    (c) Whenever there is a change in the name and/or address of the 
grantee of an equipment authorization, notice of such change(s) shall 
be submitted to the Commission via the Internet within 30 days after 
the grantee starts using the new name and/or address.
    (d) In the case of transactions affecting the grantee, such as a 
transfer of control or sale to another company, mergers, or transfer of 
manufacturing rights, notice must be given to the Commission via the 
Internet within 60 days after the consummation of the transaction. 
Depending on the circumstances in each case, the Commission may require 
new applications for equipment authorization. In reaching a decision 
the Commission will consider whether the acquiring party can adequately 
ensure and accept responsibility for continued compliance with the 
regulations. In general, new applications for each device will not be 
required. A single application for equipment authorization may be filed 
covering all the affected equipment.
    5. Section 2.948 is amended by revising paragraph (d) introductory 
text and removing paragraph (d)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  2.948  Description of measurement facilities.

* * * * *
    (d) A laboratory that has been accredited with a scope covering the 
required measurements shall be deemed competent to test and submit test 
data for equipment subject to verification,

[[Page 68829]]

Declaration of Conformity, and certification. Such a laboratory shall 
be accredited by an approved accreditation organization based on the 
International Organization for Standardization/International 
Electrotechnical Commission (ISO/IEC) Standard 17025, ``General 
Requirements for the Competence of Calibration and Testing 
Laboratories.'' The organization accrediting the laboratory must be 
approved by the Commission's Office of Engineering and Technology, as 
indicated in Sec.  0.241 of this chapter, to perform such accreditation 
based on ISO/IEC 58, ``Calibration and Testing Laboratory Accreditation 
Systems--General Requirements for Operation and Recognition.'' The 
frequency for revalidation of the test site and the information that is 
required to be filed, or retained by the testing party shall comply 
with the requirements established by the accrediting organization. 
However, in all cases, test site revalidation shall occur on an 
interval not to exceed two years.
* * * * *
    6. Section 2.962 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(4), (e) 
introductory text, (f)(1), (f)(3), (g)(3) and by adding paragraph 
(c)(7) to read as follows:


Sec.  2.962  Requirements for Telecommunication Certification Bodies.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) The TCB shall demonstrate an ability to recognize situations 
where interpretations of the regulations or test procedures may be 
necessary. The appropriate key certification and laboratory personnel 
shall demonstrate a knowledge of how to obtain current and correct 
technical regulation interpretations. The competence of the 
Telecommunication Certification Body shall be demonstrated by 
assessment. The general competence, efficiency, experience, familiarity 
with technical regulations and products included in those technical 
regulations, as well as compliance with applicable parts of the ISO/IEC 
Guides 25 and 65, shall be taken into consideration.
* * * * *
    (7) A Telecommunication Certification Body shall be reassessed for 
continued accreditation on intervals not exceeding two years.
* * * * *
    (e) Designation of a TCB. * * *
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) A TCB shall certify equipment in accordance with the 
Commission's rules and policies.
* * * * *
    (3) A TCB may establish and assess fees for processing 
certification applications and other tasks as required by the 
Commission.
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (3) If during post market surveillance of a certified product, a 
Telecommunication Certification Body determines that a product fails to 
comply with the applicable technical regulations, the Telecommunication 
Certification Body shall immediately notify the grantee and the 
Commission. A follow-up report shall also be provided within thirty 
days of the action taken by the grantee to correct the situation.
* * * * *

PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES

    7. The authority citation for part 15 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303, 304, 307, 336, and 544A.


Sec.  15.7  [Removed]

    8. Section 15.7 is removed.
    9. Section 15.203 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  15.203  Antenna requirement.

    (a) An intentional radiator shall be designed to ensure that no 
antenna other than that certificated with the device may be used. The 
use of a permanently attached antenna or of an antenna that uses a 
unique coupling to the intentional radiator shall be considered 
sufficient to comply with the provisions of this section. The 
manufacturer may design the unit so that a broken antenna can be 
replaced by the user, but the use of a standard antenna jack or 
electrical connector is prohibited. This requirement does not apply to 
carrier current devices or to devices operated under the provisions of 
Sec. Sec.  15.211, 15.213, 15.217, 15.219, or 15.221. Further, this 
requirement does not apply to intentional radiators that must be 
professionally installed, such as perimeter protection systems and some 
field disturbance sensors, or to other intentional radiators which, in 
accordance with Sec.  15.31(d), must be measured at the installation 
site. However, the installer shall be responsible for ensuring that the 
proper antenna is employed so that the limits in this part are not 
exceeded.
    (b) Intentional radiators may be certificated with multiple antenna 
types. Manufacturers must supply a list of acceptable antenna types 
with applications for equipment authorization. Compliance testing must 
be performed using the highest gain antenna of each type of antenna to 
be certified and with the transmitter operating at its maximum output 
power. Any antenna meeting the specifications of tested antennas can be 
used with the device without retesting. Use of an antenna of a 
different type than the tested antenna, one that exceeds the gain of a 
tested antenna, or one that does not meet the tested antenna 
specifications will require retesting and new approval by either a TCB 
or the Commission.
    10. Section 15.204 is amended by adding paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) 
and (b)(3) and by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  15.204  External radio frequency power amplifiers and antenna 
modifications.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) A transmission system consisting of an intentional radiator, an 
external radio frequency power amplifier, and an antenna, may be 
authorized, marketed and used under this part. However, when a 
transmission system is authorized as a system, it must always be 
marketed as a complete system and must always be used in the 
configuration in which it was authorized. Except as described in 
paragraph (b)(3) of this section, an external radio frequency power 
amplifier shall be marketed only in the system configuration with which 
the amplifier is authorized and shall not be marketed as a separate 
product.
    (2) Professional radio system installers and parties that offer 
commercial radio services may substitute technically equivalent 
components, including external radio frequency power amplifiers and/or 
antennas, in systems that have been granted prior equipment 
authorization. The professional installer or commercial service 
provider must place a label on the transmission system that lists the 
FCC Identification Number of the system that was granted equipment 
authorization, identifies any components that were substituted, and 
designates a point of contact for the party that installed the system.
    (3) An external radio frequency power amplifier may be marketed for 
individual sale provided it is intended for use in conjunction with a 
transmitter that operates in the 902-928 MHz, 2400-2483.5 MHz, and 
5725-5850 MHz bands pursuant to Sec.  15.247 or a transmitter that 
operates in the 5.725-

[[Page 68830]]

5.825 GHz band pursuant to Sec.  15.407. The output power of such an 
amplifier must not exceed the maximum permitted output power of its 
associated transmitter.
    (c) Except as otherwise described in paragraph (b) of this section, 
only the antenna with which an intentional radiator is authorized may 
be used with the intentional radiator.
    11. Section 15.212 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  15.212  Modular transmitters.

    (a) The radio elements of the modular transmitter must have its own 
shielding. If the modular transmitter consists of two or more 
partitioned sections, the interface between the sections of the modular 
system must be digital with a minimum signaling amplitude of 150 mV 
peak-to-peak. The physical crystal and tuning capacitors for 
partitioned modules can be located external to the shielded radio 
elements.
    (b) The modular transmitter must have buffered modulation/data 
inputs (if such inputs are provided) to ensure that the module will 
comply with part 15 requirements under conditions of excessive data 
rates or over-modulation. For partitioned modules, control information 
and other data may be exchanged between the firmware and radio front 
end.
    (c) The modular transmitter must have its own power supply 
regulation.
    (d) The modular transmitter must comply with the antenna 
requirements of Sec. Sec.  15.203 and 15.204(c). The antenna must 
either be permanently attached or employ a ``unique'' antenna coupler 
(at all connections between the module and the antenna, including the 
cable). Any antenna used with the module must be approved with the 
module, either at the time of initial authorization or through a Class 
II permissive change. The ``professional installation'' provision of 
Sec.  15.203 may not be applied to modules.
    (e)(1) The modular transmitter must be tested in a stand-alone 
configuration, i.e., the module must not be inside another device 
during testing. Unless the transmitter module will be battery powered, 
it must comply with the AC line conducted requirements found in Sec.  
15.207. AC or DC power lines and data input/output lines connected to 
the module must not contain ferrites, unless they will be marketed with 
the module (see Sec.  15.27(a)). The length of these lines used during 
testing shall be a length typical of actual use or, if that length is 
unknown, at least 10 centimeters to insure that there is no coupling 
between the case of the module and supporting test equipment. Any 
accessories, peripherals, or support equipment connected to the module 
during testing shall be unmodified or commercially available (see Sec.  
15.31(i)).
    (2) A module comprised of two or more sections shall be tested 
installed on a reference platform or final host device. Signal 
injection testing shall be performed on the implementation with a 
length of cable not exceeding ten centimeters connecting the module 
components and platform.
    (f) The modular transmitter must be labeled with its own FCC ID 
number, and, if the FCC ID is not visible when the module is installed 
inside another device, then the outside of the device into which the 
module is installed must also display a label referring to the enclosed 
module. This exterior label can use wording such as the following: 
``Contains Transmitter Module FCC ID: XYZMODEL1'' or ``Contains FCC ID: 
XYZMODEL1.'' Any similar wording that expresses the same meaning may be 
used. The Grantee may either provide such a label, an example of which 
must be included in the application for equipment authorization, or, 
must provide adequate instructions to parties that may include the 
module in their product that such a label must be placed on the outside 
of the device. In the latter case, a copy of these instructions must be 
included in the application for equipment authorization.
    (g) The modular transmitter must comply with any specific rule or 
operating requirements applicable to the transmitter and the 
manufacturer must provide adequate instructions along with the module 
to explain any such requirements. A copy of these instructions must be 
included in the application for equipment authorization.
    (h) The modular transmitter must comply with any applicable RF 
exposure requirements.
    (i) The type number of a partitioned module will consist of a 
digital word 4 bytes in length with the following bit definition: 16 
bits for the company information, 16 bits for the Device Number.
    12. Section 15.247 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) 
introductory text and by adding paragraphs (b)(6), (b)(7), (b)(8), 
(b)(9), (b)(10), (b)(11) and (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  15.247  Operation within the bands 902-928 MHz, 2400-2483.5 MHz, 
and 5725-5850 MHz.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Frequency hopping systems shall have hopping channel carrier 
frequencies separated by a minimum of 25 kHz or the 20 dB bandwidth of 
the hopping channel, whichever is greater. Frequency hopping systems in 
the 2.4 GHz band may have hopping channel carrier frequencies separated 
by 25 kHz or two-thirds of the 20 dB bandwidth of the hopping channel, 
whichever is greater, provided the systems employ fewer than 75 hopping 
channels and operate with an output power no greater than 125 mW. The 
system shall hop to channel frequencies that are selected at the system 
hopping rate from a pseudorandomly ordered list of hopping frequencies. 
Each frequency must be used equally on the average by each transmitter. 
The system receivers shall have input bandwidths that match the hopping 
channel bandwidths of their corresponding transmitters and shall shift 
frequencies in synchronization with the transmitted signals.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) A device that operates in the 2.4 GHz band and transmits to 
multiple receivers (simultaneously or sequentially) will be permitted 
to operate at point-to-point power levels if it satisfies both of the 
following conditions:
    (i) It must form multiple directional beams (simultaneously or 
sequentially) for the purpose of focusing energy on different receivers 
or groups of receivers.
    (ii) It must transmit different information to each receiver.
    (7) For devices qualifying as point-to-point under this 
interpretation, total RF power supplied to the array or arrays that 
comprise the device (i.e., sum of power supplied to all antennas, 
antenna elements, staves, etc. and summed across all carriers or 
frequency channels) is limited as follows:
    (i) Total power is limited to the applicable power level as 
specified in paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(3) of this section.
    (ii) Total power must be reduced by 1 dB for each 3 dB of 
directional gain above 6 dB of the antenna/array device, as defined in 
paragraph (b)(9) of this section.
    (8) The power limits specified previously will be applied to the 
aggregate power of all simultaneously operated frequency channels and 
directional beams, except that, for devices that transmit on multiple 
beams simultaneously (on the same or different frequency channels), a 
higher total power level may be allowed. For such devices, both of the 
following power limits must be satisfied.
    (i) The power supplied to each beam will be subject to the power 
limit as specified in paragraph (b)(7)(i) of this section.
    (ii) Aggregate power transmitted simultaneously on all beams must 
not

[[Page 68831]]

exceed the power limit determined in paragraph (b)(7)(i) of this 
section by more than 8 dB.
    (9) Directional gain shall be computed as follows:
    (i) Directional gain will be assumed to be equal to the sum of 10 
log ( of array elements or staves) and the directional gain of 
the individual elements or staves (or of the element or stave having 
the highest gain if all are not the same).
    (ii) A value for directional gain less than that given by (b)(9)(i) 
of this section will be accepted only if sufficient evidence is 
presented that the directional gain cannot exceed the proposed value 
(for example due to shading of the array, or coherence loss in the 
beamforming).
    (10) If a device transmits in only single sector (single 
directional beam), then it does not satisfy the conditions of paragraph 
(b)(6) of this section and must be evaluated under point-to-multipoint 
rules.
    (11) If a device transmits in multiple sectors (multiple beams 
pointed in different directions) and satisfies the conditions of 
paragraph (b)(6)(i) of this section, then the device may operate at 
point-to-point power levels computed according to paragraphs (b)(7) and 
(b)(8) of this section. Power in each sector must satisfy the limit in 
paragraph (b)(7)(i) of this section, and total RF power supplied to all 
antennas (all sectors) simultaneously must satisfy the limit in 
(b)(8)(ii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) The peak output power and peak power spectral density for 
digitally modulated system may be determined in accordance with the 
provisions specified in Sec. Sec.  15.407(a)(4) and 15.407(a)(5).
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 03-30540 Filed 12-9-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P