[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 117 (Friday, June 18, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34103-34112]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-13573]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 15

[ET Docket No. 04-186 and ET Docket No. 02-380; FCC 04-113]


Unlicensed Operation in the TV Broadcast Bands

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend the Commission's rules to 
allow unlicensed radio transmitters to operate in the broadcast 
television spectrum at locations where that spectrum is not being used. 
We believe that the proposals set forth will provide for more efficient 
and effective use of the TV spectrum and will have significant benefits 
for the public by allowing the development of new and innovative types 
of unlicensed broadband devices and services for businesses and 
consumers.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before September 1, 2004, and reply 
comments must be filed on or before October 1, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hugh VanTuyl, (202) 418-7506, email: 
[email protected] or Alan Stillwell, (202) 418-2925, email: 
[email protected], Office of Engineering and Technology. e-mail:, 
TTY (202) 418-2989.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rule Making, ET Docket No. 04-186 and ET Docket No. 02-380, 
FCC 04-113, adopted May 13, 2004, and released May 25, 2004. 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, 
Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 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 
September 1, 2004, and reply comments on or before October 1, 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. Although this 
proceeding is captioned under multiple dockets, only one copy of an 
electronic submission, captioned to ET Docket No. 04-186, should be 
filed. 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. 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 Rule Making

    1. The Notice of Proposed Rule Making proposes to allow unlicensed 
radio transmitters to operate in the broadcast television spectrum at

[[Page 34104]]

locations where that spectrum is not being used. We believe that the 
proposals set forth herein would provide for more efficient and 
effective use of the TV spectrum and would have significant benefits 
for the public by allowing the development of new and innovative types 
of unlicensed broadband devices and services for businesses and 
consumers.
    2. We recognize that broadcasters are currently undergoing a 
transition to digital operation, during which channel availability is 
likely to change more frequently. Our approach will appropriately 
account for these changes. To ensure that no harmful interference to 
authorized users of the spectrum will occur, we propose to define when 
a TV channel is ``unused'' and to require these unlicensed devices 
comply with significant restrictions and technical protections. 
Unlicensed devices would be required to incorporate ``smart radio'' 
features to identify the unused TV channels in the area where they are 
located. We intend to consider several alternative methods for 
identifying the unused TV channels, including approaches that would; 
allow existing television and/or radio stations to transmit information 
on TV channel availability directly to an unlicensed device; employ 
geo-location technologies such as the Global Positioning Satellite 
(GPS) system; or employ spectrum sensing techniques that would 
determine if the signals of authorized TV stations are present in an 
area.
    3. On December 11, 2002, the Commission adopted a Notice of Inquiry 
(NOI), 68 FR 2730, January 21, 2003, in this proceeding seeking comment 
on the possibility of allowing unlicensed devices to operate in the TV 
broadcast bands at locations and times when the spectrum is not being 
used by authorized services. The Commission noted that unused portions 
of the TV spectrum appear to be a suitable choice for expanded 
unlicensed operations. In this regard, the Commission observed that 
there is significant bandwidth available because each TV channel 
occupies six megahertz and multiple channels are generally vacant or 
unused in a particular area. The Commission stated that allowing 
unlicensed devices to operate on unused TV channels would lead to more 
efficient use of the spectrum. Commenting parties representing the 
interests of manufacturers and users of unlicensed devices generally 
support this approach, while those representing the interests of the 
current users of the TV broadcast spectrum, both primary and secondary, 
express concern about potential interference from such new unlicensed 
operations.

Unlicensed Operation in the Broadcast TV Spectrum

    4. Part 15 unlicensed devices and wireless broadband services using 
such devices have been extremely successful. The past few years have 
witnessed the development of broadband unlicensed industry standards 
such as IEEE 802.11b (Wi-Fi), Bluetooth, and Home RF that have greatly 
expanded the number and variety of devices that operate in the 2.4 GHz 
and 5 GHz industrial, scientific and medical equipment (ISM) bands. 
These standards have enabled the introduction of a host of new wireless 
Internet products as well as wireless computer peripherals such as 
printers and keyboards, and wireless headsets and computer connections 
for cellular and PCS phones.
    5. The record developed in response to the NOI indicates that there 
is need for additional spectrum for unlicensed broadband devices. A 
number of commenting parties in particular state that unlicensed 
devices should be allowed to operate in the TV broadcast bands. 
Broadcasters, however, express concern that allowing unlicensed 
operation in the TV bands would pose a risk of interference to over-
the-air television service and could adversely affect the DTV 
transition. They state that unlicensed operation in the TV bands would 
be problematic during the DTV transition because the television bands 
will be in a crowded, fluid and fragile state during that period, and 
unlicensed devices could cause significant disruption to DTV service. 
Other parties express concern about possible interference from 
unlicensed devices to licensed non-broadcast services that operate on 
TV channels. Parties representing Private Land Mobile Radio Service 
(PLMRS) and Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) interests do not 
believe that unlicensed devices should be permitted to operate on TV 
channels 14-20, which are used by the PLMRS/CMRS in certain parts of 
the country, or on TV channels above 51, which have been reallocated 
for other services. In addition, manufacturers of wireless microphones 
that operate on VHF and UHF TV channels are concerned about possible 
interference from unlicensed devices.
    6. We request comment on our tentative conclusions regarding the 
interest in operation of unlicensed devices in the broadcast TV bands 
and the suitability of those bands for such operations. We request 
comment on proposals for requirements to ensure that unlicensed 
broadband devices operating in the TV bands would transmit on vacant 
spectrum and not interfere with authorized incumbent operations, 
including: analog and digital television, low power television, 
television translator, television booster, and Class A television 
stations (as well as future authorization of digital low power 
television, television translator and television booster stations being 
considered in MB Docket No. 03-185), 68 FR 55566, September 26, 2003, 
broadcast auxiliary services such as wireless microphones; and PLMRS 
and CMRS backhaul operations.

Requirements for Unlicensed Use of the TV Bands

    7. Because unlicensed broadband devices would share spectrum with 
broadcast TV and other licensed services, they would need to have 
capabilities to avoid causing harmful interference to licensed services 
in the TV band. Specifically, an unlicensed device would need the 
ability to determine whether a TV channel or frequency band is unused 
before it could transmit. Additionally, an unlicensed device may need 
capabilities to avoid occupying a frequency band in the event a 
licensed user wishes to commence transmissions on a channel that was 
previously vacant. As pointed out by a number of parties with interest 
in TV broadcasting, this capability is especially important in light of 
the transition to DTV and the facts that many broadcasters may be 
required to change their current DTV channel and that new DTV stations 
may begin operation.
    8. For the purpose of developing interference protection criteria, 
we propose to classify the unlicensed broadband devices to be used in 
the TV bands into these two general functional categories. The first 
category will consist of lower power ``personal/portable'' unlicensed 
devices, such as Wi-Fi like cards in laptop computers or wireless in-
home LANs. The second category will consist of higher power ``fixed/
access'' unlicensed devices that are generally operated from a fixed 
location and may be used to provide a commercial service such as 
wireless broadband internet access. We believe that both of these types 
of operations can be accommodated in the TV spectrum, provided 
appropriate measures are taken to ensure that operations are limited to 
unused TV channels. At the same time, we recognize that different 
requirements may be appropriate for ensuring interference protection to 
licensed operations from the two different types of devices, given the 
differences in the

[[Page 34105]]

uses and the interference potential of these types of unlicensed 
broadband applications. That is, certain methods that are appropriate 
for limiting the interference potential of personal/portable devices 
would be less appropriate for fixed/access devices and vice versa. 
Therefore, we propose different interference avoidance requirements for 
these two different types of unlicensed broadband applications. In both 
cases, however, our goal is to make the technical requirements as 
simple and as reliable as possible. We believe that this approach will 
provide flexibility to permit a wide range of unlicensed broadband uses 
and applications and ensure that the most appropriate and effective 
mechanisms are in place to limit such unlicensed use to only unused TV 
channels.
    9. There are at least three methods that could be used to determine 
whether a portion of the TV band is unused at a specific time and/or 
location. First, the location of an unlicensed device could be 
determined by a professional installer or by using geo-location 
technology such as GPS incorporated within the device. Using either of 
these methods, it could then be determined from either an internal or 
external database whether the unlicensed device is located far enough 
outside the protected service contours of licensed stations to avoid 
causing harmful interference. A second method would be for an 
unlicensed device to receive information transmitted by an external 
source such as a broadcast station or another unlicensed transmitter 
indicating which channels are available at its geographic location. A 
third method would be to incorporate sensing capabilities in the 
unlicensed device to detect whether other transmitters are operating in 
an area. For example, a fixed unlicensed transmitter could be required 
to incorporate an antenna and a receiver capable of detecting signals 
down to a certain threshold level that would be used to determine if a 
particular TV channel is actually in use. Generally, such sensing would 
have to be much more sensitive than the receivers used in the licensed 
service. If no signals were detected above the threshold, the device 
would be allowed to transmit. If signals are detected above the 
threshold on a particular channel, the unlicensed device would have to 
search for another channel. As the Commission has previously noted, 
there are techniques that can be used to increase the ability of a 
sensing receiver to reliably detect other signals in a band which rely 
on the fact that it is not necessary to decode the information in a 
signal to determine whether a signal is present.
    10. Unlicensed Personal/Portable Operations. Interference was the 
primary concern raised by parties opposed to unlicensed operations in 
the TV bands. These parties raise valid concerns that given the 
potential ubiquitous and uncontrolled deployment of unlicensed devices, 
any requirements on these devices must ensure that the devices only 
transmit on unused TV channels. To ensure that this is the case, we are 
proposing to allow personal/portable unlicensed broadband devices to 
transmit only after they receive a ``control'' signal that positively 
identifies which TV channels are vacant and therefore available for 
use. Without reception of this ``control'' signal, no transmissions 
would be permitted. This would provide positive assurance that these 
devices would operate only on unused TV channels. We propose to permit 
the transmission of control signal data by a number of sources. In 
particular, we propose that the control signal could be a data stream 
from a digital TV station, information transmitted in the vertical 
blanking interval (VBI) of an analog TV station, subcarrier data from 
an FM radio station, data transmitted by a licensed wireless provider, 
or channel availability data from a fixed/access unlicensed device. We 
propose that the transmission of this information would be on a 
voluntary basis and that parties could receive compensation for 
transmitting this information. Under the approach we are proposing, a 
TV channel would be considered vacant only if no portion of the service 
area of an authorized station assigned to use that channel was within 
the service area of the station transmitting the control signal. For 
example, if the information is transmitted by a DTV station, the 
identified vacant channels must not be used for the provision of 
television or other licensed services anywhere within the noise-limited 
service contour of that DTV station. We also seek comment on how often 
the control signal information should be transmitted and updated to 
take into account changes in TV station operations that arise due to 
the transition to DTV and the commencement of new stations. We 
tentatively believe that control signal information should be at a 
minimum current on a daily basis.
    11. Given the portable and potentially ubiquitous nature of these 
devices and the importance of protecting television service, we believe 
that, at least initially, unlicensed personal/portable broadband 
devices that operate in the TV bands should be subject to certain 
additional requirements. In particular, we propose to limit the maximum 
power output of these devices to 100 milliwatts (mW) and to require 
that such devices have a permanently attached integral antenna with a 
maximum permissible gain of 6 dBi. We believe that these power and 
antenna provisions will provide sufficient communications capabilities 
to allow personal/portable broadband devices to serve a wide range of 
broadband applications, such as home networks, LANs and broadband 
connectivity, while at the same time limiting the potential for 
interference and RF safety concerns. We seek comment on whether these 
devices should be subject to routine evaluation for RF exposure. We 
also seek comment on whether we should allow higher power operation and 
what safeguards would be needed to protect current and future licensees 
in the TV bands. We further propose to require that such devices 
automatically and periodically transmit a unique identification signal. 
We seek comment on what information should be required to be 
transmitted and how often it should be repeated for easy identification 
of the unlicensed device. For example, should we require the device to 
transmit the name of its manufacturer, its FCC identifier, and its 
serial number? What time interval would be appropriate for periodic 
transmission of the identifying information? We believe that taken 
together these proposed requirements address the interference concerns 
raised by commenting parties. In particular, we believe that this plan 
will appropriately manage the potential for harmful interference to 
television and other licensed services from unlicensed personal/
portable devices and, in the unlikely event that such interference were 
to occur, provide a positive means to identify its source so that it 
can be eliminated.
    12. We seek comment on these proposals. In particular, we seek 
specific comment on what is the most efficient and effective method for 
providing control signals to unlicensed devices. In this regard, we ask 
whether broadcasters would voluntarily engage in agreements with 
unlicensed device manufacturers or service providers to transmit this 
information. We note agreements with unlicensed device manufacturers to 
carry channel availability data could provide broadcasters a new source 
of revenue. For example, we understand that many FM radio broadcasters 
have agreed to transmit information to support devices

[[Page 34106]]

using Microsoft's Smart Personal Object Technology (``SPOT''). While we 
believe that voluntary approaches are the most desirable means for 
providing control channel information, we also request comment on 
whether we should require TV stations to transmit this information and 
how frequently such information should be transmitted. We further 
request comment on whether we should designate specific entities that 
would be responsible for determining the unused channels in a station's 
service area. For example, this function could be performed by 
frequency coordinators, engineering consulting firms, or broadcast 
trade associations. We also seek comment on the frequency with which 
these entities update their information on allotments and vacancies and 
whether we should provide guidelines in that regard. Additionally, we 
seek comment on whether constraints are needed on stations 
retransmitting control signals to ensure that the control signals are 
not transmitted or received beyond the originating station's service 
area. For example, translator stations generally retransmit the entire 
signal of a primary TV station. How should we ensure that translators 
do not inappropriately retransmit the control signals of their primary 
TV stations beyond the coverage area of those stations? We also request 
comment on the desirability and practicality of using other approaches 
for preventing harmful interference to TV services from personal/
portable unlicensed devices in the TV bands. In particular, parties 
favoring such approaches should describe how such techniques would 
ensure that unlicensed devices only operate on vacant spectrum and not 
cause harmful interference to licensed services. We also request 
comment on whether additional requirements would be appropriate for 
personal/portable operations. For example, should we require that all 
personal/portable devices be registered with an industry-accepted 
entity, such as a frequency coordinator, that maintains a registration 
database of all models of personal/portable transmitters along with 
their operating frequencies? This registration data base could include 
the unique identification of the personal/portable device. We also 
request comment and suggestions on the appropriate entity that we 
should select to maintain such a registration database.
    13. Fixed/Access Unlicensed Devices. Fixed/access types of devices 
present different operational and interference considerations. In 
general, we anticipate that these devices would be used by WISPs and 
others as base stations to provide internet access and other broadband 
data services to homes and businesses, including to personal/portable 
services. We propose to allow fixed/access devices to operate under the 
same technical provisions as digital transmission systems that operate 
under Sec.  15.247 of the rules. This would permit fixed/access devices 
to operate with a transmitter output power of up to one watt and to 
employ higher gain directional antennas, with requirements for 
transmitter output reductions for antennas with gains above 6 dBi. We 
believe that these power levels are sufficient to be useful for WISPs 
and other wireless networking applications and will ensure that these 
devices can successfully share the TV spectrum. We also believe that 
these power and antenna provisions will limit the potential for 
interference and RF safety concerns. We seek comment on whether these 
devices should be subject to routine evaluation for RF exposure. We 
further propose to require that such devices automatically and 
periodically transmit a unique identification so that any harmful 
interference situation, should it occur, can be quickly identified and 
remedied. We request comment on what information should be required to 
be transmitted, in what format, and how often it should be repeated for 
easy identification of the unlicensed device. For example, should we 
require unlicensed fixed/access devices to transmit location 
information, name of manufacturer, FCC identifier, and serial number? 
What time interval would be appropriate for periodic transmission of 
the identification information?
    14. To ensure that fixed/access devices operate only on unused TV 
channels, we propose to require that such devices incorporate a method 
for determining geographic location with a minimum accuracy of 10 
meters. To meet this requirement, for example, the device could 
incorporate a GPS receiver to determine its geographic coordinates. 
Using this location information, local broadcast station data and the 
protection requirements described, channel availability for the 
unlicensed device can be determined. We therefore propose to require 
that the fixed/access unlicensed transmitter have the capability to 
access such a database and appropriate computational software to 
determine which TV channels are available for unlicensed use based on 
its location. The equipment would also be required to have the 
capability to limit its transmissions to only those channels that are 
identified as unused through this process. As an alternative, we 
propose to require that the unlicensed device be professionally 
installed by a party that would determine the device's geographic 
location and the available unused channels at that location. In this 
case, the installer could provide the device's coordinates to a 
frequency coordinator, industry association, local broadcast group or 
other party that maintains an appropriate and current data base to 
determine which TV channels are unused at the device's location. The 
installing party would then configure the device to operate only on 
unused channels. We seek comment on the qualifications an individual 
must possess in order to be classified as a professional installer. We 
recognize that industry organizations such as the National Association 
of Radio Telecommunications Engineers (NARTE) and the Part 15 
Organization have developed Professional Installer Certification 
programs designed to ensure that installers are able to set up 
unlicensed links in a manner to minimize the possibility of creating 
harmful interference to other users of the spectrum. Should the 
Commission consider completion of industry-based certification programs 
such as these to be sufficient training to be recognized as a 
professional installer? What criteria should the Commission place on 
any such programs that it deems acceptable? As a second alternative, we 
seek comment on whether the control signal approach would also be 
appropriate for fixed/access devices. Under any of these approaches, we 
would require that the unlicensed device or its operator periodically 
access the channel availability database and software to ensure that 
the channels on which the device operates remain unused. We anticipate 
that this database and software could be made available by unlicensed 
equipment vendors, broadcast engineering firms or other third-party 
providers. We request comment on how often an unlicensed device or 
operator must access the channel availability database and update or 
reprogram the device's usable channel list.
    15. We request comment on this approach, recognizing in particular 
the changes that will occur during the DTV transition. We also seek 
comment on whether we should allow fixed/access devices to operate with 
higher power than proposed above and, if so, what safeguards would be 
needed to protect current licensees in the TV bands. We note that we 
recently proposed to allow certain unlicensed devices to operate with 
higher power in rural or other

[[Page 34107]]

areas with limited spectrum use. We also seek comment on whether we 
should require devices to use transmit power control (TPC) and operate 
with the minimum power necessary to achieve reliable communication to 
reduce the possibility of interference to licensed services and to 
enable better spectrum sharing between unlicensed devices.
    16. We also request comment on whether additional requirements 
would be appropriate for fixed/access operations. For example, should 
we require that all fixed/access devices also be registered with an 
industry-accepted entity, such as a frequency coordinator, that 
maintains a registration database of all fixed/access transmitters 
along with their operating frequencies? This registration data base 
would include the unique identification of the fixed/access device, its 
geographic coordinates, and the channels available for use at that 
location. We also request comment and suggestions on the appropriate 
entity that we should select to maintain such a registration database. 
In addition, we request comment on whether we should permit fixed/
access devices to use a spectrum sensing approach, as an alternative to 
the geo-location approach described above. We request comment on what 
would be the appropriate signal levels that an unlicensed device would 
need to be capable of detecting to ensure that no harmful interference 
is caused to licensed operations, and the current availability of 
suitable detection measures and devices. In addition, when making a 
determination as to an appropriate signal level, it would also be 
necessary to specify other parameters of the detection methodology to 
the extent these could not be incorporated in a signal level 
measurement, including, for example, the length, location, and 
frequency of the detection measurement. In particular, we request 
parties to address how such an approach would consider the so-called 
``hidden node'' problem where the unlicensed transmitting device may be 
shielded from the TV transmitter but have a direct path to a nearby TV 
receiver.

Protection of Broadcast Television Service

    17. We propose to define the technical criteria for determining 
when a TV channel can be considered vacant for the purpose of allowing 
operation of an unlicensed device on that channel. Analog and digital 
full service TV stations and Class A TV, low power TV, TV translator 
and TV booster stations are generally protected from interference 
within defined signal contours. The signal level defining a television 
station's protected contour varies depending on the type of station, 
e.g., analog or digital TV, and the band in which a TV station 
operates. Different protected contour values are specified for both 
analog and digital stations that operate in the low VHF band (channels 
2-6), the high VHF band (channels 7-13) and the UHF band (channels 14-
69), see chart in paragraph 29 of the NPRM. We propose to use the 
service area criteria to define the areas that unlicensed devices must 
protect from harmful interference. All unlicensed operations would be 
required to protect TV service within the contours defined by the 
criteria.
    18. Whether or not interference occurs depends on the desired-to-
undesired (D/U) signal ratio needed for acceptable service. This D/U 
ratio will vary depending on the type of station, the frequency band 
and the nature of the undesired signal. In considering digital 
broadband unlicensed operations in the television band, we note that 
such operations will be at very low power compared to television 
operations. We also believe that the signals from such unlicensed 
devices can be expected to appear ``noise-like'' and that the carrier-
related interference mechanisms that can affect analog television would 
not occur. We therefore believe that the requirements needed to protect 
television service from digital unlicensed devices should be limited to 
co- and adjacent channel operations only for fixed/access operations 
and co-channel operations only for personal/portable operations. Given 
the expected noise-like character of signals from unlicensed devices, 
we are proposing to use the same protection criteria that are currently 
specified in the rules for digital television. We request comment on 
this approach and on whether we need to proscribe a modulation 
requirement for such unlicensed devices to ensure that their 
transmissions appear noise-like. With regard to personal/portable 
operations, we believe at this time that the potential for harmful 
interference to adjacent channel television operations is sufficiently 
low that we do not need to impose adjacent channel restrictions on 
these devices. We note that even in the ``worst case'' situation at the 
edge of a television station's service area, i.e., where the TV 
station's signal is the lowest, the interference potential from an 
adjacent channel personal/portable device would be minimal and, in 
practice, would be mitigated by the effects of ambient noise, shielding 
from buildings, walls, ground clutter, etc. We therefore are proposing 
to use the criteria in paragraph 30 of the NPRM, to ensure that 
unlicensed devices do not cause harmful interference to TV service.
    19. We propose to require that the service and protection criteria 
be used in conjunction with appropriate computational software, 
including use of the Commission's propagation curves, and a television 
station engineering database to develop the control signal information 
on available channels for unlicensed personal/portable devices and for 
coordination and deployment of unlicensed fixed/access devices. All 
unlicensed operations in the TV bands would be subject to the general 
requirements of part 15 for not causing harmful interference and would 
be required to ensure that the D/U ratios for acceptable television 
service always maintained. We also seek comment on whether there are 
any special considerations for cases where consumers use indoor DTV 
antennas. As indicated, fixed/access unlicensed devices would be 
subject to the co- and adjacent channel D/U criteria while personal/
portable devices would be subject only to the co-channel criteria. The 
adjacent channel D/U criteria would not apply to fixed/access devices 
between channels 4 and 5, channels 6 and 7, and channels 13 and 14 
because of the frequency separations that exist between those channels. 
That is, those channels are not actually on adjacent frequencies. For 
adjacent channel operations within the protected service contour, we 
propose to require that calculation of desired signal levels be based 
on FCC F(90,90) curves or the protected contour field strength value, 
whichever is higher. For unlicensed operation outside the protected 
contour of a television station, calculations of television (desired) 
signal levels would be based on the FCC F(50,50) curves. Calculations 
of unlicensed (undesired) signal levels would be based on the FCC 
F(50,50) curves or other appropriate models. We believe this approach 
should provide additional protection to television viewers within the 
protected contour of an adjacent channel station.
    20. In addition, we propose to not allow unlicensed devices to 
operate within the protected contour of any co-channel TV operation. 
This proposal along with the minimum D/U requirements would mean that 
such devices would have to be located at least some minimum distance 
outside the protected signal contours of co-channel television 
stations. This minimum distance would be determined using the values in 
above Table and would depend on the maximum power and antenna

[[Page 34108]]

characteristics of the unlicensed device, the signal strength of the 
licensed station's protected service contour, the desired-to-undesired 
(D/U) signal ratio permitted at the licensed station's protected 
service contour, and the method used to calculate the signal contours 
of the unlicensed device. We seek comment on these proposals, including 
whether the proposed protection criteria are appropriate.

Permissible Channels for Unlicensed Operation

    21. We believe it is generally desirable to allow unlicensed 
devices to access the largest practicable number of the 68 television 
channels. This would maximize the opportunities for operation of 
unlicensed devices in all areas, and would be particularly important 
for the successful implementation of unlicensed devices in areas where 
the TV bands are crowded with other services. There are, however, 
certain channels that we believe are, not suitable or appropriate for 
use by unlicensed devices, see paragraphs 34-36 of the NPRM for more 
discussion. These include channels 2-4, 37, and 52-69. In addition, we 
tentatively conclude that channels 14-20 are not suitable for use in 
markets where they are used for PLMRS and CMRS. With the exception of 
these channels, we propose to allow unlicensed devices to operate on 
any unused TV channel. Thus, TV channels 5-36 and 38-51 would be 
generally available for unlicensed operation and channels 14-20 would 
be available in most locations.
    22. We seek comment on our proposals for the TV channels that would 
be available for unlicensed use. We also request comment on whether the 
proposed minimum separations to protect PLMRS/CMRS operations are 
appropriate, and in particular, what special protections, if any, are 
necessary to accommodate these operations, including those operations 
that are licensed pursuant to a waiver.

Wireless Microphone Operations

    23. As noted, manufacturers of wireless microphones express concern 
that operation of new unlicensed devices in the TV bands could cause 
interference to wireless microphones. We believe that the operational 
characteristics of wireless microphones significantly reduce the 
likelihood of interference from unlicensed devices for several reasons. 
Wireless microphones are permitted relatively high output power given 
the range over which they are typically operating. The maximum 
permitted output power of these devices is 50 milliwatts in the VHF 
band and 250 milliwatts in the UHF band. Wireless microphones are used 
in locations such as theaters and sports arenas where the operating 
range would typically be hundreds of feet at the most, so operation at 
the power levels permitted in the rules results in a significant signal 
level at the wireless microphone receiver. Further, the vast majority 
of wireless microphones are frequency modulated (FM). FM receivers 
exhibit a ``capture effect'' in which they respond to only the 
strongest signal received on a frequency and reject any weaker 
interfering signals. Because the desired signal at a wireless 
microphone receiver is relatively strong, we believe that the 
likelihood of interference from unlicensed device signals is therefore 
low such that unlicensed use should generally be compatible with 
wireless microphones. Nonetheless, we seek comment on whether other 
measures are needed to protect wireless microphone operation including 
the possibility of designating one or two unused TV channels in each 
market for use by only wireless microphones.

Other Issues

    24. Out of Band Emission Limits. We propose to require that 
unlicensed devices operating in the TV bands comply with the same out-
of-band emission limits that apply to other part 15 digital 
transmission system transmitters. These limits seem appropriate given 
that we are proposing power and antenna characteristics for unlicensed 
devices in the TV bands that are similar to those for other part 15 
devices that employ digital modulation. Specifically, we propose to 
require that out-of-band emissions in any 100 kHz bandwidth outside the 
frequency band in which the unlicensed device operates be at least 20 
dB below that in the 100 kHz bandwidth within the band that contains 
the highest level of the desired power. Consistent with the current 
rules, we also propose to not require attenuation of emissions below 
the general limits specified in Sec.  15.209(a). To reduce the 
likelihood of harmful interference to licensed services on adjacent 
channels or outside the TV bands, we further propose to require that 
emissions outside the TV channel(s) where an unlicensed device operates 
comply with the general limits in Sec.  15.209(a). This is consistent 
with the out-of-band emission requirements for certain other part 15 
intentional radiators. We seek comment on these proposals.
    25. Security Requirements. As the Commission noted in the cognitive 
radio proceeding, equipment that relies on new capabilities such as 
geo-location raises the possibility of new types of abuse, such as 
reprogramming GPS receivers with geographic offsets or altering 
database information. In addition, the software used to select the 
appropriate operating parameters could be altered to make an unlicensed 
device transmit at frequencies, power levels or locations where it 
should not. To prevent devices from being modified to transmit on 
occupied frequencies and causing harmful interference to licensed 
services, we propose to require that an unlicensed device that operates 
in the TV bands have certain capabilities to ensure that it cannot be 
easily modified. Specifically, we propose to require that an unlicensed 
device not have any controls accessible to any party, other than a 
professional installer, that allow selection of the transmit channel or 
output power. We also propose to require that manufacturers of 
unlicensed devices that operate in the TV bands take steps to ensure 
that only the software that was approved with a device can be loaded 
into a device, and that the software not allow the user to operate the 
device with parameters outside those that were approved. This proposed 
requirement would apply to software that selects a device's operating 
frequency, to software used in determining a device's geographic 
location or identifying TV channels that are vacant, and to the 
information in the database accessed by a device. We further propose to 
require that an unlicensed device incorporate a means to detect whether 
tampering with the hardware or software has occurred, and that a device 
not operate if tampering is detected. We also propose to require that 
manufacturers describe their device's security features in the 
application for equipment authorization. We seek comment on these 
proposals. In particular, we seek comment on the steps manufacturers 
could take to protect hardware and software from modifications for 
improper purposes and how tampering with hardware or software could be 
detected.
    26. Compliance and Enforcement. We propose to subject unlicensed 
devices operated under the proposals to the general operating 
conditions in Sec.  15.5 that an unlicensed device not cause harmful 
interference and that it must accept interference caused by the 
operation of an authorized radio station. The operator of an unlicensed 
device operating under the rules proposed would be required to cease 
operation upon notification by a Commission

[[Page 34109]]

representative that the device was causing harmful interference, 
regardless or whether the device was otherwise in compliance with the 
rules, until such time as the condition causing the harmful 
interference was corrected. We also ask whether we should hold parties 
that provide information on channel availability to unlicensed devices 
responsible for the validity of that information. To what extent should 
these parties be able to rely on information obtained from the 
Commission? In cases where errors or other inaccuracies were found in 
such data, we would require the responsible party to cease distributing 
the control information when advised that it is incorrect by a 
Commission representative. Such party would be allowed to resume 
distribution of channel availability information if and when that 
information was corrected. We request comment on these proposals for 
ensuring that harmful interference is not caused by the operation of 
these devices and the enforcement of the rules we are proposing for 
unlicensed operation on vacant channels. We also invite interested 
parties to submit comments and suggestions regarding any other possible 
enforcement mechanisms that might be appropriate and effective for 
unlicensed devices operating in the broadcast TV bands.
    27. Measurement/Testing Procedures. Unlicensed transmitters must be 
tested to show compliance with the applicable technical requirements in 
part 15 of the rules before they can be certified. Part 15 specifies 
general testing requirements applicable to unlicensed transmitters and 
incorporates some industry procedures into the rules by reference, such 
as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) C63.4-2001 
measurement procedure. The types of tests required typically include 
the maximum output power or field strength, spurious emissions, 
occupied bandwidth and operating frequency.
    28. We expect that any new testing procedures would be specified at 
the time any rules are adopted, as the Commission did in the proceeding 
making additional spectrum available for unlicensed devices in the 5 
GHz band. We seek comment on any new tests that may be required for 
unlicensed devices that operate in the TV bands and on the appropriate 
testing procedures.
    29. Certification by TCBs. Unlicensed transmitters operating under 
part 15 of the rules are required to be certified by the Commission or 
a designated Telecommunication Certification Body (TCB) before they may 
be legally marketed within the United States. In establishing the 
requirements and rules for TCBs, the Commission stated that while it 
intended to allow TCBs to certify a broad range of equipment, certain 
functions should continue to be performed by the Commission. These 
functions include certifying new or unique equipment for which the 
rules or requirements do not exist or for which the application of the 
rules is not clear. Because unlicensed devices operating in the TV 
bands would contain new technologies and we are proposing new rules to 
accommodate them, we expect that many questions about the application 
of the rules would arise. Consistent with the Commission's previous 
action in the software defined radio proceeding, we tentatively 
conclude that TCBs should not be permitted to certify unlicensed 
devices that operate in the TV bands until the Chief of the Office of 
Engineering and Technology issues a public notice announcing that TCBs 
may certify such devices. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion.
    30. Unlicensed Use in Border Areas near Canada and Mexico. The 
allotment and assignment of TV channels in the border areas with Canada 
and Mexico are subject to agreements with each of those countries. Low 
power TV assignments within 32 kilometers (20 miles) of the Canadian 
border must be referred to the Canadian authorities for approval. In 
addition, low power UHF TV stations that are located less than 40 
kilometers (25 miles) from the Mexican border, and low power VHF TV 
stations that are less than 60 kilometers (37 miles) from the Mexican 
border, must be referred to the Mexican government for approval. In 
keeping with the current agreements with Canada and Mexico, we propose 
to prohibit unlicensed fixed/access devices from operating less than 
these distances from the Canadian and Mexican borders until agreements 
are reached with those countries. We seek comment on this proposal. In 
particular, we request comment on how to ensure that unlicensed devices 
using vacant TV channels do not operate within the border areas, 
whether the methods used to ensure that these devices operate only on 
vacant TV channels could be adapted to preclude operation in the border 
areas, or whether some other methods would be more appropriate in this 
regard.
    31. Need for Voluntary Standards. Unlicensed devices operating 
under part 15 of the rules have no protection from interference from 
other unlicensed devices. In bands that are heavily used by unlicensed 
devices such as the spread spectrum bands under Sec.  15.247 of the 
rules, industry bodies have developed voluntary standards that 
facilitate spectrum sharing between unlicensed devices, such as the 
IEEE 802.11 standards. We seek comment on whether there is a need for 
such voluntary standards to facilitate sharing between unlicensed users 
in the TV bands. If so, how should such voluntary standards be 
developed and what should the Commission's role, if any, be in such a 
process to make certain that the standards remain current and support 
innovation?

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    32. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA),\1\ the Commission has prepared this present Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of 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 51 of the 
NPRM. 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\ In addition, the Notice and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will 
be published in the Federal Register.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
    \2\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
    \3\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    33. The NPRM would propose to allow unlicensed devices to operate 
in the TV broadcast bands at locations where spectrum is not being used 
by licensed services. The NPRM would propose to require unlicensed 
devices to incorporate ``smart radio features'' to prevent harmful 
interference from unlicensed devices to licensed services. For the 
purpose of developing interference protection criteria, the NPRM would 
propose to classify unlicensed broadband devices to be used in the TV 
bands into two general functional categories. The first category would 
consist of lower power ``personal/portable'' unlicensed devices, such 
as Wi-Fi like cards in laptop computers or wireless in-home LANs. The 
second category would consist of higher power ``fixed/access'' 
unlicensed devices that are generally operated from

[[Page 34110]]

a fixed location and may be used to provide a commercial service such 
as wireless broadband internet access.
    34. 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 wireless internet service providers (WISPs) are using 
unlicensed devices within wireless networks to serve the needs of 
consumers. WISPs around the country are providing an alternative high-
speed connection in areas where cable or DSL services have been slow to 
arrive. The additional frequency bands where operation is proposed 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. In addition, TV 
frequencies, which are below 900 MHz, have less signal attenuation 
through foliage and walls than frequencies above 900 MHz currently used 
by WISPs, thus affording improved signal coverage.

B. Legal Basis

    35. 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. 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

    36. 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.\4\ 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.\5\ 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).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
    \5\ Id. 601(3).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment 
Manufacturers
    37. 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.\7\ Census Bureau data indicate 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.\8\ 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 at least 
1,150 small manufacturers of radio and television broadcasting and 
wireless communications equipment, and possibly there are more that 
operate with more than 500 but fewer than 750 employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 334220.
    \8\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wireless Service Providers

    38. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for 
wireless firms within the two broad economic census categories of 
``Paging''\9\ and ``Cellular and Other Wireless 
Telecommunications.''\10\ Under both SBA categories, a wireless 
business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census 
category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 1997 show that there were 
1,320 firms in this category, total, that operated for the entire 
year.\11\ Of this total, 1,303 firms had employment of 999 or fewer 
employees, and an additional 17 firms had employment of 1,000 employees 
or more.\12\ Thus, under this category and associated small business 
size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. For the 
census category Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census 
Bureau data for 1997 show that there were 977 firms in this category, 
total, that operated for the entire year.\13\ Of this total, 965 firms 
had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and an additional 12 firms 
had employment of 1,000 employees or more.\14\ Thus, under this second 
category and size standard, the majority of firms can, again, be 
considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 513321 (changed to 517211 in 
October 2002).
    \10\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 513322 (changed to 517212 in 
October 2002).
    \11\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
``Information,'' Table 5, Employment Size of Firms Subject to 
Federal Income Tax: 1997, NAICS code 513321 (issued October 2000).
    \12\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
``Information,'' Table 5, Employment Size of Firms Subject to 
Federal Income Tax: 1997, NAICS code 513321 (issued October 2000). 
The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number 
of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the 
largest category provided is ``Firms with 1000 employees or more.''
    \13\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
``Information,'' Table 5, Employment Size of Firms Subject to 
Federal Income Tax: 1997, NAICS code 513322 (issued October 2000).
    \14\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
``Information,'' Table 5, Employment Size of Firms Subject to 
Federal Income Tax: 1997, NAICS code 513322 (issued October 2000). 
The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number 
of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the 
largest category provided is ``Firms with 1000 employees or more.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    39. Unlicensed transmitters are already required to be authorized 
under the Commission's certification procedure as a prerequisite to 
marketing and importation, and the proposals in this proceeding would 
not change that requirement. There would, however, be several changes 
to the compliance requirements.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See text of NPRM at paragraphs 21, 22, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 
34, 35, 36, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, and 46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    40. Unlicensed transmitters capable of operating in the TV bands 
would have to incorporate features to ensure that they operate on only 
vacant channels. A transmitter used for fixed operation would have to 
incorporate a GPS receiver to determine its location and would have to 
access a database and computational software to determine which TV 
channels are vacant at its location. Alternatively, an unlicensed 
transmitter would not have to incorporate these features if it is 
professionally installed and the installer determines the geographic 
coordinates of the transmitter, determines which TV channels are vacant 
at that location, and adjusts the transmitter to operate on only those 
vacant channels. Portable unlicensed devices would have to be capable 
of receiving a signal from a fixed unlicensed transmitter, or a local 
FM or TV station indicating which TV

[[Page 34111]]

channels are vacant in that area. If the unlicensed device did not 
detect a signal with this channel availability information, or if no 
vacant channels were available at its location, the unlicensed device 
would not be allowed to operate. In addition, any unlicensed 
transmitter used in the TV bands would have to incorporate features to 
prevent unauthorized modifications that could cause it to operate on 
occupied frequencies and therefore cause harmful interference. The 
applicant for certification would have to demonstrate in the 
application that the equipment meets these requirements.

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

    41. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, 
specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in 
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four 
alternatives (among others): ``(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 and 
reporting requirements under the rule for such 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.'' 
\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    42. If the rules proposed in this notice are adopted, we believe 
they might have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities. For an entity that chooses to manufacture or import 
equipment for the subject bands, the rules would impose costs for 
compliance with equipment technical requirements, such as incorporating 
a GPS receiver and database access capabilities into an unlicensed 
device to determine its location and which TV channels are vacant in an 
area, or incorporating an FM or TV receiver to detect the presence of 
channel availability data being transmitted in its area. However, the 
burdens for complying with the proposed rules would be the same for 
both large and small entities. Further, the proposals in this NPRM are 
ultimately beneficial for both large and small entities. We cannot find 
electrical engineering alternatives that would achieve our goals while 
treating small entities differently. Nonetheless, we solicit comment on 
any alternatives commenters may wish to suggest for the purpose of 
facilitating the Commission's intention to minimize the compliance 
burden on smaller entities.

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

    43. None.

Ordering Clauses

    44. Pursuant to sections 4(i), 302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(r) and 307 
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 302, 
303(e), 303(f), 303(r) and 307, this Notice of Proposed Rule Making is 
hereby adopted.
    45. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this notice, 
including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15

    Communications equipment, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 15 as follows:
    1. The authority citation for part 15 continues to read as follows:

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

    2. Section Sec.  15.244 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  15.244  Operation within the bands 76-88 MHz, 174-216 MHz, 470-
608 MHz and 614-698 MHz.

    (a) The fundamental emissions from intentional radiators operated 
under this section shall be confined to one or more contiguous 
television broadcast channels as defined in part 73 of this chapter.
    (b) The maximum conducted output power for fixed devices is 1 watt 
peak. The maximum conducted output power for portable devices is 100 
milliwatts peak.
    (c) If transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 6 dBi 
are used, the peak output power specified in paragraph (b) of this 
section shall be reduced by the amount in dB that the directional gain 
of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi.
    (d) In any 100 kHz bandwidth outside the frequency band in which 
the intentional radiator is operating, the radio frequency power that 
is produced by the intentional radiator shall be at least 20 dB below 
that in the 100 kHz bandwidth within the band that contains the highest 
level of desired power, based on either an RF conducted or radiated 
measurement. Attenuation below the general limits specified in Sec.  
15.209(a) is not required. Radiated emissions that fall outside the TV 
broadcast channel(s) where the device operates must comply with the 
radiated emission limits specified in Sec.  15.209(a).
    (e) An intentional radiator used for fixed operation must comply 
with one of the following paragraphs (e)(1) or (e)(2):
    (1) The intentional radiator shall incorporate a GPS receiver to 
determine the geographic coordinates at its location with an accuracy 
of 10 meters. The intentional radiator shall have the 
capability of accessing a database and computational software to 
determine the TV channels that are vacant at its location. The device 
must have the capability to limit its transmissions to only those 
channels that are identified as unused.
    (2) The intentional radiator must be professionally installed by a 
party that will determine the device's geographic location and the 
available unused TV channels at that location. The installing party 
will configure the device to operate on only unused channels. The 
unlicensed device or its operator must periodically access a channel 
availability database and computational software to ensure that the 
channels on which the device operates remain unused.
    (f) An intentional radiator used for portable operation must be 
capable of receiving a control signal from an unlicensed transmitter, 
or a TV or FM broadcast station indicating the TV channel(s) that are 
vacant within the service area of the unlicensed transmitter, TV or FM 
station. The intentional radiator must transmit only on channels(s) 
that are designated as vacant. The intentional radiator shall not 
operate if no unoccupied frequency band is available within its 
frequency range of operation or if it does not detect any unlicensed 
transmitters, FM or TV broadcast stations transmitting channel 
availability information.
    (g)(1) An intentional radiator must protect TV stations from 
harmful interference within the following service contours.

[[Page 34112]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Protected contour
                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------
             Type of station                                              Contour
                                                      Channel              (dBu)          Propagation curve
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analog TV................................  Low VHF (2-6)...............         47  F(50,50)
                                           High VHF (7-13).............         56  F(50,50)
                                           UHF (14-69).................         64  F(50,50)
Analog Class A, LPTV, translator and       Low VHF (2-6)...............         62  F(50,50)
 booster.
                                           High VHF (7-13).............         68  F(50,50)
                                           UHF (14-69).................         74  F(50,50)
Digital TV...............................  Low VHF (2-6)...............         28  F(50,90)
                                           High VHF (7-13).............         36  F(50,90)
                                           UHF (14-51).................         41  F(50,90)
Digital Class A..........................  Low VHF (2-6)...............         43  F(50,90)
                                           High VHF (7-13).............         48  F(50,90)
                                           UHF (14-51).................         51  F(50,90)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) A TV channel will be considered vacant for use by an 
intentional radiator operating under the provisions of this section if 
the following desired-to-undesired (D/U) signal ratios between co-
channel and adjacent channel TV stations and the intentional radiator 
are met at all points within the service area of the unlicensed 
transmitter, TV or FM broadcast station that transmits channel 
availability information.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Protection ratios
                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------
             Type of station                                             D/U ratio
                                                Channel separation          (dB)          Propagation curve
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analog TV, Class A, LPTV, translator and   Co-channel..................         34  F(50,10)
 booster.
                                           Upper adjacent..............        -17  F(50,50)
                                           Lower adjacent..............        -14  F(50,50)
Digital TV and Class A...................  Co-channel..................         23  F(50,10)
                                           Upper adjacent..............        -26  F(50,50)
                                           Lower adjacent..............        -28  F(50,50)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (h) Operation is not permitted within the service contours of co-
channel stations. Portable devices are not required to comply with the 
D/U ratios for TV stations operating on adjacent channels. Fixed 
devices are not required to comply with the adjacent channel D/U ratios 
between channels 4 and 5, channels 6 and 7, and channels 13 and 14 
because of the frequency separations that exist between those channels. 
For adjacent channel operation within the protected service contour of 
a television station, calculation of desired signal levels shall be 
based on FCC F(90,90) curves or the protected contour field strength 
value, whichever is higher. For unlicensed operation outside the 
protected contour of a television station, calculations of television 
(desired) signal levels would be based on the FCC F(50,50) curves. 
Calculations of unlicensed (undesired) signal levels would be based on 
the FCC F(50,50) curves or other appropriate models.
    (i) Operation on a TV channel shared with the PLMRS or CMRS is 
permitted only if every point in the reception area of an unlicensed 
transmitter, or a TV or FM station that transmits channel availability 
information is separated by the following distances from the of the 
center coordinates of the metropolitan areas where shared operation is 
permitted: 134 kilometers for co-channel operation and 131 kilometers 
for adjacent channel operation.
    (j) Operation of fixed devices under the provisions of this section 
is not permitted on VHF channels within 32 kilometers of the border 
with Mexico, on UHF channels within 40 kilometers of the border with 
Mexico, or on either VHF or UHF channels within 60 kilometers of the 
border with Canada.
    (k) Devices operating under the provisions of this section shall be 
equipped with a means to automatically and periodically transmit a 
unique identification signal. Devices must not be equipped with any 
controls accessible to any party, other than a professional installer, 
that allow selection of the transmit channel or output power. Devices 
must include features to ensure that only the software that was 
approved with a device can be loaded into a device, and the software 
may not allow the user to operate the device with parameters outside 
those that were approved. ``Software'' in this context includes the 
software that selects a device's operating frequency, software used in 
determining a device's geographic location or identifying TV channels 
that are vacant, and to the information in the database accessed by a 
device. Devices must incorporate a means to detect whether tampering 
with the hardware or software has occurred and must not operate if 
tampering is detected. The application for certification must describe 
how the device complies with these requirements.

[FR Doc. 04-13573 Filed 6-17-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P