[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 82 (Monday, April 29, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25138-25176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08528]



[[Page 25137]]

Vol. 78

Monday,

No. 82

April 29, 2013

Part II





Federal Communications Commission





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





47 CFR Parts 0, 1, 2, et al.





Radio Experimentation and Market Trials--Streamlining Rules; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 78 , No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 25138]]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 0, 1, 2, 5, 22, 73, 74, 80, 87, 90 and 101

[ET Docket No. 10-236 and 06-155; FCC 13-15]


Radio Experimentation and Market Trials--Streamlining Rules

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document revises and streamlines the Commission rules to 
modernize the Experimental Radio Service (ERS). The rules adopted in 
the Report and Order updates the ERS to a more flexible framework to 
keep pace with the speed of modern technological change while 
continuing to provide an environment where creativity can thrive. To 
accomplish this transition, the Commission created three new types of 
ERS licenses--the program license, the medical testing license, and the 
compliance testing license--to benefit the development of new 
technologies, expedite their introduction to the marketplace, and 
unleash the full power of innovators to keep the United States at the 
forefront of the communications industry. The Commission's actions also 
modify the market trial rules to eliminate confusion and more clearly 
articulate its policies with respect to marketing products prior to 
equipment certification. The Commission believes that these actions 
will remove regulatory barriers to experimentation, thereby permitting 
institutions to move from concept to experimentation to finished 
product more rapidly and to more quickly implement creative problem-
solving methodologies.

DATES: Effective May 29, 2013, except Sec. Sec.  2.803(c)(2), 5.59, 
5.61, 5.63, 5.64, 5.65, 5.73, 5.79, 5.81, 5.107, 5.115, 5.121, 5.123, 
5.205, 5.207, 5.217(b), 5.307, 5.308, 5.309, 5.311, 5.404, 5.405, 
5.406, 5.504, and 5.602. These rules contain new or modified 
information collection requirements that require approval by the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 
and will become effective after the Commission publishes a document in 
the Federal Register announcing the approval and effective date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rodney Small, Office of Engineering 
and Technology, 202-418-2452, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order, ET Docket No. 10-236 and 06-155, FCC 13-15, adopted January 
31, 2013, and released January 31, 2013. 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. People 
with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible formats for 
people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio 
format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 
(tty).

Summary of Report and Order

    1. In November 2010, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM) in this proceeding to implement Recommendations 5.14 
and 7.7 of the National Broadband Plan. In that NPRM, the Commission 
also sought comment on several proposed changes to the Experimental 
Radio Service rules to provide additional flexibility to innovators, so 
that they can more quickly transform their ideas to fully functional 
new products and services that meet consumer needs. Specifically, the 
Commission proposed to create a new program experimental license to 
provide greater flexibility than the conventional experimental license 
to allow experimenters to alter the course of their tests, if needed, 
without having to request specific permission from the Commission. It 
targeted this proposal at specific sectors of the communications 
ecosystem, including universities and non-profit research organizations 
and medical institutions. It also proposed to eliminate the almost 
unused developmental license, consolidate all experimental rules 
including broadcast experimental rules in parts 73 and 74 into part 5, 
clarify the market trial rules, and make targeted rule changes aimed at 
providing additional flexibility and clarity of its rules.
    2. In the Report and Order (R&O) the Commission revises and 
streamlines its rules to modernize the ERS. The rules adopted in the 
R&O update the ERS to a more flexible framework to keep pace with the 
speed of modern technological change while continuing to provide an 
environment where creativity can thrive. To accomplish this transition, 
the Commission creates three new types of ERS licenses--the program 
license, the medical testing license, and the compliance testing 
license--to benefit the development of new technologies, expedite their 
introduction to the marketplace, and unleash the full power of 
innovators to keep the United States at the forefront of the 
communications industry. The Commission's actions also modify the 
market trial rules to eliminate confusion and more clearly articulate 
its policies with respect to marketing products prior to equipment 
certification. The Commission believes that these actions will remove 
regulatory barriers to experimentation, thereby permitting institutions 
to move from concept to experimentation to finished product more 
rapidly and to more quickly implement creative problem-solving 
methodologies.
    3. The Report and Order takes the following actions:
     Consolidates rules for broadcasting experiments into a new 
subpart within part 5 and eliminates developmental licensing rules in 
several Commission rules parts so that all experimental authority will 
be under the part 5 ERS Rules, providing clear and consistent 
guidelines to applicants for all types of experimentation.
     Establishes program experimental licenses for colleges and 
universities with an accredited graduate research program in 
engineering, research laboratories, manufacturers of radio frequency 
(RF) equipment, manufacturers that integrate radio frequency equipment 
into their end products and health care institutions to allow broad 
experimental authority under a single license.
     Creates a Commission Web site where program licensees will 
register individual experiments to be conducted under a program license 
at least ten days prior to commencing the experiment.
     Requires that each program licensee post on the Commission 
Web site a report for each individual experiment completed, including a 
description of its results.
     Establishes a compliance testing license, which will be 
available to Commission-recognized testing laboratories that test radio 
frequency devices for certification purposes.
     Establishes a medical testing license to permit health 
care facilities to undertake clinical trials of cutting-edge wireless 
medical technologies.
     Establishes a process whereby the Commission can specify 
innovation zones where program licensees may operate in addition to 
their authorized area of operations.

[[Page 25139]]

     Broadens opportunities for market trials by adopting a new 
subpart within the ERS rules that contains provisions for product 
developmental trials, as well as market trials, and modifies the rules 
to clarify when operation or marketing of radio frequency devices is 
permitted prior to equipment certification, including the number of 
devices that can be imported for such purposes.
     Makes other targeted changes to the Commission's 
experimental rules and procedures.

A. Streamlining the Commission's Rules for Experimentation

    4. In the NPRM, the Commission noted that one goal of this 
proceeding was to examine the experimental rules, as well as associated 
developmental rules in various services, to reduce duplicative and 
confusing requirements. To that end, the Commission observed that 
licenses suitable for performing experimentation and development of new 
innovative products and services are scattered among various rule 
sections. Most notably, the Commission observed that it offers options 
for obtaining either an experimental license or a developmental license 
for entities that are developing new technology or promoting advances 
in existing technology. It further observed that the developmental 
licensing rules appear to be largely duplicative of the ERS rules, and 
that the vast majority of applicants apply for experimental licenses 
under part 5, rather than for developmental licenses under other rule 
parts. In addition, the NPRM noted that experimental licenses are 
available not only under part 5, but also under parts 73 and 74, in 
cases in which the experiment involves broadcast technology. The 
Commission observed that many of the rules covering broadcast and non-
broadcast experimental licenses, as well as developmental licenses, are 
duplicative and often lead to confusion among would-be innovators. It 
envisioned a single ``one stop shop'' in part 5 of its rules to make 
its experimental processes easier to understand, allow it to eliminate 
duplicative provisions, and ultimately encourage greater 
experimentation.
    5. To achieve these goals, the Commission proposed to eliminate the 
developmental rules and evaluate all future applications seeking any 
form of experimental or developmental authority under a consolidated 
part 5, with the relevant portions of the existing experimental 
broadcasting rules that are now in parts 73 and 74 moved to part 5. In 
short, the Commission proposed a new framework wherein all experimental 
applications would be evaluated under either broadcast experimental 
rules or non-broadcast experimental rules. It stated its belief that 
eliminating developmental licenses in favor of experimental licenses 
would have little or no impact, as experimental rules are either 
similar or less burdensome. It also observed that there are very few 
currently active developmental licenses. The Commission concluded that 
its proposals would provide clear and consistent guidelines to all 
parties seeking to experiment and innovate, leading to increased 
opportunities for experimentation.
    6. In addition to the broad proposals, the Commission made 
proposals regarding three specific developmental licensing issues. 
First, because broadcast experiments pursuant to parts 73 and 74 of its 
rules rely heavily on broadcasting-specific engineering and licensing 
knowledge, and are typically designed to support the operations of 
existing broadcasters, it did not propose to alter these processes, the 
ways these applications are filed or evaluated by the Commission's 
Media Bureau, or otherwise disturb existing practice. Instead, the 
Commission simply proposed to create a new subpart within part 5 into 
which it would move the relevant portions of the existing rules that 
are now in parts 73 and 74. It noted that this consolidation would 
remove duplicative or unneeded language and provide clearer guidance 
than is available today regarding when an applicant should file for a 
broadcast experimental license--as opposed to a more general ERS 
license--while retaining the necessary distinctions for broadcast-
specific experimentation. Further, the Commission noted that, in 
consolidating the parts 73 and 74 rules into part 5, it did not intend 
to propose any change to the Section 106 historic preservation review 
applicable to broadcast experimental radio stations authorized by the 
Commission. Additionally, the Commission proposed to cancel all 
existing developmental licenses and reissue them as experimental 
licenses under the part 5 rules. Finally, the Commission noted that the 
rules for private radio meteor burst communications in Sec.  90.250 
require that new authorizations be issued subject to the developmental 
grant procedure, and that an application for issuance of a permanent 
authorization must be filed prior to the expiration of the 
developmental authorization. Therefore, it proposed to retain the 
existing rule, simply substituting the developmental license 
requirement with a requirement to instead obtain an experimental 
license to satisfy the existing ``pre-license'' requirement.
    7. Decision. The Commission's proposal to consolidate all of its 
experimental and developmental rules into part 5 received widespread 
support, and the Commission finds that adopting that proposal will 
promote greater experimentation and efficiency, thus providing a 
significant benefit at little or no cost to the public. The current 
rule structure involves experimental and developmental operations 
scattered across ten rule parts with varying policies and eligibility 
requirements. To remove the confusion among license applicants caused 
by the varying rules, the Commission consolidates its developmental 
rules from various rule parts and its experimental rules from parts 5, 
73, and 74 into a consolidated part 5. The Commission is retaining all 
necessary distinctions for broadcast-specific experimentation in the 
revised rules.
    8. The Commission also adopts the NPRM's proposal to convert the 
few existing developmental licenses to experimental licenses. It will 
cancel developmental licenses and reissue them as part 5 experimental 
licenses with the same technical parameters that they currently enjoy. 
In addition, these licenses will be freed from the specific 
developmental rules to which they must now adhere, and instead will 
follow the ERS Rules. Further, because the Commission did not receive 
any comments opposing the proposal for handling meteor burst 
communication systems under Sec.  90.250 and it is in the public 
interest to do so, it adopts the NPRM's proposal to require applicants 
for these systems to first obtain and operate under an experimental 
license prior to applying for a permanent meteor burst communication 
system under part 90 licensing requirements.
    9. Regarding CTIA's recommendation that the Commission provides 
streamlined processing for transfers of control and assignment 
applications involving experimental licenses, the Commission observes 
that these transactions already generally occur on an expeditious basis 
and it sees no reason to alter its existing processes. In cases where 
there may be a long lag time between application filing and grant of a 
transfer of control, the Commission notes that many of these 
experimental transactions are components in a much larger transaction 
such as a merger involving licenses from many Commission licensing 
systems. In these cases, the experimental license transfer of control 
cannot be granted until the

[[Page 25140]]

Commission issues a decision on the larger transaction. Once that 
occurs, the experimental license transfer of control generally occurs 
very quickly, often within one day. The Commission will continue to 
handle these types of transactions on a case-by-case basis.
    10. Similarly, regarding Lockheed Martin's recommendation that the 
Commission removes experimental licensing requirements in areas where 
there is negligible risk of harmful interference and omit unnecessary 
restrictions on experimental license operations, the Commission 
believes that the actions in the R&O providing for new program 
experimental licenses will serve Lockheed Martin's stated 
recommendation to streamline the Commission's rules. In addition, the 
Commission takes many additional actions in the R&O based on specific 
comments to further streamline, simplify, and clarify the experimental 
licensing process.

B. Program Experimental Radio Licenses

    11. In the NPRM, the Commission noted that research institutions 
already use its experimental licensing program to deliver impressive 
results, but that its existing experimental rules are not always nimble 
enough to account for the speed of today's technological development. 
Currently, the rules allow for an experimenter to apply for a 
conventional experimental license to cover a single or several closely 
related experiments for 2-5-year periods with options for renewals for 
up to 5 years. Any qualified company or individual, including students, 
may apply for a license, and experiments cannot begin until the 
Commission grants the license. These conventional experimental licenses 
are characterized by a narrowly defined purpose and specific 
limitations on frequencies, emissions, and power levels. If, during the 
course of experimentation, a licensee determines that it would be 
better served by conducting experiments using parameters that would 
differ from what was authorized, the licensee must often request a 
modified or new license before exploring a new line of experimentation. 
This process can delay the introduction of new technologies into the 
marketplace and may prevent the American public from expeditiously 
taking advantage of technological advances.
    12. In pursuit of a process that could keep pace with innovation, 
the Commission proposed in the NPRM to establish a new type of 
experimental license--a program license--under which qualified 
institutions would be permitted to conduct an ongoing program of 
research and experimentation under a single experimental authorization 
for a five-year period on a non-interference basis without having to 
obtain prior authorization for each distinct experiment or series of 
unrelated experiments. The Commission's intent was to allow 
experimentation with limited constraints, and it proposed few 
requirements for these program licenses beyond a provision for public 
notice prior to each experiment and an obligation to report results at 
the conclusion of each experiment. Its proposal was designed to 
establish a balance that allows organizations the greatest level of 
flexibility to experiment--particularly in high-value frequency bands 
that may host the newest generation of consumer devices and 
applications--in order to unlock enormous economic and social benefits, 
while respecting the fundamental principle that experiments must be 
designed to avoid harmful interference to existing services.
    13. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to establish three 
different types of program licenses and further proposed that 
eligibility for each would require applicants to demonstrate basic 
expertise in radio management. First, it proposed a research program 
experimental radio license under which colleges, universities, and non-
profit research organizations would be permitted to use a broad range 
of radio frequencies for research and experimentation. It proposed to 
restrict the research program experimental license to Accreditation 
Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) colleges or universities 
with graduate research programs or existing industry partnerships and a 
defined geographic location, or to nationally recognized non-profit 
research laboratories with a defined geographic location. The 
Commission reasoned that these institutions typically have a record of 
generating the types of innovations and technological breakthroughs 
that it seeks to foster, and argued that this new license option would 
provide more flexibility to accelerate the rate of these innovations. 
It proposed to restrict all research experiments to the grounds of the 
license holder's location and to require that licensees have 
institutional processes to monitor and effectively manage a wide 
variety of research projects.
    14. Second, the Commission proposed to establish a medical program 
experimental radio license, available to hospitals and other health 
care institutions, to expedite the process by which medical equipment 
is approved under its equipment authorization procedures, eliminate the 
need to obtain multiple experimental licenses, and encourage the 
creation of test-beds for medical device innovation. It proposed that 
this license would be limited to experiments for therapeutic and 
diagnostic medical equipment designed to comply with the Commission's 
Rules for such equipment. It noted that the Food and Drug 
Administration's (FDA) investigational device exemption (IDE) may be 
applicable when these experiments involve patients. In this regard, the 
Commission noted that the FDA in consultation with the Commission is 
exploring approaches to streamline IDEs for wireless medical devices, 
when an IDE is required. The Commission proposed that the medical 
program experimental license be supervised by it, in consultation with 
the FDA, to ensure that patient safety is considered, and noted that 
the new program is not intended to replace the FDA's existing oversight 
and review programs.
    15. Finally, the Commission proposed an innovation zone 
experimental radio license to provide greater opportunities for testing 
and experimentation in specified geographic locations with pre-
authorized boundary conditions. It envisioned that such zones, which 
could include isolated or protected areas, could become havens for 
enterprise and innovation because they would permit experimenters to 
explore a variety of technologies with reduced barriers to entry. Its 
proposal to establish an innovation zone program license was intended 
to complement its research program license proposal by making a 
carefully restricted set of locations available to foster robust 
wireless engineering experimentation and development, but with 
different eligibility and use restrictions. Specifically, the 
Commission's proposal stated that innovation zone licensees did not 
necessarily have to be associated with a college, university, or 
nonprofit research organization. The Commission further proposed to 
permit operations over large areas that are available for use by 
multiple parties, and proposed to prohibit use by a single entity at an 
exclusive-use facility (such as within the grounds of a large 
manufacturer's plant).
    16. Decision. The Commission finds that adding rules for a program 
experimental license will augment the existing experimental radio 
license program by affording new options for experimentation that will 
reduce regulatory delay and uncertainty and promote innovation. The 
Commission will continue to issue conventional

[[Page 25141]]

experimental licenses under existing rules, but it also will have the 
ability to authorize ongoing experimentation and research for qualified 
applicants under a program license.
    17. The Commission adopts rules for program licenses that differ 
somewhat from the proposals in the NPRM based on comments to the NPRM 
and our further evaluation. As an initial matter, the Commission 
reduces the categories of program licenses from research, medical, and 
innovation zones to a single category encompassing all program 
experimental radio licenses. The rules that it adopts incorporate, to a 
large extent, the proposals for research and medical program licenses, 
but not the proposal for the innovation zone program license. The 
Commission believes, upon further reflection, that distinguishing 
separate licenses for general research and medical research is 
unnecessary. Instead, the Commission creates a single program 
experimental license to encompass all basic research and 
experimentation. Thus, basic medical research and experimentation 
conducted by a hospital or health care institution that does not 
involve ``clinical trials'' will be covered by the program experimental 
license, and the Commission creates a separate medical testing license 
for those experiments that do involve clinical trials. Mayo Clinic's 
comments highlight the fact that there are two types of medical 
experiments--those involving basic research and those involving real-
world patient testing. Moreover, medical experiments that involve 
patient testing generally require FDA participation. Thus, the 
Commission finds it more logical and administratively convenient to 
treat basic medical device research experiments under the program 
experimental license. The Commission does not believe that the issuance 
of further guidelines about the Commission's and FDA's respective roles 
in the application, review, and approval processes should serve as a 
precondition to or otherwise keep us from adopting the proposed rules. 
The Commission has an ongoing coordination process in place with FDA 
regarding medical radiocommunication device matters, and will continue 
its practice of releasing advice and information as it becomes 
available. Licensees seeking to test medical devices who have specific 
questions about the respective roles of the Commission and FDA 
regarding a planned course of experimentation should continue to raise 
these matters directly with staff at the respective agencies.
    18. The basic framework for a program license differs from a 
conventional license in several significant ways. A program license 
will permit innovators to conduct any number of unrelated experiments 
at defined geographic locations under the licensee's control. Licensees 
will be able to conduct experiments within a broad range of 
frequencies, emissions and power levels to support ongoing research. 
These licenses will be issued for a 5-year term and may be renewed for 
additional 5-year periods. Eligibility will be limited to certain 
categories of researchers. Licensees will be required to provide public 
notice of individual experiments before they are initiated and the 
results of those experiments after they are concluded. With limited 
exceptions, experimentation will not be permitted in restricted 
frequency bands. The Commission discusses all of the requirements for 
program licenses in detail in the R&O.
    19. The Commission believes that a program license will provide a 
more efficient way for many qualified institutions to conduct cutting-
edge research and experimentation and accelerate innovation in RF 
technology to more quickly transform ideas into important new consumer 
products and services. The new license will offer experimenters a wide 
range of flexibility to design their experiments and to change course 
with respect to frequencies, emissions, and power--subject to certain 
limitations--as experimenters conduct their research. The Commission 
believes that establishing such a license will more closely align its 
rules with the iterative nature of the learning and discovery process 
that occurs in laboratories today. Further, the Commission notes that 
this addition to its experimental licensing program will more closely 
align it with other licensing regimes within the Commission that have 
moved to a more flexible structure. Experimenters taking advantage of 
this new option will now be free to follow their research wherever it 
leads (subject to the basic tenets of the overall experimental license 
framework, such as not causing harmful interference and operating 
within the scope of the authorization). This should substantially 
reduce how often they need to engage the Commission to seek permission 
to make changes to a preconceived course of experimentation.
    20. The Commission emphasizes that this new license will build on 
its existing experimental license structure, rather than replace it. As 
with existing experimental licenses, the Commission may, at its 
discretion, place special conditions on program experimental licenses 
to ensure that a licensee conducts it experimental program in a manner 
that ensures that no harmful interference is caused to existing 
licensees and Federal Government operations as authorized by the 
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). The 
Commission could, for example, require that experiments be restricted 
to a specified portion of the program licensee's research campus or 
conducted during specified hours; require additional coordination for 
experiments that exceed a certain power level, operate outdoors, or 
operate on a specific frequency band; or impose additional notification 
requirements for the first set of experiments that a new licensee 
conducts under its program experimental license. The Commission 
emphasizes that such conditions, when imposed, will be narrowly 
tailored to address specific potential concerns it identifies and that 
a program experimental licensee will be afforded the freedom to design 
and conduct a wide range of experiments under the terms of its license.
    21. Individuals and institutions that do not qualify for our new 
program experimental licenses may still apply for conventional 
experimental licenses. Additionally, institutions that do qualify may 
nonetheless choose to apply for conventional experimental licenses in 
certain instances--such as when the particular experiment that they 
wish to undertake is not permitted under the program experimental 
license rules. The Commission finds that by providing both conventional 
experimental license and program experimental license opportunities, it 
will provide greater flexibility to experimenters and promote greater 
levels of experimentation that will serve the public interest by 
spurring innovation, creating new products and services, and ultimately 
leading to the creation of new jobs. Further, the Commission finds that 
under the program license, licensees conducting consecutive experiments 
will accrue cost savings by filing fewer applications and having the 
ability to begin their experiments in a timelier manner. Thus, the 
Commission finds that for these licensees the program license will be 
more efficient than obtaining multiple conventional licenses. These 
efficiencies should also result in faster service for the remaining 
conventional license applicants. Accordingly creating a new program 
experimental license provides significant public benefits at little or 
no

[[Page 25142]]

cost, and so the Commission adopts that proposal, as modified. As 
proposed, the rules for this new license will be contained in a new 
subpart E within part 5 of the Commission's rules.
    22. Under the rules the Commission adopts, conventional 
experimental licenses and program experimental licenses will co-exist 
under its general experimental licensing framework. The Commission 
observes that experimental radio licenses do not convey any exclusive 
spectrum rights, and often different conventional experimental 
licensees have conducted experiments in the same general area on a non-
interference basis. If an interference problem is anticipated between 
an existing conventional experimental licensee and a new program 
experimental licensee, the Commission sees no reason why this cannot be 
resolved by the parties, just as is the case at present between two 
conventional experimental licensees.
    23. Research institutions have made important discoveries via the 
Commission's existing experimental licensing program, and it foresees 
even greater potential under our new license. The Commission concludes 
that a research program experimental license has significant potential 
to advance the state-of-the-art in communications research and applied 
development, including medical research, thus enhancing economic and 
social welfare. However, upon consideration of the record in this 
proceeding and further reflection regarding the fundamental nature of 
the research program license, the Commission makes certain 
modifications to the proposal to better align the final rules to expand 
eligibility and the types of experimentation that will be encompassed.
1. Eligibility
    24. Based on the record and the Commission's decision to define a 
program license as one that supports all types of basic RF research, 
including medical research, the Commission concludes that it is 
appropriate to expand the scope of eligibility for program experimental 
licenses beyond what was proposed in the NPRM. Thus, program 
experimental licenses may be granted to the following qualified 
entities: A college or university with a graduate research program in 
engineering that is accredited by ABET; a research laboratory; a 
hospital or health care institution; a manufacturer of radio frequency 
equipment; or a manufacturer that integrates RF equipment into its end 
products. This expanded eligibility will permit enhanced public 
benefits by significantly expanding the scope of RF research with no 
public costs.
    25. The Commission emphasizes that under the eligibility rules it 
is adopting, it will limit program experimental licensees to those 
entities that have demonstrated experience with RF technology (or have 
partnered with an entity possessing the requisite expertise) and have 
defined geographic areas. By so doing, program experiments will be 
unlikely to cause harmful interference to incumbent spectrum licensees, 
but if that should inadvertently occur, the experimenter will be able 
to quickly remedy it. To ensure that this condition is met, the 
Commission will require each applicant for a program license to 
accompany its application with an explanation of how its staff 
possesses the expertise with RF technology and to so certify in its 
application.
    26. The Commission finds it unnecessary to require a pilot program 
before making experimental program licenses widely available. The 
certification requirements that it is imposing are an appropriate 
method for ensuring that program licensees do not cause harmful 
interference to service licensees. The Commission has used similar 
application certifications in the past to ensure compliance with 
certain requirements, and it concludes that this approach is suitable 
here. In this regard, the Commission notes that the Communications Act 
provides for the Commission to impose penalties, including fines, 
license revocation, and preclusion from obtaining future Commission 
licenses on applicants who willfully provide false statements on 
application forms.
    27. Applicants for program experimental licenses must apply on FCC 
Form 442 (``Application For New or Modified Radio Station Authorization 
Under part 5 Of FCC Rules--Experimental Radio Service (Other Than 
Broadcast)''). The Commission is revising this form to include not only 
conventional experimental licenses, but also program experimental 
licenses, medical testing experimental licenses, and compliance testing 
experimental licenses. Each applicant for a program experimental 
license must specify how it meets the eligibility requirements for such 
a license, a certification of RF expertise or partnership with another 
entity possessing such expertise, the purpose of its proposed 
experimental program, and whether its research program includes federal 
frequencies, Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) frequencies, public 
safety frequencies, or medical testing. The Commission notes that 
program experimental licenses may not be transferred without its 
approval. Additionally, applications must specify, and the Commission 
will grant authorizations for, a geographic area that is inclusive of 
an institution's real-property facilities where the experimentation 
will be conducted and that is under the applicant's control. If an 
applicant needs to conduct experiments in more than one defined 
geographic area, it must apply for a license for each location. The 
Commission concludes that because interference issues are unique to 
each area, the limitation on the geographic scope of a program 
experimental license provides an appropriate way for the Commission to 
take these factors into account within the licensing process.
    28. The Commission believes that this approach is well tailored for 
the experimental program license concept. Unlike a conventional 
experimental license application, which can be filed by any party and 
is subject to case-by-case analysis, a test planned under the authority 
of a program license will be conducted by a licensee whose 
qualifications have already been reviewed by the Commission. This 
entity will have already committed to design and conduct experimental 
testing in a way that will not cause harmful interference.
2. General License Requirements
    29. In the NPRM, the Commission made a number of proposals relating 
to operating parameters of program experimental licenses. Many of those 
proposals followed directly from requirements already in place for 
conventional experimental licenses. First, the Commission proposed 
that: (1) Program licenses be granted for five year, renewable terms; 
(2) the Commission has the authority to prohibit or require 
modification of specific experiments at any time without notice or 
hearing, if in its discretion the need for such action arises; and (3) 
all experiments must be conducted on a non-interference basis to 
primary and secondary licensees, and that the licensee must take all 
necessary technical and operational steps to avoid harmful interference 
to authorized services. Commenters strongly supported all of these 
proposals, and the Commission adopts them.
    30. Additionally, the Commission proposed that within 30 days after 
completion of each experiment, the licensee must file a narrative 
statement describing its results, including any interference incidents 
and steps taken to resolve them. It further proposed that, before 
conducting tests, a licensee must evaluate the propagation 
characteristics

[[Page 25143]]

of the frequencies to be used in individual experiments, the 
operational nature of the services normally operating on those and 
nearby frequencies, and the specific operations listed within the 
Commission's licensing databases. The Commission noted that online 
tools, such as its General Menu Reports system, which allows users to 
search many different Commission licensing databases from one place, 
could facilitate these tasks. Moreover, it proposed that experiments be 
designed to use the minimum power necessary and be restricted to the 
smallest practicable area needed to accomplish the experiment's goals, 
e.g., an individual laboratory, specific building, or designated 
portion of a campus. The Commission observed that experimenters may 
also choose to reduce the frequencies used, restrict the time of use, 
limit the duration of tests, or employ other means to address potential 
interference concerns. Finally, the Commission proposed to require that 
all experiments comply with its existing experimental rules involving 
matters such as protected geographic areas and antenna structure 
placement. All of these proposals found support in the record, and the 
Commission also adopts them.
    31. In the NPRM, the Commission noted that its existing 
experimental licensing rules require a licensee to transmit the 
licensee's assigned call sign unless that call sign has been 
specifically exempted by the terms of the licensee's station 
authorization. The Commission therefore proposed to require that tests 
conducted under the authority of a research license either transmit 
station identification as part of the broadcast or provide detailed 
testing information (such as starting time and duration) via a web-
based reporting portal, and proposed to require the communication of 
information that is sufficient to identify the license holder and the 
geographic coordinates of the station. As stated in the NPRM, this 
requirement is important for mitigating interference, should an 
authorized service licensee receive any. Regarding this proposal, 
commenters expressed concern only regarding patient confidentiality for 
experiments involving medical equipment and patients. The Commission 
concludes that the proposal to require station identification or 
testing disclosure is sufficiently flexible to accommodate patient 
confidentiality. In most cases, the testing information that must be 
disclosed--parameters like starting time and duration--would not 
implicate patient confidential information, and geographic information 
would likely identify a healthcare facility's campus broadly as opposed 
to a specific individual's location. As such, the Commission adopts its 
proposal to require that tests conducted under the authority of a 
research license either transmit station identification as part of the 
broadcast or provide detailed testing information on the Commission's 
program experimental registration Web site. To the extent that a 
research program licensee believes that a particular test scenario 
creates a conflict between the requirement to provide detailed testing 
information and the necessity to protect patient confidential 
information, the Commission encourages the licensee to first discuss 
the matter with Commission staff and the U.S. Department of Health and 
Human Services. If the licensee concludes that the information it must 
disclose would jeopardize the confidentiality of patient information, 
the licensee should then consider pursuing that particular test under 
the Commission's conventional experimental licensing procedures. The 
Commission finds that its general program experimental rules will 
provide a public benefit at minimal cost by ensuring that program 
experiments can be undertaken on a non-interference basis to incumbent 
operations, while protecting the confidentiality of medical 
information.
3. Operating Frequencies and Additional Requirements Related to Safety 
of the Public
    32. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed that program experimental 
licensees be permitted to operate in any frequency band, except in 
bands exclusively allocated to passive services (as are conventional 
experimental licensees) or in certain restricted bands. More 
specifically, it proposed that program licensees--unlike conventional 
experimental licensees--would not be permitted to operate on the 
restricted band frequencies that are listed in Sec.  15.205(a) of the 
Commission's rules, except that they would be permitted to operate in 
frequency bands above 38.6 GHz unless they are listed in footnote US246 
of the Table of Frequency Allocations. Except for these restrictions, 
the Commission proposed that program licensees be permitted to conduct 
experiments on all other frequencies, as are conventional licensees, 
and thus have access to the largest range of frequencies practical to 
enable a broad range of experimentation. However, for experiments that 
may affect bands used for the provision of commercial mobile services, 
emergency notifications, or public safety purposes, the Commission 
proposed that the program experimental radio licensee develop a 
specific plan to avoid interference to these bands, prior to commencing 
operation, including providing:
    (a) Notice to parties, including other Commission licensees and end 
users, who might be affected by the experiment;
    (b) provisions for the quick identification and elimination of any 
harm the experiment may cause; and
    (c) an alternate means for accomplishing potentially affected vital 
public safety functions during the experiment.
    33. The Commissions proposed applying these provisions to all 
experiments that implicate these critical service bands (i.e. bands 
used for the provision of commercial mobile services, emergency 
notifications, or public safety purposes), and that they would be in 
addition to the notification requirements that apply to all program 
experimental licenses.
    34. Decision. As proposed, the rules that the Commission adopted 
will provide authority for program licensees to operate on most bands, 
but not on specific public safety and passive frequency bands. Parties 
interested in conducting experiments on these restricted frequency 
bands must apply for a traditional conventional experimental license 
and provide the required showing.
    35. Regarding appeals for additional flexibility by allowing 
experiments in the restricted bands at very low power with proper site 
selection, the Commission does not believe that such a deviation from 
our proposal is warranted nor is there sufficient evidence to support 
allowing such experimentation under a program license at this time. 
Many of the operations in these bands are Federal and must be 
coordinated with NTIA through its Interdepartment Radio Advisory 
Committee. The Commission notes that it is not foreclosing experiments 
of the nature suggested, rather they can be accomplished using the 
current process of obtaining a conventional experimental license.
    36. Regarding operation on other frequencies, including the bands 
used for critical services described in the NPRM, the Commission 
concurs that in general, program experiments can safely be performed in 
these bands, provided that a specific plan is developed to ensure no 
disruption to those services. The Commission appreciates the concern 
expressed by various licensees, but reiterates that harmful 
interference

[[Page 25144]]

caused by program license experiments to any licensed services is 
unacceptable and will not be countenanced.
    37. For program license experiments that may affect critical 
service bands (i.e. bands used for the provision of commercial mobile 
services, emergency notifications, or public safety purposes), the 
Commission adopts its proposal that the program licensee must develop a 
specific plan to avoid harmful interference to operations in these 
bands. For purposes of this requirement, the Commission notes that 
there are many current bands, as well as bands that may be designated 
in the future used for the provision of various commercial mobile 
services (including broadband) including, for example--the Cellular 
Radio Service, Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) service, broadband 
Personal Communications Service (PCS), Advanced Wireless Service (AWS), 
700 MHz band, Broadband Radio Service (BRS)/Educational Broadband 
Service (EBS), and Wireless Communications Service in the 2.3 GHz band. 
That plan must be developed by the program licensee prior to commencing 
an experiment, and provide notice to licensees and, as appropriate, to 
end users of the critical service bands who could potentially be 
affected by the experiment describing how the program licensee intends 
to quickly identify and eliminate any harm that the experiment may 
cause. If the experiment may potentially impact safety of the public, 
the program licensee must specify how potentially affected public 
safety functions will be provided during the duration of the 
experiment. The Commission is also requiring that, for these 
experiments, licensees supplement their web-based notifications 
described in Section III.B.4., of the R&O, to include a list of the 
critical service licensees that operate in the affected bands in the 
geographic vicinity of the planned experiment. Doing so will serve as 
an effective check that the program experimental licensee has conducted 
sufficient research to meet the requirement that it has contacted all 
critical service licensees who might be affected by the experiment, and 
will aid us in evaluating whether the licensee is conducting its 
activities with the high level of rigor and diligence that the 
Commission demands under the program experimental license program.
    38. The Commission also concludes that it is not in the public 
interest to categorically prohibit or restrict experimentation in 
commercial mobile service bands. The Commission believes that it is 
desirable to support experimentation in all bands where it is 
practical, and observes that successful innovation in the commercial 
mobile service space has the potential to directly and immediately 
improve some of the most widespread and ubiquitous consumer services. 
Many entities are engaged in designing products specifically for the 
these bands that are intended to work with various operators' systems, 
and eliminating the ability to experiment in this spectrum would remove 
one of the avenues available for such development. The Commission also 
notes that experimenters may often work with network providers to 
develop equipment, and adopting rules limiting such operations would 
not be to either party's benefit. The Commission also notes that these 
bands are not restricted bands under part 15, and experimenters in 
these bands can already test new designs and prototypes on that 
spectrum. The rules stipulate that all experimentation is on a non-
interference basis and that it is incumbent on all experimenters to 
ensure that they do not cause interference to service licensees' 
operations or risk fines and the possibility of license forfeiture. 
Moreover, while many experiments will be fixed, devices often are built 
for mobility, and the Commission does not find it in the public 
interest to limit the ability of experimenters to fully test their 
devices.
    39. The Commission adopts its proposed rules to permit program 
experimental licensees to operate in any frequency band, except for 
frequency bands exclusively designated as restricted in Sec.  15.205(a) 
of the Commission's rules, with the additional exception that program 
licensees would be permitted to operate in frequency bands above 38.6 
GHz, unless these bands are listed in footnote US246 of the Table of 
Frequency Allocations. Additionally, for experiments that may affect 
bands used for the provision of commercial mobile services, emergency 
notifications, or public safety purposes, program experimental radio 
licensees must develop a specific plan to avoid interference to these 
bands prior to commencing operation. As part of this plan, licensees 
must provide notice to critical service license and, as appropriate, 
end users who might be affected by the experiment; provide for the 
quick identification and elimination of any harm the experiment may 
cause; and provide an alternate means for accomplishing potentially 
affected vital public safety functions during the experiment. The 
Commission emphasizes that the burden is on program licensees to 
contact any and all commercial mobile service, emergency notification, 
or public safety licensees who might be affected by a program 
experiment, even if the probability of harmful interference as the 
result of that program experiment is thought to be relatively low. The 
proposed rules were crafted to ensure that harmful interference from 
program experiments would not occur to any service licensee, and the 
Commission believes that those rules, together with additional rules 
adopted, will provide a significant public benefit at minimal cost by 
creating an environment ripe for experimentation and innovation, while 
protecting incumbent operations.
4. Responsible Party and Notification Requirements
    40. The Commission proposed that each program licensee register its 
experiments on a newly-created Commission program experimental 
registration Web site at least seven calendar days prior to the 
commencement of each experiment. This seven-day period was intended to 
provide interested parties with sufficient time to assess whether they 
believe harmful interference may occur to their systems. To ensure that 
such analysis could be done, the Commission proposed that registrations 
include the following information:
    (1) A narrative statement describing the experiment;
    (2) Contact information for the researcher in charge;
    (3) Technical details, including:
    (i) The frequency or frequency bands;
    (ii) The maximum effective isotropically radiated power (EIRP) or 
effective radiated power (ERP) under consideration;
    (iii) The emission designators to be used;
    (iv) A description of the geographic area in which the test will be 
conducted;
    (v) The number of units to be used;
    (vi) A public safety mitigation plan, if necessary; and
    (vii) For medical program experimental radio licenses, the rule 
part for which the experimental device is intended.

The Commission proposed that, once this seven-day notification period 
elapsed, an experiment under a program license would be permitted to 
commence without further approval or additional authorization from the 
Commission; however, if any licensee of an authorized service raised 
interference concerns, it would have to contact the program licensee 
and post its complaint on the Commission's program

[[Page 25145]]

experimental registration Web site. In the event that a complaint is 
lodged, the Commission proposed that the experiment would be placed on 
hold pending resolution of the complaint. Specifically, it proposed 
that before conducting an experiment, the program licensee evaluate and 
account for interference concerns raised by interested parties, and 
that it would have to obey any instructions from the Commission to 
delay, modify, or abandon the experiment. Additionally, it proposed 
that the experiment not be permitted to commence until the parties had 
resolved the issue. Moreover, it proposed that the complainant bear the 
burden of proof that the proposed experiment would cause harmful 
interference, and that the parties work in good faith to resolve the 
complaint. Finally, the Commission proposed to implement measures, such 
as adding a Real Simple Syndication (RSS) feed, to make it easier for 
incumbent licensees and other interested parties to become aware of 
pending tests and make experimenters aware of their concerns. The NPRM 
sought comment on what those measures should be.
    41. Decision. The Commission's overriding goal is to ensure that 
program experiments can proceed in an efficient and expeditious manner, 
without impairing or causing harmful interference to incumbent 
operations. The Commission concludes that, based on the comments, some 
modifications to the NPRM's proposed procedures will provide a better, 
more equitable way to move forward with program licenses and protect 
incumbent users. As a baseline, the Commission adopts web-based 
notification procedure with the information requirements proposed in 
the NPRM. The Commission is also expanding a program experimental 
licensee's obligations and responsibilities in several significant 
ways.
    42. First, the Commission notes that commenters ask that the 
Commission explicitly collect contact information for a ``stop buzzer'' 
point of contact who can immediately shut down an experiment if harmful 
interference occurs to services entitled under the rules to protection. 
The Commission's intent with the proposed criteria was that collecting 
information for the researcher-in-charge would fill this need. However, 
because this contact could be different than the person actually 
conducting the experiment, the Commission is explicitly adding a ``stop 
buzzer'' point of contact to the list of required information in Sec.  
5.307 of the rules. It also is adding a new Sec.  5.308 to the rules 
requiring the ``stop buzzer'' point of contact to be available at all 
times during operation of each experiment conducted under a program 
license.
    43. Second, while the NPRM proposed that program licensees report 
the specifics of their proposed experiments to the Commission's program 
experimental registration Web site at least seven calendar days prior 
to commencement of the experiment, upon reflection the Commission finds 
ten calendar days to be a more appropriate period. The Commission notes 
that, in some instances, holidays and weekends would shorten the number 
of business days in a seven calendar-day period. Increasing the 
notification period to ten calendar days, will better ensure that 
licensees, if so interested, have adequate time to examine and respond 
to an experimental posting in a timely manner. Additionally, the NPRM 
proposed that the incumbent licensee would have the burden of 
identifying interference concerns, but commenters have convinced the 
Commission that the proposed procedures would unduly shift the burden 
of proof regarding interference from experimenters to incumbent users. 
The Commission finds that it would be better to modify this proposal to 
better reflect the balance of license rights and interference 
protection afforded under the existing rules and to be consistent with 
our policies for conventional experimental licenses. Under the 
Commission's traditional conventional experimental license program, 
applicants file with the Commission all relevant information, and the 
Commission makes a determination as to whether the proposed experiment 
is: (a) Acceptable as proposed, due to a minimal risk of harmful 
interference, or (b) unacceptable as proposed, due to a significant 
risk of harmful interference. The Commission may also impose certain 
requirements on granted licenses. Based on a re-evaluation of the 
NPRM's proposal, the Commission agrees with commenters that it should 
not shift the burden regarding interference analysis onto incumbent 
licensees. Therefore, the Commission adopts rules that more closely 
adhere to current policy and procedure for conventional experimental 
licenses in this regard.
    44. First, the Commission is requiring that at the time of 
application for a program license, applicants indicate whether they 
intend to operate on CMRS or public safety frequencies. This will 
provide a simple means for interested CMRS and public safety licensees 
to determine if they need to seek further information on a program 
licensee's specific experiments from the web-based registration system. 
If the Commission becomes aware of an applicant who fails to specify in 
its application that it will be experimenting on CMRS or public safety 
frequencies, but once licensed either reports its intent for such use 
or actually initiates such use, the Commission will take disciplinary 
action including, but not limited to loss of license and/or fines. If 
an experimenter alters plans after the initial application to 
subsequently include CMRS spectrum or public safety frequencies, it 
must file an application to amend its license. The Commission believes 
that this procedure, along with the web-based registration of specific 
experiments, will adequately protect critical operations from harmful 
interference from tests conducted under program experimental license 
while still providing for experiment flexibility for program licensees.
    45. Second, the Commission adopts a requirement that each web 
posting include a document describing the planned experiment and 
explaining the measures being taken to avoid causing harmful 
interference to any incumbent service licensee. The Commission does not 
find that describing their experiments in web postings will be 
excessively burdensome to program licensees, as it can expect them to 
have already undertaken internal analyses regarding the interference 
potential of their experiments. Thus, this requirement is intended to 
provide an open and transparent method for potentially affected service 
licensees and other interested parties not only to become aware of 
planned experiments, but also to have assurance that adequate planning 
that has gone into such experiments.
    46. The Commission views this analysis as an essential requirement 
for program licensees and cautions prospective licensees that this 
analysis should not be taken lightly. It expects that in exchange for 
the flexibility the Commission is providing through the program 
license, program licensees will do a thorough analysis to ensure that 
incumbent licensees are protected from harmful interference. The 
Commission notes, that in many instances, this explanation could be 
brief, such as in cases in which experiments are proposed to be 
conducted indoors, outdoors at low power, at remote locations, or on 
unused frequencies. In other instances, where the interference risk is 
greater, the explanation may need more detail, such as detailed link 
budgets and propagation and interference analyses.

[[Page 25146]]

    47. The Commission believes that the requirement for program 
experimental licensees to post their interference analysis to the 
Commission's program experimental registration Web site will generally 
obviate the need for incumbent licensees to perform their own detailed 
analyses to ensure protection from interference. In this manner, the 
Commission believes that the burdens associated with preventing harmful 
interference remain the same as at present--on the potential 
interferer.
    48. The Commission disagrees with commenters that advocate a 
consent requirement on program licensees that plan to experiment in 
commercial mobile service spectrum. Implementing a rule requiring 
consent could slow the ability for innovation without providing any 
substantial benefits in interference protection to the licensee in 
return. The Commission also believes that a formal pre-filing 
coordination requirement is generally unnecessary. The Commission 
believes that there may be certain circumstances where there may be 
additional concerns about how a proposed experiment conducted under a 
program experimental license could potentially affect a commercial 
mobile service provider's network. The Commission has discretion to 
place coordination conditions on any experimental license. The 
Commission will continue to use its discretion to place appropriate 
conditions on experimental licenses in general and experiments 
conducted under a program license in particular. The Commission is 
especially concerned about experiments involving commercial mobile 
service spectrum in scenarios where it determines there may be an 
increased risk of causing interference to commercial mobile service 
licensees--for instance, in public spaces--and may require prior 
notification or coordination, as necessary. As the Commission gains 
experience with this new licensing approach, it will be better able to 
tailor notification and coordination requirements as necessary to apply 
only those that are most appropriate for the specific circumstances. 
The Commission also observes that new Sec.  5.311 imposes additional 
requirements for experiments conducted in critical safety bands, 
including bands used for the provision of commercial mobile services. 
In reviewing the Web site posting of the planned experiment, Commission 
staff could determine that other conditions are necessary; alternately, 
a licensee who is concerned about a posted experiment plan and who has 
been unable to resolve its concerns with the experimental licensee 
could seek assistance from us.
    49. The Commission concludes that the approach it implemented for 
program experimental licenses is both consistent with the current rules 
and offers additional opportunities for licensees to identify and 
resolve potential interference concerns. Neither coordination nor 
consent is required under the current rules. Rather, the Commission 
examines all applications for conventional experimental licenses and 
determines whether the proposed operations are acceptable due to the 
risk of harmful interference. If the Commission determines that an 
experimental licensee should coordinate with an incumbent licensee to 
reduce the risk of interference, it may condition the experimental 
licensee accordingly.
    50. The Commission will not require coordination between program 
licensees and incumbent commercial mobile service providers. It 
recognizes that there could be situations in which it determines that 
there would be an increased possibility that a planned program 
experiment could have a greater potential to cause harmful interference 
to a commercial mobile service licensee, and the Commission will impose 
additional requirements in the program licensee--or it may even 
prohibit the experiment in its entirety. Further, the Commission 
emphasizes that if it becomes aware that a program licensee is not 
providing adequate analysis of the interference environment as required 
by the rules, it may place a coordination requirement on a particular 
course of experimentation, or even on all future experiments, that are 
conducted under that license. In addition, if a violation is 
particularly egregious or if there are instances of repeat violations, 
the Commission has the authority to cancel that license and deny that 
entity from operating under a program license in the future. In cases 
in which the Commission does impose a coordination requirement, it 
expects that all parties will cooperate to work in good faith to 
expeditiously resolve any concerns.
    51. Some commenters requested that the Commission provide as much 
as 30 days between a program licensee's notification of their 
experiment to the web-based registration system and when they could 
commence their experiment. Those comments were predicated on the NPRM's 
proposal, which would have placed the burden of proof for claims of 
harmful interference on the incumbent licensees. Now, with the modified 
rule which places that burden on the program licensee, the Commission 
has relieved incumbent licensees of much, if not all, of this task. 
Nonetheless, the Commission increased the notification period by three 
days. It believes that this 10-day notification period is a reasonable 
timeframe to allow incumbents to examine, if they so choose, any filing 
of interest, while not creating long delays in experimentation. In 
addition, the Commission notes that all license applications already 
require contact information to be provided, and it is setting forth 
specific requirements for program experimental licensees. Service 
licensees who have questions about a proposed experiment or its 
accompanying interference analysis will have a ready point of contact.
    52. To recap, while a program license will be granted for a series 
of experiments, each individual experiment must be preceded by a web 
posting containing information required by the rules. The Commission 
emphasizes that incumbent licensees may object to a particular 
experiment, and they may contact the program licensee to try and work 
out any objections. However, only the Commission has the authority to 
prevent a program licensee from beginning operations or to order the 
cessation of operations. The Commission is not adopting the proposal 
that an experiment automatically not be permitted to commence until the 
parties resolve all outstanding interference objections. The added 
requirement that a program experimental licensee must submit an 
interference analyses in conjunction with its notice of proposed 
experimentation reduces any benefit from this proposed provision (which 
the Commission also recognizes could be used to block or delay 
important experimental work). If an incumbent licensee believes that it 
will suffer interference and does not informally resolve the matter 
with the experimental licensee, the incumbent licensee would have to 
bring its concerns to the Commission for action. In such an event, the 
Commission would examine the evidence and decide whether the experiment 
should proceed as planned, should not be permitted to proceed, or if 
specific notification or coordination requirements should be imposed. 
The Commission's Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) will issue 
such a public notice with instructions regarding the complaint 
procedure.
    53. In the R&O, the Commission also addresses the process that will 
be used for experiments that propose to use exclusive Federal spectrum 
or shared Federal/non-Federal spectrum. As an initial matter, it notes 
that under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

[[Page 25147]]

between the Commission and NTIA, the Commission will coordinate all 
such applications for Commission operating licenses with NTIA, which is 
afforded 15 days to reply to the Commission. Under its application 
procedures for program licenses, however, the Commission will not be 
collecting specific frequency information, but rather only location 
information with the initial application. As described, frequency 
information will be prior-reported by the licensee to the Commission's 
Web site before any experimentation may begin. To satisfy its 
obligation to prior coordinate experiments that will be using either 
Federal exclusive or Federal shared spectrum, the Commission will add a 
question to the application form where applicants for a program license 
can indicate if they are planning on using any spectrum that is 
allocated to the Federal government on a shared or exclusive basis and, 
thus, is subject to coordination under the MOU. An affirmative answer 
will trigger a location-specific coordination with NTIA and based on 
the outcome of that coordination the Commission may place special 
conditions on the license which could include a list of frequencies or 
frequency bands on which the applicant would be restricted from 
operating on at the proposed location. Applicants who plan on using 
such spectrum should plan to ensure they apply with sufficient time to 
complete this coordination prior to the time they intend to begin 
transmitting as the Commission will not grant authority to operate 
until the conclusion of the coordination process. The Commission, at 
that time, will take any action if it deems that any is warranted. As 
with the similar requirement that it is implementing for experiments on 
CMRS spectrum, the Commission notes that if it becomes aware of an 
applicant indicating in its application that it will not be 
experimenting on frequencies that are part of a Federal spectrum 
allocation, but once licensed either report its intent for such use or 
actually initiates such use, the Commission will take disciplinary 
action including, but not limited to loss of license and/or fines. If 
an experimenter alters plans after the initial application to 
subsequently include Federal spectrum, it must file an application to 
amend its license. The Commission believes that this procedure will 
adequately protect Federal operations from harmful interference from 
tests conducted under program experimental license while still 
providing for experiment flexibility for program licensees.
    54. The Commission believes that its amended approach for prior 
notification of experiments in which the licensee provides a 
description of how it will avoid interference will result in more 
carefully planned program experiments, while not imposing an undue 
burden on experimenters. Further, in developing the Commission's new 
program experimental registration Web site, it will emphasize the 
importance of implementing additional measures to make it easier for 
incumbent licensees and other interested parties to become aware of 
program experiments, such as by developing an automated process for 
distributing information regarding program experiments by RSS feeds or 
other appropriate means. The Commission finds that its overall approach 
balances the needs of both program licensees and service incumbents, 
providing a public benefit significantly outweighing its cost.
5. Use Prohibitions
    55. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed that experiments could not 
be conducted under a program experimental license when the applicant 
requires non-disclosure of proprietary information. Several commenters 
expressed disagreement with that proposal. The NPRM also proposed that 
experiments could not be conducted under a program experimental license 
when an environmental assessment or orbital debris mitigation plan must 
be filed with the Commission. There is little or no objection to this 
aspect of the NPRM.
    56. Decision. Commenters generally request that they be permitted 
to maintain confidentiality of proprietary information and still take 
advantage of the flexibility the Commission is affording through the 
program experimental license. As the Commission has stated throughout 
this proceeding, its goal is to enable more robust experimentation. 
With that principle in mind and based on the comments and an 
examination of our current process, the Commission is modifying the 
proposal related to the treatment of confidential and proprietary 
information.
    57. The Commission believes that program licensees can describe 
their experiments under the prior notification procedures and report on 
the results of their experiments on the Commission's Web site in 
general terms that do not disclose any proprietary or confidential 
information. The Commission will require public disclosure of 
frequency, power, location, emission designators and contact 
information. The Commission observes that this information, with the 
exception of power and emission designators, is required for public 
disclosure today for conventional experimental licenses. The Commission 
also finds that requiring public disclosure of power and emission 
designators is necessary so that potentially affected service licensees 
can assess the program licensee's analysis of interference avoidance 
and mitigation, given the reduced level of Commission review that may 
occur prior to specific experiments under the program license. 
Moreover, the Commission may request that a program licensee provide 
information in addition to that required by the rules, which could 
include proprietary or confidential information. For example, such 
information requests may be necessary to resolve an interference 
complaint, to gain a better understanding of new technology 
development, or to audit the program to ensure that parties are 
conducting actual experiments. If confidential or proprietary 
information must be disclosed due to Commission request for additional 
information, it will entertain requests to keep such information from 
the public, consistent with the current rules for treating confidential 
information set forth in Sec.  0.459. Failure to comply with a 
Commission request for additional information or, if review of such 
information reveals that a licensee is not conducting a program of 
actual experimentation, could result in forfeiture of the program 
license and loss of privilege of obtaining such a license in the 
future. The Commission modifies its rules accordingly. Finally, the 
Commission reiterates that if entities believe that they need to 
disclose confidential or proprietary information as part of the 
justification for their license, they can forego the program 
experimental license and instead obtain a conventional experimental 
license.
    58. Additionally, the Commission adopts the NPRM's proposal to 
prohibit program experimental licenses when an environmental assessment 
or orbital debris mitigation plan must be filed with the Commission. It 
finds that these prohibitions are necessary due to the required 
Commission review and approval of these filings prior to the onset of 
operation. The Commission's overall approach to use prohibitions 
balances the need to reduce the costs of regulatory burdens on 
experimental licensees and the benefits of protecting the public from 
harmful interference to existing radio services.
6. Innovation Zones
    59. Many commenters are skeptical of the NPRM`s proposal to create 
a discrete

[[Page 25148]]

innovation zone program license, and the Commission is not doing so in 
the R&O. Nevertheless, it believes that there is a place for 
designating specific areas where licensees can operate experimental 
devices to assess real world performance in the presence of other 
similar or dissimilar devices, differing terrain, and changing 
atmospheric conditions. The Commission believes that, if properly 
structured, such zones can provide equipment developers valuable 
insight to ensure that their products perform as intended when they 
become available to the public. Therefore, the Commission establishes a 
mechanism by which it can create innovation zones--designated 
geographic areas and frequency ranges--in which program licensees will 
be afforded additional opportunities to design and conduct 
experimentation.
    60. Commenters observe that establishing an innovation zone under 
the NPRM's proposed rules would have been a complex undertaking whose 
risks would have been difficult to evaluate without any experience with 
other types of program experimental licenses. Further, because the 
Commission did not propose any restrictions on who could hold an 
innovation zone license, organizations and individuals not as well-
versed in RF spectrum management as research licensees could 
potentially have obtained such licenses, thereby increasing the 
interference risk to licensed services. While the Commission has 
considered restricting eligibility for innovation zone licenses in the 
same fashion that was proposed in the NPRM for research and medical 
licenses, it declines such an approach, as that could severely limit 
the utility the Commission envisions for such zones.
    61. The Commission concludes that there is a better way to enable 
the type of widespread experimentation that it envisioned under the 
NPRM's innovation zone proposal. Accordingly, the Commission adopts 
rules that allow it--on its own motion or in response to a public 
request--to designate a defined geographic area and frequency range(s) 
as an innovation zone for specific types of experiments. An innovation 
zone designation will not confer operating authority on the entity that 
owns or manages the designated site. Instead, under the rules that the 
Commission adopts, it will permit research program experimental 
licensees to operate in innovation zones within guidelines that will be 
establish on a case-by-case basis. These zones may include geographic 
areas beyond a program licensee's authorized area. Thus, the Commission 
will effectively provide in some circumstances an extension of a 
research program license, without the licensee being required to modify 
that license to cover a new location. By modifying the NPRM's proposal 
in this manner to limit operational authority within an innovation zone 
to program licensees, the Commission can better manage the potential 
for harmful interference from individual experiments, while still 
providing opportunities to test potentially innovative wireless devices 
in real world operating environments.
    62. The Commission recognizes that there must be some limits and 
constraints to minimize the potential of harmful interference due to 
operation under this expanded flexibility. First, it reiterates that 
these innovation zones may be created only by specific Commission 
action in response to a request, or alternatively, on the Commission's 
own motion. An innovation zone designation will be conveyed via Public 
Notice and posted on the Commission's new program experimental 
registration Web site, detailing the specific geographic area(s) 
included and the technical parameters, such as frequency bands and 
power limits, included. In that connection, the Commission observes 
that OET has delegated authority to generally administer the ERS, which 
therefore gives it the authority to designate experimental innovation 
zones and their operational conditions. Second, operation under this 
authority will not permit a program licensee to abdicate its 
notification and reporting responsibilities. Prior to operating in an 
innovation zone, program licensees must provide notification of their 
intended operations consistent with the procedures adopted in the R&O. 
It is important that all licensees have full knowledge of operations in 
an area, so that, if necessary, they can remedy harmful interference. 
Finally, only program licensees will be permitted to operate in an 
innovation zone under their existing authorization. Conventional 
licensees will have to apply for and receive a license modification if 
they want to expand the scope of their experimentation to an area and 
frequency band that is part of an innovation zone.
    63. Structuring innovation zones in this way will allow targeted 
experimentation in response to specific industry or regulatory needs. 
The Commission believes that these innovation zones hold great promise 
to enable development of robust devices that can withstand the 
increasingly complex communications environment in which they must 
operate. Accordingly, the Commission' s revised innovation zone 
structure can provide a significant public benefit, while reducing 
substantially the potential interference costs of the NPRM's innovation 
zone proposal.

C. Compliance Testing License

    64. The NPRM noted that Sec.  2.803 of the Commission's rules 
provides for the operation of RF devices for compliance testing, but 
does not eliminate the requirement to obtain a station license for 
products that normally require a license to operate. The NPRM therefore 
asked how laboratories engaged in the testing of equipment, that are 
not themselves manufacturers or licensed service providers, should be 
authorized to conduct their work. It also asked if the Commission 
should make specific provisions in its part 5 experimental radio 
service rules to issue licenses to laboratories accredited by 
accreditation bodies that it recognizes for RF product testing 
consistent with their approved competencies.
    65. In a related issue, the NPRM noted that the Commission's 
equipment approval process often requires testing at an Open Area Test 
Site (OATS). The NPRM observed that the Commission's existing rules 
require an experimental license for radiation emissions testing in 
conjunction with regulatory approval and asked how entities engaged in 
open area testing, but that are not themselves manufacturers or 
licensed service providers, should be authorized to conduct their work. 
The NPRM sought comment on whether the Commission should make specific 
provisions in its part 5 experimental radio service rules to issue 
licenses to these entities patterned after the program license model.
    66. Decision. The Commission concurs with the commenters' 
assessment that it is appropriate for the Commission to issue 
laboratories engaged in the compliance testing of equipment, including 
those operating an OATS but that are not themselves manufacturers or 
licensed service providers, licenses with similar terms, conditions, 
and renewal processes as we are adopting for program experimental 
licenses. It will therefore create another type of experimental 
license--a compliance testing experimental license--to account for the 
work of test labs that conduct compliance testing under the 
Commission's equipment authorization program. This license will be 
available both to those test labs that the Commission currently 
recognizes for RF product testing and to any other test lab that it 
finds has sufficient expertise

[[Page 25149]]

to undertake such testing. Due to the nature of the compliance testing 
process, the Commission will not impose on them most of the limitations 
and reporting requirements that it is imposing on program licenses. 
Specifically, because compliance testing often involves emission 
measurements in restricted bands, compliance testing licensees will be 
exempt from the prohibition on operating in the restricted bands listed 
in Sec.  15.205(a) of the rules and from operating in the bands 
allocated exclusively to the passive services. In addition, the 
Commission will not impose the designation of a ``stop buzzer'' point 
of contact nor the ten- day notification period requirements on these 
licenses, as it does not believe that any significant interference risk 
exists for products reaching this stage of development, when operated 
by a test lab solely for the purposes of certifying equipment for 
compliance with our rules. Finally, the Commission will not require the 
filing of a narrative statement detailing the results of the testing 
done under this license. By its nature, successful testing results in 
the issuance of an equipment certification grant and an entry in the 
Commission's Equipment Authorization System. Test labs are already 
required to include various test reports and other documentation, 
negating any need to mandate compliance with the more general program 
license reporting requirement. Compliance testing experimental 
licensees will also be exempt from the additional requirements inSec.  
5.311 of our rules that relate to safety of the public.
    67. The Commission does find, however, that some restrictions are 
necessary on these licenses. First, while it received no comment 
regarding eligibility, it finds that it is important to limit 
eligibility to Commission-recognized testing laboratories to provide 
assurance to the public of the competency of the entities that are 
engaged in compliance testing and operating under this broad authority. 
However, the Commission does not currently require that Commission-
recognized testing laboratories be accredited, and thus the Commission 
will not limit eligibility to accredited laboratories. Rather, it will 
grant compliance testing experimental radio licenses to those 
laboratories recognized by the Commission as being competent to perform 
measurements of equipment for equipment authorization.
    68. In addition, the Commission will limit the authority of 
compliance testing experimental licenses to only those testing 
activities necessary for product certification. Accordingly, compliance 
testing experimental licensees will not be permitted to conduct 
immunity testing under this license. Such testing often entails high 
powered emissions over a very broad swath of spectrum, which could pose 
a significant risk of interference to other systems, including Federal 
systems. A traditional conventional experimental license will be 
required for immunity testing to ensure that all necessary coordination 
is conducted and that all reasonable precautions against interference 
are taken. Finally, consistent with the new program and medical testing 
experimental licenses, the Commission will require compliance testing 
license applicants to apply on revised FCC Form 442, and it will issue 
compliance testing licenses for five years and prohibit transfers of 
such licenses. Each applicant must specify how it is eligible to 
receive a compliance testing experimental license, such as by including 
a description or other proof of its qualifications. The Commission 
finds that this structure will provide public benefits by ensuring 
efficient compliance testing at minimal costs. Rules specific to this 
license are contained in a new subpart G within part 5 of the 
Commission's rules.

D. Medical Testing License

    69. The Commission has established an additional type of license to 
meet specific needs of the medical community for clinical trials--the 
medical testing license. While non-clinical trial testing is permitted 
under our program license, the Commission finds that it can best meet 
medical RF experimentation needs by providing several different types 
of authorizations that can support a broad range of medical device 
research, development and testing, rather than limiting such 
experimentation to the medical program license concept that was 
proposed in the NPRM.
    70. As an initial matter, the Commission notes that the medical 
program experimental radio license proposed in the NPRM was narrowly 
targeted for hospitals and other health care institutions. The 
Commission proposed that this license would be limited to the testing 
and operation of new medical devices that use wireless 
telecommunications technology for therapeutic, monitoring, or 
diagnostic purposes that have not yet been submitted for equipment 
certification, or for devices that use RF for ablation, so long as the 
equipment is designed to meet the Commission's technical rules. As was 
discussed, ongoing programs of related or unrelated experiments that 
encompass basic research and experimentation--including medical 
research and experimentation--logically fall under the broader category 
of research experiments. Research laboratories and manufacturers, as 
well as health care institutions, that conduct medical RF 
experimentation will be eligible for a program license, thus meeting 
the needs of a broad range of entities. Accordingly, the Commission is 
not creating a medical-specific program experimental radio license 
category.
    71. Decision. The Commission finds that the program license 
framework may not meet all of the testing needs of the medical device 
community. For example, licensees that operate under a program license 
will be required to conduct tests at geographic locations under their 
control. This will limit the ability of entities doing medical research 
to conduct clinical trials--particularly those involving patients or 
devices used for home care.
    72. To meet these needs, the Commission establishes the medical 
testing license. This license will be available to health care 
facilities as defined in Sec.  95.1103(b) of the rules so they can 
conduct clinical trials of medical devices that have already passed 
through the early developmental stage and are ready to be assessed for 
patient compatibility and use, as well as operational, interference, 
and RF immunity issues in real world situations. The health care 
facility itself will be the responsible party for all testing and 
responsible for proper operation of equipment, as well as being 
responsible for remedying any interference issues that might arise 
during the trial. The Commission will scrutinize the qualifications of 
applicants for medical testing licenses to ensure that they have 
sufficient expertise in RF management so as not to cause harmful 
interference to any authorized spectrum user. Similar to the 
requirement for program experimental licenses, the Commission will 
require each applicant to submit a statement with its application 
detailing how it meets eligibility requirement relative to RF 
expertise.
    73. While the Commission will not explicitly condition medical 
testing licenses on health care facilities obtaining FDA approval to 
conduct a clinical trial for the RF devices to be tested under a 
medical testing license, as it can envision some applications where 
such approval may not be necessary, the Commission cautions that all 
parties involved in clinical testing must be aware of the FDA's 
jurisdiction and take all necessary steps to satisfy the requirements 
of both the FDA and

[[Page 25150]]

the Commission prior to testing a device. Thus, medical testing 
licensees must consider that a license grant by the Commission may not 
by itself be sufficient to begin testing. Each experimenter must 
determine whether the device needs specific pre-approval from the FDA, 
including whether the device meets the criteria for testing under an 
IDE. The Commission also notes that it and FDA may consult from time to 
time if questions arise regarding the use of devices under the medical 
testing license. If the Commission determines that FDA requirements 
have not been met for a particular device that is the subject of an 
experiment, it may take action up to and including termination of the 
experimental license.
    74. Because medical testing licenses are primarily designed to 
address the needs of health care facilities that want to conduct their 
own clinical trials, they are similar to product development licenses. 
However, medical testing licenses are targeted to a distinct user 
community to provide the flexibility needed to conduct clinical trials. 
Similar to program licenses, the Commission will issue medical testing 
licenses for five year, renewable terms, and the licensee will be 
authorized to conduct multiple unrelated experiments under just one 
license. Although the Commission proposed that medical program licenses 
be limited to investigations and tests involving therapeutic, 
monitoring, and diagnostic medical equipment that have not yet been 
submitted for equipment certification, or for devices that use RF for 
ablation, the Commission will slightly modify this description to be 
consistent with the FDA's definition of a medical device. Specifically, 
it will define a medical device for the purposes of a medical testing 
license as a device that uses RF wireless technology or communications 
functions for diagnosis, treatment, or patient monitoring. Under the 
rules adopted, the Commission will permit medical testing licensees to 
operate in any frequency band under part 15 (Radio Frequency Devices), 
part 18 (Industrial, Scientific, and Medical Equipment), or part 95 
(Personal Radio Services, Subpart H--Wireless Medical Telemetry Service 
and Subpart I--Medical Device Radiocommunication Service) of the 
Commission's rules. The Commission's goal is to speed the process for 
device development to benefit the public, and it believes that goal is 
best served by requiring that the device being tested under a medical 
testing license comply with existing parts 15, 18, or 95 rules, so that 
additional rulemaking efforts are not necessary. If medical devices do 
not comply with the technical limits in these rules, they must be 
tested under a conventional or program experimental license.
    75. The Commission notes that harmful interference caused by an 
experimental licensee to any licensed service is unacceptable, and thus 
it finds no need to exclude certain Amateur Radio bands from potential 
use by medical testing licensees. More generally, the Commission does 
not find the concerns raised regarding medical experimental licenses to 
be fundamentally different than the concerns raised about research 
program experimental licenses, which have already been addressed. In 
particular, any part 5 licensee, including a medical testing licensee, 
will be responsible for ensuring that harmful interference is not 
caused to authorized spectrum users. Similarly, medical testing 
licensees must ensure that their devices are immune to interference 
affects from authorized services sharing the same bands as their 
devices. Testing under a medical testing license will allow for such 
testing. Thus, it will not restrict medical testing licensees from 
operating in any of the specific bands noted by commenters.
    76. To make the medical testing license as useful as possible for 
clinical trials, the Commission will permit licensees to conduct these 
trials not only at the facilities (e.g., a hospital) under their 
control--a requirement for program licensees--but also to conduct 
product testing in other locations. For example, the Commission will 
permit licensees to conduct experiments when patients are confined to 
their homes as they recover from medical procedures or when patients, 
who are using implanted or body-worn medical devices, are ambulatory. 
This flexibility is necessary to ensure critical functions for many 
medical devices--such as remote monitoring, device tolerance to 
potential interference sources, and patient ability to use devices 
without the benefit of assistance as critical aspects of experiments 
conducted outside of medical campuses. Health care facilities will 
specify their intended area of operation when they apply for a medical 
testing license, as specified in Sec.  5.404 of our rules. The 
Commission recognizes that some commenters expressed concerns about the 
interference potential that could be caused to authorized services if 
medical experiments are conducted outside a health care facility. The 
Commission believes that this concern is addressed in several ways. 
First, a medical testing license will be used primarily for clinical 
trials, not basic medical research. This means that the basic RF 
experimentation for the medical device will have already been completed 
and the device, in many cases, will already have received FDA approval 
for such testing. In addition, although a health care facility could 
oversee a clinical trial beyond its facility, it may not want to assume 
this responsibility in some cases and instead prefer that the device 
manufacturer or health practitioner, under a conventional or product 
development trial license, assume responsibility for clinical trials 
outside the health care facility. The Commission will also require that 
medical testing licensees follow the same responsible party and 
designation of ``stop buzzer'' point of contact requirements as program 
licensees. Finally, the Commission will require that medical testing 
licensees follow the same notice and reporting requirements as program 
licensees--i.e., medical testing licensees must provide both prior 
notification of planned experimentation and a report of experimental 
results on the Commission's program experimental registration Web site. 
This public disclosure of medical testing prior to and at the 
conclusion of each trial will notify authorized users of such testing 
in their geographic area. The Commission intends to closely monitor 
medical testing experiments and may revisit these geographic 
requirements as it gains some experience with this new type of license.
    77. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed that medical program 
experimental licensees file yearly reports to the experimental 
licensing system of the activity that has been performed under their 
licenses to provide a venue for sharing information that medical 
researchers would find beneficial in the goal of patient care. No one 
commented on this proposal. The Commission concludes that a yearly 
reporting requirement for medical testing licenses will likewise 
support the sharing of useful information within the medical community, 
and it adopted such a requirement. These reports will be filed through 
the same Web site that will be used for registering experiments and 
will be available to the public. This action will facilitate the 
dissemination of information obtained in medical testing experiments 
that may be beneficial in providing improved patient care.
    78. Finally, the Commission adopted the NPRM's proposal that tests 
conducted under a medical experimental authorization not be subject to 
our traditional station identification rules. As the Commission

[[Page 25151]]

observed in the NPRM, its past experience in the medical device field 
suggests that such requirements are impractical for many of the devices 
expected to be tested under the proposed new authorization, and the 
typical power level and deployment environment for such devices will 
serve to reduce the potential for unanticipated interference that 
cannot be readily identified and resolved.
    79. The Commission also notes that health care facilities that wish 
to enable medical device testing by program licensees under real-world 
conditions (including testing with patients) can instead request that 
they be designated as an innovation zone for such testing. Thus, a 
health care institution that would like to offer its facilities as a 
test-bed, but lacks the expertise to oversee such operations itself, 
can petition the Commission to designate their facility as an 
innovation zone, so that individual developers and manufacturers with 
research program licenses can use the facility under their license. 
This approach may be particularly useful for manufacturers who want to 
test medical or other types of equipment that will be used in a health 
care setting while it is in the product development stage, but who will 
not be eligible for the medical testing license. The Commission notes 
that under the innovation zone approach, the program licensee that the 
health care facility permits to experiment on its premises would be the 
responsible party for the testing and operation of equipment within the 
innovation zone. This is different from the medical testing license, in 
which the health care facility is the responsible party.
    80. These different licensing options represent a multi-faceted 
approach to facilitate robust medical RF experimentation that responds 
to the record developed in this proceeding. The medical testing 
experimental license complements the types of medical RF 
experimentation that parties will be able to conduct under either a 
conventional or program experimental license. This overall approach 
will provide a significant benefit to the public at no public cost by 
streamlining the process by which medical equipment is approved under 
our equipment authorization procedures, thus reducing the time it takes 
to develop cutting-edge medical devices and systems.

E. Broadening Opportunities for Market Trials

    81. In the NPRM, the Commission noted that market studies and real-
world trials, which require operation of equipment prior to 
authorization, can be vital to the transformation of prototypes to 
fully functional new products and services that meet consumer needs. 
This observation continued from the more general examinations of the 
market study process undertaken by the Commission in the August 2009 
Wireless Innovation NOI and the March 2010 National Broadband Plan. The 
Commission observed in the NPRM that its rules generally prohibit 
marketing or operation of equipment prior to authorization, but that 
some exceptions exist. Specifically, Sec.  2.803 of the Commission's 
rules allows for advertising and display, conditional sales to certain 
businesses, and outright sales of equipment that has not yet been 
authorized so long as proper notice is provided to the prospective 
buyer. This rule section also permits a manufacturer to operate its 
product for demonstration or evaluation purposes under the authority of 
a local Commission-licensed service provider so long as that equipment 
operates in the bands licensed to that service provider. Additionally, 
Sec.  5.3(j) of the rules permits licensees operating non-certified 
equipment under experimental radio authorizations to conduct ``limited 
market studies,'' on a case-by-case basis subject to limitations 
established by the Commission. Because these rules and exceptions are 
scattered over several rule parts, equipment manufacturers and 
licensees are often confused as to which particular rules apply to 
various situations. Thus, the NPRM proposed to bring more clarity to 
the rules regarding the operation and marketing of RF devices prior to 
equipment approval and also to relax the conditions under which market 
trials can be conducted to enable more robust market trial activities 
by a greater number of innovators.
    82. As a first step, the NPRM proposed to parse the existing rule 
into separate rule sections--one addressing rules for marketing devices 
prior to equipment authorization and one addressing operation of 
devices prior to equipment authorization. These rule sections--
Sec. Sec.  2.803 and 2.805, respectively--would more clearly define the 
parameters for marketing and operating devices prior to equipment 
authorization. The Commission adopted the proposed new rule structure, 
which we find will provide the public benefit of increased clarity at 
no public cost.
    83. The NPRM did not propose to alter the substance of the existing 
rules in Sec.  2.803, but rather proposed only to clarify them so that 
they would be easier to understand. However, commenters raise an issue 
with the provision that effectively prohibits operating unauthorized 
devices in residential areas. Under existing Sec.  2.803(e)(1)(iv) of 
our rules, RF devices may be operated, but not marketed, for the 
purposes of ``evaluation of product performance and determination of 
customer acceptability, provided such operation takes place at the 
manufacturer's facilities during developmental, design, or pre-
production states.''
    84. In the case of testing devices in conjunction with a service 
provider, that provider is the licensee and is ultimately responsible 
for operations under its license. Moreover, the service provider has a 
direct interest in not causing interference to its own customers and 
therefore has a significant incentive to take steps to minimize any 
risk. The Commission will therefore modify proposed Sec. Sec.  
2.805(b)(3)(iii) and 2.805(b)(3)(iv) of the rules to permit a 
manufacturer to operate unauthorized equipment in a residential area, 
so long as it is operated in conjunction with, and under the authority 
of, a service provider's license. Finally, the rules the Commission 
adopt requires that licensees in market trials ensure that trial 
devices are either rendered inoperable or retrieved from trial 
participants at the conclusion of the trial, and that licensees notify 
participants in advance of the trial that operation of trial devices is 
not permitted following the trial. These rules essentially follow 
existing rules and procedures currently available in the ERS for 
limited market studies.
    85. In consideration of the comments, the Commission will add a 
provision to the rules in Sec.  2.805(b)(2) to permit general operation 
of RF devices subject to certification that have not yet been certified 
without the need for an experimental license, provided that the devices 
are operated as part of a trade show or exhibition demonstration and at 
or below the maximum power level permitted for unlicensed devices under 
its part 15 rules. Current rules provide such an exception only for 
devices designed to operate under parts 15, 18, or 95, and the 
Commission is keeping that exception. Expanding this exception to 
devices designed to operate under any rule part, but capping the power 
level for demonstration purposes to the part 15 levels, will reduce 
burdens on manufacturers, as they will no longer need to obtain an 
experimental license or Special Temporary Authorization (STA), or 
operate under a third party's service license to conduct such 
demonstrations. Further, this expansion will increase opportunities for 
manufacturers to demonstrate their products, with little

[[Page 25152]]

potential for increasing interference, as emissions at part 15 levels 
are currently permitted. The Commission does not find it necessary to 
restrict such use to indoor only or to preclude in-motion operations. 
The Commission observes that the current exceptions do not include such 
restrictions, and it has not received any interference complaints. 
However, the Commission will not allow RF devices operating under this 
provision to be used beyond trade shows or exhibitions. Trade show and 
exhibition schedules and operating hours are known and generally occur 
in confined areas, and often have their own frequency coordinators, so 
any instance of harmful interference can be identified and remedied 
quickly. In contrast, unrestricted use of uncertified devices at any 
location, even at the part 15 levels, could increase the likelihood of 
interference to authorized spectrum users without any such ability for 
quick remediation. Accordingly, the Commission finds that its revised 
rules strike an appropriate balance between the benefits of enhanced 
opportunities for manufacturers of RF devices to demonstrate their 
products and the potential costs of harmful interference to authorized 
Commission radio services.
1. Product Development and Marketing Trials
    86. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to expand upon the 
existing concept of ``limited market studies'' as currently codified in 
our part 5 rules. Specifically, it proposed to adopt a new subpart that 
contains provisions for two types of trials--product development trials 
and market trials. As an initial matter, because part 5 does not 
contain a definition of marketing, the Commission proposed to cross-
reference the part 2 definition in the revised part 5 market trial 
rules and sought comment on whether this definition meets the needs of 
part 5 licensees. It then proposed that a product development trial be 
defined as an experimental program designed to evaluate product 
performance in the conceptual, developmental, and design stages, and 
that a market trial be defined as a program designed to evaluate 
product performance and customer acceptability prior to the production 
stage. The Commission proposed that these trials be conducted under the 
authority of a part 5 license and--because they would typically involve 
equipment that has not yet been certified--operate as an exception to 
the general part 2 rule restricting such operation.
    87. The NPRM envisioned that product development trials could 
include equipment that would not be able to operate in compliance with 
existing Commission rules, absent an experimental radio authorization. 
Thus, the Commission's proposals were designed to generally track the 
existing rules for limited market studies, in that the NPRM proposed to 
explicitly prohibit the marketing of devices operated as part of a 
product development trial and retain the requirements that licensees 
retain ownership of the equipment and they notify users that they are 
part of a limited market study.
    88. Regarding market trials, the Commission recognized that they 
often involve the offer for sale or lease of a device operated pursuant 
to a license, so that manufacturers and service providers can evaluate 
customer demand for new capabilities or services at various price 
points. It proposed that under a market trial, licensees would be 
permitted to lease equipment to trial participants. However, it also 
proposed to continue the prohibition on sale of equipment that has not 
yet been certified to market trial participants, such as consumer end 
users, and require that licensees retain ownership of equipment. To do 
otherwise, the Commission reasoned, would put the ownership of 
uncertified equipment directly with consumers and complicate the 
Commission's efforts to enforce its rules when the trial ends. The 
Commission also proposed to require that licensees ensure that trial 
devices are either rendered inoperable or are retrieved at the end of 
the trial. Additionally, recognizing that two parties may plan to 
conduct a market trial together (e.g., a manufacturer working in 
conjunction with a service provider), it proposed rules that would 
permit it to issue a part 5 license to more than one party, and to 
allow licensees to sell equipment to each other. In these instances, it 
proposed that one party must be designated as the responsible party for 
that trial. Finally, to ensure that it would have a licensee identified 
as the responsible party for all market trials, the Commission proposed 
that a part 5 license would be necessary for all market trials, even 
those for devices designed to be authorized under parts 15, 18, or 95 
of its rules.
    89. Decision. The Commission believes that the proposals will 
expand the availability of trials, so that manufacturers and service 
providers can gain valuable insight to the needs of consumers prior to 
offering new products and services to the broader marketplace. 
Commenters generally agreed, and the Commission adopts those proposals 
with only minor modifications. The Commission finds that the changes 
are in the public interest and will provide a significant benefit at 
little or no cost.
    90. The Commission believes that these rules address the concerns 
that some commenters expressed regarding the potential for 
proliferation of unauthorized equipment. The prohibition on the sale of 
such equipment to consumers has been in place for market studies under 
part 5 rules for some time, as has a requirement that each experimental 
licensee inform all participants in a market trial that the operation 
of the service or device is being conducted under an experimental 
authorization and is strictly temporary. These rules have worked well 
in the past and the Commission believes that they will continue to 
function as designed to ensure that trials do not become proxies for 
actual product or service offerings.
    91. Regarding Mayo's concern that the proposed definition of a 
product development trial in Sec.  5.5 is too narrow and should be 
expanded to explicitly include medical devices, the Commission concurs. 
As the Commission has observed in discussions regarding medical testing 
licenses, medical devices must not only be evaluated in the conceptual, 
developmental, and design stages, but also through extensive clinical 
trials. The Commission envisions that a party developing a medical 
device might seek authorization for a product development trial when, 
it has developed equipment that would not be able to be operated in 
compliance with existing Commission rules, absent an experimental radio 
authorization. To remove any uncertainty about the potential scope of a 
product development trial, the Commission modifies the definition of a 
product development trial to specifically include medical devices being 
used in clinical trials.
    92. The rules that the Commission adopts differentiate between 
product development trials and market trials, as set forth in Sec.  
5.501 and 5.502 of our rules, respectively. In a product development 
trial, licensees must own all of the equipment, must inform all 
participants of the nature of the trial, and must not market devices or 
offer services for hire. Market trials, coming later in the development 
process, will also have requirements that the licensees retain 
ownership of all equipment, but the Commission will allow limited 
marketing of equipment. Specifically, it will permit the sale of 
equipment between licensees in a market trial, provided that they each 
have an experimental license

[[Page 25153]]

authorizing a market trial. The Commission will also permit the lease 
of equipment to trial participants. As an example, a manufacturer 
holding an experimental license for a market trial may sell equipment 
to a similarly licensed service provider, but neither of those 
licensees may sell equipment to an unlicensed trial participant--
rather, those participants may only lease trial equipment. In addition, 
the rules require that if more than one licensee is authorized for a 
market trial, one of those licensees must be designated as the 
responsible party for the trial. The Commission will designate the 
responsible party, if the parties themselves do not submit that 
information to us. Finally, the rules require that licensees in market 
trials ensure that trial devices are either rendered inoperable or 
retrieved from trial participants at the conclusion of the trial, and 
that licensees notify participants in advance of the trial that 
operation of trial devices is not permitted following the trial. These 
rules essentially follow existing rules and procedures currently 
available in the ERS for limited market studies.
    93. The Commission finds it logical to require that both product 
development and market trials be authorized under conventional--rather 
than a program--experimental licenses. The Commission does so in 
recognition of the inherent difference between product development and 
market trials and ``regular'' experimentation and testing--the most 
prominent difference being the necessity to prevent an experimental 
licensee from creating a de facto service through the experimental 
licensing process. The Commission does not believe that requiring a 
conventional license--a continuation of the Commission's existing 
practice for market trials--will diminish either the ability of 
experimenters to conduct such trials or the independent value of a 
program license.
    94. The Commission believes that these rules will enhance and build 
on the rules previously available to part 5 licensees for market 
studies. They provide additional flexibility for manufacturers and 
service providers to gain an understanding of the viability of their 
products in the marketplace. The Commission is confident that 
experimental licenses will take advantage of them and provide a 
substantial benefit to the American public at minimal cost.
2. Evaluation Kits
    95. Evaluation kits typically consist of a component that a 
manufacturer intends to offer for sale, mounted on a board, with or 
without an enclosure, in configurations that provide connections to a 
power supply, easy access to terminals, and sometimes supporting 
devices or other hardware. The NPRM noted that in many instances, 
developers and system integrators seek to obtain evaluation kits from 
manufacturers to test and evaluate a component that the manufacturer 
intends to offer for sale to facilitate the purchaser's development of 
hardware and software for use with that component. The NPRM pointed out 
that, under the current rules, sales of these kits are not permitted 
before equipment authorization is granted for the component, and that 
this restriction delays the ability of manufacturers and system 
integrators to develop hardware and software for use with the 
component. Recognizing that this restriction leads to inefficiency in 
the device development process, the NPRM proposed to modify Sec.  2.803 
of the rules to allow the sale of these evaluation kits, so long as 
notice stating that the component has not yet been certified is 
provided to any buyer.
    96. Decision. There was no opposition to the proposal to modify 
Sec.  2.803 to allow for the sale of evaluation kits, provided that 
notification to the buyer is provided regarding the authorization 
status of the component. Accordingly, the Commission adopts that 
proposal. In doing so, it notes, as pointed out by the 
Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) and the Semiconductor 
Industry Association, that not all sales of evaluation kits are 
prohibited by the rules. However, the Commission's action here removes 
any ambiguity that may exist over which kits fell into the prohibited 
category, thus simplifying our regulations for the benefit of continued 
innovation. Additionally, the Commission incorporates--with some 
edits--the changes to Sec.  2.1, 2.803, and 2.805 that were recommended 
by the Semiconductor Industry Association. In particular, the 
Commission modifies the Semiconductor Industry Association's proposed 
definition of evaluation kits to include software, as well as to 
reference system integrators and product developers, so that the 
definition would read: ``An assembly of components, subassemblies, or 
circuitry, including software, created by or for a component maker, 
system integrator, or product developer for the sole purpose of 
facilitating: (i) End product developer evaluation of all or some of 
such components, subassemblies, or circuitry, or (ii) the development 
of software to be used in an end product.''
3. Importation Limits
    97. In the NPRM, the Commission also addressed rules that place 
limits on the quantity of devices that can be imported for testing and 
evaluation to determine compliance with the rules or suitability for 
marketing. The current rule in Sec.  2.1204(a)(3) permits RF devices to 
be imported in quantities up to 2000 units for products designed solely 
for operation within a radio service that requires an operating 
license, and up to 200 units for all other devices. The Office of 
Engineering and Technology proposed in its 2006 Biennial Review Staff 
Report to increase the importation limit for devices that do not 
require an individual station license from 200 units to 1200 units, and 
further proposed to treat devices that contain both licensed and 
unlicensed transmitters as licensed, and therefore subject to the 2000-
unit importation limit applicable to licensed devices. The Commission 
reiterated that proposal in the NPRM, stating that these limits would 
better reflect current manufacturing, design, and marketing techniques, 
and would also decrease the administrative burden on both industry and 
the Commission.
    98. Decision. The rules limiting the importation of devices that 
have not yet been authorized are intended to strike a balance between 
ensuring that manufacturers have a sufficient number of devices 
available for compliance testing and market studies, while also 
ensuring that unauthorized devices are not distributed to the general 
public thereby reducing the risk of harmful interference to authorized 
devices. Originally, the Commission provided that unauthorized devices 
could be imported in ``limited quantities.'' That ambiguous designation 
was later clarified to a limit of 200 devices for testing and 
evaluation to determine compliance with the Commission's Rules and 
Regulations or suitability for marketing. Subsequently, in 1998, the 
Commission adopted the current importation limits of 2000 devices for 
services in which a license is needed and 200 devices for all other 
services. Since the Commission last modified its rules, the 
communications market has undergone significant changes characterized 
by a proliferation of both licensed and unlicensed devices, as well as 
highly-sophisticated new devices--such as the latest mobile phones--
that contain several licensed and unlicensed transmitters. Such devices 
are being introduced to the marketplace at ever increasing rates. These 
changes have led to requirements for extensive testing, as well as 
significant market research

[[Page 25154]]

trials, to ensure that these devices will meet user expectations. 
Device testing is further augmented by the need for devices sold to 
multiple telecommunications providers to be tested on each provider's 
network. Thus, based on our experience--as well as the comments--the 
current importation limits are no longer adequate to meet the 
industry's needs. The need for increased device testing, in turn, has 
put additional pressure on the Commission to issue timely waivers of 
the existing limits, so that manufacturers and telecommunications 
providers can meet their deadlines.
    99. The Commission therefore adopts the proposal to increase the 
current importation limits. However, based on the comments and our 
experience in granting waivers of the current limits, the Commission 
believes that the proposed increase was too modest to make a 
significant difference to manufacturers or to Commission staff. In 
particular, it notes that several commenters--requested that the 
Commission raise the limits beyond what was proposed and that it apply 
a common limit for all devices. The Commission agrees with the 
commenters, and thus is adopting rules that increase the importation 
limit for all devices--those that require a license and those that do 
not--to 4000 units. Adopting a single limit for all devices will 
decrease the administrative burden on both manufacturers and the 
Commission. Additionally, given the number of devices available that 
contain a mix of unlicensed transmitters and transmitters that require 
operation pursuant to a Commission license, it finds that the current 
distinction among device types is less meaningful. Furthermore, the 
Commission does not expect that an increase in the limit will increase 
the risk of interference from devices that are solely unlicensed. Based 
on its experience, the Commission believes that a new 4000-unit limit--
which is one-third larger than the 3000-unit limit suggested by 
Qualcomm--will be sufficient to meet industry's needs. The Commission 
finds that a 4000-unit limit strikes the proper balance among ensuring 
that sufficient devices are available for testing, protecting 
authorized devices from harmful interference, and freeing up Commission 
resources from addressing excessive numbers of waiver requests. With 
respect to adoption of the 8000-unit limit recommended by TIA, the 
Commission finds a four-fold increase would be excessive. To the extent 
that a TIA member or other party has a specific need to import more 
than 4000 units for testing, it will continue its past practice of 
providing reasonable flexibility on a case-by-case basis, subject to 
justification for a higher number of imported units. Under this 
approach, the Commission can still accommodate the interest of parties, 
such as TIA, that advocated for a larger importation limit. 
Accordingly, the Commission finds that this balanced approach benefits 
the public by reducing administrative burdens, while guarding against 
the costs of harmful interference to authorized Commission devices.

F. Modifying and Improving Rules and Procedures

    100. Anechoic Chambers and Faraday Cages. In the NPRM, the 
Commission proposed to add rules to codify existing practices regarding 
the treatment of experiments conducted within anechoic chambers and 
Faraday cages. Specifically, it proposed to permit RF tests and 
experiments that are fully contained within an anechoic chamber or a 
Faraday cage to occur without the need for obtaining an experimental 
license, and inquired whether there should be a minimum standard for 
the shielding effectiveness of the chamber.
    101. Commenters were supportive of the NPRM's proposal to codify 
the Commission's existing policy of allowing RF tests and experiments 
that are fully contained within an anechoic chamber or a Faraday cage 
without the need for obtaining an experimental license. Therefore, the 
Commission adopted that proposal. In doing so, it observes that all 
experimenters, even those operating in RF enclosed facilities, are 
required to comply with the general prohibition against causing harmful 
interference to other spectrum users. Thus, the Commission expects that 
experimenters who use these facilities will ensure proper functioning 
prior to use, including ensuring sufficient isolation of RF energy. 
Further, the Commission observes it is codifying existing practice that 
has been in place for quite some time, and that it received no 
complaints from other spectrum users of harmful interference. 
Therefore, the Commission does not believe it is necessary to adopt 
additional standards for emission limits outside these RF enclosures. 
This approach will reduce administrative burdens and provide cost 
savings to the public.
    102. Inter and Intra-Agency Coordination Procedures. The Commission 
believes that its existing coordination processes and procedures are 
sufficient. It disagrees with commenters who assert that, once 
submitted, application status is not readily apparent from checking the 
on-line experimental licensing system (ELS). In concert with NTIA, the 
Commission has taken action to provide on-line tools for applicants. 
First, it notes that applicants can query the ELS for the status of 
specific applications. Second, at the Commission's recommendation, NTIA 
has made available on its Web site status information regarding the 
Commission's applications--including experimental applications--that 
are being coordinated between the two agencies. Third, applicants may, 
and often do, call or email OET experimental licensing staff for status 
updates, and they respond to all inquiries in a timely manner. In that 
connection, the Commission notes that its experimental licensing staff 
routinely corresponds with applicants to work out mutually acceptable 
solutions for all parties. However, the Commission recognizes that 
parties might find value in having access to more detailed information 
about the status of their applications and additional methods for 
interacting with the Commission. The Commission is working on projects 
to upgrade many of the Commission's electronic filing systems, and it 
will endeavor to modify the ELS to make more detailed information 
available. Finally, regarding the timeframe for coordinating with NTIA, 
the Commission and NTIA have agreed in a Memorandum of Understanding 
(MOU) to coordination procedures between the two agencies, including a 
requirement for coordination to be accomplished within 15 working days 
of such requests. The vast majority of applications are coordinated 
within this timeframe. In cases where complex concerns are raised, our 
staff works closely with applicants and NTIA staff to find mutually 
agreeable solutions. The Commission finds that its current approach 
reduces administrative burdens and provides cost savings to the public.
    103. Special Temporary Authorization. In the NPRM, the Commission 
proposed changes to Sec.  5.61, which contains rules for STAs. As an 
initial matter, BAE Systems points out that it appears that the NPRM 
removed the requirement to file such requests electronically, and 
recommends that the Commission modify the proposed rule to restore that 
requirement. The Commission agrees with BAE's recommendation. The 
proposed removal of this requirement was inadvertent, as the Commission 
has required electronic filing for quite some time. Accordingly, the 
Commission is retaining this requirement in Sec.  5.61 of its rules. 
BAE

[[Page 25155]]

also asks that the Commission clarify the rule language in Sec.  
5.61(c), which requires an application for a conventional experimental 
license be ``consistent with the terms and conditions'' of the prior-
granted STA in order to obtain an extension of that STA. BAE 
specifically asks if this means that the application for a conventional 
license must mirror exactly every technical parameter of the prior-
granted STA. Additionally, BAE asks about the situation in which a 
conventional license is associated with a different government contract 
than the STA or when it is for internal research and development 
(IR&D), rather than in support of a contract. The Commission takes this 
opportunity to state that the parameters of the conventional license 
application do not need to mirror exactly the parameters of the STA. 
They may differ so long as any changes do not increase the interference 
potential of the equipment under test. For example, a change to lower 
power or antenna height would be permissible, but an increase in those 
parameters would not. Likewise, a change in location or addition of 
locations would not be permissible under this rule. Under this 
guidance, a change in contract number or change to support IR&D rather 
than a contract would also be acceptable. The Commission will add 
clarifying language to the rule, which codifies our existing practice 
and reduces regulatory burdens on some experimental applicants.
    104. The Commission observes that a part 5 authorization may be 
granted for a broad range of research and experimentation, including 
market trials. Additionally, an ERS applicant must describe the program 
of research and experimentation proposed and the specific objectives it 
seeks to accomplish stating ``how the program of experimentation has a 
reasonable promise of contribution to the development, extension, or 
expansion, or utilization of the radio art, or is along lines not 
already investigated.'' The Commission relies on its staff to exercise 
their expertise and discretion in determining whether particular 
applications meet the requirements of the part 5 rules and find no need 
to modify those rules. The Commission finds that the current approach 
reduces administrative burdens and provides cost savings to the public.
    105. Changes in Equipment and Emission Characteristics. The NPRM 
proposed to modify Sec.  5.77(a) of the Commission's rules to provide 
additional flexibility for licensees to make changes to equipment 
without prior Commission consent provided that certain conditions are 
met. Specifically, that proposal would require that the power output of 
the new equipment comply with the license and that the transmitter as a 
whole or output power rating of the transmitter not be changed. BAE 
suggests modifying these two conditions to a single one stating that 
changes can be made to equipment provided that the Effective Radiated 
Power (ERP) and directivity comply with the license and the regulations 
governing the license. The Commission agrees that such a change would 
be beneficial and provide licensees with additional flexibility to 
alter equipment as necessary without increasing interference potential 
to authorized services. Therefore, the Commission modified Sec.  5.77 
to make this change. BAE also requests that the Commission alter 
proposed Sec.  5.77(b) to retain language that states that licensees 
who make changes to their emissions and want such change to become a 
permanent part of their license may address such changes at the next 
renewal, rather than adopt the NPRM's proposal to require that an 
application for modification be filed. The Commission disagrees with 
BAE that any changes are necessary here. The NPRM's proposal provides 
more flexibility than the previous rule, as it allows applicants to 
file an immediate application for modification to make emission changes 
permanent. The Commission notes that such a modification can also be 
made in conjunction with a renewal application as is current practice. 
Thus, the Commission adopts the NPRM's proposed rule change to Sec.  
5.77(b).
    106. Recognition of Internal Research and Development. BAE observes 
that many applicants for experimental authorization that support 
homeland security, public safety, and defense priorities require such 
licenses for IR&D work, in addition to contractual work with various 
agencies. Accordingly, BAE requests that the Commission explicitly 
recognize IR&D work on experimental licenses. While the Commission 
recognizes the value of IR&D in the development of new equipment and 
techniques, it does not believe that it needs to be explicitly 
recognized on the experimental license or within the experimental 
licensing system database. The Commission notes that the vast majority 
of experimentation is for internal development rather than under a 
government contract, and so there is no need to track such instances as 
a separate category. The Commission also notes that it collects 
government contract information because it is needed in order to grant 
a non-Federal entity the ability to conduct experiments on a Federal 
facility's property.
    107. Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Equipment. Lockheed Martin 
observes that both Commission Form 442 and Sec.  5.61 of the 
Commission's Rules (``Procedure for obtaining a special temporary 
authorization'') require applicants to identify all equipment to be 
used in an experiment by supplying the manufacturer name and model 
number of that equipment. Lockheed Martin argues that this requirement 
is unnecessary for COTS equipment because Sec.  5.77 of the 
Commission's rules already permits experimental licensees to make 
changes to transmitters ``without specific authorization from the 
Commission provided that the change does not result in operations 
inconsistent'' (with the terms of the authorization). Lockheed Martin 
therefore recommends that an experimental applicant or licensee not be 
required to specify manufacturer identification of any COTS equipment 
used as part of an experiment. Alternatively, Lockheed Martin 
recommends that the Commission clarify that COTS equipment can be 
substituted during the term of the experimental authorization, provided 
that it otherwise complies with the requirements of the license.
    108. The Commission agrees with Lockheed Martin and notes that it 
has routinely allowed experimental licensees to substitute one piece of 
COTS equipment for another, provided it does not generally increase the 
risk of harmful interference to authorized spectrum users. To avoid any 
confusion on this matter, the Commission is revising the instructions 
to Form 442 by adding a note stating: ``Provided that commercial off-
the-shelf (COTS) equipment used in experiments is operating in 
accordance with its certification, substituting one piece of COTS 
equipment for another without notifying the Commission is permitted so 
long as such equipment substitution will not result in operations 
inconsistent with the terms of the authorization.'' Licensees should be 
aware, however, that if they make any modifications to COTS equipment 
that would invalidate the equipment's certification, they must modify 
their experimental license accordingly. The Commission believes that 
this added clarification will reduce regulatory burdens on 
experimenters by enabling them to more easily choose equipment for 
conducting their testing, while not increasing the potential for 
causing

[[Page 25156]]

harmful interference to authorized Commission radio services.
    109. Special Grant Conditions. Lockheed Martin recommends that the 
Commission change its default practice of issuing special grant 
conditions that restrict experimentation when an applicant discloses 
that its experiment supports a U.S. government contract. Lockheed 
Martin argues that, while there are some instances where coordination 
requirements in Federal or shared Federal/non-Federal bands will 
necessitate restricting experimental transmissions only to those 
necessary to fulfill a government contract, there are other instances 
where a band can support developers who are working both toward meeting 
the specific requirements of a contract and on related independent 
activities designed to advance the state-of-the-art.
    110. The Commission is sympathetic to Lockheed Martin's arguments 
regarding making more efficient use of the spectrum and reducing 
administrative burdens; however, it declines to make the requested 
changes, as many special grant procedures are a direct consequence of 
the type of experiment or location. For example, the Commission does 
not have the legal authority to allow experimentation at a defense 
facility without permission of the military. Accordingly, the decision 
to impose special grant conditions will continue to be made on a case-
by-case basis. The Commission notes however, that the use of special 
grant conditions in some circumstances does not preclude entities from 
obtaining experimental licenses, either conventional or program, to 
experiment in most bands for their own internal research and 
development efforts. The Commission finds that its approach best 
balances protecting the public from harmful interference to existing 
radio services and reducing regulatory burdens on experimental 
applicants.
    111. Permanent Discontinuance of License. Clearwire contends that 
it is difficult for a service licensee to determine the source of 
interference to its operations if it does not know whether experiments 
have been discontinued or did not take place under an authorization 
listed in the Commission's database. As a remedy, Clearwire recommends 
that the Commission enforce Sec.  5.81 of the rules, which requires 
that ERS licensees who have permanently discontinued their experiments 
notify OET. As Clearwire notes, the rules already require licensees to 
notify the Commission if they permanently discontinue their 
experimental operations. However, it may be that some licensees simply 
just allow their licenses to expire once they conclude their 
experiments. To ensure that licensees are fully aware of their 
obligation to notify the Commission if they cease experimental 
operations prior to their license expiration date, the Commission adds 
clarifying language to explicitly state this in the rule in Sec.  5.81. 
In addition, the Commission notes that if it becomes aware of rule 
violations, the Commission can take disciplinary action to include 
fines and/or loss of ability to obtain future licenses.
    112. Coordination Charges. Clearwire states that it charges ERS 
applicants the costs of coordinating requests for experimental use of 
spectrum that Clearwire uses on a primary basis. Boeing disagrees with 
this practice, and argues that because licensees under the 
Communications Act do not acquire an ownership interest in their 
licensed spectrum, the Commission has statutory authority to prohibit 
licensees from charging fees for reviewing and approving coordination 
requests for experimental use of spectrum. Clearwire responds that 
while it agrees with Boeing that ``payment for approval'' by authorized 
licensees would be inappropriate, such licensees should be permitted to 
recover their costs of coordinating with ERS applicants. Although the 
Commission has discretion under part 5 to condition a license on 
coordination with the primary licensee in a frequency band, the part 5 
rules do not address the charging issue. Further, the Commission notes 
that it did not address this issue in the NPRM. Because the Commission 
does not have proper notice of this issue, the issue is beyond the 
scope of this proceeding and is not addressed any further.
    113. Electronic Filing of Informal Objections to Experimental 
License Applications Pursuant to Sec.  5.95. The Commission adopted 
electronic filing procedures for experimental license applications 
using the ELS in 1998, and in a subsequent Order in 2003, mandated the 
electronic filing of all experimental applications. In that Order, the 
Commission also adopted a non-substantive procedural rule codifying in 
Sec.  5.95 of the rules the existing procedures for filing informal 
objections to experimental license applications, but directed filers to 
make submissions pursuant to the requirements in Sec. Sec.  1.41-1.52 
of the rules without clarifying how filers should make submissions 
electronically.
    114. Because the ELS did not support processing informal objections 
at the time Sec.  5.95 was adopted, the Commission adopts a non-
substantive procedural change to Sec.  5.95 to clarify that filers 
shall no longer file informal objections using the process for print 
mail submissions in Sec. Sec.  1.41-1.52, but shall submit all informal 
objections electronically via the ELS as otherwise required in Sec.  
5.55 of the rules. OET is releasing a public notice announcing the date 
after which no further paper filings will be accepted. This change 
merely clarifies the requirements for mandatory electronic filing. 
Thus, it is procedural in nature and does not substantively change the 
information required to be filed with the Commission, making the notice 
and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act 
inapplicable.

Procedural Matters

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    115. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA) \1\ an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in this 
proceeding.\2\ The Commission sought written public comment on the 
proposals in the NPRM, including comments on the IRFA. The comments 
received are discussed below. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.\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 Promoting Expanded Opportunities for Radio 
Experimentation and Market Trials Under part 5 of the Commission's 
Rules and Streamlining Other Related Rules, ET Docket No. 10-236; 
2006 Biennial Review of Telecommunications Regulations--Part 2, 
Administered by the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET), ET 
Docket 06-155; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 25 FCC Rcd 16544 
(2010); Erratum, 26 FCC Rcd 3828 (2011).
    \3\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Need for and Objectives of the Report and Order

    116. The NPRM sought to promote innovation and efficiency in 
spectrum use in the Commission's part 5 Experimental Radio Service 
(ERS). The NPRM proposed specific steps to accelerate the rate at which 
innovative ideas transform from prototypes to consumer devices and 
services. These proposals were designed to contribute to advancements 
in devices and services available to the American public by enabling a 
quicker equipment development process and promoting greater spectrum 
efficiency over the long term.
    117. The objective of the Report and Order (R&O) is to provide 
increased opportunities for experimentation and innovation. To this 
end, the R&O establishes new program and testing

[[Page 25157]]

experimental radio license that will eliminate administrative burdens 
on those who are engaged in ongoing programs of research, 
experimentation, and testing. The current rules allow for an 
experimenter to apply for and be issued a license to cover a single or 
a series of closely related experiments--referred to hereinafter as a 
conventional experimental license--which generally limits the scope of 
the experiment, frequencies, emissions, and power levels. If licensees 
want to vary any of their authorized parameters, they must apply for 
new or modified licenses. While the current process works well for 
those applicants who need to undertake only a single experiment, it can 
be cumbersome for applicants who wish to pursue ongoing research and 
can significantly delay the introduction of new technologies and 
services into the marketplace. The R&O allows the FCC to continue to 
issue conventional experimental licenses for specific types of 
experimentation, but also permits issuance of program and testing 
experimental licenses to promote ongoing research. The testing licenses 
are being created to advance the critical areas of medical and 
compliance testing. All of these new licenses will allow researchers 
and laboratories to conduct multiple non-related experiments under a 
single authorization over a longer period of time, thus eliminating 
regulatory delay and uncertainty.
    118. The R&O also broadens opportunities for market studies by 
revising and consolidating the Commission's existing ERS Rules, 
promotes greater overall experimentation by streamlining those rules 
and procedures, and opens new opportunities for experimentation by 
making targeted modifications to those rules and procedures.

B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response 
to the IRFA

    119. One commenting party, Stephen Crowley, responded directly to 
the IRFA. Crowley observes that the IRFA provided an estimate of the 
number of small businesses involved in a variety of radio services, but 
contends that the IRFA did not provide an analysis describing the 
impact of the proposed rules on small businesses. Crowley further 
contends that the IRFA omitted a class of small business that would be 
impacted if the proposals set forth in the NPRM were adopted--namely 
wireless technology developers. Crowley notes that such developers were 
precluded from obtaining research program experimental licenses under 
the proposed rules, and argues that this proposal would force wireless 
technology developers to obtain conventional experimental licenses, 
which would impose delays and increased costs on them. Crowley 
therefore recommends as a significant alternative to the proposed rules 
that the Commission permit wireless technology developers and other 
commercial entities to be eligible for research program experimental 
licenses.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Crowley Comments to NPRM at 8-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    120. Regarding Crowley's contention that the IRFA did not describe 
the impact of the proposed rules on small businesses, the IRFA 
solicited comment on that issue, as required by the RFA. Also, the IRFA 
solicited comment on the impact of the proposed rules on Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (Except Satellite), which includes wireless 
technology developers. Finally, a number of commenting parties 
expressed the same concern as Crowley did regarding the proposed 
exclusion of commercial entities from receiving program experimental 
licenses. Based on those comments, the Commission decided to modify its 
proposal to permit manufacturers that have demonstrated expertise in 
radio spectrum management to receive such licenses.

C. Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration

    121. Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, the 
Commission is required to respond to any comments filed by the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA), and to 
provide a detailed statement of any change made to the proposed rules 
as a result of those comments. The Chief Counsel did not file any 
comments in response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.

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

    122. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, 
where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that will 
be affected by the proposed rules.\5\ The RFA generally defines the 
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' \6\ In addition, the term ``small business'' has the 
same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small 
Business Act.\7\ A small business concern is one which: (1) Is 
independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of 
operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the 
SBA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3), 604(a)(3).
    \6\ Id., 601(6).
    \7\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the 
definition of ``small business concern'' in the Small Business Act, 
15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory 
definition of a small business applies ``unless an agency, after 
consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes 
one or more definitions of such terms which are appropriate to the 
activities of the agency and publishes such definitions(s) in the 
Federal Register.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    123. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that are not 
easily categorized at present. The Commission therefore describes here, 
at the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size 
standards that encompass entities that could be directly affected by 
the proposals under consideration.\8\ As of 2009, small businesses 
represented 99.9% of the 27.5 million businesses in the United States, 
according to the SBA.\9\ Additionally, a ``small organization'' is 
generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned 
and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' \10\ Nationwide, as of 
2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small organizations.\11\ 
Finally, the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is defined 
generally as ``governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, 
villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of 
less than fifty thousand.'' \12\ Census Bureau data for 2007 indicate 
that there were 89,527 governmental jurisdictions in the United 
States.\13\ We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88,761 entities 
may qualify as ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' \14\ Thus, we 
estimate that

[[Page 25158]]

most governmental jurisdictions are small. There is an overall trend of 
increasing experimental activity. For example, disposals (grants and 
dismissals) under the ERS increased from 1,067 in 2000 to 1,235 in 2005 
to 1,553 in 2011.\15\ By contrast, much less activity has taken place 
under our developmental rules, which we are eliminating in the Report 
and Order. Since 1999 in the non-broadcast (wireless) radio services, 
ten developmental licenses were granted under Part 22 (Public Mobile 
Services), one was granted under Part 80 (Maritime Services), 37 were 
granted under Part 87 (Aviation Services), and eight were granted under 
Part 90 (Private Land Mobile Radio Services). None were granted since 
1999 under Part 101 (Fixed Microwave Services).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(3)-(6).
    \9\ See SBA, Office of Advocacy, ``Frequently Asked Questions,'' 
available at http://web.sba.gov/faqs/faqindex.cfm?areaID=24 (last 
visited Aug. 31, 2012).
    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \11\ Independent Sector, The New NonProfit Almanac & Desk 
Reference (2010).
    \12\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \13\ U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United 
States: 2011, Table 427 (2007).
    \14\ The 2007 U.S Census data for small governmental 
organizations are not presented based on the size of the population 
in each such organization. There were 89,476 local governmental 
organizations in 2007. If we assume that county, municipal, 
township, and school district organizations are more likely than 
larger governmental organizations to have populations of 50,000 or 
less, the total of these organizations is 52,095. If we make the 
same population assumption about special districts, specifically 
that they are likely to have a population of 50,000 or less, and 
also assume that special districts are different from county, 
municipal, township, and school districts, in 2007 there were 37,381 
such special districts. Therefore, there are a total of 89,476 local 
government organizations. As a basis of estimating how many of these 
89,476 local government organizations were small, in 2011, we note 
that there were a total of 715 cities and towns (incorporated places 
and minor civil divisions) with populations over 50,000. City And 
Towns Totals: Vintage 2011--U.S. Census Bureau, available at http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2011/index.html. If we 
subtract the 715 cities and towns that meet or exceed the 50,000 
population threshold, we conclude that approximately 88,761 are 
small. U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of The United States 
2011, Tables 427, 426 (Data cited therein are from 2007).
    \15\ These figures include all part 5 experimental application 
types: New licenses, modifications of licenses, assignment of 
licenses, license renewals, transfers of control, and grants of 
Special Temporary Authorization. See https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/GenericSearch.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    124. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). Since 
2007, the Census Bureau has placed wireless firms within this new, 
broad, economic census category.\16\ Prior to that time, such firms 
were within the now-superseded categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular 
and Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' \17\ Under the present and 
prior categories, the SBA has deemed a wireless business to be small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees.\18\ Because Census Bureau data are not 
yet available for the new category, we will estimate small business 
prevalence using the prior categories and associated data. For the 
category of Paging, data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms that 
operated for the entire year.\19\ Of this total, 804 firms had 
employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three firms had employment of 
1,000 employees or more.\20\ For the category of Cellular and Other 
Wireless Telecommunications, data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 
firms that operated for the entire year.\21\ Of this total, 1,378 firms 
had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment 
of 1,000 employees or more.\22\ Thus, we estimate that the majority of 
wireless firms are small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions, ``517210 
Wireless Telecommunications Categories (Except Satellite)''; http://www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/ND517210.HTM#N517210.
    \17\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517211 
Paging''; http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.; U.S. 
Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517212 Cellular and Other 
Wireless Telecommunications''; http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.
    \18\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210 (2007 NAICS). The 
now-superseded, pre-2007 CFR citations were 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS 
codes 517211 and 517212 (referring to the 2002 NAICS).
    \19\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size Including Legal Form of 
Organization,'' Table 5, NAICS code 517211 (issued Nov. 2005).
    \20\ Id. 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 for firms with ``1000 
employees or more.''
    \21\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size Including Legal Form of 
Organization,'' Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005).
    \22\ Id. 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 for firms with ``1000 
employees or more.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    125. Fixed Microwave Services. Fixed microwave services include 
common carrier,\23\ private operational-fixed,\24\ and broadcast 
auxiliary radio services.\25\ At present, there are approximately 
22,015 common carrier fixed licensees and 61,670 private operational-
fixed licensees and broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in the 
microwave services. The Commission has not created a size standard for 
a small business specifically with respect to fixed microwave services. 
For purposes of this analysis, the Commission uses the SBA small 
business size standard for the category Wireless Telecommunications 
Carriers (except Satellite), which is 1,500 or fewer employees.\26\ The 
Commission does not have data specifying the number of these licensees 
that have no more than 1,500 employees, and thus are unable at this 
time to estimate with greater precision the number of fixed microwave 
service licensees that would qualify as small business concerns under 
the SBA's small business size standard. Consequently, the Commission 
estimates that there are 22,015 or fewer common carrier fixed licensees 
and 61,670 or fewer private operational-fixed licensees and broadcast 
auxiliary radio licensees in the microwave services that may be small 
and may be affected by the rules and policies proposed herein. We note, 
however, that the common carrier microwave fixed licensee category 
includes some large entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See 47 CFR 101 et seq. for common carrier fixed microwave 
services (except Multipoint Distribution Service).
    \24\ Persons eligible under parts 80 and 90 of the Commission's 
rules can use Private Operational-Fixed Microwave services. See 47 
CFR parts 80 and 90. Stations in this service are called 
operational-fixed to distinguish them from common carrier and public 
fixed stations. Only the licensee may use the operational-fixed 
station, and only for communications related to the licensee's 
commercial, industrial, or safety operations.
    \25\ Auxiliary Microwave Service is governed by part 74 of Title 
47 of the Commission's Rules. See 47 CFR part 74. This service is 
available to licensees of broadcast stations and to broadcast and 
cable network entities. Broadcast auxiliary microwave stations are 
used for relaying broadcast television signals from the studio to 
the transmitter, or between two points such as a main studio and an 
auxiliary studio. The service also includes mobile television 
pickups, which relay signals from a remote location back to the 
studio.
    \26\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    126. Unlicensed Personal Communications Services. As its name 
indicates, Unlicensed Personal Communications Services (UPCS) is not a 
licensed service. UPCS consists of intentional radiators operating in 
the frequency bands 1920-1930 MHz and 2390-2400 MHz that provide a wide 
array of mobile and ancillary fixed communication services to 
individuals and businesses. The Report and Order potentially affects 
UPCS operations in the 1920-1930 MHz band; operations in those 
frequencies are given flexibility to deploy both voice and data-based 
services. There is no accurate source for the number of operators in 
the UPCS. Since 2007, the Census Bureau has placed wireless firms 
within the new, broad, economic census category Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite).\27\ Prior to that time, 
such firms were within the now-superseded category of ``Paging'' and 
``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' \28\ Under the 
present and prior categories, the SBA has deemed a wireless business to 
be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.\29\ Because Census Bureau 
data are not yet available for the new category, we will estimate small 
business prevalence using the prior categories and associated data. For 
the category of Paging, data for 2002 show

[[Page 25159]]

that there were 807 firms that operated for the entire year.\30\ Of 
this total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 
three firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more.\31\ For the 
category of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, data for 
2002 show that there were 1,397 firms that operated for the entire 
year.\32\ Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer 
employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more.\33\ 
Thus, we estimate that the majority of wireless firms are small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions, ``517210 
Wireless Telecommunications Categories (Except Satellite)''; http://www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/ND517210.HTM#N517210.
    \28\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517211 
Paging''; http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.; U.S. 
Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517212 Cellular and Other 
Wireless Telecommunications''; http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.
    \29\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210 (2007 NAICS). The 
now-superseded, pre-2007 CFR citations were 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS 
codes 517211 and 517212 (referring to the 2002 NAICS).
    \30\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of 
Organization,'' Table 5, NAICS code 517211 (issued Nov. 2005).
    \31\ Id. 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 for firms with ``1000 
employees or more.''
    \32\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of 
Organization,'' Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005).
    \33\ Id. 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 for firms with ``1000 
employees or more.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    127. Aviation and Marine Radio Services. There are approximately 
26,162 aviation, 34,555 marine (ship), and 3,296 marine (coast) 
licensees.\34\ The Commission has not developed a small business size 
standard specifically applicable to all licensees. For purposes of this 
analysis, the Commission will use the SBA small business size standard 
for the category Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except 
Satellite), which is 1,500 or fewer employees.\35\ The Commission is 
unable to determine how many of those licensed fall under this 
standard. For purposes of our evaluations in this analysis, we estimate 
that there are up to approximately 62,969 licensees that are small 
businesses under the SBA standard.\36\ In 1998, the Commission held an 
auction of 42 VHF Public Coast licenses in the 157.1875-157.4500 MHz 
(ship transmit) and 161.775-162.0125 MHz (coast transmit) bands. For 
this auction, the Commission defined a ``small'' business as an entity 
that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average 
gross revenues for the preceding three years not to exceed $15 million 
dollars. In addition, a ``very small'' business is one that, together 
with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues 
for the preceding three years not to exceed $3 million dollars.\37\ 
Further, the Commission made available Automated Maritime 
Telecommunications System (``AMTS'') licenses in Auctions 57 and 
61.\38\ Winning bidders could claim status as a very small business or 
a very small business. A very small business for this service is 
defined as an entity with attributed average annual gross revenues that 
do not exceed $3 million for the preceding three years, and a small 
business is defined as an entity with attributed average annual gross 
revenues of more than $3 million but less than $15 million for the 
preceding three years.\39\ Three of the winning bidders in Auction 57 
qualified as small or very small businesses, while three winning 
entities in Auction 61 qualified as very small businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Vessels that are not required by law to carry a radio and 
do not make international voyages or communications are not required 
to obtain an individual license. See Amendment of parts 80 and 87 of 
the Commission's rules to Permit Operation of Certain Domestic Ship 
and Aircraft Radio Stations Without Individual Licenses, Report and 
Order, WT 96-82, 11 FCC Rcd 14849 (1996).
    \35\ See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
    \36\ A licensee may have a license in more than one category.
    \37\ Amendment of the Commission's Rules Concerning Maritime 
Communications, PR Docket No. 92-257, Third Report and Order and 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 19853 (1998).
    \38\ See ``Automated Maritime Telecommunications System Spectrum 
Auction Scheduled for September 15, 2004, Notice and Filing 
Requirements, Minimum Opening Bids, Upfront Payments and Other 
Auction Procedures,'' Public Notice, 19 FCC Rcd 9518 (WTB 2004); 
``Auction of Automated Maritime Telecommunications System Licenses 
Scheduled for August 3, 2005, Notice and Filing Requirements, 
Minimum Opening Bids, Upfront Payments and Other Auction Procedures 
for Auction No. 61,'' Public Notice, 20 FCC Rcd 7811 (WTB 2005).
    \39\ See 47 CFR 80.1252.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    128. Public Safety Radio Services. Public Safety radio services 
include police, fire, local government, forestry conservation, highway 
maintenance, and emergency medical services.\40\ There are a total of 
approximately 127,540 licensees in these services. Governmental 
entities \41\ as well as private businesses comprise the licensees for 
these services. All governmental entities with populations of less than 
50,000 fall within the definition of a small entity.\42\ The small 
private businesses fall within the ``wireless'' category described 
supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ With the exception of the special emergency service, these 
services are governed by subpart B of part 90 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 CFR 90.15-90.27. The police service includes approximately 
27,000 licensees that serve state, county, and municipal enforcement 
through telephony (voice), telegraphy (code) and teletype and 
facsimile (printed material). The fire radio service includes 
approximately 23,000 licensees comprised of private volunteer or 
professional fire companies as well as units under governmental 
control. The local government service that is presently comprised of 
approximately 41,000 licensees that are state, county, or municipal 
entities that use the radio for official purposes not covered by 
other public safety services. There are approximately 7,000 
licensees within the forestry service which is comprised of 
licensees from state departments of conservation and private forest 
organizations who set up communications networks among fire lookout 
towers and ground crews. The approximately 9,000 state and local 
governments are licensed to highway maintenance service provide 
emergency and routine communications to aid other public safety 
services to keep main roads safe for vehicular traffic. The 
approximately 1,000 licensees in the Emergency Medical Radio Service 
(``EMRS'') use the 39 channels allocated to this service for 
emergency medical service communications related to the delivery of 
emergency medical treatment. 47 CFR 90.15-90.27. The approximately 
20,000 licensees in the special emergency service include medical 
services, rescue organizations, veterinarians, handicapped persons, 
disaster relief organizations, school buses, beach patrols, 
establishments in isolated areas, communications standby facilities, 
and emergency repair of public communications facilities. 47 CFR 
90.33-90.55.
    \41\ See 47 CFR 1.1162.
    \42\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    129. The Report and Order establishes a new type of experimental 
radio license--the program experimental radio license--to permit 
qualified institutions to conduct an ongoing program of research and 
experimentation that would otherwise require the issuance of multiple 
individual experimental radio license authorizations under the 
Commission's existing rules. Program experimental radio licensees will 
have new requirements to file notification of planned experiments to be 
conducted under the license, resolve interference concerns that are 
raised by other licensees, and file post-experiment reports with the 
Commission. The Report and Order also consolidates, clarifies, and 
streamlines existing rules to facilitate experimentation in the radio 
spectrum. These rules will permit qualified applicants to engage in 
additional marketing activities, while streamlining existing rules to 
eliminate burdensome regulations. We project that by creating a new 
license type and by revising our existing rules, reporting, 
recordkeeping and other compliance requirements associated with the 
issuance of an experimental radio licenses will be reduced.

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

    130. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its final rules, 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

[[Page 25160]]

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.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    131. We find that our rules in this proceeding will help alleviate 
burdens on small entities by simplifying procedures and reducing 
paperwork, and no alternative rules would be less burdensome. We do not 
find it appropriate to establish different rules for small entities, as 
we believe that the rules that we have adopted are not burdensome on 
any entities.

G. Federal Rules That Might Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Rules

    132. None.

H. Report to Congress

    133. The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, 
including this Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, in a report to be 
sent to Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. In addition, 
the Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including this 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See 5 U.S.C. 604(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Congressional Review Act

    134. The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order to 
Congress and the Government Accountability Office, pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Ordering Clauses

    135. Pursuant to Sections 4(i), 301, and 303 of the Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 301, and 303, this Report 
and Order is adopted.
    137. Parts 0, 1, 2, 5, 22, 73, 74, 80, 87, 90, and 101 of the 
Commission's Rules, 47 CFR parts 0, 1, 2, 5, 22, 73, 74, 80, 87, 90, 
and 101, are amended as set forth in the Order. These revisions will 
take effect 30 days after publication of a summary of this Report and 
Order in the Federal Register, except for Sec. Sec.  2.803(c)(2), 5.59, 
5.61, 5.63, 5.64, 5.65, 5.73, 5.79, 5.81, 5.107, 5.115, 5.121, 5.123, 
5.205, 5.207, 5.217(b), 5.307, 5.308, 5.309, 5.311, 5.404, 5.405, 
5.406, 5.504, and 5.602. These rules contain new or modified 
information collection requirements that require approval by the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 
and will become effective after the Commission publishes a notice in 
the Federal Register announcing the approval and effective date.
    136. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Report and 
Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to Congress 
and the Government Accountability Office, pursuant to the Congressional 
Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 0

    Organization and functions (Government agencies)

47 CFR Part 1

    Administrative practice and procedures, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

47 CFR Parts 2 and 74

    Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

47 CFR Part 5

    Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

47 CFR Parts 22, 73, 80, 87, 90 and 101

    Communications equipment, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR parts 0, 1, 2, 5, 22, 73, 74, 
80, 87, 90 and 101 as follows:

PART 0--COMMISSION ORGANIZATION

0
1. The authority citation for part 0 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Sec. 5, 48 Stat. 1068, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 155, 
225, unless otherwise noted.

0
2. Section 0.406 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  0.406  The rules and regulations.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Part 5, experimental radio service. Part 5 provides for the 
temporary use of radio frequencies for research in the radio art, for 
communications involving other research projects, for the development 
of equipment, data, or techniques, and for the conduct of equipment 
product development or market trials.
* * * * *

PART 1--PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

0
3. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 79 et seq.; 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 
155, 157, 225, 227, 303(r), and 309, Cable Landing License Act of 
1921, 47 U.S.C. 35-39, and the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job 
Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96.


0
4. Section 1.77 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  1.77  Detailed application procedures; cross references.

* * * * *
    (d) Rules governing applications for authorizations in the 
Experimental Radio Service are set forth in part 5 of this chapter.
* * * * *

0
5. Section 1.913 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  1.913  Application and notification forms; electronic and manual 
filing.

    (a) * * *
    (1) FCC Form 601, Application for Authorization in the Wireless 
Radio Services. FCC Form 601 and associated schedules are used to apply 
for initial authorizations, modifications to existing authorizations, 
amendments to pending applications, renewals of station authorizations, 
special temporary authority, notifications, requests for extension of 
time, and administrative updates.
* * * * *

0
6. Section 1.981 is revised to read as follows


Sec.  1.981  Reports, annual and semiannual.

    Where required by the particular service rules, licensees who have 
entered into agreements with other persons for the cooperative use of 
radio station facilities must submit annually an audited financial 
statement reflecting the nonprofit cost-sharing nature of the 
arrangement to the Commission's offices in Washington, DC or 
alternatively may be sent to the Commission electronically via the ULS, 
no later than three months after the close of the licensee's fiscal 
year.

0
7. Section 1.1307 is amended by revising the entry ``Experimental 
Radio,

[[Page 25161]]

Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and Other Program Distributional Services 
(part 74)'' of the table in paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  1.1307  Actions that may have a significant environmental effect, 
for which Environmental Assessments (EAs) must be prepared.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *

          Table 1--Transmitters, Facilities and Operations Subject to Routine Environmental Evaluation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Service (title 47 CFR rule part)                              Evaluation required if:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Auxiliary and Special Broadcast and Other     Subparts G and L: Power > 100 W ERP.
 Program Distributional Services (part 74).
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL 
RULES AND REGULATIONS

0
8. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

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


0
9. Section 2.1 is amended by adding the definitions ``End Product'' and 
``Evaluation Kit'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  2.1  Terms and definitions.

* * * * *
    End Product. A completed electronic device that has received all 
requisite FCC approvals and is suitable for marketing.
* * * * *
    Evaluation Kit. An assembly of components, subassemblies, or 
circuitry, including software, created by or for a component maker, 
system integrator, or product developer for the sole purpose of 
facilitating: (i) End product developer evaluation of all or some of 
such components, subassemblies, or circuitry, or (ii) the development 
of software to be used in an end product.
* * * * *


Sec.  2.102  [Amended]

0
10. Section 2.102 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph 
(b)(2).

0
11. Section 2.803 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.803  Marketing of radio frequency products prior to equipment 
authorization.

    (a) Marketing, as used in this section, includes sale or lease, or 
offering for sale or lease, including advertising for sale or lease, or 
importation, shipment, or distribution for the purpose of selling or 
leasing or offering for sale or lease.
    (b) General rule. No person may market a radio frequency device 
unless:
    (1) For devices subject to authorization under certification, the 
device has been authorized in accordance with the rules in subpart J of 
this chapter and is properly identified and labeled as required by 
Sec.  2.925 and other relevant sections in this chapter; or
    (2) For devices subject to authorization under verification or 
Declaration of Conformity in accordance with the rules in subpart J of 
this chapter, the device complies with all applicable technical, 
labeling, identification and administrative requirements; or
    (3) For devices that do not require a grant of equipment 
authorization under subpart J of this chapter but must comply with the 
specified technical standards prior to use, the device complies with 
all applicable, technical, labeling, identification and administrative 
requirements.
    (c) Exceptions. The following marketing activities are permitted 
prior to equipment authorization:
    (1) Activities under product development and market trials 
conducted pursuant to subpart H of part 5.
    (2) Limited marketing is permitted, as described in the following 
text, for devices that could be authorized under the current rules; 
could be authorized under waivers of such rules that are in effect at 
the time of marketing; or could be authorized under rules that have 
been adopted by the Commission but that have not yet become effective. 
These devices may not be operated unless permitted by Sec.  2.805.
    (i) Conditional sales contracts (including agreements to produce 
new devices manufactured in accordance with designated specifications) 
are permitted between manufacturers and wholesalers or retailers 
provided that delivery is made contingent upon compliance with the 
applicable equipment authorization and technical requirements.
    (ii) A radio frequency device that is in the conceptual, 
developmental, design or pre-production stage may be offered for sale 
solely to business, commercial, industrial, scientific or medical users 
(but not an offer for sale to other parties or to end users located in 
a residential environment) if the prospective buyer is advised in 
writing at the time of the offer for sale that the equipment is subject 
to the FCC rules and that the equipment will comply with the 
appropriate rules before delivery to the buyer or to centers of 
distribution.
    (iii) (A) A radio frequency device may be advertised or displayed, 
(e.g., at a trade show or exhibition) if accompanied by a conspicuous 
notice containing this language:

    This device has not been authorized as required by the rules of 
the Federal Communications Commission. This device is not, and may 
not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until 
authorization is obtained.

    (B) If the device being displayed is a prototype of a device that 
has been properly authorized and the prototype, itself, is not 
authorized due to differences between the prototype and the authorized 
device, this language may be used instead: Prototype. Not for Sale.
    (iv) An evaluation kit as defined in Sec.  2.1 may be sold provided 
that:
    (A) Sales are limited to product developers, software developers, 
and system integrators;
    (B) The following notice is included with the kit:
    FCC NOTICE: This kit is designed to allow:
    (1) Product developers to evaluate electronic components, 
circuitry, or software associated with the kit to determine whether to 
incorporate such items in a finished product and
    (2) Software developers to write software applications for use with 
the end product. This kit is not a finished product and when assembled 
may not be resold or otherwise marketed unless

[[Page 25162]]

all required FCC equipment authorizations are first obtained. Operation 
is subject to the condition that this product not cause harmful 
interference to licensed radio stations and that this product accept 
harmful interference. Unless the assembled kit is designed to operate 
under part 15, part 18 or part 95 of this chapter, the operator of the 
kit must operate under the authority of an FCC license holder or must 
secure an experimental authorization under part 5 of this chapter.
    (C) The kit is labeled with the following legend: For evaluation 
only; not FCC approved for resale; and
    (D) Any radiofrequency transmitter employed as part of an 
evaluation kit shall be designed to comply with all applicable FCC 
technical rules, including frequency use, spurious and out-of-band 
emission limits, and maximum power or field strength ratings applicable 
to final products that would employ the components or circuitry to be 
evaluated.
    (d) Importation. The provisions of subpart K of this part continue 
to apply to imported radio frequency devices.

0
12. Section 2.805 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  2.805  Operation of radio frequency products prior to equipment 
authorization.

    (a) General rule. A radio frequency device may not be operated 
prior to equipment authorization unless the conditions set forth in 
paragraphs (b), (c), (d) or (e), of this section are meet. Radio 
frequency devices operated under these provisions may not be marketed 
(as defined in Sec.  2.803(a)) except as provided elsewhere in this 
chapter. In addition, the provisions of subpart K continue to apply to 
imported radio frequency devices.
    (b) Operation of a radio frequency device prior to equipment 
authorization is permitted under the authority of an experimental radio 
service authorization issued under part 5 of this chapter.
    (c) Operation of a radio frequency device prior to equipment 
authorization is permitted for experimentation or compliance testing of 
a device that is fully contained within an anechoic chamber or a 
Faraday cage.
    (d) For devices designed to operate solely under parts 15, 18, or 
95 of this chapter without a station license, operation of a radio 
frequency device prior to equipment authorization is permitted under 
the following conditions, so long as devices are either rendered 
inoperable or retrieved at the conclusion of such operation:
    (1) The radio frequency device shall be operated in compliance with 
existing Commission rules, waivers of such rules that are in effect at 
the time of operation, or rules that have been adopted by the 
Commission but that have not yet become effective; and
    (2) The radio frequency device shall be operated for at least one 
of these purposes:
    (i) Demonstrations at a trade show or an exhibition, provided a 
notice containing the wording specified in Sec.  2.803(c)(2)(iii) is 
displayed in a conspicuous location on, or immediately adjacent to, the 
device; or all prospective buyers at the trade show or exhibition are 
advised in writing that the equipment is subject to the FCC rules and 
that the equipment will comply with the appropriate rules before 
delivery to the buyer or to centers of distribution; or
    (ii) Evaluation of performance and determination of customer 
acceptability, during developmental, design, or pre-production states. 
If the device is not operated at the manufacturer's facilities, it must 
be labeled with the wording specified in Sec.  2.803(c)(2)(iii), and in 
the case of an evaluation kit, the wording specified in Sec.  
2.803(c)(2)(iv)(C).
    (e) Operation of a radio frequency device prior to equipment 
authorization is permitted under either paragraph (e)(1) or (e)(2) of 
this section so long as devices are either rendered inoperable or 
retrieved at the conclusion of such operation:
    (1) The radio frequency device shall be operated in compliance with 
existing Commission rules, waivers of such rules that are in effect at 
the time of operation, or rules that have been adopted by the 
Commission but that have not yet become effective; and
    (i) Under the authority of a service license (only in the bands for 
which that service licensee holds a license) provided that the licensee 
grants permission and the licensee continues to remain responsible for 
complying with all of the operating conditions and requirements 
associated with its license; or
    (ii) Under a grant of special temporary authorization.
    (2) The radio frequency device shall be operated at or below the 
maximum level specified in the table in Sec.  15.209(a) of this chapter 
for at least one of these purposes:
    (i) Demonstrations at a trade show or an exhibition, provided a 
notice containing the wording specified in Sec.  2.803(c)(2)(iii) is 
displayed in a conspicuous location on, or immediately adjacent to, the 
device; or all prospective buyers at the trade show or exhibition are 
advised in writing that the equipment is subject to the FCC rules and 
that the equipment will comply with the appropriate rules before 
delivery to the buyer or to centers of distribution; or
    (ii) Evaluation of performance and determination of customer 
acceptability, during developmental, design, or pre-production states. 
If the device is not operated at the manufacturer's facilities, it must 
be labeled with the wording specified in Sec.  2.803(c)(2)(iii), and in 
the case of an evaluation kit, the wording specified in Sec.  
2.803(c)(2)(iv)(C).

0
13. Section 2.811 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  2.811  Transmitters operated under part 73 of this chapter.

    Section 2.803(a) through (c) shall not be applicable to a 
transmitter operated in any of the Radio Broadcast Services regulated 
under part 73 of this chapter, provided the conditions set out in part 
73 of this chapter for the acceptability of such transmitter for use 
under licensing are met.

0
14. Section 2.1204 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  2.1204  Import conditions.

    (a) * * *
    (3) The radio frequency device is being imported in quantities of 
4,000 or fewer units for testing and evaluation to determine compliance 
with the FCC Rules and Regulations, product development, or suitability 
for marketing. The devices will not be offered for sale or marketed.
    (i) Prior to importation of a greater number of units than shown in 
paragraph (a)(3) of this section, written approval must be obtained 
from the Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology, FCC; and
    (ii) Distinctly different models of a device and separate 
generations of a particular model under development are considered to 
be separate devices.
* * * * *

0
15. Revise part 5 to read as follows:

PART 5--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO SERVICE

Subpart A--General
Sec.
5.1 Basis and purpose.
5.3 Scope of service.
5.5 Definition of terms.
Subpart B--Applications and Licenses

License Requirements

5.51 Eligibility.
5.53 Station authorization required.
5.54 Types of authorizations available.

General Filing Requirements

5.55 Filing of applications.

[[Page 25163]]

5.57 Who may sign applications.
5.59 Forms to be used.
5.61 Procedure for obtaining a special temporary authorization.
5.63 Supplemental statements required.
5.64 Special provisions for satellite systems.
5.65 Defective applications.
5.67 Amendment or dismissal of applications.
5.69 License grants that differ from applications.
5.71 License period.
5.73 Experimental report.
5.77 Change in equipment and emission characteristics.
5.79 Transfer and assignment of station authorization for 
conventional, program experimental, medical testing, and compliance 
testing experimental radio licenses.
5.81 Discontinuance of station operation.
5.83 Cancellation provisions.
5.84 Non-interference criterion.
5.85 Frequencies and policy governing frequency assignment.
5.91 Notification to the National Radio Astronomy Observatory.
5.95 Informal objections.
Subpart C--Technical Standards and Operating Requirements
5.101 Frequency stability.
5.103 Types of emission.
5.105 Authorized bandwidth.
5.107 Transmitter control requirements.
5.109 Responsibility for antenna structure painting and lighting.
5.110 Power limitations.
5.111 Limitations on use.
5.115 Station identification.
5.121 Station record requirements.
5.123 Inspection of stations.
5.125 Authorized points of communication.
Subpart D--Broadcast Experimental Licenses
5.201 Applicable rules.
5.203 Experimental authorizations for licensed broadcast stations.
5.205 Licensing requirements, necessary showing.
5.207 Supplemental reports with application for renewal of license.
5.211 Frequency monitors and measurements.
5.213 Time of operation.
5.215 Program service and charges.
5.217 Rebroadcasts.
5.219 Broadcasting emergency information.
Subpart E--Program Experimental Licenses
5.301 Applicable rules.
5.302 Eligibility.
5.303 Frequencies.
5.304 Area of operations.
5.305 Program license not permitted.
5.307 Responsible party.
5.308 Stop buzzer.
5.309 Notification requirements.
5.311 Additional requirements related to safety of the public.
5.313 Innovation zones.
Subpart F--Medical Testing Experimental Licenses
5.401 Applicable rules.
5.402 Eligibility and usage.
5.403 Frequencies.
5.404 Area of operation.
5.405 Yearly report.
5.406 Responsible party, ``stop-buzzer,'' and notification 
requirements, and additional requirements related to safety of the 
public.
5.407 Exemption from station identification requirement.
Subpart G--Compliance Testing Experimental Licenses
5.501 Applicable rules.
5.502 Eligibility.
5.503 Scope of testing activities.
5.504 Responsible party.
5.505 Exemption from station identification requirement.
Subpart H--Product Development and Market Trials
5.601 Product development trials.
5.602 Market trials.

    Authority: Secs. 4, 302, 303, 307, 336 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as 
amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303, 307, 336. Interpret or apply sec. 
301, 48 Stat. 1081, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 301.

Subpart A--General


Sec.  5.1  Basis and purpose.

    (a) Basis. The rules following in this part are promulgated 
pursuant to the provisions of Title III of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, which vests authority in the Federal Communications 
Commission to regulate radio transmissions and to issue licenses for 
radio stations.
    (b) Purpose. The rules in this part provide the conditions by which 
portions of the radio frequency spectrum may be used for the purposes 
of experimentation, product development, and market trials.


Sec.  5.3  Scope of service.

    Stations operating in the Experimental Radio Service will be 
permitted to conduct the following type of operations:
    (a) Experimentations in scientific or technical radio research.
    (b) Experimentations in the broadcast services.
    (c) Experimentations under contractual agreement with the United 
States Government, or for export purposes.
    (d) Communications essential to a research project.
    (e) Technical demonstrations of equipment or techniques.
    (f) Field strength surveys.
    (g) Demonstration of equipment to prospective purchasers by persons 
engaged in the business of selling radio equipment.
    (h) Testing of equipment in connection with production or 
regulatory approval of such equipment.
    (i) Testing of medical devices that use RF wireless technology or 
communications functions for diagnosis, treatment, or patient 
monitoring.
    (j) Development of radio technique, equipment, operational data or 
engineering data, including field or factory testing or calibration of 
equipment, related to an existing or proposed radio service.
    (k) Product development and market trials.
    (l) Types of experiments that are not specifically covered under 
paragraphs (a) through (k) of this section will be considered upon 
demonstration of need for such additional types of experiments.


Sec.  5.5  Definition of terms.

    For the purposes of this part, the following definitions shall be 
applicable. For other definitions, refer to part 2 of this chapter 
(Frequency Allocations and Radio Treaty Matters; General Rules and 
Regulations).
    Authorized frequency. The frequency assigned to a station by the 
Commission and specified in the instrument of authorization.
    Authorized power. The power assigned to a radio station by the 
Commission and specified in the instrument of authorization.
    Experimental radio service. A service in which radio waves are 
employed for purposes of experimentation in the radio art or for 
purposes of providing essential communications for research projects 
that could not be conducted without the benefit of such communications.
    Experimental station. A station utilizing radio waves in 
experiments with a view to the development of science or technique.
    Harmful interference. Any radiation or induction that endangers the 
functioning of a radionavigation or safety service, or obstructs or 
repeatedly interrupts a radio service operating in accordance with the 
Table of Frequency Allocations and other provisions of part 2 of this 
chapter.
    Landing area. As defined by 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(28), any locality, 
either of land or water, including airdromes and intermediate landing 
fields, that is used, or intended to be used, for the landing and take-
off of aircraft, whether or not facilities are provided for the 
shelter, servicing, or repair of aircraft, or for receiving or 
discharging passengers or cargo.
    Market trial. A program designed to evaluate product performance 
and customer acceptability prior to the production stage, and typically 
requires

[[Page 25164]]

testing a specific product under expected use conditions to evaluate 
actual performance and effectiveness.
    Open Area Test Site. A site for electromagnetic measurements that 
has a reflective ground plane, and is characterized by open, flat 
terrain at a distance far enough away from buildings, electric lines, 
fences, trees, underground cables, pipelines, and other potential 
reflective objects, so that the effects due to such objects are 
negligible.
    Person. An individual, partnership, association, joint stock 
company, trust, corporation, or state or local government.
    Product development trial. An experimental program designed to 
evaluate product performance (including medical devices in clinical 
trials) in the conceptual, developmental, and design stages, and 
typically requiring testing under expected use conditions.

Subpart B--Applications and Licenses

License Requirements


Sec.  5.51  Eligibility.

    (a) Authorizations for stations in the Experimental Radio Service 
will be issued only to persons qualified to conduct the types of 
operations permitted in Sec.  5.3, including testing laboratories 
recognized by the Commission for radio frequency device testing.
    (b) No foreign government or representative thereof is eligible to 
hold a station license in the Experimental Radio Service.


Sec.  5.53  Station authorization required.

    No radio transmitter shall be operated in the Experimental Radio 
Service in the United States and its Territories except under and in 
accordance with a proper station authorization granted by the 
Commission.


Sec.  5.54  Types of authorizations available.

    The Commission issues the following types of experimental 
authorizations:
    (a)(1) Conventional experimental radio license. This type of 
license is issued for a specific research or experimentation project 
(or a series of closely-related research or experimentation projects), 
a product development trial, or a market trial. Widely divergent and 
unrelated experiments must be conducted under separate licenses.
    (2) Special temporary authorization. When an experimental program 
is expected to last no more than six months, its operation is 
considered to be temporary and the special temporary authorization 
procedure outlined in Sec.  5.61 must be used.
    (b) Broadcast experimental radio license. This type of license is 
issued for the purpose of research and experimentation for the 
development and advancement of new broadcast technology, equipment, 
systems or services. This is limited to stations intended for reception 
and use by the general public.
    (c) Program experimental radio license. This type of license is 
issued to qualified institutions and to conduct an ongoing program of 
research and experimentation under a single experimental authorization 
subject to the requirements of subpart E of this part. Program 
experimental radio licenses are available to colleges, universities, 
research laboratories, manufacturers of radio frequency equipment, 
manufacturers that integrate radio frequency equipment into their end 
products, and medical research institutions.
    (d) Medical testing experimental radio license. This type of 
license is issued to hospitals and health care institutions that 
demonstrate expertise in testing and operation of experimental medical 
devices that use wireless telecommunications technology or 
communications functions in clinical trials for diagnosis, treatment, 
or patient monitoring.
    (e) Compliance testing experimental radio license. This type of 
license will be issued to laboratories recognized by the FCC under 
subpart J of part 2 of this chapter to perform:
    (1) Testing of radio frequency devices, and
    (2) Testing of radio frequency equipment in an Open Area Test Site.
    (f) An experimental license is not required when operation of a 
radiofrequency device is fully contained within an anechoic chamber or 
a Faraday cage.

General Filing Requirements


Sec.  5.55  Filing of applications.

    (a) To assure that necessary information is supplied in a 
consistent manner by applicants, standard forms must be used, except 
for applications for special temporary authorization (STA) and reports 
submitted for Commission consideration. Standard numbered forms for the 
Experimental Radio Service are described in Sec.  5.59.
    (b) Applications requiring fees as set forth in part 1, subpart G 
of this chapter must be filed in accordance with Sec.  0.401(b) of this 
chapter.
    (c) Each application for station authorization shall be specific 
and complete with regard to the information required by the application 
form and this part.
    (1) Conventional license and STA applications shall be specific as 
to station location, proposed equipment, power, antenna height, and 
operating frequencies.
    (2) Broadcast license applicants shall comply with the requirements 
in subpart D of this part; Program license applicants shall comply with 
the requirements in subpart E of this part; Medical Testing license 
applicants shall comply with the requirements in subpart F of this 
part; and Compliance Testing license applicants shall comply with the 
requirements in subpart G of this part.
    (d) Filing conventional, program, medical, and compliance testing 
experimental radio license applications:
    (1) Applications for radio station authorization shall be submitted 
electronically through the Office of Engineering and Technology Web 
site http://www.fcc.gov/els.
    (2) Applications for special temporary authorization shall be filed 
in accordance with the procedures of Sec.  5.61.
    (3) Any correspondence relating thereto that cannot be submitted 
electronically shall instead be submitted to the Commission's Office of 
Engineering and Technology, Washington, DC 20554.
    (e) For broadcast experimental radio licenses, applications for 
radio station authorization shall be submitted in accordance with the 
provisions of Sec.  5.59.


Sec.  5.57  Who may sign applications.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, 
applications, amendments thereto, and related statements of fact 
required by the Commission shall be personally signed by the applicant, 
if the applicant is an individual; by one of the partners, if the 
applicant is a partnership; by an officer or duly authorized employee, 
if the applicant is a corporation; or by a member who is an officer, if 
the applicant is an unincorporated association. Applications, 
amendments, and related statements of fact filed on behalf of eligible 
government entities, such as states and territories of the United 
States and political subdivisions thereof, the District of Columbia, 
and units of local government, including incorporated municipalities, 
shall be signed by such duly elected or appointed officials as may be 
competent to do so under the laws of the applicable jurisdiction.

[[Page 25165]]

    (b) Applications, amendments thereto, and related statements of 
fact required by the Commission may be signed by the applicant's 
attorney in case of the applicant's physical disability or of his/her 
absence from the United States. The attorney shall in that event 
separately set forth the reason why the application is not signed by 
the applicant. In addition, if any matter is stated on the basis of the 
attorney's belief only (rather than his/her knowledge), he/she shall 
separately set forth reasons for believing that such statements are 
true.
    (c) Only the original of applications, amendments, or related 
statements of fact need be signed; copies may be conformed.
    (d) Applications, amendments, and related statements of fact need 
not be submitted under oath. Willful false statements made therein, 
however, are punishable by fine and imprisonment, U.S. Code, title 18, 
Sec. 1001, and by appropriate administrative sanctions, including 
revocation of station license pursuant to Sec. 312(a)(1) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
    (e) ``Signed,'' as used in this section, means an original 
handwritten signature; however, the Office of Engineering and 
Technology may allow signature by any symbol executed or adopted by the 
applicant with the intent that such symbol be a signature, including 
symbols formed by computer-generated electronic impulses.


Sec.  5.59  Forms to be used.

    (a) Application for conventional, program, medical, and compliance 
testing experimental radio licenses.
    (1) Application for new authorization or modification of existing 
authorization. Entities must submit FCC Form 442.
    (2) Application for renewal of experimental authorization. 
Application for renewal of station license shall be submitted on FCC 
Form 405. Unless otherwise directed by the Commission, each application 
for renewal of license shall be filed at least 60 days prior to the 
expiration date of the license to be renewed.
    (3) Application for consent to assign an experimental 
authorization. Application for consent to assign shall be submitted on 
FCC Form 702 when the legal right to control the use and operation of a 
station is to be transferred as a result of a voluntary act (contract 
or other agreement) or an involuntary act (death or legal disability) 
of the grantee of a station authorization or by involuntary assignment 
of the physical property constituting the station under a court decree 
in bankruptcy proceedings, or other court order, or by operation of law 
in any other manner.
    (4) Application for consent to transfer control of Corporation 
holding experimental authorization. Application for consent to transfer 
control shall be submitted on FCC Form 703 whenever it is proposed to 
change the control of a corporation holding a station authorization.
    (5) Application for product development and market trials. 
Application for product development and market trials shall be 
submitted on FCC Form 442.
    (b) Applications for broadcast experimental radio license--(1) 
Application for new authorization or modification of existing 
authorization. An application for a construction permit for a new 
broadcast experimental station or modification of an existing broadcast 
experimental station must be submitted on FCC Form 309.
    (2) Application for a license. An application for a license to 
cover a construction permit for a broadcast experimental station must 
be submitted on FCC Form 310.
    (3) Application for renewal of license. An application for renewal 
of station license for a broadcast experimental station must be 
submitted on FCC Form 311. Unless otherwise directed by the Commission, 
each application for renewal of license shall be filed at least 60 days 
prior to the expiration date of the license to be renewed.


Sec.  5.61  Procedure for obtaining a special temporary authorization.

    (a)(1) An applicant may request a Special Temporary Authorization 
(STA) for operation of a conventional experimental radio service 
station during a period of time not to exceed 6 months.
    (2) Applications for STA must be submitted electronically through 
the Office of Engineering and Technology Web site http://www.fcc.gov/els at least 10 days prior to the proposed operation. Applications 
filed less than 10 days prior to the proposed operation date will be 
accepted only upon a showing of good cause.
    (3) In special situations, as defined in Sec.  1.915(b)(1) of this 
chapter, a request for STA may be made by telephone or electronic media 
provided a properly signed application is filed within 10 days of such 
request.
    (b) An application for STA shall contain the following information:
    (1) Name, address, phone number (also email address and facsimile 
number, if available) of the applicant.
    (2) Explanation of why an STA is needed.
    (3) Description of the operation to be conducted and its purpose.
    (4) Time and dates of proposed operation.
    (5) Class(es) of station (e.g. fixed, mobile, or both) and call 
sign of station (if applicable).
    (6) Description of the location(s) and, if applicable, geographical 
coordinates of the proposed operation.
    (7) Equipment to be used, including name of manufacturer, model and 
number of units.
    (8) Frequency (or frequency bands) requested.
    (9) Maximum effective radiated power (ERP) or equivalent 
isotropically radiated power (EIRP).
    (10) Emission designator (see Sec.  2.201 of this chapter) or 
describe emission (bandwidth, modulation, etc.)
    (11) Overall height of antenna structure above the ground (if 
greater than 6 meters above the ground or an existing structure, see 
part 17 of this chapter concerning notification to the FAA).
    (c) Extensions of an STA may be granted provided that an 
application for a conventional experimental license that is consistent 
with the terms and conditions of that STA (i.e., there is no increase 
in interference potential to authorized services) has been filed at 
least 15 days prior to the expiration of the licensee's STA. When such 
an application is timely filed, operations may continue in accordance 
with the other terms and conditions of the STA pending disposition of 
the application, unless the applicant is notified otherwise by the 
Commission.


Sec.  5.63  Supplemental statements required.

    Applicants must provide the information set forth on the applicable 
form as specified in Sec.  5.59. In addition, applicants must provide 
supplemental information as described below:
    (a) If installation and/or operation of the equipment may 
significantly impact the environment (see Sec.  1.1307 of this chapter) 
an environmental assessment as defined in Sec.  1.1311 of this chapter 
must be submitted with the application.
    (b) If an applicant requests non-disclosure of proprietary 
information, requests shall follow the procedures for submission set 
forth in Sec.  0.459 of this chapter.
    (c) For conventional and broadcast experimental radio licenses, 
each application must include:
    (1) A narrative statement describing in detail the program of 
research and experimentation proposed, the specific objectives sought 
to be accomplished; and how the program of experimentation has a 
reasonable

[[Page 25166]]

promise of contribution to the development, extension, or expansion, or 
use of the radio art, or is along lines not already investigated.
    (2) If the authorization is to be used for the purpose of 
fulfilling the requirements of a contract with an agency of the United 
States Government, a narrative statement describing the project, the 
name of the contracting agency, and the contract number.
    (3) If the authorization is to be used for the sole purpose of 
developing equipment for exportation to be employed by stations under 
the jurisdiction of a foreign government, a narrative statement 
describing the project, any associated contract number, and the name of 
the foreign government concerned.
    (4) If the authorization is to be used with a satellite system, a 
narrative statement containing the information required in Sec.  5.64.
    (d) For program experimental radio licenses, each application must 
include:
    (1) A narrative statement describing how the applicant meets the 
eligibility criteria set forth in subpart E of this part.
    (2) If the authorization is to be used for the purpose of 
fulfilling the requirements of a contract with an agency of the United 
States Government, a narrative statement describing the project, the 
name of the contracting agency, and the contract number.
    (3) If the authorization is to be used for the sole purpose of 
developing equipment for exportation to be employed by stations under 
the jurisdiction of a foreign government, a narrative statement 
describing the project, any associated contract number, and the name of 
the foreign government concerned.
    (e) For medical testing and compliance testing experimental radio 
licenses, each application must include a narrative statement 
describing how the applicant meets the eligibility criteria set forth 
in Sec. Sec.  5.402(a) and 5.502 respectively.


Sec.  5.64  Special provisions for satellite systems.

    (a) Construction of proposed experimental satellite facilities may 
begin prior to Commission grant of an authorization. Such construction 
is entirely at the applicant's risk and does not entitle the applicant 
to any assurances that its proposed experiment will be subsequently 
approved or regular services subsequently authorized. The applicant 
must notify the Commission's Office of Engineering and Technology in 
writing that it plans to begin construction at its own risk.
    (b) Except where the satellite system has already been authorized 
by the FCC, applicants for an experimental authorization involving a 
satellite system must submit a description of the design and 
operational strategies the satellite system will use to mitigate 
orbital debris, including the following information:
    (1) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the amount of debris released in a planned manner during normal 
operations, and has assessed and limited the probability of the space 
station becoming a source of debris by collisions with small debris or 
meteoroids that could cause loss of control and prevent post-mission 
disposal;
    (2) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the probability of accidental explosions during and after 
completion of mission operations. This statement must include a 
demonstration that debris generation will not result from the 
conversion of energy sources on board the spacecraft into energy that 
fragments the spacecraft. Energy sources include chemical, pressure, 
and kinetic energy. This demonstration shall address whether stored 
energy will be removed at the spacecraft's end of life, by depleting 
residual fuel and leaving all fuel line valves open, venting any 
pressurized system, leaving all batteries in a permanent discharge 
state, and removing any remaining source of stored energy, or through 
other equivalent procedures specifically disclosed in the application;
    (3) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the probability of the space station becoming a source of 
debris by collisions with large debris or other operational space 
stations. Where a space station will be launched into a low-Earth orbit 
that is identical, or very similar, to an orbit used by other space 
stations, the statement must include an analysis of the potential risk 
of collision and a description of what measures the space station 
operator plans to take to avoid in-orbit collisions. If the space 
station operator is relying on coordination with another system, the 
statement shall indicate what steps have been taken to contact, and 
ascertain the likelihood of successful coordination of physical 
operations with, the other system. The statement must disclose the 
accuracy--if any--with which orbital parameters of non-geostationary 
satellite orbit space stations will be maintained, including apogee, 
perigee, inclination, and the right ascension of the ascending node(s). 
In the event that a system is not able to maintain orbital tolerances, 
i.e., it lacks a propulsion system for orbital maintenance, a statement 
disclosing that fact shall be included in the debris mitigation 
disclosure. Such systems shall also indicate the anticipated evolution 
over time of the orbit of the proposed satellite or satellites. Where a 
space station operator requests the assignment of a geostationary-Earth 
orbit location, it shall assess whether there are any known satellites 
located at, or reasonably expected to be located at, the requested 
orbital location, or assigned in the vicinity of that location, such 
that the station keeping volumes of the respective satellites might 
overlap. If so, the statement shall identify those parties and describe 
the measures that will be taken to prevent collisions;
    (4) A statement detailing the post-mission disposal plans for the 
space station at end of life, including the quantity of fuel--if any--
that will be reserved for post-mission disposal maneuvers. For 
geostationary-Earth orbit space stations, the statement shall disclose 
the altitude selected for a post-mission disposal orbit and the 
calculations that are used in deriving the disposal altitude. The 
statement shall also include a casualty risk assessment if planned 
post-mission disposal involves atmospheric re-entry of the space 
station. An assessment shall include a statement as to the likelihood 
that portions of the spacecraft will survive re-entry and reach the 
surface of the Earth, and the probability of human casualty as a 
result.


Sec.  5.65  Defective applications.

    (a) Applications that are defective with respect to completeness of 
answers to required questions, execution or other matters of a purely 
formal character may be found to be unacceptable for filing by the 
Commission, and may be returned to the applicant with a brief statement 
as to the omissions.
    (b) If an applicant is requested by the Commission to file any 
documents or information not included in the prescribed application 
form, failure to comply with such request will constitute a defect in 
the application.
    (c) Applications not in accordance with the Commission's rules, 
regulations, or other requirements will be considered defective unless 
accompanied either by:
    (1) A petition to amend any rule, regulation, or requirement with 
which the application is in conflict; or
    (2) A request for waiver of any rule, regulation, or requirement 
with which the application is in conflict. Such request shall show the 
nature of the

[[Page 25167]]

waiver desired and set forth the reasons in support thereof.


Sec.  5.67  Amendment or dismissal of applications.

    (a) Any application may be amended or dismissed without prejudice 
upon request of the applicant. Each amendment to or request for 
dismissal of an application shall be signed, authenticated, and 
submitted in the same manner as required for the original application. 
All subsequent correspondence or other material that the applicant 
desires to have incorporated as a part of an application already filed 
shall be submitted in the form of an amendment to the application.
    (b) Defective applications, as defined in Sec.  5.65, are subject 
to dismissal without prejudice.


Sec.  5.69  License grants that differ from applications.

    If the Commission grants a license or special temporary authority 
with parameters that differ from those set forth in the application, an 
applicant may reject the grant by filing, within 30 days from the 
effective date of the grant, a written description of its objections. 
Upon receipt of such objection, the Commission will coordinate with the 
applicant in an attempt to resolve issues arising from the grant.
    (a) Applicants may continue operating under the parameters of a 
granted special temporary authority (STA) during the time any problems 
are being resolved when:
    (1) An application for a conventional license has been timely filed 
in accordance with Sec.  5.61; and
    (2) The application for conventional license is for the same 
facilities and technical limitations as the existing STA.
    (b) The applicant, at its option, may accept a grant-in-part of 
their license while working to resolve any issues.


Sec.  5.71  License period.

    (a) Conventional experimental radio licenses. (1) The regular 
license term is 2 years. An applicant may request a license term up to 
5 years, but must provide justification for a license of that duration.
    (2) A license may be renewed for an additional term not exceeding 5 
years, upon an adequate showing of need to complete the experiment.
    (b) Program, medical testing, and compliance testing experimental 
radio licenses. Licenses are issued for a term of 5 years and may be 
renewed for up to 5 years upon an adequate showing of need.
    (c) Broadcast experimental radio license. Licenses are issued for a 
one-year period and may be renewed for an additional term not exceeding 
5 years, upon an adequate showing of need.


Sec.  5.73  Experimental report.

    (a) The following provisions apply to conventional experimental 
radio licenses and to medical testing experimental licenses that 
operate under part 15, Radio Frequency Devices; part 18, Industrial, 
Scientific, and Medical Equipment, part 95, Personal Radio Services 
subpart H--Wireless Medical Telemetry Service; or part 95, subpart I--
Medical Device Radiocommunication Service:
    (1) The Commission may, as a condition of authorization, request 
that the licensee forward periodic reports in order to evaluate the 
progress of the experimental program.
    (2) An applicant may request that the Commission withhold from the 
public certain reports and associated material and the Commission will 
do so unless the public interest requires otherwise. These requests 
should follow the procedures for submission set forth in Sec.  0.459 of 
this chapter.
    (b) The provisions in Sec.  5.207 apply to broadcast experimental 
radio licenses.
    (c) The provisions in Sec.  5.309 apply to program experimental 
licenses and to medical testing experimental licenses that do not 
operate under part 15, Radio Frequency Devices; part 18, Industrial, 
Scientific, and Medical Equipment, part 95, Personal Radio Services 
subpart H--Wireless Medical Telemetry Service; or part 95, subpart I--
Medical Device Radiocommunication Service.


Sec.  5.77  Change in equipment and emission characteristics.

    (a) The licensee of a conventional or broadcast experimental radio 
station may make any changes in equipment that are deemed desirable or 
necessary provided:
    (1) That the operating frequency is not permitted to deviate more 
than the allowed tolerance;
    (2) That the emissions are not permitted outside the authorized 
band;
    (3) That the ERP (or EIRP) and antenna complies with the license 
and the regulations governing the same; and
    (b) For conventional experimental radio stations, the changes 
permitted in paragraph (a) of this section may be made without prior 
authorization from the Commission provided that the license supplements 
its application file with a description of such change. If the licensee 
wants these emission changes to become a permanent part of the license, 
an application for modification must be filed.
    (c) Prior authorization from the Commission is required before the 
following antenna changes may be made at a station at a fixed location:
    (1) Any change that will either increase the height of a structure 
supporting the radiating portion of the antenna or decrease the height 
of a lighted antenna structure.
    (2) Any change in the location of an antenna when such relocation 
involves a change in the geographic coordinates of latitude or 
longitude by one second or more, or when such relocation involves a 
change in street address.


Sec.  5.79  Transfer and assignment of station authorization for 
conventional, program experimental, medical testing, and compliance 
testing experimental radio licenses.

    A station authorization, the frequencies authorized to be used by 
the grantee of such authorization, and the rights therein granted by 
such authorization shall not be transferred, assigned, or in any manner 
either voluntarily or involuntarily disposed of, unless the Commission 
decides that such a transfer is in the public interest and gives its 
consent in writing.


Sec.  5.81  Discontinuance of station operation.

    In case of permanent discontinuance of operation of a station in 
the Experimental Radio Service prior to the license expiration date, 
the licensee shall notify the Commission. Licensees who willfully fail 
to do so may be subject to disciplinary action, including monetary 
fines, by the Commission.


Sec.  5.83  Cancellation provisions.

    The applicant for a station in the Experimental Radio Services 
accepts the license with the express understanding that:
    (a) The authority to use the frequency or frequencies permitted by 
the license is granted upon an experimental basis only and does not 
confer any right to conduct an activity of a continuing nature; and
    (b) The grant is subject to change or cancellation by the 
Commission at any time without notice or hearing if in its discretion 
the need for such action arises. However, a petition for 
reconsideration or application for review may be filed to such 
Commission action.


Sec.  5.84  Non-interference criterion.

    Operation of an experimental radio station is permitted only on the 
condition that harmful interference is not caused to any station 
operating in accordance with the Table of Frequency Allocation of part 
2 of this chapter. If harmful interference to an established

[[Page 25168]]

radio service occurs, upon becoming aware of such harmful interference 
the Experimental Radio Service licensee shall immediately cease 
transmissions. Furthermore, the licensee shall not resume transmissions 
until the licensee establishes to the satisfaction of the Commission 
that further harmful interference will not be caused to any established 
radio service.


Sec.  5.85  Frequencies and policy governing frequency assignment.

    (a) Stations operating in the Experimental Radio Service may be 
authorized to use any Federal or non-Federal frequency designated in 
the Table of Frequency Allocations set forth in part 2 of this chapter, 
provided that the need for the frequency requested is fully justified 
by the applicant, except that experimental stations may not use any 
frequency or frequency band exclusively allocated to the passive 
services (including the radio astronomy service). Stations authorized 
under subparts E and F are subject to additional restrictions.
    (b) Frequency or frequency bands are assigned to stations in the 
Experimental Radio Service on a shared basis and are not assigned for 
the exclusive use of any one licensee. Frequency assignments may be 
restricted to specified geographical areas.
    (c) Broadcast experimental radio stations. (1) The applicant shall 
select frequencies best suited to the purpose of the experimentation 
and on which there appears to be the least likelihood of interference 
to established stations.
    (2) Except as indicated only frequencies allocated to broadcasting 
service are assigned. If an experiment cannot be feasibly conducted on 
frequencies allocated to a broadcasting service, an experimental 
station may be authorized to operate on other frequencies upon a 
satisfactory showing of the need therefore and a showing that the 
proposed operation can be conducted without causing harmful 
interference to established services.
    (d) Use of Public Safety Frequencies.
    (1) Conventional experimental licenses. Applicants in the 
Experimental Radio Service shall avoid use of public safety frequencies 
identified in part 90 of this chapter except when a compelling showing 
is made that use of such frequencies is in the public interest. If an 
experimental license to use public safety radio frequencies is granted, 
the authorization will include a condition requiring the experimental 
licensee to coordinate the operation with the appropriate frequency 
coordinator or all of the public safety licensees using the frequencies 
in question in the experimenter's proposed area of operation.
    (2) Program experimental licenses. A program licensee shall plan a 
program of experimentation that avoids use of public safety 
frequencies, and may only operate on such frequencies when it can make 
a compelling showing that use of such frequencies is in the public 
interest. A licensee planning to operate on public safety frequencies 
must incorporate its public interest showing into the narrative 
statement it prepares under Sec.  5.309(a)(1), and must coordinate, 
prior to operating, with the appropriate frequency coordinator or all 
of the public safety licensees that operate on the frequencies in 
question in the program experimental licensee's proposed area of 
operation
    (e) The Commission may, at its discretion, condition any 
experimental license or STA on the requirement that before commencing 
operation, the new licensee coordinate its proposed facility with other 
licensees that may receive interference as a result of the new 
licensee's operations.
    (f) Protection of FCC monitoring stations. (1) Applicants may need 
to protect FCC monitoring stations from interference and their station 
authorization may be conditioned accordingly. Geographical coordinates 
of such stations are listed in Sec.  0.121(b) of this chapter.
    (2) In the event that calculated value of expected field strength 
exceeds a direct wave fundamental field strength of greater than 10 mV/
m in the authorized bandwidth of service (-65.8 dBW/m\2\ power flux 
density assuming a free space characteristic impedance of 120[pi] ohms) 
at the reference coordinates, or if there is any question whether field 
strength levels might exceed the threshold value, the applicant should 
call the FCC, telephone 1-888-225-5322 (1-888-CALL FCC).
    (3) Coordination is suggested particularly for those applicants who 
have no reliable data that indicates whether the field strength or 
power flux density figure indicated in paragraph (f)(2) of this section 
would be exceeded by their proposed radio facilities (except mobile 
stations). The following is a suggested guide for determining whether 
coordination is needed:
    (i) All stations within 2.4 kilometers (1.5 statute miles);
    (ii) Stations within 4.8 kilometers (3 statute miles) with 50 watts 
or more average ERP in the primary plane of polarization in the 
azimuthal direction of the Monitoring Station;
    (iii) Stations within 16 kilometers (10 statute miles) with 1 kW or 
more average ERP in the primary plane of polarization in the azimuthal 
direction of the Monitoring Station;
    (iv) Stations within 80 kilometers (50 statute miles) with 25 kW or 
more average ERP in the primary plane of polarization in the azimuthal 
direction of the Monitoring Station.
    (4) Advance coordination for stations operating above 1000 MHz is 
recommended only where the proposed station is in the vicinity of a 
monitoring station designated as a satellite monitoring facility in 
Sec.  0.121(b) of this chapter and also meets the criteria outlined in 
paragraphs (f)(2) and (3) of this section.


Sec.  5.91  Notification to the National Radio Astronomy Observatory.

    In order to minimize possible harmful interference at the National 
Radio Astronomy Observatory site located at Green Bank, Pocahontas 
County, West Virginia, and at the Naval Radio Research Observatory site 
at Sugar Grove, Pendleton County, West Virginia, any applicant for an 
Experimental Radio Service station authorization other than a mobile, 
temporary base, or temporary fixed station, within the area bounded by 
39[deg]15' N on the north, 78[deg]30' W on the east, 37[deg]30' N on 
the south and 80[deg]30' W on the west shall, at the time of filing 
such application with the Commission, simultaneously notify the 
Director, National Radio Astronomy Observatory, P.O. Box NZ2, Green 
Bank, West Virginia 24944, in writing, of the technical particulars of 
the proposed station. Such notification shall include the geographical 
coordinates of the antenna, antenna height, antenna directivity if any, 
frequency, type of emission, and power. In addition, the applicant 
shall indicate in its application to the Commission the date 
notification was made to the Observatory. After receipt of such 
applications, the Commission will allow a period of twenty (20) days 
for comments or objections in response to the notifications indicated. 
If an objection to the proposed operation is received during the 
twenty-day period from the National Radio Astronomy Observatory for 
itself or on behalf of the Naval Radio Research Observatory, the 
Commission will consider all aspects of the problem and take whatever 
action is deemed appropriate.


Sec.  5.95  Informal objections.

    A person or entity desiring to object to or to oppose an 
Experimental Radio application for a station license or authorization 
may file an informal objection against that application. The informal 
objection and any responsive pleadings shall be submitted

[[Page 25169]]

electronically consistent with the requirements set forth in Sec.  
5.55.

Subpart C--Technical Standards and Operating Requirements


Sec.  5.101  Frequency stability.

    Experimental Radio Service licensees shall ensure that transmitted 
emissions remain within the authorized frequency band under normal 
operating conditions: Equipment is presumed to operate over the 
temperature range -20 to +50 degrees Celsius with an input voltage 
variation of 85% to 115% of rated input voltage, unless justification 
is presented to demonstrate otherwise.


Sec.  5.103  Types of emission.

    Stations in the Experimental Radio Service may be authorized to use 
any of the classifications of emissions covered in part 2 of this 
chapter.


Sec.  5.105  Authorized bandwidth.

    The occupied bandwidth of transmitted emissions from an 
Experimental Radio Service station shall not exceed the authorized 
bandwidth specified in the authorization. Each authorization will show, 
as the prefix to the emission classification, a figure specifying the 
necessary bandwidth. The application may request an authorized 
bandwidth that is greater than the necessary bandwidth for the emission 
to be used, if required for the experimental purpose. Necessary 
bandwidth and occupied bandwidth are defined and determined in 
accordance with Sec.  2.1 and Sec.  2.202 of this chapter.


Sec.  5.107  Transmitter control requirements.

    Each licensee shall be responsible for maintaining control of the 
transmitter authorized under its station authorization, including the 
ability to terminate transmissions should interference occur.
    (a) Conventional experimental radio stations. The licensee shall 
ensure that transmissions are in conformance with the operating 
characteristics prescribed in the station authorization and that the 
station is operated only by persons duly authorized by the licensee.
    (b) Program experimental radio stations. The licensee shall ensure 
that transmissions are in conformance with the requirements in subpart 
E of this part and that the station is operated only by persons duly 
authorized by the licensee.
    (c) Medical testing experimental radio stations. The licensee shall 
ensure that transmissions are in conformance with the requirements in 
subpart F of this part and that the station is operated only by persons 
duly authorized by the licensee.
    (d) Compliance testing experimental radio stations. The licensee 
shall ensure that transmissions are in conformance with the 
requirements in subpart G of this part and that the station is operated 
only by persons duly authorized by the licensee.
    (e) Broadcast experimental stations. Except where unattended 
operation is specifically permitted, the licensee of each station 
authorized under the provisions of this part shall designate a person 
or persons to activate and control its transmitter. At the discretion 
of the station licensee, persons so designated may be employed for 
other duties and for operation of other transmitting stations if such 
other duties will not interfere with the proper operation of the 
station transmission systems.


Sec.  5.109  Responsibility for antenna structure painting and 
lighting.

    Experimental Radio Service licensees may become responsible for 
maintaining the painting and lighting of any antenna structure they are 
authorized to use in accordance with part 17 of this chapter. See Sec.  
17.6 of this chapter.


Sec.  5.110  Power limitations.

    (a) The transmitting radiated power for stations authorized under 
the Experimental Radio Service shall be limited to the minimum 
practical radiated power necessary for the success of the experiment.
    (b) For broadcast experimental radio stations, the operating power 
shall not exceed by more than 5 percent the maximum power specified. 
Engineering standards have not been established for these stations. The 
efficiency factor for the last radio stage of transmitters employed 
will be subject to individual determination but shall be in general 
agreement with values normally employed for similar equipment operated 
within the frequency range authorized.


Sec.  5.111  Limitations on use.

    (a) Stations may make only such transmissions as are necessary and 
directly related to the conduct of the licensee's stated program of 
experimentation and the related station instrument of authorization, 
and as governed by the provisions of the rules and regulations 
contained in this part. When transmitting, the licensee must use every 
precaution to ensure that it will not cause harmful interference to the 
services carried on by stations operating in accordance with the Table 
of Frequency Allocations of part 2 of this chapter.
    (b) A licensee shall adhere to the program of experimentation as 
stated in its application or in the station instrument of 
authorization.
    (c) The radiations of the transmitter shall be suspended 
immediately upon detection or notification of a deviation from the 
technical requirements of the station authorization until such 
deviation is corrected, except for transmissions concerning the 
immediate safety of life or property, in which case the transmissions 
shall be suspended as soon as the emergency is terminated.


Sec.  5.115  Station identification.

    (a) Conventional experimental radio licenses. A licensee, unless 
specifically exempted by the terms of the station authorization, shall 
transmit its assigned call sign at the end of each complete 
transmission: Provided, however, that the transmission of the call sign 
at the end of each transmission is not required for projects requiring 
continuous, frequent, or extended use of the transmitting apparatus, 
if, during such periods and in connection with such use, the call sign 
is transmitted at least once every thirty minutes. The station 
identification shall be transmitted in clear voice or Morse code. All 
digital encoding and digital modulation shall be disabled during 
station identification.
    (b) Broadcast experimental licenses. Each experimental broadcast 
station must transmit aural or visual announcements of its call letters 
and location at the beginning and end of each period of operation, and 
at least once every hour during operation.
    (c) Program experimental radio licenses. Program experimental radio 
licenses shall comply with either paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2):
    (1) Stations may transmit identifying information sufficient to 
identify the license holder and the geographic coordinates of the 
station. This information shall be transmitted at the end of each 
complete transmission except that: this information is not required at 
the end of each transmission for projects requiring continuous, 
frequent, or extended use of the transmitting apparatus, if, during 
such periods and in connection with such use, the information is 
transmitted at least once every thirty minutes. The station 
identification shall be transmitted in clear voice or Morse code. All 
digital encoding and digital modulation shall be disabled during 
station identification; or
    (2) Stations may post information sufficient to identify it on the 
Commission's program experimental registration Web site.

[[Page 25170]]

Sec.  5.121  Station record requirements.

    (a) For conventional, program, medical testing, and compliance 
testing experimental radio stations, the current original authorization 
or a clearly legible photocopy for each station shall be retained as a 
permanent part of the station records, but need not be posted. Station 
records are required to be kept for a period of at least one year after 
license expiration.
    (b) For Broadcast experimental radio stations, the license must be 
available at the transmitter site. The licensee of each experimental 
broadcast station must maintain and retain for a period of two years, 
adequate records of the operation, including:
    (1) Information concerning the nature of the experimental operation 
and the periods in which it is being conducted; and
    (2) Information concerning any specific data requested by the FCC.


Sec.  5.123  Inspection of stations.

    All stations and records of stations in the authorized under this 
part shall be made available for inspection at any time while the 
station is in operation or shall be made available for inspection upon 
reasonable request of an authorized representative of the Commission.


Sec.  5.125  Authorized points of communication.

    Generally, stations in the Experimental Radio Service may 
communicate only with other stations licensed in the Experimental Radio 
Service. Nevertheless, upon a satisfactory showing that the proposed 
communications are essential to the conduct of the research project, 
authority may be granted to communicate with stations in other services 
and U.S. Government stations.

Subpart D--Broadcast Experimental Licenses


Sec.  5.201  Applicable rules.

    In addition to the rules in this subpart, broadcast experimental 
station applicants and licensees shall follow the rules in subparts B 
and C of this part. In case of any conflict between the rules set forth 
in this subpart and the rules set forth in subparts B and C of this 
part, the rules in this subpart shall govern.


Sec.  5.203  Experimental authorizations for licensed broadcast 
stations.

    (a) Licensees of broadcast stations (including TV Translator, LPTV, 
and TV Booster stations) may obtain experimental authorizations to 
conduct technical experimentation directed toward improvement of the 
technical phases of operation and service, and for such purposes may 
use a signal other than the normal broadcast program signal.
    (b) Experimental authorizations for licensed broadcast stations may 
be requested by filing an informal application with the FCC in 
Washington, DC, describing the nature and purpose of the 
experimentation to be conducted, the nature of the experimental signal 
to be transmitted, and the proposed schedule of hours and duration of 
the experimentation. Experimental authorizations shall be posted with 
the station license.
    (c) Experimental operations for licensed broadcast stations are 
subject to the following conditions:
    (1) The authorized power of the station may not be exceeded more 
than 5 percent above the maximum power specified, except as 
specifically authorized for the experimental operations.
    (2) Emissions outside the authorized bandwidth must be attenuated 
to the degree required for the particular type of station.
    (3) The experimental operations may be conducted at any time the 
licensed station is authorized to operate, but the minimum required 
schedule of programming for the class and type of station must be met. 
AM stations also may conduct experimental operations during the 
experimental period (12 midnight local time to local sunrise) and at 
additional hours if permitted by the experimental authorization 
provided no interference is caused to other stations maintaining a 
regular operating schedule within such period(s).
    (4) If a licensed station's experimental authorization permits the 
use of additional facilities or hours of operation for experimental 
purposes, no sponsored programs or commercial announcements may be 
transmitted during such experimentation.
    (5) The licensee may transmit regularly scheduled programming 
concurrently with the experimental transmission if there is no 
significant impairment of service.
    (6) No charges may be made, either directly or indirectly, for the 
experimentation; however, normal charges may be made for regularly 
scheduled programming transmitted concurrently with the experimental 
transmissions.
    (d) The FCC may request a report of the research, experimentation 
and results at the conclusion of the experimental operation.


Sec.  5.205  Licensing requirements, necessary showing.

    (a) An applicant for a new experimental broadcast station, change 
in facilities of any existing station, or modification of license is 
required to make a satisfactory showing of compliance with the general 
requirements of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, as well as 
the following:
    (1) That the applicant has a definite program of research and 
experimentation in the technical phases of broadcasting which indicates 
reasonable promise of substantial contribution to the developments of 
the broadcasting art.
    (2) That upon the authorization of the proposed station the 
applicant can and will proceed immediately with its program of research 
and experimentation.
    (3) That the transmission of signals by radio is essential to the 
proposed program of research and experimentation.
    (4) That the program of research and experimentation will be 
conducted by qualified personnel.
    (b) A license for an experimental broadcast station will be issued 
only on the condition that no objectionable interference to the regular 
program transmissions of broadcast stations will result from the 
transmissions of the experimental stations.
    (c) Special provision for broadcast experimental radio station 
applications. For purposes of the definition of ``experimental 
authorization'' in Section II.A.6 of the Nationwide Programmatic 
Agreement Regarding the Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act 
Review Process set forth in Appendix C to Part 1 of this chapter, an 
Broadcast Experimental Radio Station authorized under this Subpart 
shall be considered an ``Experimental Broadcast Station authorized 
under part 74 of the Commission's Rules.''


Sec.  5.207  Supplemental reports with application for renewal of 
license.

    A report shall be filed with each application for renewal of 
experimental broadcast station license which shall include a statement 
of each of the following:
    (a) Number of hours operated.
    (b) Full data on research and experimentation conducted including 
the types of transmitting and studio equipment used and their mode of 
operation.
    (c) Data on expense of research and operation during the period 
covered.
    (d) Power employed, field intensity measurements and visual and 
aural

[[Page 25171]]

observations and the types of instruments and receivers utilized to 
determine the station service area and the efficiency of the respective 
types of transmissions.
    (e) Estimated degree of public participation in reception and the 
results of observations as to the effectiveness of types of 
transmission.
    (f) Conclusions, tentative and final.
    (g) Program of further developments in broadcasting.
    (h) All developments and major changes in equipment.
    (i) Any other pertinent developments.


Sec.  5.211  Frequency monitors and measurements.

    The licensee of a broadcast experimental radio station shall 
provide the necessary means for determining that the frequency of the 
station is within the allowed tolerance. The date and time of each 
frequency check, the frequency as measured, and a description or 
identification of the method employed shall be entered in the station 
log. Sufficient observations shall be made to insure that the assigned 
carrier frequency is maintained within the prescribed tolerance.


Sec.  5.213  Time of operation.

    (a) Unless specified or restricted hours of operation are shown in 
the station authorization, broadcast experimental radio stations may be 
operated at any time and are not required to adhere to a regular 
schedule of operation.
    (b) The FCC may limit or restrict the periods of station operation 
in the event interference is caused to other broadcast or non-broadcast 
stations.
    (c) The FCC may require that a broadcast experimental radio station 
conduct such experiments as are deemed desirable and reasonable for 
development of the type of service for which the station was 
authorized.


Sec.  5.215  Program service and charges.

    (a) The licensee of a broadcast experimental radio station may 
transmit program material only when necessary to the experiments being 
conducted, and no regular program service may be broadcast unless 
specifically authorized.
    (b) The licensee of a broadcast experimental radio station may make 
no charges nor ask for any payment, directly or indirectly, for the 
production or transmission of any programming or information used for 
experimental broadcast purposes.


Sec.  5.217  Rebroadcasts.

    (a) The term rebroadcast means reception by radio of the programs 
or other transmissions of a broadcast station, and the simultaneous or 
subsequent retransmission of such programs or transmissions by a 
broadcast station.
    (1) As used in this section, the word ``program'' includes any 
complete program or part thereof.
    (2) The transmission of a program from its point of origin to a 
broadcast station entirely by common carrier facilities, whether by 
wire line or radio, is not considered a rebroadcast.
    (3) The broadcasting of a program relayed by a remote broadcast 
pickup station is not considered a rebroadcast.
    (b) No licensee of a broadcast experimental radio station may 
retransmit the program of another U.S. broadcast station without the 
express authority of the originating station. A copy of the written 
consent of the licensee originating the program must be kept by the 
licensee of the broadcast experimental radio station retransmitting 
such program and made available to the FCC upon request.


Sec.  5.219  Broadcasting emergency information.

    (a) In an emergency where normal communication facilities have been 
disrupted or destroyed by storms, floods or other disasters, a 
broadcast experimental radio station may be operated for the purpose of 
transmitting essential communications intended to alleviate distress, 
dispatch aid, assist in rescue operations, maintain order, or otherwise 
promote the safety of life and property. In the course of such 
operation, a station of any class may communicate with stations of 
other classes and in other services. However, such operation shall be 
conducted only on the frequency or frequencies for which the station is 
licensed and the used power shall not exceed the maximum authorized in 
the station license. When such operation involves the use of 
frequencies shared with other stations, licensees are expected to 
cooperate fully to avoid unnecessary or disruptive interference.
    (b) Whenever such operation involves communications of a nature 
other than those for which the station is licensed to perform, the 
licensee shall, at the earliest practicable time, notify the FCC in 
Washington, DC of the nature of the emergency and the use to which the 
station is being put and shall subsequently notify the same offices 
when the emergency operation has been terminated.
    (c) Emergency operation undertaken pursuant to the provisions of 
this section shall be discontinued as soon as substantially normal 
communications facilities have been restored. The Commission may at any 
time order discontinuance of such operation.

Subpart E--Program Experimental Radio Licenses


Sec.  5.301  Applicable rules.

    In addition to the rules in this subpart, program experimental 
applicants and licensees must follow the rules in subparts B and C of 
this part. In case of any conflict between the rules set forth in this 
subpart and the rules set forth in subparts B and C of this part, the 
rules in this subpart shall govern.


Sec.  5.302  Eligibility.

    Program experimental licensees may be granted to the following 
entities: a college or university with a graduate research program in 
engineering that is accredited by the Accreditation Board for 
Engineering and Technology (ABET); a research laboratory; a hospital or 
health care institution; a manufacturer of radio frequency equipment; 
or a manufacturer that integrates radio frequency equipment into their 
end products. Each applicant must meet the following requirements:
    (a) The radiofrequency experimentation will be conducted in a 
defined geographic area under the applicant's control;
    (b) The applicant has institutional processes to monitor and 
effectively manage a wide variety of research projects; and
    (c) The applicant has demonstrated expertise in radio spectrum 
management or partner with another entity that has such expertise.


Sec.  5.303  Frequencies.

    Licensees may operate in any frequency band, except for frequency 
bands exclusively designated as restricted in Sec.  15.205(a) of this 
chapter with the additional exception that program licensees are 
permitted to operate in frequency bands above 38.6 GHz, unless these 
bands are listed in footnote US246 of the Table of Frequency 
Allocations.


Sec.  5.304  Area of operations.

    Applications must specify, and the Commission will grant 
authorizations for, a geographic area that is inclusive of an 
institution's real-property facilities where the experimentation will 
be conducted and that is under the applicant's control. If an applicant 
wants to conduct experiments in more than one defined geographic area, 
it shall apply for a license for each location.

[[Page 25172]]

Sec.  5.305  Program license not permitted.

    Experiments are not permitted under this subpart and a conventional 
experimental radio license is required when:
    (a) An environmental assessment must be filed with the Commission 
as required by Sec.  5.63(a), or
    (b) An orbital debris mitigation plan must be filed with the 
Commission as required by Sec.  5.64, or
    (c) The applicant requires non-disclosure of proprietary 
information as part of its justification for its license application; 
or
    (d) A product development or a market trial is to be conducted.


Sec.  5.307  Responsible party.

    (a) Each program experimental radio applicant must identify a 
single point of contact responsible for all experiments conducted under 
the license, including
    (1) Ensuring compliance with the notification requirements of Sec.  
5.309 of this part; and
    (2) Ensuring compliance with all applicable FCC rules.
    (b) The responsible individual will serve as the initial point of 
contact for all matters involving interference resolution and must have 
the authority to discontinue any and all experiments being conducted 
under the license, if necessary.
    (c) The license application must include the name of the 
responsible individual and contact information at which the person can 
be reached at any time of the day; this information will be listed on 
the license. Licensees are required to keep this information current.


Sec.  5.308  Stop buzzer.

    A ``Stop Buzzer'' point of contact must be identified and available 
at all times during operation of each experiment conducted under a 
program license. A ``stop buzzer'' point of contact is a person who can 
address interference concerns and cease all transmissions immediately 
if interference occurs.


Sec.  5.309  Notification requirements.

    (a) At least ten calendar days prior to commencement of any 
experiment, program experimental licensees must provide the following 
information to the Commission's program experimental registration Web 
site.
    (1) A narrative statement describing the experiment, including a 
description and explanation of measures taken to avoid causing harmful 
interference to any existing service licensee;
    (2) Contact information for the researcher-in-charge of the 
described experiment;
    (3) Contact information for a ``stop buzzer''; and
    (4) Technical details including:
    (i) The frequency or frequency bands;
    (ii) The maximum equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP) or 
effective radiated power (ERP) under consideration;
    (iii) The emission designators to be used;
    (iv) A description of the geographic area in which the test will be 
conducted;
    (v) The number of units to be used; and
    (vi) A mitigation plan as required by Sec.  5.311, if necessary.
    (5) For program license experiments that may affect frequency bands 
used for the provision of commercial mobile services, emergency 
notifications, or public safety purposes, a list of those critical 
service licensees that are authorized to operate in the same bands and 
geographic area of the planned experiment.
    (b) Experiments may commence without specific approval or 
authorization once ten calendar days have elapsed from the time of 
posting to the above Web site. During that ten-day period, the licensee 
of an authorized service may contact the program licensee to resolve 
any objections to an experiment. It is expected that parties will work 
in good faith to resolve such objections, including modifying 
experiments if necessary to reach an agreeable resolution. However, 
only the Commission has the authority to prevent a program licensee 
from beginning operations (or to order the cessation of operations). 
Therefore, if an incumbent licensee believes that it will suffer 
interference (or in fact, has experienced interference), it must bring 
its concerns to the Commission for action. In such an event, the 
Commission will evaluate the concerns, and determine whether a planned 
experiment should be permitted to commence as proposed (or be 
terminated, if the experiment has commenced).
    (c) The Commission can prohibit or require modification of specific 
experiments under a program experimental radio license at any time 
without notice or hearing if in its discretion the need for such action 
arises.
    (d) Within 30 days after completion of each experiment conducted 
under a program experimental radio license, the licensee shall file a 
narrative statement describing the results of the experiment, including 
any interference incidents and steps taken to resolve them. This 
narrative statement must be filed to the Commission's program 
experimental registration Web site and be associated with the materials 
described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (e)(1) The Commission may ask licensees for additional information 
to resolve an interference incident, gain a better understanding of new 
technology development, or for auditing purposes to ensure that 
licensees are actually conducting experiments. Failure to comply with a 
Commission request for additional information under this section, or 
if, upon review of such information, the Commission determines that a 
licensee is not actually conducting experimentation, could result in 
forfeiture of the program license and loss of privilege of obtaining 
such a license in the future.
    (2) All information submitted pursuant to this section will be 
treated as routinely available for publicly inspection, within the 
meaning of Sec.  0.459 of this chapter. Licensees are permitted to 
request that information requested by the Commission pursuant to this 
section be withheld from public inspection. The Commission will 
consider such requests pursuant to the procedures set forth in Sec.  
0.459 of this chapter.


Sec.  5.311  Additional requirements related to safety of the public.

    In addition to the notification requirements of Sec.  5.309, for 
experiments that may affect frequency bands used for the provision of 
commercial mobile services, emergency notifications, or public safety 
purposes, the program experimental radio licensee shall, prior to 
commencing transmissions, develop a specific plan to avoid interference 
to these bands. The plan must include provisions for:
    (a) Providing notice to parties, including other Commission 
licensees that are authorized to operate in the same bands and 
geographic area as the planned experiment and, as appropriate, their 
end users;
    (b) Rapid identification, and elimination, of any harm the 
experiment may cause; and
    (c) Identifying an alternate means for accomplishing potentially-
affected vital public safety functions during the experiment.


Sec.  5.313  Innovation zones.

    (a) An innovation zone is a specified geographic location with pre-
authorized boundary conditions (such as frequency band, maximum power, 
etc.) created by the Commission on its own motion or in response to a 
request from the public. Innovation zones will be announced via public 
notice and posted on the

[[Page 25173]]

Commission's program experimental registration Web site.
    (b) A program experimental licensee may conduct experiments in an 
innovation zone consistent with the specified boundary conditions 
without specific authorization from the Commission. All licensees 
operating under this authority must comply with the requirements and 
limitations set forth for program licensees in this part, including 
providing notification of its intended operations on the program 
experimental registration Web site prior to operation.

Subpart F--Medical Testing Experimental Radio Licenses


Sec.  5.401  Applicable rules.

    In addition to the rules in this subpart, medical testing 
experimental applicants and licensees must follow the rules in subparts 
B and C of this part. In case of any conflict between the rules set 
forth in this subpart and the rules set forth in subparts B and C of 
this part, the rules in this subpart shall govern.


Sec.  5.402  Eligibility and usage.

    (a) Eligibility for medical testing licenses is limited to health 
care facilities as defined in Sec.  95.1103(b) of this chapter.
    (b) Medical testing experimental radio licenses are for testing in 
clinical trials medical devices that use RF wireless technology for 
diagnosis, treatment, or patient monitoring for the purposes of, but 
not limited to, assessing patient compatibility and usage issues, as 
well as operational, interference, and RF immunity issues. Medical 
testing is limited to testing equipment designed to comply with the 
rules in part 15, Radio Frequency Devices; part 18, Industrial, 
Scientific, and Medical Equipment; part 95, Personal Radio Services 
subpart H--Wireless Medical Telemetry Service; or part 95, subpart I--
Medical Device Radiocommunication Service.


Sec.  5.403  Frequencies.

    (a) Licensees may operate in any frequency band, including those 
above 38.6 GHz, except for frequency bands exclusively allocated to the 
passive services (including the radio astronomy service). In addition, 
licensees may not use any frequency or frequency band below 38.6 GHz 
that is listed in Sec.  15.205(a) of this chapter.
    (b) Exception: Licensees may use frequencies listed in Sec.  
15.205(a) of this chapter if the device under test is designed to 
comply with all applicable service rules in part 18, Industrial, 
Scientific, and Medical Equipment; part 95, Personal Radio Services 
subpart H--Wireless Medical Telemetry Service; or part 95, subpart I--
Medical Device Radiocommunication Service.


Sec.  5.404  Area of operation.

    Applications must specify, and the Commission will grant 
authorizations for, a geographic area that is inclusive of an 
institution's real-property facilities where the experimentation will 
be conducted and that is under the applicant's control. Applications 
also may specify, and the Commission will grant authorizations for, 
defined geographic areas beyond the institution's real-property 
facilities that will be included in clinical trials and monitored by 
the licensee. In general, operations will be permitted where the 
likelihood of harmful interference being caused to authorized services 
is minimal.


Sec.  5.405  Yearly report.

    Medical testing licensees must file a yearly report detailing the 
activity that has been performed under the license. This report is to 
be filed electronically to the Commission's program experimental 
registration Web site and must, at a minimum, include:
    (a) A list of each test performed and the testing period; and
    (b) A Description of each test, including equipment tested; and
    (c) The results of the test including any interference incidents 
and their resolution.


Sec.  5.406  Responsible party, ``stop-buzzer,'' and notification 
requirements, and additional requirements related to safety of the 
public.

    (a) Medical testing licensees must identify a single point of 
contact responsible for all experiments conducted under the license and 
must also identify a ``stop buzzer'' point of contact for all 
experiments, consistent with subpart E, Sec. Sec.  5.307 and 5.308.
    (b) Medical testing licensees must meet the notification and safety 
of the public requirements of subpart E, Sec. Sec.  5.309 and 5.311.


Sec.  5.407  Exemption from station identification requirement.

    Medical testing experimental licensees are exempt from complying 
with the station identification requirements of Sec.  5.115.

Subpart G--Compliance Testing Experimental Radio Licenses


Sec.  5.501  Applicable rules.

    In addition to the rules in this subpart, compliance testing 
experimental applicants and licensees must follow the rules in subparts 
B and C of this part. In case of any conflict between the rules set 
forth in this subpart and the rules set forth in subparts B and C of 
this part, the rules in this subpart shall govern.


Sec.  5.502  Eligibility.

    Compliance testing experimental radio licenses may be granted to 
those testing laboratories recognized by the FCC as being competent to 
perform measurements of equipment for equipment authorization.


Sec.  5.503  Scope of testing activities.

    The authority of a compliance testing experimental license is 
limited to only those testing activities necessary for device 
certification (including antenna calibration, test site validation, 
proficiency testing, and testing in an Open Area Test Site); i.e., 
compliance testing experimental licensees are not authorized to conduct 
immunity testing.


Sec.  5.504  Responsible party.

    Compliance testing licensees must identify a single point of 
contact responsible for all experiments conducted under the license, 
including ensuring compliance with all applicable FCC rules:
    (a) The responsible individual will serve as the initial point of 
contact for all matters involving interference resolution and must have 
the authority to discontinue any and all experiments being conducted 
under the license, if necessary.
    (b) The name of the responsible individual, along with contact 
information, such as a phone number and email address at which he or 
she can be reached at any time of the day, must be identified on the 
license application, and this information will be listed on the 
license. Licensees are required to keep this information current.


Sec.  5.505  Exemption from station identification requirement.

    Compliance testing experimental licensees are exempt from complying 
with the station identification requirements of Sec.  5.115.

Subpart H--Product Development and Market Trials


Sec.  5.601  Product development trials.

    Unless otherwise stated in the instrument of authorization, 
experimental radio licenses granted for the purpose of product 
development trials pursuant to Sec.  5.3(k) are subject to the 
following conditions:

[[Page 25174]]

    (a) All transmitting and/or receiving equipment used in the study 
shall be owned by the licensee.
    (b) The licensee is responsible for informing all participants in 
the experiment that the operation of the service or device is being 
conducted under an experimental authorization and is strictly 
temporary.
    (c) Marketing of devices (as defined in Sec.  2.803 of this 
chapter) or provision of services for hire is not permitted.
    (d) The size and scope of the experiment are subject to such 
limitations as the Commission may establish on a case-by-case basis. If 
the Commission subsequently determines that a product development trial 
is not so limited, the trial shall be immediately terminated.
    (e) Broadcast experimental station applicants and licensees must 
also meet the requirements of Sec.  5.205.


Sec.  5.602  Market trials.

    Unless otherwise stated in the instrument of authorization, 
experimental radio licenses granted for the purpose of market trials 
pursuant to Sec.  5.3(k) are subject to the following conditions:
    (a) Marketing of devices (as defined in Sec.  2.803 of this 
chapter) and provision of services for hire is permitted before the 
radio frequency device has been authorized by the Commission, subject 
to the ownership provisions in paragraph (d) of this section and 
provided that the device will be operated in compliance with existing 
Commission rules, waivers of such rules that are in effect at the time 
of operation, or rules that have been adopted by the Commission but 
that have not yet become effective.
    (b) The operation of all radio frequency devices that are included 
in a market trial must be authorized under this rule section, including 
those devices that are designed to operate under parts 15, 18, or 95 of 
this chapter.
    (c) If more than one entity will be responsible for conducting the 
same market trial e.g., manufacturer and service provider, each entity 
will be authorized under a separate license. If more than one licensee 
is authorized, the licensees or the Commission shall designate one as 
the responsible party for the trial.
    (d) All transmitting and/or receiving equipment used in the study 
shall be owned by the experimental licensees. Marketing of devices is 
only permitted as follows:
    (1) The licensees may sell equipment to each other, e.g., 
manufacturer to service provider,
    (2) The licensees may lease equipment to trial participants for 
purposes of the study, and
    (3) The number of devices to be marketed shall be the minimum 
quantity of devices necessary to conduct the market trial as approved 
by the Commission.
    (e) Licensees are required to ensure that trial devices are either 
rendered inoperable or retrieved by them from trial participants at the 
conclusion of the trial. Licensees are required to notify trial 
participants in advance that operation of the trial device is subject 
to this condition.
    (f) The size and scope of the experiment are subject to limitations 
as the Commission shall establish on a case-by-case basis. If the 
Commission subsequently determines that a market trial is not so 
limited, the trial shall be immediately terminated.
    (g) Broadcast experimental station applicants and licensees must 
also meet the requirements of Sec.  5.205.

PART 22--PUBLIC MOBILE SERVICES

0
16. The authority citation for part 22 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 222, 303, 309, and 332.


Sec.  22.165  [Amended]

0
17. Section 22.165 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph 
(d)(2).

0
18. Section 22.377 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  22.377  Certification of transmitters.

    Transmitters used in the Public Mobile Services, including those 
used with signal boosters, in-building radiation systems and cellular 
repeaters, must be certificated for use in the radio services regulated 
under this part. Transmitters must be certificated when the station is 
ready for service, not necessarily at the time of filing an 
application. The FCC may list as certificated only transmitters that 
are capable of meeting all technical requirements of the rules 
governing the service in which they will operate. The procedure for 
obtaining certification is set forth in part 2 of this chapter.

Subpart D [Removed and Reserved]

0
19. Subpart D (consisting of Sec. Sec.  22.401 through 22.413) is 
removed and reserved.

0
20. Section 22.591 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  22.591  Channels for point-to-point operation.

* * * * *
    (a) The 72-76 MHz channels may be used in point-to-multipoint 
configurations. The 72-76 MHz channels are also allocated for 
assignment in the Private Radio Services (see part 90 of this chapter).
* * * * *


Sec.  22.599  [Removed]

0
21. Section 22.599 is removed.

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

0
22. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336 and 339.


Sec.  73.1510  [Removed]

0
23. Section 73.1510 is removed.

PART 74--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER 
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES

0
24. The authority citation for part 74 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307, 309, 336 and 554.


0
25. Section 74.1 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  74.1  Scope.

    (a) The rules in this subpart are applicable to the Auxiliary and 
Special Broadcast and Other Program Distributional Services.
    (b) Rules in part 74 which apply exclusively to a particular 
service are contained in that service subpart, as follows: Remote 
Pickup Broadcast Stations, subpart D; Aural Broadcast STL and Intercity 
Relay Stations, subpart E; TV Auxiliary Broadcast Stations, subpart F; 
Low-power TV, TV Translator and TV Booster Stations, subpart G; Low-
power Auxiliary Stations, subpart H; FM Broadcast Translator Stations 
and FM Broadcast Booster Stations, subpart L.

0
26. Section 74.5 is amended by revising the introductory text to read 
as follows:


Sec.  74.5  Cross reference to rules in other parts.

    Certain rules applicable to Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and other 
Program Distribution services, some of which are also applicable to 
other services, are set forth in the following parts of the FCC Rules 
and Regulations:
* * * * *

0
27. Section 74.15 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (a) 
and revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:

[[Page 25175]]

Sec.  74.15  Station license period.

* * * * *
    (f) The license of an FM translator or FM broadcast booster, TV 
translator or TV broadcast booster, or low power TV station will expire 
as a matter of law upon failure to transmit broadcast signals for any 
consecutive 12-month period notwithstanding any provision, term, or 
condition of the license to the contrary. Further, if the license of 
any AM, FM, or TV broadcasting station licensed under part 73 of this 
chapter expires for failure to transmit signals for any consecutive 12-
month period, the licensee's authorizations under part 74, subparts D, 
E, F, and H in connection with the operation of that AM, FM, or TV 
broadcasting station will also expire notwithstanding any provision, 
term, or condition to the contrary.

0
28. Section 74.16 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  74.16  Temporary extension of station licenses.

    Where there is pending before the Commission any application, 
investigation, or proceeding which, after hearing, might lead to or 
make necessary the modification of, revocation of, or the refusal to 
renew an existing auxiliary broadcast station license or a television 
broadcast translator station license, the Commission in its discretion, 
may grant a temporary extension of such license: Provided, however, 
That no such temporary extension shall be construed as a finding by the 
Commission that the operation of any radio station thereunder will 
serve public interest, convenience, and necessity beyond the express 
terms of such temporary extension of license: And provided further, 
That such temporary extension of license will in no wise affect or 
limit the action of the Commission with respect to any pending 
application or proceeding.
0
29. Section 74.28 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  74.28  Additional orders.

    In case the rules contained in this part do not cover all phases of 
operation with respect to external effects, the FCC may make 
supplemental or additional orders in each case as may be deemed 
necessary.

Subpart A [Removed and Reserved]

0
30. Subpart A (consisting of Sec. Sec.  74.101 through 74.184) is 
removed and reserved.


Sec.  74.780  [Amended]

0
31. Section 74.780 is amended by adding an entry for ``Part 5--
Experimental authorizations'' in numerical order and removing the entry 
for ``Section 73.1510--Experimental authorizations.''

PART 80--STATIONS IN THE MARITIME SERVICES

0
32. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Secs. 4, 303, 307(e), 309, and 332, 48 Stat. 1066, 
1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307(e), 309, and 332, unless 
otherwise noted. Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105, 
as amended; 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 301-609; 3 UST 3450, 3 UST 4726, 12 
UST 2377.


Sec.  80.25  [Amended]

0
33. Section 80.25 is amended by removing paragraph (c).


Sec.  80.33  [Removed]

0
34. Section 80.33 is removed.


Sec.  80.203  [Amended]

0
35. Section 80.203 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (j).


Sec.  80.211  [Amended]

0
36. Section 80.211 is amended by removing paragraph (g).

0
37. Section 80.377 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  80.377  Frequencies for ship earth stations.

    The frequency band 1626.5-1645.5 MHz is assignable for 
communication operations and radiodetermination and telecommand 
messages that are associated with the position, orientation and 
operational functions of maritime satellite equipment. The frequency 
band 1645.5-1646.5 MHz is reserved for use in the Global Maritime 
Distress and Safety System (GMDSS).


Sec.  80.391  [Removed]

0
38. Section 80.391 is removed.

PART 87--AVIATION SERVICES

0
39. The authority citation for part 87 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 303 and 307(e), unless otherwise 
noted.


0
40. Section 87.27 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  87.27  License term.

    Licenses for stations in the aviation services will normally be 
issued for a term of ten years from the date of original issuance, or 
renewal.


Sec.  87.37  [Removed]

0
41. Section 87.37 is removed.

PART 90--PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

0
42. The authority citation for part 90 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Sections 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7) of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 
303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7), and Title VI of the Middle Class Tax 
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156.


Sec.  90.7  [Amended]

0
43. Section 90.7 is amended by removing the definition ``Developmental 
Operation.''


Sec.  90.20  [Amended]

0
44. Section 90.20 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph 
(e)(3).


Sec.  90.35  [Amended]

0
45. Section 90.35 is amended by removing the entry for ``8,400 to 
8,500'' from the table in paragraph (b)(3) and by removing and 
reserving paragraphs (c)(75), (d)(6) and (e)(2).


Sec.  90.129  [Amended]

0
46. Section 90.129 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (f).


Sec.  90.149  [Amended]

0
47. Section 90.149 is amended by removing paragraph (c).


Sec.  90.175  [Amended]

0
48. Section 90.175 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph 
(j)(4).


Sec.  90.203  [Amended]

0
49. Section 90.203 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph 
(b)(1).


Sec.  90.241  [Amended]

0
50. Section 90.241 is amended by removing paragraph (e).

0
51. Section 90.250 is amended by revising paragraph (i) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  90.250  Meteor burst communications.

* * * * *
    (i) Stations employing meteor burst communications must not cause 
interference to other stations operating in accordance with the 
allocation table. New authorizations will be issued subject to the 
Commission's experimental licensing rules in part 5 of this chapter. 
Prior to expiration of the experimental authorization, application Form 
601 should be filed for issuance of a permanent authorization.

[[Page 25176]]

Subpart Q [Removed and Reserved]

0
52. Subpart Q (consisting of Sec. Sec.  90.501 through 90.517) is 
removed and reserved.

PART 101--FIXED MICROWAVE SERVICES

0
53. The authority citation for part 101 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154, 303.


Sec.  101.21  [Amended]

0
54. Section 101.21 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (b).

0
55. Section 101.129 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  101.129  Transmitter location.

    (a) The applicant must determine, prior to filing an application 
for a radio station authorization, that the antenna site specified 
therein is adequate to render the service proposed. In cases of 
questionable antenna locations, it is desirable to conduct propagation 
tests to indicate the field intensity which may be expected in the 
principal areas or at the fixed points of communication to be served, 
particularly where severe shadow problems may be expected. In 
considering applications proposing the use of such locations, the 
Commission may require site survey tests to be made pursuant to an 
experimental license under part 5 of this chapter. In such cases, 
propagation tests should be conducted in accordance with recognized 
engineering methods and should be made with a transmitting antenna 
simulating, as near as possible, the proposed antenna installation. 
Full data obtained from such surveys and its analysis, including a 
description of the methods used and the name, address and 
qualifications of the engineer making the survey, must be supplied to 
the Commission.
* * * * *

Subpart F [Removed and Reserved]

0
56. Subpart F (consisting of Sec. Sec.  101.401 through 101.413) is 
removed and reserved.

[FR Doc. 2013-08528 Filed 4-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P