Radio Experimentation and Market Trials-Streamlining Rules, 25137-25176 [2013-08528]
Download as PDF
Vol. 78
Monday,
No. 82
April 29, 2013
Part II
Federal Communications Commission
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
47 CFR Parts 0, 1, 2, et al.
Radio Experimentation and Market Trials—Streamlining Rules; Final Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:58 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25138
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
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
§§ 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,
Rodney.Small@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 fcc504@fcc.gov 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
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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.
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
• 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 § 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
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25139
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 broadcastspecific 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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25140
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
program of research and
experimentation under a single
experimental authorization for a fiveyear 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
B. Program Experimental Radio Licenses designed to avoid harmful interference
to existing services.
11. In the NPRM, the Commission
13. In the NPRM, the Commission
noted that research institutions already
proposed to establish three different
use its experimental licensing program
types of program licenses and further
to deliver impressive results, but that its proposed that eligibility for each would
existing experimental rules are not
require applicants to demonstrate basic
always nimble enough to account for the expertise in radio management. First, it
speed of today’s technological
proposed a research program
development. Currently, the rules allow experimental radio license under which
for an experimenter to apply for a
colleges, universities, and non-profit
conventional experimental license to
research organizations would be
cover a single or several closely related
permitted to use a broad range of radio
experiments for 2–5-year periods with
frequencies for research and
options for renewals for up to 5 years.
experimentation. It proposed to restrict
Any qualified company or individual,
the research program experimental
including students, may apply for a
license to Accreditation Board for
license, and experiments cannot begin
Engineering and Technology (ABET)
until the Commission grants the license. colleges or universities with graduate
These conventional experimental
research programs or existing industry
licenses are characterized by a narrowly partnerships and a defined geographic
defined purpose and specific limitations location, or to nationally recognized
on frequencies, emissions, and power
non-profit research laboratories with a
levels. If, during the course of
defined geographic location. The
experimentation, a licensee determines
Commission reasoned that these
that it would be better served by
institutions typically have a record of
conducting experiments using
generating the types of innovations and
parameters that would differ from what
technological breakthroughs that it
was authorized, the licensee must often
seeks to foster, and argued that this new
request a modified or new license before license option would provide more
exploring a new line of
flexibility to accelerate the rate of these
experimentation. This process can delay innovations. It proposed to restrict all
the introduction of new technologies
research experiments to the grounds of
into the marketplace and may prevent
the license holder’s location and to
the American public from expeditiously require that licensees have institutional
taking advantage of technological
processes to monitor and effectively
advances.
manage a wide variety of research
12. In pursuit of a process that could
projects.
keep pace with innovation, the
14. Second, the Commission proposed
Commission proposed in the NPRM to
to establish a medical program
establish a new type of experimental
experimental radio license, available to
hospitals and other health care
license—a program license—under
institutions, to expedite the process by
which qualified institutions would be
which medical equipment is approved
permitted to conduct an ongoing
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 preauthorized 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25141
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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25142
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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 noninterference 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 realproperty 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-bycase 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
§ 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
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25143
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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
25144
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 noninterference 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 § 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
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 webbased 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 § 5.307 of the
rules. It also is adding a new § 5.308 to
the rules requiring the ‘‘stop buzzer’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25145
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.
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
25146
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 § 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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)
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 priorreported 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25147
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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
25148
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 § 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 in§ 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 Commissionrecognized 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 Commissionrecognized 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 nonclinical 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
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25149
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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
25150
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
§ 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
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 testbed, 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 realworld trials, which require operation of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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, § 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 Commissionlicensed service provider so long as that
equipment operates in the bands
licensed to that service provider.
Additionally, § 5.3(j) of the rules
permits licensees operating noncertified 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—§§ 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 § 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
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25151
effectively prohibits operating
unauthorized devices in residential
areas. Under existing § 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 preproduction 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
§§ 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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25152
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 § 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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 § 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 § 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 § 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.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25153
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
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
25154
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 4000unit 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 8000unit 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
readily apparent from checking the online 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 § 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 § 5.61 of its rules. BAE
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
also asks that the Commission clarify
the rule language in § 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 § 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 § 5.77 to make this change.
BAE also requests that the Commission
alter proposed § 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 § 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
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25155
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 § 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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
25156
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 § 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 § 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 § 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 § 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 §§ 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 § 5.95 was adopted, the
Commission adopts a non-substantive
procedural change to § 5.95 to clarify
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that filers shall no longer file informal
objections using the process for print
mail submissions in §§ 1.41–1.52, but
shall submit all informal objections
electronically via the ELS as otherwise
required in § 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
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
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).
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
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
4 See
Crowley Comments to NPRM at 8–9.
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
5 See
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25157
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.
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
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.’’
8 See 5 U.S.C. 601(3)–(6).
9 See SBA, Office of Advocacy, ‘‘Frequently
Asked Questions,’’ available at https://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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
Continued
29APR2
25158
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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).
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 nowsuperseded 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
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
https://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/
2011/. 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.
16 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517210 Wireless Telecommunications Categories
(Except Satellite)’’; https://www.census.gov/naics/
2007/def/ND517210.HTM#N517210.
17 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517211 Paging’’; https://www.census.gov/epcd/
naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.; U.S. Census Bureau,
2002 NAICS Definitions, ‘‘517212 Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications’’; https://
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).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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.
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
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.’’
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 OperationalFixed Microwave services. See 47 CFR parts 80 and
90. Stations in this service are called operationalfixed 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 operationalfixed 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.
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 nowsuperseded 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
27 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517210 Wireless Telecommunications Categories
(Except Satellite)’’; https://www.census.gov/naics/
2007/def/ND517210.HTM#N517210.
28 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517211 Paging’’; https://www.census.gov/epcd/
naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.; U.S. Census Bureau,
2002 NAICS Definitions, ‘‘517212 Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications’’; https://
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).
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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.
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
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.’’
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
$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.
128. Public Safety Radio Services.
Public Safety radio services include
police, fire, local government, forestry
conservation, highway maintenance,
and emergency medical services.40
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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25159
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.
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
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:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25160
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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
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
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).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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
§§ 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
43 See
44 See
5 U.S.C. 603(c).
5 U.S.C. 604(b).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:58 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 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
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.
2. Section 0.406 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as
follows:
■
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
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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.
§ 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.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 1.913 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:
§ 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.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Section 1.981 is revised to read as
follows
§ 1.981
■
PO 00000
3. The authority citation for part 1
continues to read as follows:
■
4. Section 1.77 is amended by revising
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
47 CFR Parts 2 and 74
Communications equipment, Radio,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
*
PART 1—PRACTICE AND
PROCEDURE
■
47 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and
procedures, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
§ 0.406
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.
*
*
*
*
*
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.
■ 7. Section 1.1307 is amended by
revising the entry ‘‘Experimental Radio,
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25161
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and Other
Program Distributional Services (part
74)’’ of the table in paragraph (b)(1) to
read as follows:
§ 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 Program Distributional Services (part 74) ..........................
*
*
Subparts G and L: Power > 100 W ERP.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
PART 2—FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS
AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS;
GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS
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.
9. Section 2.1 is amended by adding
the definitions ‘‘End Product’’ and
‘‘Evaluation Kit’’ in alphabetical order
to read as follows:
■
§ 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.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 2.102
[Amended]
10. Section 2.102 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph
(b)(2).
■ 11. Section 2.803 is revised to read as
follows:
■
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 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:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
*
*
(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 § 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 § 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
*
*
(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
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25162
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
■ 12. Section 2.805 is added to read as
follows:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 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 § 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
§ 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 preproduction states. If the device is not
operated at the manufacturer’s facilities,
it must be labeled with the wording
specified in § 2.803(c)(2)(iii), and in the
case of an evaluation kit, the wording
specified in § 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 § 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
§ 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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 preproduction states. If the device is not
operated at the manufacturer’s facilities,
it must be labeled with the wording
specified in § 2.803(c)(2)(iii), and in the
case of an evaluation kit, the wording
specified in § 2.803(c)(2)(iv)(C).
■ 13. Section 2.811 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 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.
■ 14. Section 2.1204 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as
follows:
§ 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.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 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.
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Who may sign applications.
Forms to be used.
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.
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 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 A—General
5.57
5.59
5.61
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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.
§ 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.
§ 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25163
(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.
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25164
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
authorization procedure outlined in
§ 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.
§ 5.54
General Filing Requirements
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
§ 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 § 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 5.53
Station authorization required.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
§ 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 § 5.59.
(b) Applications requiring fees as set
forth in part 1, subpart G of this chapter
must be filed in accordance with
§ 0.401(b) of this chapter.
(c) Each application for station
authorization shall be specific and
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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
https://www.fcc.gov/els.
(2) Applications for special temporary
authorization shall be filed in
accordance with the procedures of
§ 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
§ 5.59.
§ 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.
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
§ 5.59
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
(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 computergenerated electronic impulses.
§ 5.61 Procedure for obtaining a special
temporary authorization.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
(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 https://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
§ 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25165
(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 § 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.
§ 5.63
Supplemental statements required.
Applicants must provide the
information set forth on the applicable
form as specified in § 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 § 1.1307 of this
chapter) an environmental assessment
as defined in § 1.1311 of this chapter
must be submitted with the application.
(b) If an applicant requests nondisclosure of proprietary information,
requests shall follow the procedures for
submission set forth in § 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25166
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 § 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 §§ 5.402(a) and 5.502
respectively.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 postmission 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 postmission 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.
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
waiver desired and set forth the reasons
in support thereof.
§ 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 § 5.65, are subject to dismissal
without prejudice.
§ 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 § 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
(c) Broadcast experimental radio
license. Licenses are issued for a oneyear period and may be renewed for an
additional term not exceeding 5 years,
upon an adequate showing of need.
§ 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
§ 0.459 of this chapter.
(b) The provisions in § 5.207 apply to
broadcast experimental radio licenses.
(c) The provisions in § 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.
§ 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25167
(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.
§ 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.
§ 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.
§ 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.
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25168
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 5.85 Frequencies and policy governing
frequency assignment.
(a) Stations operating in the
Experimental Radio Service may be
authorized to use any Federal or nonFederal 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 § 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 § 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/m2 power flux density assuming a
free space characteristic impedance of
120p 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
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 § 0.121(b) of this
chapter and also meets the criteria
outlined in paragraphs (f)(2) and (3) of
this section.
§ 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°15′ N on the north, 78°30′ W on
the east, 37°30′ N on the south and
80°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.
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
electronically consistent with the
requirements set forth in § 5.55.
Subpart C—Technical Standards and
Operating Requirements
§ 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.
§ 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.
§ 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 § 2.1 and § 2.202 of this chapter.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
(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.
§ 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 § 17.6 of this chapter.
§ 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.
§ 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
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25169
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.
§ 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.
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25170
§ 5.121
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
§ 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.
§ 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
§ 5.201
Applicable rules.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
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.
§ 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 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.’’
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
§ 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.
§ 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 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.
§ 5.217
Rebroadcasts.
(a) The term rebroadcast means
reception by radio of the programs or
other transmissions of a broadcast
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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.
§ 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
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25171
Commission may at any time order
discontinuance of such operation.
Subpart E—Program Experimental
Radio Licenses
§ 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.
§ 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.
§ 5.303
Frequencies.
Licensees may operate in any
frequency band, except for frequency
bands exclusively designated as
restricted in § 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.
§ 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.
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25172
§ 5.305
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 § 5.63(a), or
(b) An orbital debris mitigation plan
must be filed with the Commission as
required by § 5.64, or
(c) The applicant requires nondisclosure 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.
§ 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 § 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.
§ 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 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;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
(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
§ 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
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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
§ 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 § 0.459 of this
chapter.
§ 5.311 Additional requirements related to
safety of the public.
In addition to the notification
requirements of § 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.
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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
§ 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.
§ 5.402
Eligibility and usage.
(a) Eligibility for medical testing
licenses is limited to health care
facilities as defined in § 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 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
§ 15.205(a) of this chapter.
(b) Exception: Licensees may use
frequencies listed in § 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
95, Personal Radio Services subpart H—
Wireless Medical Telemetry Service; or
part 95, subpart I—Medical Device
Radiocommunication Service.
§ 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.
§ 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.
§ 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, §§ 5.307 and 5.308.
(b) Medical testing licensees must
meet the notification and safety of the
public requirements of subpart E,
§§ 5.309 and 5.311.
§ 5.407 Exemption from station
identification requirement.
Medical testing experimental
licensees are exempt from complying
with the station identification
requirements of § 5.115.
Subpart G—Compliance Testing
Experimental Radio Licenses
§ 5.501
Applicable rules.
In addition to the rules in this
subpart, compliance testing
experimental applicants and licensees
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
25173
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.
§ 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.
§ 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.
§ 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.
§ 5.505 Exemption from station
identification requirement.
Compliance testing experimental
licensees are exempt from complying
with the station identification
requirements of § 5.115.
Subpart H—Product Development and
Market Trials
§ 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 § 5.3(k) are subject to
the following conditions:
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25174
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(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
§ 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 § 5.205.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
§ 5.602
Market trials.
Unless otherwise stated in the
instrument of authorization,
experimental radio licenses granted for
the purpose of market trials pursuant to
§ 5.3(k) are subject to the following
conditions:
(a) Marketing of devices (as defined in
§ 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,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
(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 § 5.205.
(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).
*
*
*
*
*
§ 22.599
■
[Removed]
21. Section 22.599 is removed.
PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICES
22. The authority citation for part 73
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336
and 339.
§ 73.1510
■
[Removed]
23. Section 73.1510 is removed.
PART 74—EXPERIMENTAL RADIO,
AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST
AND OTHER PROGRAM
DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES
24. The authority citation for part 74
continues to read as follows:
PART 22—PUBLIC MOBILE SERVICES
■
■
16. The authority citation for part 22
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307, 309,
336 and 554.
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 222, 303, 309,
and 332.
■
§ 22.165
§ 74.1
[Amended]
17. Section 22.165 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph
(d)(2).
■ 18. Section 22.377 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 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]
19. Subpart D (consisting of §§ 22.401
through 22.413) is removed and
reserved.
■ 20. Section 22.591 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
§ 22.591 Channels for point-to-point
operation.
*
PO 00000
*
*
Frm 00038
*
Fmt 4701
*
Sfmt 4700
25. Section 74.1 is revised to read as
follows:
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.
■ 26. Section 74.5 is amended by
revising the introductory text to read as
follows:
§ 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:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 27. Section 74.15 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph (a)
and revising paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
§ 74.15
Station license period.
§ 74.780
*
*
*
*
*
(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.
§ 87.37
■
28. Section 74.16 is revised to read as
follows:
[Amended]
■
■
■
PART 80—STATIONS IN THE
MARITIME SERVICES
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.
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.
§ 80.25
[Amended]
35. Section 80.203 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph (j).
■
§ 80.211
36. Section 80.211 is amended by
removing paragraph (g).
■ 37. Section 80.377 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 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).
■
38. Section 80.391 is removed.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Additional orders.
39. The authority citation for part 87
continues to read as follows:
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]
§ 87.27
30. Subpart A (consisting of §§ 74.101
through 74.184) is removed and
reserved.
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.
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303 and 307(e),
unless otherwise noted.
40. Section 87.27 is revised to read as
follows:
■
PO 00000
License term.
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
§ 90.7
[Amended]
43. Section 90.7 is amended by
removing the definition ‘‘Developmental
Operation.’’
■
[Amended]
44. Section 90.20 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph (e)(3).
■
[Amended]
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).
■
[Amended]
46. Section 90.129 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph (f).
■
§ 90.149
[Amended]
47. Section 90.149 is amended by
removing paragraph (c).
■
§ 90.175
[Amended]
48. Section 90.175 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph (j)(4).
■
§ 90.203
[Amended]
49. Section 90.203 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph
(b)(1).
■
§ 90.241
[Amended]
50. Section 90.241 is amended by
removing paragraph (e).
■ 51. Section 90.250 is amended by
revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:
■
[Removed]
PART 87—AVIATION SERVICES
§ 74.28
42. The authority citation for part 90
continues to read as follows:
■
§ 90.129
[Amended]
■
§ 80.391
PART 90—PRIVATE LAND MOBILE
RADIO SERVICES
§ 90.35
[Removed]
34. Section 80.33 is removed.
§ 80.203
41. Section 87.37 is removed.
§ 90.20
[Amended]
33. Section 80.25 is amended by
removing paragraph (c).
■
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.
■ 29. Section 74.28 is revised to read as
follows:
[Removed]
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.’’
§ 80.33
§ 74.16 Temporary extension of station
licenses.
25175
Sfmt 4700
§ 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.
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
25176
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
§ 101.129
Subpart Q [Removed and Reserved]
52. Subpart Q (consisting of §§ 90.501
through 90.517) is removed and
reserved.
■
PART 101—FIXED MICROWAVE
SERVICES
53. The authority citation for part 101
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303.
§ 101.21
[Amended]
54. Section 101.21 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph (b).
■
55. Section 101.129 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES2
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Apr 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
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]
56. Subpart F (consisting of
§§ 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
E:\FR\FM\29APR2.SGM
29APR2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 82 (Monday, April 29, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25137-25176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing 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, Rodney.Small@fcc.gov.
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 fcc504@fcc.gov 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 https://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 https://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2011/. 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)''; https://www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/ND517210.HTM#N517210.
\17\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517211
Paging''; https://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.; U.S.
Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517212 Cellular and Other
Wireless Telecommunications''; https://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)''; https://www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/ND517210.HTM#N517210.
\28\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517211
Paging''; https://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.; U.S.
Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, ``517212 Cellular and Other
Wireless Telecommunications''; https://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 https://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 https://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