Unlicensed White Space Devices, 15210-15216 [2016-05764]
Download as PDF
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
15210
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules
D.C. Circuit’s direction to EPA to
continue administering CAIR, the
Agency believed that it was appropriate
for states to rely on CAIR emission
reductions for prong 4 purposes. EPA
intended to allow this practice until a
valid replacement for CAIR was
developed and EPA acted on SIPs
submitted in compliance with any new
rule, or until the CSAPR litigation was
resolved in a way that provided
different direction regarding CAIR and
CSAPR. After publication of the
February 20, 2013, prong 4 proposal,
EPA asked the Supreme Court to review
the DC Circuit’s decision and the
Supreme Court reversed that ruling and
upheld CSAPR.18 EPA began
implementation of CSAPR, which
replaced CAIR, on January 1, 2015.
Therefore, because of this intervening
change in the law, EPA cannot finalize
its February 20, 2013, proposal to
approve the prong 4 element that relies
on CAIR, and Mississippi cannot rely on
the outdated rationale contained in the
NPRM regarding CAIR to satisfy prong
4.
As mentioned above, a state may meet
the requirements of prong 4 without a
fully approved regional haze SIP by
showing that its SIP contains adequate
provisions to prevent emissions from
within the state from interfering with
other states’ measures to protect
visibility. Mississippi did not, however,
provide a demonstration in any of the
infrastructure SIP submissions subject
to today’s proposed action that
emissions within its jurisdiction do not
interfere with other states’ plans to
protect visibility.
As discussed above, Mississippi does
not have a fully approved regional haze
SIP that meets the requirements of 40
CFR 51.308 and has not otherwise
shown that its SIP contains adequate
provisions to prevent emissions from
within the state from interfering with
other states’ measures to protect
visibility. Therefore, EPA is proposing
to disapprove the prong 4 portions of
Mississippi’s May 29, 2012, 2008 8-hour
Ozone infrastructure SIP submission;
July 26, 2012, 2008 8-hour Ozone
infrastructure SIP resubmission;
February 28, 2013, 2010 1-hour NO2
infrastructure SIP submission; June 20,
2013, 2010 1-hour SO2 infrastructure
SIP submission; and December 8, 2015,
2012 annual PM2.5 infrastructure SIP
submission. Mississippi did not submit
these infrastructure SIPs to meet
requirements for Part D or a SIP call;
therefore, if EPA takes final action to
disapprove the prong 4 portions of these
18 EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134
S. Ct. 1584 (2014).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Mar 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
submissions, no sanctions will be
triggered. However, if EPA finalizes this
proposed disapproval action, that final
action will trigger the requirement
under section 110(c) that EPA
promulgate a FIP no later than two years
from the date of the disapproval unless
the State corrects the deficiency through
a SIP revision and EPA approves the SIP
revision before EPA promulgates such a
FIP.
V. Proposed Action
As described above, EPA is proposing
to disapprove the prong 4 portions of
Mississippi’s May 29, 2012, 2008 Ozone
infrastructure SIP submission; July 26,
2012, 2008 Ozone infrastructure SIP
resubmission; February 28, 2013, 2010
NO2 infrastructure SIP submission; June
20, 2013, 2010 SO2 infrastructure SIP
submission; and December 8, 2015,
2012 PM2.5 infrastructure SIP
submission. All other outstanding
applicable infrastructure requirements
for these SIP submissions will be
addressed in separate rulemakings.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations.
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. EPA is proposing to determine
that the prong 4 portions of the
aforementioned SIP submissions do not
meet Federal requirements. Therefore,
this proposed action does not impose
additional requirements on the state
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: March 8, 2016.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2016–06062 Filed 3–21–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 15
[ET Docket No. 16–56; FCC 16–23]
Unlicensed White Space Devices
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) proposes to amend its
rules to improve the quality of the
geographic location and other data
submitted for fixed white space devices
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules
operating on unused frequencies in the
TV Bands and, in the future, the 600
MHz Band for wireless services. The
proposed rules would eliminate the
professional installer option for fixed
white space devices and require that
each fixed white space device
incorporate a geo-location capability to
determine its location, and would
provide options to accommodate fixed
white space device installations in
locations where an internal geo-location
capability is not able to provide this
information. These proposals will
improve the accuracy and reliability of
the fixed white space device data
recorded in the white space databases
and assure that the potential to cause
interference to protected services is
minimized.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or
before May 6, 2016, and reply comments
must be filed on or before June 6, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ET Docket No. 16–56, by
any of the following methods:
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Web site: https://
apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• People with Disabilities: Contact the
FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–
418–0432.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hugh L. Van Tuyl, Office of Engineering
and Technology, (202) 418–7506, email:
Hugh.VanTuyl@fcc.gov, TTY (202) 418–
2989.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and Order (NPRM
and Order), ET Docket No. 16–56, FCC
16–23, adopted February 25, 2016 and
released February 26, 2016. 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
full text may also be downloaded at:
www.fcc.gov.
Synopsis of Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
1. In this NPRM, the Commission
proposes and seek comment on
revisions to the geo-location and
registration requirements for fixed white
space devices. It proposes to adopt
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Mar 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
many of the recommendations outlined
in the plan submitted by the National
Association of Broadcasters and certain
white space device manufacturers
(‘‘NAB and Manufacturers’ Plan’’) and
believes that this approach will improve
the integrity of the white space database
system and better ensure efficient and
beneficial use of white spaces while
protecting licensees and other
authorized users.
2. Location Data. The Commission
proposes to modify section 15.711(c) to
eliminate the option for professional
installation of fixed white space
devices, thereby eliminating the
possibility that manual data entry could
cause incorrect location data to be
stored in the white space device or
provided to a database. The Commission
proposes to instead require that fixed
white space devices include a geolocation capability that can
automatically determine its geographic
coordinates without manual
intervention. It also proposes that the
geographic coordinates shall be stored
automatically in the fixed white space
device and transmitted electronically
directly from the device to the database,
rather than entered manually in the
database, thereby further reducing the
possibility of introducing data errors.
3. The Commission proposes that
when a fixed white space device is
moved to another location or its
coordinates become altered, its
geographic coordinates and antenna
height above ground must be reestablished and the device re-registered
with a database. With regard to the
geographic coordinates, it proposes that
they be re-established using an
incorporated geo-location capability.
The Commission seeks comment on
these proposals and on whether a reregistration requirement should apply to
any change in location or only those
changes where the coordinates differ by
more than the accuracy requirement
(±50 meters) from the last registered
location. With respect to the antenna
height above ground, the Commission
seeks comment on whether it should
require that this height be determined
automatically using the fixed device’s
incorporated geo-location capability,
such as GPS. Because the vertical height
accuracy of GPS is typically less than
the horizontal location accuracy, the
Commission seeks comment on whether
it should allow users, including
professional installers and operators, to
override an automatically determined
height if it proves to be inaccurate, or
whether it should simply allow users to
manually enter the antenna height
above ground in all cases.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15211
4. The Commission proposes to
modify the current rule that requires a
fixed white space device to contact the
database at least once a day to verify
that its operating channels continue to
be available for its use. It proposes to
require a fixed white space device to
check its coordinates once each day,
except when not in operation, and to
report its geographic location to the
database when its makes its daily
request for a list of available channels.
The Commission seeks comment on
implementing this proposal. Should the
geographic coordinates reported each
day be treated by the white space
database as a modification of the
registration record? Should the
registration record be updated only if
the difference in location exceeds 50
meters? What would be the impact on
device manufacturers and database
administrators?
5. The Commission recognizes that
there will be many important
applications for fixed white space
devices in which the device needs to be
installed where an incorporated geolocation capability will not function
(e.g., indoors). Thus, the Commission
proposes to permit fixed white space
devices to obtain their geographic
coordinates from an external source that
is connected to the fixed white space
device when the internal geo-location
capability does not function. It also
proposes that, in cases where the geolocation capability is provided by an
external source connected to the fixed
white space device, the fixed device and
external geo-location source would be
required to communicate using a secure
method that ensures that the fixed
device obtains information only from a
source that has been approved for that
function by the Commission’s
equipment certification program. If the
fixed white space device is unable to
verify that the external source from
which it is receiving geo-location data is
an approved source, the fixed device
would not be allowed to use that
received data when reporting its
location to the database. The
Commission seeks comment on whether
each fixed white space device should be
associated with specific external geolocation sources or whether
manufacturers should have the
flexibility to design fixed white space
devices to operate with a variety of geolocation sources as long as such sources
are approved for use with the fixed
white space device.
6. The NAB and Manufacturers’ Plan
makes specific suggestions for how
fixed devices should rely on an external
geo-location source for determining the
geographic coordinates of a fixed white
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
15212
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules
space device. It suggests that the
external geo-location source would be
required to be connected at all times to
the fixed white space device, and that
the fixed white space device would be
required to cease transmitting if the
connection to the external geo-location
source is disconnected or ceased to
function properly. NAB and the
Manufacturers suggest that the
connection between the fixed white
space device and the external geolocation source could be by Ethernet,
USB, serial port or other connection,
and a fixed device would be required to
be located within 100 meters of the geolocation source. The parties also suggest
that a separate geo-location source may
be connected to more than one fixed
device at the same general location as
long as the white space devices it serves
are all located no more than 100 meters
from the geo-location source. The
Commission requests comment on these
specific suggestions. Do the methods
suggested by the NAB and
Manufacturers’ Plan provide sufficient
flexibility in the design of fixed devices
without compromising our goal of
ensuring that a device operates at the
location reported to its databases. The
Commission seeks comment on whether
it is necessary for a fixed white space
device to be connected to its external
geo-location source by a cable, or
whether we could permit the
connection to the geo-location source
via wireless. Because allowing wireless
connections may create a path for
entering erroneous location data,
commenters are asked to address
whether safeguards tailored to the
wireless environment are needed to
ensure location data is within the
required accuracy guidelines, and, if so,
what they should be. The Commission
also seeks comment on the appropriate
method of obtaining the antenna height
above ground for indoor fixed devices
(automatic determination or manual
entry) that is reported to the white space
database.
7. As an alternative to using any type
of external geo-location source, the
Commission seeks comment on whether
a fixed white space device could be
connected by a long cable to a separate
antenna and continue to rely on its
internal geo-location capability. What
requirements would be necessary to
ensure that the coordinates and location
uncertainty reported to the white space
database are accurate? Would the
suggestions in the NAB and
Manufacturers’ plan be appropriate for
this situation?
8. The NAB and Manufacturers’ Plan
also suggests another approach for low
power (40 mW EIRP) fixed white space
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Mar 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
devices with an internal geo-location
capability that operate indoors where
their geo-location capability does not
function. Under this provision, the rules
would allow a fixed white space device
operating with 40 mW or less EIRP to
establish its location using its
incorporated geo-location capability at a
point immediately outside the indoor or
other enclosure where the device’s geolocation capability does not function,
and then to register with its database
after the device is installed at its fixed
location using the location established
at the outdoor point. In such
applications, the device would store
internally the coordinates of an outdoor
position as close as possible to the
location where it will be installed and
also record the time that it obtained
those coordinates. The device would
then be installed at its fixed location
and register with its database within 30
minutes using the coordinates of the
outdoor location. If the device does not
complete its registration within the 30
minute period, it would need to start
over, re-establish its coordinates at a
location where its geo-location
capability functions, and initiate a new
30 minute time period. The Commission
seeks comment on these suggestions and
asks whether this is a workable
approach that would provide additional
flexibility in the methods for
determining geo-location for fixed
devices located indoors without
increasing the potential for inaccurate
locations to be recorded in the databases
and/or increase the potential for
interference.
9. The Commission seeks comment on
alternative parameters and approaches.
Is 40 mW the appropriate power level at
which to define a low power fixed white
space device or would 100 mW be more
appropriate? Is 30 minutes sufficient
time for the installer to re-locate the
device to a nearby operating location,
activate the device, register the device
with a database, and complete any other
steps necessary for the installation? Is
30 minutes the appropriate amount of
time to balance the need for properly
completing the installation and
registration of a device while limiting
the opportunity for relocating the device
to a faraway place where it could cause
interference?
10. The Commission also seeks
comment on where the responsibility
would lie in verifying that the fixed
white space device registration occurs
within the allowable 30 minute time
period. Should the capability reside in
the fixed white space device whereby
after 30 minutes the data would
automatically be erased if the device is
not successfully registered with a
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
database, or should an associated time
stamp for the geo-location data be
transmitted to the database which
would not permit the registration to
proceed if outside the 30 minute
window? Should the Commission allow
other methods of transferring location
data to fixed white space devices—for
example, could an outdoor location
sensor, such as a GPS receiver, write an
encrypted file to an SD Card or USB
memory stick that could then be
plugged into a fixed white space device?
How would such a connection ensure
that a fixed device would be located no
more than 100 meters from its geolocation source? Under such a scheme,
what methods could be used to ensure
registration within 30 minutes of
determining the fixed white space
device’s location?
11. Low power fixed white space
devices operating indoors where their
incorporated geo-location capability
does not function would not be able to
re-check their coordinates daily and
transmit them to the database when
verifying their available channel list,
unless each day the device was
uninstalled and moved to the outdoor
location to repeat the entire initial
location-determining procedure. The
Commission seeks comment on whether
in such situations, it should allow these
devices to use the coordinates
previously obtained at an outdoor
position and stored in the device until
such time as the device is moved or
disconnected from its power supply, at
which point the device would again reestablish its coordinates using its
incorporated geo-location capability. If
using previously obtained coordinates
in this manner would not serve the
public interest, does the impracticality
of obtaining updated coordinates on a
daily basis warrant a rejection of this
proposal? Are there other methods for
updating the location information of
these devices, short of using a wired
external geo-location source, which
could be employed successfully?
12. Because the Commission adopted
rules in the Part 15 White Space Report
and Order in ET Docket No. 14–165 that
provide flexibility to manufacturers and
operators of white space devices that
use less accurate geo-location methods,
it tentatively concludes that it is not
necessary to modify the default location
accuracy requirement from ±50 meters
to ±100 meters as requested in the NAB
and Manufacturers Plan. Should parties
disagree, the Commission seeks
comment on what changes we should
make and how they should be
implemented.
13. NAB and the Manufacturers
request an increase in protection
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules
distances that is greater than their
requested increase in geo-location
uncertainty. If the Commission were to
specify a less accurate geo-location
requirement, it seeks comment on how
much the protection distances to TV
contours should change, and on
whether and by what amount distances
from any other protected service may
need to be increased. It also seeks
comment on whether rule changes
would be needed to account for indoor
operations. How could it ensure that the
reported geo-location uncertainty of an
indoor device is accurate? For example,
should a device that obtains its location
from a separate geo-location source
automatically add a certain amount,
such as 100 meters, to its geo-location
uncertainty when providing its location
to the database? How would such a
requirement apply for a device that is
moved outdoors to obtain its
coordinates and then moved back to an
indoor location?
14. The Commission proposes that
effective six months after the effective
date of the new rules, new applications
for certification of fixed white space
devices must comply with any rules it
adopts in this proceeding requiring
incorporated geo-location capability.
Further, it proposes that within one year
after the effective date of any new rules,
manufacturers would no longer be able
to manufacture and import fixed white
space devices that do not comply with
the new requirements. In order to allow
manufacturers to deplete any inventory
of devices that do not comply with the
new requirements, the Commission
proposes to permit the marketing of
these devices for up to eighteen months
after the effective date of the new rules,
but seeks comment on whether it should
specify only certification and marketing
cutoff dates (e.g., six months for
certification and 12 or 18 months for
marketing), and allow manufacturers to
decide their manufacturing and
importation cutoff dates. The
Commission proposes to permit users of
fixed white space devices that do not
comply with new rules to continue to
operate their devices indefinitely.
Because the majority of fixed white
space devices in operation today do not
include a geo-location capability and
would not be able to easily recheck their
coordinates every day and transmit
them to the database, the Commission
seeks comment on whether allowing
their continued operation would pose
any concerns about the integrity of the
data in the database.
15. The Commission proposes to treat
equipment changes that simply add an
incorporated geo-location capability to
an existing certificated device as a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Mar 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
permissive change under its equipment
authorization rules. It seeks comment on
the proposed timeframes for
implementing any new requirements for
incorporating a geo-location capability
into all fixed white space devices and
whether they are appropriate to provide
for a smooth transition to new devices.
16. Finally, the Commission invites
comment on the expected costs and
benefits of the proposed rule changes in
this section and whether the benefits
will outweigh the costs. Parties who
make specific suggestions for
implementing the proposals also should
address the costs and benefits associated
with their suggestions.
17. Device Identification, Contact
Information and Other Data Issues. The
current rules assign responsibility for
the accuracy of the registration
information either to the party who
provides the information to the database
or to the party who is responsible for the
white space device. Because the rules
are not clear as to which party is
responsible for the white space device,
and thus for entering and maintaining
the registration information, the
Commission seeks comment on whether
the responsible party should be the
owner, the contact person, or some
other party.
18. The Commission proposes to
require the white space database that
originates a registration request for a
fixed device to confirm the email
address and telephone number entered
for the contact person. It also proposes
that the database not provide service to
the device nor share the registration
information with other approved white
space databases until it receives a
confirming response from the party
responsible for the device registration.
The Commission further proposes that
the white space database confirm the
contact person’s information if any of
the identifying information is modified.
Under these proposals, a white space
database administrator would be
allowed to implement the confirmation
requirement using a method of its
choosing as long as that method obtains
a confirming response that (1) the party
addressed in the message is responsible
for the operation of the subject fixed
device, and (2) the email address and
telephone number for that party are
correct and appropriate to reach that
party in a timely manner.
19. Finally, the Commission invites
comment on the expected costs and
benefits of the proposed rule changes in
this section and whether the benefits
will outweigh the costs. Parties who
make specific suggestions for
implementing the proposals also should
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15213
address the costs and benefits associated
with their suggestions.
20. Other Issues. The Commission
does not propose to amend its rules to
incorporate new accountability and/or
enforcement measures to ensure the
integrity of the registration information
for fixed devices as requested by NAB.
The current rules already place
responsibility for the accuracy of the
data entered for fixed device
registrations on the party responsible for
the device and hold database
administrators responsible for verifying,
correcting and removing inaccurate
data. These existing rules and the
proposals set forth in this Notice, along
with the ongoing oversight of
Commission staff, are sufficient and
appropriate for addressing these issues.
Procedural Matters
1. 21. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended
(RFA),1 the Commission has prepared
this present Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the
possible significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities by
the policies and rules proposed in this
Notice of Proposed Rule Making
(NPRM). Written public comments are
requested on this IRFA. Comments must
be identified as responses to the IRFA
and must be filed by the deadlines for
comments on the NPRM. The
Commission will send a copy of the
NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration (SBA).2 In
addition, the NPRM and IRFA (or
summaries thereof) will be published in
the Federal Register.3
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the
Proposed Rules
22. The NPRM proposes to amend
Part 15 of the Commission’ rules to
improve the quality of the geographic
location and other data submitted for
fixed white space devices operating on
unused frequencies in the TV Bands
and, in the future, the new 600 MHz
Band for wireless services. The
proposals are designed to improve the
integrity of the white space database
system and, as white space device
deployments grow, to increase the
confidence of all spectrum users of
these frequency bands that the white
space geolocation/database spectrum
1 See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601–
612, has been amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA), Public Law 104–121, Title II, 110 Stat.
857 (1996).
2 See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
3 See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
15214
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules
management scheme fully protects
licensees and other authorized users.
23. The NPRM responds to a petition
submitted by the National Association
of Broadcasters (NAB) alleging that
there are data errors in the registration
records for fixed devices in the white
space databases, and requesting that the
Commission undertake rulemaking and
other actions to correct and avoid such
errors.
B. Legal Basis
24. The proposed action is taken
pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 7(a), 302(a),
303(f), and 303(r) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 157(a),
302(a), 303(f), and 303(r).
C. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rules Will Apply
25. The RFA directs agencies to
provide a description of, and where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities that may be affected by
the proposed rules, if adopted.4 The
RFA generally defines the term ‘‘small
entity’’ as having the same meaning as
the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small
organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental
jurisdiction.’’ 5 In addition, the term
‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning
as the term ‘‘small business concern’’
under the Small Business Act.6 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
Small Business Administration (SBA).7
26. Radio and Television
Broadcasting and Wireless
Communications Equipment
Manufacturing. The Census Bureau
defines this category as follows: ‘‘This
industry comprises establishments
primarily engaged in manufacturing
radio and television broadcast and
wireless communications equipment.
Examples of products made by these
establishments are: Transmitting and
receiving antennas, cable television
equipment, GPS equipment, pagers,
4 See
5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
5 U.S.C. 601(6).
6 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 term which are
appropriate to the activities of the agency and
publishes such definition(s) in the Federal
Register.’’
7 See 15 U.S.C. 632.
cellular phones, mobile
communications equipment, and radio
and television studio and broadcasting
equipment.’’ 8 The SBA has developed a
small business size standard for Radio
and Television Broadcasting and
Wireless Communications Equipment
Manufacturing, which is: All such firms
having 750 or fewer employees.
According to Census Bureau data for
2007, there were a total of 939
establishments in this category that
operated for part or all of the entire year.
Of this total, 912 had less than 500
employees and 17 had more than 1000
employees.9 Thus, under that size
standard, the majority of firms can be
considered small.
D. Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements for Small Entities
27. White space devices are
unlicensed devices that operate in the
TV bands, and in the future, the 600
MHz band, at locations where
frequencies are not in use by licensed
services. The rules provide for three
types of white space devices: Fixed, and
Mode I and Mode II personal/portable
devices. To prevent harmful
interference to protected services, the
rules generally require that white space
devices provide their geographic
coordinates to a white space database
and operate only on location specific
channels provided by that database. The
location for fixed white space devices
may be determined either through an
internal geo-location capability or by a
professional installer.10 Additionally, a
fixed white space device must register
with a database and, in addition to its
location, must also provide the device’s
identifying information (FCC
identification number and manufacturer
serial number), antenna height, the
name of its owner, and contact
information for the party responsible for
its operation.
28. Most RF transmitting equipment,
including white space devices, must be
authorized through the certification
procedure. Certification is an equipment
authorization issued by the Commission
or by a designated TCB based on an
application and test data submitted by
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
5 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Mar 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
8 The NAICS Code for this service 334220. See 13
CFR 121/201. See also https://factfinder.census.gov/
servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-fds_name=EC0700A1&geo_id=&-_skip=300&-ds_name=EC0731SG2&-_
lang=en.
9 See https://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/
IBQTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=&-fds_
name=EC0700A1&-_skip=4500&-ds_
name=EC0731SG3&-_lang=en.
10 Mode I and Mode II personal/portable devices
have differing requirements which are not
described herein because the NPRM addresses only
fixed white space devices.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the responsible party (e.g., the
manufacturer or importer). The NPRM
does not propose to change the
authorization procedure for white space
devices, but it does propose to establish
new technical requirements or modify
existing technical requirements for
white space devices. Specifically, the
NPRM proposes the following changes
to the fixed white space device
compliance requirements:
29. Fixed white space device geolocation requirements. The proposed
rules would eliminate the professional
installer option for fixed white space
devices. Instead, a fixed white space
device would be required to include a
geo-location capability that can
determine its geographic coordinates
without manual intervention. The
proposed rules would also require that
the geographic coordinates be stored
automatically in the fixed white space
device and transmitted electronically
directly from the device to the
databases. In addition, a fixed white
space device would be required to check
its coordinates once each day using its
geo-location capability and to report its
geographic location to the database
daily when it makes a request for a list
of available channels.
30. The NPRM also proposes options
to accommodate fixed white space
device installations in locations where
an internal geo-location capability is not
able to provide this information. It
proposes to permit fixed white space
devices to obtain their geographic
coordinates from an external source that
is connected to the fixed white space
device when the internal geo-location
capability does not function. It also
proposes that in cases where the geolocation capability is provided by an
external source connected to the fixed
white space device, the fixed device and
external geo-location source would be
required to communicate using a secure
method that ensures that the fixed
device obtains information only from a
source that has been approved for that
function by the Commission’s
equipment certification program.
31. Transition requirements for fixed
white space device rule changes. The
NPRM proposes that, effective six
months after the effective date of the
new rules, new applications for
certification of fixed white space
devices must comply with any rules the
Commission adopts in this proceeding
requiring incorporated geo-location
capability. The NPRM also proposes
that, within one year after the effective
date of any new rules, manufacturers
would no longer be able to manufacture
and import fixed white space devices
that do not comply with the new
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules
requirements. In order to allow
manufacturers to deplete any inventory
of devices that do not comply with the
new requirements, the NPRM proposes
to permit the marketing of these devices
for up to eighteen months after the
effective date of the new rules. In
addition, the NPRM proposes to permit
fixed white space devices that do not
comply with new rules to continue to
operate indefinitely. Further, it proposes
that the Commission would treat
equipment changes that simply add an
incorporated geo-location capability to
an existing certificated device as a
permissive change.
32. Fixed white space device
registration requirements. The NPRM
proposes to require the white space
database that receives the initial
registration request for a fixed device to
confirm the email address and
telephone number entered for the
contact person. It also proposes that the
database not provide service to the
device nor share the registration
information with other approved white
space databases until it receives a
confirming response from the party
responsible for the device registration.
The NPRM further, proposes that the
white space database confirm the
contact person’s information if any of
the identifying information is modified
(e.g., updating the email address or
phone number). A white space database
administrator would be allowed to
implement the confirmation
requirement using a method of its
choosing as long as that method obtains
a confirming response that (1) the party
addressed in the message is responsible
for the operation of the subject fixed
device, and (2) the email address and
telephone number for that party are
correct and appropriate to reach that
party in a timely manner.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
E. Steps Taken To Minimize the
Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives
Considered
33. The RFA requires an agency to
describe any significant, specifically
small business, alternatives that it has
considered in reaching its proposed
approach, which may include the
following four alternatives (among
others): ‘‘(1) the establishment of
differing compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables that take into
account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification,
consolidation, or simplification of
compliance and reporting requirements
under the rule for such small entities;
(3) the use of performance rather than
design standards; and (4) an exemption
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Mar 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
from coverage of the rule, or any part
thereof, for such small entities.’’ 11
34. The proposed requirement for all
fixed white space devices to incorporate
a geo-location capability would require
changes to previously approved devices,
because most approved fixed devices
rely on the use of a professional installer
and do not have a geo-location
capability. As discussed above, the
NPRM proposes transition and
grandfathering provisions to minimize
the impact on fixed white space device
manufacturers and users. It proposes
that manufacturers could continue to
apply for certification of devices under
the current rules for up to six months
after the effective date of any new rules,
and that changes that simply add an
incorporated geo-location capability to
an existing certificated device would be
processed under the streamlined
‘‘permissive change’’ rules.12 The NPRM
also proposes that parties could
continue to manufacture and import
devices that comply with the current
rules for up to one year after the
effective date of any new rules. In order
to allow manufacturers to deplete any
inventory of devices that do not comply
with new requirements, the NPRM
proposes to permit the marketing of
these devices for up to eighteen months
after the effective date of any new rules.
Additionally, the NPRM proposes to
permit fixed white space devices that do
not comply with any new rules adopted
in this proceeding to continue to operate
indefinitely.
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rules
35. None.
36. Paperwork Reduction Act
Analysis. This document contains
proposed new information collection
requirements. The Commission, as part
of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, invites the general
public and the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) to comment on the
information collection requirements
contained in this document, as required
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition,
pursuant to the Small Business
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public
Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4),
we seek specific comment on how we
might further reduce the information
collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
11 5
U.S.C. 603(c)(1)–(c)(4).
CFR 2.1043.
12 47
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15215
Ordering Clauses
37. Pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 7(a),
302(a), 303(f), and 303(r) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 157(a),
302a(a), 303(f), and 303(r), this Notice of
Proposed Rule Making is adopted.
38. The Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
this Notice of Proposed Rule Making,
including the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis to the Chief Counsel
for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15
Communications equipment, Radio,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR
part 15 as follows:
PART 15—RADIO FREQUENCY
DEVICES
1. The authority citation of part 15
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 304,
307, 336, 544a, and 549.
2. Section 15.711 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (c)(1),
redesignating paragraph (c)(2) as (c)(5),
adding new paragraphs (c)(2) through
(4), and revising newly redesignated
paragraphs (c)(5)(ii) and (iv) to read as
follows:
■
§ 15.711
Interference avoidance methods.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) Accuracy. Fixed and Mode II
white space devices shall determine
their location and their geo-location
uncertainty (in meters), with a
confidence level of 95%.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) The geographic coordinates of a
fixed white space device shall be
determined automatically by an
incorporated geo-location capability
prior to its initial service transmission at
a given location and each time the
device is activated from a power-off
condition to determine the available
channels and the corresponding
maximum permitted power for each
available channel at its geographic
coordinates, taking into consideration
the device’s geo-location uncertainty.
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
15216
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules
The fixed white space device shall
check its location once each day, except
when not in operation, and store this
information automatically in the device.
(2) If the fixed white space device is
located where the incorporated geolocation capability does not function,
the fixed device may obtain its
geographic coordinates from an external
geo-location source that is connected to
the fixed device using a secure method
that ensures that the external geolocation source has been approved for
that function by the Commission’s
equipment certification program.
(3) The fixed white space device shall
transmit electronically its geographic
coordinates and antenna height above
ground to the white space database from
which it obtains its list of available
channels for operation at the time it
registers. The fixed white space device
shall electronically transmit this
information to the white space database
on a daily basis when the device
requests a list of the available channels
for operation.
(4) If a fixed white space device is
moved to another location or its stored
geographic coordinates become altered,
the device shall re-establish its:
(i) Geographic coordinates; and
(ii) Registration with the white space
database based on the device’s new
coordinates and antenna height above
ground level.
(5)(i) * * *
(ii) Operation is permitted only on
channels and at power levels that are
indicated in the white space database as
being available for each white space
device. Operation on a channel must
cease immediately or power must be
reduced to a permissible level if the
database indicates that the channel is no
longer available at the current operating
level.
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) Fixed white space devices
without a direct connection to the
Internet: A fixed white space device
may not operate on channels provided
by a white space database for another
fixed device. A fixed white space device
that has not yet been initialized and
registered with a white space database
consistent with § 15.713 of this part, but
can receive the transmissions of another
fixed white space device, may transmit
to that other fixed white space device on
either a channel that the other white
space device has transmitted on or on a
channel which the other white space
device indicates is available for use to
access the database to register its
location and receive a list of channels
that are available for it to use.
Subsequently, the newly registered
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Mar 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
fixed white space device must only use
the channels that the database indicates
are available for it to use.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Section 15.713 is amended by
revising paragraph (g)(3)(iii) and adding
paragraph (g)(4) to read as follows:
§ 15.713
White Space Database.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) Device’s geographic coordinates
(latitude and longitude (NAD 83))
including the location uncertainty, in
meters;
*
*
*
*
*
(4) The white space database that
receives a fixed white space device
registration shall confirm the email
address and telephone number of the
contact person responsible for the
operation of the fixed device. The
database shall not provide service to the
fixed device nor share the registration
information with other approved white
space databases until it receives a
confirming response from the contact
person verifying their information. If the
registration record is modified to
identify a new contact person or to
provide a new email address or
telephone number, the white space
database shall verify the new
information before continuing to
provide service to the fixed white space
device.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–05764 Filed 3–21–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[DA 16–268; MB Docket No. 16–68; RM–
11762]
Radio Broadcasting Services;
Maryville, Missouri
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
This document proposes to
amend the FM Table of Allotments by
allotting Channel 285C3 at Maryville,
Missouri, as the community’s fourth
local service. A staff engineering
analysis indicates that Channel 285C3
can be allotted to Maryville consistent
with the minimum distance separation
requirements of the Commission’s rules
without a site restriction. The reference
coordinates are 40–22–33 NL and 94–
51–25 WL.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments must be filed on or
before May 2, 2016, and reply comments
on or before May 17, 2016.
DATES:
Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. In addition to
filing comments with the FCC,
interested parties should serve the rule
making petitioner and the counter
proponent as follows: Michael Myers,
111 SW. Cross Creek Dr., Grain Valley,
Missouri 64029.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau, (202)
418–2700.
This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No.
16–68, adopted March 10, 2016, and
released March 11, 2016. The full text
of this Commission decision is available
for inspection and copying during
normal business hours in the FCC’s
Reference Information Center at Portals
II, CY–A257, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. This document
does not contain proposed information
collection requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. In addition,
therefore, it does not contain any
proposed information collection burden
‘‘for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
Provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to
this proceeding.
Members of the public should note
that from the time a Notice of Proposed
Rule Making is issued until the matter
is no longer subject to Commission
consideration or court review, all ex
parte contacts are prohibited in
Commission proceedings, such as this
one, which involve channel allotments.
See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules
governing permissible ex parte contacts.
For information regarding proper
filing procedures for comments, see 47
CFR 1.415 and 1.420.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio, Radio broadcasting.
Federal Communications Commission.
James D. Bradshaw,
Deputy Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR
part 73 as follows:
E:\FR\FM\22MRP1.SGM
22MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 22, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15210-15216]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05764]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 15
[ET Docket No. 16-56; FCC 16-23]
Unlicensed White Space Devices
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) proposes to amend its rules to improve the quality of the
geographic location and other data submitted for fixed white space
devices
[[Page 15211]]
operating on unused frequencies in the TV Bands and, in the future, the
600 MHz Band for wireless services. The proposed rules would eliminate
the professional installer option for fixed white space devices and
require that each fixed white space device incorporate a geo-location
capability to determine its location, and would provide options to
accommodate fixed white space device installations in locations where
an internal geo-location capability is not able to provide this
information. These proposals will improve the accuracy and reliability
of the fixed white space device data recorded in the white space
databases and assure that the potential to cause interference to
protected services is minimized.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or before May 6, 2016, and reply
comments must be filed on or before June 6, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by ET Docket No. 16-56,
by any of the following methods:
Federal Communications Commission's Web site: https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language
interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hugh L. Van Tuyl, Office of
Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-7506, email:
Hugh.VanTuyl@fcc.gov, TTY (202) 418-2989.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and Order (NPRM and Order), ET Docket No. 16-56,
FCC 16-23, adopted February 25, 2016 and released February 26, 2016.
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 full text may
also be downloaded at: www.fcc.gov.
Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
1. In this NPRM, the Commission proposes and seek comment on
revisions to the geo-location and registration requirements for fixed
white space devices. It proposes to adopt many of the recommendations
outlined in the plan submitted by the National Association of
Broadcasters and certain white space device manufacturers (``NAB and
Manufacturers' Plan'') and believes that this approach will improve the
integrity of the white space database system and better ensure
efficient and beneficial use of white spaces while protecting licensees
and other authorized users.
2. Location Data. The Commission proposes to modify section
15.711(c) to eliminate the option for professional installation of
fixed white space devices, thereby eliminating the possibility that
manual data entry could cause incorrect location data to be stored in
the white space device or provided to a database. The Commission
proposes to instead require that fixed white space devices include a
geo-location capability that can automatically determine its geographic
coordinates without manual intervention. It also proposes that the
geographic coordinates shall be stored automatically in the fixed white
space device and transmitted electronically directly from the device to
the database, rather than entered manually in the database, thereby
further reducing the possibility of introducing data errors.
3. The Commission proposes that when a fixed white space device is
moved to another location or its coordinates become altered, its
geographic coordinates and antenna height above ground must be re-
established and the device re-registered with a database. With regard
to the geographic coordinates, it proposes that they be re-established
using an incorporated geo-location capability. The Commission seeks
comment on these proposals and on whether a re-registration requirement
should apply to any change in location or only those changes where the
coordinates differ by more than the accuracy requirement (50 meters) from the last registered location. With respect to the
antenna height above ground, the Commission seeks comment on whether it
should require that this height be determined automatically using the
fixed device's incorporated geo-location capability, such as GPS.
Because the vertical height accuracy of GPS is typically less than the
horizontal location accuracy, the Commission seeks comment on whether
it should allow users, including professional installers and operators,
to override an automatically determined height if it proves to be
inaccurate, or whether it should simply allow users to manually enter
the antenna height above ground in all cases.
4. The Commission proposes to modify the current rule that requires
a fixed white space device to contact the database at least once a day
to verify that its operating channels continue to be available for its
use. It proposes to require a fixed white space device to check its
coordinates once each day, except when not in operation, and to report
its geographic location to the database when its makes its daily
request for a list of available channels. The Commission seeks comment
on implementing this proposal. Should the geographic coordinates
reported each day be treated by the white space database as a
modification of the registration record? Should the registration record
be updated only if the difference in location exceeds 50 meters? What
would be the impact on device manufacturers and database
administrators?
5. The Commission recognizes that there will be many important
applications for fixed white space devices in which the device needs to
be installed where an incorporated geo-location capability will not
function (e.g., indoors). Thus, the Commission proposes to permit fixed
white space devices to obtain their geographic coordinates from an
external source that is connected to the fixed white space device when
the internal geo-location capability does not function. It also
proposes that, in cases where the geo-location capability is provided
by an external source connected to the fixed white space device, the
fixed device and external geo-location source would be required to
communicate using a secure method that ensures that the fixed device
obtains information only from a source that has been approved for that
function by the Commission's equipment certification program. If the
fixed white space device is unable to verify that the external source
from which it is receiving geo-location data is an approved source, the
fixed device would not be allowed to use that received data when
reporting its location to the database. The Commission seeks comment on
whether each fixed white space device should be associated with
specific external geo-location sources or whether manufacturers should
have the flexibility to design fixed white space devices to operate
with a variety of geo-location sources as long as such sources are
approved for use with the fixed white space device.
6. The NAB and Manufacturers' Plan makes specific suggestions for
how fixed devices should rely on an external geo-location source for
determining the geographic coordinates of a fixed white
[[Page 15212]]
space device. It suggests that the external geo-location source would
be required to be connected at all times to the fixed white space
device, and that the fixed white space device would be required to
cease transmitting if the connection to the external geo-location
source is disconnected or ceased to function properly. NAB and the
Manufacturers suggest that the connection between the fixed white space
device and the external geo-location source could be by Ethernet, USB,
serial port or other connection, and a fixed device would be required
to be located within 100 meters of the geo-location source. The parties
also suggest that a separate geo-location source may be connected to
more than one fixed device at the same general location as long as the
white space devices it serves are all located no more than 100 meters
from the geo-location source. The Commission requests comment on these
specific suggestions. Do the methods suggested by the NAB and
Manufacturers' Plan provide sufficient flexibility in the design of
fixed devices without compromising our goal of ensuring that a device
operates at the location reported to its databases. The Commission
seeks comment on whether it is necessary for a fixed white space device
to be connected to its external geo-location source by a cable, or
whether we could permit the connection to the geo-location source via
wireless. Because allowing wireless connections may create a path for
entering erroneous location data, commenters are asked to address
whether safeguards tailored to the wireless environment are needed to
ensure location data is within the required accuracy guidelines, and,
if so, what they should be. The Commission also seeks comment on the
appropriate method of obtaining the antenna height above ground for
indoor fixed devices (automatic determination or manual entry) that is
reported to the white space database.
7. As an alternative to using any type of external geo-location
source, the Commission seeks comment on whether a fixed white space
device could be connected by a long cable to a separate antenna and
continue to rely on its internal geo-location capability. What
requirements would be necessary to ensure that the coordinates and
location uncertainty reported to the white space database are accurate?
Would the suggestions in the NAB and Manufacturers' plan be appropriate
for this situation?
8. The NAB and Manufacturers' Plan also suggests another approach
for low power (40 mW EIRP) fixed white space devices with an internal
geo-location capability that operate indoors where their geo-location
capability does not function. Under this provision, the rules would
allow a fixed white space device operating with 40 mW or less EIRP to
establish its location using its incorporated geo-location capability
at a point immediately outside the indoor or other enclosure where the
device's geo-location capability does not function, and then to
register with its database after the device is installed at its fixed
location using the location established at the outdoor point. In such
applications, the device would store internally the coordinates of an
outdoor position as close as possible to the location where it will be
installed and also record the time that it obtained those coordinates.
The device would then be installed at its fixed location and register
with its database within 30 minutes using the coordinates of the
outdoor location. If the device does not complete its registration
within the 30 minute period, it would need to start over, re-establish
its coordinates at a location where its geo-location capability
functions, and initiate a new 30 minute time period. The Commission
seeks comment on these suggestions and asks whether this is a workable
approach that would provide additional flexibility in the methods for
determining geo-location for fixed devices located indoors without
increasing the potential for inaccurate locations to be recorded in the
databases and/or increase the potential for interference.
9. The Commission seeks comment on alternative parameters and
approaches. Is 40 mW the appropriate power level at which to define a
low power fixed white space device or would 100 mW be more appropriate?
Is 30 minutes sufficient time for the installer to re-locate the device
to a nearby operating location, activate the device, register the
device with a database, and complete any other steps necessary for the
installation? Is 30 minutes the appropriate amount of time to balance
the need for properly completing the installation and registration of a
device while limiting the opportunity for relocating the device to a
faraway place where it could cause interference?
10. The Commission also seeks comment on where the responsibility
would lie in verifying that the fixed white space device registration
occurs within the allowable 30 minute time period. Should the
capability reside in the fixed white space device whereby after 30
minutes the data would automatically be erased if the device is not
successfully registered with a database, or should an associated time
stamp for the geo-location data be transmitted to the database which
would not permit the registration to proceed if outside the 30 minute
window? Should the Commission allow other methods of transferring
location data to fixed white space devices--for example, could an
outdoor location sensor, such as a GPS receiver, write an encrypted
file to an SD Card or USB memory stick that could then be plugged into
a fixed white space device? How would such a connection ensure that a
fixed device would be located no more than 100 meters from its geo-
location source? Under such a scheme, what methods could be used to
ensure registration within 30 minutes of determining the fixed white
space device's location?
11. Low power fixed white space devices operating indoors where
their incorporated geo-location capability does not function would not
be able to re-check their coordinates daily and transmit them to the
database when verifying their available channel list, unless each day
the device was uninstalled and moved to the outdoor location to repeat
the entire initial location-determining procedure. The Commission seeks
comment on whether in such situations, it should allow these devices to
use the coordinates previously obtained at an outdoor position and
stored in the device until such time as the device is moved or
disconnected from its power supply, at which point the device would
again re-establish its coordinates using its incorporated geo-location
capability. If using previously obtained coordinates in this manner
would not serve the public interest, does the impracticality of
obtaining updated coordinates on a daily basis warrant a rejection of
this proposal? Are there other methods for updating the location
information of these devices, short of using a wired external geo-
location source, which could be employed successfully?
12. Because the Commission adopted rules in the Part 15 White Space
Report and Order in ET Docket No. 14-165 that provide flexibility to
manufacturers and operators of white space devices that use less
accurate geo-location methods, it tentatively concludes that it is not
necessary to modify the default location accuracy requirement from
50 meters to 100 meters as requested in the NAB
and Manufacturers Plan. Should parties disagree, the Commission seeks
comment on what changes we should make and how they should be
implemented.
13. NAB and the Manufacturers request an increase in protection
[[Page 15213]]
distances that is greater than their requested increase in geo-location
uncertainty. If the Commission were to specify a less accurate geo-
location requirement, it seeks comment on how much the protection
distances to TV contours should change, and on whether and by what
amount distances from any other protected service may need to be
increased. It also seeks comment on whether rule changes would be
needed to account for indoor operations. How could it ensure that the
reported geo-location uncertainty of an indoor device is accurate? For
example, should a device that obtains its location from a separate geo-
location source automatically add a certain amount, such as 100 meters,
to its geo-location uncertainty when providing its location to the
database? How would such a requirement apply for a device that is moved
outdoors to obtain its coordinates and then moved back to an indoor
location?
14. The Commission proposes that effective six months after the
effective date of the new rules, new applications for certification of
fixed white space devices must comply with any rules it adopts in this
proceeding requiring incorporated geo-location capability. Further, it
proposes that within one year after the effective date of any new
rules, manufacturers would no longer be able to manufacture and import
fixed white space devices that do not comply with the new requirements.
In order to allow manufacturers to deplete any inventory of devices
that do not comply with the new requirements, the Commission proposes
to permit the marketing of these devices for up to eighteen months
after the effective date of the new rules, but seeks comment on whether
it should specify only certification and marketing cutoff dates (e.g.,
six months for certification and 12 or 18 months for marketing), and
allow manufacturers to decide their manufacturing and importation
cutoff dates. The Commission proposes to permit users of fixed white
space devices that do not comply with new rules to continue to operate
their devices indefinitely. Because the majority of fixed white space
devices in operation today do not include a geo-location capability and
would not be able to easily recheck their coordinates every day and
transmit them to the database, the Commission seeks comment on whether
allowing their continued operation would pose any concerns about the
integrity of the data in the database.
15. The Commission proposes to treat equipment changes that simply
add an incorporated geo-location capability to an existing certificated
device as a permissive change under its equipment authorization rules.
It seeks comment on the proposed timeframes for implementing any new
requirements for incorporating a geo-location capability into all fixed
white space devices and whether they are appropriate to provide for a
smooth transition to new devices.
16. Finally, the Commission invites comment on the expected costs
and benefits of the proposed rule changes in this section and whether
the benefits will outweigh the costs. Parties who make specific
suggestions for implementing the proposals also should address the
costs and benefits associated with their suggestions.
17. Device Identification, Contact Information and Other Data
Issues. The current rules assign responsibility for the accuracy of the
registration information either to the party who provides the
information to the database or to the party who is responsible for the
white space device. Because the rules are not clear as to which party
is responsible for the white space device, and thus for entering and
maintaining the registration information, the Commission seeks comment
on whether the responsible party should be the owner, the contact
person, or some other party.
18. The Commission proposes to require the white space database
that originates a registration request for a fixed device to confirm
the email address and telephone number entered for the contact person.
It also proposes that the database not provide service to the device
nor share the registration information with other approved white space
databases until it receives a confirming response from the party
responsible for the device registration. The Commission further
proposes that the white space database confirm the contact person's
information if any of the identifying information is modified. Under
these proposals, a white space database administrator would be allowed
to implement the confirmation requirement using a method of its
choosing as long as that method obtains a confirming response that (1)
the party addressed in the message is responsible for the operation of
the subject fixed device, and (2) the email address and telephone
number for that party are correct and appropriate to reach that party
in a timely manner.
19. Finally, the Commission invites comment on the expected costs
and benefits of the proposed rule changes in this section and whether
the benefits will outweigh the costs. Parties who make specific
suggestions for implementing the proposals also should address the
costs and benefits associated with their suggestions.
20. Other Issues. The Commission does not propose to amend its
rules to incorporate new accountability and/or enforcement measures to
ensure the integrity of the registration information for fixed devices
as requested by NAB. The current rules already place responsibility for
the accuracy of the data entered for fixed device registrations on the
party responsible for the device and hold database administrators
responsible for verifying, correcting and removing inaccurate data.
These existing rules and the proposals set forth in this Notice, along
with the ongoing oversight of Commission staff, are sufficient and
appropriate for addressing these issues.
Procedural Matters
1. 21. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA),\1\ the Commission has prepared this present Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the
policies and rules proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rule Making
(NPRM). Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments
must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the
deadlines for comments on the NPRM. The Commission will send a copy of
the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration (SBA).\2\ In addition, the NPRM and IRFA
(or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
\2\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
\3\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
22. The NPRM proposes to amend Part 15 of the Commission' rules to
improve the quality of the geographic location and other data submitted
for fixed white space devices operating on unused frequencies in the TV
Bands and, in the future, the new 600 MHz Band for wireless services.
The proposals are designed to improve the integrity of the white space
database system and, as white space device deployments grow, to
increase the confidence of all spectrum users of these frequency bands
that the white space geolocation/database spectrum
[[Page 15214]]
management scheme fully protects licensees and other authorized users.
23. The NPRM responds to a petition submitted by the National
Association of Broadcasters (NAB) alleging that there are data errors
in the registration records for fixed devices in the white space
databases, and requesting that the Commission undertake rulemaking and
other actions to correct and avoid such errors.
B. Legal Basis
24. The proposed action is taken pursuant to sections 1, 4(i),
7(a), 302(a), 303(f), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 157(a), 302(a), 303(f), and 303(r).
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Will Apply
25. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.\4\ The RFA generally
defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the
terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small
governmental jurisdiction.'' \5\ In addition, the term ``small
business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern''
under the Small Business Act.\6\ 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 Small Business Administration (SBA).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
\5\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
\6\ 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 term which are appropriate to the
activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the
Federal Register.''
\7\ See 15 U.S.C. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
Equipment Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines this category as
follows: ``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in
manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless
communications equipment. Examples of products made by these
establishments are: Transmitting and receiving antennas, cable
television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile
communications equipment, and radio and television studio and
broadcasting equipment.'' \8\ The SBA has developed a small business
size standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless
Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which is: All such firms having
750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there
were a total of 939 establishments in this category that operated for
part or all of the entire year. Of this total, 912 had less than 500
employees and 17 had more than 1000 employees.\9\ Thus, under that size
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The NAICS Code for this service 334220. See 13 CFR 121/201.
See also https://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-fds_name=EC0700A1&-geo_id=&-_skip=300&-ds_name=EC0731SG2&-_lang=en.
\9\ See https://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=&-fds_name=EC0700A1&-_skip=4500&-ds_name=EC0731SG3&-_lang=en.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities
27. White space devices are unlicensed devices that operate in the
TV bands, and in the future, the 600 MHz band, at locations where
frequencies are not in use by licensed services. The rules provide for
three types of white space devices: Fixed, and Mode I and Mode II
personal/portable devices. To prevent harmful interference to protected
services, the rules generally require that white space devices provide
their geographic coordinates to a white space database and operate only
on location specific channels provided by that database. The location
for fixed white space devices may be determined either through an
internal geo-location capability or by a professional installer.\10\
Additionally, a fixed white space device must register with a database
and, in addition to its location, must also provide the device's
identifying information (FCC identification number and manufacturer
serial number), antenna height, the name of its owner, and contact
information for the party responsible for its operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Mode I and Mode II personal/portable devices have differing
requirements which are not described herein because the NPRM
addresses only fixed white space devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
28. Most RF transmitting equipment, including white space devices,
must be authorized through the certification procedure. Certification
is an equipment authorization issued by the Commission or by a
designated TCB based on an application and test data submitted by the
responsible party (e.g., the manufacturer or importer). The NPRM does
not propose to change the authorization procedure for white space
devices, but it does propose to establish new technical requirements or
modify existing technical requirements for white space devices.
Specifically, the NPRM proposes the following changes to the fixed
white space device compliance requirements:
29. Fixed white space device geo-location requirements. The
proposed rules would eliminate the professional installer option for
fixed white space devices. Instead, a fixed white space device would be
required to include a geo-location capability that can determine its
geographic coordinates without manual intervention. The proposed rules
would also require that the geographic coordinates be stored
automatically in the fixed white space device and transmitted
electronically directly from the device to the databases. In addition,
a fixed white space device would be required to check its coordinates
once each day using its geo-location capability and to report its
geographic location to the database daily when it makes a request for a
list of available channels.
30. The NPRM also proposes options to accommodate fixed white space
device installations in locations where an internal geo-location
capability is not able to provide this information. It proposes to
permit fixed white space devices to obtain their geographic coordinates
from an external source that is connected to the fixed white space
device when the internal geo-location capability does not function. It
also proposes that in cases where the geo-location capability is
provided by an external source connected to the fixed white space
device, the fixed device and external geo-location source would be
required to communicate using a secure method that ensures that the
fixed device obtains information only from a source that has been
approved for that function by the Commission's equipment certification
program.
31. Transition requirements for fixed white space device rule
changes. The NPRM proposes that, effective six months after the
effective date of the new rules, new applications for certification of
fixed white space devices must comply with any rules the Commission
adopts in this proceeding requiring incorporated geo-location
capability. The NPRM also proposes that, within one year after the
effective date of any new rules, manufacturers would no longer be able
to manufacture and import fixed white space devices that do not comply
with the new
[[Page 15215]]
requirements. In order to allow manufacturers to deplete any inventory
of devices that do not comply with the new requirements, the NPRM
proposes to permit the marketing of these devices for up to eighteen
months after the effective date of the new rules. In addition, the NPRM
proposes to permit fixed white space devices that do not comply with
new rules to continue to operate indefinitely. Further, it proposes
that the Commission would treat equipment changes that simply add an
incorporated geo-location capability to an existing certificated device
as a permissive change.
32. Fixed white space device registration requirements. The NPRM
proposes to require the white space database that receives the initial
registration request for a fixed device to confirm the email address
and telephone number entered for the contact person. It also proposes
that the database not provide service to the device nor share the
registration information with other approved white space databases
until it receives a confirming response from the party responsible for
the device registration. The NPRM further, proposes that the white
space database confirm the contact person's information if any of the
identifying information is modified (e.g., updating the email address
or phone number). A white space database administrator would be allowed
to implement the confirmation requirement using a method of its
choosing as long as that method obtains a confirming response that (1)
the party addressed in the message is responsible for the operation of
the subject fixed device, and (2) the email address and telephone
number for that party are correct and appropriate to reach that party
in a timely manner.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
33. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant,
specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four
alternatives (among others): ``(1) the establishment of differing
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small
entities.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. The proposed requirement for all fixed white space devices to
incorporate a geo-location capability would require changes to
previously approved devices, because most approved fixed devices rely
on the use of a professional installer and do not have a geo-location
capability. As discussed above, the NPRM proposes transition and
grandfathering provisions to minimize the impact on fixed white space
device manufacturers and users. It proposes that manufacturers could
continue to apply for certification of devices under the current rules
for up to six months after the effective date of any new rules, and
that changes that simply add an incorporated geo-location capability to
an existing certificated device would be processed under the
streamlined ``permissive change'' rules.\12\ The NPRM also proposes
that parties could continue to manufacture and import devices that
comply with the current rules for up to one year after the effective
date of any new rules. In order to allow manufacturers to deplete any
inventory of devices that do not comply with new requirements, the NPRM
proposes to permit the marketing of these devices for up to eighteen
months after the effective date of any new rules. Additionally, the
NPRM proposes to permit fixed white space devices that do not comply
with any new rules adopted in this proceeding to continue to operate
indefinitely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 47 CFR 2.1043.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
35. None.
36. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis. This document contains
proposed new information collection requirements. The Commission, as
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the
general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment
on the information collection requirements contained in this document,
as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13.
In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific
comment on how we might further reduce the information collection
burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Ordering Clauses
37. Pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 7(a), 302(a), 303(f), and 303(r)
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i),
157(a), 302a(a), 303(f), and 303(r), this Notice of Proposed Rule
Making is adopted.
38. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Notice of
Proposed Rule Making, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15
Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 15 as follows:
PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES
0
1. The authority citation of part 15 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 336, 544a, and
549.
0
2. Section 15.711 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (c)(1),
redesignating paragraph (c)(2) as (c)(5), adding new paragraphs (c)(2)
through (4), and revising newly redesignated paragraphs (c)(5)(ii) and
(iv) to read as follows:
Sec. 15.711 Interference avoidance methods.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Accuracy. Fixed and Mode II white space devices shall determine
their location and their geo-location uncertainty (in meters), with a
confidence level of 95%.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) The geographic coordinates of a fixed white space device shall
be determined automatically by an incorporated geo-location capability
prior to its initial service transmission at a given location and each
time the device is activated from a power-off condition to determine
the available channels and the corresponding maximum permitted power
for each available channel at its geographic coordinates, taking into
consideration the device's geo-location uncertainty.
[[Page 15216]]
The fixed white space device shall check its location once each day,
except when not in operation, and store this information automatically
in the device.
(2) If the fixed white space device is located where the
incorporated geo-location capability does not function, the fixed
device may obtain its geographic coordinates from an external geo-
location source that is connected to the fixed device using a secure
method that ensures that the external geo-location source has been
approved for that function by the Commission's equipment certification
program.
(3) The fixed white space device shall transmit electronically its
geographic coordinates and antenna height above ground to the white
space database from which it obtains its list of available channels for
operation at the time it registers. The fixed white space device shall
electronically transmit this information to the white space database on
a daily basis when the device requests a list of the available channels
for operation.
(4) If a fixed white space device is moved to another location or
its stored geographic coordinates become altered, the device shall re-
establish its:
(i) Geographic coordinates; and
(ii) Registration with the white space database based on the
device's new coordinates and antenna height above ground level.
(5)(i) * * *
(ii) Operation is permitted only on channels and at power levels
that are indicated in the white space database as being available for
each white space device. Operation on a channel must cease immediately
or power must be reduced to a permissible level if the database
indicates that the channel is no longer available at the current
operating level.
* * * * *
(iv) Fixed white space devices without a direct connection to the
Internet: A fixed white space device may not operate on channels
provided by a white space database for another fixed device. A fixed
white space device that has not yet been initialized and registered
with a white space database consistent with Sec. 15.713 of this part,
but can receive the transmissions of another fixed white space device,
may transmit to that other fixed white space device on either a channel
that the other white space device has transmitted on or on a channel
which the other white space device indicates is available for use to
access the database to register its location and receive a list of
channels that are available for it to use. Subsequently, the newly
registered fixed white space device must only use the channels that the
database indicates are available for it to use.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 15.713 is amended by revising paragraph (g)(3)(iii) and
adding paragraph (g)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 15.713 White Space Database.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) Device's geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude (NAD
83)) including the location uncertainty, in meters;
* * * * *
(4) The white space database that receives a fixed white space
device registration shall confirm the email address and telephone
number of the contact person responsible for the operation of the fixed
device. The database shall not provide service to the fixed device nor
share the registration information with other approved white space
databases until it receives a confirming response from the contact
person verifying their information. If the registration record is
modified to identify a new contact person or to provide a new email
address or telephone number, the white space database shall verify the
new information before continuing to provide service to the fixed white
space device.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-05764 Filed 3-21-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P