In its July 2017 Open Meeting, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) voted to approve a Report and Order (“R&O”) containing new rules that impact how RF equipment, manufacturers, vendors, importers, and distributors may conduct their businesses.
These rules particularly affect IoT equipment suppliers, which are subject to virtually all the new rules.
Prior to finalizing the new rules, the FCC emphasized the importance of them to the RF equipment industry, stating that the rules overhaul consists of a “wide range of equipment approval issues of a technical, legal, and practical nature, impacting a diverse set of stakeholders, each of whom will need to closely analyze and consider the potential impact of the rule changes.”
FCC Severely Penalizes Non-Compliant Equipment Suppliers
Because the Communications Act and the FCC’s rules strictly prohibit (with limited exceptions) the marketing, testing, and operation of unauthorized RF equipment, it is critical that IoT stakeholders at all levels of the equipment supply chain be aware of the new rules. The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau will not hesitate to impose substantial monetary forfeitures and other sanctions on parties that violate the RF equipment rules.
For example, the FCC recently issued an Order and Consent Decree, imposing a steep fine and other sanctions on a manufacturer/distributor of LED light fixtures that failed to comply with the FCC’s equipment authorization rules before marketing a line of light fixtures. The devices reportedly caused interference to radio transmissions, which resulted in the FCC conducting an investigation of the manufacturer, who was found guilty of serious violations.
After the manufacturer fixed the interference problem and proactively complied with the FCC’s RF equipment rules, the FCC agreed to a consent decree to resolve the case. Specifically, the FCC agreed to terminate the investigation in exchange for the manufacturer agreeing to pay $90,000 to the U.S. Treasury and implement a strict compliance program.
More importantly for IoT suppliers, the FCC issued a threat to future RF equipment manufacturers and other responsible parties who market unauthorized equipment. Specifically, the FCC asserted its authority to conduct hearings and declare non-compliant RF equipment suppliers unqualified to hold any type of FCC authorization.
In other words, the FCC threatened to prevent RF equipment suppliers who violate FCC rules from ever legally marketing their products in the U.S., by denying them equipment authorizations.
This is a critically important development. Because virtually all devices that generate RF energy (even passive devices such as sensors) are subject to FCC rules, this case underscores the importance of ensuring full compliance with FCC rules prior to marketing RF equipment in the U.S.
New Rules are Just the Beginning of Equipment Regulatory Changes
The rules put forth in the R&O are only the start of many new regulatory changes for RF equipment suppliers. Rule changes affecting the following topics will be addressed in subsequent FCC proceedings:
- Modular component certification;
- Responsible parties for refurbished devices
- Software and firmware security requirements;
- And confidentiality of information contained in RF equipment certification applications.
High-Level Overview 4 of the FCC’s Equipment Regulation Changes
1) “Self-Approval” Authorization for Non-Transmitting RF Devices
Most non-transmitting RF devices (unintentional radiators) are “self-authorized” by one of two procedures (depending on the specific type of the device): Verification and Declaration of Conformity (“DoC”).
These procedures are very similar, wherein the responsible party (“RP”) submits prototype to a lab for testing for compliance with FCC technical rules. If device passes, it is labeled and marketed. Nothing is submitted to FCC unless audited. The main differences are that with a DoC, the RP must use an FCC-accredited testing lab, include “compliance information statement” with each device, and include FCC logo on device’s label.
- Combine elements of DoC & Verification into one procedure: Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity (“SDoC”).
- Eliminate the FCC-accredited lab requirement for any device subject to SDoC.
- Eliminate the FCC logo requirement.
- Require that all devices subject to SDoC contain lengthy compliance statements.
2) Importation Rules
Importers of RF devices must declare that their devices have been tested and approved via the applicable authorization procedure or are being imported pursuant to one of the FCC-approved specific exemptions.
Declaration Requirements: No RF device may be imported unless the importer declares that the device meets the FCC rule requirements via: (a) electronic declaration at points of entry where electronic filing at U.S. Customs & Border Protection (“CBP”) is available; and (b) where electronic filing is not available, importer must use FCC Form 740 and attach it to the CBP-required papers.
Trade Show Exemption for Unauthorized Devices: FCC permits the importation of 200 unauthorized devices for use in licensed service to be imported for trade show demonstration purposes, and 10 unauthorized devices intended for unlicensed use.
Importation of Unauthorized Devices for Personal Use Only: A total of three unauthorized devices for use in unlicensed services may be imported for personal use
- Eliminate Form 740 filing requirements. Importers would no longer have to file information with the FCC specifying the import conditions on which they are relying.
- The permitted number of unauthorized devices for trade show demonstration purposes would be increased to 400.
- A total of three unauthorized devices intended for use in licensed services would be permitted, as long as those devices are for personal use only.
3) Measurement Requirements for RF Equipment Authorization
FCC will accept measurement data in accordance with three types of measurement procedures: (a) OET bulletins or reports published in its “Knowledge Database” (“KDB”); (b) those published by national engineering societies and acknowledged by the FCC; and (c) current measurement procedures accepted by the FCC.
- Add acknowledgement in rules to permit reliance on advisory information contained in FCC’s online KDB publications.
- Add references to specific sections of American National Standard for Compliance Testing of Transmitters (“ANSI”) C63.4-2014 and ANSI C63.10-2013 to address certain measurements for some unlicensed devices.
- Combine current rules for RF measurement of composite systems into one rule (while retaining some references to applicable rules).
- ANSI C63.26 – new standard for compliance testing for licensed devices. References to this standard could replace measurement in FCC rules for RF power output, modulation characteristics, occupied bandwidth, spurious emission at antenna terminals, field strength of spurious radiation, frequency stability and frequency spectrum.
The FCC has very strict rules about proper labeling of RF devices before they are placed on the market. Manufacturers of RF devices and other responsible parties have been subject to fines and sanctions by the FCC for improper labeling of their devices.
The FCC requires that all RF equipment have “permanently affixed” labels, containing specific compliance information. The information varies, depending on the category of the device. If the devices is too small to accommodate a proper label, the FCC permits the information to be listed in the user’s manual or on the box in which the device is contained. The “FCC identifier” must be on the device itself, regardless of how small the device is.
Any RF device that is equipped with an integrated electronic display screen or a device without such a screen that can operate in conjunction with a device that has a screen may display any labeling information required by the FCC.
This is a high-level overview of some of the FCC’s equipment regulation changes. Due to the complexity and comprehensive nature of the proposed regulation changes, an exhaustive report is beyond the scope of this article.
All information provided in this article is “Informational Only” and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Decisions should not be made without first seeking the advice of experienced telecommunications counsel.