FCC proposes ban on equipment authorizations for devices deemed to pose a threat to national security

 

June 17, 2021 – U.S. Federal Communications Commission proposes rules that would prohibit all future authorizations for communications equipment deemed to pose a national security risk.

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeks comment on the proposal to prohibit all future authorizations of communications equipment that has been determined to pose an unacceptable risk to U.S. national security, as identified on the “Covered List” published by the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau. This proposal will prohibit authorization of listed equipment through either the FCC’s Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity (SDoC) or Certification authorization methods.

Furthermore, the FCC seeks comments on whether it should revoke prior authorizations for any equipment on the “Covered List” and if so by what procedures should be used.

As of this writing, the “Covered List” includes Huawei Technologies Company, ZTE Corporation, Hytera Communications Corporation, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company, and Dahua Technology Company.

REF:

Press Release:
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-373363A1.pdf

FCC EDOCS:
https://www.fcc.gov/document/equipment-authorization-and-competitive-bidding-supply-chain-nprm

ET Docket No. 21-232 and EA Docket No. 21-233:

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-21-622A1.pdf

“Covered List”
https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist

Electronic Device Retailers FCC Issues Warning

February 15, 2019, the Federal Communication Commission issued an enforcement advisory warning electronic device retailers, yes, those selling devices not just making them, of potential fines if devices are in violation of the applicable FCC authorization requirements. Fines could total more than $150,000 per violation.

This is of significant importance as many retailers and distributors assume that the device manufacturer shoulders the burden for regulatory compliance, and accepts that if a product manufacturer claims compliance then that is all that is required, often retailers and distributors are unaware of the authorization requirements but this advisory opens the door for retailers and distributors to face penalties if the products are not in compliance with the required FCC authorization methods found under part 15 of Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations.

Specifically, this advisory is addressing those products that fall under the "Suppliers Declaration of Conformity" or SDoC authorization rules. A non-exhaustive list of examples of the types of products covered can be found in C.F.R. 47 §15.101(a) and §18.203.

For a basic guide and to understand what the SDoC authorization encompasses, please visit https://celectronics.com/training/learning/authorization/FCC-SDoC-Guide.html

REF:
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-19-91A1.pdf

FCC will no longer accept applications for equipment certification

The FCC introduced a Report and order just before the new year that among other things, effectively puts them out of the RF device certification business and permits this activity to be performed solely by private Telecommunication Certification Bodies, also known as TCBs,

The big take away is that the FCC will no longer be certifying products, however also included in this report is a new requirement that all testing be done at an “accredited” lab.

A quote from the report and order; 

41. Proposal. In the Notice, the Commission proposed to require that all laboratories that test
equipment subject to Certification or to DoC under any rule part be accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, ending
the “2.948-listing” program for unaccredited labs to test equipment to be certified under Parts 15 and 18
of the rules.

Prior to this order devices subject to certification; such as radio transmitters, could be tested at any listed lab. This listing program is less rigorous and less expensive than full certification. The listing program simply requires that the lab file information with the FCC. In contrast, the accreditation requirement ensures that the the testing laboratory is competent to perform the required work, but it also requires that the laboratory be in a country that is recognized by the FCC, such as one with an established Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) with the United States.

Currently, many companies rely on test data suppled by third party test labs that are not accredited or are in countries which do not have an established MRA with the United States. As an example, there are no laboratories in China that are qualified to perform testing for FCC certification or DoC, due to the fact that there is no MRA between China and the United States.

Along with this change the FCC lays out the process for a pre-grant approval procedure to be followed when a TCB is faced with certification of a device based on new technology.

The FCC also makes clear in the report the TCB’s responsibility in performing “post-market” surveillance of products it has certified.

Reference;

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db1230/FCC-14-208A1.pdf

Google granted FCC approval for TV bands database system

The FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) has granted operational approval for Google’s TV bands database system, to provide service to the public.

The TV bands database system is designed to protect broadcast TV stations, fixed broadcast auxiliary service (BAS) links, Multichannel video programing distributors (MVPDs), private land mobile and commercial mobile radio service, offshore radio telephone service, radio astronomy at specific sites and low power auxiliary service.

Some operators must specifically register to receive protection from TV band devices, such as, MVPD receive sites, wireless microphone users and temporary BAS links.

Google’s spectrum database can be found at http://www.google.org/spectrum/whitespace/index.html

REF:

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0628/DA-13-1472A1.pdf

New FCC ID format could make searching IDs difficult

Starting tomorrow, May 1^st, 2013, the FCC will begin issuing new grantee codes as five character codes. Existing 3 character codes will still be valid, but new codes as of tomorrow will be in the 5 character format.  An earlier post describes why the change to the 5 character system. See FCC running out of Grantee codes.

Now that grantee codes could be both 3 character and 5 character, for those who use the Equipment Authorization Database search to lookup FCC IDs, it could be difficult at first getting use to the new system. How do you know if it’s a 3 character code or a 5 character code just by looking at the ID?

Example;

FCC ID: 2AA567SAMPL

FCC ID: G777SAMPLE500

Here’s a tip.

3 or 5 character grantee code? To tell;

1. if it starts with a number, it’s a 5 character code

2. if it starts with a letter, it’s a 3 character code.

The use of 1 and 0 is excluded, to avoid confusion with the letters i and o.

I don’t know if this visual would work the same for you, but what I do is picture a telephone keypad, it kind of looks like a # symbol with the number 5 in the middle;

 

 

# = Number so 5 starts with number. Silly, but it works for me.

So for the example above; 2AA56 is the 5 character code (starts with a #) and G77 is the 3 character code (starts with a letter).

REF:

Released: 04/09/2013. OFFICE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY TO BEGIN ISSUING FIVE-CHARACTER GRANTEE CODES FOR CERTIFIED RADIOFREQUENCY EQUIPMENT. (DA No. 13-669)

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-13-669A1.pdf