[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 149 (Monday, August 4, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41879-41882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20398]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 2 and 15
[ET Docket 95-19; FCC 97-240]
Equipment Authorization for Digital Devices
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: By this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Commission responds
to three Petitions for Reconsideration filed by the Information
Technology Industry Council (ITI), Hewlett-Packard Company (HP), and
Intel Corporation (Intel) regarding the Declaration of Conformity (DoC)
procedure for the authorization of digital devices. This action is
intended to clarify and improve the DoC process.
DATES: Effective September 17, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of Engineering and Technology,
Anthony Serafini at (202) 418-2456 or Neal McNeil (202) 418-2408.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET Docket 95-19, FCC 97-240, adopted July
3, 1997 and released July 18, 1997. The full text of this decision is
available for inspection and copying during regular business hours in
the FCC Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, DC.
The complete text of this decision also may be purchased from the
Commission's duplication contractor, International Transcription
Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW, Washington, DC
20036.
1. In the Report and Order, of this proceeding, 61 FR 31044, June
19, 1996, the Commission adopted rules to streamline the equipment
authorization requirements for personal computers and personal computer
peripherals. Specifically, the Commission established the DoC procedure
which allows digital devices to be authorized based on a manufacturer's
or supplier's declaration that the device complies with the FCC
requirements for controlling radio frequency interference. The DoC
procedure requires laboratories performing compliance testing to be
accredited under the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation
Program (NVLAP) developed by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) or by the American Association for Laboratory
Accreditation (A2LA). In the Report and Order, the Commission delegated
to the Chief of the Office of Engineering and Technology authority to
recognize additional accrediting organizations and to make
determinations regarding the continued acceptability of individual
accrediting organizations and accredited laboratories. Further, in the
interest of fair trade the rules specify that laboratories located
outside of the United States or its possessions will be accredited only
if there is a mutual recognition agreement (MRA) between that country
and the United States that permits similar accreditation of U.S.
facilities to perform testing for products marketed in that country.
2. The Report and Order also adopted rules to permit the marketing,
without further testing, of personal computers assembled from separate
components that have themselves been authorized under a DoC. The
Commission found that this approach would provide both flexibility for
manufacturers and system integrators and adequate assurance that such
modular computers will comply with the FCC technical standards. Testing
procedures were adopted for CPU boards and power supplies. However, due
to the difficulties associated with determining the shielding
effectiveness of enclosures, the Commission did not adopt rules to
authorize enclosures. To ensure that systems assembled from modular
components would comply with the technical standards, the Commission
adopted a two step test procedure for authorizing CPU boards. The CPU
board must first be tested installed in a typical enclosure but with
the enclosure's cover removed so that the internal circuitry is exposed
at the top and at least two sides. Additional components, including a
power supply, peripheral devices, and subassemblies, shall be added, as
needed, to result in a complete personal computer system. Under this
test, radiated emissions from the system under test may be no more than
3 dB above the limits specified in section 15.109 of this chapter. If
the initial test demonstrates that the system is within 3 dB of the
limits, a second test is performed using the same configuration but
with the cover installed on the enclosure. Under the latter test
conditions, the system under test shall not exceed the radiated
emission limits specified in section 15.109 of this chapter. If,
however, the initial test demonstrates compliance with the radiated
emission standards in section 15.109 of this chapter, the second test
is not required to be performed. The system must also be tested to
comply with the AC power line conducted limits specified in section
15.107 of this chapter in accordance with the procedures specified in
section 15.31 of this chapter.
3. On July 16, 1996, the Commission's Office of Engineering and
Technology (OET) issued a Public Notice taking steps to encourage the
use of the new DoC procedure. The Public Notice addressed concerns that
use of the DoC procedure would be hindered by the ability of NVLAP and
A2LA to timely process the initial demand for accreditation by adopting
a provisional transition period of one year for obtaining such
accreditation. The Public Notice also addressed issues concerning the
recognition of accreditors located outside of the United States. A
laboratory would be permitted to submit documentation to OET's
Equipment Authorization Division stating that it has filed an
application for accreditation with an approved laboratory accreditation
body and provide evidence that it meets all aspects of ISO/IEC Guide
25. Such labs will be provisionally accepted by the FCC for a period of
one year, until August 19, 1997, or until the application for
accreditation has been acted upon, whichever is sooner. A laboratory
that is denied accreditation by an approved accreditation body will
lose its provisional acceptance. However, any DoCs that were issued
will remain valid.
4. Petitions for Reconsideration were filed on July 19, 1996, by
the ITI, HP, and Intel. ITI requests reconsideration of the laboratory
accreditation requirement for manufacturers' and foreign test
laboratories to use the new DoC procedure. ITI feels that
manufacturers' laboratories should not be required to be accredited
before using the DoC process. Additionally, ITI argues that the
accreditation requirement should not apply to foreign trading partners
in countries that currently do not have similar accreditation
requirements. The Commission believes that laboratory accreditation is
a vital component of the DoC procedure and denies the ITI Petition for
Reconsideration. HP requests reconsideration or clarification of the
rules regarding use of the DoC procedure by laboratories outside the
United States. HP feels that the mutual recognition agreement (MRA)
requirement unreasonably discriminates against test labs located in
foreign countries. The Commission finds that the rules do not
adequately address the requirements for foreign laboratories
[[Page 41880]]
and grants the HP Petition by clarifying the requirements and
incorporating into the rules the July 16, 1996, public notice entitled,
``OET Takes Steps to Encourage Self-Declaration for Computer
Compliance'' (public notice). Intel requests reconsideration of the
testing procedure for the authorization of CPU boards to either take
into account the shielding effectiveness of enclosures or to disregard
emissions from peripheral devices. The Commission agrees that emissions
from peripheral devices should not adversely impact the testing of CPU
boards and grants, in part, the Intel Petition for Reconsideration.
Finally, the Commission amends the rules in several respects on its own
motion.
5. Accordingly, It is ordered that the petition for reconsideration
filed by Information Technology Industry Council is denied. The
petition for reconsideration filed by Hewlett-Packard Company is
granted. The petition for reconsideration filed by Intel Corporation is
granted as described above and denied in all other respects. Finally,
it is ordered that part 15 of the Commission's rules and regulations is
amended as specified below effective September 17, 1997. This action is
taken pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 4(i), 301, 302,
303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304, 307 and 405 of the Communications Act of
1934 as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f),
303(r), 304, 307 and 405.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification
6. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. Sec. 603, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) was incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in
ET 95-19, FCC No. 95-46, 60 FR 15116, March 22, 1995. The Commission
sought written comments on the proposals in the NPRM including the
IRFA. No commenting parties raised issues specifically in response to
the IRFA and a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) was
included in the Report and Order in this proceeding. The rules adopted
in this Memorandum Opinion and Order (MO&O) provide clarification and
further relaxation of the computer authorization process requirements
adopted in the Report and Order. We therefore certify pursuant to
section 605(b) of the RFA that the rules adopted in this MO&O do not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
7. The Commission will send a copy of this final certification,
along with MO&O, in a report to Congress pursuant to the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C.
Sec. 801(a)(1)(A), and to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 605(b).
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 2
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
47 CFR Part 15
Computer technology.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
Amendatory Text
Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 2 and 15 are
amended as follows:
PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL
RULES AND REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 2 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 4, 302, 303, and 307 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 302, 303, and 307,
unless otherwise noted.
1. Section 2.909 is amended by redesignating paragraph (c)(3) to
(c)(4) and by adding a new paragraph (c)(3), to read as follows:
Sec. 2.909 Responsible party.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) Retailers or original equipment manufacturers may enter into an
agreement with the responsible party designated in paragraph (c)(1) or
(c)(2) of this section to assume the responsibilities to ensure
compliance of equipment and become the new responsible party.
* * * * *
2. Section 2.948 is amended by removing the note at the end of
paragraph (d) and by adding paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2) and (d)(3) to
read as follows:
Sec. 2.948 Description of measurement facilities.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) In addition to meeting the above requirements, the
accreditations of laboratories located outside of the United States or
its possessions will be acceptable only under one of the following
conditions:
(i) If there is a mutual recognition agreement between that country
and the United States and that laboratory is covered by the agreement;
(ii) If there is an agreement between accrediting bodies that
permits similar accreditation of U.S. facilities to perform testing for
products marketed in that country; or
(iii) If the country already accepts the accreditation of U.S.
laboratories.
(2) Organizations outside of the United States that seek to become
accreditors may seek agreements with approved United States accrediting
bodies to mutually recognize the accreditation of laboratories. The
Commission will review such agreements and will consult with the Office
of the United States Trade Representative and other Executive Branch
agencies before accepting them for purposes of the DoC procedure in
order to ensure that the respective foreign countries accept United
States accreditations and do not impose additional barriers upon United
States companies. Accrediting bodies located outside of the United
States will only be permitted to accredit laboratories within their own
country for DoC testing.
(3) To facilitate use of the DoC procedure, the FCC will accept a
laboratory that submits documentation to OET's Equipment Authorization
Division stating that it has filed an application for accreditation
with an approved laboratory accreditation body and provides evidence
that it meets all aspects of ISO/IEC Guide 25. Such labs will be
provisionally accepted by the FCC for a period of one year (until
August 19, 1997) or until the application for accreditation has been
acted upon, whichever is sooner. A laboratory that is denied
accreditation by an approved accreditation body will lose its
provisional acceptance. However, any DoCs that were issued will remain
valid.
3. Section 2.1077 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (b)(1),
(b)(2), (b)(3), and (b)(4) to (b)(2), (b)(3), (b)(4), and (b)(5)
respectively and by adding a new paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
2.1077 Compliance information.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Identification of the assembled product, e.g., name and model
number.
* * * * *
PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES
1. The authority citation for Part 15 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 4, 302, 303, 304, and 307 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 302, 303, 304, and
307.
[[Page 41881]]
1. Section 15.19 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1)(ii) to
read as follows, redesignating paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) to (b)(3)
and (b)(4) respectively and adding a new paragraph (b)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 15.19 Labelling requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) If a personal computer is authorized based on assembly using
separately authorized components, in accordance with Sec. 15.101(c)(2)
or (c)(3), and the resulting product is not separately tested:
* * * * *
(2) Label text and information should be in a size of type large
enough to be readily legible, consistent with the dimensions of the
equipment and the label. However, the type size for the text is not
required to be larger than eight point.
* * * * *
2. Section 15.31 is amended by revising the first sentence of
paragraph (a)(6) and paragraph (b), to read as follows:
Sec. 15.31 Measurement standards.
(a) * * *
* * * * *
(6) Digital devices authorized by verification, Declaration of
Conformity, or for which an application for equipment authorization is
filed on or after May 1, 1994, and intentional and other unintentional
radiators for which verification is obtained, or for which an
application for equipment authorization is filed on or after June 1,
1995 are to be measured for compliance using the following procedure
excluding section 5.7, section 9 and section 14: American National
Standards Institute (ANSI) C63.4-1992, entitled ``Methods of
Measurement of Radio-Noise Emissions from Low-Voltage Electrical and
Electronic Equipment in the Range of 9 kHz to 40 GHz,'' published by
the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc. on July 17,
1992 as document number SH15180. * * *
* * * * *
(b) All parties making compliance measurements on equipment subject
to the requirements of this part are urged to use these measurement
procedures. Any party using other procedures should ensure that such
other procedures can be relied on to produce measurement results
compatible with the FCC measurement procedures. The description of the
measurement procedure used in testing the equipment for compliance and
a list of the test equipment actually employed shall be made part of an
application for certification or included with the data required to be
retained by the party responsible for devices authorized pursuant to a
Declaration of Conformity or devices subject to notification or
verification.
* * * * *
3. Section 15.32 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 15.32 Test procedures for CPU boards and computer power supplies.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) Testing for radiated emissions shall be performed with the CPU
board installed in a typical enclosure but with the enclosure's cover
removed so that the internal circuitry is exposed at the top and on at
least two sides. Additional components, including a power supply,
peripheral devices, and subassemblies, shall be added, as needed, to
result in a complete personal computer system. If the oscillator and
the microprocessor circuits are contained on separate circuit boards,
both boards, typical of the combination that would normally be
employed, must be used in the test. Testing shall be in accordance with
the procedures specified in Sec. 15.31.
(i) Under these test conditions, the system under test shall not
exceed the radiated emission limits specified in Sec. 15.109 by more
than 6 dB. Emissions greater than 6 dB that can be identified and
documented to originate from a component(s) other than the CPU board
being tested, may be dismissed.
(ii) Unless the test in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section
demonstrates compliance with the limits in Sec. 15.109, a second test
shall be performed using the same configuration described above but
with the cover installed on the enclosure. Testing shall be in
accordance with the procedures specified in Sec. 15.31. Under these
test conditions, the system under test shall not exceed the radiated
emission limits specified in Sec. 15.109.
(2) In lieu of the procedure in (a)(1) of this section, CPU boards
may be tested to demonstrate compliance with the limits in Sec. 15.109
using a specified enclosure with the cover installed. Testing for
radiated emissions shall be performed with the CPU board installed in a
typical system configuration. Additional components, including a power
supply, peripheral devices, and subassemblies, shall be added, as
needed, to result in a complete personal computer system. If the
oscillator and the microprocessor circuits are contained on separate
circuit boards, both boards, typical of the combination that would
normally be employed, must be used in the test. Testing shall be in
accordance with the procedures specified in Sec. 15.31. Under this
procedure, CPU boards that comply with the limits in Sec. 15.109 must
be marketed together with the specific enclosure used for the test.
* * * * *
4. Section 15.101 is amended by revising the table in paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
Sec. 15.101 Equipment authorization of unintentional radiators.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of device Equipment authorization required
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TV broadcast receiver............ Verification.
FM broadcast receiver............ Verification.
CB receiver...................... Certification.
Superregenerative receiver....... Certification.
Scanning receiver................ Certification.
All other receivers subject to Notification.
Part 15.
TV interface device.............. Certification.
Cable system terminal device..... Notification.
Stand-alone cable input selector Verification.
switch.
Class B personal computers and Declaration of Conformity or
peripherals. Cerification.
CPU boards and internal power Declaration of Conformity or
supplies used with Class B Certification.
personal computers.
Class B personal computers Declaration of Conformity.
assembled using authorized CPU
boards or power supplies.
Class B external switching power Verification
supplies.
[[Page 41882]]
Other Class B digital devices & Verification.
peripherals.
Class A digital devices, Verification.
peripherals & external switching
power supplies.
All other devices................ Verification.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-20398 Filed 8-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
