94-17846. Radio Scanners That Receive Cellular Telephone Transmissions  

  • [Federal Register Volume 59, Number 140 (Friday, July 22, 1994)]
    [Unknown Section]
    [Page 0]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 94-17846]
    
    
    [[Page Unknown]]
    
    [Federal Register: July 22, 1994]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
    
    47 CFR Parts 2 and 15
    
    [ET Docket No. 93-1; FCC 94-183]
    
     
    
    Radio Scanners That Receive Cellular Telephone Transmissions
    
    AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
    
    ACTION: Final rule; petition for reconsideration.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This Memorandum Opinion and Order denies a petition for 
    reconsideration of new regulations that deny equipment authorization to 
    radio scanners capable of receiving transmissions in the Domestic 
    Public Cellular Radio Telecommunications Service. This action is taken 
    in response to a petition for reconsideration filed by Kenwood 
    Communications Corporation. The intended effect of this action is to 
    help ensure the privacy of cellular telephone conversations.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: July 22, 1994.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    David Wilson, Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 653-8138.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
    Memorandum Opinion and Order in ET Docket No. 93-1, FCC 94-183, adopted 
    July 8, 1994, and released July 19, 1994. The full text of this 
    decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
    hours in the FCC Dockets Branch (Room 230), 1919 M Street NW., 
    Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision also may be 
    purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, International 
    Transcription Services at (202) 857-3800 or 2100 M Street NW., Suite 
    140, Washington, DC 20037.
    
    Summary of the Memorandum Opinion and Order
    
        1. By this action, the Commission denies a request by Kenwood 
    Communications Corporation (Kenwood) for reconsideration of portions of 
    the rules adopted in the Report and Order in this proceeding. These 
    rules were adopted in response to the Telephone Disclosure and Dispute 
    Resolution Act (TDDRA), Pub. L. 102-556, and generally prohibit the 
    manufacture and importation of radio scanners capable of receiving 
    cellular telephone communications. See Report and Order in ET Docket 
    No. 93-1, 58 FR 25574, April 27, 1993.
        2. In its Petition for Reconsideration, Kenwood raises three 
    issues. First, it argues that the deadlines for complying with the 
    rules adopted in this proceeding should be extended. Second, it 
    requests that scanners sold to Military Affiliate Radio Service (MARS) 
    and Civil Air Patrol (CAP) licensees be exempt from the regulations 
    adopted in this proceeding. Finally, it argues that the definition of 
    ``readily altered by the user'' that was adopted in this proceeding 
    should include only scanners that can be modified ``quickly'' by ``non-
    technical'' consumers. There were no comments filed in response to the 
    Kenwood petition.
        3. Implementation dates. Kenwood contends that the April 26, 1993, 
    cutoff date for equipment authorization and the April 26, 1994, cutoff 
    date for manufacture and importation of scanners that do not comply 
    with the new rules do not provide sufficient time to design and build 
    new products to replace those being prohibited. This short period of 
    time is, however, mandated by the TDDRA and reflects the position of 
    Congress that reception of cellular communications by means of scanning 
    receivers is a serious problem that must be resolved expeditiously. 
    Accordingly, we are denying Kenwood's request for an extension of the 
    cutoff dates.
        4. Exemption for equipment sold to MARS and CAP licensees. Kenwood 
    states that it manufactures two-way transceivers that are generally set 
    up to operate only on frequencies available within a particular radio 
    service. Kenwood indicates that some of its transceivers are routinely 
    modified at its factory to operate on additional frequencies, such as 
    those used by MARS and CAP licensees, in order to accommodate the needs 
    of its customers. Kenwood states that these factory modifications can 
    result, incidentally, in the ability to scan cellular telephone 
    frequencies.
        5. We see no reason why it is not possible to manufacture equipment 
    to operate on MARS and CAP frequencies without resulting in that 
    equipment also having the capability to receive the cellular 
    frequencies, since MARS and CAP frequencies are far removed from the 
    cellular frequencies. Consequently, we find that there is no technical 
    justification for exempting scanning equipment from the rules adopted 
    in this proceeding based on its intended use by MARS or CAP licensees, 
    and we are denying Kenwood's request.
        6. The definition of ``readily altered by the user.'' Kenwood 
    requests that we modify the definition of ``readily altered by the 
    user'' to include only devices that can be quickly modified by ``non-
    technical consumers.''
        7. We believe that Kenwood's proposed definition would make it too 
    easy to modify scanners. Most of the examples given in our definition 
    of scanners that can be ``readily altered by the user'' are 
    modifications that perhaps could not be done by ``non-technical 
    consumers.'' Yet, they are examples of precisely the kind of easy 
    modifications that we believe the TDDRA was intended to prohibit.
        Accordingly, we are rejecting Kenwood's request.
        8. In accordance with the above discussion and pursuant to the 
    authority contained in Sections 4(i), 302 and 303 of the Communications 
    Act of 1934, as amended, and the Telephone Disclosure and Dispute 
    Resolution Act, it is ordered that the Petition for Reconsideration 
    filed by Kenwood Communications Corporation is denied.
        9. For further information on this proceeding, contact David 
    Wilson, Technical Standards Branch, Office of Engineering and 
    Technology, at (202) 653-8138.
    
    List of Subjects in 47 CFR Parts 2 and 15
    
        Communications equipment, wiretapping and electronic surveillance.
    
    Federal Communications Commission.
    William F. Caton,
    Acting Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 94-17846 Filed 7-21-94; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
07/22/1994
Department:
Federal Communications Commission
Entry Type:
Uncategorized Document
Action:
Final rule; petition for reconsideration.
Document Number:
94-17846
Dates:
July 22, 1994.
Pages:
0-0 (1 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Federal Register: July 22, 1994, ET Docket No. 93-1, FCC 94-183
CFR: (2)
47 CFR 2
47 CFR 15