[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 6, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31190-31192]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2684]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 2

[ET Docket No. 03-108; FCC 07-66]


Cognitive Radio Technologies and Software Defined Radios

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document responds to two petitions concerning the rules 
adopted in the Report and Order in this proceeding (``Cognitive Radio 
Report and Order''). The Commission granted a petition for 
clarification filed by Cisco Systems, Inc. (``Cisco'') requesting that 
the Commission clarify the requirement to approve certain devices as 
software defined radios, and its policy on the confidentiality of 
software that controls security measures in software defined radios. 
The Commission also granted in part and denied in part a petition for 
reconsideration filed by Marcus Spectrum Solutions (``MSS'') requesting 
that the Commission clarify the rules concerning the submission of 
radio software source code, clarify the rules concerning the 
certification of software defined amateur radio equipment, and initiate 
a further proceeding to adopt regulatory requirements for high-power, 
high-speed digital-to-analog (D/A) converters.

DATES: Effective July 6, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hugh Van Tuyl, Policy and Rules 
Division, Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-7506, e-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f2ba87959adca4939ca6878b9eb2949191dc959d84"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="84ccf1e3ecaad2e5ead0f1fde8c4e2e7e7aae3ebf2">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, ET Docket No. 03-108, FCC 07-66, adopted 
April 20, 2007 and released April 25, 2007. The full text of this 
document is available on the Commission's Internet site at http://www.fcc.gov. It is also available for inspection and copying during 
regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 
12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The full text of this document 
also may be purchased from the Commission's duplication contractor, 
Best Copy and Printing Inc., Portals II, 445 12th St., SW., Room CY-
B402, Washington, DC 20554; telephone (202) 488-5300; fax (202) 488-
5563; e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#16505555565455465f4153543855595b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b6f0f5f5f6f4f5e6ffe1f3f498f5f9fb">[email protected]</span></a>.

Summary of the Memorandum Opinion and Order

    1. On March 17, 2005, the Commission adopted the Cognitive Radio 
Report and Order 70 FR 23032, May 4, 2005, in which it modified the 
rules to reflect ongoing technical developments in cognitive and 
software defined radio technologies. In response to the Cognitive Radio 
Report and Order, Cisco and MSS each filed a petition seeking 
reconsideration or clarification of various aspects of the Commission's 
decisions in the Cognitive Radio Report and Order. The Information 
Industry Technology Council (``ITI'') filed comments in opposition of 
MSS' petition. No comments were filed in response to Cisco's petition. 
In response to the two petitions concerning the rules adopted in the 
Cognitive Radio Report and Order in this proceeding, the Commission 
granted the petition for clarification filed by Cisco Systems, Inc. 
(``Cisco'') requesting that the Commission clarify: (1) The requirement 
to approve certain devices as software defined radios, and (2) its 
policy on the confidentiality of software that controls security 
measures in software defined radios. The Commission also granted in 
part and denied in part a petition for reconsideration filed by Marcus 
Spectrum Solutions (``MSS'') requesting that the Commission (1) Clarify 
the rules concerning the submission of radio software source code, (2) 
clarify the rules concerning the certification of software defined 
amateur radio equipment, and (3) initiate a further proceeding to adopt 
regulatory requirements for high-power, high-speed digital-to-analog 
(D/A) converters.
    2. In the Cognitive Radio Report and Order, the Commission modified 
the rules to require that radios in which the software is designed or 
expected to be modified by a party other than the manufacturer be 
certified as software defined radios. To minimize the filing burden on 
manufacturers, this requirement was narrowly tailored to affect only 
those radios where the software can be modified by a party other than 
the manufacturer because such radios pose a higher risk of interference 
to authorized radio services. The definition of software defined radio 
(SDR) is intentionally broad, while the category of equipment that is 
required to be certified as SDRs is intentionally narrow. The 
Commission agrees with Cisco that a reading of the definition of SDR in 
the rules by itself may give the incorrect impression that more devices 
must be certified as SDRs than the rules intended to require. The 
Commission finds that the appropriate solution to Cisco's concern is to 
add an additional sentence following the definition of SDR to indicate 
the class of radios that must be certified as SDRs. It therefore 
clarifies the rules by adding the following statement to the definition 
of SDR: ``In accordance with Sec.  2.944 of this part, only radios in 
which the software is designed or expected to be modified by a party 
other than the manufacturer and would affect the listed operating 
parameters or circumstances under which the radio transmits must be 
certified as software defined radios.'' This action clarifies the 
intent of the rules adopted in the Cognitive Radio Report and Order.
    3. With regard to Cisco's second request, the Commission recognizes 
that some manufacturers may wish to use open source software (e.g., 
GNU/Linux) in developing SDRs. The use of such software may have 
advantages for manufacturers such as lower cost and decreased product 
development time.

[[Page 31191]]

However, as Cisco notes, open source software may be subject to 
licensing agreements that require the party modifying the code to make 
the source code publicly available. The Commission did not address the 
possibility of manufacturers using open source software to implement 
security measures. However, it recognizes that hardware and software 
security measures that interact with the open source software need not 
be subject to an open source agreement. The Commission hereby states 
that it is its policy, consistent with the intent of Cognitive Radio 
Report and Order and Cisco's request, that manufacturers should not 
intentionally make the distinctive elements that implement that 
manufacturer's particular security measures in a software defined radio 
public, if doing so would increase the risk that these security 
measures could be defeated or otherwise circumvented to allow operation 
of the radio in a manner that violates the Commission's rules. A system 
that is wholly dependent on open source elements will have a high 
burden to demonstrate that it is sufficiently secure to warrant 
authorization as a software defined radio.
    4. In response to the MSS petition for reconsideration, the 
Commission clarifies that in the event that questions arise about the 
compliance of a particular device, its staff has the authority to 
request and examine any component, whether software or hardware, of a 
radio system when needed for certification under Commission rules. The 
manufacturer could request that the Commission hold the information 
confidential, and the Commission would generally grant such a request 
absent a compelling reason otherwise. The Commission expects that 
requests for software source code would be extremely rare. It would not 
be burdensome for a manufacturer to request confidentiality for 
software source code, and the Commission finds there is no need to 
modify the confidentiality rules to address a specific class of 
information that would be requested only infrequently.
    5. The Commission declines to take any actions with respect to 
regulating the marketing of certain types of D/A converters. MSS does 
not demonstrate any current need for regulation of D/A converters. It 
admits that the types of D/A converters that it is concerned about are 
not presently on the market, and that it is not aware of any 
discussions about the possible marketing of these types of D/A 
converters. The Commission therefore finds that MSS' concerns about 
possible misuse of equipment not available now or in the foreseeable 
future are premature, speculative, and not a basis for initiating a 
further rule making proceeding at this time.
    6. In regard to MSS' request for clarification about the regulatory 
treatment of amateur radio equipment, the Commission did not intend to 
impose any new certification requirements for amateur radio equipment 
in the Cognitive Report and Order. External RF amplifiers that operate 
below 144 MHz that are marketed for use with amateur stations will 
continue to require certification before they can be marketed. Other 
amateur radio equipment, including equipment that meets the definition 
of a software defined radio and that has software that is designed or 
expected to be modified by a party other than the manufacturer, will 
continue to be exempt from a certification requirement. However, as the 
Commission noted in the Cognitive Report and Order, certain 
unauthorized modifications of amateur transmitters are unlawful. It may 
revisit the issue of the certification of amateur equipment with 
software modifiable features as identified above in the future if 
misuse of such devices results in significant interference to 
authorized spectrum users.

Procedural Matters

    7. Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification. The Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),\1\ requires that a 
regulatory flexibility analysis be prepared for rulemaking proceedings, 
unless the agency certifies that ``the rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' \2\ The 
RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same 
meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and 
``small governmental jurisdiction.'' \3\ In addition, the term ``small 
business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' 
under the Small Business Act.\4\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 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\ 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    \3\ 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
    \4\ 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.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. In the Cognitive Radio Report and Order, the Commission expanded 
the definition of software defined radio (SDR) to include radios in 
which software can control the circumstances under which the radio 
operates in accordance with the Commission's rules. This broad 
definition covers both radios that have software embedded on chips or 
implemented in other ways so that the software cannot be readily 
changed by the user, as well as radios that are designed so the 
software can be easily changed after manufacture. In the Cognitive 
Radio Report and Order, the Commission also modified the rules to 
require that a radio be approved as an SDR if the software that 
controls the operating parameters or the circumstances under which it 
transmits is designed or expected to be modified by a party other than 
the manufacturer. This requirement applies to only a narrow subset of 
radios that meet the definition of SDR. A Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis was incorporated in the Cognitive Radio Report and Order. 
Following publication of the Cognitive Radio Report and Order, Cisco 
filed its petition seeking clarification of which radios require 
certification as SDRs. In the Memorandum Opinion and Order, the 
Commission amended the definition of SDR to reference the requirements 
concerning which radios must be certified as SDRs. This change 
clarifies the rules adopted in the Cognitive Radio Report and Order and 
does not modify any compliance requirements. For this reason, this 
change will not result in a ``significant economic burden'' on 
manufacturers. Therefore, we certify that the amendments included in 
the Memorandum Opinion and Order will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    9. The Commission will send a copy of the Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, including a copy of this final certification, in a report to 
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act.\5\ In addition, the 
Memorandum Opinion and Order and this certification will be sent to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, and 
will be published in the Federal Register.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
    \6\ See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. This document does not contain any information collection 
requirements

[[Page 31192]]

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-
13.

Ordering Clauses

    11. Pursuant to the Section 1, 4, 301, 302(a), and 303, of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 301, 
302(a), and 303, the Memorandum Opinion and Order is adopted, and part 
2 of the Commission's Rules is amended as specified in the attached 
appendix, and will become effective 30 days after publication in the 
Federal Register.
    12. The petition for clarification filed by Cisco Systems, Inc. is 
hereby granted. This action is taken pursuant to the authority 
contained in Sections 4(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), and 303(r) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 301, 
302, 303(e), 303(f), and 303(r).
    13. The petition for reconsideration filed by Marcus Spectrum 
Solutions is hereby granted in part and denied in part. This action is 
taken pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 4(i), 301, 302, 
303(e), 303(f), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), and 
303(r).
    14. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of the Memorandum 
Opinion and Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 2

    Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting, and recordkeeping 
requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.

Final Rule

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications 
Commission amends 47 CFR part 2 to read as follows:

PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL 
RULES AND REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise 
noted.

    Section 2.1(c) is amended by revising the definition of ``software 
defined radio'' to read as follows:


Sec.  2.1  Terms and definitions.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    Software defined radio. A radio that includes a transmitter in 
which the operating parameters of frequency range, modulation type or 
maximum output power (either radiated or conducted), or the 
circumstances under which the transmitter operates in accordance with 
Commission rules, can be altered by making a change in software without 
making any changes to hardware components that affect the radio 
frequency emissions. In accordance with Sec.  2.944 of this part, only 
radios in which the software is designed or expected to be modified by 
a party other than the manufacturer and would affect the above-listed 
operating parameters or circumstances under which the radio transmits 
must be certified as software defined radios.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 07-2684 Filed 6-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>