31556 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur

oxides.

Dated: May 8, 2001.

Jane Diamond,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F—California

2. Section 52.220 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(279)(i)(B) to read

as follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(279) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) Monterey Bay Unified Air

Pollution Control District.

(1) Rule 404, Monterey Bay Unified

APCD, adopted on March 22, 2000.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 01–14606 Filed 6–11–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–60–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 15

[ET Docket 99–231; FCC 01–158]

Spread Spectrum Devices; and WiLAN, Inc. Application

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document denies WiLAN’s Application for Review and

grants a waiver request for equipment

certification for Wi-LAN’s Wideband

Orthogonal Frequency Division

Multiplexing (W–OFDM) system and

similar systems that operate in the 2.4–

2.483 GHz band if they meeting the

existing rules for direct sequence spread

spectrum systems. We take this action to

serve the public interest.

DATES: Effective June 12, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neal

McNeil, Office of Engineering and

Technology, (202) 418–2408, TTY (202)

418–2989, e-mail: nmcneil@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Further

Notice of Proposed Rule Making and

Order, ET Docket 99–231, FCC 01–158,

adopted May 10, 2001 and released May

11, 2001. The full text of this document

is 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 complete text of this

document also may be purchased from

the Commission’s duplication

contractor, International Transcription

Service, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036.

Summary of Order

1. Wi-LAN Application for Review.

On February 17, 2000, Wi-LAN filed an

application for equipment certification

for its Wideband Orthogonal Frequency

Division Multiplexing (W–OFDM)

transmitter under the rules for direct

sequence spread spectrum systems. The

Commission’s Office of Engineering and

Technology (‘‘OET’’) denied that

application on the basis that Wi-LAN’s

W–OFDM device did not meet the

definition of a direct sequence spread

spectrum system as set forth in § 2.1 of

the rules. Subsequently, OET denied

Wi-LAN’s Petition for Reconsideration

of that decision for the same reasons.

Wi-LAN filed an Application for Review

of the staff action. In this filing, Wi-LAN

argues that its device meets all the

technical requirements explicitly stated

in the rules for direct sequence spread

spectrum systems and should be granted

certification. We find that OET acted

properly in denying Wi-LAN’s

application for certification. In this

regard, we agree with OET that WiLAN’s W–OFDM device does not meet

the definition of a direct sequence

spread spectrum system as set forth in

§ 2.1 of the rules. The Wi-LAN system

does however, resemble a spread

spectrum system in its spectrum

characteristics. Notwithstanding our

finding that Wi-LAN’s W–OFDM system

is not a spread spectrum system as

defined in our rules, we find that it will

serve the public interest to allow grant

of equipment certification now for this

system and similar systems that operate

in the 2.4–2.483 GHz band if they meet

the existing rules for direct sequence

spread spectrum systems in 47 CFR

15.247(a), (b), (c), and (d), conditioned

on their compliance with any final rules

that may be adopted in this proceeding.

Accordingly, the Commission will

waive, on an interim basis, the

restriction of 47 CFR 15.247(a) that

limits operation pursuant to the

remaining portions of 47 CFR 15.247 to

frequency hopping and direct sequence

spread spectrum systems. We find that

there is good cause to waive the cited

rule during the pendency of this

proceeding because such devices have

generally the same emission mask as

currently authorized devices and thus

will not undermine the existing rules.

Digital modulation systems closely

resemble spread spectrum systems in

terms of their spectrum occupancy

characteristics, and therefore are not

likely to pose any increased risk of

interference over that posed by spread

spectrum systems. We believe that

compliance with the rules, which

address spectrum occupancy, power,

out-of-band emissions, and antennas,

will ensure that digital modulation

systems operating in the 2.4 GHz band

will operate with the same spectrum

occupancy characteristics as spread

spectrum systems. We also observe that

such systems appear to offer capabilities

in terms of broadband data transmission

capacity that are likely to make them

more desirable than traditional spread

spectrum systems for many users.

Allowing authorization of digital

modulation systems now will avoid the

delays otherwise imposed by our

rulemaking process and thereby

substantially speed the process for

implementation of these new system

designs. In this regard, our decision to

waive the restrictions which prevent

authorization of such systems reflects

our view that it is appropriate and

desirable to take steps wherever

possible to facilitate the timely and

efficient introduction of new

technologies and equipment, and

particularly those that will support the

development and deployment of

broadband infrastructure without threat

to incumbent operations and devices.

For the reasons indicated in this Further

Notice of Proposed Rule Making and

Order (FNPRM and Order) that the

Commission released on May 11, 2001,

we believe that authorization of WiLAN’s device and other digital

modulation systems prior to our

adoption of final rules will not result in

harm to other radio operations.

Consistent with Wi-LAN’s application

for equipment certification, we will

require that any devices granted prior to

the adoption of new rules pursuant to

the provisions of paragraph 26 of the

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 31557

FNPRM and Order comply with a

maximum peak output power limit of

100 mW. In addition, any devices so

conditionally authorized will have to

comply with whatever rules we

ultimately adopt for digital modulation

systems in the 2.4 MHz band.

Accordingly, we are instructing the

Commission’s Office of Engineering and

Technology (‘‘OET’’) to re-examine the

Wi-LAN application for certification of

its W–OFDM system for its compliance

with the above listed portions of 47 CFR

15.247 of the rules and the power limits

indicated. OET shall also accept

applications for equipment certification

under 47 CFR 15.247 for other devices

using digital modulation techniques if

the equipment complies with the

provisions stated in the FNPRM and

Order. Such applications submitted

pursuant to the provisions of the

FNPRM and Order need not be

accompanied by a formal waiver

request, but should state that they fall

within the terms of the FNPRM and

Order as to the waiver. Any such

applications will be subjected to the

conditions set forth in the FNPRM and

Order, including that operation is

conditioned on compliance with any

final rules that may be adopted in this

proceeding.

2. Pursuant to 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), the

Application for Review filed by WiLAN, Inc., on September 20, 2000 is

hereby DENIED.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 15

Communications equipment.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–14525 Filed 6–11–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 25

[IB Docket No. 00–203; FCC 01–177]

Blanket Licensing for Small Aperture

Terminals in the C-Band and Routine

Licensing of 3.7 Meter Transmit and

Receive Stations at C-Band

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document adopts rules

that are designed to provide wider

access to electronic commerce in

underserved rural areas of America by

facilitating the deployment of small

antenna terminals in C-band satellite

networks under a single authorization,

with prior frequency coordination.

DATES: Effective July 12, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Edward R. Jacobs, Planning and

Negotiations Division, International

Bureau, (202) 418–0624 or via electronic

mail: ejacobs@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s First

Report and Order in IB Docket No. 00–

203, FCC 01–177, adopted May 23, 2001

and released May 25, 2001. The Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in IB

Docket No. 00–203, FCC 00–369, was

adopted October 13, 2000 and released

October 24, 2000. 65 FR 70541,

November 24, 2000. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center (Room CY–A257) 445 12th

Street, SW., Washington, DC and may

also be purchased from the Commission

copy contractor, International

Transcription Services (ITS), Inc., (202)

857–3800, 1231 20th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20036.

Summary of the First Report and Order

In the First Report and Order in this

proceeding, the Commission amends

part 25 of its rules to give operators the

option of obtaining licenses for a limited

class of small aperture terminal earth

station networks in the C-band (CSAT),

under a single authorization. This

option is available only to those seeking

licensing of CSAT networks that use no

more than 40 MHz of C-band spectrum

for each of no more than three satellite

locations within the visible

geostationary satellite arc. That is, this

option provides for streamline licensing

of a system that uses no more than 20

MHz of uplink and 20 MHz of downlink

spectrum for each of a maximum of 3

satellites. The 20 MHz of uplink and 20

MHz of downlink spectrum may be

different for each of the 3 satellites.

Among other things, these procedures

require CSAT applicants to complete

frequency coordination for each

individual earth station before bringing

it into use. The Commission finds that

these changes will promote more

efficient and equitable use of C-band

spectrum shared by the fixed service

(FS) and fixed-satellite service (FSS). In

those cases where these streamlined

procedures can be used, it will also

alleviate concerns that individual

licensing of earth stations in a network

of small aperture terminal earth stations

could result in longer overall license

processing times, increased consumer

costs, and additional administrative

burdens. In addition, where CSAT earth

stations have been coordinated, the

streamlined rules allow providers to

operate on a conditional basis until final

approval, facilitating deployment of

systems and service to the public.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA), an Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)

of the possible significant economic

impact on small entities was

incorporated in the FWCC/Onsat/

Hughes NPRM. 65 FR 70541, November

24, 2000. The Commission sought

written public comments on the

proposals in the FWCC/Onsat/Hughes

NPRM including comment on the IRFA.

This present Final Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Rules

In this First Report and Order, the

Commission provides for a streamlined

licensing procedure that will allow the

licensing of large networks of small

earth station terminals in the 4 and 6

GHz bands. These streamlined

procedures will better enable the rapid

delivery of earth station services,

including broadband access, to rural

Americans.

B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised

by Public Comments in Response to the

IRFA

No comments were submitted in

direct response to the IRFA.

C. Description and Estimate of the

Number of Small Entities to Which the

Rules Will Apply

The RFA directs agencies to provide

a description of and, where feasible, an

estimate of the number of small entities

that may be affected by the adopted

rules. The RFA generally defines the

term ‘‘small entity’’ as having the same

meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’

‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small

governmental jurisdiction.’’ In addition,

the term ‘‘small business’’ has the same

meaning as the term ‘‘small business

concern’’ under the Small Business Act.

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 (SBA). A

small organization is generally ‘‘any notfor-profit enterprise which is

independently owned and operated and

is not dominant in its field.’’