Providing information and fielding questions for wireless manufacturers are some of the many activities that we perform at ACB. Packets provides an overview of just a small portion of the communiqués that run in and out of our office.
These two standards are
referenced to IEEE 802.11/802.11b but with many differences. One major difference
from international standards is the Encryption. GB standards requires
WAPI Encryption Technique instead of WEP (Wired Equivalent Privacy) on WLAN.
Currently for MII approval,
international standards are used for testing and certification. Although major
WLAN providers are said not to be ready to comply with new GB standards, from
December 1, all WLAN products operating in the frequency bands of 2.4GHz and
5GHz, including Router, AP, terminal, etc, must comply with new GB standards
to be approved in China.
Courtesy of SIEMIC China
Products under CCC Mark
must first be evaluated against this general safety code in additional to the
product specific GB Standards.
For more information and
to find out how SIEMIC can help you to access the China Market, contact us at
Courtesy of SIEMIC China
FCC Part 15 Rules
1) Part 15.231 is still
limited to devices that transmit control signals but it now allows data to be
sent with the control signal. Also, the total duration of transmission for polling
and supervision transmissions used for security or safety applications has been
increased from 1 sec to 2 sec per hour.
2) Part 15.225 limits for
RFID devices have been increased and the frequency range has also expanded.
In addition the FCC will now allow powered RFID tags to be approved as a system
along with the tag reader under one FCC ID.
3) The DoC label has changed.
There is no longer the requirement to display For Home or Office Use
Also, the wording Tested to Comply with FCC standards is no longer
required. The label now requires just the FCC logo and the Trade Name and Model
4) The information to the
User can now be provided in a form other than paper as long as the manual is
only provided in this other form (i.e., a CD or over the Internet).
5) Measurement standards
have been changed: ANSI 63.4-2001 (except for section 220.127.116.11, section 5.7,
section 9, and section 14) is now the accepted measurement standard replacing
the ANSI 63.4-1992. (Still use a loop for measurements below 30MHz). ANSI C63.17-1998
is the measurement standard for Unlicensed PCS devices. Other Measurement Procedures
are deleted as they were no longer being used.
6) Low powered devices operating
below 490kHz with emissions at least 40dB below the limit no longer need to
be certified but can now be approved through the verification procedure.
7) Filing of the test site
information is no longer required. This used to be done every 3 years. The NVLAP
accreditation will handle this and provide the necessary information to the
Keep in mind, this is just a summary of the changes most important to our customers and there are other changes to Part 15, Part 2 and Part 90. For more information or help with interpreting the changes give us a call at 703 847-4700. Back to Top
Applicants take note:
Each block will require 2 plots/data tables: one upper edge, and one lower edge, for the worst-case modulation type only. The worst-case modulation type may be determined by the applicant or test lab through preliminary testing. For Cellular transmitters, this will require 8 plots/data tables to be submitted for the 4 blocks. For PCS transmitters, this will require 12 plots/data tables to be submitted for the 6 blocks. The plots/data tables should represent compliance with out-of-block emissions as tested using spectrum analyzer settings specified in 22.917(b) or 24.238, as appropriate. Back to Top
Anniversary: 20 Years of FCC Rules on Digital Devices
The original Rules covered
the frequency range up to 1GHz and at that time computers operated at a few
MHz with Intel 8086 microprocessors running the IBM PC and the Motorola 68000
running the Apple Lisa (soon to be retooled as the Macintosh). The IBM XT was
released in 1983, sporting an 8086 microprocessor and with a slot for an 8087
math co-processor. A complete system selling for $5000, included a 10MB hard
disk, 128K of RAM, one floppy drive, monochrome monitor and a printer.
From the late 1980s through
the early 1990s, the PC boom, spurred by the open format of the IBM PC bus and
operating system, allowed anyone with a screwdriver to make a computer. This
created a huge surge in FCC Certifications because, at the time, every configuration
of PC and every computer peripheral needed to have an FCC ID number. The applications
to the OET swelled and the turn-around time took up to two months; enforcement
was reasonably vigorous as computer companies sprouted up like mushrooms after
a summer rain. The commission changed the requirement to allow manufacturers
to self-declare, rather than go through the formal Certification
process. Certification is now required only for intentional emitters (radio
Fast-forward to 2003, the
present version of the Pentium 4 clocks at 3.2 GHz and contains over 55 million
transistors. The microprocessor
In 1965, Gordon Moore, co-founder of Intel speculated that the numbers of transistors per square inch that could be etched into an integrated circuit would double every year. The trend has slowed down some, with the doubling occurring at every 18 months to two years. Conventional wisdom has it that the upper limit achievable by improvements in current technology will occur before 2020. With even that barrier in mind, transistor counts of up to 1Billion+ are conceivable in the next 5 years and clock speeds to 10 GHz and higher are certainly on the near horizon. Who knows what the upper end may be? Back to Top
FCC Enforcement Policy
This should be a concern
to all manufacturers, distributors as well as EMC test labs. The FCCs
enforcement options for unlawful equipment include equipment seizure, civil
fines, and possibly even jail for knowing violations of law.
The FCC sent a letter dated
July 7, 2003 to a company that allegedly marketed unlawful recording equipment,
an unintentional radiator. In the past, this would ordinarily have prompted
a short letter of inquiry permitting a narrative response. Instead, the FCCs
inquiry leaves no stone unturned, and is one of the most comprehensive enforcement
letters we have ever. We understand from staff within the FCCs Enforcement
Bureau that this is to be a standard approach in the future.
should now be extra vigilant to ensure their products comply with all FCC rules
to avoid the onerous burdens of responding to an FCC investigation.
In the letter, the FCC asked
for details regarding the following information:
Perhaps equally indicative
of the FCCs seriousness is the two-an-a-half pages of instructions for
how to respond to the agencys inquiry. The instructions read like a discovery
request in a litigation matter, and include the following requirements:
If you have any questions regarding this matter contact Fish & Richardson, P.C. at 202/783-5070.