In a recent Memorandum Opinion and Order (MO&O)
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-66A1.pdf
on cognitive or "smart radio" systems, the FCC has affirmed its favorable policy toward the regulation of amateur software defined radios (SDRs). A cognitive radio system is an SDR that can adapt its operating parameters by interacting with its RF environment. The FCC's April 20 MO&O was in response to petitions seeking clarification of the Commission's March 2005 Report and Order (R&O) in ET Docket 03-108. In that proceeding the agency declined to adopt any new regulations for cognitive Amateur Radio transceivers or for digital-to-analog (D/A) converters. ARRL Chief Technology Officer Paul Rinaldo, W4RI, says the April MO&O indicates that the FCC intends to treat Amateur Radio SDRs the same as any other Amateur Radio equipment.
"This is welcome news from the FCC as it clarifies the matter of certification of amateur equipment," Rinaldo remarked. "It applies not only to terrestrial amateur equipment but also to amateur satellites, which increasingly are using SDR in their designs."
AMSAT-NA has announced it's revamped the design of its Project Eagle satellite to take maximum advantage of software defined transponder (SDX) technology.
The "cognitive radio" proceeding is emblematic of the FCC's ongoing struggle to address thorny regulatory issues to keep pace with cutting-edge technology. In its 2005 R&O, the FCC concluded that neither software programmable amateur transceivers nor high-speed D/A converters "present any significantly greater risk of interference to authorized radio services" than conventional hardware radios.
April's MO&O was in response to petitions from Marcus Spectrum Solutions (MSS), owned by Mike Marcus, N3JMM, a former FCC staffer and a member of the ARRL Software Defined Radio Technology Working Group, and from Cisco Systems. While the League was satisfied that the FCC's 2005 R&O had exempted Amateur Radio SDRs from its certification requirement, MSS felt the Order was ambiguous and sought further assurances.
In response, the FCC said it "did not intend to impose any new certification requirements for Amateur Radio equipment" in its 2005 R&O, including SDR equipment that may be modified by someone other than the manufacturer. The Commission noted, however, that external RF amplifiers operating below 144 MHz and marketed for amateur use "will continue to require certification before they can be marketed."
MSS also requested a Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making with respect to digital-to-analog (D/A) devices. Marcus predicted that if high-power, high-speed D/A converters with antenna-like connectors ever became readily available, it could bypass the entire FCC equipment certification program and open the door to D/A-equipped computers capable of operating on any frequency. The FCC declined to act on Marcus's request, saying MSS did not "demonstrate any current need for regulation of D/A converters."
The FCC reiterated that it "may revisit the issue of the certification of amateur equipment with software modifiable features in the future, if misuse of such devices results in significant interference to authorized spectrum users."
ARRL General Counsel Chris Imlay, W3KD, expressed confidence that it would not prove necessary for the FCC to revisit the issue, however, "as no misuse of amateur SDR technology is anticipated." For the FCC to impose any limitations on amateur SDR equipment "would be contrary to the goals enunciated for the Amateur Radio Service in §97.1 of the FCC's rules," he added.
Cisco had asked the FCC to revise its rules to better specify those classes of devices that do not require SDR certification. It also wanted the FCC to establish a policy that software that supports security measures not be made public if doing so could compromise security or enable illegal operation.
In response, the FCC revised §2.1(c) its rules to state that only radios with software "designed or expected to be modified by a party other than the manufacturer" -- such as downloading from the Internet -- and that would affect frequency range, modulation type, maximum power output or the circumstances under which the transmitter operates legally, would have to be certified as SDRs.
The FCC said it anticipates Commission requests for software source code would be extremely rare. "It would not be burdensome for a manufacturer to request confidentiality for software source code in the event we request it," the Commission added.
From the May 4th ARRL Letter