Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version
********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
This document was converted from Microsoft Word.
Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.
All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.
Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.
If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.
*****************************************************************
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of )
)
Tung Shih Technology Co., Ltd. ) EB Docket No. 05-30
) EB-02-TS-606
Grantee of Equipment )
Authorizations for )
Learned Mode Remote Control )
Transmitter Devices, FCC ID
Nos. MMORC0196M and MMORMC575
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Adopted: January 26, 2005 Released:
January 31, 2005
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Order to Show Cause, we commence a hearing
proceeding pursuant to Section 2.939 of the Commission's
Rules (``Rules''),1 to determine whether the equipment
authorizations held by Tung Shih Technology Co., Ltd. (``Tung
Shih'') for learned mode remote control transmitter devices
(``learned mode transmitters''), FCC ID Nos. MMORC0196M and
MMORMC575, should be revoked. Devices manufactured by Tung
Shih under those FCC ID numbers apparently have the
capability to transmit on frequencies that are not authorized
by their equipment certifications. In addition, these
devices apparently have the capability to transmit on
restricted frequencies specified in Section 15.205(a) of the
Rules.2
II. BACKGROUND
2. Learned mode or ``trainable'' transmitters are
typically sold as universal replacements or duplicates for
garage door openers, keyless entry systems, security alarms,
remote switches and similar types of radio controlled
devices. These transmitters are designed to recognize and
replicate the operating frequency, duty cycle and coding
scheme of the targeted radio system.3
3. As intentional radiators,4 learned mode
transmitters must be certificated prior to marketing
according to procedures specified in Part 2, subpart J of the
Rules.5 On October 30, 1996, and October 2, 2002,
respectively, the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology
(``OET'') granted Tung Shih equipment certifications, FCC ID
Nos. MMORC0196M and MMORMC575, for learned mode transmitters.
The certification granted under FCC ID No. MMORC0196M
authorizes emissions only in the 286-320 MHz frequency band,
and the certification granted under FCC ID No. MMORMC575
authorizes emissions only in the 313.95-314.95 MHz frequency
band. Additionally, Section 15.205(a) of the Rules allows
intentional radiators, such as learned mode transmitters, to
transmit only spurious emissions6 in the restricted frequency
bands, which include 240-285 MHz, 322-335.4 MHz and 399.9-410
MHz.
4. After receiving complaints, the Enforcement
Bureau (``EB'') launched an investigation to determine
whether learned mode transmitters manufactured by Tung Shih
under FCC ID Nos. MMORC0196M and MMORMC575 are capable of
transmitting emissions that are not authorized by Tung Shih's
equipment certifications and whether they are capable of
transmitting non-spurious emissions in any of the restricted
bands specified by Section 15.205(a) of the Rules. As part
of the investigation, EB purchased a sample device, the
Remocon LRT-1 (``LRT-1''), manufactured by Tung Shih under
FCC ID No. MMORC0196M. The OET Laboratory tested the LRT-1
and determined that it is capable of being tuned to and
operated on a range of frequencies that are not authorized by
its equipment authorization. Specifically, the OET
Laboratory found that the LRT-1 was capable of acquiring and
transmitting on a range of frequencies, including the
frequency 437.004 MHz.7 Furthermore, the instructions for
the LRT-1 included with the sample device indicated that it
is designed to acquire and operate on all frequencies in the
255-500 MHz band, which includes frequencies that are within
the restricted bands specified by Section 15.205(a) of the
Rules, and the OET Laboratory's examination of the LRT-1
confirmed that the device can be readily tuned to restricted
band frequencies. As part of the investigation, EB also
ordered Tung Shih to provide a sample learned mode
transmitter manufactured under FCC ID No. MMORMC575.8 Tung
Shih provided a sample device (``RMC-535'') manufactured by
Tung Shih under that FCC ID number. The OET Laboratory
tested the RMC-535 and determined that it is capable of being
tuned to and operating on a range of frequencies that are not
authorized by its equipment authorization. Specifically, the
OET Laboratory found that the RMC-535 is capable of acquiring
and transmitting on a range of frequencies, including the
frequency 310.9 MHz.9 Additionally, the OET Laboratory's
examination of the RMC-535 established that the device can be
readily tuned to frequencies that are within the restricted
bands specified by Section 15.205(a) of the Rules.
III. DISCUSSION
5. Section 2.939(a)(2) of the Rules provides that
the Commission may revoke any equipment authorization ``if
upon subsequent inspection or operation it is determined that
the equipment does not conform to the pertinent technical
requirements or to the representations made in the original
application.''10 Furthermore, Section 2.939(a)(4) of the
Rules provides that the Commission may revoke any equipment
authorization because of conditions coming to its attention
``which would warrant it in refusing to grant an original
application.''11 The Commission is required to follow the
same procedures in revoking an equipment authorization as it
does in revoking a radio station license.12 Pursuant to
Section 312(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
before revoking a radio station license, the Commission must
serve the licensee with an order to show cause why revocation
should not be issued and must provide the licensee with an
opportunity for hearing.13
6. As noted above, Section 15.205(a) of the Rules
allows learned mode transmitters to transmit only spurious
emissions in the restricted frequency bands, including 240-
285 MHz, 322-335.4 MHz and 399.9-410 MHz. In addition, Tung
Shih's equipment certification (FCC ID No. MMORC0196M)
covering the LRT-1 authorizes operation only in the frequency
band 286-320 MHz. In view of the instructions indicating
that the LRT-1 can operate on any frequency in the band
between 255 and 500 MHz and the OET Laboratory's examination
of the device, which confirmed that the device can be readily
tuned to restricted band frequencies, it appears that the
LRT-1 fails to conform to the technical requirements of
Section 15.205(a) and the requirements of its equipment
certification. The OET Laboratory's finding that the LRT-1
is capable of acquiring and transmitting on a range of
frequencies outside the 286-310 MHz band specified by the
equipment certification, including frequency 437.004 MHz,
provides further evidence that the LRT-1 apparently does not
conform to the requirements of its equipment certification.
7. Similarly, in view of the OET Laboratory's
observation that the RMC-535 can be readily tuned to
frequencies that are within the restricted bands specified by
Section 15.205(a) of the Rules, it appears that the RMC-535
does not conform either to the technical requirements of
Section 15.205(a) or to the requirements of its equipment
certification (FCC ID No. MMORMC575), which authorizes
operation only in the frequency band 313.95-314.95 MHz. The
OET Laboratory's finding that the RMC-535 is capable of
acquiring and transmitting on a range of frequencies outside
the 313.95-314.95 MHz band specified by the equipment
certification, including 310.9 MHz, provides further evidence
that the RMC-535 apparently does not conform to the technical
requirements of its equipment certification.
8. Furthermore, it appears, in view of the foregoing,
that the Commission would be warranted in refusing to grant
an original application for equipment authorization for the
devices certified under FCC ID Nos. MMORC0196M and MMORMC575.
We are, accordingly, designating this matter for hearing
before an Administrative Law Judge to determine whether the
equipment authorizations held by Tung Shih under FCC ID Nos.
MMORC0196M and MMORMC575 should be revoked.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
9. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to
Section 2.939(b) of the Rules, Tung Shih is hereby ORDERED TO
SHOW CAUSE why its equipment authorizations, FCC ID Nos.
MMORMC575 and MMORC0196M, SHOULD NOT BE REVOKED. Tung Shih
SHALL APPEAR before an Administrative Law Judge at a time and
place to be specified in a subsequent order and give evidence
upon the following issues:
(a) To determine whether the LRT-1 learned mode
transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under FCC
ID No. MMORC0196M conforms to the technical
requirements specified by Section 15.205(a) of
the Rules;
(b) To determine whether the LRT-1 learned mode
transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under FCC
ID No. MMORC0196M conforms to the technical
requirements specified by its equipment
authorization;
(c) To determine, in light of the evidence
adduced pursuant to issues (a) and (b), whether
equipment authorization FCC ID No. MMORC0196M
held by Tung Shih should be revoked;
(d) To determine whether the RMC-535 learned mode
transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under FCC
ID No. MMORMC575 conforms to the technical
requirements specified by Section 15.205(a) of
the Rules;
(e) To determine whether the RMC-535 learned mode
transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under FCC
ID No. MMORMC575 conforms to the technical
requirements specified by its equipment
authorization; and
(f) To determine, in light of the evidence
adduced pursuant to issues (d) and (e), whether
equipment authorization FCC ID No. MMORMC575
held by Tung Shih should be revoked.
10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that,
pursuant to 2.939(b) of the Rules, to avail itself of the
opportunity to be heard and to present evidence at a hearing
in this proceeding, Tung Shih, in person or by an attorney,
SHALL FILE with the Commission, within thirty (30) days of
the release of this Order to Show Cause, a written appearance
stating that it will appear at the hearing and present
evidence on the issues specified above. If Tung Shih fails
to file a timely notice of appearance, its right to a hearing
SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE WAIVED. In the event that Tung Shih
waives its right to a hearing, the Chief Administrative Law
Judge (or the presiding officer if one has been designated)
SHALL, at the earliest practicable date, ISSUE an order
reciting the events or circumstances constituting a waiver of
hearing, terminating the hearing proceeding, and certifying
the case to the Commission.
11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section
0.111(b) of the Rules,14 the Enforcement Bureau shall serve
as trial staff in this proceeding.
12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, the burden of
proceeding with the introduction of evidence and the burden
of proof with respect to the issues specified above shall be
on the Enforcement Bureau.
13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order to
Show Cause shall be sent by International Registered Mail,
Return Receipt Requested, and by Federal Express, to Tung
Shih Technology Co., Ltd., 7F-10, No. 130, Ssu Wei Road, Hsin
Chu City, 300, Taiwan.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
David H. Solomon
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________
1 47 C.F.R. § 2.939.
2 47 C.F.R. § 15.205(a).
3 Public Notice, FCC Clarifies Equipment Certification Procedures
for ``Learned Mode'' or ``Trainable'' Transmitters, DA 02-2850
(October 28, 2002).
4 Section 15.3 (o), of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 15.3(o), defines
an intentional radiator as ``A device that intentionally
generates and emits radio frequency energy by radiation or
induction.''
5 47 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart J
6 47 C.F.R. § 2.1 defines spurious emissions as ``Emission on a
frequency or frequencies which are outside the necessary
bandwidth and the level of which may be reduced without affecting
the corresponding transmission of information. Spurious emissions
include harmonic emissions, parasitic emissions, intermodulation
products and frequency conversion products, but exclude out-of-
band emissions.''
7 The OET Laboratory determined that the LRT-1 was capable of
being tuned to and operating on a range of frequencies, but for
testing purposes, it specifically operated the device on
frequency 437.004 MHz.
8 Letter of October 26, 2004, from Deputy Chief, Spectrum
Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau, to Tung Shih.
9 The OET Laboratory determined that the RMC-535 was capable of
being tuned to and operating on a range of frequencies, but for
testing purposes, it specifically operated the device on
frequency 310.9 MHz.
10 47 C.F.R. § 2.939(a)(2).
11 47 C.F.R. § 2.939(a)(4).
12 47 C.F.R. § 2.939(b).
13 47 U.S.C. § 312(c).
14 47 C.F.R. § 0.111(b).