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 )
Authorization for )
Learned Mode Remote Control )
Transmitter Devices, FCC ID
Nos. MMORC0196N and MMORMC575
ORDER OF REVOCATION
Adopted: April 15, 2005
Released: April 18, 2005
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. By this Order of Revocation, acting pursuant to
authority delegated to the Enforcement Bureau under section
0.111(a)(17) of the Commission's rules,1 we revoke the above-
captioned equipment authorizations held by Tung Shih
Technology Co., Ltd. (``Tung Shih'') for its learned mode
remote control devices (``learned mode transmitters''). We
conclude, based upon the evidence described herein, that the
learned mode transmitters manufactured by Tung Shih have the
capability to transmit impermissibly on restricted
frequencies specified in section 15.205(a) of the
Commission's rules.2 We further conclude that Tung Shih's
learned mode transmitters also have the capability to
transmit impermissibly on frequencies that are not authorized
by their equipment authorizations.
II. BACKGROUND
2. On January 31, 2005, the Commission released an
Order to Show Cause designating this case for hearing.3 The
OSC specified 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 the 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.
3. The OSC ordered Tung Shih, pursuant to section
2.939(b) of the Commission's rules,4 within thirty days of
the release of the OSC (i.e., by March 2, 2005), in person or
by its attorney, to file a written notice of appearance in
order to avail itself of the opportunity to be heard.5 The
OSC directed that the notice of appearance state that Tung
Shih would appear on the date fixed for the hearing and
present evidence on the specified issues. The OSC warned
Tung Shih that, if it failed to so file a written notice of
appearance, its right to a hearing on the matter of its
equipment authorizations would be deemed waived, and the
Chief Administrative Law Judge (or the presiding officer if
one had been designated) would, 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.6
4. The Presiding Judge determined that Tung Shih had
received a copy of the OSC but had failed to file a written
notice of appearance seeking to avail itself of the
opportunity to be heard.7 Accordingly, he concluded that
Tung Shih had waived its right to a hearing, and terminated
the proceeding and certified the case to the Commission for
disposition in accordance with 47 C.F.R. § 1.92(c). The
Commission has delegated authority to the Enforcement Bureau
for such revocation proceedings, terminated on the basis of
waiver, pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 0.111(a)(17).
III. DISCUSSION
A. Facts
5. Learned mode 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.8 As intentional radiators,9 learned
mode transmitters must be certified by the Commission prior
to marketing according to procedures specified in Part 2,
subpart J of the rules.10
6. On October 30, 1996, and October 2, 2002,
respectively, the Commission's Office of Engineering and
Technology (``OET'') granted Tung Shih equipment
certifications, FCC ID Nos. MMORC0196M and MMORMC575, for
learned mode transmitters. The first certification
authorized emissions only within the 286-320 MHz frequency
band, while the second certification authorized emissions
only within the 313.95-314.95 MHz frequency band. At all
relevant times, section 15.205(a) of the rules allowed
intentional radiators, such as learned mode transmitters, to
transmit only spurious emissions11 in the restricted
frequency bands, which include 240-285 MHz, 322-335.4 MHz and
399.9-410 MHz.
7. After receiving complaints, OET tested the Remocon
LRT-1 (``LRT-1''), which is manufactured by Tung Shih under
FCC ID No. MMORC0196M. OET determined that the LRT-1 is
capable of being tuned to and operated on a range of
frequencies that are not authorized, including, but not
limited to, 437.004 MHz. The instructions for the LRT-1
included with the sample device also indicate that it is
designed to acquire and operate on all frequencies within the
255-500 MHz band, which includes frequencies that are within
the restricted bands specified by section 15.205(a) of the
rules. OET's examination of the LRT-1 confirmed that the
device can be readily tuned to operate on restricted band
frequencies.
8. OET also tested the RMC-535, a device manufactured
by Tung Shih under FCC ID No. MMORMC575, a sample of which
had been provided by Tung Shih. OET determined that the RMC-
535 is capable of being tuned to and operated on a range of
unauthorized frequencies, including 310.9 MHz. OET's
examination of the RMC-535 also established that the device
can be readily tuned to operate on frequencies that are
within the restricted bands specified by section 15.205(a) of
the rules.
B. Discussion
9. As noted above, section 15.205(a) of the rules
allows learned mode transmitters to transmit only spurious
emissions in the restricted 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. However, OET found that the LRT-1 can be readily tuned
to restricted band frequencies, while the instructions for
the device indicate that the LRT-1 can operate on any
frequency in the band between 255 and 500 MHz. Thus, the
LRT-1 does not conform to either the requirements of section
15.205(a) or its equipment authorization. Likewise, OET
found that the RMC-535 can be readily tuned to frequencies
that are within the restricted bands specified by section
15.205(a) of the Commission's rules and that it was capable
of acquiring and transmitting on a range of frequencies,
including 310.9 MHz, which is outside the range of
frequencies specified by its authorization. Thus, the RMC-
535 also does not conform to either the requirements of
section 15.205(a) or its equipment authorization.
C. License Revocation
10. 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.''12 Furthermore, section 2.939(a)(4) of the
rules states 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.''13 In light of the above, we conclude that
both the LRT-1 learned mode transmitter manufactured by Tung
Shih under FCC ID No. MMORC0196M and the RMC-535 learned mode
transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under FCC ID No.
MMORMC575 do not conform to the applicable technical
requirements for learned mode transmitters. We further
conclude that, had the Commission been aware of the technical
capability of these devices, it could have refused to grant
Tung Shih's original applications for equipment authorization
for each such device. Based on the foregoing, we conclude
that the equipment authorizations held by Tung Shih for its
learned mode transmitters, FCC ID Nos. MMORC0196M and
MMORMC575, should be revoked.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
11. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to 47
C.F.R. § 2.939(b), the equipment authorizations, FCC ID Nos.
MMORC0196M and MMORMC575, held by Tung Shih ARE REVOKED,
effective the fortieth (40th) day after release of this Order
of Revocation, unless Tung Shih files a petition for
reconsideration or application for review within thirty (30)
days of the release of this Order of Revocation, in which
case the effective date will be suspended, pending further
Order of the Commission.
12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order of
Revocation shall be sent by 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. § 0.111(a)(17).
2 47 C.F.R. § 15.205(a).
3 Order to Show Cause, 20 FCC Rcd 1668 (2005) (``OSC'').
4 47 C.F.R. § 2.939(b) states: ``Revocation of an equipment
authorization shall be made in the same manner as revocation of
radio station licenses.'' Revocation of radio station licenses
is governed by sections 1.91 and 1.92 of the Commission's rules.
47 C.F.R. §§ 1.91, 1.92. Consequently, we will refer to those
rules herein.
5 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.91(c).
6
See also 47 C.F.R. § 1.92(c). This rule provides that, whenever
a hearing is waived, the Presiding Administrative Law Judge
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. See also 47 C.F.R. § 1.92(a).
7 Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 05M-15 (rel. Mar. 23, 2005).
Therein, the Presiding Judge determined that the Commission had
sent the OSC to Tung Shih, both by registered mail and by
facsimile, and that Tung Shih had received the OSC.
Nonetheless, Tung Shih did not file a written notice of
appearance by March 2, 2005, nor did it appear in person or by
attorney at the Prehearing Conference held on March 17, 2005.
8 Public Notice, FCC Clarifies Equipment Certification Procedures
for ``Learned Mode'' or ``Trainable'' Transmitters, 17 FCC Rcd
21423 (OET 2002).
9 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.''
10 47 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart J.
11 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.''
12 47 C.F.R. § 2.939(a)(2).
13 47 C.F.R. § 2.939(a)(4).