RADAR MANUFACTURERS SEEK LONGER TIMELINE TO MEET NEW FCC RULES
Radar detector industry petitioned FCC Fri. for partial reconsideration of decision that required those devices to meet Part 15 limits on emissions in 11.7-12.2 GHz band. While saying they agreed with order’s technical provisions (CD July 22 p1), group of 6 radar detector manufacturers argued that implementation schedule was “infeasible, unprecedented and unnecessary.” Commission required that radar detectors made domestically or imported into U.S. comply with new technical rules starting 30 days after publication in Federal Register. All radar detectors marketed in U.S., including those sold at retail, must start compliance within 60 days of that publication. Members of Radio Assn. Defending Airwave Rights (RADAR) instead want FCC to require compliance by Dec. 31 “and that the distribution pipeline be left to empty at its own speed.” If Commission still decides to require date for retail compliance, RADAR proposes July 1, 2003, deadline. Current timelines could “shut down” industry, it warned. Rules were designed to prevent interference to VSATs that had been traced to radar detectors. Petition for more time for compliance drew sharp criticism from Satellite Industry Assn. (SIA) Fri., with Exec. Dir. Richard DalBello saying he was “flabbergasted” by request.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Radar manufacturers, including BG Tech America, Bel- Tronics, Cobra Electronics, Escort, SK Global American and Whistler Group, also filed motion for stay of new rules, requesting FCC decision before Sept. 1. Expeditious action is needed because dates for manufacturing and retail compliance now would fall in early Sept. and Oct., group said. “Without a stay, the petition will become moot long before it can be decided,” it said. Group said that in Feb., its members began responding to reports of interference from radar detectors into VSAT receivers and began implementing same Part 15-based technical standards ultimately adopted in order. Original target of industry was 100% compliance by June 1, 2003, although it subsequently told Commission that manufacturers expected to reach full compliance by Jan. 2003. “The Commission’s marketing deadline, 60 days after publication, will find the retail stores holding a mixture of product: Compliant and not; certified and not; labeled and not,” it said. While stores “ideally” would check items in stock against manufacturer lists to return noncompliant products, most stores are more likely to return entire stock to manufacturers “with an invitation to ship back the units that comply,” petition said. “This will almost certainly shut down some manufacturers, and possibly the industry as a whole.”
Group contended that there was no FCC precedent for regulating consumer products on comparably aggressive schedule, “especially a product regulated for the first time.” Petition said slower schedule proposed by manufacturers would reduce number of potentially interfering units in service because most radar detector sales were upgrades. Most upgrades take out noncomplying units and replace them with compliant ones, petition said. “If the Commission’s schedule disrupts the distribution chain (as it certainly will), users will simply hang on to their older units, with a consequent higher risk of interference,” filing said.
“Our position is that the FCC identified a detailed technical analysis, came up with an unassailably correct conclusion and then took a tough and courageous stance,” SIA’s DalBello said. “I think that they should be applauded instead of people wailing about the conclusion.” He said request for additional time was effort by industry to “dump” its existing inventory and extend timeline into next end-of- year holiday selling season. “I'm a little bit flabbergasted,” he said. “That is cheeky.”
“If we're required to do it, it’s going to interrupt the flow of product through the retail channel,” RADAR attorney Mitchell Lazarus said. “In the past, when the FCC has newly regulated a consumer device, it has allowed much more time.” Petition said that when FCC overhauled Part 15 rules in 1989, it allowed 10-year transition for newly regulated receivers and 10 years for other devices. Only similar treatment at FCC has been new rules for CB receivers, expanding those radios from 23 to 40 channels in 1976 to address interference, Lazarus said. Manufacturers had 1 year to discontinue production already under way, he said, and “shortly after that, the CB radio market collapsed.”