Hi Robert, Passing the FCC unintentional limits may give reasonable presumption of conformity for non-interference to licensed services requirement, however it does not guarantee such. As others have pointed out, passing this may not be sufficient in itself. However, if the grantee had complained to the FCC directly without involving you first, and the FCC found your device to be interfering, the devices compliance might have helped present a reasonable case of due diligence in your response, but you would still an obligation to remedy the issue or cease operation. The due diligence might have reduced a fine the FCC applied, which can be quite substantial. As is, it looks the the grantee went to you first, so that scenario is moot. It looks like the solution is to work with your customer to fix the interference or have them cease operation of your device. That being said, I'm not sure if a reduction of 20 dB is necessary, but I don't have the details to provide an informed response. Sometimes it is an alternative to shift the frequency in some way such that the interference to in-band of nearby licensed services is non-existent.
Best Regards, Scott Drysdale OOO - Own Opinions Only. On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 9:41 AM Moeller, Robert T. < robert.moel...@banctec.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Maybe someone can help with this question: We have had one of our systems > installed and operating at a customer site in the US, and now suddenly a > local Cell Ph Company has made complaint that we have an unintentional > signal radiating at 780 MHz which is interfering with their Cell Tower. > Our equipment is EMC tested to CISPR Class A for business only use, and at > 780 Mhz our radiated Level at 3Meters is under the Class A limit of 57 dB > at 780 Mhz. Question is, can the complaining company legally demand that > we drop the signal further, they may be looking at a necessary reduction of > current level by 20 dB lower. > > > > Thank You > > > > > > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc > discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to < > emc-p...@ieee.org> > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html > > Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at > http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in > well-used formats), large files, etc. > > Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ > Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> > List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org> > Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org> > David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com> > - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
