KL7-612T-V2Active RFID Tag

Th‰vUht%Tr…vr†D†‡hyyh‡v‚Bˆvqr1 FrrƒUuv†9‚pˆ€r‡ Savi P/N 805-03671-001 (Rev. B) The SaviTag 600 Series Tags consist of a hermetically-sealed plastic case enclosing a printed circuit board with a non-replaceable battery. The SaviTag 605 includes an interface to a standard bolt seal for use in security applications. See Figure 3. • The SaviTag 602 contain three labels; one is on the face of the tag and contains the Savi Technology logo and tag model number. The second label is also on the face of the tag and contains the tag serial number in both bar code and numerical format. The third label is on the back surface of the SaviTag and contains compliance markings. The SaviTag 604 and 605 combine the Savi compliance and model number labels. This label is located on the back surface of the SaviTag. • The 600 Series Tags can be exposed to environments including rain, snow, and direct exposure to sunlight. • Tag battery life varies by model as shown in the table below. The tags contain an internal lithium battery and should be discarded according to local safety requirements. The lithium battery can be harmful to the environment. Please follow current procedures for safely disposing of lithium batteries. UhtH‚ˆ‡vt The 600 Series SaviTags have a variety of mounting options: • The SaviTag 602 may be attached using adhesives. • The SaviTag 604 has two mounting holes for attachment using screws or rivets. • The SaviTag 605 is attached using the Bolt Seal. The 600 Series SaviTags can be mounted on items of any material. However, the SaviTag 602 requires a 0.75 inch separation from metal surfaces. After installation, verify tag operation by exposing it to a 600 Series Signpost and reading the Tag ID with a 600 Series SaviReader. Figure 1SaviTag 602Figure 3SaviTag 605 Tag Model Battery Life (Years) ST 6024 ST 6048 ST 6055 Figure 2SaviTag 604 Th‰vUht%Tr…vr†D†‡hyyh‡v‚Bˆvqr1 FrrƒUuv†9‚pˆ€r‡ Arqr…hy8‚€€ˆvph‡v‚† 8‚€€v††v‚A88I‚‡vpr The Federal Communications Commission has established technical standards regarding radio frequency energy that computer devices emit. This equipment has been tested and found to comply with the limits for a Class B digital device, pursuant to Part 15 of the FCC Rules. These limits are designed to provide reasonable protection against harmful interference in a residential installation. This equipment generates, uses, and can radiate radio frequency energy and, if not installed and used in accordance with the instructions, may cause harmful interference with radio/TV reception. However, there is no guarantee that interference will not occur in a particular installation. If this equipment does cause harmful interference to radio or television reception, which can be determined by turning the equipment off and on, the user is encouraged to try and correct the interference by one or more of the following measures: •Reorient or relocate the receiving antenna. •Increase the separation between the equipment and the receiver. •Connect the equipment into an outlet on a circuit different from that to which the receiver is connected. •Consult the dealer or an experienced radio/TV technician for assistance. Changes or modifications to this equipment that are not expressly approved by Savi Technology could void the warranty and the authority to operate this equipment. Using this equipment in a manner not specified by the manufacturer might impair the protection that the equipment provides. Savi Technology is not responsible for radio/TV interference caused by using unauthorized cable or by making unauthorized changes to this equipment. Arqr…hy8‚€€ˆvph‡v‚† 8‚€€v††v‚A88 Ghiry T‡h‡r€r‡ This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following conditions: •This device may not cause harmful interference, and •This device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation. The label statement corresponds to the following devices: 9rpyh…h‡v‚‚s8‚s‚…€v‡’ Hereby, Savi Technology, Inc., 615 Tasman Drive Sunnyvale, California 94086-1707 declares that the SaviTag 602, 604, and 605 are in compliance with the essential requirements and other relevant provisions of Directive 1999/5/EC. Savi Technology, Inc. 615 Tasman Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94089-1707 Phone:(408) 743-8000 Fax:(408) 543-8650 E-mail:[email protected] Web site:www.savi.com Copyright © 2001, Savi Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. First edition printed September 2001. Copyright protection claimed includes all forms and matters of copyrightable material and information, now allowed by statutory or judicial law or hereinafter granted. Information in this guide is subject to change without notice and does not represent a commitment from the vendor. Savi is a registered trademark and EchoPoint is a trademark of Savi Technology, Inc. Other product names mentioned in this guide may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners and are hereby acknowledged. DeviceModelFCC ID Radio TagST-602-01KL7-612T-V1 Radio TagST-604-01KL7-612T-V2 Radio TagST-605-SL1KL7-612T-V2 0889

RE: Savi Technology, FCC ID: KL7-612T-V2 The following addresses each of the issues raised in the comments letter from ATCB dated on December 9 th , 2001. 1) Photographs may not be held confidential based only upon on the basis of trade secrets. Please remove the request for photographs from the letter of confidentiality or provide a better justification. The confidentiality request has been updated to remove photographs from its scope. The revised letter has been uploaded to the ATCB website. 2) The theory of operation provided information with respect to meeting the requirements of 15.231(a). However, the information provided does not appear to meet the current requirements of 15.231(a). In specific please address the following concerns: a) Beacon Mode: This mode appears to contain periodic transmissions at regular intervals (15.231(a)(3)). This is not permitted except for polling of supervision transmissions (which is allowed only for security or safety applications). Please explain how this unit meets these requirements and what type of information is contained within this data pulse. Also, the transmission rate stated exceeds the rate allowed by this section (1 transmission per hour). The Beacon Mode should fall under the requirements of 5.231(e). The test report and data have been updated to reflect the evaluation of the transmissions from the unit against the field strength limit of 15.231(e). The Theory of Operations has also been updated to show that Beacon Mode meets the requirements of 15.231(e). Both Theory of Operations and Test Report have been loaded to the ATCB web site with the word “REVISED” appended to their filename. b) Signpost Mode: The information provided exceeds the 5 second transmission duration allowed by 15.231(a)(1) or 15.231(a)(2). Also, the transmission of signpost ID's could be considered to be data since they are not inherent to the tag itself. Savi considers Signpost Mode transmissions to be individual and random. Each individual transmission contains the same information and should comply because it is less than 5 seconds in duration. Since these transmissions are random and not periodic, the 1 per hour restriction should not apply. Further, the transmission is only of a unique recognition code that includes both the Tag and Signpost IDs. The combination of these codes is unique to the Tag and determines what controls are implemented by the system. c) Information available on Savi Technology's website regarding this system states the tags communicate their location, unique ID, and other application data. This implies more transmission than is allowed by 15.231(a). Modifications will be made to the marketing document "Savi Series 600 RFID System" located on the SAVI website to remove the confusing statements concerning communication transmissions. The phrase "and other application data" will be removed and the term "unique identifier" will be replaced with "unique recognition code". 3) Information given in the application for the reader suggests that some tags can communicate with a collection mode as well. Is this applicable to this tag? Please comment on this issue. The 604 Tag cannot communicate in a collection mode. They can only communicate in the Beacon Mode and Signpost mode as detailed in the Theory of operations as they do not incorporate a 433 MHz receiver. 4) Information in the manual shows the same FCC ID for both the ST-604 & ST-605 models while most information presented (i.e., photographs, test report, etc.) presented in the application supports only the model ST-604. The schematic diagram also shows different population of the board for various options. Please comment. The application is for the ST-604. Savi hope to share the same FCC ID with the 605 Tag as they share the same rf circuitry. The 605 Tag utilizes some of the optional components to add an extra function. Once the 605 Tag has been tested it is hoped to submit an application for a Permissive Change to the existing FCC ID requested for the 604 Tag 5) FYI, the information requested in item 2) will need to be provided before a final the review of the test report can be completed. This is noted. If you have any further questions or need clarification on any of the points raised above, please contact me via [email protected] . Regards, Mark Briggs Director of Engineering Elliott Labs [email protected] [email protected]

RE: Savi Technology, FCC ID: KL7-612T-V2 The following addresses each of the issues raised in the comments letter from ATCB dated on December 18 th , 2001. 1) The test report states that the EUT was placed into beacon mode during the test (which according to the theory of operation transmits 3.75 mS every 10 seconds) and the final worse-case results show that the EUT was extremely close to the 15.231(e) limits. With respect to this issue, please comment on: a) Was the actual transmit cycle used during testing the same as specified by the theory of operations for beacon mode? For example, was the actual beacon mode used (actually > 10 seconds between burst), or was the transmit time interval between transmission reduced for testing purposes? The EUT was transmitting continuously during testing. b) If the EUT was tested with an extremely low duty cycle please explain any special measurement precautions taken to ensure that the measurement was adequately maximized? Please include information on whether the EUT was maximized under automation or by manual control. The continuous transmission allowed the signals to be maximized without having to take any special precautions. All measurements were made by manual control of turntable and antenna mast. c) Is Savi Technology comfortable with this margin? Savi are comfortable with the margin of the fundamental signal. The unit tested will be used as a “calibration” unit to configure the ATE used in the manufacturing process. Audits on previous, similar devices have shown that the output levels are very repeatable between devices. 2) Please confirm if there is any expected power difference between the beacon mode and the signpost mode, or is this only a difference in encoding information and the transmit pattern used? The output powers for both Beacon and SignPost modes are identical. The only difference is in the information transmitted. If you have any further questions or need clarification on any of the points raised above, please contact me via [email protected] . Regards, Mark Briggs Director of Engineering Elliott Labs [email protected] [email protected]

American Telecommunications Certification Body Inc. 6731 Whittier Ave, McLean, VA 22101 December 9, 2001 RE: Savi Technology FCC ID: KL7-612T-V2 After a review of the submitted information, I have a few comments on the above referenced Application. 1) Photographs may not be held confidential based only upon on the basis of trade secrets. Please remove the request for photographs from the letter of confidentiality or provide a better justification. As an alternative, you may use a black marker to "black out" the top of any readable components and provide new internal photographs. Please provide feedback with respect to this issue. 2) The theory of operation provided information with respect to meeting the requirements of 15.231(a). However, the information provided does not appear to meet the current requirements of 15.231(a). In specific please address the following concerns: a) Beacon Mode: This mode appears to contain periodic transmissions at regular intervals (15.231(a)(3)). This is not permitted except for polling of supervision transmissions (which is allowed only for security or safety applications). Please explain how this unit meets these requirements and what type of information is contained within this data pulse. Also, the transmission rate stated exceeds the rate allowed by this section (1 transmission per hour). b) Signpost Mode: The information provided exceeds the 5 second transmission duration allowed by 15.231(a)(1) or 15.231(a)(2). Also, the transmission of signpost ID's could be considered to be data since they are not inherent to the tag itself. c) Information available on Savi Technology's website regarding this system states the tags communicate their location, unique ID, and other application data. This implies more transmission than is allowed by 15.231(a). 3) Information given in the application for the reader suggests that some tags can communicate with a collection mode as well. Is this applicable to this tag? Please comment on this issue. 4) Information in the manual shows the same FCC ID for both the ST-604 & ST-605 models while most information presented (i.e., photographs, test report, etc.) presented in the application supports only the model ST-604. The schematic diagram also shows different population of the board for various options. Please comment. 5) FYI, the information requested in item 2) will need to be provided before a final the review of the test report can be completed. Timothy R. Johnson Examining Engineer mailto: [email protected] The items indicated above must be submitted before processing can continue on the above referenced application. Failure to provide the requested information may result in application termination. Correspondence should be considered part of the permanent submission and may be viewed from the Internet after a Grant of Equipment Authorization is issued. Please do not respond to this correspondence using the email reply button. In order for your response to be processed expeditiously, you must submit your documents through the AmericanTCB.com website. Also, please note that partial responses increase processing time and should not be submitted. Any questions about the content of this correspondence should be directed to the sender.

American Telecommunications Certification Body Inc. 6731 Whittier Ave, McLean, VA 22101 December 18, 2001 RE: Savi Technology FCC ID: KL7-612T-V2 After a review of the submitted information, I have a few comments on the above referenced Application. 1) The test report states that the EUT was placed into beacon mode during the test (which according to the theory of operation transmits 3.75 mS every 10 seconds) and the final worse-case results show that the EUT was extremely close to the 15.231(e) limits. With respect to this issue, please comment on: a) Was the actual transmit cycle used during testing the same as specified by the theory of operations for beacon mode? For example, was the actual beacon mode used (actually > 10 seconds between burst), or was the transmit time interval between transmission reduced for testing purposes? b) If the EUT was tested with an extremely low duty cycle please explain any special measurement precautions taken to ensure that the measurement was adequately maximized? Please include information on whether the EUT was maximized under automation or by manual control. c) Is Savi Technology comfortable with this margin? 2) Please confirm if there is any expected power difference between the beacon mode and the signpost mode, or is this only a difference in encoding information and the transmit pattern used? Timothy R. Johnson Examining Engineer mailto: [email protected] The items indicated above must be submitted before processing can continue on the above referenced application. Failure to provide the requested information may result in application termination. Correspondence should be considered part of the permanent submission and may be viewed from the Internet after a Grant of Equipment Authorization is issued. Please do not respond to this correspondence using the email reply button. In order for your response to be processed expeditiously, you must submit your documents through the AmericanTCB.com website. Also, please note that partial responses increase processing time and should not be submitted. Any questions about the content of this correspondence should be directed to the sender.

Savi Technology, Inc. 615 Tasman Dr. Sunnyvale, CA 94089 March 21, 2002 Via Electronic Filing Equipment Authorization Branch Federal Communications Commission 7435 Oakland Mills Road Columbia, MD 21046 Re:FCC ID: KL7-612T-V2 Ladies and Gentlemen: The above referenced application, the TCB grant for which was set aside on January 16, 2002, is hereby amended to reflect operation in accordance with Section 15.231(e). As described below, Savi no longer proposes that any portion of the operation be conducted under Section 15.231(a) of the Rules. Savi proposes to modify the tag protocol so that the system would operate in compliance with the provisions of Section 15.231(e) without resorting to Section 15.231(a). These changes would result in the limiting of tag transmissions to a maximum period of one second with silent periods of at least 30 times the duration of the transmission, but in no case less than 10 seconds. The reduced field strength levels mandated by Section 15.231(e) would be met by virtue of the protocol duty cycle and average emissions measurements per Section 15.35. Thus, while the maximum duration of any transmission of the messages from the tag is one second, within any 100 ms portion of that one second period the maximum on-air time would be 10 ms. As a result, the maximum field strength would be derated by a factor of 0.10. The changes would be made in the firmware inside the tag. This firmware is not user-adjustable. A revised Theory of Operation document has been prepared and is being submitted with this letter of amendment. I believe the confidential treatment of the Theory of Operation is covered by the letter of November 30, 2001, submitted with the application to American Telecommunication Certification Body, Inc., which requested such treatment for the Theory of Operation. If a separate letter is now needed, please let me know. The basic oscillator circuit in the tag has not changed. As such, the maximum measured field strength set forth in the original test report remains applicable. Those measurements showed a maximum transmit time of 9.8 milliseconds within any 100 milliseconds. The maximum fundamental at 433.920 MHz was 92.3 dBuV/m peak and 72.3 dBuV/m average as calculated by subtracting 20 dB from the peak. The 20 dB factor was derived under Section 15.35(c) as 20 log 9.8/100. See page 8 of the EMC Test Data Appendix to the Elliot Labs Test Report. Given the duty cycle of a maximum on air time of 10 milliseconds within any 100 milliseconds, the calculated maximum field limit under Section 15.231(e) is 72.8 dBuV/m at 3 meters (92.8 dBuV/m peak). Accordingly, the measured data show compliance with Section 15.231(e). The same units, if tested to the new protocol, would have these values in compliance with Section 15.231(e). Should any questions arise, please contact me or our counsel David Hilliard of Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP (202-719-7058 or [email protected]). Respectfully, /s/ Rod Thorne Rod Thorne VP, Network Products Executive for Compliance Encl. Revised Theory of Operation (submitted separately

Timing Verification The following plots were made to demonstrate the timing of the transmissions from the Savi ST-602 and ST-604 tags. The actual tag used during testing was an ST-602, but as both tags use the same firmware it is representative of both types of tag. The graphs show: A 10.1 second interval between successive transmissions; A total of four pulses per transmission, each pulse separated by a 90mS period, giving a total transmission time of 310mS; An individual pulse width of 10mS. The timing of the pulses meets the requirements of FCC 15.231(e) as the transmission time is less than 1 second and the silent period is greater than 30 times the duration of each transmission and greater than 10 seconds.

Savi Technology, Inc 615 Tasman Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94089 May 2, 2002 Via Electronic Filing Equipment Authorization Brance Federal Communicatio ns Co mmission 7435 Oakland Mills Road Columbia, MD 21046 RE: (1.) FCC ID: KL7-612T-V1 and KL7-612T-V2 (2.) K. Hawkins e-mail to American TCB of 4/11/02 (3.) K. Hawkins e-mail to American TCB of 5/1/02 Ladies and Gentlemen: I am writing to provide the information requested in Reference (3.) above. You asked us to explain the pulse waveforms submitted in the up-load of 4/14/02 in response to Reference (2.) above. (These waveforms are enclosed in a separate PDF file for convenience.) There are three waveforms in that up-load showing that four transmission pulses of 9.75 msec duration are transmitted in a 310 msec interval, and that the Tag is silent for 10.1 seconds between re-transmissions. The diagram submitted April 14, 2002, shows at the top of the page the timing measurement of the four pulses in the second (rightmost) portion of the diagram. There is a measurement anomaly in the leftmost portion of the top diagram in that the four pulses are not visible as fine structure. Consequently, we have had the timing verified again and are including the latest such data with this response as Page 3 below. In this latest attached waveform diagram, four pulses are shown with the silent period markers set at 10.079 seconds. In the submission of April 14, the second (i.e. middle) diagram shows the individual four pulses with the markers set at 310 milliseconds. Finally the third (i.e. bottom) diagram shows a single individual pulse with the markers set 9.75 milliseconds apart. The content of the pulses may be explained by referring to Page 7 of the Theory of Operation, (provided herein as Addendum 1 for convenience) which shows the bit structure of the Recognition Code transmitted by the Tag to the Reader. To summarize, there are 176 FSK bits in each pulse with a bit period of approximately 55 microsecs. The content of these bits consists of the Unique Recognition Code, which is made up of the preamble, tag field, signpost field, and alarm control codes field of the Tag. You also asked us to clarify the operation of the Tag to ensure that the 10 second silent period is maintained. The Savi Tag is equipped with a timing capability that controls the re-transmission process of a given tag and prevents re-transmission until 10 seconds of silence has been measured. The Signpost continuously transmits its 132 kHz signal. If a second tag is introduced into the vicinity of the 132 kHz signal, it operates independently of the first tag. The first tag will not be stimulated by the presence of the second tag. Nor will the 132 kHz Signpost signal reset the timer of any tag so as to interrupt the timer or otherwise violate the 10 second silent period. Finally, please note that the data discussed above reflect only the timing. The maximum RF fields produced by the tags have been reported previously in the original test report. We hope that this information meets with your approval. If there are further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or our cousel, David Hilliard of Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP (202-719-7058 or dhilliard@ wrf.com ). Respectfully, Rod Thorne VP, Network Products Executive for Complaince Savi Technology, Inc. Encl: Timing Verification waveforms, 1 page previously submitted on 4/14/02. Addendum 1: Page 7 of the Theory of Operation Tag to Reader Uplink Under controlled circumstances the tag transmits its unique Recognition Code to the Reader. This unique Recognition Code is used by the system to control access and exit to secure areas, to perform system component identification and to report alarm status. Recognition Code Structure The tag transmission co nsists of a unique Recognition Code made up of a preamble and three fields (refer to diagram belo w). The three fields are, (1) the Tag field, which is permanently preprogrammed into the tag, (2) the Signpost field, which is received from the Signpost transmitter and (3) the Alarm Control code field. These three fields are required by the Site Co ntrol Unit to uniquely identify and control ro uting of an item within a facility and notify the system of alarm conditions. Preamble 20 bits Tag field 128 bits Signpost field 16 bits Alarm Control Code field 12 bits Tag Modulation and Coding The Tag to Reader communicatio n link uses FSK modulation at 433.92 MHz with frequency deviatio n of +/-35 KHz. Unique Recognition Code

External Photographs

Internal Photographs Assembly View Circuit Board, Top and Bottom Views

File: R45527 (Revised) Page 1 of 16 Electromagnetic Emissions Test Report and Application for Grant of Equipment Authorization pursuant to FCC Part 15, Subpart C Specifications for an Intentional Radiator on the Savi Technology, Inc. Model: EchoPoint Tag, Model ST-604-01 FCC ID: KL7-612T-V2 GRANTEE: Savi Technology, Inc. 615 Tasman Drive Sunnyvale, CA. 94089-1707 TEST SITE: Elliott Laboratories, Inc. 684 W. Maude Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94086 REPORT DATE: December 13, 2001 FINAL TEST DATE: November 21, 2001 AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY: ______________________________ Mark Briggs Director of Engineering This report shall not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of Elliott Laboratories, Inc. Elliott Laboratories, Inc. -- EMC Department Test Report Report Date: November 30, 2001 File: R45527 (Revised) Page 2 of 16 pages TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER PAGE.............................................................................................................................................................1 TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................2 SCOPE..........................................................................................................................................4 OBJECTIVE................................................................................................................................4 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE...........................................................................................5 EMISSION TEST RESULTS.....................................................................................................5 LIMITS OF CONDUCTED INTERFERENCE VOLTAGE.....................................................5 LIMITS OF RADIATED FIELD STRENGTH – FUNDAMENTAL SIGNAL.......................5 LIMITS OF RADIATED FIELD STRENGTH – SPURIOUS SIGNALS................................6 20DB BANDWIDTH MEASUREMENT..................................................................................6 TIME OF TRANSMISSION.....................................................................................................6 MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTIES.....................................................................................7 EQUIPMENT UNDER TEST (EUT) DETAILS......................................................................8 GENERAL.................................................................................................................................8 OTHER EUT DETAILS............................................................................................................8 ENCLOSURE............................................................................................................................8 MODIFICATIONS....................................................................................................................8 SUPPORT EQUIPMENT..........................................................................................................8 INTERFACE PORTS................................................................................................................9 EUT OPERATION....................................................................................................................9 TEST SITE.................................................................................................................................10 GENERAL INFORMATION..................................................................................................10 CONDUCTED EMISSIONS CONSIDERATIONS...............................................................10 RADIATED EMISSIONS CONSIDERATIONS....................................................................10 MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTATION............................................................................11 INSTRUMENT CONTROL COMPUTER.............................................................................11 LINE IMPEDANCE STABILIZATION NETWORK (LISN)................................................11 FILTERS/ATTENUATORS....................................................................................................12 ANTENNAS............................................................................................................................12 ANTENNA MAST AND EQUIPMENT TURNTABLE........................................................12 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION..............…

Text truncated - open the document above for the full version.