FCC UWB Rule Rewrite: Scanner Interference Comments Due Dec. 2

The FCC opened a rulemaking on Nov. 2, 2026 that could loosen the technical limits on unlicensed ultra-wideband devices, and it is asking a question that scanner listeners should care about: how much weaker may incumbent reception become before the Commission acts. Docketed as ET Docket No. 26-245 (FCC 26-66, 91 FR 68912), the notice proposes to rewrite the Part 15 Subpart F ultra-wideband rules on petitions from Robert Bosch LLC and the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. Comments are due Dec. 2, 2026, and reply comments Jan. 4, 2027.

Nothing is decided. This is a proposed rule with an open comment window and no vote scheduled. But it is the one live docket this quarter where the FCC formally asks whether its measurement framework should change in ways that raise instantaneous power spectral density, and whether those changes affect "aggregate emissions, and receiver susceptibility" in incumbent bands.

What the FCC proposed on Nov. 2

The Federal Register notice asks whether the Commission's 2002 measurement framework, written before modern UWB modulation existed, should be revised. The specific concern raised in the petitions is instantaneous power spectral density: how much energy a UWB device may concentrate in a very short interval.

That is an engineering question with a listener-facing consequence. Limits written in 2002 assumed a certain pulse shape and duty cycle. Modern UWB modulation does not look like that, and a framework built around average behavior can understate what a receiver actually experiences at a given moment.

Why receiver susceptibility is the question that matters

Receiver susceptibility is the machinery that decides how clean scanner audio stays. A receiver is susceptible when a weak signal in its passband is degraded by energy it did not intend to hear. Regulatory limits are set partly by how much of that degradation an incumbent service is expected to tolerate.

If the FCC raises permitted instantaneous power spectral density without revisiting receiver susceptibility, the burden of proof shifts onto the incumbent: prove harm after the fact rather than prevent it in the rule. If the Commission treats susceptibility as part of the analysis, limits stay anchored to what existing receivers can survive.

The services the FCC actually names

Read the document before writing anything dramatic. The services the notice identifies as needing protection are:

• Aeronautical radionavigation
• GPS and other GNSS
• Mobile satellite service
• Radar altimeters
• Weather radar

Scanner receivers are not on that list. No one at the FCC is proposing to degrade police scanner reception, and any article that says otherwise is inventing a threat. The honest version is narrower and still worth your attention: UWB is an unlicensed underlay. Its emissions are low, spread wide, and they accumulate. They sit underneath the VHF and UHF bands that scanners tune, across the same spectrum that public safety radio uses.

How UWB noise reaches a scanner

UWB devices transmit across a very wide swath at very low power. Individually, the contribution is small. The aggregate effect is what the notice asks about, and aggregate is the right word for a listener: one vehicle with UWB sensors is not the issue, a parking structure full of them is a different question.

Three things decide whether a listener ever notices:

• Distance. UWB emissions fall off fast. A device in the next room is not the same as a device in the next county.
• Front-end quality. A receiver with a good front end rejects out-of-band energy that a cheap front end folds into the passband.
• Antenna and location. Height and a directional antenna buy margin that no rulemaking can take away.

That is why this docket is a slow-burn issue for scanner owners, not an emergency. The rules set the floor on interference. Your setup sets the rest.

How to file a comment before Dec. 2

The comment window is 22 days from the Nov. 10 filing date that triggered this coverage, closing Dec. 2, 2026. Filing is public and does not require a lawyer:

1. Open the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System and search for ET Docket No. 26-245.
2. File under the "Express" category if you are commenting as an individual.
3. State the docket number, your interest as a scanner listener, and one concrete point. The useful point is that receiver susceptibility should be analyzed before any increase in instantaneous power spectral density is adopted.
4. Save the confirmation number. Comments are part of the public record and are read.

Keep it short and specific. A paragraph that names the docket and the question the Commission asked carries more weight than a page of complaint. If you also want to track how the FCC's other radio actions affect scanners, we cover those in the 450 MHz drone band proposal and the Covered List rulemaking.

What happens next

Reply comments close Jan. 4, 2027. After that the Commission can adopt, modify or drop the proposal. There is no vote on the calendar, which means the practical window for influence is the comment record, not a hearing.

In the meantime, nothing about your scanner changes. Current Part 15 Subpart F limits remain in force, and no UWB device may legally exceed them. If your reception is worse than it used to be, interference from a nearby device is a complaint you can file with the FCC, and it is a separate process from this rulemaking. Start with our nine-step reception troubleshooting guide before assuming the spectrum is at fault.

Practical hedge: a receiver with a solid front end and a decent antenna keeps working through interference that flattens a cheap handheld. The Baofeng UV-5R Mini is the compact option we ship pre-programmed to your zip code, and it is the radio most listeners start with.

FAQ

Is the FCC banning or restricting police scanners?

No. ET Docket 26-245 concerns unlicensed ultra-wideband devices under Part 15 Subpart F. Scanners are not the subject of the proceeding.

Will this rulemaking make scanner reception worse?

Not automatically. The notice asks whether changes to the 2002 measurement framework would affect aggregate emissions and receiver susceptibility. Any effect depends on what the Commission adopts, if anything.

When are comments due?

Comments are due Dec. 2, 2026. Reply comments are due Jan. 4, 2027.

Do I need a lawyer to file a comment?

No. Individuals can file an express comment in the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System under ET Docket No. 26-245.

What services does the FCC say need protection?

Aeronautical radionavigation, GPS and other GNSS, mobile satellite service, radar altimeters and weather radar.

Has the FCC voted on this yet?

No. This is a proposed rule only, with the comment period open and no vote scheduled.

Bottom line: The FCC is taking comments until Dec. 2, 2026 on whether weaker receiver protections are acceptable as it rewrites the ultra-wideband rules. Scanner receivers are not named in the docket, so the risk to your reception is indirect: UWB emissions sit under the VHF and UHF bands as an unlicensed underlay and accumulate. If you want the Commission to analyze receiver susceptibility before raising instantaneous power limits, say so in ET Docket 26-245 before the window closes.