169.8125 P25 being used in Napa County?

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,875
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
I am picking up P25 traffic on 169.8125 with a NAC of 430. The reason I scan this frequency is because it is used by Lassen National Park, and that is listed in the DB. However, this signal comes in way too clear to be from Lassen and has a different NAC.

From what I can tell this is at Lake Berryessa in Napa County. I haven't been in that area in years, so I wonder if this is a state park or other government recreation site. I looked up Oak Shores and found that in recreation.gov. I did all the basic searches here on RR and only find Lassen. I'm hoping someone closer can confirm this and fill in the details. Thanks!
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
11,950
Location
Taxachusetts
$430 has been reported in the past for CA for the BoR
but that was 166.9250 and 172.6250, a likely target tho..

My notes say
166.9250 Solano Project and Lake Berryessa Project
172.6250 Angels Camp - New Melones Dam

maybe this is a repeater out for 166.9250 ?
Monticello Dam is operated by the US Bureau of Reclamation. So, that's a possibility.
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,875
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
I am clearly hearing both sides of each communication on a single frequency. I've been hearing this for a couple of weeks but expected it was Lassen NP. Only recently I looked at the display to see the signal strength at max (which I wouldn't suspect for Lassen) and jot down the NAC. I am very familiar with Lassen NP, and now I've heard discussions regarding places that I didn't recognize are in the park. Upon doing a little search, that's where I found these locations at Lake Berryessa in Napa County. The talks are in regard to visitors, recreation and related things which are not BOR.

Can someone tell me what agency runs the recreation at Lake Berryessa? I found I could reserve at reservation.gov and I'm fairly certain this is that agency.
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
11,950
Location
Taxachusetts

I am clearly hearing both sides of each communication on a single frequency. I've been hearing this for a couple of weeks but expected it was Lassen NP. Only recently I looked at the display to see the signal strength at max (which I wouldn't suspect for Lassen) and jot down the NAC. I am very familiar with Lassen NP, and now I've heard discussions regarding places that I didn't recognize are in the park. Upon doing a little search, that's where I found these locations at Lake Berryessa in Napa County. The talks are in regard to visitors, recreation and related things which are not BOR.

Can someone tell me what agency runs the recreation at Lake Berryessa? I found I could reserve at reservation.gov and I'm fairly certain this is that agency.
 

norcalscan

Interoperating Spurious Emissions
Joined
Feb 7, 2003
Messages
400
Location
The real northern california
That freq for Lassen is Turner Mtn, which is a very significant 6800ft peak on the south side, so I’m a bit shocked to see it reassigned in Napa, unless they think every user is at low elevation and counting on immediate terrain for protection. But I have zero faith in the NTIA assignments up here with what I’ve seen, govt work. :cautious: There might be some antenna isolation on Turner as well to focus towards the park some more vs full omni (which other omni stations easily get in from Stockton or further with any hint of elevation or power.)
I too have 166.925 for Berryessa BOR. In my master list for norcal programming for me, I have no other instance of 169.8125 besides Lassen Turner.
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,875
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
Thank you. I didn't realize that BOR ran sites for recreation. What I am hearing is clearly BOR @ Lake Berryessa. I finally figured out where BOR frequencies are listed, and this specific site is not listed. I also suspect this is managed by NTIA and therefore won't show up as an FCC license.

While I may be able to receive Lassen and Berryessa from here, they likely don't interfere with each other. At minimum, they're using different NAC codes (lol). For me it's like picking up UHF from San Joaquin county and Yuba-Sutter counties. Each is close for me, but not close to each other.
 

norcalscan

Interoperating Spurious Emissions
Joined
Feb 7, 2003
Messages
400
Location
The real northern california
Here's a floating BOR record in the Napa County area for Berryessa, not listed in the statewide list gmclam linked to. One saving grace with NTIA assignments, usually the feds assign a NAC to an agency, so most of BOR looks like they use NAC 430. That can help determine an unknown user.
 

es93546

A Member Twice
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
463
Location
East of the Sierra Crest-Right Side of CA on Map
I am picking up P25 traffic on 169.8125 with a NAC of 430. The reason I scan this frequency is because it is used by Lassen National Park, and that is listed in the DB. However, this signal comes in way too clear to be from Lassen and has a different NAC.

From what I can tell this is at Lake Berryessa in Napa County. I haven't been in that area in years, so I wonder if this is a state park or other government recreation site. I looked up Oak Shores and found that in recreation.gov. I did all the basic searches here on RR and only find Lassen. I'm hoping someone closer can confirm this and fill in the details. Thanks!
It would not be a state park since it is a federal frequency. California State Parks uses 700/800 MHz in that area. I'm not at all familiar as to how recreation at BOR sites is managed. From what I've seen in other areas BOR major reservoirs are designated National Recreation Areas, with NPS management. Another thing to research.

Just realized, the 169.8125 could be a rebanding of 166.925 to fit the new repeater output range in the fed VHF band. :unsure:
You beat me to the punch on that. There are many agencies that did not meet the January 2019 deadline for the new VHF High federal government band reallocation. I've noticed the Dept. of the Interior seems to be lagging behind others, most notably the U.S. Forest Service. They seem to be nearly complete with the effort.
 
Top