Are radios required to be FCC certified?
- Thread starter escapeit
- Start date
- Status
I have always been told the a radio has to be FCC Accepted for the RF Band it operates in. All radios I have seen have had a sticker with a FCC ID and listed the RF Band it was accepted in.
It depends what you want to use them for... The Baofengs are generally marketed as ham radios which don't require any sort of certification to use. But, you require an operator's license to use them and they can only be operated in specific portions of the VHF and UHF ham bands.
Radios used for other services such as GMRS/FRS/MURS do require certification to be used legally. https://www.fcc.gov/general/family-radio-service-frs
However, I'd be willing to bet that a significant number of FRS/GMRS/MURS operators are using the cheapie Chinese Baofengs and their equivalents.
Radios used for other services such as GMRS/FRS/MURS do require certification to be used legally. https://www.fcc.gov/general/family-radio-service-frs
However, I'd be willing to bet that a significant number of FRS/GMRS/MURS operators are using the cheapie Chinese Baofengs and their equivalents.
clbsquared
Member
If you are using it to "receive only" then you're in good shape. However, if you are using it to transmit and receive, you should look into getting an FCC License. The Baofengs, to my knowledge are not an FCC accepted radio. That doesn't mean its illegal to use them though. But you should still look into licensing for whatever purpose you will be using the radios for.
nd5y
Member
bill4long
Member
BF-F8HP is legal for amateur radio transmitting. Not legal to transmit on anything else.
Of course, you will need an amateur radio license to transmit.
Of course, you will need an amateur radio license to transmit.
Aren't we talking about two different requirements here? FCC certification, based on my understanding, is granted to many types of devices. I believe, among other things, that it ensures that a device will not cause high amounts of RFI. Whereas, an FCC license is required for transmitting only on a device that has that capability.
Certifications are most commonly Part 15 which deals with spurious transmissions and rf radiation safety. And Part 15 applies to all kinds of devices, not just radios.
Type acceptance is FCC approval for use in various radio services. For our purposes here on RR, the common services would generally be Part 90 - public safety and business, Part 95 - personal radio services like FRS, GMRS, & CB, Part 80 - maritime and marine. There are others, but these are familiar to most RR folks. Type Acceptance means the radio has been tested and meets the FCC's minimum technical standards for a particular service and in many cases, a sub-part of that service.
These days, commercially available radios may share many technical attributes which are acceptable for more than one Part, but there are unique limitations. Part 80 VHF radios are pretty much the same as Part 90 in many ways but with one major exception. Part 80 has a requirement that the radio must continually monitor Channel 16, the calling and emergency channel. These services do not generally require operators licenses, and except for the license by rule exceptions in Part 95, they do require station licenses. Part 80 has some different rules based on size of the vessel, etc.
Part 87, the Amateur Radio Service is much different. It's designated for use by the hobby and experimental crowd. There are no type acceptances for Part 87, but there are technical requirements the operator must adhere to. All Part 87 operators must be licensed.
This is a very basic summary, and there are lots details that I have skimmed over. But for the purposes of the OP's question, his Baofengs are legit for use only in the Amateur service, and then only by a properly licensed operator. They're not type accepted for any other service and therefore should not be used for anything other than Amateur radio.
I am not being the police here, folks do as they please. But I think I've filled in some of the info that the OP is looking for.
FCC
The FCC does not play with amateur operators!
https://transition.fcc.gov/eb/AmateurActions/Welcome.html
The FCC does not play with amateur operators!
https://transition.fcc.gov/eb/AmateurActions/Welcome.html
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
FCC logo on it's own doesn't mean anything.
Part 15 would be required for the receiver since it's a mass produced radio, not a one off (or few off) home build.
Amateur radio TRANSMITTERS don't require type certification.
Transmitting anywhere else (with very few exceptions covered under Part 15) requires a type certification. This includes GMRS, FRS, Part 90, CB, MURS, etc. etc, etc.....
Bottom line is these radios are known to be problematic. FCC has pulled type certification on some of these cheap Chinese radios for failure to meet the requirements.
If you are going to use this radio as RECEIVE only, you're probably not going to cause any problems. I would NOT trust it as a transmitter.
You'd be entirely within your rights to send it back to Amazon and get your money back. Amazon should not be selling these in the USA if the radios do not have the proper type certifications.
Of course many ignore these rules and no one gets hurt. Your choice.
Devices can be FCC "Type 15" accepted for home or business use, meaning, they provide different amounts of RFI and how that has to be tolerated, or not. If that's a Type15 rating sticker, it has nothing really to do with the use of a TRANSMITTER, which is the usual "FCC radio" worry.
Radio receivers don't need any acceptance, anyone can use them.
Radio transmitters--and transceivers--don't need any acceptance/certification unless someone is using them to transmit. If you are a ham, you become personally liable for technical compliance if the radio is not type accepted. So the radio doesn't "need" acceptance, but then YOU become responsible for it, more so than if it had been accepted and simply drifted out.
For all other services, the transmitter needs to be type accepted (certified) before it can be used for transmissions.
To complicate things, NO radio may be advertised or sold by any vendor for any specific service (ham, frs, cb, anything) unless it has been type accepted/certified. If an Amazon vendor says "ham radio" and it hasn't gotten an FCC blessing? The use (by a ham) can be legal, while the advertising and sale are still ILLEGAL.
Simple enough?(G)
Most of the Chinese sdr radios, damn near all of them for every purpose, have no FCC blessing and have no business being advertised or sold. If a vendor cannot give you the FCC type acceptance/certification numbers for a specific radio and service? You can bet it wasn't submitted because it can't pass, for whatever reason.
The ARRL has been field testing ht's at the Dayton Hamvention for several years now. The brand name radios all still fell within FCC requirements, the Chinese SDRs all failed to meet specs. Anyone can argue all they please, but that still says something overwhelming about uncertified radios.
mm-
"Amazon should not be selling these in the USA if the radios do not have the proper type certifications. "
Sadly, there's probably nothing illegal in what Amazon is doing. It is not illegal to sell these, even though advertising them for a specific purpose may be illegal, and of course, that's the seller not Amazon that is doing the wrong. Amazon might have a moral or ethical obligation to ban them, but Jeff Bezos doesn't seem to have much grasp on the finer points of those issues. Legally? They're just selling radios. Sadly, they're probably allowed to do that.
Radio receivers don't need any acceptance, anyone can use them.
Radio transmitters--and transceivers--don't need any acceptance/certification unless someone is using them to transmit. If you are a ham, you become personally liable for technical compliance if the radio is not type accepted. So the radio doesn't "need" acceptance, but then YOU become responsible for it, more so than if it had been accepted and simply drifted out.
For all other services, the transmitter needs to be type accepted (certified) before it can be used for transmissions.
To complicate things, NO radio may be advertised or sold by any vendor for any specific service (ham, frs, cb, anything) unless it has been type accepted/certified. If an Amazon vendor says "ham radio" and it hasn't gotten an FCC blessing? The use (by a ham) can be legal, while the advertising and sale are still ILLEGAL.
Simple enough?(G)
Most of the Chinese sdr radios, damn near all of them for every purpose, have no FCC blessing and have no business being advertised or sold. If a vendor cannot give you the FCC type acceptance/certification numbers for a specific radio and service? You can bet it wasn't submitted because it can't pass, for whatever reason.
The ARRL has been field testing ht's at the Dayton Hamvention for several years now. The brand name radios all still fell within FCC requirements, the Chinese SDRs all failed to meet specs. Anyone can argue all they please, but that still says something overwhelming about uncertified radios.
mm-
"Amazon should not be selling these in the USA if the radios do not have the proper type certifications. "
Sadly, there's probably nothing illegal in what Amazon is doing. It is not illegal to sell these, even though advertising them for a specific purpose may be illegal, and of course, that's the seller not Amazon that is doing the wrong. Amazon might have a moral or ethical obligation to ban them, but Jeff Bezos doesn't seem to have much grasp on the finer points of those issues. Legally? They're just selling radios. Sadly, they're probably allowed to do that.
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
The FCC would disagree with this statement:
eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations
Labelling requirements are laid out here:
eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations
Again, the FCC would disagree with you on this:
eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations
Specifically:
"(c) Unless specifically exempted, the operation or marketing of an intentional or unintentional radiator that is not in compliance with the administrative and technical provisions in this part, including prior Commission authorization or verification, as appropriate, is prohibited under section 302 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and subpart I of part 2 of this chapter. The equipment authorization and verification procedures are detailed in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter."
Amateur radio transceivers would require Part 15 certification on their receivers. While it's true the transmitters do not require certification, the receivers do for mass produced radios.
See above about:
" Unless specifically exempted, the operation or marketing of an intentional or unintentional radiator that is not in compliance with the administrative and technical provisions in this part, including prior Commission authorization or verification, as appropriate, is prohibited under section 302 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and subpart I of part 2 of this chapter. "
Amazon is marketing these non-type accepted radios. Truck stops have been busted for selling non-type accepted CB's. Amazon is basically doing the same thing. Being an online seller doesn't exempt them from this.
Look at the dates of the enforcement actions, and more to the point the sheer lack of any meaningful quantity of them. The one at the very top was one of the most serious violators, yet it too decades to "bust him."
mm-
That link is for "Type 15" acceptance, which has to do with RFI and "radiators" and has got nothing to do specifically with radio receivers. Yes, like everything including LED light bulbs, a radio receiver can be an RFI source and needs Type15 acceptance. But that's such a cruel joke, it has nothing to do with what we were discussing--which is the acceptance or certification of radios, for the purposes of "radio" sales and use.
The FCCs widespread and long term refusal to take action against Type15 violations and their sellers and makers, is well known. They're too busy selling airwave auctions to give a damn about Type15 anyway.
That link is for "Type 15" acceptance, which has to do with RFI and "radiators" and has got nothing to do specifically with radio receivers. Yes, like everything including LED light bulbs, a radio receiver can be an RFI source and needs Type15 acceptance. But that's such a cruel joke, it has nothing to do with what we were discussing--which is the acceptance or certification of radios, for the purposes of "radio" sales and use.
The FCCs widespread and long term refusal to take action against Type15 violations and their sellers and makers, is well known. They're too busy selling airwave auctions to give a damn about Type15 anyway.
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
I think you might need to go back and read some of those links. Part 15 does specifically apply to receivers, most of which will radiate some RF from their local oscillators. A radio receiver is specified as an "unintentional radiator" because of this. If you look at the back of any proper receiver you'll see the FCC notice.
Very specifically it calls out RECEIVERS:
Type of Device Equipment authorization required
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superregenerative receiver Declaration of Conformity or Certification.
Scanning receiver Certification.
All other receivers subject to part 15 Declaration of Conformity or Certification.
Also:
"(b) Only those receivers that operate (tune) within the frequency range of 30-960 MHz, CB receivers and radar detectors are subject to the authorizations shown in paragraph (a) of this section. However, receivers indicated as being subject to Declaration of Conformity that are contained within a transceiver, the transmitter portion of which is subject to certification, shall be authorized under the verification procedure. Receivers operating above 960 MHz or below 30 MHz, except for radar detectors and CB receivers, are exempt from complying with the technical provisions of this part but are subject to §15.5."
Lack of action on behalf of the FCC does not negate the letter of the law. Ignorance of the law has been proven to not be a valid defense.
Lack of consistent or equal enforcement has been sucessfully deployed as defense in matters of law. I don't know of any cases specific to the FCC and am not bothering to look any up at this time. However, the FCC wouldn't be advertising any cases where they got their hats handed to them. They seek permenant injunctions against publishing those cases. They don't want the little people to get any look behind that thin curtain.
All of that said, I don't fundamentally disagree with your posts. For the unlucky soul that gets singled out by Uncle Charlie, there's a whole lot of time and, perhaps, expense ahead of them. The question for most of us might be, "Do you feel lucky?"
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
True, and usually for good reasons, but I don't think that applies when we look at the FCC, at least not that I've ever seen.
The FCC rules are well published, but they tend to be a bit hard for the layperson to understand. Unfortunately some use the ignorance of the law, coupled with lack of honesty by some radio manufacturers/testing labs (sometimes the same thing) as a reason to do whatever they want.
I'm mostly OK if someone honestly speaks up and says that they understand the rules and are choosing to violate them anyway. That truthfulness actually sits better with me than those that claim the rules say something they don't and then try to use flawed data to claim they are operating legally.
What I've seen in many cases is amateur radio operators read part 97 and only part 97 and are under the impression that they understand the rules. Other rule parts apply and often those get ignored. Part 2, Part 15 and in some cases, Part 90 should all be read and understood by amateur radio operators and anyone else that works in the industry. Unfortunately the ARRL has dumbed things down too much.
Accurate, right there.
I learned at a young age to not play "luck". It rarely works out for me, personally. I'd rather toe the line and not have to worry about looking over my shoulder.
In my line of work using luck as any sort of tool usually ends up with someone dead or me having to work very long hours to fix something.
Yep, I'm the same way. I try to follow laws wherever reasonably possible. I don't tend to make excuses when I choose not to, or can't, comply. In my lifetime, I've had sucess complying with most laws on a daily basis. Then again, alway expect me to remain silent when it comes to specifics about the very few exceptions.
It drives me batty when government entities and others rely heavily on digests of laws. They are rarely accurate and usually cannot be comprehensive in scope by their very nature. Reading the actual laws/regulations and reading case law is the only way I am ever confident in my own choices.
What is legal, and what is NOT legal for our Chinese radios.
This article by KD8DVR pretty much sums up what is and what isn't regarding Chinese radios.
What is legal, and what is NOT legal for our Chinese radios? Repeaterbook.com Blog, 01/02/2015 by KD8DVR
<http://repeaterbook.com/b2e/blog1.php/what-is-legal-and-what>
What is legal, and what is NOT legal for our Chinese radios?
Ask ten people, get ten answers.
OK... A radio needs Part 95 acceptance for FRS, GMRS, MURS. No Baofeng has this. I'm aware of only ONE Wouxun model that is approved for Part 95(a) GMRS use. Anytone has two models that are pending GMRS and MURS certification. Currently, legal issues have suspended the previous certification.
For commercial use, radios need Part 90 approval. Most Baofengs HAVE this. Many Wouxun radios have this. A few Puxing radios have this. Most Anytone radios have this. GMRS radios need Part 95A certification. MURS radios require Part 95D certification. FRS radios require Part 95B certification.
Check on the back of the radio for the "FCC ID" sticker. This FCC ID can be looked up to see what rule parts the radio is certified for. An FCC ID label is required to be placed on the back of the radio.
SOME commercial radios have more than one rule part. You'd see Part 90 AND Part 95(a). Then these would be legal on GMRS. Not FRS, Part 95(b) or MURS Part 95(d)? Because FRS radios have a maximum of 500 mw and non removable antennas. Murs has a 2 watt maximum, and these radios exceed that on high power. Of course, you then have the field programmability, which oddly enough even violates the Part 90 approval... figure that one out!
For Amateur radio use, NO Part 97 approval is required. I don't even think there is an equipment certification for Part 97. Part 97 primarily covers operating rules, although there are some equipment rules. Since amateur operators can use *almost* all equipment, other rule parts dealing with equipment come into play. Part 97 does cover proper engineering practices that are required to make sure equipment is within tolerance.
For amateur equipment, Part 15 largely applies on VHF and UHF radios. This is primarily for radios with a scanning function, to certify the radios cannot monitor cellular, as well as receiver products interfering and receiving interference from consumer products.
If you take your Icom, Kenwood, etc., radios and enter the FCC ID into the FCC database, you will see it likely listed as "Part 15 scanning receiver." That's why you see some new equipment like on Universal being listed "This radio has not received FCC approval." Not waiting for Part 97 approval; but waiting for that Part 15 receiver compliance.
The applicable rule here is 15.101 Paragraphs (a) and (B)
Most Part 90 radios.... Which are commercial radios, can be used on the amateur bands legally. That's why all these Baofengs, Wouxuns, Puxings, etc., have taken off. Wouxun started it off by being the first Chinese radio to get FCC approval. All these other radios floating around at the time had no approval. Of course, when this hit the net with a firestorm and sales took off, other manufacturers finally got into the fray, and we now have the mess we are in today.
You see all the hams with Motorola, Midland, and other radios on the ham bands. They are Part 90 radios, which makes them legal for amateur operators. They have been certified for use in the USA, based on technical standards for commercial use. Amateurs may use any equipment certified under any other rule part. The reverse is NOT true. Amateurs are expected to utilize proper engineering practices and are granted wide latitude for operation.
What about all those Quangshengs, and oddball brands. Forget it. If they have no FCC ID, they are not legal for use on ANY radio service in the USA.... Including amateur. This may, at first thought, contradict my previous statements regarding proper amateur engineering practices. The answer to that is simple: The radios have not passed any type of scrutiny in regards to spectral purity, or any other factors governing equipment for use in the USA.
This will not, by any means, stop the debate. If I get one person to consider the rules, then that is a victory. I will hear 100 different reasons why I am wrong. This is an interpretation. I've tried to be as literal as possible, with as little personal bias as possible. I could spoon feed each and every applicable regulation, and draw pictures. I'd still be doubted. At any rate, at least I'd cause a pause to consider. For the record, I own several brands of radios, such as Baofeng and Puxing.
The point, really, is to make people stop and consider the fact that ALL radio services have rules, regulations and technical standards. Not all radios will work with other radios. Very few can be used by the general public.
[Update 11-27-2015 for Part 15 clarifications and Part 90 corrections]
Note: the FCC approval process only applies to commercially manufactured equipment. Homebrew stuff is exempt.
On my web page below, I have some detail in the exact provisions of the rules:
http://kd8dvr.dodropin.org/part15
Of course, feel free to consult the FCC regulations if you don't want to take my word on this:
https://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/rules-regulations-title-47
For UK Users:
Baofeng, Wouxun, TYT, and many other radios are ILLEGAL on PMR446.
For Australian users:
Baofeng, Wouxun, TYT and most if not all Cheap Chinese Radios, are illegal in Australia for ALL PURPOSES! This includes amateur and commercial use. The ACMA will and has confiscated many radios. Unlikw many nations, the ACMA is an active enforcement agency.
John, KD8DVR Ohio Repeaterbook Admin.
This article by KD8DVR pretty much sums up what is and what isn't regarding Chinese radios.
What is legal, and what is NOT legal for our Chinese radios? Repeaterbook.com Blog, 01/02/2015 by KD8DVR
<http://repeaterbook.com/b2e/blog1.php/what-is-legal-and-what>
What is legal, and what is NOT legal for our Chinese radios?
Ask ten people, get ten answers.
OK... A radio needs Part 95 acceptance for FRS, GMRS, MURS. No Baofeng has this. I'm aware of only ONE Wouxun model that is approved for Part 95(a) GMRS use. Anytone has two models that are pending GMRS and MURS certification. Currently, legal issues have suspended the previous certification.
For commercial use, radios need Part 90 approval. Most Baofengs HAVE this. Many Wouxun radios have this. A few Puxing radios have this. Most Anytone radios have this. GMRS radios need Part 95A certification. MURS radios require Part 95D certification. FRS radios require Part 95B certification.
Check on the back of the radio for the "FCC ID" sticker. This FCC ID can be looked up to see what rule parts the radio is certified for. An FCC ID label is required to be placed on the back of the radio.
SOME commercial radios have more than one rule part. You'd see Part 90 AND Part 95(a). Then these would be legal on GMRS. Not FRS, Part 95(b) or MURS Part 95(d)? Because FRS radios have a maximum of 500 mw and non removable antennas. Murs has a 2 watt maximum, and these radios exceed that on high power. Of course, you then have the field programmability, which oddly enough even violates the Part 90 approval... figure that one out!
For Amateur radio use, NO Part 97 approval is required. I don't even think there is an equipment certification for Part 97. Part 97 primarily covers operating rules, although there are some equipment rules. Since amateur operators can use *almost* all equipment, other rule parts dealing with equipment come into play. Part 97 does cover proper engineering practices that are required to make sure equipment is within tolerance.
For amateur equipment, Part 15 largely applies on VHF and UHF radios. This is primarily for radios with a scanning function, to certify the radios cannot monitor cellular, as well as receiver products interfering and receiving interference from consumer products.
If you take your Icom, Kenwood, etc., radios and enter the FCC ID into the FCC database, you will see it likely listed as "Part 15 scanning receiver." That's why you see some new equipment like on Universal being listed "This radio has not received FCC approval." Not waiting for Part 97 approval; but waiting for that Part 15 receiver compliance.
The applicable rule here is 15.101 Paragraphs (a) and (B)
Most Part 90 radios.... Which are commercial radios, can be used on the amateur bands legally. That's why all these Baofengs, Wouxuns, Puxings, etc., have taken off. Wouxun started it off by being the first Chinese radio to get FCC approval. All these other radios floating around at the time had no approval. Of course, when this hit the net with a firestorm and sales took off, other manufacturers finally got into the fray, and we now have the mess we are in today.
You see all the hams with Motorola, Midland, and other radios on the ham bands. They are Part 90 radios, which makes them legal for amateur operators. They have been certified for use in the USA, based on technical standards for commercial use. Amateurs may use any equipment certified under any other rule part. The reverse is NOT true. Amateurs are expected to utilize proper engineering practices and are granted wide latitude for operation.
What about all those Quangshengs, and oddball brands. Forget it. If they have no FCC ID, they are not legal for use on ANY radio service in the USA.... Including amateur. This may, at first thought, contradict my previous statements regarding proper amateur engineering practices. The answer to that is simple: The radios have not passed any type of scrutiny in regards to spectral purity, or any other factors governing equipment for use in the USA.
This will not, by any means, stop the debate. If I get one person to consider the rules, then that is a victory. I will hear 100 different reasons why I am wrong. This is an interpretation. I've tried to be as literal as possible, with as little personal bias as possible. I could spoon feed each and every applicable regulation, and draw pictures. I'd still be doubted. At any rate, at least I'd cause a pause to consider. For the record, I own several brands of radios, such as Baofeng and Puxing.
The point, really, is to make people stop and consider the fact that ALL radio services have rules, regulations and technical standards. Not all radios will work with other radios. Very few can be used by the general public.
[Update 11-27-2015 for Part 15 clarifications and Part 90 corrections]
Note: the FCC approval process only applies to commercially manufactured equipment. Homebrew stuff is exempt.
On my web page below, I have some detail in the exact provisions of the rules:
http://kd8dvr.dodropin.org/part15
Of course, feel free to consult the FCC regulations if you don't want to take my word on this:
https://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/rules-regulations-title-47
For UK Users:
Baofeng, Wouxun, TYT, and many other radios are ILLEGAL on PMR446.
For Australian users:
Baofeng, Wouxun, TYT and most if not all Cheap Chinese Radios, are illegal in Australia for ALL PURPOSES! This includes amateur and commercial use. The ACMA will and has confiscated many radios. Unlikw many nations, the ACMA is an active enforcement agency.
John, KD8DVR Ohio Repeaterbook Admin.
- Status
Similar threads
