Interpretation of FCC Part 97 Emergency Distress Operations Rules

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

You cannot use an amateur radio call sign on a part 90 frequency. It is not value there. You need a part 90 license. Your amateur privileges give you no operating authority outside of part 97. None. Please consult the regulations of any radio service you operate on or plan on operating on. An amateur license makes no one entitled to special exceptions to other radio services.

AntiSquid Disclaimer: All posted content is personal opinion only and may not imply fact or accusation.

She just did it, and legally as well. Some folks just don't get it!

 

[nd5y]

Amateur stations (and others) in or within 50 nautical miles of Alaska are allowed to use the Alaska Emergency Frequency 5167.5 kHz.
See eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations and
eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Amateur stations (and others) in or within 50 nautical miles of Alaska are allowed to use the Alaska Emergency Frequency 5167.5 kHz.
See eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations and
eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations

Right also from Part 90!

§ 90.253 Use of frequency 5167.5 kHz.

§ 90.253 Use of frequency 5167.5 kHz.

The frequency 5167.5 kHz may be used by any station authorized under this part to communicate with any other station in the State of Alaska for emergency communications. The maximum power permitted is 150 watts peak envelope power (PEP). All stations operating on this frequency must be located in or within 50 nautical miles (92.6 km) of the State of Alaska. This frequency may also be used by stations authorized in the Alaska-private fixed service for calling and listening, but only for establishing communication before switching to another frequency.

 

[mmckenna]

She just did it, and legally as well. Some folks just don't get it!

Exactly.

Which always made me think that if the FCC would specifically spell this out in the FCC Part 97 rules to allow interoperability with other non-amateurs, then they'd have the justification to specifically spell it out for anything else they wanted to.
Since they didn't specifically do that, it sort of makes me think they don't want it happening.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Exactly.

Which always made me think that if the FCC would specifically spell this out in the FCC Part 97 rules to allow interoperability with other non-amateurs, then they'd have the justification to specifically spell it out for anything else they wanted to.
Since they didn't specifically do that, it sort of makes me think they don't want it happening.

I think a problem most people have regarding their personal freedoms and the law is that they assume that if something is not specifically permitted that it is prohibited. Guess what, you probably have a lot more freedom that you think you do. To the annoyance of some, those freedoms are tested every day by some folks.

 

[jonwienke]

In a free society, if it's not forbidden, it's legal.

If you have to get permission in writing before something is allowed, you're no longer free.

 

[mmckenna]

I understand what you both are saying, but I don't agree with the conclusion. The FCC clearly spelled out the Alaska Emergency channel for a reason, to make sure it's understood.
The other parts of Part 97, Part 90, etc. clearly spell out why it's not legal to use amateur gear for non-amateur radio frequencies.
So, it is written, but some chose to take a very loose interpretation of it.

So be it. I'm not going to stand in anyones way.

 

[SCPD]

Hey Guys, the very last thing I wanted was to re-ignite this emotional topic..... that said, I do appreciate the validative support, especially your's, RFI-EMI Guy.... .
.
And KD8DVR... what can I say??...... only that I won't engage.
.
I came back here, not to talk about modifying ham radios to use on non-authorized Part 90 (and other Parts) frequencies, but to make the simple point that a Ham radio can be 'hacked' to operate on a non (exclusively) ham frequency in the Parts 90, 87,80 - and it is perfectly, perfectly ! - legal.
.
It is legal to do, it is legal to possess, and it is legal to operate. Don't give me any gumpf about 'illegally modifying ham radios'- if a radio can be modified for 5167.5, it can be modified for any frequency- and don't give me "But this is HF"-- this is a Ham Radio we are talking about; mod'ing a V/UHF ham radio is no different-- just know the laws and operate it legally, be it Part 97.401, 403, 405- especially 403, 405--- and others similar portions of Part 90, 87, 80 etc..... We certainly have hashed that to death here over the past months.
.
If there is a modern, commerically available Ham radio that comes un-modified that can operate on 5167.5Khz,- tell me about it... If you need, want,- what ever- and are legally able to* operate on this frequency- you must therefore "hack' said radio to operate on these other FCC Parts.
I apologize if my sentence structure is a tad stilted, a tad repetitive- it is because I want my intentions and meanings made as clear as possible- and this simple, repetitive approach is my attempt at trying (beating a dead horse?) to get this idea thru......(sigh....)... now I can collapse.
.
All that said, we (plural) had some fun operating on 5167.5. I only checked into a net briefly, but my companion, "Barbi," (also our chief engineer- and a Ham) stayed on for a lot longer, much much longer than is legally specified in 97.401 - she chatted away several nights with new found friends... Oh, the charm of a woman's voice out in the frozen wild!...
If any of you are familar with 123.45Mhz and how, outside the confines of 'civilisation' it can resemble an old fashioned Party Line- then you know what Part 80 channels can be like out in the "Great White Lonesome." Strictly-by-the-Law Legal??... (laughing!)... tell it to the Sour Doughs in the Bush.
.
And did I mention the old White Alice installation?... ahhh!- maybe another time...
.
..................................CF
.
.
* Please read the portion of Part 97.401 cited-- Alaska, 50 miles....etc. And remember, any class of amateur license can operate on 5167.5-- even a Novice

 

[mmckenna]

If any of you are familar with 123.45Mhz and how, outside the confines of 'civilisation' it can resemble an old fashioned Party Line- then you know what Part 80 channels can be like out in the "Great White Lonesome." Strictly-by-the-Law Legal??... (laughing!)... tell it to the Sour Doughs in the Bush.

Yeah, very common. Many VHF marine radios in vehicles, homes, etc where I used to live. Most homes had a marine VHF whip mounted on it somewhere.

Very common to call a Taxi on marine VHF in most towns. Sort of became what CB never did.
.

And did I mention the old White Alice installation?... ahhh!- maybe another time...

I'd love to see some photos of the White Alice station if you've got them. I visited the one on the mountain above Kodiak back in the early 90's. I've heard the remnants were finally removed a few years back.

 

[n5ims]

If there is a modern, commerically available Ham radio that comes un-modified that can operate on 5167.5Khz,- tell me about it... If you need, want,- what ever- and are legally able to* operate on this frequency- you must therefore "hack' said radio to operate on these other FCC Parts.

It appears that the Yaesu FT 991A (Yaesu FT-991A, Yaesu FT991A Transceiver) may allow this directly using a menu setting. Other current and earlier Yaesu radios may have similar menu settings.

https://mans.io/files/viewer/416003/108

151 EMERGENCY FREQ TX (ENABLE/DISABLE)

 

[DaveNF2G]

I think the takeaway from coyote's postings is that the operation took place on a specific frequency under specific rules about that frequency that enable operations there that would not be lawful on other frequencies.

The rest is presumptions, assumptions and rationalizations.

 

[SCPD]

Well, Dave (NF2G), that summation is not exactly what I tried to get across... but I appreciate your interpretation.
.

I will post one last missive on this subject, then take a final, Final! bow and "Exit Stage Right." --(and do I hear the applause and the final gasps of the audience's relief?... )
.
I offer this up, not as a flight into 19th century poetry, but to make my point. This poem is about this whole subject- taken from the day the topic was first posted, up until this very moment.... Remember?.. it started with modify'ing ham radios for use on non ham frequencies... and, oh, how far afield it has often strayed!
So, without further adieu, I offer up this poem. Those with poetry in their souls will understand it right off-- the others? To those I say (laughing!) "fear not, I shall not tread these boards again!"
.
___________________________________________________________________

Blind Men and the Elephant
.............A Poem by John Godfrey Sax (1816-1887)

It was six men of Indostan,
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approach'd the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, -"Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear,
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"

The Third approach'd the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," -quoth he- "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee:
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," -quoth he,-
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said- "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Then, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," -quoth he,- "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

.

So, oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean;
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
.
__________________________________________________

This ancient parable, used today, is a warning for people that promote absolute truth. The simple reason is -- our perceptions and life experiences can lead to limited access and overreaching misinterpretations. How can a person with a limited touch of truth turn that into the one and only version of all reality? Be careful from whence we draw our conclusions, Amigos.
.

And now I retire from the field... This has been quite a Party, No?? (smiles!)----- from here on, its all your's, Gentlemen!......
.
................................CF

 

[Hans13]

Bravo, CF!.

 

[robertmac]

And a couple of days ago, I heard our local Fire Department say someone had hacked into their radio system and was reporting a severely injured party involved in a snowmobile accident. Mind you, this was only when they were on a practise session.

 

[prcguy]

I'll stir the pot here with some more controversial ham radios on non ham frequencies. The US Coast Guard Auxiliary allows the use of amateur radios on its non amateur HF networks, mmckenna should know this.

I have two licenses issued to me by the US Coast Guard, a fixed station and mobile station, on NTIA controlled HF frequencies and my non part 90 amateur radios are listed on the forms for the license. The USCGAUX allows non part 90 radios on HF but do require part 90 radios on their non marine band part 80 VHF frequencies. In contrast, the Civil Air Patrol requires part 90 certified radios on their HF networks.
prcguy

 

[N8OHU]

I'll stir the pot here with some more controversial ham radios on non ham frequencies. The US Coast Guard Auxiliary allows the use of amateur radios on its non amateur HF networks, mmckenna should know this.

I have two licenses issued to me by the US Coast Guard, a fixed station and mobile station, on NTIA controlled HF frequencies and my non part 90 amateur radios are listed on the forms for the license. The USCGAUX allows non part 90 radios on HF but do require part 90 radios on their non marine band part 80 VHF frequencies. In contrast, the Civil Air Patrol requires part 90 certified radios on their HF networks.
prcguy

Not controversial to me, since you clearly have the authorization to use those radios on non-ham frequencies.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[mmckenna]

The US Coast Guard Auxiliary allows the use of amateur radios on its non amateur HF networks, mmckenna should know this.

Thanks, but not really.
I got out in 94. I was never a radioman in the Coast Guard, but I did know a few. I was active duty, never in the auxiliary and never worked with the auxiliary

Overall, I don't have a problem with responsible use of radios, no matter what type acceptance they have.
My reason for participating in these conversations is twofold:

1. New amateurs need to be giving proper guidance. Since this particular website attracts a lot of new amateurs, scanner enthusiasts, other hobbyists, etc. Providing accurate information that can be backed up with a link to the source can be helpful. We all know that there are a lot of nuances to the rules. We all know there are times when the rules don't fit well with reality. The understanding and knowledge of the hows, whys and whens comes with time. Expecting a new amateur with the ink still wet on their licenses is to fully understand this just isn't realistic.
When a new amateur comes along all starry eyed and thinks their radio is going to save the day, that's a nice thing to see. But when they mistakenly assume that they have some right or duty to get on public safety frequencies, someone needs to steer them right. A new ham won't necessarily understand why they should or shouldn't be doing this. At those times it's a good idea to fall back on the rules as a starting place. Telling or encouraging amateur radio operators to open up a radio so they can access public safety frequencies isn't being responsible. If they chose to do it on their own that is their own individual choice. I'm certainly not the radio police and I'm not going to go around checking for clipped wires or removed diodes. Honestly, I don't really care what someone choses to do with their own possessions.

2. Part of my job entails working on public safety telecommunications systems. I work with police and fire as well as 911 dispatchers. I understand how the systems and people all work together to provide a service to the public. I know that dispatchers really don't want an otherwise well meaning individual to show up on one of their dispatch channels trying to "help". I've specifically talked to dispatchers about this scenario, and they all say that dialing in by telephone is the quickest way to get help. Calling in via radio is going to be met with skepticism at first, slow down response, and generally work against the procedures they have in place. Amateur radio operators, scanner listeners and other hobbyists as a whole do not have the understanding as to how the dispatch systems work. While a well meaning individual might assume they know from what they've heard on the scanner, they usually don't. The fastest way to get help in an emergency is to follow the established procedures, follow the directions of the dispatchers, and for the love of God, let them do their job. Trying to come in a side door and "speed up" the process rarely works as intended.

Now, looking back through this thread (and others), the people new to the hobby seem to understand. It's a good thing when someone is willing to understand that they may not have all the required information to do something like this. That's a good thing.

The reason this thread has lasted as long as it has is because there are a few of us that have the background and knowledge to understand the technology and people involved. It's gone beyond the "in an emergency" thing. We all know (Yes, me included) that in a real, honest to God, life or death emergency, we are going to do whatever it takes to get help. No one (me included, again) would blame you for using a modified amateur radio, kids walkie-talkie, tin can and string, etc. to get help. The difference is that the few of us that are still talking about this have some knowledge and experience in the field and are probably going to make better and more informed decisions about this than a 19 year old kid with a scanner and a modified amateur radio will.

Yes, there are instances where an amateur radio CAN be used outside the amateur radio bands, but that's is often beyond what a new amateur that just passed a 35 question multiple choice test is involved in. Again, this is something that comes with time and experience. There is a HUGE difference between using a modified (or even non-modified) amateur radio to drive a transverter or use the Alaska emergency frequency, and using their $35 Baofung radio to bypass calling 911.

Yes, there are places where cell phones don't work. Yes, there are times you won't have a PLB on hand and no other means to get help. By all means, use whatever equipment you have on hand to get help in a life or death situation.

Keep in mind that the FCC rules that apply to amateur radio are written for the amateur radio hobbyist. They are not meant to be an all encompassing list of directions on what to do in every situation. Also, there are other readily available means to get help in an emergency. Cheap skate amateurs not wanting to have such equipment in their possession when they know they will be out of cell phone and amateur radio repeater range are just being negligent. Expecting the rest of the world to buy into their lopsided reasoning isn't appropriate.

I don't have a problem with you guys and your opinions. They are all valid statements, well thought out and presented. That's the sign of someone who understands, has knowledge, knows how to apply it, and has thought it through. I value those sorts of people. Where I have the issue is the people that haven't thought it through, don't have the understanding, knowledge or training to apply what they know (or think they know) correctly. My argument has always been that simply modifying the radio doesn't make someone a public safety professional. It doesn't give someone the training to know how to work on the inside of the emergency dispatch field, and it shouldn't ever be used in place of proper training.

Whackerism is a disease. True knowledge and understanding, on the other hand, is a different thing. Confusing the two is bad.

 

[jbantennaman]

Exactly.




I'm responsible for the technical side of a small PSAP. A few years ago I was having lunch with the dispatch supervisor and I asked her how they'd react to a "distress" call coming in on one of our VHF channels.
Initial reaction would be "hoax".
Secondary reaction would be "why the he77 is this guy on our channel?"
Tertiary reaction would be "ok, get him/her the help they need".
Forth reaction would be "make sure he doesn't do it again"
Fifth reaction would be to call me and want to know how it happened and how we keep it from happening again. Read: Encryption considered.

Remember, "when all else fails" the fate of the free world will be resting on a bunch of people who passed a 35 question multiple choice test and bought a $20 Chinese radio.

Best approach is to be prepared in the first place.
Relying on a hacked amateur grade radio isn't being prepared.

If someone wants to hack their amateur radio, that's fine with me. But for Pete's sake, call it what it is.

I just had this conversation this morning with a kid that works at the jail that passed his Technician Class License 5 years ago by watching a Youtube video.
He never was smart enough to upgrade his license, even though he tried once or twice - without studying or looking at the book.

So this dullard calls me on the phone looking for a spare antenna for his Beofeng handitalkie.
His story is that it fell apart - my reply was you get what you paid for!

Then he goes on to tell me how he has been selling these radios to the local firemen and PennDot workers. When I asked him what spectrum analyzer he used, and told him that those radios are not Part Type Acceptable for any radio service, he was very offended.

When I explained to him that at the EOC there is equipment that tells the dispatcher which radio is transmitting - when using LMRS equipment designed for their equipment - Harris, Motorola, Hytera, etc..
That not only do you need the right PL, DCS, but also the identifier - his reply was that he didn't care because they didn't care, so long as they were getting what they wanted cheap!

His reply was that he switched it to Narrow Band before he gave it to them.
Only Amateur Radio Narrow Band and PLMRS Narrow Band is two different things and needs to be set with a service monitor.

So basically now, if they were to get caught using illegal equipment on emergency frequencies, the whole fire department could be in big trouble.
His only defense was that he was only selling them for monitoring purposes only.
What they did with them after he sold them to them was their business.

Why did I quit ARES and RACES?
Well, because our Section manager was a P.O.S. and they didn't do anything.
Just having a weekly net on HF does not train anyone to respond to a disaster.
Being untrained and undisciplined makes them more dangerous then anything else.

I did my FEMA training and sent it to the appropriate people, but it does no good, since they are not going to call licensed amateurs unless all other avenue's have been exhausted.
And, when that happens - all the public service people are going to do is HYJACK the radios and the frequencies and take them for themselves.

This is what happened in the Flood of '96....
I say screw em - if their radios fails, let them scrub their nuts.
Our radio service, which is of no service to anyone but ourselves, is not appreciated enough and is overlooked by all but a few select people.

If people are too stupid to get a license, they shouldn't be using our frequencies.
If people are too stupid to upgrade their license privileges in a reasonable amount of time, they shouldn't be licensed in the first place.
The FCC should make a rule that says you have 2 years to upgrade - else you have to take the test again or loose your license. That would get rid of a lot of the LIDS, Kids, and bicycle riders!

 

[nd5y]

Only Amateur Radio Narrow Band and PLMRS Narrow Band is two different things and needs to be set with a service monitor.

Please explain the difference.

 

[mmckenna]

If people are too stupid to get a license, they shouldn't be using our frequencies.
If people are too stupid to upgrade their license privileges in a reasonable amount of time, they shouldn't be licensed in the first place.
The FCC should make a rule that says you have 2 years to upgrade - else you have to take the test again or loose your license. That would get rid of a lot of the LIDS, Kids, and bicycle riders!

I think this would defeat the purpose of amateur radio.
The issue I see with this is that it would force people to upgrade just for the sake of keeping their license. Not to learn something new, not to further themselves.
Not everyone needs an "Extra" license.
I'll add that I've seen Amateur Extras do some pretty stupid stuff, and I've known novices (back when there were novices) and the dreaded no-code techs (sarcasm) that knew more than the "extras".

A license class doesn't mean anything, it just means someone has learned enough to regurgitate the answers on a multiple choice test. It's like college, and I work at a university, repetition and regurgitated answers get you a diploma. A diploma doesn't mean anything on it's own. It's the skill, knowledge and being able to apply the training once out in the real world.