FCC Cracks Down on Uncertified VHF/UHF Gear, With Hams Caught in the Middle

A couple of points:

1) The rules cover new radios that are manufactured and sold. Not radios that are modified, converted, or homebrewed by hams.

2) Many hams today actually do design and build their radios - today, right now. Many also restore, renovate, and modify. For example.....

https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/a-few-pictures-of-the-southgate-type-7.453281/

3) The word is "ham". Not "HAM". Apostrophes are used for contractions and possessives, not plurals.

"Ham" is not an acronym nor a proper name. We speak of "ham radio" not "HAM radio". We are "hams", not "HAM's".

 

you made that decision when you bought a home in the hoa.

 

I have a car capable of going near 100 mph, but there is no state or federal highways in America that this speed is legal , yet millions of these vehicles are sold yearly. It all falls on the responsibility of the operator. Who’s to stop someone from buying a box of old radios in a sealed bid from a fire department that is unloading surplus equipment, all tuned to a 155.—— frequency.
Some people will be involved in nefarious activities regardless of the rules,that’s why we still have guards in banks.

 

Hi. I am the person who was in charge of the spectral tests that KE4YMX is talking about. Perhaps this gentleman may remember that my crew and I may have scoffed at his test results (all in good fun and taste), but we politely explained his (Baofeng) handheld was only borderline (at the FCC limits or just below the allowed limits). This is in sharp contrast to nearly 100% of the other, more expensive brands, that all greatly exceed the requirement for suppression of harmonics and other spurious emissions.

To date, the ARRL Lab has in fact, measured nearly 2,000 handhelds and has identified the makes and models that tend to not pass this basic FCC emission test. An article was published containing our test results up to that time with the intent on educating Radio Amateurs about the matter (November 2015 QST). We enjoyed confiscating all of these non-compliant radios and destroyed them with a pavement roller. (Just kidding!)

Personally, I've operated all sorts of vintage military surplus equipment, like the ARC-5s. They can transmit outside of the ham bands and as a Radio Amateur, I need to be concerned with keeping my transmissions within the Amateur bands and knowing what the output spectrum looks like, in order to comply with FCC rules. As hams, we have had a long tradition of transmitting with radios from other services, as long as we follow FCC Pat 97.

Just a thought; users with poor spectral quality: Considerable damage to the reputation of the Amateur Service could happen with only one ham who inadvertently creates interference to a fire/police/ambulance communications. Imagine a news report about "some ham" who caused interference that delayed important communications? That's all the fodder that's needed for other (commercial) services to say our radio service uses inferior equipment and that their radio service should be able to buy that part of the radio spectrum. That's why we have done such testing.

WB1GCM
ARRL Lab

 

Prior to this development, I may have transmitted as much as once with my UV5-R. Since then it has served as an inexpensive scanner receiver and WX radio. I also use it for a flashlight!

 

I still disagree (respectfully). I DO own a radio that is capable of being operated outside the amateur bands. However, the use of said radio IS covered, not by FCC, but by NTIA. So its operations ARE covered by a legal agreement under another agency. I, according to Part 97, I can also operate the radio ON the amateur bands while abiding by the Rules governing the Service. In fact, its technical specs are more stringent than for regular amateur equipment. I am not worried. It still comes down to USE. Under the NTIA, I must operate withing the specs and spectral purity required; I must operate on the amateur bands according to the spectral requirements of THAT service. So long as I do THAT, I have no worries. I think our skivvies are knotted unnecessarily!

 

'
But remember one thing. We often get all tangled up in the Constitution when it comes to station inspection. When you received your license, you agreed to abide by ALL the rules of the Service. One of those Rules was that we must submit to inspection of our stations upon request by an FCC agent. That has NOTHING to do with "constitutional rights". You may, indeed, invoke said "rights" by refusing entry. Here's where the "BUT" comes in! By refusing the station inspection, you may find that the FINE for said refusal to be worse than if you had allowed the agent to come in! Your "rights" may become "constipational 'rights' instead of constitutional when the letter arrives!

 

Or you may find you don't have a license any more.

One small point:

IIRC, the "inspection" business comes under "conditions of grant". As you say, these are agreed to when signing the papers applying for a license.

However, IIRC, the rules specify that the inspections can only take place "during normal business hours or whenever the station is in operation" Which means they can't come banging on your door at 2 AM local unless you are on the air then.

 

The FCC is going to clean this up just like they have all the illegal 10M rigs that are sold at most Truck Stops and online at any CB site. Just gotta hand it to the FCC folks. They are right on top of everything.

 

Your choices are extremely limited when you need to live and commute in a major metropolitan area. Capisci?

 

Not a good analogy. Here's why:

All of those vehicles you mention have speedometers that are reasonably accurate. The speedometer is usually the biggest indicator on the dashboard. Speed limits are posted on practically every road, street and highway.

So if you are going 70, 80 or 90 on a highway with a posted limit of 65, you can't claim ignorance because that BIG indicator is right there telling how fast you're going. It may be a few MPH off but not more than that.

Radios are completely different. I don't know of ANY handheld that indicates spurious output frequencies or levels. The display may show that it is transmitting on 146.52, but how can the "operator" know what other frequencies are being transmitted, and at what level, without test equipment that most hams don't have?

A better analogy would be pollution coming from vehicle tailpipes. We are all required to meet the emission requirements of the state of registry of our motor vehicles, but few of us have the equipment to measure it. So many, if not most, states require periodic emissions inspections of motor vehicles. And....let us not forget what happened to one automaker who was caught selling cars that were programmed to fool the emissions testers......

 

Agreed.

 

So up on the bench by my dead Radios

 

The "standards" the FCC is concerned about is if this radio equipment is in compliance with Part 90 specifications or not. Has nothing to do with any kind of compliance in the amateur radio service. We don't have any certification requirements.

However, there's two separate issues here...

#1 FCC Part 90 compliance. (They're not)

#2 Importing and "using" any non certified radios contrary to Part 302 of the Communication Act on the amateur radio bands.

So basically it comes down to this... If any radio is found not Part 90 compliant, then that means they are not certified for anything. This means they can't import, market or sell them anywhere in the United States.

So if they are prohibited from selling and marketing them anywhere in the United States, then we cannot purchase them from anyone in the United States because they are not legal to import or sell to anyone.

...It doesn't just end there though.

According to Part 302 of the Communication Act, it also means we are also prohibited from using any non compliant radio equipment on ANY radio service in the United States, including the Amateur Radio Service.

The part about "using" them is specifically described in this paragraph from Part 302 of the Communication Act...

...So that's what the words in the Communication Act says.