Petition RM-11833

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by K4KWH, Apr 5, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
  1. N2SUB

    N2SUB Premium Subscriber QRZ Page


    What he said. ^^
    You may be a safe driver while operating your radio, but you cannot possibly guarantee that all drivers in all mobile services are.

    This is true as well.
    The stuff I see on a daily basis, especially on my motorcycle, would amaze you, and it's only getting worse.

    Congrats on your accomplishment, and I wish you the best. I hate to be a downer, but we'll have to agree to disagree. I admire your passion.
    N2EY likes this.
  2. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Thank you! I was wondering why this zombie appeared, because I knew I had already read the FCC decision, and your post cleared up the confusion.


    Federal Communications Commission

    Washington, D.C. 20554

    October 3, 2019

    DA 19-997

    Jerry Oxendine

    2007 E. Lee Street

    Gastonia, NC 28054

    Dear Mr. Oxendine:

    This letter responds to your petition for declaratory ruling or, alternatively, rulemaking, dated January 10, 2018. You request a determination that state and local laws that prohibittalking on handheld communications devices while driving are preempted by federal law to the extent that they apply to devices other than commercial mobile radio service subscriber unitsinterconnected to the public switched telephone network, such as part 90 private land mobile radios, part 95 Citizens Band (CB) radios, and part 97 amateur radios (collectively referred to herein as “two-way radios”). For the reasons set forth below, we deny the petition.

    Our research indicates that over a third of states have enacted distracted driving laws that prohibit drivers from talking on a handheld communications device while the vehicle is in motion, and only about half of them exempt any two-way radios. You assert that state and local laws prohibiting use of handheld two-way radios while driving conflict with the federal interest in supporting mobile communications, particularly in the amateur service.

    We acknowledge that there is a strong federal interest in promoting amateur communications and that the amateur service is regulated extensively under part 97 of the Commission's rules. But we find no basis for preempting the distracted driving laws that you describe. State and local laws may be preempted if: (1) Congress does so expressly; (2) Congress, through legislation, clearly indicates its intent to occupy the field of regulation, leaving “no room for the States to supplement;” or (3) the laws “actually conflict[]” with federal law, such that “compliance with both federal and state regulations is a physical impossibility” or they “stand[] as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.” None of these applies here.

    Laws that prohibit talking on handheld communications devices while driving do not preclude or unreasonably obstruct mobile use of handheld two-way radios. These laws apply tothe use of handheld devices while driving. A driver can comply with these laws by using a hands-free attachment or by parking the vehicle prior to using a handheld device, both of which are contemplated by our rules regarding two-way radios. Consequently, the record before us doesnot demonstrate that state and local laws that prohibit talking on handheld devices while driving stand as an obstacle to amateur communications or actually conflict with federal law in any way. Nor is there any express preemption or argument that Congress has “occupied the field.” We therefore deny your petition.

    Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to section 4(i) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 154(i), and section 1.2 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 1.2, the petition for a declaratory ruling filed on January 16, 2018, by Jerry Oxendine IS DENIED.

    This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR §§ 0.131, 0.331.


    Scot Stone

    Deputy Chief, Mobility Division

    Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
  3. KN6SD

    KN6SD Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    "I can bring an HT into a cinema, but the management can prohibit me from using it there. Same principle". Bad example, the Cinema is private property.. "The problem is that your claim that operating a two-way radio is different from a cell phone and presents a very minimal impact upon driving is nothing more than an opinion". Not really, before cell usage in vehicles the Country had all sorts of Two-Way Radio users in vehicles without any noticeable problems. I don't recall the NTSB ever putting out a Press Release about the dangers of mobile two-way radio usage. Additionally, the real problem isn't the cell phone, it's how people are interacting with the device, they are taking their eyes off of the road to send and answer TEXTS while the vehicle is in motion. A two-way radio does not require an operator to look at the device while using it. So, Two-Way Radio use and TEXTING Via Cellular are two different activities.
    KI7HSB likes this.
  4. KX4O

    KX4O Ham Member QRZ Page

    Point well taken. As far as opinion vs. data, well, we do have some data...


Share This Page