There has been quite a ruckus about the FCC and Part 97.113 concerning emergency communications but I have been taking a wait and see attitude about it. These FCC Rules say: No amateur station shall transmit communications in which the station licensee or control operator has a pecuniary interest, including communications on behalf of an employer.
The question on the table is whether this prohibition strictly applies to employees of a public safety organization. For example, is it a violation of the rules for a firefighter or hospital employee to use ham radio as part of a emergency communications practice exercise? Apparently, the answer is yes.
Read this posting on the N5FDL Blog for more details, including some correspondence with the FCC. The ARRL offered this explanation in the September issue of QST. This article reports that W0WLS is withdrawing from ham radio emcomm work after getting a letter from the FCC’s Laura Smith.
The K3NG Report says that The FCC is Throwing the Baby Out With the Bathwater. I agree.
If you are involved with emergency communciations, you should make sure you understand this latest development.
73, Bob K0NR
Hi Bob K0NR
It is the Amateur Radio community, and Emcomm activists in specific that need to ask for a rule change.
To lambast the FCC for enforcing longstanding rules, or even worse as some have suggested to only enforce the rules we agree with, is wrong.
If society is better served as is, so be it; if an effort to petition and change the rules for the future result in the changes some want, so be it – but at present the W0WLS borke the rules.
Unless the W0WLS operations are addressed by a retroactive rules change, they remain illegal.
The law is a cold hard mistress, and our wishes & desires don’t affect it much.
73
Steve
K9ZW
Hi Steve,
I agree that we should not ask the FCC to ignore its own rules. (There’s been too much of that with regard to BPL.)
On the other hand, most FCC regulations are broadly stated with room for interpretation. For example, the FCC could have interpreted the rule against communications on behalf of the employer to not include ARES/RACES sponsored exercises (i.e., the communication benefits ARES/RACES, not the fire station, hospital, etc. where the employee works.)
See N5FDL’s posting at http://n5fdl.com/97113/
OK, the FCC did not choose to do that. So now we are going to see petitions to the FCC to change the rule. In the meantime, emergency communications will suffer.
73, Bob K0NR
Has anyone asked for a clarification on this rulling for the ARRL and the FCC?
Yes, the FCC has been clear on this issue…see N5FDL’s postings. http://n5fdl.com/97113/
73, Bob K0NR
The ARRL published their guidelines on the topic at http://www.arrl.org/news/files/ARRL_AppropriateUseGuidelines.pdf
Hey Guys this comment from K0RM which I do agree with:
This seems in direct conflict to FCC Report and Order 06-149.
[Quote]
52. Mr. DiGennaro also requests that we amend Section 97.113 our Rules, which prohibits
“[c]ommunications for hire or for material compensation, direct or indirect, paid or promised,” by amateur stations,
227 to clarify that amateur licensees who, by virtue of their employment, are directly involved in facilitating relief and recovery in times of disaster are not prohibited from effecting emergency communications using amateur radio.
228 We conclude that the proposed rule change is not necessary, however, because Section 97.113 does not prohibit amateur radio operators who are emergency personnel engaged in disaster relief from using the amateur service bands while in a paid duty status.
229 These individuals are not receiving compensation for transmitting amateur service communications; rather, they are receiving compensation for services related to their disaster relief duties and in their capacities as emergency personnel.
[End Quote]
So, was Ms. Smith’s email an official FCC interpretation of its own rules? Not sure how to resolve the conflict…but my take would be that a published rule is the law and of the land and an email doesn’t take precedence….
Well the rule clearly states that we are not allowed to use our ham radio license and gear on behalf of our employer. Even W0WLS clearly indicated that he was on the clock and getting paid. This is a clear cut violation of the rule. No if’s and’s or butts about it. This is like grabbing a face mask in football right in front of the umpire. Sorry but I don’t think us hams should be bashing the FCC on this or anyone else. Hams should not feel like they are above the law, rather we should be upheld to a higher level then most others out there. W0WLS should have told the hospital that they would have to bring in someone from outside the company to provide this sort of communications. I am proud that W0WLS admitted his fault in this and that he owned up to his mistake and wont make it again. These are the types of people that hams should look up to rather then down on. We should also give a thumbs up to how Mrs Smith did her job. Sorry to say it folks but if you are doing 90mph in a 35 mph zone and the cops catch you….then too bad so sad. This is the law and the laws need to be upheld…otherwise we just turn into CB radio. Enough said.
Orion KE7VLC
Pingback: Time to Change the FCC Rules for EmComm? 97.113 at The KØNR Weblog