Source: https://www.fcc.gov/print/node/36551
Timestamp: 2015-05-27 07:58:05
Document Index: 243184656

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 2', 'arts 2', 'art 97', 'art 2', 'art 97', 'arts 2', 'arts 2', '§ 2', 'arts 2', '§ 2', '§ 2']

Amateur Radio Service at 5 MHz
Word Document [1]PDF Document [2]Text Document [3]	Released: November 18, 2011
Amendment of Parts 2 and 97 of the )
Commission’s Rules to Facilitate Use by the )
RM-11353
Amateur Radio Service of the Allocation at
Adopted: November 16, 2011
1. By this action, we amend Parts 2 and 97 of the Commission’s Rules to facilitate more efficient and effective use by the Amateur Radio Service of five channels in the 5330.5-5406.4 kHz band (the 60 meter band).1 Specifically, and consistent with our proposals in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in this proceeding, we replace one of the channels with a less encumbered one, increase the maximum authorized power amateur stations may transmit in this band, and authorize amateur stations to transmit three additional emission designators.2 We also adopt an additional operational rule that prohibits the use of automatically controlled digital stations and makes editorial revisions to the relevant portions of the Table of Frequency Allocations (Allocation Table) and our service rules.
2. In 2003, the Commission allocated five channels in the 60 meter band to the amateur service on a secondary basis. In Part 97 of its Rules, the Commission makes the frequencies 5332 kHz, 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz, and 5405 kHz available for use by stations having a control operator holding a General, Advanced, or Amateur Extra Class license; requires that amateur operators ensure that their station's transmission occupies only 2.8 kHz centered at each of these frequencies; and requires that amateur stations not cause harmful interference to other authorized stations.3
1 Part 2 of the Rules, inter alia, sets forth the frequency allocations for the various radio services. Part 97, the Amateur Radio Service, provides rules for amateur operators to participate in a voluntary noncommercial communication service that, among other things, allows stations to communicate among themselves, provide emergency communications, and experiment with various radio techniques and technologies to further the understanding of radio use and the development of new technologies. In the Amateur Radio Service, wavelength bands, rather than frequency bands are the usual means of identifying radio spectrum. In this Order, we use the term “60 meter band” when referring to the 5330.5-5406.4 kHz band.
2 Amendment of Parts 2 and 97 of the Commission’s Rules to Facilitate Use by the Amateur Radio Service of the Allocation at 5 MHz, ET Docket No. 10-98, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 25 FCC Rcd 5108 (2010) (NPRM).
3 Amendment of Parts 2 and 97 of the Commission’s Rules to Create a Low Frequency Allocation for the Amateur Radio Service, ET Docket No. 02-98, Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 10258 (2003) (60 Meter Allocation R&O). The Commission codified this allocation by adding footnote US381 (renumbered herein as US23) to the Allocation Table. Assigned frequency is defined to be the center of the frequency band assigned to a station. Thus, the frequencies listed in footnote US381 are assigned frequencies, which are also known as center frequencies. 47 C.F.R. §§ 2.1(c); 2.106, footnote US381.
3. The 60 meter band is part of the larger 5060-5450 kHz band, which is a Federal/non-Federal shared band that is allocated to the fixed service on a primary basis and to the mobile except aeronautical mobile service on a secondary basis. The 5060-5450 kHz band is primarily used by Federal agencies for ship-to-shore and fixed point-to-point communications. Non-Federal use of the 5060-5450 kHz band includes state government licensees and licensees in the Industrial/Business Pool that operate standby and/or backup communication circuits for use during emergency and/or disaster situations, entities prospecting for petroleum and natural gas or distributing electric power, coast stations, and aeronautical fixed stations.4
4. The Commission added the secondary amateur service allocation after determining that such frequencies could be useful to the amateur radio community for completing disaster communications links at times when existing frequencies in the 3500-4000 kHz (80 and 75 meter) and 7000-7300 kHz (40 meter) bands are not available due to ionospheric conditions. It concluded that such an allocation represented the best compromise available to give the amateur service access to new spectrum while assuring the Federal Government agencies that their use is protected.5
5. At the request of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA),6
the Commission restricted amateur stations operating on the five channels in the 60 meter band to upper sideband (USB) voice transmissions (phone emission 2K80J3E) and to a maximum effective radiated power (ERP) of 50 watts (W) peak envelope power (PEP).7 The Commission adopted these operating restrictions to decrease the interference potential between amateur stations and Federal stations.
6. On October 10, 2006, the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) filed a Petition for Rulemaking requesting that the Commission amend Parts 2 and 97 of its Rules to replace one of the allocated center frequencies (5368 kHz) with a less encumbered frequency (5358.5 kHz); increase the maximum ERP from 50 to 100 W PEP; and authorize the use of additional emissions types, limited to emission designators 150HA1A, 60H0J2B, and 2K80J2D. It said that its proposals were designed to facilitate more efficient and effective use of the secondary amateur radio service allocation in the 60 meter band.8 As part of its petition, ARRL attached a May 12, 2006 letter from NTIA indicating that it would “look favorably” on the above-described modifications should ARRL choose to pursue rule changes with 4 We briefly note two U.S. footnotes that apply to the 5060-5450 kHz band: Footnote US22 lists the 68 preferred carrier frequencies in the 2-10 MHz band that are available for disaster or long distance communications and which are expected to support most, if not all, non-Federal requirements for disaster and long distance communications. Notably, none of these frequencies fall within the 60 meter band channels. Footnote US212 designates a carrier frequency (5167.5 kHz) for emergency communications and other purposes in Alaska. While this frequency is available for limited amateur use under specified conditions, it is not affected by the instant rulemaking.
5 See 60 Meter Allocation R&O, 18 FCC Rcd at 10268.6 NTIA is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves as the President’s principal advisor on telecommunications and information policy issues. NTIA manages Federal use of the radio spectrum and coordinates Federal use with the FCC. See 47 C.F.R. § 2.1.
7 See 60 Meter Allocation R&O, 18 FCC Rcd at 10268. See note 28, below, for a description of this phone emission. ERP (in a given direction) is the product of the power supplied to the antenna and its gain relative to a half-wave dipole in a given direction. 47 C.F.R. §§ 2.1, 97.313(i).
8 See ARRL Petition for Rulemaking (ARRL Petition). We note that ARRL also identifies itself as ARRL – the national association for Amateur Radio.
the Commission.9 The Commission issued a public notice on December 8, 2006 seeking comment on the ARRL Petition.10 No comments were received in response to the public notice.
7. On May 4, 2010, the Commission issued a NPRM in this proceeding, in which we proposed to adopt the three rule modifications requested by ARRL. We also identified and sought comment on four operational issues: (1) Would a transmission time limit help ensure that amateur operators transmitting the two data emissions avoid causing harmful interference to Federal users in instances where Federal agencies exercise their primary use of the 60 meter band, and if so, would 3 minutes be sufficient, or is another limit more appropriate? (2) Should amateur stations be permitted to transmit emission types in addition to those proposed in the NPRM? (3) Would a Voice-Operated Transmit (VOX) mode of operation, which ARRL recommended that we require for amateur operators transmitting phone emissions, increase the potential for interference because of its susceptibility to keying a radio to transmit under high surrounding noise environments such as might be found in an emergency operations center? (4) Should amateur operators that provide emergency communications using the 60 meter band be encouraged to add a sound card-generated Automatic Link Establishment (ALE) capability to their stations? In response to the NPRM, ARRL and 42 amateur service licensees filed comments in this proceeding.11
8. We first address the three key rule changes identified in the NPRM that can lead to more efficient and effective use of the 60 meter band by the Amateur Radio Service: replacing one channel, increasing power limits, and adding emission designators. We then discuss modifications to specific operational rules, including several matters where we conclude that it is unnecessary to change the existing rules.
In its petition, ARRL requested that we replace one of the five channels in the 60 meter band (5368 kHz) with a channel (5358.5 kHz) that NTIA has identified. ARRL based its request on reports from amateur operators of frequent interference from a digital signal on the existing authorized channel. We conclude that our proposal to replace the 5368 kHz channel with one centered on 5358.5 kHz will benefit amateur operations in the 60 meter band and adopt this rule change.
10. Commenters supporting the channel replacement proposal (ARRL, Davis, McIntosh, Thomas, Whedbee) agree that the replacement channel would allow for greater amateur use.12 For example, McIntosh observes that the 5368 kHz channel is normally occupied by a primary user that operates for long periods of time and that replacing this channel would have the effect of restoring amateur radio operations to five “clear” channels in the 60 meter band. In its comments, ARRL reports that numerous amateur licensees have experienced substantial and frequent interference on 5368 kHz and reiterates its support for substituting 5358.5 kHz for that channel to alleviate interference to amateur 9 See Letter from Karl Nebbia, Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Spectrum Management, NTIA, to Paul L. Rinaldo, ARRL Chief Technology Officer, May 12, 2006 (2006 NTIA Letter). This letter is attached, as Appendix A, to the ARRL Petition.
10 Public Notice, Report No. 2799 (rel. Dec. 8, 2006). RM-11353 was established for the ARRL Petition.11 See Appendix A for the list of parties filing in this proceeding. This list includes late-filed comments, which we include as part of the record. 12 See comments of ARRL at 8, Davis at 1, McIntosh at 1-2, Thomas at 1, and Whedbee at 1. While these five commenters specifically stated that they support the replacement channel proposal, we observe that many other commenters expressed general support for the proposals in the NPRM without specifically addressing this issue.
operations. We observe that the replacement channel will also eliminate an existing overlap of the existing channel on primary coast station channels 5367 kHz and 5370 kHz.13
11. One commenter (Slye) asserts that there is no reason to believe that the replacement channel would be immune to future Federal use. However, we note that the replacement channel was identified as offering favorable use characteristics during discussions between ARRL and NTIA.14 While the nature of the amateur secondary allocation means that any 60 meter channel could become difficult to use due to increased activity by primary users, we conclude that there is tangible value in switching to the more lightly used 5358.5 kHz channel. Similarly, we do not find persuasive the concerns raised by Slye and Tisdale that it will be difficult for amateur radio operators and equipment manufacturers to adjust to the replacement channel. While there will be nominal costs for users who wish to retune their equipment to be able to access the new channel, they will benefit by being able to make greater use of the 60 meter band via the replacement channel. Moreover, amateur radio operators are not required to modify their equipment; those who choose not to will no longer be permitted to use a channel that they have not, as a practical matter, had reliable access to for some time. This action, which represents the first channel modification since the rules were adopted in 2003, provides a way to resolve what has become an impediment to amateur use of the 60 meter band. Moreover, licensees that decline to upgrade their stations to operate on the replacement channel will continue to be able to access the four remaining channels.15
12. We note that three commenters (Jones, Slye, Tisdale) suggest that the new channel should be an additional channel, not a replacement channel.16 Because the existing model of secondary amateur radio use of five channels is acceptable to the primary Federal users in the 60 meter band and was the basis of the discussions between ARRL and NTIA that formed the outline of our proposal, we will not pursue this proposal.
13. Finally, in considering those comments that discuss the adjustments that amateur radio operators and equipment manufacturers will need to make to use the replacement channel, we conclude that proposed Section 97.303(h) requires a de minimis adjustment.17 This action ensures that a large installed base of equipment is not rendered technically out of compliance under our modified rules. Accordingly, we amend footnote US381 and Section 97.303(h) by removing 5368 kHz, by adding the center (assigned) frequency 5358.5 kHz, and by defining the 60 meter band as the 5330.5-5406.4 kHz band; and we also amend Section 97.303(h) by adding carrier frequencies for each of the five channels in 13 See call signs KPH and WNU.14 See 2006 NTIA Letter, supra note 9.15 Based on the record of intensive use of the 5368 kHz channel by primary users, we conclude that, for a significant number of amateur licensees, the replacement channel is the only means of gaining access to a fifth channel. Thus, under current practice, many amateur radio operators have practical access to only four channels.
16 See comments of Jones at 1, Slye at 1, and Tisdale at 1-2.17 When the use of a center frequency is restricted to emission designator 2K80J3E and to USB transmission, it is generally understood to mean that the carrier frequency is set 1.4 kHz below the center frequency, and the proposed rules reflected this convention. However, in this instance, NTIA recommends that the carrier frequency be set 1.5 kHz below the center frequency, and ARRL repeats NTIA’s guidance on its website. See NTIA 2003 Letter to Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology, FCC, received by the Commission’s Office of the Secretary on March 19, 2003; http://www.arrl.org/60m-channel-allocation [4]. Additionally, one manufacturer states that “transmission is impossible” on any 5 MHz band frequency other than the five carrier frequencies recommended by NTIA. See instruction manual for the Icom IC-7000 at 40 (available at http://www.icomamerica.com/en/downloads/DownloadDetails.aspx?Document=13 [5]). For these reasons, we conclude that the rule as proposed, if adopted, could cause a large install base of equipment to be slightly non-compliant with the Rules.
the 60 meter band that are 1.5 kHz below the center frequency. In addition, we renumber footnote US381 as US23 to be consistent with our current numbering system for domestic footnotes that is based on frequency order.
14. Section 97.313(i) states that no station may transmit with an ERP exceeding 50 W PEP on the 60 meter band and also provides a simplified means of calculating ERP. In the NPRM, we proposed to increase the maximum ERP that amateur stations may transmit on channels in the 60 meter band from50 to 100 W PEP. Based on the record, we adopt our proposal.
15. Twelve commenters (ARRL, Blanchard, Floberg, Hobart, Houlne, Kinter, Leggett, McIntosh, Slye, Thomas, Tisdale, Whedbee) specifically state that they support the proposed power increase.18 For example, Kinter identifies a situation where the 50 W PEP power limit “hindered the communication between a field group preparing for an emergency drill across the state and the state control center” and states that additional power would have allowed him to hear clearly above the noise.19 ARRL states that a transmitter power output increase to 100 W PEP limit would substantially increase the communications reliability in the use of these channels without significantly increasing the risk of interference to Federal users.20 Similarly, Slye states that “most stations are 100 Watt units, and a 3 dB increase in signal may make the difference in maintaining essential communications, while the increased potential for harmful interference is slight.”21 We agree with these commenters that the current power limitation of 50 W PEP hinders communications and that a small amount of additional power would make it easier for amateur users to communicate in the band.
16. Three commenters – Davis, Furman, and Jones – state the proposed power increase should not be adopted or that it will cause problems for incumbents in the band.22 We believe that the examples cited by the twelve commenters above offer compelling reasons to support our tentative conclusion that an increase in maximum power would serve to facilitate many amateur radio communications with minimal risk of harmful interference.23 We also reject requests for higher power limits, such as 500 W PEP.24 There is no indication that a greater power limit would produce substantially greater benefits or that any increased potential for harmful interference at this power limit has been fully considered. Additionally, we do not believe that it would be useful to complicate the rules by establishing different power limits for different circumstances, as some commenters suggest.25 Because the minimal 50 W PEP increase does not 18 See comments of ARRL at 8, Blanchard at 1, Floberg at 1, Hobart at 1, Houlne at 2-4, Kinter at 1, Leggett at 3, McIntosh at 4, Slye at 2, Thomas at 1, Tisdale at 2, and Whedbee at 3.
19 See Kinter comments at 1.20 See ARRL comments at 8. See also Tisdale comments at 2 (stating that the power increase would greatly improve radio service on these frequencies at all times, especially during the summer “when there is generally a lot of static and noise on these frequencies”).
21 See Slye comments at 2.22 See comments of Davis at 1 and Jones at 1. See also Furman comments at 1 (describing his individual experience in operating an 8 foot magnetic loop at 5 feet above ground and with 8 watts that can work worldwide with no difficulty, and claiming that an increase in power would just add to the interference).
23 See, e.g., ARRL at 8 (describing how these frequencies are susceptible to high static levels on a seasonal and geographic basis which affects communications reliability during emergencies, and supporting the proposed power increase as a way to overcome these difficulties); Houlne at 4 (describing the “effective difference in signal strength between 50 and 100 watts is minimal as to interference”). 24 See Currier comments at 1.25 Seven commenters in all (Currier, Davis, Furman, Hambrecht, Jones, Kinter, Mabry) suggest a range of power limits. See, e.g., comments of Mabry at 1 (suggesting that the transmitter output power limit should remain at 50 W (continued….)
significantly increase the potential for interference between stations, such a distinction is not necessary or warranted. Just as with the existing 50 W PEP power limit, a 100 W limit that applies to all channels will be straightforward, easy to understand, and easy to apply. Thus, we conclude that there is a tangible benefit—greater communication abilities that will enhance amateur emergency communication activities—that will accrue if we increase the power limit to 100 W PEP and that the record shows that the costs (i.e., the increased potential for harmful interference) are minimal. We specifically reject alternate options such as an even higher power increase or different power limits for different circumstances, because these options would introduce added costs—a significantly greater interference potential and added regulatory complexity—that would sharply reduce the overall benefits of the rule change. 17. As part of our amendment of the transmitter power standard applicable to the 60 meter band, we clarify the second sentence in Section 97.313(i) by revising “dipole” to read “half-wave dipole antenna,” by removing unnecessary text, and by explicitly stating that a numeric gain of 1 is equivalent to 0 dBd.26 We likewise correct an errant cross-reference in Section 97.313(f) of our transmitter power rules that was introduced when we recently combined two footnotes.27
18. Under the existing rules, only upper sideband voice transmissions are permitted in the 60 meter band.28 In the NPRM, we proposed to authorize the use of three additional emission designators in the band: CW emission 150HA1A, which is Morse telegraphy by means of on-off keying