"Never anonymous Bud" wrote:

It STILL boils down to the FCC NOT accepting
an emergency as a reason for transmitting on
a frequency you are NOT licensed for.

Here in San Diego, a few years ago, a licensed
Ham operator with a modded (out-of-band xmit)
radio was off-roading with friends. One of
them had a serious crash. Ham guy claimed
he couldn't hit a Ham repeater, so called in
on a Sheriff's Dept. freq (453.400).

The injured person was rescued, but the FCC
filed charges against the Ham guy for
unlicensed operation.

The case was settled when Ham guy 'donated'
his radio to the County.

FCC ruling was he was not licensed for the
frequency he used, and that they make NO
exemption for an emergency.


That not quite correct. The rules do allow an Amateur the use of "any
means of radio communications at its disposal," which would clearly include
the use of equipment capable of operating on frequencies outside the amateur
bands (see last paragraph below).


PART 97--AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE
Subpart E--Providing Emergency Communications
Sec. 97.403--Safety of life and protection of property.

No provision of these rules prevents the use by an
amateur station of any means of radio communications at
its disposal to provide essential communication needs
in connection with the immediate safety of human life
and immediate protection of property when normal
communication systems are not available.

Sec. 97.405 Station in distress.

(a) No provision of these rules prevents the use by an
amateur station in distress of any means at its disposal
to attract attention, make known its condition and
location, and obtain assistance.
(b) No provision of these rules prevents the use by a
station, in the exceptional circumstances described in
paragraph (a) of this section, of any means of radio
communications at its disposal to assist a station
in distress.

Other rules (97.401 and 97.407) cover emergency operations during a
disaster. Subpart E, Section 2.405, contains additional guidance concerning
emergency operations.

The operator you describe was more likely cited for having equipment
improperly modified to transmit outside the Amateur Bands, not for actually
using those out-of-band frequencies in the situation described. I realize
this sounds like a Catch-22 situation, but those are the rules. In this
case, if the operator had used another radio, a radio approved for those
frequencies, there would have been no rule violation.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/