ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null And Void':
from
The ARRL Letter
on
July 29, 2010
Website:
http://www.arrl.org/
View comments about this article!
ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null And Void':
Saying that only the Federal Communications Commission is empowered
to regulate radio frequency interference (RFI), the ARRL has notified
Midwest City, Oklahoma, that its local ordinance 27-3(9), seeking to
regulate radio transmissions and RFI, is "null and void." Midwest City
is in the Oklahoma City metropolitan area. The ordinance reads: "In
addition to other public nuisances declared by other sections of this
Code or law, the following [is] hereby declared to be [a] public
nuisance: Operating or using any electrical apparatus or machine which
materially and unduly interferes with radio or television reception by
others."
On July 21, ARRL General Counsel Chris Imlay, W3KD, wrote to Midwest
City Assistant City Manager Dave Ballew, City Attorney Katherine Bolles
and Director of Code Enforcement Mike Stroh, informing them that the
ARRL had been provided with a copy of the ordinance by amateurs in that
community. "We are also aware that a notice was sent by Mr Stroh on
behalf of the City to one of ARRL's members who resides in Midwest City
asserting that the FCC-licensed radio amateur to whom the letter was
addressed was in violation of the ordinance as the result of radio
frequency interference appearing in a neighbor/complainant's home
electronic equipment," the letter read. "The licensed radio amateur was
ordered to remedy the problem in one day, under penalty of a sanction
assessed against the real property of the radio amateur." Read more
here
http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-argues-that-oklahoma-town-s-rfi-ordinance-is-null-and-void.
Source:
The ARRL Letter
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null And V
|
|
|
by KJ4FUU on July 30, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The blame for this misguided law has to be split between legislators who don't know what their legislating about, and manufacturers who somehow manage to market TVs and Radios that fail to reject the RFI at reasonable levels.
Hams may appear to be easier to pick on. Can you imagine the outcry from the electronics and department stores if they had banned appliances that couldn't reject signals from FCC-approved stations?
I just hope that my neighbors don't get licensed and start operating on the 6-meter band, or I'll have to do a bunch of stuff to my chinese-made, Best Buy distributed HDTV, because right now, I can't operate 6 meters if anyone is watching the TV because of the RFI the TV generates.
-- Tom
|
| |
|
RE: ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null A
|
|
|
by KF7CG on July 30, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A lot of the confusion on this lays at the feet of Congress. Over 6 years ago they passed a law allowing local and state municipal;ities to enact civil and criminal penalties for illegal unlicensed radio activities such as Citizens Band over power and off frequency operation.
The law and I haven't looked it up yet empowered the governing bodies to to make it a local violation but gave licensed radio operations and out by way of their licensed. It could be very easy to misconstrue the intent and thrust of this law if you were a locality that wished to do so.
I complained about this law when it was making its way through Congress, but to no avail. Unless I missed a repeal of the law or a court decision nullifying it, under very limited circumstances local law has the authority to sanction illegal radio behavior. The law is frequency limited and doesn't apply to Federal Communications Licensees while they are operating within their presribed limits.
This law, however, can give cover for much local harassment and gives some degree of legitimacy to local regulations.
KF7CG
|
| |
|
RE: ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null A
|
|
|
by KF7CG on July 30, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In addition to my previous reply. I did some quick research on this site and found an old article on the law that should help shed some light on the law if it is followed. I reproduce it from eHam.net archives below:
HR2346 - To Curb C.B. RFI Interference
Stephen Mitchell (N6TGK) on November 30, 2000
View comments about this article!
While checking the various amateur radio and scanner related web-sites I like to visit, I found a news article from the Associated Press reporting on a bill headed to the President for signing. At first glance, this bill sounds like a good idea, but I also see a potential for problems. Here’s the article:
Bill Would Curb CB Interference
WASHINGTON (AP) - Citizens would get help from state and local officials to stop unauthorized CB radios that interfere with their televisions, radios and cordless telephones under legislation headed to the president.
The bill, HR 2346, which passed the House by voice vote Monday, allows state and local governments to enact and enforce regulations that prohibit people from using unauthorized CB radio equipment, such as those that exceed the permitted power levels.
Existing law permits only the Federal Communications Commission to pursue complaints of interference on the commercial airwaves. But the agency doesn't always have the resources or field agents to investigate and act on every complaint, lawmakers say.
And while many citizens abide by the law in operating their CB radio service, "rogue operations do exist across the country," said Rep. Albert Wynn, D-Md.
Rep. Vernon Ehlers, R-Mich., introduced the measure after hearing from a constituent who complained about interference on wireless devices because of a CB radio operating beyond the prescribed power levels.
The consumer sought help from local police officials, who said it was outside their jurisdiction and referred them to the FCC. Ehlers said he was surprised to find this was not an isolated problem experienced by consumers.
The FCC does not oppose the measure, which passed the Senate earlier this year.
As stated above, this bill sounds good in its intention of curtailing use of illegal amplifiers on the Citizen’s Band. However, I feel this bill has the potential for keeping law enforcement officials busy chasing down interference complaints. As we all know, most electronic equipment is poorly shielded and filtered. When I was in high school and running on C.B. I caused interference to our phones and the neighbor’s phones running just the legal 4 watts permitted to C.B. operators. Today, I have some minor problems with RFI running just 20 watts SSB on any of the bands.
To make matters worse, most citizens don’t know the difference between an amateur radio station and a C.B. station, let alone whether or not that C.B. station is running legally or not. So the first time they get any interference to their TV, VCR or telephone, they’ll be calling the local police who will then come knocking on your door. Now, if you’re an amateur radio operator and you’re also running 1500 watts, you better hope that the nice police officer has been educated and knows the difference between an illegal C.B. amplifier and a legal amateur radio amplifier.
I would also like to know how they intend to enforce this law if it comes into being. Let me share a story that happened to me about four years ago and is kind of related. My friend and I were sitting in an "In and Out Burger" parking lot (probably the best burgers you’ll find on the west coast) and we were just eating our meals minding our own business. We were just about done when a San Diego PD cruiser pulled up and two female officers got out and approached my truck. They immediately began questioning us as to what we were doing there and why we were interfering with the McDonald’s drive thru across the street. Yes, you read right… they didn’t ask if we knew anything about it or if we were even responsible. They wanted to know why we were doing it. First off, my friend and I had no idea what they were talking about. The officer explained that someone was interfering with the drive thru across the street with a C.B. and we must be the culprits because of the antennas on my truck. I had to explain that I was not a C.B. operator but an amateur radio operator. She then asked to see my license. By this time I was quite annoyed so I told her I didn’t have it with me. She then looked over at her partner and said, "Should I write him a citation for that?"
Mistake on her behalf. Here’s where I got to have my field day. I immediately informed her that anything radio related regarding interference is out of her jurisdiction and is a problem handled by the FCC. I also informed her that if she did try to write me a citation the most she could write me up for would possibly be section 594 P.C. (Malicious Mischief). About this time she noticed the decal from my employer on my rear window of the truck and asked, "Who works for the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department?" I got to reply, with a big smile on my face, "I do and that’s why you can’t pull this stuff with me like you could with the general public. I know what your bounds are because I’m bound by them as well."
I no longer work in law enforcement but the point is that this could easily happen to any one of us while we’re sitting at home one night having a nice rag chew with our friends or running a contest. I feel that the public’s interest would be best served if Congress would require manufacturers to install better shielding and filtering. I agree with the need to eliminate illegal amplifiers on C.B. I just don’t think this is the best way to go about it.
Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
It took 10 years but some of the trouble may be coming home to roost. Unintended consequenc4es delayed, but not avoided.
KF7CG
|
| |
|
ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null And V
|
|
|
by KJ4MPW on August 3, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
@KF7CG
Could we get a link to that?
|
| |
|
ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null And V
|
|
|
by KE4MOB on August 4, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Even more interesting now that Arizona has stepped into the mess with immigration.
If the federal government chooses not to enforce it's laws, then do states or localities have the right to make laws of their own and enforce them?
|
| |
|
RE: ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null A
|
|
|
by KF7CG on August 4, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Here is the link direct from a search in this forum on dHam.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Articles Home] [Add Article] Articles by Category Antennas Contesting DXing Editorial Emergency/Public Service General How To Humor News Operating Opinion Products Propagation Radios Regulatory Space
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 1
HR2346 - To Curb C.B. RFI Interference
by Stephen Mitchell (N6TGK) on November 30, 2000
Stephen Mitchell N6TGK explores this bill for us
Page 1
As you can see the link doesn't copy. Instead do a search on "HR2346" in the seach by title field of this website, it will return you the link to the entire discussion.
KF7CG
|
| |
|
RE: ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null A
|
|
|
by VE3LXL on August 4, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> If the federal government chooses not to enforce it's laws, then do states or localities have the right to make laws of their own and enforce them?
The issue here is if local governments can make laws that directly contradict federal law - in other words, can they override federal law? This ordinance says that a licensed radio operator (the amateur) can be fined if he interferes with unlicensed Part 15 devices (e.g., household electronic appliances). This is directly the opposite of what the federal rules say.
|
| |
|
RE: ARRL Argues That Oklahoma Towns RFI Ordinance Is 'Null A
|
|
|
by KE4MOB on August 4, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The problem is that the ARRL's argument is that the FCC is solely responsible for matters of RFI and radio transmissions.
And have others have pointed out, Congress has delegated some of that authority to local and state regulators. The question at hand is if the existing ordinance is overreaching and assumes local and state governments are in fact delegated the power that the ordinance wields.
I'm guessing it will be tossed, but one never knows. Sounds like a U.S. Court of Appeals case in the making.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other News Articles
Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:
Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial:
New Communication Exhibit Helps Kids Get the Message:
Transmission of Images - No Internet, Satellite, Cable, or Cells Needed!
Deltona Youth Loves to Ham It Up on the Radio:
|
