 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||
|
|
To support HR 2160 -- The Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Enhancement Act of 2009 -- the ARRL is asking its membership to contact their members of the US House of Representatives with a request to become co-sponsors of this significant piece of legislation. [continued: Read More]
On Wednesday, April 29, 2009 Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) introduced HR 2160, the Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Enhancement Act of 2009, in the US House of Representatives. This bill, if passed, would “promote and encourage the valuable public service, disaster relief, and emergency communications provided on a volunteer basis by licensees of the Federal Communications Commission in the Amateur Radio Service, by undertaking a study of the uses of Amateur Radio for emergency and disaster relief communications, by identifying unnecessary or unreasonable impediments to the deployment of Amateur Radio emergency and disaster relief communications, and by making recommendations for relief of such unreasonable restrictions so as to expand the uses of Amateur Radio communications in Homeland Security planning and response.” The bill has been referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The bill currently has five co-sponsors: Madeleine Bordallo (Guam), Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) and Bennie Thompson (D-MS). Representative Thompson serves as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security. Representatives Jackson-Lee, Lofgren and Kilroy are members of that committee.
“We understand that Representative Jackson-Lee was very impressed with the radio amateurs she encountered on a visit to an Emergency Operations Center in Houston during Hurricane Ike last September,” said ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ. “We are grateful to her and to the five original co-sponsors for their support of Amateur Radio and the encouragement that their bill offers.”
ARRL President Joel Harrison, W5ZN, concurred: “We are excited to have Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee introduce HR 2160. It is extremely encouraging to have the support of a number of original co-sponsors -- including several members of the House Homeland Security Committee -- who recognize the importance of Amateur Radio’s long history of public service. Once the text of the bill is available we will be asking ARRL members to seek co-sponsorship and support from their own representatives.”
If enacted into law, H.R. 2160 - the Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Enhancement
Act of 2009 - would instruct the Secretary of Homeland Security to undertake a study, and
report its findings to Congress within 180 days, on the uses and capabilities of Amateur
Radio communications in emergencies and disaster relief.
The study shall:
The following legislative positions were developed to guide the efforts of ARRL volunteers and staff during the 111th Congress of the United States (2009-2010).
The ability of the Amateur Radio Service to maintain and expand its benefits to the public rests on two key elements of public policy: adequate access to the radio spectrum and the ability to install and operate effective Amateur Radio stations.
Frequencies allocated to the Amateur Radio Service are the technological equivalent of a “national park,” where all may enjoy a natural resource for the purpose of experimentation, education and voluntary emergency communications, provided they demonstrate, through testing, that they are responsible users. Like allocations to other radiocommunication services, the allocations to the Amateur Radio Service offer protection against interference from other services as well as from unlicensed emitters.
The ARRL supports measures that preserve and protect access to existing Amateur Radio Service and Amateur Satellite Service frequencies as a natural resource for the enjoyment of all properly licensed individuals, and protect against interference from unlicensed emitters.
An Amateur Radio station is only as effective as its antenna. Increasingly pervasive private land use regulations (covenants, conditions and restrictions) limit radio amateurs’ housing choices to such an extent that in many parts of the country it is not possible to install an effective Amateur Radio antenna in a residential area. The ARRL supports the right of federally licensed radio amateurs to be able to install reasonable antennas on their own homes.
To implement these two key elements of public policy in the 111th Congress and to serve the public interest, the ARRL has adopted the following legislative objectives.
Objective #1: The ARRL seeks legislation to extend the requirement for “reasonable accommodation” of Amateur Radio station antennas (a requirement that now applies to state and local regulations) to all forms of land use regulation.
This could be achieved by amending Section 207 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to add the phrase, “...or that preclude or otherwise do not reasonably accommodate communications by stations federally licensed in the Amateur Radio Service.”
BACKGROUND: In 1985 the FCC established a limited preemption policy that fairly balanced the federal interest in protecting and enhancing Amateur Radio emergency and public service communications and the state/local interest in exercising jurisdiction over land use policy. This limited preemption policy is set out in §97.15(b) of the Commission’s Rules:
Except as otherwise provided herein, a station antenna structure may be erected at heights and dimensions sufficient to accommodate amateur service communications. [State and local regulation of a station antenna structure must not preclude amateur service communications. Rather, it must reasonably accommodate such communications and must constitute the minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the state or local authority’s legitimate purpose. See PRB-1, 101 FCC 2d 952 (1985) for details.]
This policy has worked well for more than 20 years and has withstood judicial review. It has encouraged reasonable accommodation of Amateur Radio antenna systems in residential areas by municipal land use authorities and in numerous cases has avoided unnecessary litigation. However, the FCC has declined to extend the policy to private land use regulations in the absence of a Congressional mandate.
The federal interest in protecting and enhancing Amateur Radio emergency and public service communications and in promoting the Amateur Radio Service generally as a benefit to the public is the same in areas that are subject to covenants, conditions and restrictions as in areas subject only to state and municipal land use regulation.
Accordingly, the ARRL seeks from Congress an instruction to the FCC to apply its longstanding preemption policy to all types of land use regulations, consistently and without discrimination.
Objective #2: The ARRL opposes legislation that encourages the deployment of RF technologies such as broadband over power line (BPL) systems unless adequate safeguards against interference to licensed radiocommunication services are included in the legislation.
BACKGROUND: The ARRL has more than five years of experience dealing with interference resulting from BPL. While BPL has failed to gain a significant toehold as a consumer broadband delivery mechanism, its proponents are now touting BPL as part of the “smart grid” to improve the efficiency of the nation’s electric power grid. The ARRL does not oppose this application of BPL technology as long as adequate steps to prevent radio interference are mandated. The mistakes made with BPL must not be repeated with other RF-generating technologies.
Objective #3: The ARRL opposes legislation that would diminish the rights of federal licensees in favor of unlicensed emitters, especially unintentional emitters.
BACKGROUND: In adopting its BPL rules the FCC took an unprecedented step in creating a “safe harbor” in which unlicensed, unintentional emitters are permitted to interfere with licensed radiocommunication services and are not required to correct the interference. By doing so, the FCC has diminished the rights of its licensees and has devalued the radio spectrum. The FCC’s authority to enact such a permissive regulation is questionable at best. Therefore, the ARRL must be vigilant against any legislative efforts to legitimize this action after the fact.
Objective #4: The ARRL seeks recognition of the unique resources, capabilities, and expertise of the Amateur Radio Service in any legislation addressing communications issues related to emergencies, disasters, or homeland security.
BACKGROUND: The Amateur Radio Service is the only widely deployed communications system that requires no infrastructure in order to communicate across great distances. Radio amateurs possess the skills and the equipment to bridge the communication gaps that inevitably develop when normal communications networks are destroyed, disrupted or overloaded.
Public Law 109-295, Sec. 671(b), Title XVIII, Sec. 1805(c) includes amateur radio operators among the communications providers with which Regional Emergency Communications Coordination (RECC) Working Groups are to coordinate in the course of their duties. As additional legislation is introduced and considered to address the need for robust, sustainable and interoperable voice and data communications networks to be available during and after natural disasters, acts of terrorism and other manmade disasters, Congress should recognize the capabilities of the Amateur Radio Service and should mandate that representatives of Amateur Radio emergency response organizations be included in planning and coordination groups at all levels of government.
Objective #5: The ARRL supports the complementary legislative objectives of other radiocommunication services, particularly the public safety and scientific services that require spectrum access and protection from interference for noncommercial purposes that benefit the public.
BACKGROUND: The Amateur Radio Service is among the radiocommunication services that use the radio spectrum in ways that benefit the public and that do not provide a revenue stream. Public policy must continue to support and encourage such uses. Spectrum policy must not subordinate these services to commercial services simply because the commercial users can afford to pay for spectrum access.
