Jump to content


Photo

DMR on GMRS

DMR on GMRS

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#21 intermod

intermod

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:KAF1291

Posted 03 February 2018 - 03:00 PM

No. Part 90 is not your party line.

 

90.403(a), (d), and (e) all limit your communications to only the permitted uses in 90.405, and ( B) will hold the licensee responsible for any violations, regardless of who is transmitting under the Part 90 license.

90.405(a)(2) limits your communications to transmissions directly related and necessary to your Part 90 eligibility. Unnecessary communications clog up the limited frequency pool for other eligible Part 90 licensees; they too are paying for a license, and interfering with their essential communications with your non-essential communications can warrant FCC investigation.

90.427(a) makes it extremely unwise to publish your operating frequency and access codes to the public, as you become responsible for a stranger's operation. 90.433© also makes you responsible for their radios, and 90.443( B) expects you to have some sort of Part 90 compliance information for each radio used, in addition to records of all maintenance. If you're not in direct control of the radios used on your license, station inspection (which you're making yourself an easy target for) will get messy.

 

If you're claiming eligibility with some purpose you stretched the truth to make, most of your communications won't be necessary and incidental to the operations stated in your eligibility, violating 90.403. If you make up a purpose you have no intention of fulfilling, you're lying on an official form submitted to the federal government and committing a crime; furthermore, you will not be making essential communications as the eligibility does not exist and no essential communications can be made, further violating 90.403.

 

If you're going to get a commercial license because you are performing commercial activities, go right ahead. That does not authorize you to use a Part 90 authorization to do your Part 95 activities. That is what Part 97 is for. I won't condone the recommendation of Part 90 when the stated purpose of operation is in conflict with the FCC rules and better fulfilled by other services.

 

All true - there are risks with everything.  If one does use Part 90, they just need to be prepared to justify their rule interpretation with the Commission.

 

Each year there is less FCC enforcement staff, less enforcement, and the trend is to only spend time on incidents that affect public safety systems (considering just Part 90).  They are not seeking these things out, and normally do not currently respond for Part 90 business issues even if there is a formal complaint.  A good part of NXDN and DMR communications are encrypted anyway (its included free with the digital radio now and enabled with a checkbox...), so there is no way for the FCC to know the message content - its virtually unenforceable.   But could they drop in and listen to your radio's speaker - of course.  Likelihood?  Low.  

  

The activity needs to be a gross violation with limited grey area for a violation these days.  Of course there is no grey area with ยง90.35's eligibility requirement of "....operation of a commercial activity..."   ;)

 

Personally, I have yet to see an NOV for a Part 90 business eligibility issue, but I could have missed it.   

 

Not condoning this, just describing my observations over the years.    



#22 Jackel0228

Jackel0228

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:WRAE320

Posted 03 February 2018 - 03:24 PM

Well I actually do have a legitimate commercial application that we really DO use for our business. The whole reason I personally got the part 90 license is because even though it's a family owned business that is operated by the FCC's definition of immediate family members, I felt that we were also using the channels for commercial activities, as well as casual family communications. So rather than take something away from the true GMRS user group, I felt getting an IG license covers every aspect more suitably, Even though not every communication is business related. So what's the solution? Change channels every time you want to ask your wife what's for dinner?

Also, I've carried radios all my working life and I can say that there is always casual conversation among users, from a chemical plant, petroleum refinery, propane pipeline or construction site. Am I suggesting that you get a IG license to operate the business of raising a child or cook dinner? No, that seems like a blatant disregard for the rules, but I think paying your money, doing some frequency coordination and acting responsibly is a good way to think.

#23 intermod

intermod

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:KAF1291

Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:35 PM

Well I actually do have a legitimate commercial application that we really DO use for our business. The whole reason I personally got the part 90 license is because even though it's a family owned business that is operated by the FCC's definition of immediate family members, I felt that we were also using the channels for commercial activities, as well as casual family communications. So rather than take something away from the true GMRS user group, I felt getting an IG license covers every aspect more suitably, Even though not every communication is business related. So what's the solution? Change channels every time you want to ask your wife what's for dinner?

Also, I've carried radios all my working life and I can say that there is always casual conversation among users, from a chemical plant, petroleum refinery, propane pipeline or construction site. Am I suggesting that you get a IG license to operate the business of raising a child or cook dinner? No, that seems like a blatant disregard for the rules, but I think paying your money, doing some frequency coordination and acting responsibly is a good way to think.

 

Agree...I also have a business so this would work for me...

 

G



#24 WRAF213

WRAF213

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts
  • LocationVentura, CA, USA
  • GMRS Callsign:WRAF213
  • Ham Callsign:KJ6PSG

Posted 04 February 2018 - 07:46 PM

Asking what's for dinner on a Part 90 system is fine if kept to a minimum; regulators almost certainly won't be pedantic about that. Creating a Part 90 system and inviting a closed group of friends to do casual conversation on it is not. Openly inviting people to join the system for casual conversation will get your license revoked. The FCC can do a station inspection if they suspect this, regardless of whether you're using encrpytion. Whether they end up doing so or not is irrelevant, that doesn't make it any more legal or responsible.



#25 jimlock

jimlock

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • GMRS Callsign:wrbk862

Posted 06 December 2018 - 06:45 PM

P25 (C4FM - emission types F1D and F1E) is allowed on GMRS believe it or not. DMR (FXD and FXE) is not. Very odd.

https://www.law.corn...text/47/95.1771

 

 


  • Hans likes this

#26 WRAF213

WRAF213

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts
  • LocationVentura, CA, USA
  • GMRS Callsign:WRAF213
  • Ham Callsign:KJ6PSG

Posted 06 December 2018 - 08:11 PM

P25 voice is not F1D, and F1E is not allowed. Similarly, DMR is not FXD/FXE -- that's a catch-all for different data encapsulations. The FCC has made it very clear that frequency-modulated voice traffic must be F3E or G3E, to prevent manufacturer exclusive voice formats. P25 is not, and for the foreseeable future, will not be allowed on GMRS, just like all other digital voice formats. They express this in the 2017 report on Part 95 reform and 95.1787.
  • Hans likes this

#27 Radioguy7268

Radioguy7268

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • LocationSoutheastern PA

Posted 07 December 2018 - 01:02 PM

I agree with your comment about Digital emissions, the FCC has been pretty clear that GMRS is supposed to be analog voice in a clear & unencrypted state (foreign languages allowed - as long as your ID is in English or CWID).

Asking what's for dinner on a Part 90 system is fine if kept to a minimum; regulators almost certainly won't be pedantic about that. Creating a Part 90 system and inviting a closed group of friends to do casual conversation on it is not. Openly inviting people to join the system for casual conversation will get your license revoked. The FCC can do a station inspection if they suspect this, regardless of whether you're using encrpytion. Whether they end up doing so or not is irrelevant, that doesn't make it any more legal or responsible.

 

However, when it comes to Part 90, I'm pretty sure that an FB6 private carrier repeater license can be used any way that a paying customer chooses to use it. I've never seen a single action from the FCC since the deregulation in 1980 for "casual communication" on Part 90 frequencies.  

 

I've got more than one licensed FB6 (and FB8) system, and I've never cared what a customer talked about. I also don't think the FCC ever asked to look at my books and see how much I was charging those FB6 customers. I think the definition of "Private Carrier" is fairly loose. I just told the Frequency Coordinators that I was planning to offer airtime service to my customers.


  • Hans likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users