Does Line A still exist?

[k2zs]

I can't seem to find any reference to the frequencies that aren't to be used north of Line A, is that still a thing? I followed the link to the new FCC rules and don't see it mentioned anywhere...

 

Thanks

[PastorGary]

The modified Rules have references to that situation as found in 95.307 and 95.309.  These newly worded paragraphs can be found in the first part of the new Rules for the entire Personal Radio Services introduction in Subpart A, at the very top of the page:

 

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=72b61b708f0ce25ea78b21b0aed4e95b&node=47:5.0.1.1.5&rgn=div5

 

 

Section 95.309 may be of help.

[axorlov]

Great question. I was reading through the rules and through the https://www.fcc.gov/general/international-agreements and I can't find anything regarding 462/467 MHz.

[k2zs]

Great question. I was reading through the rules and through the https://www.fcc.gov/general/international-agreements and I can't find anything regarding 462/467 MHz.

I couldn't either, that's why I asked. I did find another thread where someone said they had dropped that restriction but I'll be darned if I can find it again lol...

[Hans]

I'm not seeing the restriction anywhere. Am I just missing it?

 

I also remember reading in at least two places on the web that the restriction no longer existed for FRS and GMRS. And, like K2zs, I can't seem to find the information sources again. If memory serves, someone had posted that their new license didn't have the restriction specified.

 

Has this been figured out?

[Hans]

Well, I happened to think that the ULS might show that information so I looked up a new, 10 year license. The restriction is there on the ULS. This is strange because it is not mentioned in part 95© or (E) and there appears to be no international agreement listed.

 

I'm stumped.

[Hans]

I couldn't either, that's why I asked. I did find another thread where someone said they had dropped that restriction but I'll be darned if I can find it again lol...

 

Was it here https://forums.mygmrs.com/topic/890-whats-permitted-close-to-the-canadian-border/?do=findComment&comment=7503 ?

[Elkhunter521]

I received my 1st GMRS lic dated Jan. 27, 2018. The line A, line C restriction was printed on the bottom of the lic. WRAQ318

[ctbailey]

Line A does still exist.

 

Part 97 (Amateur) is still clear on its' existence, with respect to 420.00-430.00 Mhz.  Canada is using that portion of the 70 cm band for government frequencies.

 

Part 95?  Why wouldn't it still exist? 

 

[Hans]

Line A does still exist.

 

Part 97 (Amateur) is still clear on its' existence, with respect to 420.00-430.00 Mhz.  Canada is using that portion of the 70 cm band for government frequencies.

 

Part 95?  Why wouldn't it still exist?

I'm not clear on your question. I and others can't find Line A mentioned in Part 95 and we can't seem to find the frequencies listed in the FCC treaties/agreements list. Have you found them?

[FrankNY]

I don't know where it's mentioned in the rules, but I'm sitting here looking at an associate's recently issued (01-27-2018) GMRS license renewal in front of me and it states the following.

 

Licensees who operate North of Line A and East of Line C may not operate on channels 462.650 MHZ,467.650 MHZ, 462.700 MHZ and 467.700 MHZ unless your previous license authorized such operations.

 

So it would seem to me that those lines continue to exist.

 

Regards,

 

Frank.

 

P.S. And would someone please notify the FCC that the word megahertz is abbreviated MHz, and to always use a blank space after a comma.

[Hans]

We know it is on the licenses but if it isn't in the regulations then it doesn't hold water, does it? The license parameters are spelled out in Part 95. If there is no definition of the restriction, either in Part 95 or in supra, then it isn't enforceable.

[FrankNY]

Again, I think that someone should notify the FCC.

 

Regards,

 

Frank.

[mainehazmt]

ah 2 other freq that no one is on up here  lol

[WRPB409]

My GMRS License was granted on 1-14-22 and there is a reference to not operating North of Line A and East of line C on 462.650 MHZ, 462.700 and 467.700 unless a previous authorized such operation.  

[PACNWComms]

1 hour ago, WRPB409 said:

My GMRS License was granted on 1-14-22 and there is a reference to not operating North of Line A and East of line C on 462.650 MHZ, 462.700 and 467.700 unless a previous authorized such operation.  

My license was granted 11-02-2021, and lists the three you have above, and also 467.650 MHz. 

[KAF6045]

Line-A is /defined/ in Part 90 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-90/subpart-A but that only specifies "Commission coordination with the Canadian authorities in the assignment of frequencies is generally required", doesn't state frequencies.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-1/subpart-F/subject-group-ECFR8fff3365c42ee11/section-1.928 gives bands in which coordination is required.

Part 95 does have the generic "Near a U.S. border or in an area that is or may be subject to an international treaty or agreement. Treaties and agreements may be viewed or downloaded from the FCC Web site: http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sand/agree/. " Unfortunately, the agreements only state that frequency coordination will be done between US and Canada -- which basically means the restricted frequencies could be changed at any time the two countries discuss possible interference.

 

 

[SteveShannon]

24 minutes ago, KAF6045 said:

Line-A is /defined/ in Part 90 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-90/subpart-A but that only specifies "Commission coordination with the Canadian authorities in the assignment of frequencies is generally required", doesn't state frequencies.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-1/subpart-F/subject-group-ECFR8fff3365c42ee11/section-1.928 gives bands in which coordination is required.

Part 95 does have the generic "Near a U.S. border or in an area that is or may be subject to an international treaty or agreement. Treaties and agreements may be viewed or downloaded from the FCC Web site: http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sand/agree/. " Unfortunately, the agreements only state that frequency coordination will be done between US and Canada -- which basically means the restricted frequencies could be changed at any time the two countries discuss possible interference.

 

 

Our GMRS licenses are specific with respect to frequencies. I don’t know if new licenses would be issued if the agreements changed. 

[KAF6045]

2 minutes ago, Sshannon said:

Our GMRS licenses are specific with respect to frequencies. I don’t know if new licenses would be issued if the agreements changed. 

I'd expect any change in coordination would incorporate the (current) 10-year license term as a transition period. That is, one would operate with the restriction printed upon their license until it is renewed, at which time the new restrictions would take effect.

Somewhat similar to the current exclusion which mentions that the current line-A restriction does not apply if one's prior license had listed those particular frequencies (hold over from the days of GMRS users being authorized only two primary frequency pairs [simplex/duplex]?).

[gortex2]

Well all my fcc licenses are above line A and everyone has to have Canadian approval....takes well over a year to get a channel approved....

[KAF6045]

Based upon https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf08144.html#s3.2 it may be time to petition Congress (Line-A is a treaty matter, FCC does not do treaties) into negotiations to remove the 462.650 and 462.700 restriction. Canada has officially assigned those to their (license free, low-power [2W]) GMRS class. Given (emphasis mine)

Quote

4. Land Mobile Licensing Moratorium and Status

In 2000 and 2004, with the release of policy decisions to allow FRS and GMRS into Canada, the Department established moratoriums on licensing of land mobile services in each of the respective bands. Land mobile licensees that choose to remain on the related frequencies may receive interference, and are subject to the provisions of the Spectrum Utilization Policy released when the applicable moratorium was established.

it would seem that their former land mobile users aren't being protected from Canadian GMRS, so why should US users need to protect them? Other than our 50W power limit...

However, the 467 repeater inputs may be problematic.

Quote

Removing the channels in the 467 MHz range which were reserved for possible future use as repeater input channels for GMRS.

Indicates that Canada will not allow for GMRS repeaters, only simplex, so the question is raised as to what /might/ they assign in that band?

https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf01320.html shows that Canada still promulgates the confusion of FRS and GMRS as one category. The FRS portion matches our current FRS (fixed antenna, 0.5W on "8-14", 2W on "1-7", "15-22"). It is not clear if their GMRS portion is allowed for removable antennas. E.1.1(c) only states "FRS", whereas the rest of the regulations consistently use "FRS/GMRS".

Side note: That GMRS-M is Canada's response to our MURS digital data feature; the MURS frequencies still being heavily used for business licensees in Canada.

[SteveShannon]

My state (Montana) publishes this interoperability guide for radio frequencies:

https://media.dojmt.gov/wp-content/uploads/MA_Manual_2021_color_website.pdf

Line A figures heavily in it.