[RadioRay]

While I don't condone these illegal operations he make it appear it is a major problem which it is not. That's face it hams don't use the portion of 10 meters where these illegal operations take place. While I missed the lost of 11 meters by one year we lost 11 meters because of lack of use. The same thing can happen if the hams continue to not use that portion of 10 meters. (quote)

NOT using "that" portion of 10 Meters? HA!!!!!! Since when? MANY of us use it regularly! And that portion where we often find the drivers is reserved for digital modes such as Morse, RTTY and non-voice modes. That's part of the confusion WRT truckers. They listen to 'channel 19, 2 up" on their band switch and think,
"that's a quiet 'channel' in the freeband I can use". But it is NOT. That "noise" he hears and wonders what it is IS hams talking to each other with those NON-voice modes. But drivers only know about talking on a CB where everyone talks nonstop! So he hears that noise ("brrrrr-up") and thinks, "ah, that's just a noise." But it is NOT!

And it makes it EASY for the hams (like the ones that reported Smith Transport) to document the truckers' activities to FCC!

They don't BELONG there! They are not WELCOME there! And they CAN be hit HARD for yapping there. If they want to operate there, then they can EARN the privilege by following the law, testing for the privilege like a lot of trucking hams have done.

KC0IV says no one has been fined for talking on 10 Meters. Back in a few minutes with one.......................

RR

[RadioRay]

OK, here it IS!

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 ) )
In the Matter of ) File Number: EB-06-AT-057
Larry J. Duckworth ) NAL/Acct. No. 200732480002
Cordele, Georgia )

FRN: 0015847296 ) ) FORFEITURE ORDER Adopted: February 14, 2007 Released: February 16, 2007 By the Regional Director, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION

1. In this Forfeiture Order ("Order"), we issue a monetary forfeiture in the amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) to Larry J. Duckworth for willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Commission's Act of 1934, as amended ("Act").

The noted violation involves Mr. Duckworth's operation of an unlicensed radio transmitter.

II. BACKGROUND 2. In response to a complaint, on July 18, 2006, agents from the Commission's Atlanta Office of the Enforcement Bureau ("Atlanta Office") conducted an inspection of Mr. Duckworth's CB radio station located inside his residence. The agents observed a coaxial cable connecting a linear amplifier to his CB transmitter. The power of the station as installed measured at 106 watts. Mr. Duckworth admitted to the agents that he had been operating the station with the attached linear amplifier. The agents informed him that he was in violation of the Commission's Rules ("Rules") and that use of a linear amplifier voided his authority to operate his station. Mr. Duckworth voluntarily surrendered his linear amplifier.

3. In response to another complaint, on September 28, 2006, agents from the Atlanta Office re-inspected the CB station in Mr. Duckworth's residence. The agents observed a coaxial cable connecting two linear amplifiers to his CB transmitter. The power of the station as installed measured at 2500 watts.

The CB transmitter at his station was a non-certificated CB transmitter, Galaxy model DX99V. Mr. Duckworth admitted he used his station as configured.

2. On December 15, 2006, the Atlanta Office issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture to Mr. Duckworth in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for the apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Act.

Mr. Duckworth submitted a response to the NAL requesting a reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture based on his inability to pay.

III. DISCUSSION 3. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) of the Act, Section 1.80 of the Rules, and The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement").

In examining Mr. Duckworth's response, Section 503(b) of the Act requires that the Commission take into account the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of the violation and, with respect to the violator, the degree of culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and other such matters as justice may require.

4. Section 301 of the Act requires that no person shall use or operate any apparatus for the transmission of energy or communications or signals by radio within the United States except under and in accordance with the Act and with a license.

Section 95.404 of the Rules states that CB operators do not require an individual license to operate a CB station because they are authorized by this rule to operate in accordance with the rules in this subpart.

5. Section 95.409(a) of the Rules requires that CB operators use an FCC certificated CB transmitter at their CB stations. Section 95.409 of the Rules also states that use of a non-certificated transmitter voids your authority to operate your station. On September 28, 2006, agents from the Atlanta Office observed a non-certificated CB transmitter, a Galaxy DX99V, installed at his Mr. Duckworth's CB station. Mr. Duckworth admitted using a non-certificated CB transmitter.

6. Section 95.410(a) of the Rules states that CB station transmitter output must not exceed 4 watts carrier power. Section 95.410(c) of the Rules also states that use of a transmitter which has carrier power in excess of that authorized voids your authority to operate the station. On July 18, and September 28, 2006, Mr. Duckworth's station carrier power was measured to be 106 watts and 2500 watts, respectively.

4. Section 95.411(a)(1) of the Rules prohibits attaching an external radio frequency (RF) power amplifier, sometimes called a linear amplifier, to a CB transmitter in any way.
Section 95.411(b) of the Rules states that there are no exceptions to this rule and use of a power amplifier voids your authority to operate the station. On July 18 and September 28, 2006, agents observed linear amplifiers attached to Mr. Duckworth's CB transmitter. On both dates, Mr. Duckworth admitted using the linear amplifiers attached to his transmitter.

5. Because Mr. Duckworth violated the CB Rules by using a non-certificated CB transmitter, attaching linear amplifiers to his CB transmitter, and operating overpower, he voided his authority to operate his CB station pursuant to Section 95.404 of the Rules. Thus, based on the evidence, we find that Mr. Duckworth willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the Act by operating a radio transmitter, his CB transmitter, without the required authorization from the Commission.

6. In his response to the NAL, Mr. Duckworth asserts that a $10,000 forfeiture would produce a financial hardship and requests that the forfeiture be cancelled or significantly reduced. The Commission has determined that, in general, an entity's gross revenues are the best indicator of its ability to pay a forfeiture.

After reviewing Mr. Duckworth's financial documentation, we conclude that a reduction of the forfeiture to $2,500 would be appropriate.

7. We have examined Mr. Duckworth's response to the NAL pursuant to the statutory factors above, and in conjunction with the Forfeiture Policy Statement. As a result of our review, we conclude that Mr. Duckworth willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the Act. Although cancellation of the proposed monetary forfeiture is not warranted, reduction of the forfeiture amount to $2,500 is appropriate based on Mr. Duckworth's demonstrated inability to pay.

IV. ORDERING CLAUSES

8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of the Commission's Rules, Larry J. Duckworth IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for violation of Section 301 of the Act.

While this particular one does not refer to 10 Meters directly, there ARE others that do. If you think you CAN'T get fined, keep thinking that............!


RR

[greg3564]

Originally Posted by RadioRay

OK, here it IS!

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 ) )
In the Matter of ) File Number: EB-06-AT-057
Larry J. Duckworth ) NAL/Acct. No. 200732480002
Cordele, Georgia )

FRN: 0015847296 ) ) FORFEITURE ORDER Adopted: February 14, 2007 Released: February 16, 2007 By the Regional Director, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION

1. In this Forfeiture Order ("Order"), we issue a monetary forfeiture in the amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) to Larry J. Duckworth for willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Commission's Act of 1934, as amended ("Act").

The noted violation involves Mr. Duckworth's operation of an unlicensed radio transmitter.

II. BACKGROUND 2. In response to a complaint, on July 18, 2006, agents from the Commission's Atlanta Office of the Enforcement Bureau ("Atlanta Office") conducted an inspection of Mr. Duckworth's CB radio station located inside his residence. The agents observed a coaxial cable connecting a linear amplifier to his CB transmitter. The power of the station as installed measured at 106 watts. Mr. Duckworth admitted to the agents that he had been operating the station with the attached linear amplifier. The agents informed him that he was in violation of the Commission's Rules ("Rules") and that use of a linear amplifier voided his authority to operate his station. Mr. Duckworth voluntarily surrendered his linear amplifier.

3. In response to another complaint, on September 28, 2006, agents from the Atlanta Office re-inspected the CB station in Mr. Duckworth's residence. The agents observed a coaxial cable connecting two linear amplifiers to his CB transmitter. The power of the station as installed measured at 2500 watts.

The CB transmitter at his station was a non-certificated CB transmitter, Galaxy model DX99V. Mr. Duckworth admitted he used his station as configured.

2. On December 15, 2006, the Atlanta Office issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture to Mr. Duckworth in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for the apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Act.

Mr. Duckworth submitted a response to the NAL requesting a reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture based on his inability to pay.

III. DISCUSSION 3. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) of the Act, Section 1.80 of the Rules, and The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement").

In examining Mr. Duckworth's response, Section 503(b) of the Act requires that the Commission take into account the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of the violation and, with respect to the violator, the degree of culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and other such matters as justice may require.

4. Section 301 of the Act requires that no person shall use or operate any apparatus for the transmission of energy or communications or signals by radio within the United States except under and in accordance with the Act and with a license.

Section 95.404 of the Rules states that CB operators do not require an individual license to operate a CB station because they are authorized by this rule to operate in accordance with the rules in this subpart.

5. Section 95.409(a) of the Rules requires that CB operators use an FCC certificated CB transmitter at their CB stations. Section 95.409 of the Rules also states that use of a non-certificated transmitter voids your authority to operate your station. On September 28, 2006, agents from the Atlanta Office observed a non-certificated CB transmitter, a Galaxy DX99V, installed at his Mr. Duckworth's CB station. Mr. Duckworth admitted using a non-certificated CB transmitter.

6. Section 95.410(a) of the Rules states that CB station transmitter output must not exceed 4 watts carrier power. Section 95.410(c) of the Rules also states that use of a transmitter which has carrier power in excess of that authorized voids your authority to operate the station. On July 18, and September 28, 2006, Mr. Duckworth's station carrier power was measured to be 106 watts and 2500 watts, respectively.

4. Section 95.411(a)(1) of the Rules prohibits attaching an external radio frequency (RF) power amplifier, sometimes called a linear amplifier, to a CB transmitter in any way.
Section 95.411(b) of the Rules states that there are no exceptions to this rule and use of a power amplifier voids your authority to operate the station. On July 18 and September 28, 2006, agents observed linear amplifiers attached to Mr. Duckworth's CB transmitter. On both dates, Mr. Duckworth admitted using the linear amplifiers attached to his transmitter.

5. Because Mr. Duckworth violated the CB Rules by using a non-certificated CB transmitter, attaching linear amplifiers to his CB transmitter, and operating overpower, he voided his authority to operate his CB station pursuant to Section 95.404 of the Rules. Thus, based on the evidence, we find that Mr. Duckworth willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the Act by operating a radio transmitter, his CB transmitter, without the required authorization from the Commission.

6. In his response to the NAL, Mr. Duckworth asserts that a $10,000 forfeiture would produce a financial hardship and requests that the forfeiture be cancelled or significantly reduced. The Commission has determined that, in general, an entity's gross revenues are the best indicator of its ability to pay a forfeiture.

After reviewing Mr. Duckworth's financial documentation, we conclude that a reduction of the forfeiture to $2,500 would be appropriate.

7. We have examined Mr. Duckworth's response to the NAL pursuant to the statutory factors above, and in conjunction with the Forfeiture Policy Statement. As a result of our review, we conclude that Mr. Duckworth willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the Act. Although cancellation of the proposed monetary forfeiture is not warranted, reduction of the forfeiture amount to $2,500 is appropriate based on Mr. Duckworth's demonstrated inability to pay.

IV. ORDERING CLAUSES

8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of the Commission's Rules, Larry J. Duckworth IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for violation of Section 301 of the Act.

While this particular one does not refer to 10 Meters directly, there ARE others that do. If you think you CAN'T get fined, keep thinking that............!


RR

Do you really think people are going to read this garbage? Get over your self righteousness and go bug a HAM operator web site. I'm sure you'll find plenty of other geeks to agree with your rants.

[countryhorseman]

[quote="greg3564

I'm hold multiple FEMA ICS certifications. It's funny, FEMA doesn't have HAM ops ANYWHERE in the Incident Command System. Why? Untrained hobbyists who usually have no formal training. I was trained that we were to disregard HAM ops as the information was rarely accurate and disorganized. HAM ops during a major crisis just isn't what it used to be. And that is because of the advances in communications technology.

So what were the HAM ops doing in New Orleans? Sitting in a flooded house calling for help? Public safety can have mobile repeater systems up in no time. Not all the repeater towers were "blown over." Most urban repeaters are actually mounted atop buildings and they were still intact and operating under generator power after Katrina.

I didn't want a pissing match.

My point is, while HAM still has some benefit, it is hardly is the tool it once was. The other thing is how guys like you and radio ray get all up in arms when your hobby is interrupted by heathens with no license. For crying out loud all a HAM radio is, is a glorified CB.[/quote]

Hmm, lets see, thru my ARES affiliation, I have been certified in serveral of FEMA's ICS protocols. We are also on a first call list with EMComm services are needed anywhere in Texas. Just a couple of weeks ago when Dean was in the Carribean and they activated the Emergency Preparedness plan for South Texas, over 100 HAMS were activated and given assignments to cover various functions in South and Central Texas. There is a structure in FEMA's ICS protocal for volunteer Emergency Communicators and a training structure for such. The EmComm groups are under the control and guidance of the Regional ICS, such as ARCC for the San Antonio and surrounding area. HAM's are also heavily used by the Red Cross, Salvation Army and other similiar organizations.

So that being said, I would suggest you catch up on the history and future of HAM Radio and trained Volunteer Emergency Communications Operators.

And as for Katrina, the main point of communication out of New Orleans and between 3 police substations for over a week were truck drivers that are licensed HAM's that were stuck in NO after the storm. Get it, Truck Drivers legally licensed to operate on the Amatuer Radio frequencies.

[kc0iv]

Originally Posted by RadioRay

While I don't condone these illegal operations he make it appear it is a major problem which it is not. That's face it hams don't use the portion of 10 meters where these illegal operations take place. While I missed the lost of 11 meters by one year we lost 11 meters because of lack of use. The same thing can happen if the hams continue to not use that portion of 10 meters. (quote)

NOT using "that" portion of 10 Meters? HA!!!!!! Since when? MANY of us use it regularly! And that portion where we often find the drivers is reserved for digital modes such as Morse, RTTY and non-voice modes. That's part of the confusion WRT truckers. They listen to 'channel 19, 2 up" on their band switch and think,
"that's a quiet 'channel' in the freeband I can use". But it is NOT. That "noise" he hears and wonders what it is IS hams talking to each other with those NON-voice modes. But drivers only know about talking on a CB where everyone talks nonstop! So he hears that noise ("brrrrr-up") and thinks, "ah, that's just a noise." But it is NOT!

And it makes it EASY for the hams (like the ones that reported Smith Transport) to document the truckers' activities to FCC!

They don't BELONG there! They are not WELCOME there! And they CAN be hit HARD for yapping there. If they want to operate there, then they can EARN the privilege by following the law, testing for the privilege like a lot of trucking hams have done.

KC0IV says no one has been fined for talking on 10 Meters. Back in a few minutes with one.......................

RR

Come on RR The percentage of hams that us "NON-voice modes" is extremely low and specially on 10 meters.

RR your not dealing with some new guy on the block. I've been active going on 48 years. Yes, getting real near the 1/2 century mark of being a ham. I also happen to be very active in CW. I don't have a problem copying code at 40 WPM. I've also been active on 10 meters and I'm here to tell you 10 meters CW is NOT widely used. With the elimination of the code requirement for all hams the usage will be even less.

10 meter in general has a low active due mainly to the lack of band openings. A few repeaters and even fewer digital transmissions. So you are looking at local transmissions and their mainly in the middle of the band.

So RR quit trying to blow smoke. It only weaken your argument and frankly make you look foolish.

Waiting for your list of fines for illegal 10 meter operations.

kc0iv

[kc0iv]

Originally Posted by RadioRay

OK, here it IS!

major portion deleted.

While this particular one does not refer to 10 Meters directly, there ARE others that do. If you think you CAN'T get fined, keep thinking that............!


RR

NOT a 10 meter violation. It was for a "non-certificated CB transmitter" and illegal linear amplifiers.

I would think with all these illegal 10 meter operations you would have bunches of fines.

Ill be waiting for your list of fines for illegal 10 meter operations. Maybe you should call Mr. Hollingsworth since you seen to have an inside track.

kc0iv

[kc0iv]

Originally Posted by century451

Well I am from a small town and the radios, antenna and tower was donated by Hams and is maintained by the local club. I am not talking about county emergency police and fire comunications. I am talking about emergency prepardness.

I know where Sparta, MO. been through there many times.

I have no doubt there are a few hams that supply and maintain equipment for local emergency preparedness.


kc0iv

[countryhorseman]

For the individual that was saying Amatuer Radio is not important! Funny, this area thought they were quite important and valuable. Recent article from the ARRL, there are many more like this! Just to stir the ignorance pot some more, :wink: !

==> MICHIGAN HAMS ACTIVATED DUE TO STORMS AND TORNADO

On Friday, August 24 at 5:15 PM (EDT), the National Weather Service issued a severe thunderstorm warning for Genesee County. This storm produced two tornados in the mid-Michigan area that caused severe damage to several towns. The greatest damage occurred in the City of Fenton located just south of Flint. The NWS confirmed that an EF2 tornado had touched down and had torn a path 26 miles long and up to 0.5 miles wide through Livingston, Oakland, Genesee and Lapeer County, damaging at least 250 homes and businesses. An EF2 tornado, using the Enhanced Fujita scale, is a wind estimate of 110-135 MPH in a three-second gust. More than 12,000 people lost power due to the storms.

Before the tornado hit, Michigan's Genesee County ARES and SKYWARN were activated due to a severe thunderstorm watch. The storm moved into the county with such heavy rain that visibility dropped down to zero at several points. Funnel clouds were seen in the western part of the county, but these could not be confirmed. The NWS issued a Tornado Warning based on confirmed sightings in the adjacent counties to the west, as well as reports from their Doppler radar.

As spotters continued to watch the storm, Randy Bond, N8VDS, spotted the funnel heading for Fenton and reported it to the NWS via his ham radio; Fred Moses Jr, W8FSM, confirmed the sighting. Moments later, the Genesee County 911 central dispatch center received a call that the roof on the brand new Tractor Supply Company store in Fenton had caved in and that the tornado had touched down. About half of the Fenton Community Center's roof was blown off, and debris from the building blew across the road to Fenton United Methodist Church.

Genesee County 911 called out the fire departments and activated their Fire Coordination Plan. Ham radio spotters have an agreement with Genesee County fire departments to provide supplemental communications for the departments. Hams were providing communications via the SKYWARN net and the Fire Coordination net.

As the county's fire departments started to move toward the building collapse in Fenton, hams were already on the scene. Bond and Mike Schafer, KB8RVP, shifted gears from weather spotters to Fire Coordination operators. At the request of the fire chief at the scene, Bond went to the Fenton City fire station and, using ham radio, assisted their dispatch center; the storm had damaged their radio fire communications tower, so Bond and Schafer started working dispatch for them using their ham radios until the dispatch center was able to resume normal fire communications.

Jerry Baker, KD8AYL, was next to arrive on the scene at the collapsed building and after meeting with the Incident Commander, Baker was assigned the task of setting up radio communications with more ARES volunteers in the Flint region.

As more reports of damage came in, the Fenton City and Township Fire Department became overloaded; their crippled communications tower did not help matters. ARES Emergency Coordinator for Genesee County Greg Ybarra, N8HXQ, coordinated the response during this incident and put out a call for help to District 3 Emergency Coordinator Greg Allinger, WA8OGJ. Allinger contacted other ARES units in the state, and Amateur Radio operators from nine Michigan counties responded to the Fenton area to help.

Evaluation of the damage started immediately after the storm. Baker was reassigned to a relief shelter to aid the Red Cross. What would normally have been a drive of less than 10 minutes took almost an hour due to trees and power lines down everywhere. "Trees as much as 36 inches in diameter and more than 100 years old had been ripped out of the ground by the storm; regular electric power was out and the damage reports just never seemed to end," he said.

The Genesee County Office of Emergency Management activated their Mobile Command Unit. The MCU has an Amateur Radio station in it, as well as radios for all public service organizations. The city set up a command post in the parking lot of the Fenton City fire department and began operations from there. Michigan State Police responded to the area and instituted an 8 PM curfew for everyone. State and local police set up road blocks. Access was restricted to police, fire, National Guard, Red Cross, Salvation Army or ARES.

ARES volunteers worked with all aspects of the incident. Damage reports and assessments continued until 1:30 AM Saturday when the Incident Commander determined everyone should break until 5:30 AM to get some rest.

i can't beleive i read all of this bullshit, i must be bored.

[countryhorseman]

Originally Posted by jedfxg

i can't beleive i read all of this bullshit, i must be bored.

What is bullshit? The fact that one person has actually shown anothers ignorance in that he did not know what he was spouting off about or the fact that there are actually people left in this country that make a difference on a daily basis. It amazes me the number of people that can spew BS day in and day out, but cannot back it up when challenged.

Or maybe it is the fact that some people actually use equipment in the way it was designed to be used, in a meaningful and useful manor. Other than just a forum for some coward to hide behind a mic and tell the world he forgot to put his panties on.

??????