A proposal to sell off UHF radio frequencies isn't winning any friends at the nation's largest ham radio organization.
The American Radio Relay League, based in Newington, is challenging a portion of H.R. 607, the Broadband for First Responders Act of 2011.
The bill would raise money for the federal government, by auctioning off two large chunks of spectrum in the 400 MHz band. For hams, it would mean the loss of 420-440 MHz, two thirds of their existing 70-cm UHF band. For public safety, it would mean the loss of 450-470 MHz, now home to hundreds of police, fire and business radio systems across the country.
In trade, public safety users would be assigned to the 700 MHz band, on channels that became vacant when analog television went digital in 2009. The newly available frequencies are known as "D-Block," and first went out to bid in 2008. That auction was scrapped when the first bids didn't meet the $1.3 billion minimum price set by the FCC.
H.R. 607, authored by Rep. Peter King, R-NY, would improve interoperability by putting public safety on 700 MHz, close to the existing 800 MHz band. It would also create wi-fi networks for mobile data, video streams and radio-computer connections.
Ham radio would be left holding the short straw, with no way to replace the lost frequencies.
The plan is "ill conceived and flawed," and could harm the ability of radio amateurs to provide public service communications, says Dave Sumner, chief executive officer of the ARRL.
"These (UHF) frequencies are not public safety allocations and never should have been included," he says in the League's Spectrum Defense Bulletin.
Sumner does not oppose the rest of the legislation, or its benefit to public safety.
Reassignment of 420-440 MHz would cripple some amateur radio satellites, because they can't be retuned while in orbit.
It would also effect weak signal transmissions, beacons, and EME (Earth-Moon-Earth) "moonbounce" operations, the ARRL says.
H.R. 607 is now in the hands of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

















Comments