Look at this!

Misunderstanding kept intact from question to answer to posting.

And did you know that in the country of England they speak American?

And that is normal for me most of the time.  But, in my opinion, if it was directed at Part 15 U.S. , the FCC has a lot of cleanup to do allowing past compliant stations to continue.  Then there is the whole Carrier Current and leaky coax group.  

Plus, they would need to eliminate the certs on the handful of part 15 transmitters that actually have it with the intention of transmitting in either the FM or AM band.

If that is not the case, then the definition of Microbroadcasting will have to be defined.  Does it include hooking up your Ipod to the transmitter?  I can go on and on....

At worst, it is a personal interpretation by a FCC employee, which could open a significant amount of door/threshold distance concerning earlier posts.

At best, I will grab a cold drink and wait for the next interpretation by the next agent concerning a legal Part 15 station.

As I suggested in the ALPB board, this needs to be independently confirmed with other FCC offices.  Since the FCC is not concerned with content (unlike the CRTC in Canada), I have difficulty believing that this is accurate.

Just went back to the ALPB board and Carl clears this up.  If you exceed Part 15 rules when broadcasting, THEN (and only then) do you require an experimental license.  Which is basically what has been said all along - you cannot exceed the field strength limits in those rules without being licensed.

Right on track, and follows context very well with past rulings and comments. 

The power dims now as Part 15 stations nationwide resume broadcast...

Its not. Don't believe a word of this or anything their "insider" guy says. There has to be some serious misinterpretation on the insiders part, or this is flat out twisting of words and stretching of truths in order to stir the pot.

Reprinted from ALPB Forums by authors permission.

Reconstructing

Try this question for size...

Q. Can a part 15 operator experiment outside of the part 15 rules even if the experimentation is brief?

Now look at the answer given by the FCC man.

His answer basically says....

 A. No. If you exceed part 15 levels you would need an Experimental License no matter how long or short the experimentation is.

Does this clear things up?

From the initiative site from the user "Secret Lab"

"I think you've had a major miscommunication with the FCC, 'The Legacy'. OET 63 is primarily directed at the FCC requirements for manufacturers of Part 15 devices, who will be seeking certification or registration under the rules. Here's what it says about your situation:

"Hobbyists, inventors and other parties that design and build Part 15 transmitters with
no intention of ever marketing them may construct and operate up to five such
transmitters for their own personal use without having to obtain FCC equipment
authorization. If possible, these transmitters should be tested for compliance with the
Commission's rules. If such testing is not practicable, their designers and builders are
required to employ good engineering practices in order to ensure compliance with the
Part 15 standards."

"Home-built transmitters, like all Part 15 transmitters, are not allowed to cause
interference to licensed radio communications and must accept any interference that
they receive. If a home-built Part 15 transmitter does cause interference to licensed
radio communications, the Commission will require its operator to cease operation
until the interference problem is corrected. Furthermore, if the Commission determines
that the operator of such a transmitter has not attempted to ensure compliance with the
Part 15 technical standards by employing good engineering practices then that operator
may be fined up to $10,000 for each violation and $75,000 for a repeat or continuing
violation."

"Operating a prototype of a product that is ultimately intended for market is not
considered "personal use." Thus, a party that designs and builds a transmitter with
plans to mass produce and market a future version of it must obtain an experimental
license from the FCC in order to operate the transmitter for any purpose other than
testing for compliance with the Part 15 technical standards. Information on
experimental licenses may be obtained from the contact point listed in the Additional
Information section of this bulletin. FCC authorization is not required in order to test
a transmitter for compliance with the Part 15 technical standards."

So it's not about prohibiting broadcasting per se. It's about whether you built the transmitter, and if you intend to sell more of them. Period. If you're using a certified transmitter, you're fine. If you built it, simply make sure it's in compliance and don't sell any of them without getting the FCC involved."

Carl this was Yesterdays Q&A to the FCC.

I'm talking about Today's Q&A found out by a member who has always been thurough even when it cam to the very manual's you have at the ALPB.

We at the New Radio Revolution are all about change.  But and here is the big but you have to know what the current rules are before change can happen.  So we got the answer right from an FCC agent that was in the part 15 department.

The whole thing changes when you run a Radio Station.  And didn't someone either on the ALPB or part15(dot)us mention that part 15 was never meant to broadcast to an audience?  Please don't shoot the messenger.  I did say that the New Radio Revolution would uncover the truth good, bad, and ugly.  There is a bright side to this however:

You CAN apply for an experimental license and go OVER PART 15 LIMITS!!  So if you need a license to run a Radio Station why not simply apply for say a 1 Watt, 5 Watt experimental license and then keep track of any interference this may cause.  Yes you may have to report to an engineer, however you get what you want in this case.

We're still working with the agents to try and clarify this ever further.  Again don't soot the messenger (or messengers here) because its you the operator who is the ones responsible for how you proceed from here.  We are simply reporting our findings.  If you don't like our answers and think their BS to stir the pot by ALL MEANS CALL THE FCC AND BE SURE TO BE SPICIFIC IN YOUR QUESTIONS!!

New Radio Revolution (Paving the way since June 5th 2015).

Well, considering I know our cluster's FCC lawyer quite well...

But then again what do I know, I only oversee 3 licensed stations and all the regulation that comes with it.

TheLegacy said: "You CAN apply for an experimental license and go OVER PART 15 LIMITS!!"

That is 100% true, but it is only HALF of the full story.

The other half is: "... and the FCC can turn you down."

And the other part, that once you have an "Experimental License you can run a radio station that pretends to test for interference, la la la", is not what the rule allows. "The Messenger" makes stuff up sometimes.

And we never get rid of the old problem that has tarnished the New Radio Revolution from the beginning, all these "shocking breakthrough revelations" are HEAR SAY"! And worse, it's coming from mysterious unnamed people.

I AM NOT ANGRY AND WILL NOT HARM THE MESSENGER, GEEZ UGHgrr**#!!

Call a nurse I'm on the floor.

The reported conversations with FCC agents would be more credible and accountable if the agents' names and contact information were provided.

In the mean time, parts 15.209, 15.219, 15.221, and 15.239 address only technical specifications for the transmitter system and say nothing about audiences or broadcasting or other uses of the equipment..

Neil

Well one things for sure, it has increased traffic on the board(s) today.   I haven't been around here long enough to say what I really think.  And I should add, its not my place to.

But, it would seem that this event started a similar scenario comparable to school kids gossiping about a sneak peak or super secret they just learned.  

Then one person blabs it all over until the tiny spec of truth that started the whole thing is completely buried in misguided fiction which usually involved SuzyQ giving up something to the whole football team while eating cheetos at her parents house during a full solar eclipse.

Its a good thing I didn't say what I really thought...  And of course this is just they way it looks from my desk (without a webcam).  I might be wrong.  I was once in 1987.

I think it's the responsibility of those making these allegations to also seek independent verification (and it would have been preferable before, rather than after, making them).