[Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 149, Issue 10

[Colin Lamb]

The agent still needs your consent to enter the premises.  If you do not 
give consent, a warrant is needed.  However, if you do not consent, they 
are authorized to make conclusions adverse to you and your license is in 
jeopardy.  Before the agent enters your home, he will ask for your 
consent.  This is different than a warrant, where no consent is required.

The FCC has authority to make the inspections, which is necessary so 
they can revoke your license if you refuse the inspection.

Colin Lamb  K7FM

On 5/4/2015 4:22 PM, Zev Darack wrote:
> The FCC does not agree with you.
>
> Section 303(n) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act) gives
> the Federal Communications Commission the "authority to inspect all radio
> installations associated with stations required to be licensed by any Act,
> or which the Commission by rule has authorized to operate without a license
> under section 307(e)(1), or which are subject to the provisions of any Act,
> treaty, or convention binding on the United States . . ." 47 U.S.C. 303(n)
> Both Section 303(n) of the Act, and the Rules which implement the Act,
> grant the right to inspect most radio operations to the Commission, and by
> delegated authority to the Commission's Bureaus and agents. The Enforcement
> Bureau conducts inspections of radio installations as part of the Bureau's
> function to "[e]nforce the Commission's Rules and Regulations." 47 CFR
> 0.111(a).
>
> No warrant needed.
>
> https://www.fcc.gov/guides/inspection-fact-sheet
>
> 73,
> Zev N2WKS
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 7:01 PM Steve Wright <stevewrightnz at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 05/05/15 05:57, amps-request at contesting.com wrote:
>>> Given that the rule at the time was based on input power to the final
>> stage, it begs the question of how could they possibly know without being
>> in your shack?  Granted, enforcement then was a far cry from now with
>> station audits not unusual.
>>
>> FCC in your shack?  Did they have a signed court order?  The only way
>> anyone comes into my shack, is a mate for a coffee/tea/beer/dinner.
>> Anyone else brings documents with a signature from a magistrate.  I aint
>> got stuff to hide, but it's the principle of it.
>>
>>
>>> Today it's hard enough to get the FCC to enforce rules against
>> deliberate interference.
>>
>> The user manual of the neighbours plasma TV says it *WILL* interfere
>> with Ham Radio.  *WILL*, not "might".  That's deliberate.
>>
>>
>>
>>>    I can think of a very fine reason, to prove to the authorities,
>>> should the need arise, that you are not in violation of the rule.
>>> And to prove that you are in command of the facility to maintain
>>> your output power within your limit.
>> It is their business to prove you are in violation, not he other way
>> around.  And if you are legal custody of a thing, then you are command
>> of it - that is a legal principle, unless of you waive your rights - but
>> I do not.
>>
>>
>>> When they suspected someone of cheating, they would park their van
>>> outside his house and measure field strength. Then they would go inside
>>> and measure plate voltage and current (I presume with their own
>>> instruments). So if the guy reduced power they could compute how much he
>>> was running beforehand by the difference in field strength.
>> Go... inside...  Can they DO that?  I do not think so.  Just don't go to
>> the door.
>>
>>
>>> As to how they knew whom to check, I believe that they got tips from
>>> other hams. As I recall, many of these spot checks were during contests.
>>> I remember one guy busted for running 5 kW.
>> Just don't go to the door.  It's not an offence to not go to the door.
>> What if you were on the shitter and you couldn't go to the door?
>>
>> I find there are people in society who are preoccupied with rules and
>> regulations, and while I value that society has order and structure, I
>> do NOT value the overt self-policing that our hobby has endured.  This
>> self-policing either comes at our own hand - where we very cautiously
>> and fearfully I might add - mind our own actions to such an extent that
>> metering every single input, output, and action becomes the entire
>> hobby, and I think that's daft.  The other form of self-policing, comes
>> from "tips" (read - complaints) to the regulatory authority from other
>> Hams.
>>
>> For myself, the hobby is far too interesting to get tangled up in all
>> that sort of bickering, except for some whom I have come to think are
>> actually in ham radio exactly for that reason - I bet their hobby makes
>> their life harsh - it doesn't for me, it makes my life awesome!
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Amps mailing list
>> Amps at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2015.0.5941 / Virus Database: 4339/9695 - Release Date: 05/04/15
>
>