In this episode, we join Martin Butler M1MRB, Chris Howard (M0TCH), Martin Rothwell (M0SGL), Frank Howell (K4FMH), Bill Barnes (WC3B) and Leslie Butterfields (G0CIB) to discuss the latest Amateur / Ham Radio news. Colin Butler (M6BOY) rounds up the news in brief and the episode's feature is In The Grid.

We would like to thank Walter Washburn (KT0D), an Anonymous Donor our monthly and annual subscription donors for keeping the podcast advert free. To donate, please visit - http://www.icqpodcast.com/donate

• Ham Operator Must Pay in First-Responder Interference Case

• Georgia Club Donates Radio Books to Local Library

• Year-Long Special Event Celebrates Britain's Railways

• Parker Solar Probe 'touches' the Sun

• Deadline Extended for ARRL Foundation Scholarship Applications

• Straight Key Month

• HamCation POTA Meet-up

Suitable for the urban fox 

From the January-February 2025 SARC Communicator

My power supply was an 18 volt 5.0 Ah Lithium-Ion Battery (Makita BL1850b) feeding in the Drok Buck Converter to reduce the voltage to 7.4 Volt for the Radio and that voltage was also perfect to feed the Arduino Uno as it has a 12 volt connection with its own regulator to supply 5 volt to the board.

~The Silver Fox VE3BQM

A special event station from The Netherlands

This is an HF activity on January 23 from PA25MC, which will be on the air for just one day to introduce Marines to the world of ham radio. They will try to use as many HF-bands as possible on SSB. They remind us to please remember that Amateur procedures are new to them, but will do everything to get them up to speed quickly. 

Marines are used to speaking English but naturally keep their communications short. The organizers would really appreciate it if you contribute to a successful event by connecting with them!

PA25MC is organized and supported by PI4VBD, the club station of the Royal Army. Their station will always comply with the user regulations and regulations for radio amateurs and has no military function.

 On Wednesday it was time to see if I could uphold a New Year's goal I had set for myself. Each Wednesday is the CWops Mini test for 1 hour at 1300 and 1900 UTC. I have been taking part in this weekly event for a few years now. I found it greatly helped me increase my confidence with higher speed code, becoming more familiar with my N1MM+ keyboard commands and building on my hearing the code and moving that to typing it. 

 
The code speed in the CWT's as they are called on average goes from 32wpm to 36wpm. There are times when your pushed and speeds can rise to 40 plus. I have always searched and pounced for contacts during this one-hour mini-contest. There have always been these apprehensions to run or call "CQ CWT". The mini-contests are always very well attended and these ops have an excellent grasp on CW. In the past, I have tried for a short while to run and it has been a lacklustre event for me from plan nerves and getting from ears to brain to keyboard flustered. I found once this happens things go downhill for me very fast. I then in defeat go back to search and pounce. I have been practicing over the past year with code contest programs, I have been very active in CW contests running and now it was time to commit to running in the CWTs. During the morning CWT at 1300 on Wednesday I warmed up my ears, and brain and searched and pounced for about 15 minutes. Then it was time to find a clear spot and send out "CQ CWT VE9KK". Unlike in weekend CW contests when I ran this time I felt a bit nervous. You never know the speed someone is going to come back to you at. I am perfectly fine with that as I want to improve and if you send "??" or part of a call they will slow down and all is well. 

In the 1300 UTC session, I ran for 20 minutes and actually, I was very surprised it really went off very well. Sure I did ask now and then for a repeat, had a typing breakdown due to nerves and now and then hit the wrong macro key sending the wrong message. In the 1900 UTC session, I ran for 30 minutes and it was better but as I was in the swing of things we had a power outage! 

Looking back I did ok and better than I expected, I am very glad I took the plunge and I know over time I will get better and the nerves with calm down as well. Now I know some readers will think "What is the big deal". That is very true but for me, it is like I am playing High School football and was picked up and placed in the NFL. In my humble opinion these ops are the cream of the crop when it comes to CW contesting and to be honest I find it intimidating. But one week down and 51 more to go or thereabouts!

Corporate annual reports can be real snoozers to read. Unless you have a specific interest in the contents. A high school teacher once used a similar analogy as I tried to stay awake in her class which was just before basketball practice. History is boring. Unless it touches your life! If you’re a licensed ham operator, this story possibly does touch your life. For non-profits, annual reports, if issued, are most often a fiduciary document, not just something dashed out for informal consumption. In short, you should be able to trust what financial information is reported.

That’s actually a legal aspect of being a non-profit, especially if it receives tax relief on income and donations under the IRS Code 501(c)(3). (Not all non-profits have status under this part of the tax code.) This commitment to trust is part of the determination that the IRS makes when it issues a Ruling on a non-profit corporation petition for federal tax relief. Seriously. That ruling for the ARRL came back in 1931.

The formal non-profit requirements are not as clear when it comes to non-financial statements such as factual claims made in an annual report. But the IRS makes it clear that non-profits receiving tax relief under the tax code should be publicly transparent: “By making full and accurate information about its mission, activities, finance, and governance publicly available, a charity encourages transparency and accountability to its constituents.” I was President of a small non-profit for several years, fortunate enough to have a fellow ham attorney who handled these matters weekly as my Secretary-Treasurer. We recently closed the corporation since it had fulfilled its stated mission. We never issued an annual report. Thus, I have personally been through the process. Non-profits are not required to do so but they must file Form 990 with the IRS annually, in a timely matter. For the ARRL, many such filings are available here via a name search. The ARRL Foundation’s Form 990 filings can be found there, too.

Best practices in the non-profit world, however, do suggest the following if a non-profit issues an annual report document, transparency is vital. This complements the IRS quotation on best practices in the previous paragraph:

Transparency is important for a nonprofit. People want to know how trustworthy a nonprofit organization is and see the impact of the work they’re doing. A nonprofit annual report can highlight the good you’ve done, your profits, your losses, and your expenses. This can keep volunteers and investors satisfied with what they’ve helped to create. (Mosey, a compliance assistance company for non-profits).

Especially for a non-profit like the ARRL, which is a corporation with a separate Foundation that allows donors to receive some tax benefits through those solicitations, the transparency criterion is very important.

The trust that what is said in an annual report is akin to key non-required acts that the reader experiences every day. I come from three generations of bankers (my brother was the banker, I became a news journalist then college professor). There is no requirement for a bank teller to count back cash in front of the customer. None. Their bank rating by Sheshunoff & Company will not change one whit. Why do they do it, each and every time? To certify the trust that the transaction is accurate and complete. There are many other examples available but the reader gets the point: trust and veracity are paramount for a membership-based non-profit corporation that solicits donations.

This preface is useful for what I’m about to show. When I read the 2023 Annual Report, I was looking for membership numbers. But when I read the President’s Foreword, a paragraph jumped out at me.

“According to an ARRL study, three-quarters of Technician class licensees (who make up 51% of amateur radio operators) are inactive 1 year after getting licensed.”

Wow! Let’s ponder this number. Some 75 percent of Technicians just do not participate in amateur radio as soon as one year after receiving their FCC license. Before the reader fires up a spreadsheet to copy and past the simple license numbers from the ARRL FCC Licenses page, consider what this data means. Rick K5UR was referring to 75 percent of NEW licenses, not of ALL licenses. The full Technician license count is comprised of multiple elements: Total = (Existing Licenses + New Licenses) – Expired Licenses. There is no public data readily available that will identify this equation (i.e., give unique estimates consistent with the known total).*

*Moreover, the FCC mainframe ULS database is not efficiently updated to remove expired licenses when the expiration dates pass. It's an erratic thing based upon IT workload so on any given day, the ULS database for amateur radio licenses will undoubtedly contain what "should" be expired licenses but they just haven't been purged. Joe Speroni AH0A and I have downloaded the "end of year" full set of ARS licenses on or about January 1st each year to capture the EOY dataset. Joe used to maintain a snazzy website with a database backend allowing the user to generate custom tables and graphics with filters. He sunsetted that a few years ago but I got 2000-2012 from him before that occurred. I've continued to download the data each January 1st so I have a continuing series from 2000-present. They represent a consistent dataset for EOY numbers.

But a thought experiment might be, say, 30,000 NEW Tech licenses per year. This would suggest that 22,500 would get licensed but become wholly “inactive” not later than 12 months afterwards. Imagine an active local club who works hard to get 50 new Techs into the hobby through their training and VE Testing Program in a year’s time. This would mean that only 12-13 would still be participating in the hobby a year later. Demoralizing, no?

This is a truly significant finding reported in the 2023 ARRL Annual Report so surely it was something carefully determined by people skilled in data analysis, right?. That’s what I would have assumed. It is critical to better understand this study so I needed to read it for the details.

Just knowing how being “active” in the hobby was defined and measured would be illuminating. We don’t have anything like a consensus on what this means, yet it’s used in any discussion of the state of the hobby. What were the source(s) of the data used? How large were they and how was the sample drawn? Did ARRL conduct a large random sample survey that has not been released to the public? (This is kind of a joke since they hardly ever release survey data to the membership, unlike RAC.) Will the sample generalize to some large population versus just being, say, hams in the Newington, CT area or something? So many questions that are important on this surprising result.

Yet, as the reader will see, CEO David Minster says there was not a study per se!

I sent Rick K5UR an email requesting a copy of the study cited here. So there’s no misunderstanding, I’ve reproduced the email chain for reference. No he-said, she-said here.

Let’s see if I can summarize. The ARRL President needed some data on the state of amateur radio to frame the theme of the upcoming Annual Report which was on volunteers. The President was told something, either in person or in a presentation (he says he honestly does not recall), by the CEO David Minster concerning a surprising statistic from the Strategic Working Committee about Technician License retention. Rick K5UR publishes his Foreward in the Report as a clarion call for greater volunteerism toward new Technician licensees. Routine. Next on the to-do list, right?

A volunteer for the League (me) asks for a copy of the study since it’s really important for understanding recruitment and retention of new ham operators. And the IRS says this tax-exempt non-profit corporation should be publicly transparent in its activities as well as it being “best practices” to do so. President Roderick refers it to the CEO, who runs the show in Newington. Mr. Minster then corrects the language in the official 2023 Annual Report that there really is no study per se, only a bunch of data amassed to reach some conclusions. But, on the other hand, yes, they did put the results in many tables. OK? But the CEO doesn’t have the “non-study” set of tables or is unwilling to release them. He didn’t say. Mr. Minster points to the recent Division Director to fork over answers to my basic questions noted in the email chain. As the source of this “massive set of data put into tables,” he finally replies that he has nothing to add to what CEO Minster already sent me: which was nothing! So ARRL executives have acknowledged that there is not a study in any real sense but they also refuse to disclose whatever they did to reach this surprising conclusion about Technician loss to inactivity.

The result that I illustrated above should make rational donors question why they would willingly support an education or training project just to have three-fourths of the Technicians being produced take a hike from the hobby inside of a year. Put another way, how would the reader feel if their bank just said, we don’t have to count out your cash withdrawal to you…and we don’t have to explain why.

Is the reader shocked? I'm reminded of the George Bundy character in the old television show, Married With Children, who would say in this situation: Ah geez!

Many questions come to the surface here. Were the materials lost? Did they just not know how to conduct a quality analysis of “a bunch of data” so they’re afraid of releasing it for critique by those who have professional credentials? (Among professional researchers, this is called peer-review and is expected for every study of any significance.) I honestly do not know but one is forced to guess to fill in the blanks since he refused to communicate as CEO Minster told him to do.

I get that Rick K5UR got caught short with this, trusting his CEO to get him key data for the Foreward of the Annual Report which focuses on volunteers in the hobby. I’ve put together many technical documents like this and you have to rely on others for accurate information. The CEO is compensated $303,246 plus another $45,475 in additional monies (or $348,721) according to the latest IRS Filing. This should be the kind of thing that he does for the President in preparation for a fiduciary Annual Report just like getting an official auditor to verify the financial books. But you must get these things right in such a public document, according to those who proffer best-practices for non-profit filings of annual reports. Rick knows this better than I as he is a practicing labor attorney. You must present accurate statements to the court and must face questions by the judge or opposing counsel. This time, it’s the court of public opinion. Since the CEO pushed it off on a former Division Director, it’s confusing. Or perhaps not. The reader can make their own determination here.

The CEO is compensated $303,246 plus another $45,475 in additional monies (or $348,721) according to the latest IRS Filing. This should be the kind of thing that he does for the President in preparation for a fiduciary Annual Report just like getting an official auditor to verify the financial books. 

I’ve been involved with some key issues like this myself. My university research center years ago worked with the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) on the alternative year survey of the U.S. Senate and the House staff. When the Blue Book report, as it was called, was released, it was said that everything on the Hill ceased for 15 minutes. Why? Congressional staffers wanted to see where they ranked in compensation among their peers. When Time Magazine was doing an investigative piece on the glass ceiling in Congressional staffing compensation for women, the CEO of CMF was on one telephone line with the Time reporter and me on another. When Time would ask thus and so, CMF would tell me the question and I’d quickly run the survey data on my Sun workstation, verbally giving the CMF CEO the results for his response to the reporter on the other line. The CMF CEO was speaking to the public, in the form of Time Magazine’s readership. He had to get what he said right so he called on a scientist involved with the data collection and analysis of congressional staff salary data. That’s a fairly pressured environment to get it as accurate as possible but that’s the deal, no? And, while Time is a for-profit magazine, the principle is the same for the ARRL especially since they solicit contributions from donors.

With the CEO washing his hands of it and the expert on the ARRL Strategic Working Committee just clamming up totally, we are left to conclude precisely what the CEO’s response to me said. There was no study per se. For whatever reason, when they publish something that is unfounded, trust tends to go out the window.

Now, should the reader trust the ARRL when they publish a statement about amateur radio in the U.S.? Should donors question the veracity of what good their money does for the hobby, especially if the solicitation is based on a publicly undocumented study? (Especially since IRS guidance suggests they must be transparent on their activities.) What other statements have not actually had studies behind them even though presented as such? I don’t know. If the ARRL does not have anyone who can conduct a formal study on a topic so it produces a self-standing document, then stop saying they’ve done one. But the transparency issue is still the underlying problem. It precedes the current CEO’s tenure in Newington.

Some years ago, I requested the survey data the ARRL pays for by Readex Research to better understand publication subscribers and readership. CEO Howard Michel denied that request (even though I am technically a volunteer staff “flunky” who is a professional survey researcher) stating that the “League would lose its competitive advantage.” Who is the ARRL competing with such that they desire an advantage?

General Manager at the time Harold Kramer told me that the Readex survey was “proprietary” to Readex. That’s contrary to my experience as a survey researcher who both had clients as well as hired large survey research companies like Gallup to collect data for my research program. I called Editor Rich Moseson at CQ Magazine, whose company also purchased a survey of their readers from Readex to see if the latter’s work for them was indeed the proprietary property of Readex Research. He told me no, it was not. I then called Readex as a prospective customer and asked them the same question. Their response was the survey data was the property of the client. So the League could have easily sent the data to me, as RAC recently did for a survey they collected, so I could provide expert additional analysis to assist “my” national organization.

But why tell a volunteer who is offering to donate about $10,000 of consulting time to help the League meet its mission statement of “to promote and protect the art, science, and enjoyment of amateur radio, and to develop the next generation of radio amateurs” something that is demonstrably untrue? The five pillars are Public Service, Advocacy, Education, Technology, and Membership. Clearly, such results from a national survey would significantly contribute to education, technology, and advocacy, if not the other two. It is the League’s mission. Is it to have complete control over any and all research findings? This way, the League can make whatever claims they wish without independent challenge.

The League’s record on corporate transparency is lacking in my mind from these events. It falls far short of the “best practices” for non-profit corporations as noted above: Transparency is important for a nonprofit. People want to know how trustworthy a nonprofit organization is and see the impact of the work they’re doing. It appears to be at variance with the IRS guidelines for transparency, too. The reader will have to evaluate accordingly. A statement that is often used in data science is: In God we trust. All others bring data.

Many “emergency frequency lists” showing up on the internet are a hodgepodge of frequencies scraped from various sources and assembled into what looks like a credible list. Some of these frequencies are useful, but too many are misleading and perhaps even dangerous. These lists gloss over training and licensing issues, as described here: The Talisman Radio.

Many of these lists are generated by copying other prepper lists or scanning various sources for “emergency frequencies.” Even this Wikipedia page about international distress frequencies includes some of this misinformation.

Important Disclaimer: People often point out that in many jurisdictions, a citizen without a radio license for a specific frequency can still make a call in case of a true emergency (usually defined as potential loss of life or property). This may be true, but it is generally not a good emergency communications strategy: See The Talisman Radio. Most of these lists do not address the issue of radio licensing at all, which is very misleading.

Here is a recent FCC action to consider: The FCC has ruled that a ham radio operator in Idaho must pay a record $34,000 penalty for interfering with wildfire communications on 151.145 MHz. This is a US Forest Service frequency not authorized for amateur radio licensees. So don’t be transmitting on unauthorized frequencies.

Misleading Frequency Lists

One of the worst frequency lists is shown here by Stryker Radios. This “Ham Radio Emergency Frequencies” list shows 29 frequencies, but only two are in the ham bands. The rest are a collection of airband, marine, FEMA, search and rescue, National Guard, US Air Force, etc. Most of these frequencies are not legal for the general public to use. An FCC amateur radio license permits operation on the two ham radio frequencies listed but nothing else. The 4Patriots has a similar list, leaving out the ham radio frequencies and calling the list “other emergency radio frequencies.” The Save Net Radio website also has a poorly thought-out frequency list. But they compound their errors with this statement:

It’s important to note that these frequencies aren’t just for professional rescuers and emergency workers; they can also be used by ordinary citizens who are equipped with the appropriate radio equipment.

This is incorrect and potentially dangerous.

Some Specific Frequencies

These emergency frequencies have three main uses: situational awareness (listening to learn what is happening in your environment), distress calls (calling out to anyone for help), and coordination with friends (communicating with friends and associates about supplies, health and welfare, transportation, weather, etc.)

We must consider our radio’s capabilities, specifically the frequency range (for transmit and receive, which may differ) and modulation type (AM, FM, SSB, etc.). The typical low-cost VHF/UHF radio that is so common (Baofeng UV-5R or similar) has a frequency range of 136 to 174 MHz (VHF) and 400 to 520 MHz (UHF). Many of these radios are shipped with their transmit frequency limited to the amateur (ham) radio bands: 144 to 148 MHz and 420 to 450 MHz. However, there may be a method to enable (or unlock) the entire frequency range for transmitting. Check the specifications of your radio model. These radios are almost always FM only, so no AM or SSB. Some radios can receive AM in the aircraft band but won’t transmit AM.

Listening to radio activity around you can be very helpful in understanding situational awareness. A good example is listening to your local fire or law enforcement channels. You can hear some of these frequencies using a low-cost VHF/UHF radio but a scanner that receives digital signals will be a lot more useful.

Let’s examine some of the frequencies in the Stryker list. I will skip the frequencies outside the typical VHF and UHF tuning ranges listed above, as your radio most likely won’t be able to tune them.

138.225 MHz: Primary FEMA channel for disaster relief operations.
This frequency is in the federal VHF band, but I could not confirm a specific usage.
To transmit on this frequency, you need federal authorization.

146.52 MHz: Ham radio frequency for non-repeater communications on the two-meter band.
This is the 2m FM calling frequency, which is generally lightly used. You may hear interesting traffic on this frequency but need a ham radio license to transmit on it.

151.625 MHz: Utilized by mobile businesses such as circuses, exhibitions, trade shows, and sports teams. Other channels in use are 154.57 and 154.60 MHz.
This is an itinerant business band frequency known as the Red Dot channel. The other two frequencies listed are MURS Channels 4 and 5. They may be useful to program in.

154.28 MHz: Local fire department emergency communication channel. Additional frequencies include 154.265 and 154.295 MHz.
These are Fire Mutual Aid channels (VFIRE21, VFIRE22, VFIRE23) set aside for when multiple fire districts need to communicate. Typically, each district has their own radio frequencies and only uses these when a large incident occurs with multiple agencies responding. An FCC license for these specific frequencies is required to transmit on them.

155.160 MHz: Local and state agency channel for search and rescue operations.
This is the most common VHF frequency for Search and Rescue. To transmit on it, you need an FCC license for this specific frequency.

155.475 MHz: Local and state police emergency communication channel.
This is a Law Enforcement Mutual Aid channel (VLAW31) set aside for when multiple law enforcement agencies need to communicate. An FCC license for this frequency is required to transmit on it.

156.75 MHz: International maritime weather alerts channel.
This is marine channel 15, receive only, reserved for listening to emergency locator beacons. This is not a normal communication channel and is probably not useful in an emergency.

156.80 MHz: International maritime distress, calling, and safety channel.
This is marine channel 16, the calling and distress channel, which may be useful in coastal areas, lakes, and waterways that have significant marine radio activity. This frequency is for marine / boating use using a certified VHF marine transceiver.

162.40 MHz to 162.55 MHz: Series of channels used for NOAA weather broadcasts and bulletins. Also 163.275 MHz.
These well-known weather broadcast stations cover a large portion of the US and are very useful to have programmed in your radio. Do not transmit on these frequencies.

163.4875 MHz: Nationwide emergency channel for the National Guard.
163.5125 MHz: National disaster preparedness frequency for the armed forces.
164.50 MHz: National communication channel for the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
These are federal frequencies requiring federal authorization to transmit on them.

168.55 MHz: Federal civilian agency channel for emergencies and disasters.
This frequency is assigned exclusively to smoke jumpers working on wildfire suppression.
Do not transmit on this frequency.

409.20 MHz: National communication channel for the Interstate Commerce Commission.
409.625 MHz: National communication channel for the Department of State.
These are federal frequencies requiring federal authorization to transmit on them.

462.675 MHz: General Mobile Radio Service channel for emergency communication and traveler assistance.
This is Channel 20 on GMRS and FRS radios. This frequency is probably useful, but it is subject to the GMRS and FRS rules.

Some of these frequencies may be useful to monitor in an emergency (situational awareness), but very few are available for distress calling or communicating with friends.

RadioMaster Reports Frequency List

This list originated on the Radiomaster Reports website and has spread around the web in various forms (see below). It is one of the better prepper frequency lists, but it still has some issues.

The FRS and GMRS frequencies are useful to have available. The PMR UHF frequency (446.03125 MHz) listed is actually in the 70 cm ham band in the US and is a non-standard frequency, so it should not be used at all in the US. (PMR is a European standard.) The CB frequencies listed are not available on your typical low-cost VHF/UHF handheld but are useful if you have a CB radio. The so-called CB Freeband frequencies are never legal for use and your standard CB won’t tune them.

The low-band VHF frequency of 33.4 MHz will also not work with your typical handheld radio. The FCC license database shows many businesses are licensed to operate on this frequency, including many fast food restaurants. I suppose if you want to order a hamburger in an emergency, it might work.

If you have the appropriate amateur radio license, the Ham VHF and HF frequencies listed are usable in the US. On the 2-meter band, 146.52 MHz is indeed the nationwide calling frequency and was discussed earlier. However, the frequencies of 146.42 and 146.55 MHz do not always conform to local band plans, depending on the area of the country you are in. So you may or may not find activity there. The Search and Rescue frequency (155.16 MHz) was discussed earlier. The two marine frequencies listed do not require a license but should only be used for boating and similar communications.

Summary

We could continue to examine the specifics of all these frequencies and discuss their equipment requirements, licensing requirements, and proper usage. However, the main message is that these frequency lists are just a collection of random stuff compiled and propagated around the web.  None of them are well-considered and most will likely not do you much good in an emergency.  And they might lead uninformed citizens into using a frequency that can get them into a heap of trouble.

I have been looking for a list to recommend but have not found one. Let me know if you come across one that is truly useful.

That’s what I found. Let me know what you think.

73 Bob K0NR

References

National Field Operations Guide (NFOG)
https://www.cisa.gov/safecom/field-operations-guides

NTIA Redbook
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/publications/redbook-manual

RadioMaster Reports Frequency List
https://radiofreeq.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/shtf_survivalist_radio_frequency_list.pdf

The post Erroneous Prepper Frequency Lists appeared first on The KØNR Radio Site.