FCC reject IMSA’s request to extend the certification requirement Continuing Path to Eventual 6.25 kHz Narrowbanding

Transition to 6.25 kilohertz is still in the FCC commission’s future plans. When and how the transition will happen is anyone’s guess. The most recent example is that FCC denied a request for waiver filed by the International Municipal Signal Association (IMSA). IMSA requested the certification deadline of VHF and UHF (150.80 – 162.0125, 173.20 – 173.40 and 421 – 512 MHz) LMR equipment that is not capable of operating on 6.25-kilohertz channels be extended until at least January 2020.

FCC commission announced that it would no longer certify equipment that could not operate on 6.25-kilohertz channels on Jan. 1, 2005, this deadline was later pushed back several times until it finally took effect Jan. 1, 2015. Whether or not the device has 6.25-kilohertz capability, equipment certified prior to the deadline may still be sold. But, new equipment must include the capability to operate in 6.25-kilohertz mode.

As analog technology generally does not meet the 6.25-kilohertz requirement, the commission’s certification deadline effectively required new radios to be digital. IMSA believed this to be an undue burden on public-safety users. IMSA pointed out that the commission recently eliminated the 6.25-kilohertz capability requirement for 700 MHz band public-safety equipment. If the requirement no longer made sense at 700 MHz, why continue to apply it to the bands below 512 MHz?

On June 30, the commission ultimately rejected IMSA’s arguments and issued an order denying its request for waiver. The commission stated that some comments in the proceeding claimed market competition has kept the price of 6.25-kilohertz-capable equipment comparable to that of similar equipment without 6.25-kilohertz capability.

When the transition to 6.25 kilohertz will occur? If new equipment that will need to be replaced within its expected lifetime it does not make sense to allow manufacturers to continue to certify it. Logically, if the transition is soon, it does not make sense to allow manufacturers to continue to certify new equipment that will need to be replaced within its expected lifetime.