[K3PZN-List] Concerning the new FCC rules.

[Curt Milton]

Well the debate is very meaningful to those folk who
use CW and digital modes.  These modes, while maybe a
little less active collectively than SSB, are all
being squeezed into 100 kHz (a 2:1 factor over status
quo).  And you all know 75 meter SSB practices - i
dont see many of these folk giving up their turf when
its needed for "overflow" of CW or RTTY operations. 
Gee they would show up on top of someone who had been
working the frequency for hours in sweepstakes and 3
or 4 of them would run off the contester.  

I dont know why the league seemingly dragged its feet
to work the matter, nor why the FCC seems so "behind
the curtain" in their efforts.  We all realize we need
some flexibility and courtesy in how our spectrum is
utilized.  I wish contesting organizations could work
together so we don't end up with 3 contests - a state
QSO party, a RTTY contest and a QRP CW contest all
trying to use the same 10 kHz the same weekend!  

Best ham radio and life in celebrating the holidays,  

curt

--- "Neeriemer, Bill (NIH/NLM/LHC) [C]"
<bneeriemer at mail.nih.gov> wrote:

> At the BoD meeting last night, we were discussing
> the new FCC rules,
> which took effect this morning.  Specifically, there
> was discussion
> about the brouhaha concerning the changes to the
> 75/80 meter band.
> 
> I asserted that I thought it was unlikely that the
> FCC would alter the
> R&O a second time.
> 
> A closer examination revealed a clear distinction
> between the J2D issue,
> which was altered in an Erratum, and the 75/80 meter
> changes.
> 
> The R&O is divided into 2 main sections, the English
> (or semi-English)
> portion where the commission discusses the issues
> that it is ruling on,
> and the reasoning behind their decision(s), and the
> Legalese portion
> where the commission lists the exact amendments that
> were approved.
> 
> In the case of J2D, the FCC in its discussion
> portion specifically
> addresses the concerns raised by the ARRL that J2D
> might be
> inadvertently limited to 500Hz.  In doing so, the
> FCC explicitly stated
> that they would word the new regulation in such a
> way as to avoid this
> problem.  Unfortunately, the FCC did not live up to
> its promise.  The
> erratum rewords the amendment so that it is clearer
> that J2D is not
> limited to 500Hz.  This is appropriate since the
> rules change as
> published in the Fed. Reg. were NOT what the FCC
> intended to publish.
> 
> In the case of the 75/80 meter band change, the FCC
> clearly stated its
> intent to move the PHONE/IMAGE portion to 3600
> instead of ARRL's
> proposed change.  (3635 as I recall.)  They clearly
> stated that it was
> their belief that this is what most HAMS would want
> based on the
> comments filed for the NPRM.  Since the amended
> rules conform to the
> FCC's intent, it would be inappropriate for the FCC
> to issue an erratum.
> 
> 
> Of course, nothing prevents the FCC from changes the
> rules once again,
> but it would need to follow the proper procedures.
> 
> Personally, I find this debate interesting, but
> purely academic since
> I'm still limited to VHF/UHF comms.
> 
> 73 Bill W3STG
> 
>  
> 
>
-----------------------------------------------------
> BREAK
> -----------------------------------------------
> CCARC Holiday Party Sunday December 17, 4:30 - 7:30
> PM at Boulevard and Beyond in Westminster.
> 
>
-----------------------------------------------------
> AR -----------------------------------------------
> K3PZN-List mailing list supporting the Carroll
> County Amateur Radio Club
> K3PZN-List at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/k3pzn-list
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com