[Lowfer] Group Part-5 license for LF???

[WE0H]

Yes they do but the amendment that was sent in, as I was told, hasn't seen
any response since last summer or some time around there anyhow. The Lowfer
group would very much utilize a LF Part 5 license to its fullest limits. I
really believe there would be more firsts to be invented with greater
flexibility in the regulations that a Part 5 license would enable. This
would or could be the stepping stone to a full fledged Amateur band or bands
if and when we can prove there will be no interference problems with the
utility companies. We can ask for higher than Amateur power levels and find
out if this does indeed pose a threat to the utilities. It would be easier
for the FCC to regulate a Part 5 license since they know who and where the
stations are at and there isn't a huge mass as could happen with an Amateur
Band allocation of which they turned us down already.

Mike Reid
WE0H

-----Original Message-----
From: lowfer-admin@mailman.qth.net [mailto:lowfer-admin@mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of Robert M. Bratcher Jr.
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2003 9:07 PM
To: lowfer@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Lowfer] Group Part-5 license for LF???

At 08:43 PM 5/17/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>The Part-5 license as I understand it is for Licensed Amateur radio
>operators; that is what the SHMRG group told me as there were at least one
>non-licensed person who wanted in on that group. Am I correct or not??? I
am
>asking if the Lowfer community would be interested in applying for a Part-5
>license to get what we didn't get on 136kc or ask for even more around that
>freq or somewhere else. The SHMRG group is dead as far as I am concerned.
>Nothing is going on besides Ralph and I tried and begged to get on the
>license only to be told it was at the FCC and waiting for approval to add a
>few of the interested persons. That was last year.
>
>Mike Reid

I thought they had a license for a 1750 meter frequency even though the
500kc part of the license was later denied?