[PaQSO] EPA and WPA

[Michael Coslo]

On Oct 15, 2007, at 9:53 AM, MICHAEL J COSLO wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 10:35 PM, "Cameron Bailey" <kt3a at comcast.net>  
> wrote:
>>
> Do we count EPA and WPA as sections in addition to the counties as  
> multipliers?


Sorry all - that webmail reader makes awful posts. Insists making all  
the replies as quoted, no visible wraparound - yuk. I'll reply again  
in a more legible form.

The EPA WPA mults for PA operators have been a source of contention  
for some for a long time now. But we are keeping them.
The biggest reason is that if eliminated, Out of State Operators  
would have two multipliers that In State Operators would not. The  
ramifications are immense.

One of the first things it would create is that no one could work all  
sections. I don't know how likely it would be that anyone could do  
that, but it is certain that no one could if they couldn't claim any  
PA sections.

Some have complained that of course EPA and WPA will be worked, so  
what is the point? The answer is that it doesn't matter if it is  
common, it is what it is. It would almost be like removing LUZ  
because there is a very healthy Ham presence there, and who doesn't  
work LUZ?


-73 de Mike KB3EIA -