[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012

To: "'Martin Durham'" <w1md@cfl.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012
From: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:33:11 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

I appreciate your comments.  Clearly we all don't see eye-to-eye on exactly
when a control operator is or is not considered an operator for the purposes
of the contest.

I respectfully disagree with the notion that one can be a Control Operator
under FCC rules, yet not be considered an operator of the station while it
is in the contest.  The key, to me, is that the Control Op (in not so many
words) must be PRESENT, AND must be in CONTROL.  To my thinking, the
combination implies... in fact, pretty much demands... that the Control Op
MUST be considered a station op for the contest, otherwise, the
under-licensed op can not operate outside of his or her license privileges.

In any event, after reviewing the first link in Brett (ex)VR2BG's earlier
post... well, I've said all along that we don't know everything.  Now I
understand why Yuri's log may have received additional scrutiny... because
it would certainly appear from that link (scroll down to the FCC enforcement
section) that this very situation HAS happened before.  

It certainly does make me wonder why Yuri says he didn't understand why
KP2MM was DQ'd, considering what happened with KF0R in the 2004 ARRL DX CW
contest (I believe I have the year right, as it's not explicitly mentioned
in the article).

So... well, I think I've made my position on the rules interpretation clear.
I may be wrong (certainly wouldn't be the first time!) but I don't think I
am.  So I am going to bow out of further beatings of the deceased equine at
this time. 


-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Martin Durham
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 9:39 PM
To: Ron Notarius W3WN
Cc: Dick Green WC1M; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012

Not 'quite' Ron......Not a lot of difference between control op and station
licensee requirements when it's your station. 

Per the part 97 rules from the current ARRL FCC rules page:

§97.105 Control operator duties.-

(a) The control operator must ensure the immediate proper operation of the
station, regardless of the type of control.

(b) A station may only be operated in the manner and to the extent permitted
by the privileges authorized for the class of operator license held by the
control operator.

<http://www.arrl.org/part-97-amateur-radio> §97.103 Station licensee

(a) The station licensee is responsible for the proper operation of the
station in accordance with the FCC Rules. When the control operator is a
different amateur operator than the station licensee, both persons are
equally responsible for proper operation of the station.

(b) The station licensee must designate the station control operator. The
FCC will presume that the station licensee is also the control operator,
unless documentation to the contrary is in the station records.

(c) The station licensee must make the station and the station records
available for inspection upon request by an FCC representative. When deemed
necessary by a District Director to assure compliance with the FCC Rules,
the station licensee must maintain a record of station operations containing
such items of information as the District Director may require in accord
with § 0.314(x) of the FCC Rules.

One could arguably make the case that whether the station is being operated
by a lower class licensee or an Extra class licensee who is not the primary
station licensee, the primary station licensee (presumed control operator)
should be present when the station is in operation? LOTS of SO efforts in
the records that were by ?guest op?s?

I ?suppose? if you want some wiggle room?97.105 a) says ?Immediate proper
operation? whereas 97.103 a) says ?proper operation?.

Hmmm?station owner turns on the equipment and gets everything ?all tuned up?
and ready to go before the guest op arrives?is THAT assistance?

I remember back around the first year I was a ham (30+ years ago)?my elmer
explaining to me what a control operator was supposed to ?do? (you won?t
find this in the FCC rules or ARRL contest Rules?but I think we?d all agree
that this is the intent)?a control operator is supposed be close enough at
hand to be able to take over/stop the transmitter/or disable the transmitter
should the person who is operating it under the control operators ?watchful?
guidance do something against the rules.

You have FCC rules which are THE rules?that must be followed?then the
contest rules?which must be followed AS LONG AS they don?t cause you to
break any of the FCC rules (this is for US amateurs)

So?does a CONTROL operator really constitute a 2nd operator if all they do
is ?monitor? the operation of the PRIMARY operator at the radio controls?to
ensure that the FCC rules are followed? The control operator doesn?t
(presumably) log, doesn?t (receive to aid the PRIMARY operator), and doesn?t
transmit. What exactly did the CONTROL operator due that a station operator
wouldn?t do to ensure that the station is operated within the rules?

This is all based on the ARRL contest and the specific KP2MM scenario?WW
contests add in the whole 3rd party issue which is a whole ?nother?



W1Minutuae Discriminator

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 24, 2012, at 4:13 PM, "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net> wrote:

> If you come over to my house to operate, as an Extra Class operator, I do
> not need to be present as a control operator.  So in the unlikely event
> this would happen, yes, my presence would not necessarily indicate that I
> there to be a legal control operator.
> On the other hand, when my friend Ben KB3ERQ comes over to my house to
> operate, as a Technician Class operator, I MUST legally be present as a
> control operator, UNLESS he is operating within the limits of a Tech. (Or
> someone of a higher license class must be present as the designated
> op, if you really want to split hairs that thinly.) Therefore, my presence
> WOULD indicate that I am there as a legal control operator (when Ben is
> operating outside of Tech privileges).  Not, to me, a hypothetical
> either, since Ben is a member of my multi-single team for multiple
> So, Dick, with all due respect, you can split the proverbial hairs however
> you like.  I really don't feel like playing arm-chair lawyer (that's what
> have K3AIR for, anyway).  To me, the unfortunate situation is
> cut-and-dried... Yuri operated KP2MM outside of General privileges.  So
> either he was in violation of the rules for doing so; or if he did so with
> legal control operator (Herb) present, then he was legally operating
> Multi-Single & entered in the wrong entry class.  It's either one or the
> other, and no arm-chair lawyering will change that.
> And again, we don't know the full story.  Yuri hasn't amplified his
> public post that I am aware of (outside of some indicated PM's which have
> remained private), nor is the ARRL Contest Committee saying anything (not
> that I would have expected them to).  So there may be more to the story
> we are not aware of.
> Granted, it's no fun to have your fingers burned in a situation like this,
> which is why he has my sympathies.  
> 73, ron w3wn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dick Green WC1M [mailto:wc1m73@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 2:43 PM
> To: 'Ron Notarius W3WN'; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012

CQ-Contest mailing list

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>