CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Re: Topband: Re: rm-10352

Subject: [CQ-Contest] Re: Topband: Re: rm-10352
From: aa4lr@arrl.net (Bill Coleman)
Date: Mon Jan 28 10:24:19 2002
On 1/23/02 7:39 PM, Tom Rauch at w8ji@akorn.net wrote:

>Not only that, the FCC does support ARRL band plans to the 
>extent that burden of proof in a conflict falls on stations violating 
>bandplans. Since no one is really supposed to be operating SSB 
>below 1843 anyway, it is especially unlikely they would grandfather 
>(endorse) such operation!

Tom, one detail.

The FCC does not "enforce" ARRL bandplans. Bandplans have no legal force.

The FCC DOES however enforce violations of willful interference. 
Non-compliance with a bandplan greatly increases incidence of 
interference. And non-compliance is an indicator that perhaps the 
interference is willful. 

So, while general compliance with the bandplan certainly leads to greater 
harmony, non-compliance does not, in of itself, constitute a violation to 
the FCC. (If it did, then would RM-10352 be necessary?)



Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
            -- Wilbur Wright, 1901


--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] Re: Topband: Re: rm-10352, Bill Coleman <=