[CQ-Contest] Re: Topband: FCC Inquiries Focus on 160-Meter Band Plan

[2]

>        Note that ARRL's current 160 Bandplan approved by their Board of
>Directors in July is for narrowband modes only below 1843 instead of 
>below 1830 as stated in this release...I presume ARRL will correct their
>release. 
>
>                                                73,  Bill  W4ZV
>
>P.S.  Especially note the following:
>
>"Where interference results from band plans not being followed," 
>Hollingsworth continued, "the Commission expects substantial justification 
>to be shown by the operators ignoring the band plans."
>
//  It seems to me that there is plenty of room to find a clear spot.  I 
have often heard the argument made that "we were using this frequency 
yesterday and the day before, so you guys don't have a right to use it 
today - even if it was vacant when you started using it".   Half of the 
3.5 - 4 MHz band is pretty much a vast wasteland - thanks to Newington's 
band plan.  My guess is that this Topband ruckus is mostly a turf war 
between over-assertive males.    

-  cheers  

>(From  http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/10/04/1/?nc=1  )
>
>FCC Inquiries Focus on 160-Meter Band Plan
>
>NEWINGTON, CT, Oct 4, 2001--The FCC recently asked three amateurs
>to respond to complaints alleging that they deliberately transmitted SSB
>on top of CW stations operating in the vicinity of 1820 to 1825 kHz. The
>FCC has never designated mode-specific subbands in the 160-meter
>amateur band, so operation on "Top Band" continues to be governed by a
>voluntary band plan. The current ARRL band plan stipulates only "CW,
>RTTY and other narrowband modes" in the 1800-1830 kHz segment. 
>
>In the wake of the complaints, FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio
>Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth wrote George Wehrung, W5TZ, and
>Dennis Clauder, KT5S--both of Texas--and Derrick Vogt, WA4TWM, of
>Kansas in mid-September. Hollingsworth asked each to respond to
>allegations from several other operators that their SSB transmissions
>deliberately interfered with attempts by others to operate on CW
>between 1820 and 1830 kHz. Copies of the complaints were sent to all
>three operators. 
>
>"Band plans are voluntary in nature," Hollingsworth acknowledged in
>each of the similarly worded letters. He said the FCC depends upon
>voluntary compliance because it minimizes the necessity for the
>Commission to be called in to resolve amateur problems. "Where
>interference results from band plans not being followed," Hollingsworth
>continued, "the Commission expects substantial justification to be shown
>by the operators ignoring the band plans." 
>
>One complainant reported that the SSB operators "started moving up
>and down the band between 1822 and 1825," ignoring CW operators' pleas 
>that the frequency was occupied, failing to identify and, at one point, 
>mocking the CW operators. Some complainants sent tape recordings to the FCC. 
>
>Hollingsworth requested that Wehrung, Clauder and Vogt each reply to the
>complaints within 20 days. 
>
>_______________________________________________
>Topband mailing list
>Topband at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>


-  R. L. Measures, 805.386.3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures.  
end


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