[CQ-Contest] R: ARRL DX CW Results - Did Anyone Else Notice?

[Mike Fatchett W0MU]

It is clear to me that the FCC opted into the agreement and allows US 
Citizens to use their USA assigned callsigns with other CEPT countries.  
The documents in 3 different publications clearly state Citizen.  It is 
inconsistent that a Citizen would have to provide extra documents while 
a non citizen would not.  CEPT also states using your NATIONAL license 
which would be your license where you are a citizen.  The FCC has 
entered into a more restrictive agreement that calls for US Citizens to 
carry certain documentation that is not required of others.  Why?  The 
other CEPT countries understand what is expected.  Failure to abide by 
those restrictions nulls the agreement.  If you break the agreement as 
required by the FCC There is no agreement in place. Non citizens are not 
mentioned which would indicate that they are specifically excluded.  
Why?  Because they are licensed where they are a Citizen and they should 
be using that license as called for by CEPT.

It appears that there is a lot of confusion with the FCC agreement and 
they should clarify, if they intended any and all Advanced and Extra 
licensees to be included in CEPT or just US Citizens as call out by DA 
16-1048 and two other previous notifications.  Because others have done 
it in the past is not a defense.  Because other contests have allowed it 
is not a defense.

It can be argued that the CEPT agreement intends for people to use the 
callsign in the country where they are a national/citizen.

I do not believe the CEPT was put in place to allow others to circumvent 
other countries laws and authority which could easily be done.  I can't 
operate from one location because my country is having a dispute so lets 
use our USA callsign to circumvent this. What is the actual intent of 
the agreement?  What is most transparent?

What gives anyone the right to use your USA callsign outside the 
country?  The FCC.  People are quick to discount the FCC they have the 
ultimate jurisdiction on the use of a callsign they issued. You do not 
own your call, you are granted a license.

Was the intent of the CEPT agreements were to allow callsign choicing or 
shopping.  Absolutely Not.  I believe the agreements were made with the 
understanding that people would use their calls assigned to them by the 
country where they are a citizen, their National Licenses as stated in 
TR/61.  The agreement does not offer the opportunity to chose.  It is 
apparent the the CEPT documentation has not even considered this 
possibility.

I think we all know this was wrong.  Matty could have applied for a TO 
or French callsign which would have been even shorter.  Matty could have 
done many things differently.

Threatening to sue people is bullying and should be treated as such.  
There is no place for these threats.  We are simply expressing our 
opinions.  Attempting to squelch the conversation is unacceptable.

It is common courtesy to sign your posts with your callsign.

W0MU Mike

On 8/21/2023 10:40 AM, matteyz84 at gmail.com wrote:
> @W2GD/K5ZD/N5OT (and others with the same POV):
>
> like it or not, plenty of operations by non-US citizens holding US calls
> took place in the last 27 years (1996-2023) after FCC signed a SOC with
> CEPT.
> The last operations I have knowledge of are the warmup activities before
> WRTC 2022 in July 2023 in I4 by E21EIC (and E29TGW) as I4/KY1A and BA1RB
> (and BA4TB) as I4/AE5OR.
> The first operation I have memory of is IG9/AC6WE (UA3DPX) in CQWW CW 1996
> but there might be earlier ones as well.
> In-between plenty of contest operations in major CQ/ARRL events, dxpeditions
> approved by ARRL DXCC, casual activities took place under the same
> provisions.
> The excerpts of the CEPT and FCC rules you have been posting (no matter they
> are pertinent or not) didn't change in-between (1996 to 2023).
> I don't think a tedious list of all the operations that took place this way
> between 1996 and 2023 is needed.
> However, it is wise to note some of these operations took place when K5ZD
> served as contest director in CQ events.
> And they were correctly accepted (ie. 5B/AJ2O, 5B/KC2TIZ, etc).
> Meanwhile, K5ZD seems to have changed mind on this topic and blames ARRL
> about their ARRL CW 2023 decisions....
>
> That said, in terms of regulations, as you were already explained by others,
> ARRL included:
>
> 1) FS (Saint Martin) is a French overseas territory and it is subject to the
> French regulations whose authority is ANFR;
>
> 2) Because of the previous point, FS is part of CEPT and CEPT TR 61-01 is
> applicable;
>
> 3) The current CEPT TR 61-01 docs are available at the following URL:
> https://docdb.cept.org/download/4312
>
> 4) With reference to the above URL, it is pretty clear CEPT takes into
> account just the reciprocity of the license between the countries that
> signed the agreement.
> The citizenship doesn't matter at all.
> The only mandatory requirements are:
>
> 4.a) The individual owns either a CEPT license or a license issued by a
> non-CEPT authority/country that signed the agreement with CEPT;
>
> 4.b) The individual is NOT resident in the country where he/she intends to
> operate under CEPT;
> As the residency definition in some countries part of CEPT is split between
> domicile and fiscal residence, meaning you can be domiciled in one country
> and tax resident in another, the residency topic would be a bit more complex
> than what stated in the CEPT regulations. However, this goes far beyond the
> topic you introduced;
>
> 5) The US are a non-CEPT country participating into CEPT because the FCC
> signed a SOC (Statement of Conformity).
> The SOC form is available in ANNEX 5 in the CEPT regulations (see above
> URL).
> It is immediate to verify the citizenship is not considered.
> The whole thing is about acknowledging the equivalency/reciprocity of
> licenses issued by different authorities in different countries;
>
> 6) The FCC is the authority that regulates the amateur radio service in the
> US and the US overseas territories.
> Their authority ends at the border and they are perfectly aware of that;
>
> 7) The FCC regulations are outlined in Title 47-Chapter I-Subchapter D-Part
> 97 whose equivalent digital copy is available at the following URL:
> https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-97
> With reference to the above URL, 97.5 (d) (1) (2) (3) (4) is solely about
> the conditions under which a CEPT license owner can or cannot operate over
> the US soil.
> This is NOT intended to be applied outside of the US borders.
> The nature of 97.5 (d) (1) (2) (3) (4) rule is explained in the 1996 FCC
> proposal docs: FCC states they want to avoid US citizens circumvent the FCC
> exam by getting a license in another country and then go back to the US to
> operate under the reciprocity agreement;
>
> 8) The year 2016 Public Notice DA 16-1048 provides guidelines about what an
> US citizen holding an US amateur radio license has to carry with him/her
> when travelling abroad in case he/she wants to operate under CEPT.
> However, FCC is well aware they have no authority in a foreign country.
> Their first words say it all: "Subject to the regulations in force in the
> country visited";
>
> 9) You can easily verify ANFR (France), OFCOM (UK), MIMIT (formerly MISE -
> Italy) and other regulators part of CEPT don't care at all about the
> licensee citizenship.
> They do NOT request to bring with you and show any proof of citizenship of
> any specific country.
> This is perfectly in accordance with CEPT TR 61-01 docs which they recall.
>
> Regards.
>
> Matt
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest