(I am forwarding this on behalf of Andy, KR6DD - KR N6RCE)
Comments from KR6DD, ARRL OOC, SCV, Pac.Div.:
This was a typical situation of people getting "hot
under the collar" from some misunderstandings of each
other and whatever rules apply. Let's be "cool",
fellow hams! All involved in this debate should take
note of Part 97.101(c), and also (d), although this
thread has not indicated anything malicious occurring
so far.
The FCC actually has established a form of frequency
allocation in a sense, for repeaters, beacons,
satellites, etc. -- I wouldn't call that "ownership",
maybe "stake out" is more appropriate. Not that these
entities really "own" a frequency exclusively, as
clarified by Part 97.101(b), but it is generally
expected that amateurs would not normally transmit on
the input or output of a repeater, for example, if
they are not actually trying to access that repeater.
In the case of band plans and allocations by locally
established coordination organizations, the FCC has
explicitly set up in the rules the need for an
uncoordinated repeater to yield to a coordinated
repeater in a case of QRM -- see Part 97.203, .205,
.207. See also Part 97.221 regarding digital stations
-- it would be rather ungentlemanly to plop a CW
contest QSO on 14.0960, for example, or wherever PSK
is going on. In the case of HF nets, however, I have
not seen any special privileges in the rules, so in
this case common courtesy should prevail.
With regard to unlicensed persons using a radio, that
is permitted only in cases of immediate life
threatening emergencies, and no emergency services (or
any other, commercial, government, etc.) organization
is supposed to depend on amateur radio as its regular
ongoing communications capability -- see Part
97.113(a)(5) and
97.113(b).
Andy Korsak KR6DD
ARRL Official Obserever Coordinator
Santa Clara VAlley Section
Pacific Division
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> > [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On
> Behalf
> > Of Ward Silver
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 8:57 PM
> > To: CQ-Contest Reflector
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] An Observation on Violating
> > Rules
> >
> >
> > There are many circumstances in which FCC rule
> > violations are unavoidable,
> > accidental, or even warranted under special
> > circumstances - primarily
> > emergencies and imminent threat to life or
> property.
> > Exceptional
> > circumstances occur all the time. The way to
> handle
> > it is this...
> >
... [deleted]
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|