Bob
You failed to quote 97.107(b)(1). Which says :-
"The terms of the agreement between the alien's government and the
United States;"
There is a multilateral operating agreement between the US and the
CEPT countries.
Peter
On 7 June 2017 at 15:29, <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
> Peter,
>
> Can you quote an actual rule that says what you claim?
>
> In Part 97.107, nothing like what you and others are alleging is
> justified, nor even mentioned. In the USA, the FCC rules take precedence
> in all cases, and there is nothing in the FCC rules that supports your
> claim of CEPT rules taking precedence over any operations within the USA
> under any circumstances.
>
> Specifically:
>
> 97.107 (b)(2)
> "The operating terms and conditions of the amateur service license granted
> by the alien's government"
>
> This does not say anything about operating privileges. They are covered in
> the next part. The "terms and conditions *of the amateur service
> license*" refer explicitly to only the *license* and its validity - issue
> dates, expirations, etc.
>
> In contrast, operating privileges are discussed *explicitly* in the next
> part:
>
> In the case of the UK: 97.107(b)(3) applies:
>
> "The applicable rules of this part, but not to exceed the control operator
> privileges of an FCC-granted Amateur Extra Class operator license".
>
> This is germane regarding operating privileges and what it says is:
>
> "The applicable rules of this part" which means all USA allocations,
> modes, restrictions and all other rules and regulations that apply in the
> USA *for Extra Class operators*. In other words, All foreigners eligible
> for reciprocal operating are granted full USA Extra Class privileges - but
> no more.
>
> As one example of "no more", reciprocal licensees cannot operate SSB in
> the USA CW / Digital bands, even though their licenses back home may
> permit it.
>
> In all cases, USA FCC Law takes precedence over all other countries' rules.
>
> That is what it *actually* says.
>
> You're adding things to it that it does not say.
>
> 73,
>
> Bob W5OV
>
>
> On Wed, June 7, 2017 3:08 am, Peter Bowyer wrote:
>> Yes, but the conditions under which the reciprocal privileges are granted
>> (in this case ) are governed by CEPT and adopted by FCC. In order to
>> benefit from the CEPT arrangements, FCC has to adopt its rules.
>>
>> The 'no remote operation' principle comes from the CEPT rules.
>>
>>
>> Peter G4MJS
>>
>>
>> On 6 Jun 2017 10:46 p.m., <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From what I read at the link you provided, it is precisely as I said:
>>>
>>>
>>> "US Law applies and the operators must comply with FCC rules as if
>>> they were physically within the USA".
>>>
>>> I see nothing that changes that.
>>>
>>>
>>> More specifically, anyone operating a remote station in the USA must
>>> obey the USA FCC Law as if they were here in the USA.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob W5OV
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, June 5, 2017 12:02 pm, Peter Bowyer wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sorry Bob you're wrong there. FCC has adopted the CEPT T/R 61-01
>>>> regulation to make reciprocal licensing easier.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.arrl.org/foreign-licenses-operating-in-u-s
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Peter G4MJS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5 June 2017 at 13:07, <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> N2RJ said:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> " Just be careful that you are indeed doing so. CEPT T/R 61-01 is
>>>>> not sufficient authorization for a European licensee to operate an
>>>>> internet remote base in the US while being physically present
>>>>> overseas...."
>>>>>
>>>>> EU rules do not apply to amateur radio transmissions made from
>>>>> within the USA under any circunstances.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Where the operator is located is completely irrelevant.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What happens on the air from a USA station is governed by US FCC
>>>>> Law -
>>>>> nothing else.
>>>>>
>>>>> US Law applies and the operators must comply with FCC rules as if
>>>>> they were physically within the USA.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob W5OV
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On
>>>>> Behalf
>>>>>
>>> Of
>>>
>>>>> Ria
>>>>> Jairam
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 5:53 PM
>>>>> To: W4AAW@aol.com
>>>>> Cc: CQ-Contest Reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] KU1CW location
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> W1VE and other serious operators of remote-capable stations will
>>>>>> agree with me: We remote-capable stations are not trying to fool
>>>>>> anyone or gain some sort of geographical or unfair advantage.
>>>>>> We're
>>>>>> just being
>>>>> competitive and striving to do so strictly within the rules.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is really nothing wrong with trying to gain an advantage
>>>>> during a contest. That's what contesting is. As long as it is within
>>>>> the rules. Operating from elsewhere to do better in contests has
>>>>> been a staple of contesting for pretty much as long as it has
>>>>> existed.
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Alex is a member of TeamW4AAW, which operates the first
>>>>>> Totally
>>>>>> Remote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> M/M station.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> We have 31 team members who operate W4AAW's positions from all
>>>>>> over NA,
>>>>>> from Panama, Europe and Asia, provided they meet legal/licensing
>>>>> requirements.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just be careful that you are indeed doing so. CEPT T/R 61-01 is not
>>>>> sufficient authorization for a European licensee to operate an
>>>>> internet remote base in the US while being physically present
>>>>> overseas. Even if they were allowed, their home license restrictions
>>>>> and power limits (while not
>>>>> exceeding US Extra) apply. In the UK it is 400 watts for full
>>>>> licenses and in Germany it is 750W for class A licenses. Other
>>>>> European countries
>>>>> may be different. The best thing for them to do to be compliant with
>>>>> the laws of the US is to get a US license. There are VE sessions in
>>>>> many countries overseas and one can get a license by passing the
>>>>> (now very
>>>>> easy) exams. No code required, even.
>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. The 3830 comments for KU1CW @ W4AAW in the CQWPX CW test very
>>>>>> clearly show the locations of each operator.
>>>>>
>>>>> An awards chaser who isn't competing in the contest is unlikely to
>>>>> know about nor care about 3830. The best thing to do would be to put
>>>>> the location of the stations in the QRZ profile, which is the first
>>>>> place they look.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73
>>>>> Ria, N2RJ
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 4:30 PM, W4AAW@aol.com via CQ-Contest
>>>>> <cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is the correct information on KU1CW in the CQWPX CW contest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Alex has just moved to Washington State. He has not yet
>>>>>> modified his
>>>>> license to reflect this recent development.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Alex is a member of TeamW4AAW, which operates the first
>>>>>> Totally
>>>>>> Remote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> M/M station. We have 31 team members who operate W4AAW's positions
>>>>> from all over NA, from Panama, Europe and Asia, provided they meet
>>>>> legal/licensing requirements.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. Since a W4 call sign is common in WPX tests, I suggested to
>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>> we use
>>>>> KU1CW for the contest. Alex agreed. So, the entry (as shown on
>>>>> 3830)
>>>>> was KU1CW@ W4AAW.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. The 3830 comments for KU1CW @ W4AAW in the CQWPX CW test very
>>>>>> clearly
>>>>> show the locations of each operator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If some people had bothered to read information that is readily
>>>>>> available
>>>>> in that posting, it would not have been necessary to cast
>>>>> aspersions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> During some periods of the contest, Alex even operated SO2R,
>>>>>> using two
>>>>> W4AAW positions remotely, from Washington State.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> W1VE and other serious operators of remote-capable stations will
>>>>>> agree
>>>>> with me: We remote-capable stations are not trying to fool anyone
>>>>> or gain some sort of geographical or unfair advantage. We're just
>>>>> being competitive and striving to do so strictly within the rules.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73, Mike W4AAW
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|