Reactions to ARRL's Regulation by Bandwidth

The decision by the American Radio Relay League to petition the FCC for a rules change to regulate Amateur Service transmissions by bandwidth rather than sub-band is bringing out a lot of emotion on the air and in cyberspace. Amateur Radio Newsline's Paul Courson, WA3VJB, is in the
nation's capital where he has sampled it all:

Reaction continues to build even though the FCC has not yet decided whether to accept the League's petition that was filed in mid-November.

It is the work of eight men who deliberated as an informal working group from late December 2002 until March 2003. It took another 2 1/2 years for League administrators in Newington to polish the idea to try to sell it to ARRL subscribers.

Controversy began almost immediately. The panel was formed at the pleasure of the League's president who acted without any published criteria governing ad hoc committees. There was no test to avoid conflicts-of-
interest, credentials were not validated, and there was no guarantee of fair and balanced deliberations.

One man would resign, and another, Skip Teller, KH6TY, protested that the panel was pushing a commercial system called WinLink, to automatically connect internet email and ham radio.

Now, website bulletin boards, email reflectors and on-air discussions include a litany of complaints that numerically outweigh observed public support.

The ARRL sought comment on its draft proposal, but has failed to reveal a tally of sentiment for and against the plan.

Steve NL7W posted to QRZ.com comments the League's scheme would mean "similar bandwidth digital and analog emissions would have to peacefully co-exist." He said quote "I don't believe this can happen"

Luke, AD4MG, a digital expert with Virginia's RACES emergency group, agreed and posted a spectrum image he feels shows the interference potential from dense digital signals, opposed to quieter analog voice signals.

Supporters include Stu, AB2EZ, who responded to a Newsline request for comment:

"I'm an avid CW operator, I really like CW. But there's an awful lot of spectrum that's empty most of the time that probably needs to be reclaimed."

Critics are concerned that the group in Newington hopes for support before coming up with the harder part of the proposal - new, voluntary band plans to coordinate what would go where on 160 through 10 meters.

George K3UD posted concern that there is no guarantee such plans would be honored. He told QRZ.com readers people "would be very suspicious as to who formed the agreements and more importantly, why.' He noted such plans "can be completely ignored with no fear of retribution by any governing authority."

In a statement in 2003, the chairman of the informal League panel that came up with the idea Vic Poor W5SMM, admitted the FCC had already tried regulating by bandwidth instead of mode. The agency proposal, 30 years ago, was shot down in the public comment process by hams who were overwhelmingly opposed, and convinced the FCC they liked things they way they are.

Poor is with a group that promotes an e-mail system between the internet and ham radio, WinLink, marketed to yachtsmen and recreational vehicle owners.

Reviving the idea of regulations that do not segregate by mode, the group in Newington promises to follow-through and develop a coordination plan if the FCC decides to accept the Petition for public comment.

The Petition does not propose that licensed hams measure their own signals for compliance with bandwidth technical standards, a subject of controversy among those reacting.

Bob, W2ZM, told Newsline interference complaints may go up between users of incompatible modes, because a hobbyist would have to allege interference and a bandwidth violation:

"You have to have a set of specifications. Bandwidth today is defined at 26 db either side. At the 26 db point, that's the end of your excursions. In other words, occupied bandwidth would be included in between 26 db down on
one side, 26db down on the other."

Tim, WA1HLR operates AM and remembered how the FCC's proposal in 1976 would have eliminated AM below 10 meters. He's ready to do battle again if the ARRL Petition is accepted by the agency for public comment:

"I'm against any bandwidth proposal. The whole band should be available from 3-dot-5 to 4-point-0 for any mode."

Pete WA1SOV was in the same QSO with Tim and Bob as Newsline recorded their comments.

Details of the proposal from the group in Newington are on the ARRL website.

Paul Courson, WA3VJB

Source: Amateur Radio Newsline