Someone has kindly fax'd me the information from the Feb. issue (that I don't yet have).
The petition, 10740, that was rejected by the FCC is one filed by hams upset about an activity loosely referred to as "enhanced SSB," and the unusual amount of bandwidth it consumes. To recapitulate, petitioners sought regulatory relief from interference they claim was deliberate, and from signals they portray as dirty. Part of the petition's strategy proposed a bandwidth limitation. AM got included in their petition out of concern such a rulemaking should be seen as "fair," but the document acknowledges there were no known problems with people who operate AM. The FCC rejected the petition, in effect affirming existing rules requiring purity of signal and against deliberate interference. Both are violations that are immediately actionable by the Enforcement Division. The agency's decision, portraying such a constraint as unnecessary, may dim the prospects for the ARRL's threatened bandwidth petition, the details of which have been posted. Several independent ad hoc committees reviewing the scheme have established some formidable problems dooming the proposal as written. The group in Newington has so far declined to publish any details of the comments it solicited, and has not offered even a simple tally of those opposed and in favor. Before learning "which" bandwidth proposal had been scuttled, I had hoped the volunteeer administrators and paid staff of the ARRL had withdrawn their threatened petition. That may still happen. Paul/WA3VJB Annapolis __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
