Daron- The NFCC does not create coordination councils. The constituents recognize their own coordination council.
I'll give you a specific example in your own area/council, which happened many years before you were on the scene. In Oregon packet radio was originally coordinated by some group other than ORRC (I have long forgotten what their name was) and it was run by Doug McMurdo W7XI. Eventually, the packet radio community here in Oregon became unhappy with how the packet radio systems were coordinated. Eventually we (the ORRC board of directors - which I was serving on at the time) received a signed petition from packet node and link operators that included about 80% of the total packet systems in Oregon. After several meetings and votes by the general membership, the ORRC started coordinating packet radio systems even though it never had before. Doug McMurdo's group was put out of business very quickly as the ORRC was no longer avoiding packet radio freqs. This all happened in about 1991/1992. The same story in Oregon (above) could be told again, by substituting "packet radio" with "420-450 MHz" and the man running it was Neil McKie WA6KLA rather than Doug McMurdo W7XI. It all played out pretty much the same way in about 1982-1984, and the ORRC started doing the coordinations in UHF. Daron - in both situations, the ORRC came to being because the constituents wanted the ORRC. The NFCC (and fore-runner MACC) had nothing to do with it. Starting about 10 years ago, many repeater and relay operators (constituents) in Oregon became unhappy with how the ORRC was handeling things and did not want the ORRC doing it anymore. Those constituents have since started two different groups to handle coordinations in various parts of Oregon. Again, the NFCC (and fore-runner MACC) had nothing to do with it. The purpose of NFCC is to establish recognition of Amateur Radio frequency coordination by the Federal Communications Commission, the American Radio Relay League, and all Amateur licensees. ------ Original Message ------ Received: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 08:50:17 AM PST From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] OT: Repeater coordination > >It is a fact the NFCC recognition/certification means zero in the eyes of > >the FCC. What matters is recognition by the local constituency. > > I'm curious and would enjoy the documentation you have that shows that > statement to be factual. > > I can understand that if there is a legal conflict between two organizations > claiming to be coordinators, the constituency served could make the decision > which organization is valid based on a legitimate vote of qualified > constituents. However, I can't imagine that if the FCC needs to address a > coordination issue in Oregon, that the field guy is going to poll all the > constituents in Oregon and make a tally to find the 'coordination body' for > the area in question. Much more likely, he is going to look for a published > organization doing coordination. > > There are two repeater owners in the county I reside in. If we both decide > that we are our own coordination body and we begin assigning ourselves > frequencies that conflict with coordinations issued by the incorporated, > NFCC affiliated coordination body in existence 30+ years, I do not believe > the FCC is going to recognize us as the coordinating body and back us up > simply because we are the local constituency. That would thwart any > coordination efforts, as each county, city, repeater group, etc. could act > as their own coordination body each coordinating themselves. > > We see many new folks wanting to build repeaters, and applications for them > in their garage. Hopefully they make it here to get the information and > support they need. > > 73 N7HQR > > > > > > >
