ARLB032 Call to action on LMCC (fwd)

[David V. Rogers]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 19:39:26 -0400
From: Dick Rucker <rrucker@clark.net>
Subject: ARLB032 Call to action on LMCC

Jack Kelleher forwarded this ARRL call-to-action:

>Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 07:52:38 -0400 (EDT)
>From: w4zc@macconnect.com (Jack Kelleher)
>Subject: ARLB032 Call to action on LMCC

>>To: QST@listserv.arrl.org
>>From: w1aw@arrl.org
>>Organization: American Radio Relay League
>>Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:33:28 EDT


>>ZCZC AG32
>>QST de W1AW
>>ARRL Bulletin 32  ARLB032
>>From ARRL Headquarters
>>Newington CT  May 13, 1998
>>To all radio amateurs
>>
>>SB QST ARL ARLB032
>>ARLB032 Call to action on LMCC
>>
>>League calls members to action on 70 cm petition
>>
>>The ARRL says the recent Land Mobile Communications Council petition
>>seeking access to 70 cm is ''incompatible with continued amateur use
>>of the band'' and urges members to comment in opposition--not only to
>>the FCC but to the LMCC's members. The LMCC has petitioned the FCC
>>for immediate reallocation of 420 to 430 MHz and 440 to 450 MHz from
>>the federal government to the Private Mobile Radio Service. Amateur
>>Radio enjoys the use of 70 cm on a secondary basis. The LMCC has
>>proposed to share the two subbands with Amateur Radio, but has not
>>said how sharing would be possible. The LMCC also seeks additional
>>UHF reallocations in the intermediate and long term.
>>
>>For those planning to file comments, specific information and
>>recommendations plus a copy of the LMCC petition and a list of LMCC
>>members are available on the ARRLWeb page at
>>http://www.arrl.org/news/bandthreat.
>>
>>Commenters should explain how the loss of access to 420 to 430 and
>>440 to 450 MHz would affect them personally and how it would affect
>>the ability of hams to provide needed public service. ''Even if you
>>do not use these segments yourself, it is likely that loss of access
>>would result in more crowding and interference in the part of the
>>band, or in another band, that you do use,'' said ARRL Executive Vice
>>President David Sumner, K1ZZ. ''Don't overlook the fact that if you
>>use linked voice or packet systems, it is quite likely that some of
>>the links you rely on are in either or both of these segments.''
>>
>>Amateurs involved in public service communication can ask the
>>government and nongovernment agencies they assist for written
>>statements of support. Hams also should urge Amateur Radio
>>organizations, especially those with interests in the 420 to 450 MHz
>>band, to comment as well.
>>
>>The LMCC, a nonprofit association, includes several well-known
>>organizations such as the American Automobile Association, the
>>American Petroleum Institute, the International Association of Fire
>>Chiefs, and the Association of Public Safety Communications
>>Officials-International (APCO), a frequent Amateur Radio supporter.
>>The League suggests that ARRL members who also belong to one of the
>>LMCC member organizations consider writing to inform the
>>organization that the LMCC is acting contrary to your interests and
>>requesting them to disavow the LMCC petition insofar as it affects
>>Amateur Radio.
>>
>>Sumner said ARRL members should not complain to members of Congress
>>nor write angry letters to the FCC. ''The LMCC petition is a
>>private-sector initiative, not a government proposal,'' he said. ''By
>>law, the FCC has to put the petition on public notice and invite
>>comment. That's all the FCC has done with it.'' Sumner says that
>>criticizing the FCC at this stage would be ''inappropriate and
>>counterproductive.''
>>
>>The primary occupant of the bands in question is military
>>radiolocation (radar). ''Before the FCC can take the next step to
>>reallocate this spectrum, it must get the federal government to
>>agree,'' Sumner explained. Then, the FCC would have to issue a Notice
>>of Proposed Rule Making and solicit public comments on its proposal.
>>''In other words, nothing is going to happen overnight, and there
>>will be at least one more opportunity for public comment.''
>>
>>The FCC is accepting only written comments in response to RM-9267.
>>Comments are due by June 1, and reply comments are due by June 15.
>>Address comments to RM-9267, Secretary, Federal Communications
>>Commission, 1919 M St NW, Washington, DC 20554. Formal comments must
>>be submitted in quadruplicate.
>>NNNN
>>/EX
>>
>
>
Richard A. "Dick" Rucker
City of Fairfax, VA