28 OCT, 2003 - 1215 CST

Before I get to my comments on this petition, I believe there is an
editorial typo in Chris Imlay's briefing text in [ARRL-ODV:9650].  The
first sentence of the fourth paragraph states that "ARRL has exceeded
its statutory authority...".  I believe the term "ARRL" is really meant
to be "FCC".

I agree with Chris Imlay's rationale for petitioning the court.  Yes,
there is inherent risk in opening up this can of worms.  But I believe
the FCC has already forced this issue in at least one pending proceeding
(SAVI RFID tag proposal) and it's in the process of forcing it even more
in the current BPL NOI and yet to be announced proceedings and potential
rule makings on the BPL proposal.

If we file the petition and eventually win this argument in federal court,
it's also quite possible the issue of FCC authority to modify Part 15 Device
regulations could eventually end up as a congressional bill to grant the
commission this authority.  If this happens, it will take a huge educational
campaign to convince congress that RF usage has to remain licensed and
regulated if RF spectrum is to remain useful.

However, if we fail to go on the offensive, I believe it will be even more
difficult to prevail in our effort to keep a lid on Part 15 Device
interference encroachment against licensed users of the various spectrum
allocations.

73 - Dick, W9GIG