Absolutely, Tom, the premise of the petition is that FCC created this problem that they need to fix by virtue of the fact that they diverged from the ARRL Petition and their own NPRM proposal, for no good reason. It is a good argument, and our main one. Chris -----Original Message----- From: frenaye@pcnet.com To: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Sent: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 10:19 AM Subject: [arrl-odv:14887] Re: Resolution for Board Vote At 10:02 AM 12/6/2006, w3kd@aol.com wrote:
Is there some objective reason why 3650 is a good dividing line? If there is, why didn't we advocate it in our Petition or our comments in the docket proceeding? You see the draftsman's conundrum here. We really can't as a practical matter be wishy-washy at this stage of the proceeding.
QSL, makes sense. Guess I'm reacting to the other bands where splitting at a 35 khz point is unusual, and I'm still lobbying for more I guess! I guess I'm in agreement with Jay that we really need to comment on the changes between the NPRM and the R&O, especially since they didn't raise the issue of expanding 80m phone/image further (nor deletion of auto-control, though I guess that's an oversight). After all, they're the ones that originally declined to do any of this until there was broad input from amateurs - which we did gather, summarize and act upon... -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki@arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444 ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.