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