ad: chuckmartin

ARRL takes the FCC to court over BPL rule

Discussion in 'Contests, DXpeditions, QSO Parties, Special Events' started by VK5MRD, Jan 5, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Radclub22-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
  1. VK5MRD

    VK5MRD Ham Member QRZ Page

    The ARRL, the national society of radio amateurs in the USA, has filed a
    Petition for Review in the United States District of Colombia Circuit,
    seeking a review of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC)
    recently adopted rule that exempts BPL operators from having to anything
    to correct interference to mobile operations other than to notch
    emissions to a level 20dB (below 30 MHz) or 10 dB (above 30 MHz) below
    the absolute limits specified elsewhere in the rules.

    The FCC is the regulator of non-government spectrum in the US.

    Essentially, the ARRL (supported by two other parties intervening) is
    saying that the FCC has ignored certain facts that it should have taken
    into account in formulating its rules.

    If the ARRL succeeds the Court will order the FCC to reconsider its
    decision taking into account the facts that it failed to take into account.

    The Court will not substitute its judgement for the judgement of the
    expert agency, nor will the decision deal with more than this rule
    affecting mobile operations.

    Obviously, this sort of legal challenge is very expensive, and no one
    would doubt that the ARRL Board has acted very carefully indeed, but are
    convinced that a successful outcome will influence the FCC to act in the
    future having better regard to its legal obligations.

    Unfortunately, because of the very narrow issues of fact involved and
    the very specialised nature of administrative law, the US case cannot be
    seen as model for Australia.

    For more, see the ARRL site at
    http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2007/01/01/1/?nc=1

    Wireless Institute of Australia - http://www.wia.org.au
     
  2. KB2VXA

    KB2VXA Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hi all,

    "The Court of Appeals will not substitute its judgment for the reasoned decision-making of an expert agency."

    Pardon my confusion, but why does this sound like the roar of a paper tiger?

    "Your financial support of the Spectrum Defense Fund is vital to help fund this appeal."

    Baby tiger food for Old Toothless or something akin to Social Security, a well known slush fund with more than a few fingers in the pie?

    ...and it makes me wonder.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: Radclub22-1