The FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology - the gatekeeper of
spectrum allocations - dismissed a petition by Glen E. Zook (K9STH)
for establishment of a 4-metre Amateur Radio Service band on the basis
of the spectrum requested was not available for that purpose nor was
it expected to become available for such use. The alleged merits of
establishing such a band were not reached (i.e. not discussed) in the
dismissal.

We "spectrum watchers" could have told him that years ago!

See: PETITION FOR PROPOSED CHANGES IN 47 CFR PART 97, SECTION
97.301(A) AND SECTION 97.305(C) TO ADD THE 4 -METER BAND. Denied
Glen E. Zook's Petition for Rulemaking. Action by: Chief, Office of
Engineering and Technology. Adopted: 09/17/2014 by ORDER. (DA No.
14-1347). OET
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...14-1347A1.docx
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...-14-1347A1.pdf


73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In Phil Kane writes:


The FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology - the gatekeeper of
spectrum allocations - dismissed a petition by Glen E. Zook (K9STH)
for establishment of a 4-metre Amateur Radio Service band on the basis
of the spectrum requested was not available for that purpose nor was
it expected to become available for such use. The alleged merits of
establishing such a band were not reached (i.e. not discussed) in the
dismissal.

We "spectrum watchers" could have told him that years ago!

See: PETITION FOR PROPOSED CHANGES IN 47 CFR PART 97, SECTION
97.301(A) AND SECTION 97.305(C) TO ADD THE 4 -METER BAND. Denied
Glen E. Zook's Petition for Rulemaking. Action by: Chief, Office of
Engineering and Technology. Adopted: 09/17/2014 by ORDER. (DA No.
14-1347). OET
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...14-1347A1.docx
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...-14-1347A1.pdf


73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon


Hi Phil,

Yes, I agree that the odds of success of the petition appeared to be
low, especially if pretty much the only justification by the petitioner
was, "Hey, the kid (country) down the street (across the ocean) has
this, why can't I?" Regardless of whether the parents (government) can
afford it or feel that it is appropriate to give it to him (significant
legal and technical obstacles in the present allocation tables). I'm
sure that you and I understand what the petitioner didn't, that it's
also not a good idea to get a bureaucratic agency into the habit of
saying no, even in situations where they might someday say yes.

I wouldn't want to completely give up on the prospect of a 70 MHz
amateur band here in the U.S., though. If I understand correctly, the
FCC currently views this as not possible for the foreseeable future
because this chunk of VHF spectrum is still allocated to television in
the U.S. Even if refarmed at some point, the FCC seems to want to
sell/auction the spectrum for commercial use, though it's been recent
experience that at least some auctions aren't very effective in putting
spectrum to the best/highest use. Often the buyer overbids, and either
fails to purchase the spectrum when financing falls through, or
purchases the spectrum for so much that the intended use is unprofitable
from the get-go, and it either goes unused, or the buyer obtains
permission from the FCC to flip it to another user/purpose, possibly at
a loss to the buyer.

Perhaps I should ask my elected ARRL officials this also, but are you
aware of any serious lobbying/planning to try and set aside some of 4
meters at such time as VHF television is refarmed? Are there strategies
that might have a higher odds of success in the future? Another amateur
radio band, with unique propagation characteristics, to intercommunicate
with amateurs in other countries who already have this band, would be a
good justification, but certainly not the only one required, as the
failed petitioner found out. What are the proposed alternative uses?
Mid-band VHF spectrum like this appears to not be very sexy or appealing
for those advocating state-of-the-art new uses, which seem to like
high-bandwidth, point-to-point, low multi-path, high
geographic-diversity/ frequency-reuse spectrum with fairly consistent
propagation characteristics. Unless you are, for example, a government
agency in a sparsely-populated state where trunking and repeaters are
cost-prohibitive to provide wide-area coverage, I don't see a lot of
money getting paid for this spectrum. Perhaps I'm not seeing the big
picture.

Do you have any particular useful insights into the "big picture" on the
issue of long-term future refarming of mid-band VHF spectrum from analog
television, whom we might be competing with over obtaining it, and what
might be the chances of getting at least a small slice of it for amateur
radio here in the U.S.?

(73, Paul, K3FU)

- --
Paul W. Schleck

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (NetBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAlQdzu8ACgkQ6Pj0az779o6B5ACfXsfCd9vDwq LSSDB0BqBQJ42K
XQsAoLC4tc5MPmL+qe3XlDRlEuEXXOif
=uqGh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----