(Moderator's Note: Only FCC Part 97 Amateur Radio related actions are shown below.)

________________________________
[fcclogo]
Daily Digest
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th St., SW
Washington, D.C. 20554

Vol. 39 No. 530
News media information 202 / 418-0500
Internet: http://www.fcc.gov
TTY: 1-888-835-5322


February 21, 2020
________________________________
* * * * *


[...]

IN THE MATTER OF: WILLIAM F. CROWELL, APPLICATION TO RENEW LICENSE FOR AMATEUR SERVICE STATION W6WBJ. .. (Dkt No 08-20). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 2020-02-19 by MO&O. (FCC No. 20-12). OGC. FCC-20-12A1.docxhttps://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-12A1.docx FCC-20-12A1.pdfhttps://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-12A1.pdf FCC-20-12A1.txthttps://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-12A1.txt

(Moderator's Note:

Amateur or Part 97 match found in contents linked at URL:

William F. Crowell, Application to Renew License ) FCC File No. 0002928684
for Amateur Service Station W6WBJ )


[...]

Administrative Law Judge Richard L. Sippel (the Judge), which dismissed Crowell's application to renew
his amateur radio license.2 We agree with the Judge that Crowell failed to prosecute his application by
refusing to attend a hearing scheduled by the Judge in connection with Crowell's renewal application, and

[...]

interfering with and/or otherwise interrupting radio communications; (2) transmitting one-way
communications on amateur frequencies; (3) transmitting indecent language on amateur frequencies; and
(4) transmitting music on amateur frequencies.3 The Hearing Designation Order (HDO) provided that the
hearing would be held before an FCC Administrative Law Judge "at a time and place to be specified in a

[...]

travel to Washington, D.C. for any hearing herein. However, I do wish to defend my rights to hold a
license in the amateur service. If I am required to travel to Washington, D.C. for hearings herein I will be
unable to appear and will be unable to obtain due process of law herein."8 The Judge denied Crowell's

[...]

topics, including a challenge to the Judge's finding that Crowell was not entitled to a local field hearing.18
Crowell also argues that attempting to enforce the amateur rules against him in this proceeding violates
the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by restricting his right to free speech.19 Likewise, Crowell

[...]


16Indeed, it is unlikely that section 1.224 could ever apply to an amateur licensee, given that amateur stations cannot
be used for any communications for hire or material compensation or, with limited exceptions, for communications

[...]

19Crowell asserts, for example, that this proceeding resulted from persecution by a former Enforcement Bureau
official. He also asserts that the Commission generally lacks authority to regulate speech in the amateur radio
service, especially by classifying it as "interference" or "indecency." Id. at 10-22.

[...]

consistent with the Commission's decision in the Edward B. Christopher Order,29 in which the
Commission dismissed an application for an amateur radio license after the applicant failed to appear in
Washington, D.C. for hearing, claiming financial hardship and physical disability. The Commission held

[...]

Applicant's Status Report, filed November 19, 2010, by Crowell.
39Indeed, Crowell's emphasis on the non-remunerative character of the amateur radio service (Appeal at 6) suggests
that this is more a matter of convenience than hardship.

[...]

42Crowell himself observes that the cost of hearings is a significant factor in the Enforcement Bureau's ability to
enforce the Commission's amateur rules. He states: "amateur licensees have little or no financial incentive to follow
the Commission's Rules. Such licensees may therefore be inclined to violate the rules, so it would probably be very
expensive to administer the amateur service legally and constitutionally due to the large number of cases that would
(continued....)

[...]

13. We reject Crowell's various assertions that he is entitled to a field hearing as a matter
either of Commission policy or of general law. Crowell cites what he terms the "five leading amateur
service cases on the subject of venue," which he claims show that the Commission has an established
practice of conducting field hearings in amateur license renewal proceedings.44" All these cases
demonstrate, however, is that in five specific instances over 30 years ago the Commission chose to

[...]

common practice at the time. Thus, Crowell has no support for his speculation that "the former Private
Radio Bureau realized that because the amateur radio service is non-remunerative in nature it was
required to hold field hearings in amateur cases in the city nearest to the licensee's residence."45
Similarly, Crowell has no basis for his conjecture that, in two more recent cases, the applicants chose not
to contest venue in Washington, D.C., because they were represented by Washington attorneys.46 In any
event, even if there were at one time a practice of regularly holding field hearings in amateur renewal
cases, such practice does not obviate the Judge's obligation to weigh the public interest considerations on

[...]

(RB 1982); see also Appeal at 9 ("The Commission had maintained an established policy of holding field hearings
in amateur licensing cases in the city nearest the licensee's residence"). We note that the Judge cited two cases that
referred to a "pattern" or "customary practice" of conducting field hearings in broadcast renewal proceedings, albeit

)

[...]