FCC Record, Volume 5, No. 3, Pages 556 to 796, January 29 - February 9, 1990 Page: 612
This book is part of the collection entitled: Federal Communications Commission Record and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Federal Communications Commission Record
5 FCC Rcd No. 3
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
PR Docket No. 88-527
In the Matter of RM-6274
Amendment of the Amateur Service RM-6275
Rules to Expand the 6 Meter
Repeater Subband.
REPORT AND ORDER
Adopted: January 22, 1990; Released: February 1, 1990
By the Commission:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. This Report and Order amends the Amateur Service
Rules (Part 97) by expanding the 6 meter repeater
subband from 52-54 MHz to 51-54 MHz. Such expansion
will permit operation of additional repeaters to meet the
increased demand for such operation.
II. BACKGROUND
2. On October 31, 1988, we adopted a Notice of Proposed
Rule Making (Notice) 1 in the above-captioned proceeding.
The Notice proposed to expand the amateur
service 6 meter repeater subband (52-54 MHz) by one
megahertz, thereby encompassing frequencies between
51-54 MHz. The proposal responded to requests for such
expansion from The Southern\California Six Meter Club
(SCSMC) and The Southern California Repeater and Remote
Base Association (SCRRBA). In the Notice, we stated
that there appeared to be a strong demand within the
amateur community for the expansion of the 6 meter
repeater subband, but pointed out that the ARRL's 6
meter band plan recommends that the frequency segment
51.1-52.0 MHz be utilized for simplex F3E emission voice
transmissions. We also called attention to the segment
51.0-51.1 MHz which the ARRL band plan designates as
the "Pacific DX Window" (DX window), a frequency
segment in the 6 meter band where amateur stations in
International Telecommunication Union Regions 2 and 3
can intercommunicate during certain conditions of radio
frequency propagation. The comments discussed below
address these and other matters.
III. COMMENTS
3. In response to the proposal, we received thirteen
comments and one reply comment.2 A majority of the
commenters supported the proposed expansion of the 6
meter subband. The ARRL, for example, favors the proposal
even though it does not conform with the present
ARRL 6 meter band plan. The ARRL states that its band
plan would be revised so that operations now conducted
in the 51-52 MHz expansion segment would be adequately
protected from repeater operation. 3 The SCDCC andSCRRBA support the proposed expansion because it
would provide channels for new repeaters.4 Mark Weiss
states that nationwide standardization in the use of the 6
meter repeater subband pursuant to an ARRL band plan
would encourage manufacturers to produce equipment
for the band.5
4. George Bednekoff, James F. Epley, Jr. and William
Gardner oppose the proposal. Mr. Bednekoff questions
whether there is a shortage of 6 meter band repeater
channels. He also notes that current transceivers would
not be suitable for use in an expanded repeater segment
because they have only a one megahertz separation between
the transmitting and receiving channels. Further,
he believes that communications in the DX window
would experience interference from local repeater operation.6
Mr. Epley believes that the 51-52 MHz segment
should be reserved for packet radio, television, satellite,
and communications with European stations.7 Mr. Gardner
contends that expansion of the 6 meter repeater
subband would result in interference to Japanese amateur
stations and there would be an increase in interference
between repeaters. He also states that expanding the repeater
subband would make equipment designed for the
current subband obsolete.8
IV. DISCUSSION
5. There was general support in the comments for an
expansion of the 6 meter subband. We believe that a need
for expansion has been shown and that other types of
communications can be accommodated in the remaining
one megahertz segment (50-51 MHz) where repeater operation
is prohibited. The ARRL concurs with those
commenters who are concerned about interference to stations
operating in the DX window. It said that it is
cognizant of the need to protect those operations and will
further such protection through vigorous efforts to revise
the voluntary band plan for the 6 meter band. The ARRL
believes that expansion of the 6 meter repeater subband is
desirable and can be accommodated on a planned, coordinated
basis within the amateur service. Based on the
ARRL's assurance of revised voluntary band plans, we are
confident that the other uses in the 6 meter band will be
protected.
6. We have noted the comments that concern interference
to non-repeater operations. We conclude from the
comments that in some areas, at least, such operations can
continue undisturbed within the 51-52 MHz segment. In
other areas, such operations may have to relocate to the
50-51 MHz segment. We are persuaded that any resulting
relocation inconvenience will be slight and not a sufficient
reason to preclude the expansion. With respect to
the comments stating that transceivers designed for the
current two megahertz repeater segment are unsuitable for
a three megahertz repeater segment, we do not believe
that this is a significant deterrent to authorizing the expansion.
Any necessary modification of such a transceiver
should be within the capability of an amateur operator.
V. CONCLUSION
7. In summary, we believe that the public interest will
be served by amending the amateur service rules to expand
the 6 meter band repeater subband to 51-54 MHz. It
will allow additional repeaters to operate. We are con
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 5, No. 3, Pages 556 to 796, January 29 - February 9, 1990, book, February 1990; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1659/m1/74/: accessed March 28, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.