GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
One item from FCC in today's Federal Register (Vol 72, Number 2)

It's not the Report and Order, though.

NO NEED for a report and order on the fr.

Since the FC already publically announced the acceptance of no code, that
effectively permits anyone with a CSCE for general or technician class
element 2 CSCE or license to use HF SSB NOW in the permitted frequencies.

There is no statute that requires publication in the FR before a requirement
is effective, only that the regulating agency agree in principal to the new
requirement. Such a statute would obviously be unconstitutional. It is
merely a government formality which cannot be enforced by the courts.

The FCC did not publish an effective date nor did they choose to publish one
in the federal register. That means you can transmit SSB voice at this very
moment.

Go ahead element 2 or 3 CSCE'S or tech license holders, you can transmit
NOW! I look forward to seeing you on the bands (though I do spend a lot of
time in the CW portions).

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"Stefan Wolfe" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...
One item from FCC in today's Federal Register (Vol 72, Number 2)

It's not the Report and Order, though.

NO NEED for a report and order on the fr.

Since the FC already publically announced the acceptance of no code, that
effectively permits anyone with a CSCE for general or technician class
element 2 CSCE or license to use HF SSB NOW in the permitted frequencies.

There is no statute that requires publication in the FR before a
requirement is effective, only that the regulating agency agree in
principal to the new requirement. Such a statute would obviously be
unconstitutional. It is merely a government formality which cannot be
enforced by the courts.

The FCC did not publish an effective date nor did they choose to publish
one in the federal register. That means you can transmit SSB voice at this
very moment.

Go ahead element 2 or 3 CSCE'S or tech license holders, you can transmit
NOW! I look forward to seeing you on the bands (though I do spend a lot of
time in the CW portions).


Here is the text: The R&O is ALREADY adopted;

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of

Amendment of Part 97 of the Commission's Rules

To Implement WRC-03 Regulations Applicable to Requirements for
Operator Licenses in the Amateur Radio Service









Amendment of the Commission's Rules Governing the Amateur Radio
Services
)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)


WT Docket No. 05-235

RM-10781, RM-10782, RM-10783,

RM-10784, RM-10785, RM-10786,

RM-10787, RM-10805, RM-10806,

RM-10807, RM-10808, RM-10809,

RM-10810, RM-10811, RM-10867,

RM-10868, RM-10869, RM-10870

WT Docket No. 04-140


REPORT AND ORDER AND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

------------- Adopted------------------- : December 15, 2006 Released:
December 19, 2006

By the Commission:



And,



Generally, the NPRM proposed to eliminate the requirement that an individual
must pass an international Morse code telegraphy examination in order to
qualify for any amateur radio operator license.

As discussed below, -----------------this R&O implements------------------
the proposals set forth in the NPRM. Specifically, we will amend our Amateur
Radio Service rules by:

.. revising the examination requirements for obtaining a General Class or
Amateur Extra Class amateur radio operator license; and

.. revising the operating privileges for Technician Class licensees to
include the operating privileges that are authorized to Novice Class
licensees.



So go ahead and transmit!

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

NO NEED for a report and order on the fr.

Since the FC already publically announced the acceptance of no code, that
effectively permits anyone with a CSCE for general or technician class
element 2 CSCE or license to use HF SSB NOW in the permitted frequencies.

There is no statute that requires publication in the FR before a requirement
is effective, only that the regulating agency agree in principal to the new
requirement. Such a statute would obviously be unconstitutional. It is
merely a government formality which cannot be enforced by the courts.


I doubt it. Until it shows in the Federal Registry, the old rules are
still in force. And then the old rules stay alive until 30 days elapses.

Besides, if all someone has are CSCEs, they don't even have a callsign,
so how could they operate?

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"robert casey" wrote in message
ink.net...


NO NEED for a report and order on the fr.

Since the FC already publically announced the acceptance of no code, that
effectively permits anyone with a CSCE for general or technician class
element 2 CSCE or license to use HF SSB NOW in the permitted frequencies.

There is no statute that requires publication in the FR before a
requirement is effective, only that the regulating agency agree in
principal to the new requirement. Such a statute would obviously be
unconstitutional. It is merely a government formality which cannot be
enforced by the courts.


I doubt it. Until it shows in the Federal Registry, the old rules are
still in force. And then the old rules stay alive until 30 days elapses.

Besides, if all someone has are CSCEs, they don't even have a callsign, so
how could they operate?

And those CSCEs will NOT be accepted for processing for the upgrade until
the effective date listed in the Federal Register. So if the CSCE expires
before that effective date, they will have to retest.

Dee, N8UZE

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
. ..

"robert casey" wrote in message
ink.net...


NO NEED for a report and order on the fr.

Since the FC already publically announced the acceptance of no code,
that effectively permits anyone with a CSCE for general or technician
class element 2 CSCE or license to use HF SSB NOW in the permitted
frequencies.

There is no statute that requires publication in the FR before a
requirement is effective, only that the regulating agency agree in
principal to the new requirement. Such a statute would obviously be
unconstitutional. It is merely a government formality which cannot be
enforced by the courts.


I doubt it. Until it shows in the Federal Registry, the old rules are
still in force. And then the old rules stay alive until 30 days elapses.

Besides, if all someone has are CSCEs, they don't even have a callsign,
so how could they operate?

And those CSCEs will NOT be accepted for processing for the upgrade until
the effective date listed in the Federal Register. So if the CSCE expires
before that effective date, they will have to retest.

Dee, N8UZE

Perhaps but a license upgrade on paper is an administrative exercise subject
to the administrivia that you mention. In this case the bureaucracy may not
(yet)properly reflect the law..

On the other hand, the legality is defined by the adoption and release dates
of the Report and Order that adopts the NPRM. The R&O was released on Dec.
19 but was actually effective on the adoption date of Dec. 15 2006.

Legally, Part 97 does not state that you must be a general class or
technician etc. to transmit on certain bands. It merely states that one must
pass element 2 to transmit SSB on 10m segmets, element 3 to transmit SSB on
other segments etc.

The license itself only reflects what the law requires (this may be an
exception as you point out). The law governs who may transmit where and what
element credits must be obtained before doing so.

However, actual statute law trumps bureaucracy. The Federal Register merely
records laws that have already been enacted. The Constitution was in effect
prior to the existence of a FR and nowhere is the FR mentioned in today's
constitution.

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Stefan Wolfe wrote:

wrote in message
ups.com...

One item from FCC in today's Federal Register (Vol 72, Number 2)

It's not the Report and Order, though.


NO NEED for a report and order on the fr.

Since the FC already publically announced the acceptance of no code, that
effectively permits anyone with a CSCE for general or technician class
element 2 CSCE or license to use HF SSB NOW in the permitted frequencies.

SNIPPED

100% WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!

Any law or regulation in the USA becomes effective ONLY after it is PROMULGATED!!

For laws and regulations at the Federal Level that PROMULGATION only occurs in
the Federal Register.

Operate prior to that date at your peril.

/s/ DD, W1MCE

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Jim's caution below is accurate.

Until the effective date of the new rules, you can't upgrade to General or
Extra without credit for Element 1.

AFTER the effective date you CAN upgrade to General or Extra without having
passed Element 1.

HOWEVER, you MUST upgrade by either presenting valid, unexpired CSCEs for
the written elements for the class of license at a VE session (and pay the
fee ...) OR take and pass the required written elements (and, again, pay the
fee ...) at a VE session.

Please do NOT operate beyond your license privileges.

73,
Carl - wk3c

"Jim Higgins" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 19:32:30 -0500, "Stefan Wolfe"
wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...
One item from FCC in today's Federal Register (Vol 72, Number 2)

It's not the Report and Order, though.

NO NEED for a report and order on the fr.

Since the FC already publically announced the acceptance of no code, that
effectively permits anyone with a CSCE for general or technician class
element 2 CSCE or license to use HF SSB NOW in the permitted frequencies.

There is no statute that requires publication in the FR before a
requirement
is effective, only that the regulating agency agree in principal to the
new
requirement. Such a statute would obviously be unconstitutional. It is
merely a government formality which cannot be enforced by the courts.

The FCC did not publish an effective date nor did they choose to publish
one
in the federal register. That means you can transmit SSB voice at this
very
moment.

Go ahead element 2 or 3 CSCE'S or tech license holders, you can transmit
NOW! I look forward to seeing you on the bands (though I do spend a lot of
time in the CW portions).


Do not be fooled by the above info into operating illegally.

You can transmit SSB voice once the CW requirement is officially
dropped - which will be at the time the R&O is published in the
federal register - probably some time in late January or more likely
February - ***PROVIDED*** you have used that CSCE to file for a
license upgrade... which you cannot do until the R&O is in the Federal
Register because passing a code test is a requirement until then. If
the CSCE expires you can legally apply it to an upgrade and actually
do apply it, then you must retest.

If you're just walking around with that CSCE in your pocket after the
R&O is published without filing it with the FCC for an upgrade and
you're using HF SSB privileges you are operating illegally.

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
Jim's caution below is accurate.

Until the effective date of the new rules, you can't upgrade to General or
Extra without credit for Element 1.

AFTER the effective date you CAN upgrade to General or Extra without having
passed Element 1.

HOWEVER, you MUST upgrade by either presenting valid, unexpired CSCEs for
the written elements for the class of license at a VE session (and pay the
fee ...) OR take and pass the required written elements (and, again, pay the
fee ...) at a VE session.

Please do NOT operate beyond your license privileges.


Most Definitely!


Hi Carl - Haven't heard from you for quite a while. Hope all is going well.

Someone keeps posting this kind of stuff, I can only imagine that they
want to scam people into illegal operation, then hoping they get caught?
It's a funny world we live in.

Despite my personal preferences for some sort of Element one testing,
(heck, I would prefer shrimp, steak and and lobster every evening too) I
am kind of excited that there will be a crop of amateurs, new to HF,
that will need a good deal of Elmering. Lots of exciting stuff to learn
and pass on.

And rule number one is what you stated above - keep within the privileges.


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Don't feed the troll...

Don't feed the troll...

Don't feed the troll...

ARRRRGHHHHH!!!!

Laws are only words on paper unless we as humans choose to abide by them.
Enforcement occurs when those that choose to live by the laws get tired of
and out number those that don't.

In the mean time, it isn't going to kill anyone to wait the next six to
eight weeks before the implementation date. BTW, it didn't kill me to wait
until 11:01 PM CST December 14, 2006 to operate on the expanded 80m Extra
phone band.

73, de Nate

--

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds,
the pessimist fears this is true."

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...
I
am kind of excited that there will be a crop of amateurs, new to HF, that
will need a good deal of Elmering. Lots of exciting stuff to learn and
pass on.

And rule number one is what you stated above - keep within the privileges.

Mike, forgive me for being blunt but you are in fantasy land.

It didn't happen when we reduced from 13 wpm to 5 wpm. What makes you think
that reducing from 5 wpm to 0 will have any effect?

I too have said I was waiting for the long promised injection of scientific
RF talent and youth into the service but I was merely being cynical because
it was a false promise 10 years ago and its non-fulfillment in coming years
will prove that the premise was false; it was merely used as a talking point
to support no-code and the FCC bought off on it.

Of course, and as is the case for so many political matters, truth is not
really that important and there is no accountability for these false
promises except by pests like me who will use every opportunity to remind us
of them.

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Stefan Wolfe wrote:
Legally, Part 97 does not state that you must be a general class or
technician etc. to transmit on certain bands.

See Section 97.301. Then see below:



0 2 4 6 8 10
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
TROLL-O-METER

No 73 for you,
Jeff KH6O


--

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 06:15:36 +0000, Jeffrey Herman wrote:

0 2 4 6 8 10
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
TROLL-O-METER

No 73 for you,
Jeff KH6O

Shouldn't that show S9 +60db?

;-)

- Nate

--

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds,
the pessimist fears this is true."

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"Nate Bargmann" wrote in message
et...
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 06:15:36 +0000, Jeffrey Herman wrote:

0 2 4 6 8 10
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
TROLL-O-METER

No 73 for you,
Jeff KH6O

Shouldn't that show S9 +60db?

more like 60 pounds gud buddy!

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Stefan Wolfe wrote:
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...
I
am kind of excited that there will be a crop of amateurs, new to HF, that
will need a good deal of Elmering. Lots of exciting stuff to learn and
pass on.

And rule number one is what you stated above - keep within the privileges.

Mike, forgive me for being blunt but you are in fantasy land.

Forgive me for being blunt, but there are are different fantasylands
for different people. Your's is just a bitter one. Good for you, and
enjoy it! 8^)



It didn't happen when we reduced from 13 wpm to 5 wpm. What makes you think
that reducing from 5 wpm to 0 will have any effect?

What is "it" that didn't work?



I too have said I was waiting for the long promised injection of scientific
RF talent and youth into the service but I was merely being cynical because
it was a false promise 10 years ago and its non-fulfillment in coming years
will prove that the premise was false; it was merely used as a talking point
to support no-code and the FCC bought off on it.

The Technician license was and is a dead end. Lots of people talked
their only mildly interested spouses and friends into it. It was a mistake.

Notice that you speak of Talent and youth. I don't particularly
careabout either - note I spoke of inexperienced people, not
Techno-wizzes or youth. Techno-wizzes already know it all, and the days
of youth involvement in Amateur radio as well as many other hobbies is
pretty much over. Youth are being largely segregated from the rest of
the population, presumably to "protect" them.




Of course, and as is the case for so many political matters, truth is not
really that important and there is no accountability for these false
promises except by pests like me who will use every opportunity to remind us
of them.

Sigh... Sometimes I am amazed at the stances taken by some pro-code
people. And this is coming from a pro-code Ham.

At least you can be thankful for the many years that Morse code testing
has ensured that Hams of old were upstanding, technically savvy and
morally upright. ;^)

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...

What is "it" that didn't work?

The "it"? I will quote from your own post:

I
am kind of excited that there will be a crop of amateurs, new to HF,
that will need a good deal of Elmering. Lots of exciting stuff to learn
and pass on.

I an saying that without code, nothing will change. So, what are you so
excited about in this aftermath of "no code"?

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Stefan Wolfe wrote:
...

As I have pointed out before, Einstein, Tesla, Hawkins, etc. never
bothered getting a ham ticket ... I doubt morse was the major cause (ya
don't think it was on account of the caliber of the individuals
inhabiting the bands, do 'ya? NAAAA!)

However, there is a possibility NOW that amateur radio will change and
the dead wood will be replaced by progressively minded individuals ...

JS

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

" However, actual statute law trumps bureaucracy. The Federal Register
merely
records laws that have already been enacted. The Constitution was in
effect prior to the existence of a FR and nowhere is the FR mentioned in
today's constitution.

True, but is there some other piece of Statute Law that states that
legislation cannot come into force until it has been promulgated in the
Federal Register?

Jeff

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"Jeff" wrote in message
. com...

" However, actual statute law trumps bureaucracy. The Federal Register
merely
records laws that have already been enacted. The Constitution was in
effect prior to the existence of a FR and nowhere is the FR mentioned in
today's constitution.

True, but is there some other piece of Statute Law that states that
legislation cannot come into force until it has been promulgated in the
Federal Register?

Yes, and as it was pointed out to me, it can (and probably is usually true)
that the effectivity can be conditional on the FR publication if this is
stated in the body of the law, as it was. I continue to be amazed at our
system of laws; legislators make laws without knowing when they will
actually become effective. The actual effectivity dates are delegated to
non-elected bureaucrats who publish a paper. I cannot imagine that some laws
whose effectivity dates can mean the accumulation (or loss) of wealth for
each day publication is delayed or speeded up could have not a corruptive
effect on these nameless people.

A war could be declared but not be put into effect until 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Stefan Wolfe wrote:
legislators make laws without knowing when they will
actually become effective.

Heck, legislators often make ineffective laws.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...


However, there is a possibility NOW that amateur radio will change and the
dead wood will be replaced by progressively minded individuals ...

You seem to be assuming that all progressive individuals were blocked from
amateur radio due to the code requirement. That is simply not true. There
are many progressive individuals who passed or could have passed the Morse
test. Also, amateur radio is not zero-sum: A new non morse ham does not
replace an old morse ham; he/she simply adds to the existing base of all
hams in the service. True, your claim is supported by the fact that natural
attrition will generally result in young hams replacing old hams; however,
future hams, young and old, who are not tested for Morse, might very well
have wanted to pass, and indeed passed the Morse test, had it been required;
therefore, non-progressives who could have passed the test, and who would
would have wanted to pass the test are not prevented from entering the
service. Also, the small subset of individuals who 1) could not pass the
test and 2) are progessive is only a small percentage of all hams, both
progressive and non-progressive, who either have or do not have the ability
to pass a Morse test. There are many hams on this group whom I would call
progressive but all of whom have passed the Morse test; they may not have
favored it but they themselves passed it.

So, tell me how is there a "possibility" that amateur radio will change
significantly when the impact of no code testing is obviously so small?

FCC and the Federal register
 

Jeff wrote:
" However, actual statute law trumps bureaucracy. The Federal Register
merely
records laws that have already been enacted. The Constitution was in
effect prior to the existence of a FR and nowhere is the FR mentioned in
today's constitution.

True, but is there some other piece of Statute Law that states that
legislation cannot come into force until it has been promulgated in the
Federal Register?

No - but there doesn't have to be.

The basic problem is that some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand
the test of the Report and Order.


FCC 06-178

can be downloaded from:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-178A1.pdf

in PDF

On Sheet 17 (of 41) it says:

"VI. ORDERING CLAUSES

........

40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Part 97 of the Commission's Rules IS
AMENDED as specified in Appendix A, effective [30 days after
publication in the
Federal Register]."

There's no need of any external law tying FCC action to the Federal
Register, because
the FCC did that as part of the R&O itself, rather than specifying an
effective date.

AFAIK, it's done this way to avoid conflicts. The R&O is effectively
"out there" for anyone to
look at, but if there were some sort of conflict with another govt.
agency, etc., or a mistake in the R&O, FCC could take action before
the effective date, and/or hold up implementation by not
publishing. That's extremely doubtful in this case - the delay in
getting the R&O published
is almost certainly simple bureaucratic procedure.

Not all FCC actions go through that procedure. Emergency declarations
are one example - they're usually effective immediately.

Sooner or later all the wheels will turn!

73 de Jim, N2EY

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Stefan Wolfe wrote:
...
So, tell me how is there a "possibility" that amateur radio will change
significantly when the impact of no code testing is obviously so small?



Simple, take for example einstein, tesla, hawkins, they would only need
to pass the written and learn no new pseudo-musical skills/talents like
morse ...

.... who knows, perhaps if einstein were still alive he might even bother
getting a license now!

JS

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

Cecil Moore wrote:

Stefan Wolfe wrote:

legislators make laws without knowing when they will actually become
effective.


Heck, legislators often make ineffective laws.

We now have a USA Congress that was elected on an anti-Iraq war platform.
Yesterday the key Democrats made the evening news in stating that they won't
vote to cut off $$$ for the war. But, they will provide a non-binding resolution
that the 'Sense of Congress' disapproves of the war. Heck, we knew that before
the fools got sworn in!

If you're against the war, vote against paying for the war!! [become responsible
.... not a wishy washy dish-rag!] AKA Put up or shut up!

/s/ DD, W1MCE

FCC and the Federal register
 

Section VI ORDERING CLAUSES, Paragraph 40

"It is further ordered That Part 97 of the Commission's rules IS AMENDED as
specified in Appendix A, effective [30 Days after publication in the Federal
Register]."

So, watch the FR.

wrote:

Jeff wrote:

" However, actual statute law trumps bureaucracy. The Federal Register
merely

records laws that have already been enacted. The Constitution was in
effect prior to the existence of a FR and nowhere is the FR mentioned in
today's constitution.

True, but is there some other piece of Statute Law that states that
legislation cannot come into force until it has been promulgated in the
Federal Register?


No - but there doesn't have to be.

The basic problem is that some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand
the test of the Report and Order.


FCC 06-178

can be downloaded from:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-178A1.pdf

in PDF

On Sheet 17 (of 41) it says:

"VI. ORDERING CLAUSES

.......

40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Part 97 of the Commission's Rules IS
AMENDED as specified in Appendix A, effective [30 days after
publication in the
Federal Register]."

There's no need of any external law tying FCC action to the Federal
Register, because
the FCC did that as part of the R&O itself, rather than specifying an
effective date.

AFAIK, it's done this way to avoid conflicts. The R&O is effectively
"out there" for anyone to
look at, but if there were some sort of conflict with another govt.
agency, etc., or a mistake in the R&O, FCC could take action before
the effective date, and/or hold up implementation by not
publishing. That's extremely doubtful in this case - the delay in
getting the R&O published
is almost certainly simple bureaucratic procedure.

Not all FCC actions go through that procedure. Emergency declarations
are one example - they're usually effective immediately.

Sooner or later all the wheels will turn!

73 de Jim, N2EY

FCC and the Federal register
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
t some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand
the test of the Report and Order.

Well, I did understand the Morse test but I confess that I never did
understand the test of the Report and Order. :-))

GO AHEAD, you can transmit voice SSB NOW!
 

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
Stefan Wolfe wrote:
...
So, tell me how is there a "possibility" that amateur radio will change
significantly when the impact of no code testing is obviously so small?



Simple, take for example einstein, tesla, hawkins, they would only need to
pass the written and learn no new pseudo-musical skills/talents like morse
...

I notice that you keep saying "hawkins". You are referring to Steven
Hawking, correct?

FCC and the Federal register
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
The basic problem is that some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand the test of the Report and Order.

I believe Jim meant "text" not "test" above - an easy typo to make.


FCC 06-178

can be downloaded from:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-178A1.pdf

in PDF

On Sheet 17 (of 41) it says:

"VI. ORDERING CLAUSES

.......

40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Part 97 of the Commission's Rules IS
AMENDED as specified in Appendix A, effective [30 days after
publication in the
Federal Register]."

There's no need of any external law tying FCC action to the Federal
Register, because
the FCC did that as part of the R&O itself, rather than specifying an
effective date.

There is an "external law" which ties all federal agency rulemakings to the
Federal Register.

It's called the Administrative Procedures Act and it's Title 5 USC, Chapter
5, sections 511-599.

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is the law under which some 55 U.S.
government federal regulatory agencies like the FDA and EPA (and FCC)
create the rules and regulations necessary to implement and enforce major
legislative acts such as the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, Clean Air Act or
Occupational Health and Safety Act (and the Communications Act, as
ammended).



AFAIK, it's done this way to avoid conflicts. The R&O is effectively
"out there" for anyone to
look at, but if there were some sort of conflict with another govt.
agency, etc., or a mistake in the R&O, FCC could take action before
the effective date, and/or hold up implementation by not
publishing. That's extremely doubtful in this case - the delay in
getting the R&O published
is almost certainly simple bureaucratic procedure.

I'm sure that the delay (not abnormal at all) in publishing in the FR is
just that - the bureaucracy.

Not all FCC actions go through that procedure. Emergency declarations
are one example - they're usually effective immediately.

True - but the APA requires that there be very good reasons for not giving
the citizenry due and reasonable notice before new regulations take effect.

Sooner or later all the wheels will turn!

Agreed ...
73,
Carl - wk3c

FCC and the Federal register
 

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
The basic problem is that some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand the test of the Report and Order.

AFAIK, it's done this way to avoid conflicts. The R&O is effectively
"out there" for anyone to
look at, but if there were some sort of conflict with another govt.
agency, etc., or a mistake in the R&O, FCC could take action before
the effective date, and/or hold up implementation by not
publishing. That's extremely doubtful in this case - the delay in
getting the R&O published
is almost certainly simple bureaucratic procedure.

I'm sure that the delay (not abnormal at all) in publishing in the FR is
just that - the bureaucracy.

indeed it is normal I am just hoping that we will not soon start see
ProCode insisting well maybe trhey changed their mind

Not all FCC actions go through that procedure. Emergency declarations
are one example - they're usually effective immediately.

True - but the APA requires that there be very good reasons for not giving
the citizenry due and reasonable notice before new regulations take effect.

Sooner or later all the wheels will turn!

Agreed ...

and they grind slowly and frankly they grind slower for me than you and
Jim , Carl I am one of the few people in point of fact diretly affected
by them
73,
Carl - wk3c

FCC and the Federal register
 

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
ps.com...

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
The basic problem is that some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand the test of the Report and Order.

AFAIK, it's done this way to avoid conflicts. The R&O is effectively
"out there" for anyone to
look at, but if there were some sort of conflict with another govt.
agency, etc., or a mistake in the R&O, FCC could take action before
the effective date, and/or hold up implementation by not
publishing. That's extremely doubtful in this case - the delay in
getting the R&O published
is almost certainly simple bureaucratic procedure.

I'm sure that the delay (not abnormal at all) in publishing in the FR is
just that - the bureaucracy.

indeed it is normal I am just hoping that we will not soon start see
ProCode insisting well maybe trhey changed their mind

Not all FCC actions go through that procedure. Emergency declarations
are one example - they're usually effective immediately.

True - but the APA requires that there be very good reasons for not
giving
the citizenry due and reasonable notice before new regulations take
effect.

Sooner or later all the wheels will turn!

Agreed ...

and they grind slowly and frankly they grind slower for me than you and
Jim , Carl I am one of the few people in point of fact diretly affected
by them

Mark, I think they just don't want you on HF. What do you think?



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

FCC and the Federal register
 

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
The basic problem is that some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand the test of the Report and Order.

I believe Jim meant "text" not "test" above - an easy typo to make.

Yep!

FCC 06-178

can be downloaded from:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-178A1.pdf

in PDF

On Sheet 17 (of 41) it says:

"VI. ORDERING CLAUSES

.......

40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Part 97 of the Commission's Rules IS
AMENDED as specified in Appendix A, effective [30 days after
publication in the
Federal Register]."

There's no need of any external law tying FCC action to the Federal
Register, because
the FCC did that as part of the R&O itself, rather than specifying an
effective date.

There is an "external law" which ties all federal agency rulemakings to the
Federal Register.

It's called the Administrative Procedures Act and it's Title 5 USC, Chapter
5, sections 511-599.

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is the law under which some 55 U.S.
government federal regulatory agencies like the FDA and EPA (and FCC)
create the rules and regulations necessary to implement and enforce major
legislative acts such as the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, Clean Air Act or
Occupational Health and Safety Act (and the Communications Act, as
ammended).

I did not know that! Thanks Carl!

It makes perfect sense that there would be legislation requiring the
publication of routine new rules in the Federal Register before they
become effective.

AFAIK, it's done this way to avoid conflicts. The R&O is effectively
"out there" for anyone to
look at, but if there were some sort of conflict with another govt.
agency, etc., or a mistake in the R&O, FCC could take action before
the effective date, and/or hold up implementation by not
publishing. That's extremely doubtful in this case - the delay in
getting the R&O published
is almost certainly simple bureaucratic procedure.

I'm sure that the delay (not abnormal at all) in publishing in the FR is
just that - the bureaucracy.

Agreed.

Also, after having made a couple of obvious typos and contradictions in
the "omnibus" R&O, FCC might be taking extra measures to be sure that
sort of thing isn't in this one.

Not all FCC actions go through that procedure. Emergency declarations
are one example - they're usually effective immediately.

True - but the APA requires that there be very good reasons for not giving
the citizenry due and reasonable notice before new regulations take effect.

Those emergency declarations are the exceptions that prove the rule
IMHO.

Sooner or later all the wheels will turn!

Agreed ...

Next Tuesday at the soonest.

73 de Jim, N2EY

FCC and the Federal register
 

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...
The basic problem is that some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand the test of the Report and Order.

I believe Jim meant "text" not "test" above - an easy typo to make.

Resulting in an easy joke to make.

Couldn't resist.

FCC and the Federal register
 

wrote in message
ps.com...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
The basic problem is that some folks either didn't read or didn't
understand the test of the Report and Order.

I believe Jim meant "text" not "test" above - an easy typo to make.

Yep!

I think you meant "Yes". Another typo?
(hah hah)