It sounds like QRZ isn't the only organization that's about to take Baxter
off their list. Let's see, how many decades did it take to do the obvious?

ak

"Splinter" wrote in message
...
Remeber when I said that the FCC had "future enforcement
actions" with K1MAN? Here's the most recent letter to the guy from
Riley:

October 29, 2004


Mr. Glenn A. Baxter
RR 1 Box 776
Belgrade Lakes, ME 04918


Warning Notice: Amateur Radio license K1MAN
Case #EB-2004-07

Dear Mr. Baxter:


On September 15, 2004, we notified you that we had received
approximately a dozen complaints that your Amateur radio station's
transmissions started while the communications of individual operators
and groups such as the Salvation Army Team Emergency Radio Net, which
was handling health and welfare traffic for this season's hurricane
victims, were ongoing. The letter cited an April 14, 2004 warning
issued to you about your transmissions starting while existing
communications were ongoing, and warning you that your publishing a
"transmission schedule" does not give you the right to begin
transmitting on a certain frequency at a certain time if there are
ongoing communications on that frequency.


Pursuant to Section 308(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. Section 308(b), we requested you to respond to the
letter within 20 days from receipt certifying: 1) what action(s) you
are taking to correct the deficiencies in the operation of your
station; and 2) specifying what method of station control you have
implemented for your Amateur radio station transmissions.


Your response dated October 14, 2004, in which you stated that "No
corrective actions are necessary at K1MAN" and "No changes are needed
with regard to station control..." failed to furnish the information
requested by the Commission.


In addition to the above mentioned complaints, we have received
additional complaints of interference from your station's
transmissions starting at 9:31 PM on 3.890 MHz on October 16, 2004;
6:23 PM on 3.800 MHz and 7:59 PM on 3.977 on October 19, 2004; and
7:59 PM on 3.977 MHz on October 20, 2004. We also note that, according
to your web page, your station now transmits on 14.275 MHz from 11 PM
until past 6 PM the following day.


We are affording you an additional 20 days from receipt of this letter
to furnish the information requested in our September 15, 2004 letter.


Additionally, pursuant to Section 308(b) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, you are requested to provide the name, call sign,
and address of the control operator(s) on the additional dates and
times mentioned above (9:31 PM on 3.890 MHz on October 16, 2004; 6:23
PM on 3.800 MHz and 7:59 PM on 3.977 on October 19, 2004; and 7:59 PM
on 3.977 MHz on October 20, 2004), and to describe the method of
station control used each time the station was transmitting. You are
also requested to furnish that information for the 19 hour
transmissions recently begun on 14.275 MHz.


In an inquiry of this type we are required to notify you that a
willfully false or misleading reply constitutes a separate violation
made punishable under United States Code Title 18, Section 1001.
Failure to reply also constitutes a separation violation of Commission
rules.


CC: FCC Northeastern Regional Director
FCC Boston Office District Director


--
Dan, KD8AGU
Please remove ".nospam" to reply via email.

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:02:14 GMT, "King Zulu"
wrote:

It sounds like QRZ isn't the only organization that's about to take Baxter
off their list. Let's see, how many decades did it take to do the obvious?

ak

I had a feeling that Riley would not accept K1MAN's reply, and
this does indicate that Riely's about had it. The impression I got is
that he's patient, to a point, then, if his patience runs out with
someone, then, things get very uncomfortable.
I suspect that the next series of emforcement letters won't be
asking for an explaination, but, more along the lines of a NAL telling
him to caugh up a decent amount of dough, or maybe accompanied with an
in rem seizure. But, I'm not going to second-guess the next move as
that's up to K1MAN.

--
Dan, KD8AGU
Please remove ".nospam" to reply via email.

Splinter wrote:
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:02:14 GMT, "King Zulu"
wrote:


It sounds like QRZ isn't the only organization that's about to take Baxter
off their list. Let's see, how many decades did it take to do the obvious?

ak


I had a feeling that Riley would not accept K1MAN's reply, and
this does indicate that Riely's about had it. The impression I got is
that he's patient, to a point, then, if his patience runs out with
someone, then, things get very uncomfortable.
I suspect that the next series of emforcement letters won't be
asking for an explaination, but, more along the lines of a NAL telling
him to caugh up a decent amount of dough, or maybe accompanied with an
in rem seizure. But, I'm not going to second-guess the next move as
that's up to K1MAN.


If the FCC does that, then they need to head directly on over to W1AW,
and do the exact same.

--
Dan, KD8AGU
Please remove ".nospam" to reply via email.

If the FCC does that, then they need to head directly on over to W1AW,
and do the exact same.


Maybe I'm nieve(sp), but I thought the guys at W1AW would
move up or down the band some to avoid QRMing someone
(that they can hear, there is a rule saying "listen before
you transmit"). Hams know to look up or down the band
if they don't find W1AW on the expected frequency.

Robert Casey wrote:


If the FCC does that, then they need to head directly on over to W1AW,
and do the exact same.


Maybe I'm nieve(sp), but I thought the guys at W1AW would
move up or down the band some to avoid QRMing someone
(that they can hear, there is a rule saying "listen before
you transmit"). Hams know to look up or down the band
if they don't find W1AW on the expected frequency.

I've been in RTTY QSO, when W1AW came on, and wiped us out, so no, they
don't always listen.

The problem I have is there are about 3 to 6 so called "hams" that hang
around MAN's published frequencies waiting for his broadcast to start.
Then they start bitching about MAN QRM'ing them.

The main problem on 20M is Fat Ass Mikey ND8V, and dumb ass Bobbie
WD4AWO, not K1MAN.

Keep in mind, I DO NOT support K1MAN, but at the same time I damn sure
DO NOT support what the Tennessee Toilet Tick (WD4AWO) and the Kalamazoo
Cuckoo (ND8V) are doing either. If Mikey and friends don't like what is
going on, on 14.275, well like Fat Ass Mikey likes to say, "Turn the
damn dial".

In article et, Robert Casey
writes:

I thought the guys at W1AW would
move up or down the band some to avoid QRMing someone

Look at the W1AW weekday schedule:

Simultaneous CW bulletins on 8 different frequencies 3 times a day

Simultaneous RTTY bulletins on 7 different frequencies twice a day

Simultaneous SSB bulletins on 8 different frequencies once a day

Simultaneous CW code practice on 8 different frequencies 4 times a day (except
Monday when it's only 3 times a day)

W1AW has scheduled transmissions for 44 hours a week.

73 de Jim, N2EY



W1AW transmits CW, RTTY and SSB bulletins

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article et, Robert Casey
writes:

I thought the guys at W1AW would
move up or down the band some to avoid QRMing someone

Look at the W1AW weekday schedule:

Simultaneous CW bulletins on 8 different frequencies 3 times a day

Simultaneous RTTY bulletins on 7 different frequencies twice a day

Simultaneous SSB bulletins on 8 different frequencies once a day

Simultaneous CW code practice on 8 different frequencies 4 times a day (except
Monday when it's only 3 times a day)

W1AW has scheduled transmissions for 44 hours a week.

73 de Jim, N2EY



W1AW transmits CW, RTTY and SSB bulletins

I think James is saying that W1AW doesn't have to follow the rules;
too busy to be bothered.

I think James is saying that W1AW doesn't have to follow the rules;
too busy to be bothered.

IIRC there are special rules for club stations of clubs with
more than ten thousand members....

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
nk.net...


If the FCC does that, then they need to head directly on over to W1AW,
and do the exact same.


Maybe I'm nieve(sp), but I thought the guys at W1AW would
move up or down the band some to avoid QRMing someone
(that they can hear, there is a rule saying "listen before
you transmit"). Hams know to look up or down the band
if they don't find W1AW on the expected frequency.

Bob - Perhaps the ARRL has an update to their position in 1988.
ak
-------------------------------
From ARRL to the Bermuda ham representative,
copied to Baxter, the IARU Secretary, and the FCC.

May 13, 1988
----------------------

Rather than wait to have you ask, I thought I should provide some
clarification of the letter dated May 4 that you have been sent by Glenn
Baxter, K1MAN.

Mr. Baxter states, "Our amateur broadcast practice 1s Identical to that of
W1AW." I believe he is referring to the practice of transmitting bulletins
without first ensuring that the frequencies to be used are clear of other
amateur communications. As has been discussed on occasion In QST, W1AW
transmits simultaneously on eight frequencies 1n as many amateur bands. The
bulletin transmitters are crystal-controlled, a limitation we hope will be
remedied shortly. The number of frequencies being used simultaneously, and
the technical limitations of the equipment now in use, make it impossible to
adjust the transmitter frequencies before a bulletin is to be transmitted;
the need to adhere to the published bulletin schedule precludes delaying the
broadcasts until the particular frequency is clear.

However, we are not unmindful of the need to minimize the impact of bulletin
transmissions upon ongoing amateur communications, particularly in the
crowded voice subbands. To that end, except in the event of a communications
emergency, voice bulletins are transmitted only twice a day by W1AW and are
limited to just a few minutes; the exact length of the bulletins depends on
the amount of news to be conveyed. Bulletins are not sent simply to fill out
a predetermined length of time.

I believe it 1s fair to say that our understanding of Section 97.113(d)(2)
of the FCC Rules is somewhat different from Mr. Baxter's. This Section,
which explains one of the exceptions to the general prohibition of
broadcasting in the Amateur Radio Service, provides that "Information
bulletins consisting solely of subject matter relating to amateur radio" are
not considered broadcasting. W1AW operations conform to a narrow
interpretation of this provision.

Accordingly, IARN and W1AW practice are far from "identical."

Finally, I should mention that there is no recent "FCC ruling" having any
relevance whatsoever to "frequency coordination" outside of the bands
available for repeater or auxiliary operation. It follows that no one has
"authority" to perform such coordination in the name of the FCC or, for that
matter, any other entity. Cooperation in the efficient use of the limited
amateur spectrum is essential, but by definition, cooperation is not a
one-way street.

73,
David Sumner, K1ZZ
ARRL Executive Vice President

"King Zulu" wrote in message
news:RLRmd.419221$D%.240350@attbi_s51...
-------------------------------
From ARRL to the Bermuda ham representative,
copied to Baxter, the IARU Secretary, and the FCC.

May 13, 1988
----------------------

Rather than wait to have you ask, I thought I should provide some
clarification of the letter dated May 4 that you have been sent by Glenn
Baxter, K1MAN.

Mr. Baxter states, "Our amateur broadcast practice 1s Identical to that of
W1AW." I believe he is referring to the practice of transmitting bulletins
without first ensuring that the frequencies to be used are clear of other
amateur communications.

For years I have observed/heard K1MAN transmit up to 30
Minutes prior to his "broadcast" using his unique brand
of "precursory frequency preemption". The specific method being
an announcement proclamation of: "IARN Bulletins, coming
up in 30 minutes...15 minutes...10 minutes....etc"
This practice noted above is nothing more than a thinly veiled
overt display of arrogant frequency capturing, performed by this
clown from Belgrade Lakes. (Baxter likely thinks that K1MAN
is a six-locomotive-on-the-point Norfolk Southern freight drag
with 400 coal cars in tow and he toots his big horn in advance
of every grade crossing. Perhaps this is not the best
example to equate him but U get the idea dear readers)

I believe it 1s fair to say that our understanding of Section 97.113(d)(2)
of the FCC Rules is somewhat different from Mr. Baxter's. This Section,
which explains one of the exceptions to the general prohibition of
broadcasting in the Amateur Radio Service, provides that "Information
bulletins consisting solely of subject matter relating to amateur radio"
are
not considered broadcasting. W1AW operations conform to a narrow
interpretation of this provision.

Accordingly, IARN and W1AW practice are far from "identical."

Agreed!

What many Hams / SWL's also curiously fail to
notice at first glance is that, on a consistent basis
greater than 50% (fifty percent!) of the 'program
content' of IARN H.F. Bulletin broadcasts consist
of material which is created by and produced by
sources OTHER THAN the IARN and k1man.

In any other media venue (apart from ham radio?)
this would be known as blatent plagiarism.

It really makes one wonder what Mr Baxter's true
alteriour motives are, concerning all this arcane
broadcasting he engages in. I seem to feel there
is more to this than just and over-inflated ego.
Who else or what other person in a healthy
mental mindset would pour so much
time and energy into such a goofy endeavor as
something like this?