It is clear to me that the FCC opted into the agreement and allows US
Citizens to use their USA assigned callsigns with other CEPT countries.
The documents in 3 different publications clearly state Citizen. It is
inconsistent that a Citizen would have to provide extra documents while
a non citizen would not. CEPT also states using your NATIONAL license
which would be your license where you are a citizen. The FCC has
entered into a more restrictive agreement that calls for US Citizens to
carry certain documentation that is not required of others. Why? The
other CEPT countries understand what is expected. Failure to abide by
those restrictions nulls the agreement. If you break the agreement as
required by the FCC There is no agreement in place. Non citizens are not
mentioned which would indicate that they are specifically excluded.
Why? Because they are licensed where they are a Citizen and they should
be using that license as called for by CEPT.
It appears that there is a lot of confusion with the FCC agreement and
they should clarify, if they intended any and all Advanced and Extra
licensees to be included in CEPT or just US Citizens as call out by DA
16-1048 and two other previous notifications. Because others have done
it in the past is not a defense. Because other contests have allowed it
is not a defense.
It can be argued that the CEPT agreement intends for people to use the
callsign in the country where they are a national/citizen.
I do not believe the CEPT was put in place to allow others to circumvent
other countries laws and authority which could easily be done. I can't
operate from one location because my country is having a dispute so lets
use our USA callsign to circumvent this. What is the actual intent of
the agreement? What is most transparent?
What gives anyone the right to use your USA callsign outside the
country? The FCC. People are quick to discount the FCC they have the
ultimate jurisdiction on the use of a callsign they issued. You do not
own your call, you are granted a license.
Was the intent of the CEPT agreements were to allow callsign choicing or
shopping. Absolutely Not. I believe the agreements were made with the
understanding that people would use their calls assigned to them by the
country where they are a citizen, their National Licenses as stated in
TR/61. The agreement does not offer the opportunity to chose. It is
apparent the the CEPT documentation has not even considered this
possibility.
I think we all know this was wrong. Matty could have applied for a TO
or French callsign which would have been even shorter. Matty could have
done many things differently.
Threatening to sue people is bullying and should be treated as such.
There is no place for these threats. We are simply expressing our
opinions. Attempting to squelch the conversation is unacceptable.
It is common courtesy to sign your posts with your callsign.
W0MU Mike
On 8/21/2023 10:40 AM, matteyz84@gmail.com wrote:
@W2GD/K5ZD/N5OT (and others with the same POV):
like it or not, plenty of operations by non-US citizens holding US calls
took place in the last 27 years (1996-2023) after FCC signed a SOC with
CEPT.
The last operations I have knowledge of are the warmup activities before
WRTC 2022 in July 2023 in I4 by E21EIC (and E29TGW) as I4/KY1A and BA1RB
(and BA4TB) as I4/AE5OR.
The first operation I have memory of is IG9/AC6WE (UA3DPX) in CQWW CW 1996
but there might be earlier ones as well.
In-between plenty of contest operations in major CQ/ARRL events, dxpeditions
approved by ARRL DXCC, casual activities took place under the same
provisions.
The excerpts of the CEPT and FCC rules you have been posting (no matter they
are pertinent or not) didn't change in-between (1996 to 2023).
I don't think a tedious list of all the operations that took place this way
between 1996 and 2023 is needed.
However, it is wise to note some of these operations took place when K5ZD
served as contest director in CQ events.
And they were correctly accepted (ie. 5B/AJ2O, 5B/KC2TIZ, etc).
Meanwhile, K5ZD seems to have changed mind on this topic and blames ARRL
about their ARRL CW 2023 decisions....
That said, in terms of regulations, as you were already explained by others,
ARRL included:
1) FS (Saint Martin) is a French overseas territory and it is subject to the
French regulations whose authority is ANFR;
2) Because of the previous point, FS is part of CEPT and CEPT TR 61-01 is
applicable;
3) The current CEPT TR 61-01 docs are available at the following URL:
https://docdb.cept.org/download/4312
4) With reference to the above URL, it is pretty clear CEPT takes into
account just the reciprocity of the license between the countries that
signed the agreement.
The citizenship doesn't matter at all.
The only mandatory requirements are:
4.a) The individual owns either a CEPT license or a license issued by a
non-CEPT authority/country that signed the agreement with CEPT;
4.b) The individual is NOT resident in the country where he/she intends to
operate under CEPT;
As the residency definition in some countries part of CEPT is split between
domicile and fiscal residence, meaning you can be domiciled in one country
and tax resident in another, the residency topic would be a bit more complex
than what stated in the CEPT regulations. However, this goes far beyond the
topic you introduced;
5) The US are a non-CEPT country participating into CEPT because the FCC
signed a SOC (Statement of Conformity).
The SOC form is available in ANNEX 5 in the CEPT regulations (see above
URL).
It is immediate to verify the citizenship is not considered.
The whole thing is about acknowledging the equivalency/reciprocity of
licenses issued by different authorities in different countries;
6) The FCC is the authority that regulates the amateur radio service in the
US and the US overseas territories.
Their authority ends at the border and they are perfectly aware of that;
7) The FCC regulations are outlined in Title 47-Chapter I-Subchapter D-Part
97 whose equivalent digital copy is available at the following URL:
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-97
With reference to the above URL, 97.5 (d) (1) (2) (3) (4) is solely about
the conditions under which a CEPT license owner can or cannot operate over
the US soil.
This is NOT intended to be applied outside of the US borders.
The nature of 97.5 (d) (1) (2) (3) (4) rule is explained in the 1996 FCC
proposal docs: FCC states they want to avoid US citizens circumvent the FCC
exam by getting a license in another country and then go back to the US to
operate under the reciprocity agreement;
8) The year 2016 Public Notice DA 16-1048 provides guidelines about what an
US citizen holding an US amateur radio license has to carry with him/her
when travelling abroad in case he/she wants to operate under CEPT.
However, FCC is well aware they have no authority in a foreign country.
Their first words say it all: "Subject to the regulations in force in the
country visited";
9) You can easily verify ANFR (France), OFCOM (UK), MIMIT (formerly MISE -
Italy) and other regulators part of CEPT don't care at all about the
licensee citizenship.
They do NOT request to bring with you and show any proof of citizenship of
any specific country.
This is perfectly in accordance with CEPT TR 61-01 docs which they recall.
Regards.
Matt
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|