[AMRadio] ARRL has filed its bandwidth proposal with FCC

Donald Chester k4kyv at hotmail.com
Tue Nov 15 21:46:14 EST 2005


I printed all 25 pages of the petition so I can sit down comfortably and 
digest it all.

I don't think the FCC accepts comments to a petition until it has been 
assigned a RM- number.  Also, not sure if they have a reply-comment period 
for a petition that has not officially become a NPRM.  Maybe someone could 
clarify this.

No doubt some of the anti-AM crowd will call for getting rid of the 9 kHz 
exception for AM, and that's what bothers me most about this thing - AM 
would be permitted only by an exception containted in a footnote, which 
could be very easily deleted.

Also, there is no guarantee that the FCC's NPRM would even resemble the 
original petition.  They could come out with something pretty much identical 
to Docket 20777, which would have eliminated AM altogether, back in the 

Also, I'm not sure about the "occupied bandwidth" vs "necessary bandwidth" 
issue, as far as how bandwidth would be defined.

The last time I checked, Canada still had a maximum bandwidth limit of 6 kHz 
for AM, but I never have heard of a Canadian ham being cited for running too 
much bandwidth while running a normal AM signal. I don't know how picky the 
FCC would be about this.  Of course, a strict 3.5 kHz limit would shut down 
a lot of slopbuckets as well.

Don, k4kyv

More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 15 Dec 2017.