K1TTT Technical Reference


Here it is guys, from ARRL HQ.  I sent the following message and got the 
reply that follows my message.  Looks like as long as the op has his 
liscence, he can talk to anyone, anywhere under the higher class 

>From: ke1fo
>To: reginfo
>Subject: Contesting/3rd party question
>Date: Wednesday, March 05, 1997 1:47PM
>I have a question regarding Multi Single operating in contests and the
>liscence class of the participants.  Here is the scenario.
>The contest group is using an extra class callsign for the event, but
>not all the operators are extra class.  Can the "non extra" hams operate
>outside their liscence priviliges while using the extra callsign?  And
>if they can, do they have to limit their contacts to countries with
>which the US holds a valid 3rd party aggrement?
>If this is not the appropriate person to recieve this message, please
>let me knwo who to send it to or foward it to them for me.  Thanks in
>Al, KE1FO

Subject: CORRECTION: Contesting/3rd party questio 
   Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 14:16:00 -0500 
   From: "Hogerty, Tom, KC1J" <thogerty@arrl.org>
     To: ke1fo <ke1fo@contesting.com>

On further investigation I found that my original response to you is incorrect.  The correct answer is yes, it is legal. It is also legal for the "3rd party" to pass a message as well. Note the end of Section 97.115(a)(2) "This prohibition does not apply to a message for any third party who is eligible to be a control operator of the station". While not clear from this rule, it is clear from the Report & Order that implemented the new rules in 1989 that if the "3rd party" is a
licensed amateur (regardless of license class or country of issue) the international 3rd party prohibition does not apply.
Sorry for any confusion I may have caused.

Tom Hogerty, KC1J
Regulatory Information

another version:
This 3rd Party argument raises it head about every year or so.  Here is a
copy of a letter posted to the relector by KI6X which should squash things
for a while.  I have asked the FCC about contesting and third party
operation many years ago and got basically the same response, although this
is worded better than I could probably remember it.

                                        Dan KL7Y

>                                   February 8, 1994
>Dan R. Violette, KI6X
>1122 E. Sail Ave.
>Orange, CA 92665
>Dear Dan:
>   ARRL Vice President Tom Frenaye, K1KI, shared your recent  contest reflector
>comments with us for comment.  I am addressing  the legal issues; the CAC
>issues need to be addressed separately.
>   First, "A station may only be operated in the manner and to  the extent
>permitted by the privileges authorized for the class  of operator license held
>by the control operator." [97.105(b)].  Thus, a Technician isn't eligible to be
>the control operator of  the station while it is transmitting on twenty meters.
>   A Technician, however, is eligible to be "a control operator"  of any
>station.  This is true even though he or she cannot act as  THE control
>operator at times when the station is being operated  on frequencies beyond his
>or her license class.
>   The Commission specifically acknowledged in the Part 97  rewrite proceeding
>in 1989 that messages sent between amateur  stations on behalf of another
>amateur licensee are not  third  party traffic.  See, the Report and Order,
>Docket 88-139, 4 FCC  Rcd. 4719 (1989), at paragraphs 39 and 42.  The FCC, at
>the  League's request, concurred with the prior holding of the United 
>Kingdom's Department of Trade and Industry, that "the passing of  messages on
>behalf of other licensed radio amateurs (at home and  abroad) does not
>contravene the prohibition against third party  traffic..."  FCC codified that
>provision (though not clearly  enough, really), at Section 97.115(a) of the
>rules, saying that   "The prohibition [on international third party traffic
>with  countries with which the United States does not have a third party 
>traffic agreement] does not apply to a message for any third party  who is
>eligible to be a control operator of the station."  Notice  that says "a"
>control operator, not "the" control operator. 
>   Therefore, while an unlicensed person operating with a  licensed control
>operator, is limited to communications only with  the United States stations
>and with those stations located in  countries with which the United States has
>a third party traffic  agreement.  Any licensed amateur can operate any station
>and  participate in international communications as long as there is a  control
>operator on hand who is licensed to operate on the  frequency being used.  So,
>a Technician, for example, could  operate at a contest station on 20 meters and
>contact any station  in any country as long as there was a control operator
>present who  is eligible to operate on 20 meters. 
>I hope this helps clear the air on the legal aspects of the  issue.  The CAC
>issues should be addressed through your  Division's CAC representative.  If I
>can be of further  assistance, please let me know.  73.
>                              Sincerely,
>                              John C. Hennessee, KJ4KB
>                              Regulatory Information Specialist
>                                            ARRL