[600MRG] No APPROVAL received - default approval.

[Bill Cromwell]

Hi,

The law as explained to me (all of us) says they will inform us if 1. we 
are inside 1 KM of a line carrying those signals *and* 2. those system 
operate inside the range of frequencies we are to use. If we do then it 
is the FCC that says we are denied and not the utilities. If they say we 
are in the clear that is great. If they say nothing within 30 days then 
FCC says we have approval. I have received nothing. I am good to go and 
I intend to not or notify the utilities yet again.

I am not prepared to transmit. If the utilities get around to notifying 
me that I am too close I will certainly not transmit from here even ig=f 
they are late. I intend to *NOT* risk damage to the system. That risk 
and avoiding it is the intent of all this.

73,

Bill  KU8H

On 10/23/2017 05:47 PM, Marshall Cross wrote:
> Minor point, it was is not a law.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Oct 23, 2017, at 4:50 PM, Paul Staupe <staupe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Although I agree with all that everyone has said about the language of the
>> law, I also have been waiting a little bit extra to see if I'd be getting a
>> note.
>>
>> Sure enough an hour ago I received two separate approval emails, one for
>> each band.
>>
>> They must be going over each case individually and either didn't expect
>> such a large response or don't have the resources to get the approvals out
>> in a timely manner.  Better late than never!
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Paul W0AD
>> WD2XSH/30
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Brian, WA1ZMS <wa1zms at att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree 100% with Warren. You have followed the Rules as they are written.
>>>
>>> No need to flag-down the police car to double check that you weren't
>>> really speeding as you drove by him.
>>>
>>> -Brian, WA1ZMS
>>> iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Oct 23, 2017, at 9:35 AM, k2ors at verizon.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Chris,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  On a serious note, you are better off not asking. You are likely to
>>> get hold of someone who is not clear about what you are asking and the safe
>>> bureaucratic response will be a firm "NO".
>>>>  You are absolutely clear to transmit as they have let the 30 day clock
>>> run out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 73 Warren
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Chris - KC0TKS <kc0tks at cmsdigital.net>
>>>> To: 600mrg <600mrg at w7ekb.com>
>>>> Sent: Sun, Oct 22, 2017 9:36 pm
>>>> Subject: Re: [600MRG] No APPROVAL received
>>>>
>>>> I made two UTC submissions, one for my home QTH on Sept. 15 and another
>>>> for a second possible transmit site three days later. Home is served by
>>>> a big conglomerate, 2nd site is served by a small local co-op. Did not
>>>> receive a response for either application. I know that a no-response is
>>>> the same as an approval but antenna construction is going to be
>>>> difficult so I don't really want to start anything until I know
>>>> something for sure. Guess I will get on the phone and start begging. Who
>>>> do I call, the water dept.? (sarcasm)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Chris - KC0TKS
>>>>
>>>> Sedalia, MO
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/22/2017 08:44 AM, Bob Confrey wrote:
>>>>> I have not yet received my approval for 630 and 2200 M.  Applied 1 day
>>>>> after the site opened.  My power does come from an EMC ( electric
>>>>> membership counsel ) and I live in a very rural area. No reason I should
>>>>> not be approved.  I'm wondering if the co-ops get these requests and
>>> they
>>>>> end up in the bit bucket?  I realize I'm technically good to go but do
>>> not
>>>>> like uncertainty, especially if it involves spending any money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some have actually called the UTC ( KU4XR ) and gotten answers.  Not
>>> sure I
>>>>> really want to do that?  Or I could email.
>>>>>
>>>>> I really don't believe that there were that many applications for
>>>>> approval.  Maybe 1000? maybe I'm wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any thoughts?   I'm nowhere near ready to transmit anyway, perhaps I
>>> should
>>>>> sit tight......
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob
>>>>>
>>>>> WA1EDJ
>>>>> Monroe, GA
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 600MRG mailing list
>>>>> 600MRG at w7ekb.com
>>>>> http://w7ekb.com/mailman/listinfo/600mrg_w7ekb.com
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 600MRG mailing list
>>>> 600MRG at w7ekb.com
>>>> http://w7ekb.com/mailman/listinfo/600mrg_w7ekb.com
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 600MRG mailing list
>>>> 600MRG at w7ekb.com
>>>> http://w7ekb.com/mailman/listinfo/600mrg_w7ekb.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 600MRG mailing list
>>> 600MRG at w7ekb.com
>>> http://w7ekb.com/mailman/listinfo/600mrg_w7ekb.com
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 600MRG mailing list
>> 600MRG at w7ekb.com
>> http://w7ekb.com/mailman/listinfo/600mrg_w7ekb.com
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 600MRG mailing list
> 600MRG at w7ekb.com
> http://w7ekb.com/mailman/listinfo/600mrg_w7ekb.com
>

-- 
bark less - wag more