Message-ID: <006201c10be1$bc100c40$01b51bca@xtr743187>
From: "Vernall" <vernall@xtra.co.nz>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <7D653C9C42F5D411A27C00508BF8803D55C552@pdw-mail-r1.dstl.gov.uk>
Subject: LF: 9 kHz rule interpretation
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 09:20:24 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

Hi all,

Andy wrote:
> Looks as if  allocations at 9kHz could be a headache.  If below 9kHz is
not
> allocated by ITU then administrations cannot issue licences / NoVs.

No ITU allocation means that there is (currently) no international agreement
on allocation of services to frequency bands below 9 kHz.  It does not mean
that there must be no operation.  Individual administrations continue to
have sovereignty and control of rulemaking within respective jurisdictions
(but each should not be inconsistent with ITU treaty obligations).  Where
there is "no allocation" internationally then it would hardly be an issue
for an administration to approve radio activity for frequencies below 9 kHz
(by setting terms and conditions to not interfere with radio services
"above" 9 kHz).

73, Bob ZL2CA