Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: FCC Administrative Law Judge Terminates Long-Standing Amateur License Renewal  (Read 6509 times)
W4AMP
Member

Posts: 155




Ignore
« on: July 12, 2018, 06:47:25 AM »

http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-administrative-law-judge-terminates-long-standing-amateur-license-renewal-case

In a July 9 Order, FCC Administrative Law Judge Richard L. Sippel has ended the decade-old license renewal proceeding involving William Crowell, W6WBJ (ex-N6AYJ), of Diamond Springs, California, upon a motion by Enforcement Bureau Chief Rosemary C. Harold. Termination of the proceeding and the dismissal of Crowell’s license renewal application followed his refusal to appear for a hearing in Washington, DC, to consider his license renewal and other issues in an enforcement proceeding that dates back 15 years or more.

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/0710051601041/FCC-18M-05A1.pdf
Logged
K9MHZ
Member

Posts: 1725




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2018, 11:18:39 AM »

I’m sure AB5S has the inside scoop on this one as well.
Logged
PITSWL
Member

Posts: 189




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2018, 12:34:06 PM »

I’m sure AB5S has the inside scoop on this one as well.

I, for one, am waiting with baited breath.  Wink

FYI, the ARRL has, temporarily I suspect, pulled the article. It may have something to do with the fact that the final paragraph as it was originally written contained a blatant misstatement to the effect that WBJ's license is kaput:

Quote
Crowell’s license expired in 2007, but he was allowed to continue to operate while his renewal application was pending. With his license renewal proceeding terminated, he may no longer operate legally.


As I write this, it remains Active and, I'm almost positive, will remain active pending a decision on a final Administrative appeal he may be able to make to the full Commission.

I say may be able to make because they may not grant him a final appeal because, as of this moment, there are no legitimate matters-of-fact that could form the basis for an appeal, because so many of his previous filings have been deemed to have been made in bad faith and [and this may be the most important] he failed to take advantage of an Administrative remedy before him when he refused to appear before the ALJ.

But they were 100% wrong in stating that he may no longer operate legally as of the date of the article.

I'm surprised that they made such an egregious error.



« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 12:38:22 PM by PITSWL » Logged

"Section 97.101(d) prohibits ALL amateur licensees from causing harmful interference, and does not provide ANY exception for interference caused to other amateurs whom the interferer believes have violated a Commission rule." - DA 16-877 at 17
N8YX
Member

Posts: 1310




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2018, 03:55:01 AM »

That one's definitely long overdue.

He still jamming whatever net he has/had a problem with?
Logged
W3WN
Member

Posts: 824




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2018, 05:15:28 AM »

The article is back on the ARRL site with this notation:
[UPDATED 2018-07-12 @ 1937 UTC -- This story corrects some incorrect statements included in an earlier post.]

BTW, this one made the local papers.  Announcements from the Department of Justice tend to do that...

https://triblive.com/local/westmoreland/13830218-74/fcc-n-huntingdon-man-settle-over-alleged-radio-disruption
« Last Edit: July 13, 2018, 05:23:46 AM by W3WN » Logged
W4AMP
Member

Posts: 155




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2018, 06:53:54 AM »

The article is back on the ARRL site with this notation:
[UPDATED 2018-07-12 @ 1937 UTC -- This story corrects some incorrect statements included in an earlier post.]

BTW, this one made the local papers.  Announcements from the Department of Justice tend to do that...

https://triblive.com/local/westmoreland/13830218-74/fcc-n-huntingdon-man-settle-over-alleged-radio-disruption

The freak has an obsession with Brian Crow. Nice to prove it to all the users here on eham. I would not be surprised if the freak was the one that made the transmissions in the first place.
Logged
KJ6ZH
Member

Posts: 55




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2018, 09:37:58 AM »

On the FCC ULS, it shows W6WBJ's license as expired as of 2007.
Does the FCC cancel a license once it expires?
The address listed is an empty lot per Google Maps Satellite view.
I suspect any appeal to the full commission will be rejected but never can tell.
Heard him on 3840 a few days ago but he may be waiting for the official notification in the mail to cease operations (?)
This guy is an attorney who represented himself in this matter.
Did he have a fool for an attorney?  Inquiring minds want to know  Wink
Logged
PITSWL
Member

Posts: 189




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2018, 09:49:01 AM »

That one's definitely long overdue.

He still jamming whatever net he has/had a problem with?

Someone is, and that as recently as last evening.

If Bill was involved, he couldn't have been the only one as at one point three different frequencies where WARFA members tried to operate were being bombarded with interference at once:

As usual, they attempted to gather on 3.908 only to shortly be bombarded by a recording of Bill claiming he'd like to check in, as well as a recording of another operator screaming about them picking and choosing who could check-in.

When they attempted to move to 3.890, recordings of both Bill and the screaming operator, as well as a recording of a litany of bigoted comments was played over top of them.

When most of them gave up and some moved down to 3.846, the recording of the bigoted comments started again.

By some accounts, the interference is worse than it's ever been.

Quote from: KJ6ZH
I suspect any appeal to the full commission will be rejected but never can tell.
Heard him on 3840 a few days ago but he may be waiting for the official notification in the mail to cease operations (?)

It's sort of confusing.

Were this a final decision of a proceeding as covered under §1.302, I'd be pretty confident he had the privilege of an appeal to the full Commission.

His problem is that the decision in his case falls under §1.92, which deals with cases where an individual is deemed to have waived his right to a hearing. Of relevance:

Quote
After a hearing proceeding has been terminated...the Commission will act upon the matters specified in the order to show cause in the regular course of business. The Commission will determine on the basis of all the information available to it from any source, including such further proceedings as may be warranted, if a revocation order...should issue, and if so, will issue such order. Otherwise, the Commission will issue an order dismissing the proceeding.

My thinking is that, yes, he still may file an appeal to the full Commission, but I don't believe they're obligated to grant it under these circumstances.

I think the thing that may yet get him a final stay of execution is the fact that FCC Commissioner Pai seems to have a problem with the ALJ process. He's already offered comment about the process with specific reference to Bill's case. Could he yet interject himself and grant an otherwise unwarranted appeal only to make a show of picking apart the ALJ process? Bill should hope so, because while he may imagine he will still be able to operate if they issue a final decision dismissing his renewal, I believe he'll have to initiate action in US District Court to continue to plead his case and specifically ask for an injunction allowing him to operate during those proceedings.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2018, 10:03:41 AM by PITSWL » Logged

"Section 97.101(d) prohibits ALL amateur licensees from causing harmful interference, and does not provide ANY exception for interference caused to other amateurs whom the interferer believes have violated a Commission rule." - DA 16-877 at 17
ND6M
Member

Posts: 781




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2018, 09:52:28 AM »

The article is back on the ARRL site with this notation:
[UPDATED 2018-07-12 @ 1937 UTC -- This story corrects some incorrect statements included in an earlier post.]

BTW, this one made the local papers.  Announcements from the Department of Justice tend to do that...

https://triblive.com/local/westmoreland/13830218-74/fcc-n-huntingdon-man-settle-over-alleged-radio-disruption

The freak has an obsession with Brian Crow. Nice to prove it to all the users here on eham. I would not be surprised if the freak was the one that made the transmissions in the first place.

Lets be perfectly clear and concise.

Exactly who is the "Freak' that you are referring to?
Logged
W3WN
Member

Posts: 824




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2018, 10:23:08 AM »

On the FCC ULS, it shows W6WBJ's license as expired as of 2007.
Does the FCC cancel a license once it expires?
The address listed is an empty lot per Google Maps Satellite view.
I suspect any appeal to the full commission will be rejected but never can tell.
Heard him on 3840 a few days ago but he may be waiting for the official notification in the mail to cease operations (?)
This guy is an attorney who represented himself in this matter.
Did he have a fool for an attorney?  Inquiring minds want to know  Wink
He applied for renewal prior the expiration of his last license term.  Under Part 97, he can thus, technically, remain on the air until his license is renewed -- or the renewal is denied.

Although the ALJ has ruled against him, I believe that the final action of the Commission staff's accepting the ruling of the ALJ & formally denying his license renewal remains to take place.  That's also presuming that other legal action to temporarily stay said ruling doesn't take place as well.

With regards to his actions on the air, the frequencies he frequents, and the status of his attorney... who cares?  Like Mr. Crow, whomever the hell he is, he is ultimately responsible for his own actions, and if those actions have consequences, he will have to deal with him. 

The FCC rulings involving both W6WBJ and K3VR are the consequences of their actions.  They now have to deal with them. 

Personally, I'll stick to CW.  Too much drama and too many drama queens on the various SSB nets these days.
Logged
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 2425


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2018, 10:57:31 AM »

CW does seem to be a lot more fun!
Logged

Thanks,
Dave
Amateur Radio: RFI help, Reviews, Setup information, and more...
https://www.nk7z.net
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2018, 11:25:26 AM »

I doubt they will leave the air. They will likely stay on with bogus calls.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
AB5S
Member

Posts: 32




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2018, 08:14:30 AM »

I’m sure AB5S has the inside scoop on this one as well.
I'm honored you'd have such confidence in me.
But, alas, I haven't any information at all about this case.
Shocking, I know.   Cheesy Grin Cheesy
Logged
AB5S
Member

Posts: 32




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: July 14, 2018, 08:16:15 AM »

I’m sure AB5S has the inside scoop on this one as well.

I, for one, am waiting with baited breath.  Wink

While your breath does indeed smell a lot like bait,
I'm afraid I have no information at all about this case.
Maybe next time.  Grin
Logged
W6EM
Member

Posts: 1905




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2018, 06:06:51 AM »

While I'm not sure about this, as it's been a while and my memory might miss a detail, but Glenn Baxter (SK) ex-K1MAN went to US District Court following his Forfeiture Order.  It wasn't in DC, it was near him in Maine.  And, K3VR didn't have to travel to DC either for his "day in court."

So, it would seem to me that the FCC has skipped at least one step in W6WBJ's case.  To be consistent, WBJ should be allowed to go to his closest US District Court geographically, to be heard, pending any final action on his Forfeiture Order and pending any Commission action on his renewal.  I don't believe that non-payment or dismissal of his renewal could take place without his "day in court," so to speak, on a consistent basis with the other two people.  Unless, of course, he has told the FCC that he does not wish to appeal any of same to US District Court.

To claim they have a right to dismiss the renewal due his inability to travel to DC to physically appear before an ALJ seems like new ground.  Why shouldn't the ALJ do the opposite?  (Travel to Sacramento CA to continue his proceedings)  Or, in this day of "Go-to-Meeting" via Web video, why couldn't something like that have been arranged?  Perhaps Chairman Pai has a point......




Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!