NAB reports (Jan-Dec 1948)

explore and discuss the views of the other countries’ sub¬ mitted proposals.” Matters of pure policy, the Committee agreed, were not within the scope of the Havana meeting. Conference The Conference of Engineers was held in Havana from November 1 to December 6, 1947. Countries present were: Canada, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Mexico, New¬ foundland and the United States. The Bahamas, while an adherent to the Treaty, was not represented. The Haitian and Dominican Republic legation attaches to Cuba served as observers for their respective countries, while other coun¬ tries were represented by legal and engineering personnel. In its opening Plenary Session in Havana, the IMeeting created Committee I, composed of representatives of the several countries, to prepare a report outlining in detail the scope of the meeting. This Committee likewise divided the agenda into its three component parts although they real¬ ized “that, strictly speaking, it was most difficult in many cases to draw clear lines between matters that were purely technical and matters which involved both engineering and policy.” The Conference then designated Committee A to con¬ sider the purely technical parts of the agenda, with the un¬ derstanding that a specific recommendation upon these items would be appropriate. The second part of the agenda, made up of mixed engineer¬ ing and policy, was referred to a working group designated as Committee B. The general policy, approved in Plenary’ meeting, was that Committee B “would study and discuss the subject matter but that no specific recommendations would be made” to the Plenipotentiary meeting in Canada. The Conference, recognizing that many of the recom¬ mendations in its report would be subject to further ap¬ praisal by the several countries prior to the Canadian Con¬ ference, stated that “it would be clearly understood that the views, findings and recommendations of this meeting were submitted onh' as a working basis for the prei)aration of the further proposals of the countries to be submitted to the forthcoming conference in Canada.” The mixed policy-engineering Committee B devoted a substantial portion of its time to the consideration of a num¬ ber of engineering proposals not a part of the present NARBA or the Interim Agreement. It was evident from such discussion. Committee B stated, that despite the ex¬ tensive new knowledge of radio acquired in recent years, available data concerning a number of engineering matters are in some respects incomplete. Committee B’s view was that new proposals had been submitted with respect to the basis for classification of sta¬ tions and channels and for changes in the present provisions of the North American Regional Agreement concerning methods to be followed in the determination of the intensity of skywave signals. There have also been proposals for changes in the extent to which stations of several classes are to be accorded protection from interfering signals; of the adoption of new ratios of desired to undesired signals on adjacent channels; for the preparation of maps showing ground conductivity in the several countries; and for the specification of somewhat detailed engineering data on noti¬ fications and changes in assignments. Therefore as a result of these new proposals, the Conference recommended that these be studied and that, “through such study, in addition to careful overall review by each country of the views and opinions expressed, much can be accomplished toward as¬ suring a new Agreement in which full advantage will be taken of the most current and complete engineering data available.” Canada, Cuba and the United States felt that many pro¬ posals were beyond the scope of the agenda as they involved policy and mixed policy-engineering, and the Engineering Aleeting could no nothing except recommend that each country form its own judgment. However, the Alexican Delegation felt that it had been unduly restricted as no de¬ tailed study was made by the Conference of the technical aspects of the different nations’ proposals and that a tech¬ nical study should have been made which would serve as a basis in order that the Conference might present its con¬ clusion and recommendation to the various governments. Mexico felt that, as a result of this restriction, “there has been transferred to the Conference in Canada the work which should have been entirely attended to in Havana with the dilatory consequences which can be foreseen.” The work of Committee B on mixed engineering-policy matters resulted largely in obtaining for purposes of the record the views of the various countries. Because of the divergent views of the several countries concerning the na¬ ture and scope not only of Committee B’s work but that of the meetings’ terms of reference set forth in the Interim Agreement, no detailed study was made of any specific pro¬ posal. However, substantial agreement in principle was reached on some items. 540 Kilocycles It was acknowledged that the standard broadcast band would include 540 kc., raising the total channels to 107. How¬ ever, “it was recognized the determinations with respect to the particular classifications to be given 540 kc., i.e. whether it should be a clear channel, regional or a local channel and the use of that frequency to be made by the several North American countries, were beyond the scope of the present meeting and should remain for the conference in Canada.” The United States strongly supported this position and em¬ phasized the numerous different possibilities for class and use of this new channel. No objection was raised on this point by any of the countries. Mexico's Views In connection with Mexico’s point of view upon her pro¬ posals for a complete reallocation of all stations, Mexico explained that her proposal was based essentially upon: (1) the desirability from an engineering viewpoint of having clear channels together at the lower portion (540-1140 kc.) of the standard broadcast band, with regional channels in a block (1150-1540) ne.xt to the clear channels, and the local channels a block at the upper end (1550-1600 kc.) of the standard broadcast band; (2) Mexico’s need for two additional clear channels; and (3) Me.xico’s desire that two [3]