DXCC Distant Remotes: revised proposal

Dave AA6YQ

Suggestions from Larry WO7R have produced an improved version of the proposal below for consideration by the DXAC:

The DXCC rules as currently specified in


should be augmented with a "Single Location" endorsement for the following DXCC awards:

- Honor Roll
- #1 Honor Roll
- DXCC Challenge 3000
- 5-band DXCC

A DXer who has received one or more of the above awards by submitting QSOs made within 200 km of a specified QTH could so declare to
the ARRL, and receive a "Single Location" endorsement that can be affixed to their award certificate or plaque. Several approaches
to validating such a declaration can be considered, ranging from accepting the applicant's word to requiring confirmations from two
other DXers holding DXCC award credits for at least 300 entities.

This proposal preserves the ability of DXers to relocate within their DXCC entity without having to start over on DXCC, and
preserves the ability to utilize distant remote stations within one's DXCC entity if desired, while providing a way to recognize the
attainment of the DXCC award program's top awards from within a limited geographic area, consistent with rule 6 of the original DXCC
rules, circa 1937:

"Contacts may made over any period of years, and may have been made any number of years ago, provided only that all contacts be made
from the same call area (or country, where no call areas exist) and by the same station licensee; contact may have been made under
different call letters in the same area (or country), if the licensee for all was the same."


Dave, AA6YQ

-----Original Message-----
From: ARRL-Awards@... [mailto:ARRL-Awards@...] On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ
Sent: Friday, December 27, 2019 6:16 PM
To: ARRL-Awards@...
Cc: Hopengarten, Fred, K1VR, (Dir, NE); Greg K0GW; Dave K1ZZ; Dave AA6YQ
Subject: [ARRL-Awards] DXCC Distant Remotes: a proposal

First, some relevant facts:

1. For many DXers, DXCC is a lifelong competition. The ARRL encourages this by maintaining and publishing standings


and by annually awarding the "De Soto Cup"


Nobody likes having the rules changed in the middle of a competition.

2. DXCC is not a level playing field, and never will be. Stations located closer to dense clusters of DXCC entities have an
advantage over stations located further away from such clusters. Stations located close to the geomagnetic equator have an advantage
over stations located further away. Stations with more effective antennas have an advantage for stations with less effective
antennas. Stations with more effective receivers have an advantage over stations with less effective receivers. Stations that can
run more output power have an advantage over stations with less output power.

3. Many DXCC rules are effectively unenforceable. There is no way to verify that a DXCC award applicant was the operator who made
each submitted QSO, or that the applicant made each submitted QSO from within the same DXCC entity, or that all pertinent government
regulations - like RF output power - were obeyed.

4. Short of requiring every amateur transceiver to incorporate a potted GPS subsystem that reports time-and-position information
encrypted with the operator's ARRL-issued private key, there is no way to reliably determine the location of the station from which
a QSO submitted for DXCC award credit was made.

5. The DXCC award program includes separate categories for QRP and Satellite operation:


<http://www.arrl.org/dxcc-rules> rule 1.q

6. The ARRL Board of Director's rationale for rejecting the DXAC recommendation on Remote Operating is recounted by then CEO Dave
K1ZZ here:


As a DXer, I did not agree with the DXAC's recommendation, and I did not agree with the ARRL Board's action.

Technology cannot be suppressed. If remote operation is possible, it will be employed -- whether "DXCC legal" or not. There are
valid reasons for an operator wanting to participate in DXCC from more than one geographic location, physically or using remote
access technology. However, reaching the Top of the Honor Roll from one physical location with no remote access is significantly
more difficult -- and thus more praiseworthy -- than doing so from multiple physical or remotely-accessed locations.

Thus my suggested resolution to this issue is for the ARRL to create a new "Single Location" attribute applicable to every existing
DXCC award, meaning that all submitted QSOs were made from with 200 km of a single home QTH.

I further suggest that this be implemented by designating all DXCC awards issued after the internet became publicly accessible as
"Multiple Location". An Operator who has received DXCC awards by submitting QSOs that all complied with the single location
criterion could so declare to the ARRL, and receive a "Single Location" endorsement that can be affixed to their award certificate
or plaque.

Implementing this recommendation would require updating the ARRL's DXCC and LoTW software systems to track the Single/Multiple
Location attribute for each submitted QSO. It would require providing a means by which operators could apply for "Single Location"
endorsements for awards they've already received. Satisfying these requirements would consume ARRL staff time, which would have to
be funded one way or another. This incremental funding should be considered in light of the potential decline in DXCC award revenue
and ARRL dues if a less effective solution is chosen.

Implementing this recommendation would also create work for the developers of logging applications.

I began DXing in California's Silicon Valley after earning my novice ticket there in 1990. In 1997, I relocated to the Boston area
at the request of my employer. Thus the #1 Honor Roll plaque I received in 2008 and the Challenge 3000 plaque I received in 2018
would not qualify for a "Single Location" endorsement -- at least not until I re-work, re-confirm, and re-submit QSOs with the 14
entities and 864 entity-bands I only worked while in California.


Dave, AA6YQ

This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.

M.A. Glemser

i like the idea of a "single location" endorsement! Would be effective without over-complicating things.