FCC invites comments on Amateur Radio restructuring plans



ARRL Bulletin 7 ARLB007

From ARRL Headquarters

Newington CT March 24, 2004

To all radio amateurs



SB QST ARL ARLB007

ARLB007 FCC invites comments on Amateur Radio restructuring plans



The FCC is seeking comment on three plans, one from the ARRL, that

would reshape the Amateur Service licensing structure. Each Petition

for Rule Making responds to World Radiocommunication Conference 2003

actions last summer that made changes to Article 25 of the

international Radio Regulations. While differing substantially in

some other aspects, the three petitions call for modifications at

Amateur Radio's entry level and for a three-tiered license system.

One petition goes beyond licensing structure to recommend additional

changes to amateur testing and HF digital privileges. A fourth

petition focuses solely on the Morse requirement. Comments are due

by April 24 on all four petitions.



Designated RM-10867, ARRL's petition asks the FCC to create a new

entry-level license class--being called ''Novice'' for now. It would

offer limited HF CW/data and phone/image privileges on 80, 40, 15

and 10 meters plus certain VHF and UHF privileges. The League plan

also would consolidate Technician, Tech Plus (Technician with

Element 1 credit) and General licensees into a new General license

that no longer would require a Morse examination. Current

Technicians automatically would gain General privileges without

additional testing. Applicants for Amateur Extra would still have to

pass a 5 WPM Morse code examination, but the General and Extra

written exams would stay the same.



A news report ''ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License, Code-Free HF

Access,'' www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/19/1/, has further

details. Frequently asked questions (FAQs) are addressed on the ARRL

Web site, www.arrl.org/news/restructuring2/faq.html.



An ''unincorporated grassroots organization,'' the Radio Amateur

Foundation (RAF), has filed a petition designated as RM-10868. Its

wide-ranging filing asks the FCC to modify the Technician ticket to

allow restricted HF phone, data, image and CW privileges. The group

also proposes retaining the 5 WPM Morse requirement for General and

Amateur Extra applicants, upgrading Advanced class holders to Extra

and all Novices to Technician. The Radio Amateur Foundation said it

sees no need to change licensing requirements for General or Amateur

Extra applicants.



The RAF also wants to scrap existing Amateur Radio question pools

and start over from scratch, keeping the question pools out of the

public domain and requiring a 10-day waiting period before

retesting. In addition, it would permit only Generals and Amateur

Extras or Technicians licensed more than two years to request vanity

call signs.



The RAF has further asked the FCC to permit digital experimentation

from 29.0 to 29.3 MHz at bandwidths of up to 15 kHz.



In his two-page petition designated RM-10869, Ronald D. Lowrance,

K4SX, calls on the FCC to retain the 5 WPM Morse code requirement

for General class applicants and to raise the Morse requirement to

13 WPM for Amateur Extra class applicants. He called Morse code ''the

most reliable mode of communication'' in an emergency. Lowrance would

make no change in Technician licensing requirements.



The National Conference of Volunteer Examiner Coordinators (NCVEC)

wants the FCC to establish a new entry-level license called the

Communicator class. Its petition, designated RM-10870, reiterates

its call--first made last fall in RM-10787--to altogether eliminate

the Morse code testing requirement.



The NCVEC's petition would upgrade all current Novices to

Communicator class. The NCVEC would further upgrade all existing

Technician and Tech Plus (Technician with Element 1 credit)

licensees to General and all Advanced class licensees to Amateur

Extra without further testing. Once the Morse requirement goes away,

NCVEC said in its filing, ''there will be no effective difference

between the Technician and General class licenses.''



The new Communicator ticket would permit a power limit of 100 W on

bands below 24 MHz and 50 W on all frequencies above 24 MHz.

Communicator licensees would have to use commercially manufactured

equipment (or gear built from a commercial kit). They could operate

both voice and digital modes on 80, 40, 15 and 10 meters plus VHF

and UHF up to 70 cm.



All three license restructuring plans call for changes to the

present HF subbands.



Interested parties may view and comment on these petitions via the

FCC Electronic Comment Filing System, <span style="color:red;">To view the proposals click here </span>gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ec...rch_v2.cgi When entering the RM number in the ECFS ''Proceeding'' field, RM must

be in capital letters and the hyphen must be included. <span style="color:red;">To file a comment, click here </span>gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ec...rch_v2.cgi

<hr /><span style="color:blue;font-size:large;">I urge everyone to file comments on the proposals.</span>


<hr />73, Mike KD5VHF@ARRL.net</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub86.ezboard.com/bworldwidecbradioclub.showUserPublicProfile?gid=kd 5vhf>KD5VHF</A> at: 3/24/04 10:48 pm

...It's getting closer and closer to finding a license in a box of 'Cracker Jacks'...

- 'Doc




</p>

I am studying my code but am afraid that if it passes as above before I take my test that the people caught in it that automatically get upgraded will come under attack and snubbed by those that took code even though we were studying code to get our upgrade.<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/ohwell.gif ALT=":">








God bless you all !



CDX-897

OT-897

WV-897

CM-2368

American Kangaroo-1897</p>

__________________


I type slow for those that don't like to read fast

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>...It's getting closer and closer to finding a license in a box of 'Cracker Jacks'...

- 'Doc

<hr></blockquote><blockquote>Quote:<hr>Like so many other things, an amateur license is in the process of being 'dumbed down' to almost a give away status.<hr></blockquote> From what I understand(I haven't been licensed that long) The technician test today is basicly the same as the general test used to be. I guess the "dumbing down process" must have started years ago? I have read many comments almost exactly like the ones you just made in some CQ magazines from around 1972-1974 I have. I guess this must have been when the dumbing down process started or was it earlier? <blockquote>Quote:<hr>A license doesn't say anywhere on it how and what you did to pass the test, neither the new ones or the one I got 30 years ago. <hr></blockquote>Hmmm, 30 years ago.Help me understand. From the articles in the 70's CQ magazines, I guess you also "slipped in" after they "dumbed down" the test? Doc, I'm really not picking on you, Just the comments you made as they have been said for 30+ years that I know of.<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> I'm quite sure I'll be making the same comments if I'm around and still into the hobby 30 years from now. Maybe I'll laminate the articles in the CQ's I have and keep them around to remind me of the "process" Heck I get a kick out of some of the old post I have made about amateur radio and how I feel much differently now.<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/happy.gif ALT=":D">


<hr />73, Mike KD5VHF@ARRL.net</p>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I am so proud to have earned a technician license, only to be p*ssed on by other members of my "hobby", and it certainly looks like a bright future for my "hobby" when many of the other hobbyists think my tech license is a test for "morons" and if I got an automatic upgrade, I would be one of the "lazy" "crackerjack licensed" operators who would benefit from the "dumbing down" process.<hr></blockquote> Hey Paul, One thing I have learned is that there are many many more folks that will welcome you to the hobby than gripe about you being one of those ones that only had to take the "new" test. Sure it sometimes will get under your skin but just let it pass.<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> Pick up some old radio mag.s and read through them. You will notice that history <span style="font-size:x-large;">DOES</span> repeat it self. I was just reading a article in the March 1972 issue of CQ magazine by Doug Melvin WN6GGR titled "CB's Problems their own" In part, <span style="color:red;font-size:medium;"> " First off, I feel the code test speeds are fair enough as they are.Take in mind how long these speeds have been in use for FCC examinations. Then check all the QRM on our high frequency bands,especially 80-40-20 meters. Think of all the fun we would have with 500,000 licensed hams all trying to work at the same time. I say keep it like it is. " He goes on to say "Oh, some people I talk to say the FCC should close up the band(CB). This is not a solution. Even if the band were closed up, we would still hear the same garble we always hear on channel 20. More than one million CB sets have been sold, and we don't expect those sets not to be used, legal or not, now do we? Like many of the converted ones (CB to Novice) say, they deserve what they get." </span> <span style="color:blue;font-size:x-large;">March 1972, 32 years ago this month. Does this sound familiar ?</span> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol">


<hr />73, Mike KD5VHF@ARRL.net</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub86.ezboard.com/bworldwidecbradioclub.showUserPublicProfile?gid=kd 5vhf>KD5VHF</A> at: 3/25/04 10:35 pm