CW never stopped anyone from getting on HF. The FCC's proposal makes much
more sense than the League's give away program. Way to go FCC!
Alan, W3BV
At 02:11 PM 8/11/1998 -0500, Jon Ogden wrote:
>
>Well, here's the latest license restructuring posed by the FCC.
>
>I don't like it. Even though I am a fan of morse code and feel it should
>be required for HF, under the new proposal GENERAL class would be the
>entry level to HF. In other words, you'd now have to pass 13 wpm code to
>get on HF. This is silly and blocks far too many people from getting HF
>priviledges.
>
>I was hoping for better. The ARRL proposal sounded good. Hopefully, the
>FCC will modify it's proposal based on public comments.
>
>73,
>
>Jon
>KE9NA
>
>---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ----------------
>
>______________________________ Forward Header
>__________________________________
>Subject: FCC releases restructuring proposal
>Author: vec@arrl.org at Internet
To: <amps@contesting.com>
>Date: 08/11/1998 13:12
>
>
>
>Dear VE:
>
>The following was just released from FCC. FCC invites your comments by
>December 1, 1998.
>
>73,
>
>Bart J. Jahnke, W9JJ
>Manager
>ARRL/VEC
>
>bjahnke@arrl.org
>
>==========================
>
>This is the text of a W1AW Bulletin being run today...
>
>Subject: FCC restructuring proposal
To: <amps@contesting.com>
>Date: Tuesday, August 11, 1998 12:06PM
>
>FCC proposes to streamline amateur rules
>
>The FCC has proposed to phase out the Novice and Technician Plus class
>licenses, leaving just four amateur license classes in place--Technician,
>General, Advanced, and Extra. The Commission also has asked the amateur
>community to express its opinions on Morse code requirements for
>licensing
>and testing, but offered no specific changes. And the FCC proposed to
>permit
>Advanced class licensees to administer amateur exams up through General
>class. The proposals were among several suggested rules changes and
>invitations to comment contained in an FCC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
>WT
>Docket 98-143, made public August 10.
>
>In proposing to phase out the Novice and Tech Plus tickets, the FCC said
>"there appears to be an unnecessary overlap between the Novice,
>Technician,
>and Technician Plus license classes." The FCC also said that Technician
>and
>Tech Plus operators "predominantly" use FM and packet on VHF and UHF. In
>addition, the FCC said Novice applicants last year numbered fewer than
>1000,
>while there were nearly 21,500 Technician applications.
>
>Under the FCC plan, Novice and Tech Plus licensees would retain current
>operating privileges, but no new Novice or Tech Plus licenses would be
>granted. For examination purposes, current examination elements 2 and 3A
>would be combined into a new element 3A. For administrative purposes, the
>FCC would combine the current Technician and Tech Plus databases into a
>single Technician database. The proposal would eliminate the 5 WPM code
>test, Element 1A, as a required element for any class of license.
>
>The elimination of the Novice and Tech Plus license classes would
>effectively raise the bar for future applicants desiring to gain HF
>operating privileges, unless the FCC ultimately reduces Morse code
>testing
>requirements. Since the General class license would become the
>entry-level
>HF ticket under the FCC's proposed rules, applicants would have to pass
>at
>least the 13 WPM code test.
>
>The FCC did not propose to change any operating frequencies or license
>privileges for amateurs. However, the FCC does seeks comment on the
>disposition of the current Novice HF bands, which carry a 200-W output
>power
>limit for all licensees. The FCC invited comment on whether it would be
>"appropriate" to delete the Novice bands and the power restrictions on
>higher-class licensees and permit Novices to operate CW anywhere on 80,
>40,
>15, and 10 meters at 200 W output.
>
>The FCC opened the door to comments on all aspects of Morse code testing
>from the amateur community. In particular, the Commission said it wants
>to
>know if hams prefer the current three-level system or would like to see
>it
>reduced to a one or two-tier system--and, if so, at what required speeds.
>The FCC asked whether hams would be willing to trade a reduction in Morse
>code requirements for additional written elements on newer digital
>technologies "which, in part, are replacing the Morse code." And, the
>Commission asked whether it should consider specifying Morse code
>examination methods, such as fill-in-the-blank or one minute of solid
>copy,
>instead of allowing VEs to determine the testing method.
>
>In a related issue, the FCC also seeks comments on how to deal with
>potential abuses of the current disability waiver for higher-speed Morse
>code tests. In RM-9196, the ARRL had asked the FCC to require anyone
>applying for an exemption pursuant to a doctor's certification to first
>attempt the higher-speed test before examination credit could be given.
>The
>League also asked that VECs have access to relevant medical information
>from
>the certifying physician. The FCC said the ARRL's proposal would place
>"an
>unfair burden on examinees" and raised serious privacy and
>confidentiality
>issues.
>
>The FCC went along with an ARRL petition and proposed allowing Advanced
>class hams to be eligible to prepare and administer license examinations
>up
>through General class under the VE program. The Commission said the
>change
>would permit greater testing opportunities for hams. The FCC also invited
>comments on whether it should change written examination requirements "to
>provide VEs and VECs additional flexibility in determining the specific
>contents of written examinations."
>
>Referring to yet another ARRL petition, RM-9150, the FCC invited comments
>on
>how it can improve its Amateur Radio enforcement processes. The FCC
>applauded the ARRL "for its creative thinking" in that petition, but said
>the specific proposal was "inconsistent" with the current statutory role
>of
>administrative law judges. The FCC raised the possibility of encouraging
>complainants to include a draft order "to show cause to initiate a
>revocation or cease and desist hearing proceeding." The FCC said it also
>wants to hear how it can better use the services of the Amateur Auxiliary
>in
>beefing up enforcement.
>
>The FCC proposed to phase out Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service, or
>RACES, stations by not renewing their licenses. No new RACES licenses
>have
>been issued since 1980, and only 249 valid licenses remain. The FCC said
>RACES stations no longer are needed because any amateur station that has
>been properly registered with a civil defense organization has the same
>privileges as a RACES station.
>
>The FCC also took the occasion to clarify the definition of "power" as
>used
>in the RF exposure table in Section 97.13(c)(1). The FCC said it refers
>to
>peak envelope power (PEP) input to the antenna. It also made clear that
>no
>one holding an FCC-issued ham ticket may apply for a reciprocal permit
>for
>alien amateur license.
>
>The FCC set a longer-than-normal comment period. The deadline for
>comments
>is December 1, 1998. The deadline for reply comments is January 15, 1999.
>The FCC will accept electronic comments via the Internet at
>http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html.
>
>A copy of the complete NPRM will be posted on the ARRLWeb page,
>http://www.arrl.org, as soon as it is available.
>
>
>---
>Submissions hallicrafters@qth.net
>
>
>----------------- End Forwarded Message -----------------
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Jon Ogden
>
>jono@enteract.com
>www.qsl.net/ke9na
>
>"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
>Submissions: amps@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
>Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>
>
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|