ARRL VE Express Newsletter AUGUST 1992 FCC Proposes to Bring Novice Examinations Into the VEC System On July 23, 1992, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to amend the Amateur Service Rules to include Novice class Operator License Examinations in the VEC system. A copy of the FCCs proposal is included elsewhere in this newsletter. What the FCC proposes is that all examinations be VEC coordinated. Three VEC-accredited examiners would be re- quired in order to administer any examination. The FCC has indicated that General class licensees could seek accreditation in order to continue to administer the Element 1A and 2 Nov- ice license examination, but that three accredited VEs would be required to administer the examinations. A public announce- ment would need to be made prior to the administration of any examination (including examinations for the Novice license). By implementing such a system, the FCC feels that it would standardize and simplify the examination process for all ama- teur license examinations--since, currently, two examination systems exist: one for Novice applicants and a second for all other classes. The Commission cites statistics which indicate that the trend of examinations has gone from 88% of all examinations being for the Novice license in calendar year 1990, to January 1992 in which 16.3% of all new licensees were Novice while 82.3% were Technician. This trend indicates that only a small portion of initial licensees are becoming licensed under the two examiner program. The Commission also indicates that applica- tion errors are significantly higher under the two examiner Novice program. They cite an error ratio on applications of 9.4% under the two examiner program, while under the VEC system application errors were a very low 0.8%. These errors result in delays to individuals seeking their initial licenses, and an administrative burden on FCC staff already feeling the effects of a tight federal budget. The Commission feels that VEs, and VECs, could accept a small reimbursement fee to offset direct out-of-pocket expenses incurred in administering all examinations. Your comments are invited on this proposal, PR Docket No. 92-154. Please be sure to file them with the FCC by Octo- ber 9, 1992. Your reply comments are also invited. The reply- comment deadline is November 9, 1992. FCC Proposes To Provide A Special Temporary Licensing Procedure for Visiting Foreign Amateur Operators On August 6, 1992, the FCC released an NPRM which proposes a special licensing procedure for visiting foreign ama- teur operators who are interested in operating in United States. The FCC proposal would create a form of temporary operating authority available to any foreign licensee which would be valid for a 60-day period. This proposal would provide a third means for foreign amateurs to gain authority to operate in the US; the other two ways are for the foreign amateur to take the US license exami- nations, or the foreign amateur may apply for a Reciprocal Permit for an Alien Amateur License (which is only available to amateurs from 76 countries). The proposed temporary operat- ing authority would be available to all foreign amateurs (not limited only to countries with whom we have reciprocity). The FCC would have the VEC system provide the mecha- nism for granting of the temporary authority. Foreign amateurs would be required to present themselves before a team of three Extra class VEC-accredited examiners at a VEC-coordinated test session. The VEs would be required to: 1) confirm that the person currently holds an amateur service license from their country of citizenship; 2) determine the extent of operating privileges granted by the foreign license; 3) make certain that the person is qualified to perform the duties of an amateur operator in the US and that authorization is in the public inter- est; 4) provide the foreign amateur operator with a document attesting to the fact of qualification; and 5) record pertinent data so that the Commission can contact the person, if neces- sary. How would the FCC have VEs meet these objectives? The VEs would review the foreign amateur's identification (Pass- port) and licensing documents. The VEs would determine what privileges the foreign amateur's license conveys (probably to provide information to the foreign amateur regarding frequency or emission limitations while operating in the US, as compared to privileges in his/her home country). The VE Team would administer a 20-question examination (examination Element 5) consisting of questions on FCC Rules most applicable to the type of operation which the visitor plans to engage in while in the US. The pass the examination, the foreign amateur must correctly answer 18 out of the 20 questions (90%). Upon pass- ing of the examination, the VEs would record the foreign amateur's name, call sign and the privileges authorized by the foreign license. The VEs would issue a CSCE to the person which would serve as proof of the foreign amateur's conditional license authorizing operation in the US. The VEs would be required to submit to the coordinating VEC within 10 days of the test session the examinee's name, call sign, operator privi- leges as granted by the foreign license, US mailing address where the examinee may be contacted during the 60-day opera- tion period and the beginning and ending dates of the period. In turn, the VEC would add the name and US mailing address to a data base that is maintained and forwarded to the Commis- sion on a regular basis. The FCC would allow VEs and VECs to be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses in administering the examination--and would permit a test fee to be charged the visiting foreign ama- teur operator for this certification process. Upon receiving a CSCE from the VEs, the temporary visiting foreign operator would be authorized to begin a single, consecutive operating period, not to exceed 60 days, at any time during the 365 days of the issuance of the CSCE. The CSCE would designate the 60-day period for which the foreign ama- teur intended to operate. The temporary visiting foreign operator could use the same privileges in the US as those authorized by his/her own govern- ment, but they may not exceed the privileges granted to the US Extra class license. The FCC invites comments on this proposal, PR Docket No. 92-167. The comment deadline is October 26, 1992, with a reply comment deadline of November 30, 1992. Overnight Shipping Services for Returning Your Completed Test Sessions If you are not already doing so, your VE Team is encour- aged to return completed test session packages to the ARRL/VEC using one of the pre-paid overnight tracked services which we have established accounts with. These services provide your team, your applicants and us at the VEC with greater peace-of-mind in ensuring that each of your test session packag- es safely arrives at the VEC within a day or two after you've sent your completed test session package to us. In doing so, four pre-paid services are provided for your use which include US Postal Service Express Mail, UPS Red Label Overnight Air- Parcel Service, AirBorne Express and Federal Express. Of these services we highly recommend AirBorne Express. Although not as convenient as US Postal Service Express Mail, AirBorne Express does have an on-call pick-up service which covers many locations around the country--and more notably they do so at less than one-half the per-pound cost as compared to the other services. Typically, a one pound package shipped via AirBorne Express using their economy "Standard Delivery Service" (SDS) service costs $4.50; for the same package, US Postal Service charges $9.95, UPS Red Label service is $9.75 and Federal Express is about $12.00. Check with us to see if AirBorne Express can be an option for your team's packages (or feel free to call AirBorne Express at 1-800-247-2676 to find out for yourself if your area is served with local "on-call" pickup {be sure to verify whether you are within a regular "on call" service area, or not, as there is a $10 extra charge for out-of-area pickups}). As always, we can supply you with the packaging and VEC-addressed pre-paid mailing la- bels (airbills) for this service. As we've mentioned before, we currently send our daily packages from the ARRL/VEC to the FCC using AirBorne Express--and we are very pleased with the service they've been providing. Not to frighten you, but test sessions have been lost in transit to the ARRL/VEC. Almost all sessions that were lost were sent to us via First-Class Mail. Three packages have been lost during 1992, so far. So, please, do consider the use of the express services we are providing (and look into using the most cost-effective service, AirBorne Express, as an option for your team). It may cost a bit more than First-Class Mail but the comfort in knowing that your package is being tracked should be considered money well spent. Don't forget to keep your tracking label from the service you've chosen to use. Stick or staple that label or receipt to your Candidate Roster/CSCE carbon copy test session records for easy reference. Morse Code Exemption Procedures Remember that effective August 1, 1992, all applicants who are seeking handicapped/disabled Morse code exemption/credit at your test session(s) must present your VE Team with the FCC's new Form 610 which now includes the FCC's required Physician's Certification of Disability and Patient's Release of medical information on the back of the form. None of the earlier certification formats may be accepted by your VE Team. The procedure for use of the exemption/credit process is as follows: * An applicant must present your VE Team with an original of the FCC's new 610 form which must be correctly completed (that is, both the applicant and his/her physician must have already completed and signed their portions of the back of the form). Once presented; if the 610 form is correctly completed and if the applicant has passed or already holds credit(s) for the necessary written elements required for the upgrade being sought (and the applicant can verify that he/she has passed at least an initial 5 WPM Morse code examination {either via a license with a code requirement or via a CSCE}), the VE Team must accept the applicants application and issue a CSCE indicating Element 1C credit (Physician's Cert. and Release: 1C), plus any other credit(s) earned at this test session, and must indicate the upgrade earned by the individual as a result of receiving Element 1C credit. * Remember that three VEs must sign the CSCE and 610 form. The applicant must pay a $5.40 application fee. Even if the VEs assemble themselves to process such an application, this is considered a test session--it must be publicly an- nounced in advance--and the proper test session paperwork (Candidate Roster, Test Session Report and CSCE Carbon Copy) must be submitted to the VEC with the application. * VEs may not turn away someone who presents the correctly- completed Form 610 application seeking the exemp- tion/credit if that person has met all of the above require- ments. Should the VEs have observations which they would like to share about the concerns they may have regarding a specific applicant, please forward those to us with the test session paperwork (or after the test session to the VEC Manager's Attention). Since each application must be pro- cessed by a VE Team, do not direct the applicant to for- ward documents to the ARRL/VEC (they must come through your VE Team). * VEs may suggest that an applicant might try taking the exami- nation using available accommodative procedures. These procedures may not be imposed, however. Someone who presents the exemption/credit certification has already met the FCC's procedural requirements to be exempted. There- fore, only the FCC can decide whether a license should, or should not, be granted as a result. VEs must still process the paperwork as required, including issuance of an up- grade CSCE. Reissuance of Unassigned Call Signs As you may have heard, the FCC has received Congres- sional support for the reissuance/issuance of special call signs. On June 12, 1992, Rep. Edward J. Markey (Massachusetts), Chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives - Telecommuni- cations and Finance Subcommittee, and Rep. Ralph M. Hall (Texas), a member of the same House committee, wrote FCC Chairman Sikes on behalf of several radio operators interested in establishing an FCC system for allocating distinctive call signs. Congressmen Markey and Hall suggested that such call signs would be available at a fee to radio operators, in order to recover costs associated with this program. They also said, "We understand that the Commission al- ready has a system in place which assigns call signs based on a licensee's address and operator class. This method is orderly and cost-effective, but it does not allow for the creation of unique call signs which could be obtained for an extra fee. They went on to say, "We are supportive of a special call sign program, provided that it could generate sufficient fees to fully fund additional Commission staff and equipment require- ments. With this in mind, we ask that the Commission staff review this proposal to determine its feasibility." Shortly thereafter, ARRL President George Wilson III, W4OYI, wrote to FCC Chairman Sikes reiterating the League's position. In his letter, President Wilson wrote, "While the ARRL opposes the imposition of amateur license fees that would discourage individuals from obtaining an amateur license or from upgrading their skills, we do not oppose the funding of a call sign assignment system in the manner described by Messrs. Markey and Hall." He went on to say, "We would be pleased to work with FCC staff in developing a fair, workable system for assigning specific, unassigned, Amateur Radio call signs." Where does the matter stand? It's clear to the FCC, with Amateur Radio and Congressional support, that a special call sign issuance system is desired. With these requests in hand, the Commission needs to determine what staffing, computer hard- ware and software resources, and financing requirements they require in order to make such a system reality. This is indeed a glimmer of light at the end of what has been a very dark tunnel. 1993 Test Fee No word has been received from FCC regarding the maximum test fee reimbursement for 1993. As soon as we hear from them, this file and others will be updated accordingly.