Ham Radio/Ham Radio CD-ROM (Emerald Software) (1995).ISO/news/pr90-5/pr90-55.doc

Text File | 1990-02-20 | 48KB | 995 lines

              PR Docket No. 90-55

  In the Matter of

  Amendment of Part 97 of the        RM-6984  RM-6985
  Commission's Rules Concerning      RM-6986  RM-6987
  the Establishment of a Codeless    RM-6088  RM-6989
  Class of Amateur Operator License. RM-6990  RM-6991
                                     RM-6992  RM-6993
                                     RM-6994  RM-6995

        NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING

Adopted: February 8,1990;   Released: February 16, 1990

  By the Commission:

                I. INTRODUCTION
  1. In this Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Notice), we
propose to establish a new class of amateur operator
license that would not require the applicant to prove that
he or she can send and receive manual Morse code teleg-
raphy messages. This proceeding was initiated by twelve
petitions for rule making filed on matters generally relat-
ing to the amateur operator license class structure, re-
quirements, and privileges./1

                II. BACKGROUND
  2. The amateur service exists for the purpose of
self-training, intercommunication and technical investiga-
tions carried out by duly authorized persons interested in
radio technique solely with a personal aim and without
pecuniary interest./2  Article 32 of the international Radio
Regulations requires, among other things, that each per-
son seeking a license to operate the apparatus of an
amateur station prove that he or she has the ability to
send correctly by hand and to receive correctly by ear text
in Morse code signals. Although this requirement may be
waived for an operator of an amateur station transmitting
only on frequencies above 30 MHz/3, each of the five
classes of operator licenses issued by the Commission/4
requires the applicant to pass an examination in the inter-
national Morse code./5
  3. Over the years the Commission has received requests
from persons who want to pursue the purposes of the
amateur service, but who argue that Morse code telegra-
phy is an unnecessary barrier to obtaining a license.
Historically, however, the amateur community has strong-
ly supported a telegraphy skill requirement for every class
of amateur operator license. In a l974 rule making pro-
ceeding,/6 and again in a 1983 rule making proceeding,/7
amateur licensees showed nearly unanimous opposition to
proposals for a no-code license.
  4. In the l974 rule making proceeding, we proposed an
overall restructuring of the classes of amateur operator
license. Included in those proposals was the establishment
of a codeless class of license. Although it resulted in
several improvements to the license structure, the pro-
ceeding was terminated without action on the codeless
license class./8  It was during the pendency of this proceed-
ing that the computer-aided license application processing
system currently in use was developed. The capability for
processing a sixth class of license, therefore, was incor-
porated into the design for the system. In the 1983 rule
making proceeding, the Commission again sought ways to
provide a class of codeless license. One proposal was the
deletion of the slow speed telegraphy examination require-
ment for the Technician Class license./9  The alternative
proposal was a new operator license class patterned after a
Canadian codeless class of amateur license, and having
very difficult written examination requirements. This pro-
ceeding was also strongly opposed by the amateur com-
munity and was terminated without action./10  The
above-listed petitions initiating this proceeding, however,
indicate that the sentiment in the amateur community
now appears to favor a code less license class. The ARRL,
for example, states that it now supports a codeless license
as being "beneficial to the future, short and long term of
the Amateur Service"/11  The issue of a codeless class of
amateur operator license, therefore, should be considered
in light of current circumstances in the amateur service.

                III. DISCUSSION
  5. A significant segment of the amateur community has
a new view of the role of telegraphy in the future of the
service. David Stall states that "numerous recent surveys
have demonstrated that the concept of a no-code license is
rapidly attracting a wide base of support within the ama-
teur community."/12  The ARRL states that its recent stud-
ies show:

  Encouraged by changes in the FCC rules, packet
  radio and other digital modes have become extreme-
  ly popular and have led to amateur radio becoming
  increasingly attractive to computer-literate
  individuals who possess the ability to contribute
  significantly to the service, but who fail to perceive
  the relevance of manual Morse code. Many ama-
  teurs welcome the idea of providing a gateway to
  these individuals. The possibility now exists to dis-
  passionately evaluate a codeless amateur license on
  its own merits. It is this factor that accounts for
  what the League perceives as a significant shift in
  attitudes among amateurs toward a codeless amateur
  license./13

  6. The SCATG states that the time is right for a codeless
class of license:

  Morse code operations were once the only way to
  make radio communications possible. It is now just
  a facet of an entire spectrum of possible methods of
  radio communications. It is no longer in keeping
  with the basis and purpose of the Amateur Radio
  service to stress one facet of radio communications
  over all others. Knowledge of code doesn't eliminate
  rules violations or uncourteous operations./14

  7. Burt Fisher, a teacher of electronics at a regional
high school, states "the public need would best be served
if there were a door into amateur radio that had a limited
code requirement. Once in the door, these youngsters
would be tempted to the rest of the world (and technol-
ogy) of amateur radio. The public would be served as the
base of potential scientists and technicians would be en-
hanced...." He believes that a written examination could
be used to ascertain that an entry level license applicant
has knowledge of telegraphy./15  Michael Trahos believes
that it is essential to have a codeless beginner license so
that the amateur service will not stagnate or experience a
decrease in the number of licensees. He believes that if a
codeless license is not established, the number of licensed
amateur operators will decrease, with a consequent in-
creasing re-allocation of amateur service spectrum by the
Commission to the land mobile services./16
  8. John McCord believes a codeless class of license
would "attract many young minds to the hobby of ama-
teur radio...."/17  Dennis and Linda Welch find the issue of
a codeless class of license contentious and defended most-
ly by the older amateurs and championed by the very
population needed for expansion./18  Bill Welsh, who has a
personal preference for code operation, foresees "that its
years as a realistic amateur radio licensing requirement
are coming to an end."/19  James E. Taylor states that
telegraphy is no longer necessary and that the number of
amateur operators must be drastically increased in order
to "continue to justify our existence."/20  Clement Bour-
geois, however, disagrees. He states that a knowledge of
telegraphy by every amateur operator is essential. He does
believe, however, that the high speed telegraphy examina-
tion/21 should be reduced to 15 words-per-minute or less.
Larry Ballentine suggests that telegraphy examinations
only require the examinee to recognize telegraphy char-
acters, rather than to send and receive text at specific rates
of speed./23
  9. Operator license structure. The petitions espouse var-
ious views on the structure of the license ladder. The
general consensus, however, is that a codeless class of
license should be the beginning step on the ladder. The
ARRL believes that there is nothing antiquated or irrele-
vant about the Morse code, or its use in the Amateur
Radio Service, but that this is a "matter that some
individuals must learn for themselves, in order to appre-
ciate that relevance."/24  Most of the petitions favor a struc-
ture that avoids any negative effect upon any current
licensee. One approach would add a sixth class of oper-
ator license. David Stall recommends this approach, with
the sixth class modeled after the Novice Class, without the
telegraphy requirement. He believes that a codeless license
should provide "a no-code entry into amateur radio with-
out disrupting the existing classes, privileges, or incen-
tives."/25  Burt Fisher also favors the sixth class approach,/26
as does ARRL, with the codeless class positioned in the
license structure so that there is an upward path "to the
present Technician license by way of a five words per
minute Morse code examination...."/27
  10. Another approach taken in the petitions is to pre-
serve the current five class structure by conversion of the
Novice Class to a codeless class. John McCord, for exam-
ple, recommends elimination of the telegraphy require-
ment for the Novice license./28  In addition to conversion
of the Novice Class, Dennis and Linda Welch also suggest
a merger of the Technician and General Classes./29  The
SCATG recommends that the Novice Class be gradually
replaced by a non-renewable codeless class that would
"minimally disrupt the existing license structure to avoid
disenfranchising current licensees. ... [t]he new license
should avoid isolating the newcomer from the mainstream
of amateur radio operators and operations while main-
taining the incentive to upgrade and providing attractive
privileges for the newcomer...."/30
  11. Other petitions suggest major revisions to the li-
cense class structure. James Taylor states that prospective
amateur operators "are put off by the present complex,
layered structure of our hobby...." He suggests one all-
purpose operator class./31  Alan Horowitz suggests "a no-
code ham license, similar to Canada's license structure."/32
Michael Trahos, however, states that "[t]he Canadian no-
code experience has clearly shown that creation of a
no-code license class with examination requirements
greater than that of the lowest available code license class
fails to promote interest in, or insignificantly increases,
the number of licensed amateur radio operators."/33  He
suggests, instead, two new codeless classes./34  Bill Welsh
believes that emission mode privileges should be earned
"by passing written and on-the-air operating tests that are
directly related to the desired additional emission/mode
privilege being sought."/35  He suggests that all frequency
segments now offered as incentives be eliminated./36
  12. Operator privileges. The petitions generally concur
that, as a minimum, a station control operator holding a
codeless class of license be authorized all emission privi-
leges on the 1.25 meter (m) and shorter wavelength
bands. For the longer wavelength bands, however, there
are several views, starting with James Taylor's recommen-
dation that all possible privileges be authorized to the
codeless class./37  Michael Trahos and SCATG recommend
including the 6 m and 2 m bands./38  Burt Fisher recom-
mends authorizing the 52-54 MHz segment in the 6 m
band. He also recommends including the 2 m band, but
excluding emission F3E on that band./39  The ARRL rec-
ommends excluding operation on both the 6 m and 2 m
bands./40  Dennis and Linda Welch,/41 David Stall,/42 and
John McCord make recommendations similar to those of
the ARRL. John McCord, however, suggests including
digital type emission privileges on the 6 m and 2 m
bands./43
  13. The petitions recommend that the eligibility for the
codeless class of license, like all amateur operator licenses,
require the passing of a written examination. The ARRL
states that the written examination should reflect the
privileges to be earned and require a greater commitment
than does the present Technician class written examina-
tion. It believes that the lessons learned from codeless
license programs in other countries necessitate a signifi-
cant written examination. The ARRL recommends, there-
fore, that a written examination for the codeless license be
administered under the Volunteer Examiner Coordinator
(VEC) system. The ARRL also recommends a 60 question
written examination consisting of the current 55 question
written examination for the Technician Class Operator
license, augmented by five additional questions related to
the specific privileges afforded the codeless licensees. Two
of the new questions would be concerned with the ap-
plication and use of telegraphy and the remainder would
be concerned with digital communication techniques./44
The SCATG states that the written examination should
consist of 50 questions./45
  14. The petitions also suggest names for a new codeless
class of license. The SCATG suggests "Apprentice."/46  Burt
Fisher suggests "Novice-V."/47  Michael Trahos suggests
"Novice-Plus" and "Technician-Plus."/48  David Stall sug-
gests "Limited."/49  The ARRL states that its suggested
name "Communicator," although "not exactly reflective
of the type of license envisioned in the proposal... is,
however, the most descriptive among those alternatives
considered."/50

                       IV. PROPOSAL
  15. We believe that the petitions have merit. Further,
like the petitioners, we believe that this is a propitious
time to propose the establishment of a codeless license,
given the advances in electronic communications in the
past few years. We propose, therefore, to establish a
codeless class of amateur operator license, the Commu-
nicator Class. With respect to this proposed operator class,
we have established three objectives. Our first objective is
to offer an entry level license opportunity to all persons
who find the telegraphy requirement a barrier to pursuing
the purposes of the amateur service. Our view is best
expressed by the statement of the ARRL that "the goal of
the codeless amateur license is to bring such licensees into
the 'mainstream' of the Amateur Radio Service, and to
encourage them to upgrade their license class."/51 Our
second objective is to propose a type of license that can be
implemented quickly if a decision is made to proceed.
Our third objective is to avoid any negative effect upon
current licensees, upon the work of the volunteer examin-
ers, or upon the Commission's workload or resources. To
preclude any impact on our resources, it is imperative
that our existing computer-aided application processing
system be utilized "as is."/52  The proposed rule amend-
ments are contained in the attached Appendix.
  16. In proposed Sections 97.501 and 97.503(b)1), we
would require that the applicant for a Communicator
Class license pass a 60 question written examination, as
requested by ARRL. In sum, there would be an expanded
entry level examination and corresponding question pool.
We concur with ARRL that the written examination for
the Communicator Class license should correspond to the
privileges for that class of license./53  The new question
pool would be comprised of the questions from the two
pools currently used in the Novice and Technician license
examinations, and new questions as requested by ARRL./54
By incorporating existing questions, over 91 percent of
the question pool for a Communicator Class license
would already be available and would help facilitate a
smooth transition./55
  17. Operator license structure. In proposed Section 97.9.
we would incorporate the Communicator Class in a sim-
plified license structure containing four ascending steps:
Communicator, General, Advanced, and Amateur Extra
Classes, Current Technician and Novice Class operator
licenses would be grandfathered indefinitely. There would
be no new licenses issued for those license classes, but
existing licenses could be modified or renewed. This ap-
proach would meet the objectives we established in para-
graph 15. Dennis and Linda Welch, John McCord, and
SCATG suggested preserving the five-step ladder by elimi-
nating the telegraphy examination requirement from the
Novice class license. This approach deserves careful con-
sideration by the amateur community because of its sim-
plicity. We did not propose this approach because of its
disadvantage of lowering the license qualification stan-
dards for the Novice operator class. As such, it may be
unacceptable to the hundreds of thousands of amateur
operators, including the 85.000 current Novice Class li-
censees, who qualified for the Novice license by passing a
telegraphy examination. The Novice Class has operating
privileges below 30 MHz, necessitating the need for a
knowledge of telegraphy as described in paragraph 2.
  18. For future licensees, the Communicator Class li-
cense would be the first step in the license structure
instead of the Novice Class. Our premise is that most
newcomers to the service, given the choice, would elect to
qualify for the Communicator Class license rather than
the Novice Class license. There would, therefore, no long-
er be a need for the Novice Class license. We particularly
invite instructors, volunteer examiners (VEs). and VECs
to submit comments on the validity of this premise, in-
cluding factual information on the time and effort that
would be required for persons to prepare for the proposed
60 question Communicator Class written examination as
compared to the time and effort currently required for
the Novice Class 30 question written examination and
telegraphy examination.
  19. Because the written examination for the Commu-
nicator Class license would be more comprehensive than
that of the Technician Class license, the Communicator
Class would also serve in the stead of the Technician Class
for future licensees. Each step in the proposed four step
structure provides recognition that the holder has signifi-
cantly advanced his or her skills in both the communica-
tion and technical phases of the radio art./56  This structure
could be rapidly implemented. The present license ap-
plication processing system and license application form
would continue to be used./57
  20. Operator privileges. The proposed control operator
privileges of the Communicator Class would generally be
those suggested by the ARRL. The privileges would in-
clude all authorized emission types. The proposed trans-
mitter power standard would be 200 watts peak envelope
power. The licensee's station would be eligible for a
Group D call sign./58  Stations with Communicator Class
control operators would not be permitted to transmit on
the 2 m and 6 m bands. In view of ARRL's desire to
bring the codeless class into the mainstream of the ama-
teur service,/59 however, we particularly invite comment
on the effect of excluding Communicator Class licensees
from these two popular bands.
  21. The ARRL stated that one premise for its petition
was that an accommodation should be made for codeless
class licensees to upgrade their license class. It cited coun-
tries that have codeless licenses where the written exami-
nation tests the examinee's technical qualifications. The
ARRL stated that amateur service societies in countries
such as Australia, the Federal Republic of Germany, and
Belgium report ongoing telegraphy activities among the
codeless class licensees working to upgrade the license
class./60  While the proposed Communicator Class privi-
leges include telegraphy on the 1.25 meter and shorter
wavelength bands, we recognize that telegraphy operation
is more closely associated with the HF bands. The op-
portunity for newcomers to the amateur service actually
to send and receive messages in the Morse code on small
segments of the HF 80, 40, 15, and 10 meter bands is
provided to the Novice and Technician Classes so that
those operators can gain an appreciation of telegraphy
and acquire the proficiency needed to pass the telegraphy
examination for the General Class operator license. We
specifically request comments, therefore, concerning the
desirability of including the opportunity for Communica-
tor Class licensees also to experience on-the-air telegraphy
operation on the HF bands. In view of our obligation
under the provisions of the international Radio Regula-
tions,/61 if it is desired, only domestic communications on
the HF bands would be authorized.
  22. Under proposed Section 97.301(g), a Communicator
Class licensee who passes, or otherwise receives credit for
a telegraphy examination, would be authorized the addi-
tional privileges of the Technician Class./62  To avoid a
license processing burden, however, the documentation of
the passing of, or credit for, a telegraphy examination
would be evidenced by the Certificate of Successful Com-
pletion of Examination (CSCE) issued by the administer-
ing VEs,/63 rather than by the issuance of a Technician
Operator license. The indicator used by the Communica-
tor Class for identification purposes would be AC./64  Un-
der proposed Section 97.505(a)(1), VEs would be
authorized to grant examination credit, evidenced by a
CSCE, to a Communicator Class examinee for the slow
speed telegraphy examination when the examinee holds a
Novice Operator license./65  That combination, Commu-
nicator Class license and CSCE, would permit the Com-
municator Class licensee the same rights and privileges of
the Technician Class operator. The VECs would provide
listings, in paper or magnetic form, of the Communicator
Class licensees who have been issued the CSCE.
  23. Volunteer examiners. The instant proposal contains
substantive changes in the amateur operator license ex-
amination procedure and the issuance of amateur oper-
ator licenses and CSCEs.  All operator license
examinations would be administered under the VEC sys-
tem./66  The additional task of administering the Commu-
nicator Class license would be offset by the elimination of
other tasks, including the discontinuance of the two ex-
aminer system for the Novice Class license./67  The co-
ordination and oversight by the VECs provide more
credible results than does the two examiner system. In the
latter, examination administration errors are more com-
mon and cheating is a greater problem than in the VEC
system. The task of administering new Technician Oper-
ator Class licenses would also be discontinued./68  The Nov-
ice and Technician written examinations would no longer
be prepared and administered as separate examinations.
The VEs and VECs, moreover, could be reimbursed for
out-of-pocket costs incurred in connection with all exami-
nations./69

                       V. CONCLUSION
  24. We believe that this proposal would achieve the
objectives set forth in paragraph 15 above. We seek com-
ments, therefore, on the proposed revisions to Part 97 to
establish a Communicator Class Operator license for the
amateur service, as set forth in the attached Appendix.

                   VI. PROCEDURAL MATTERS
  25. For purposes of this non-restricted notice and com-
ment rule making proceeding, members of the public are
advised that ex parte presentations are permitted except
during the Sunshine Agenda period. See generally 47
C.F.R.  1.1206(a). The Sunshine Agenda period is the
period of time which commences with the release of a
public notice that a matter has been placed on the Sun-
shine Agenda and terminates when the Commission (1)
releases the text of a decision or order in the matter; (2)
issues a public notice stating that the matter has been
deleted from the Sunshine Agenda; or (3) issues a public
notice stating that the matter has been returned to the
staff for further consideration, whichever occurs first. 47
C.F.R.  1.202(f). During the Sunshine Agenda period, no
presentations, ex parte or otherwise, are permitted unless
specifically requested by Commission or staff for the clari-
fication or adduction of evidence or the resolution of
issues in the proceeding. 47 C.F.R.  1.1203.
  26. In general, an ex parte presentation is any presenta-
tion directed to the merits or outcome of the proceeding
made to decision-making personnel which (1) if written,
is not served on the parties to the proceeding, or (2), if
oral, is made without advance notice to the parties to the
proceeding and without opportunity for them to be
present. 47 C.F.R.  1.1202(b). Any person who makes or
submits a written ex parte presentation shall provide on
the same day it is submitted two copies of same under
separate cover to the Commission's Secretary for inclu-
sion in the public record. The presentation (as well as any
transmittal letter) must clearly indicate on its face the
docket number of the particular proceeding to which it
relates and the fact that two copies of it have been submit-
ted to the Secretary, and must be labeled or captioned as
an ex parte presentation. 47 C.F.R.  1.1206.
  27. Any person who is making an oral ex parte pre-
sentation and presents data or arguments not already re-
flected in that person's written comments, memoranda, or
other previous filings in that proceeding shall provide on
the day of the oral presentation an original and one copy
of a written memorandum to the Secretary (with a copy
to the Commissioner or staff member involved) which
summarizes the data and arguments. The memorandum
(as well as any transmittal letter) must clearly indicate on
its face the docket number of the particular proceeding
and the fact that an original and one copy of it have been
submitted to the Secretary, and must be labeled or cap-
tioned as an ex parte presentation. 47 C.F.R.  1.1206.
  28. Authority for issuance of this Notice is contained in
Sections 4(i) and 303(l) and (r) of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i) and 303(l)
and (r). Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in
Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47
C.F.R.  1.415 and 1.419, interested parties may file
comments on or before August 6, 1990, and reply com-
ments on or before September 7, 1990. All relevant and
timely comments will be considered by the Commission
before final action is taken in this proceeding. To file
formally in this proceeding, participants must file an
original and four copies of all comments and reply com-
ments. If participants want each Commissioner to receive
a personal copy of their comments, an original and nine
copies must be filed. Comments and reply comments
must state the proceeding to which they relate (PR Dock-
et Number). They should be sent to the Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.
Comments and reply comments will be available for pub-
lic inspection during regular business hours in the Dock-
ets Reference Room (Room 239) of the Federal
Communications Commission, 1919 M Street N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20554.
  29. In accordance with Section 605 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980. 5 U.S.C.  605, the Commission
certifies that these rules would not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities, because these entities may not use an ama-
teur station to transmit any communication the purpose
of which is to facilitate the business or commercial affairs
of any party. See 47 C.F.R.  97.113(a). Moreover, the
proposed rules would not require the use of or signifi-
cantly enhance the sale of any additional amateur station
apparatus.
  30. The proposal contained herein has been analyzed
with respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. 44
U.S.C.  3501 et seq., and found to increase the informa-
tion collection burden which the Commission imposes on
the public. This proposed increase in the information
collection burden is subject to approval by the Office of
Management and Budget as prescribed by the Act.
  31. A copy of this Notice will be forwarded to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administra-
tion.

  FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


  Donna R. Searcy
  Secretary

                   APPENDIX

  Part 97 of Chapter I of Title 47 of the Code of Federal
Regulation is proposed to be amended as follows:

  1. The authority citation for Part 97 continues to read
as follows:

  Authority citation: 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47
U.S.C.  303. Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068,
1081-1105, as amended; 47 U.S.C.  301-609, unless oth-
erwise noted.

  2. Section 97.9 is revised to read as follows:

   97.9 Operator license.

  (a) The classes of operator licenses are Communica-
  tor, General, Advanced, and Amateur Extra. There
  are also two grandfathered classes of operator li-
  censes, Novice and Technician. An operator license
  authorizes the holder to be the control operator of a
  station with the privileges of the operator class
  specified on the license. The license document or a
  photocopy thereof must be in the personal posses-
  sion of the licensee at all times when the person is
  the control operator of a station.
  (b) A person holding a Communicator Class oper-
  ator license and who holds a CSCE indicating that
  the person passed element 1(A), 1(B), or 1(C) is
  authorized to exercise the rights and privileges of
  the Technician Class for the duration of the license
  term and renewal thereof.
  (c) A person holding a Novice, Technician, Com-
  municator, General, or Advanced Class operator Ii-
  cense who has properly filed with the FCC an
  application for a higher operator class that has not
  yet been acted upon, and who holds a CSCF in-
  dicating that the person passed the necessary exami-
  nations within the previous 365 days is authorized
  to exercise the rights and privileges of the higher
  operator class.

  3. Section 97.17(a) is revised to read as follows:

   97.17 Application for new license.

  (a) Any qualified person is eligible to apply for an
  amateur service license. No new Novice or Techni-
  cian Class operator licenses will be issued.

  4. Section 97.119(e) is revised to read as follows:

   97.119 Station identification.

  (e) When the control operator is using privileges on the
basis of holding a CSCE, an indicator must be included
after the call sign as follows:

  (1) AC for Communicator Class operator;
  (2) AG for General Class operator;
  (3) AA for Advanced Class operator; or
  (4) AE for Amateur Extra Class operator.

  5. Section 97.301(a) is revised and a new paragraph (g)
is added to read as follows:

   97.301 Authorized frequency bands.

  (a) For a station having a control operator holding a
Technician, Communicator, General, Advanced or Ama-
teur Extra Class operator license:

Wave-      ITU         lTU         ITU         Sharing
length     Region I    Region 2    Region 3    require-
band                                           ments
                                               See  97.303,
                                               Paragraph:

VHF        MHz         MHz         MHz
1.25m      ---         222-225     ---       (a),(b),(e)

UHF        MHz         MHz         MHz
70 cm      430-440     420-450     420-450     (a),(b),(f)
33 cm      ---         902-928     ---         (a),(b),(g)
23 cm      1240-1300   1240-1300   1240-1300   (j)
13 cm      2300-2310   2300-2310   2300-2310   (a),(b),(j)
 do        2390-2450   2390-2450   2390-2450   (a),(b),(j)

SHF        GHz         GHz         GHz
9 cm       ---         3.3-3.5     3.3-3.5     (a),(b),(k),(l)
5 cm       5.650-5.850 5.650-5.925 5.650-5.850 (a),(b),(m)
3 cm       10.00-10.50 10.00-10.50 10.00-10.50 (b),(c),(i),(n)
1.2 cm     24.00-24.25 24.00-24.25 24.00-24.25 (a),(b),(i),(o)

EHF        GHz         GHz         GHz
6 mm       47.0-47.2   47.0-47.2   47.0-47.2
4 mm       75.5-81.0   75.5-81.0   75.5-81.0   (b).(c),(h)
2.5 mm     119.98-     119.98-     119.98-     (k),(p)
           120.02      120.02      120.02
2 mm       142-149     142-149     142-149     (b),(c),(h),
                                               (k)
1 mm       241-250     241-250     241-250     (b),(c),(h),
                                               (q)
---        above 300   above 300   above 300   (k)

                   * * * * *

  (g) For a station having a control operator holding a
Technician, General, Advanced or Amateur Extra Class
operator license:

Wave-      ITU         ITU         lTU         Sharing
length     Region 1    Region 2    Region 3    require-
band                                           ments
                                               See  97.303,
                                               Paragraph:

VHF       MHz        MHz        MHz
6 m       ---        50-54      50-54     (a)
2 m       144-146    144-148    144-148   (a)

  6. Section 97.501 is revised to read as follows:

   97.501 Qualifying for an amateur operator license.

  An applicant must successfully pass an examination for
the issuance of a new amateur operator license and for
each change in operator class. Each applicant for the class
of operator license specified below must pass, or other-
wise receive examination credit for, the following exami-
nation elements.

  (a) Amateur Extra Class operator: Element 1(C), and
elements 3(A), 3(B), 4(A), and 4(B);
  (b) Advanced Class operator: Element 1(B) or 1(C), and
elements 3(A), 3(B), and 4(A);
  (c) General Class operator: Element 1(B) or 1(C), and
elements 3(A), and 3(B);
  (d) Communicator Class operator: Element 3(A).

  7. Paragraphs (b) and (c) of Section 97.503 are revised
to read as follows:

   97.503 Element standards.

  (b) A written examination must be such as to prove
that the examinee possesses the operational and technical
qualifications required to perform properly the duties of
an amateur service licensee. Each written examination
must be comprised of a question set as follows:
  (1) Element 3(A): 60 questions concerning the privi-
leges of a Communicator Class operator license. The
minimum passing score is 45 questions answered cor-
rectly.
  (2) Element 3(B): 25 questions concerning the addi-
tional privileges of a General Class operator license. The
minimum passing score is 19 questions answered cor-
rectly.
  (3) Element 4(A): 50 questions concerning the addi-
tional privileges of an Advanced Class operator license.
The minimum passing score is 37 questions answered
correctly.
  (4) Element 4(B): 40 questions concerning the addi-
tional privileges of an Amateur Extra Class operator li-
cense.  The minimum passing score is 30 questions
answered correctly.
  (c) The topics and number of questions required in
each question set are listed below for the appropriate
examination element:

  Topics                                       Element:
                                            3   3   4   4
                                           (A) (B) (A) (B)

  (1) FCC rules for the
amateur radio services                       15  4   6  8
  (2) Amateur station operating
procedures                                    7  3   1  4
  (3) Radio wave propagation characteristics of
amateur service frequency bands               4  3   2  2
  (4) Amateur radio
practices                                    11  5   4  4
  (5) Electrical principles as applied
to amateur station equipment                  6  2  10  6
  (6) Amateur station equipment circuit
components                                    4  1   6  4
  (7) Practical circuits employed in
amateur station equipment                     3  1  10  4
  (8) Signals and emissions transmitted
by amateur stations                           4  2   6  4
  (9) Amateur station antennas and
feed lines                                    6  4   5  4
  8. Section 97.505(a) is revised to read as follows:

   97.505 Element credit.

  (a) The administering VEs must give credit as specified
below to an examinee holding any of the following docu-
ments:
  (1) An unexpired (or within the renewal grace period)
FCC-issued Novice Class operator license: Element 1(A)
and the 30 written questions in Element 3(A) based upon
the material from the written examination passed for the
Novice Class operator license.
  (2) An unexpired (or within the renewal grace period)
FCC-issued Communicator Class operator license: Ele-
ment 3(A).
  (3) An unexpired (or within the renewal grace period)
FCC-issued Technician Class operator license: Element
3(A).
  (4) An unexpired (or within the renewal grace period)
FCC-issued Technician Class operator license issued be-
fore March 21, 1987: Elements 3(A) and 3(B).
  (5) An unexpired (or within the renewal grace period)
FCC-issued General Class operator license:  Elements
1(B), 3(A), and 3(B).
  (6) An unexpired (or within the renewal grace period)
FCC-issued Advanced Class operator license: Elements
3(A), 3(B), and 4(A).
  (7) A CSCE: Each element the CSCE indicates the
examinee passed within the previous 365 days.
  (8) An unexpired (or expired less than 5 years) FCC-
issued commercial radiotelegraph operator license or per-
mit: Element 1(C).

  9. Section 97.507 is revised to read as follows:

   97.507 Preparing an examination.

  (a) Each telegraphy message and each written question
set administered to an examinee must be prepared by a
VE holding an FCC-issued Amateur Extra Class operator
license. A telegraphy message or written question set,
however, may also be prepared for the following elements
by a VE holding an FCC-issued operator license of the
Class indicated:

    (1) Element 3(B): Advanced Class operator.
    (2) Elements 1(A) and 3(A): Advanced or General
    Class operator.

  (b) Each question set administered to an examinee must
utilize questions taken from the applicable question pool.
  (c) Each telegraphy message and each written question
set administered to an examinee for a Communicator.
General, Advanced or Amateur Extra Class operator li-
cense must be prepared, or obtained from a supplier, by
the administering VEs according to instructions from the
coordinating VEC.
  (d) A telegraphy examination must consist of a message
sent in the international Morse code at no less than the
prescribed speed for a minimum of 5 minutes. The mes-
sage must contain each required telegraphy character at
least once. No message known to the examinee may be
administered in a telegraphy examination. Each 5 letters
of the alphabet must be counted as 1 word. Each nu-
meral, punctuation mark and prosign must be counted as
2 letters of the alphabet.

  10. In Section 97.511, the heading and the text are
revised to read as follows:

   97.511 Operator license examination.

  (a) Each session where an examination is administered
must be coordinated by a VEC. Each administering VE
must be accredited by' the coordinating VEC.
  (b) Each examination for a Communicator Class oper-
ator license must be administered by 3 administering VEs.
each of whom must hold an FCC-issued Amateur Extra
or Advanced Class operator license.
  (c) Each examination for a General, Advanced or Ama-
teur Extra Class operator license must be administered by
3 administering VEs, each of whom must hold an FCC-
issued Amateur Extra Class operator license.
  (d) The administering VEs must make a public an-
nouncement before administering an examination. The
number of candidates at any examination may be limited.
  (e) The administering VEs must issue a CSCE to an
examinee who scores a passing grade on an examination
element.
  (f) Within 10 days of the administration of a successful
examination, the administering VEs must submit the ap-
plication to the coordinating VEC.

  11. Section 97.513 is removed.
  12. In Section 97.519, new paragraph (d) is added to
read as follows:

   97.519 Coordinating examination sessions.

  (d) Each coordinating VEC must compile lists of Com-
municator Class operator licensees who have been issued
a CSCE for Element 1(A), 1(B), or 1(C) during each
calendar month. The VEC must forward a copy of the list
to the Private Radio Bureau, FCC, Washington. DC
20554, by the 10th day following the end of the month.

  13. Section 97.527 is amended by revising paragraph
(a), removing paragraph (c) and redesignating paragraphs
(d) (e) (f) and (g) as (c) (d) (e) and (f) to read as follows:

   97.527 Reimbursement for expenses.

  (a) VEs and VECs may be reimbursed by examinees for
out-of-pocket expenses incurred in preparing, processing,
administering, or coordinating an examination.

                   FOOTNOTES
  /1 The petitions were received from the American Radio Relay
League, Inc. (ARRL) (RM-6995), Larry Ballentine (RM-6991),
Clement Bourgeois, Jr. (RM-6988), Burt Fisher (RM-6989), Alan
Horowitz (RM-6984), John M. McCord (RM-6993), the Space
Coast Amateur Technical Group (SCATG) (RM-6986), David K.
Stall (RM-6994), James E. Taylor (RM-6985), Michael C. Trahos
(RM-6990), Dennis and Linda Welch (RM-2987), and Bill Welsh
(RM-6992). Subsequent to the Public Notice listing of the fore-
going petitions, two additional petitions addressing the same
matter were received from Larry Garens and Philip Howard.
These petitions are included in the record of this notice and
comment proceeding and will be given full consideration prior
to a final determination in this matter.
  /2 See No. 53 of the International Telecommunication Union
Radio Regulations (Geneva, 1979) (hereafter Radio Regulations).
See also 47 U.S.C.  153(q).
  /3 See No. 2735 of the Radio Regulations.
  /4 The license classes are, in ascending steps, Novice, Techni-
cian, General, Advanced and Amateur Extra.
  /5 The examinations cover three levels of telegraphy skill. They
are 5, 13, and 20 words-per-minute. The examinee must also
pass certain written examination elements, depending upon the
operator license class sought. See Sections 97.501 and 97.503 of
the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  97.501 and 97.503.
  /6 Notice of Proposed Rule Making, Docket No. 20282, 39 Fed.
Reg. 44042 (1974).
  /7 Notice of Proposed Rule Making, PR Docket No, 83-28, 48
Fed. Reg. 4855 (1983).
  /8 Third Report and Order, Docket No. 20282, 34 Fed. Reg.
16461 (1979).
  /9 The qualification requirements for a Technician Class Oper-
ator license are passing the five words-per-minute telegraphy
examination, the 30 question written examination for a Novice
Class Operator license, and the 25 question written examination
for a Technician Class Operator license.
  /10 Report and Order, PR Docket No. 83-28, 49 Fed. Reg. 1097
(1984).
  /11 RM-6995 at 21.
  /12 RM-6994 at 3.
  /13 RM-6995 at 12 and 13, N. 11.
  /14 RM-6986 at 3.
  /15 RM-6989 at 1 and 2.
  /16 RM-6990 at 5.
  /17 RM-6993 at 2.
  /18 RM-6987 at 1.
  /19 RM-6992 at 1.
  /20 RM-6985 at 1.
  /21 The highest speed telegraphy requirement is 20 words-
per-minute for the Amateur Extra Class operator license.
  /22 RM-6988 at 2 and 3.
  /23 RM-6991 at 1.
  /24 RM-6995 at 15.
  /25 RM-6994 at 1.
  /26 RM-6989 at 1.
  /27 RM-6995 at 18.
  /28 RM-6993 at 1.
  /29 RM-6987 at 2.
  /30 RM-6986 at 1,
  /31 RM-6985 at 1 and 2.
  /32 RM-6984 at 1.
  /33 RM-6990 at 4.
  /34 RM-6990 at 20.
  /35 RM-6992 at 2 and 3.
  /36 RM-6992 at 3.
  /37 RM-6985 at 2.
  /38 RM-6990 at 21, and RM-6986 at 2.
  /39 RM-6989 at 1.
  /40 RM-6995 at 20.
  /41 RM-6987 at 2.
  /42 RM-6994 at 1.
  /43 RM-6993 at 1.
  /44 RM-6995 at 17 and 18.
  /45 RM-6986 at 2.
  /46 RM-6986 at 1.
  /47 RM-6989 at 1.
  /48 RM-6990 at 20.
  /49 RM-6994 at 1.
  /50 RM-6995 at 17.
  /51 RM-6995 at 19.
  /52 The sixth license class designation is "Communicator."
  /53 A written examination must be designed to demonstrate
that the examinee has the operational and technical qualifica-
tions required to perform properly the duties of an amateur
service licensee in accordance with the privileges authorized by
the class of operator license sought. See 47 U.S.C.  303(l)(1)
and 47 C.F.R.  97.503(b).
  /54 Section 97.523, 47 C.F.R.  97.523, requires all VECs to
cooperate in maintaining one question pool for each written
examination element. Each pool must contain at least 10 times
the number of questions required for a single examination.
  /55 The current Technician Class question pool consists of 250
questions. There are currently 300 questions in the Novice Class
question pool. An additional 50 questions would be added, giv-
ing the proposed Communicator Class question pool a total of
600 questions.
  /56 See Section 97.1(c). 47 C.F.R.  97.1(c).
  /57 Until a revised FCC FORM 610 becomes available, the
administering VEs would write in certain information on the
current form in the case of an application for a Communicator
Operator license. We would furnish information to the VECs
for temporary use of the current form, if we decide to proceed
with the Communicator Class license.
  /58 The computer-aided application processing system selects a
new call sign from four basic groupings for assignment to an
amateur station. Each call sign is sequentially selected from an
alphabetized regional-group list that corresponds to the licens-
ee's class of operator license and mailing address.
  /59 RM-6995 at 19.
  /60 RM-6995 at 14.
  /61 See Radio Regulations, Nos. 2735, and 2736.
  /62 The additional privileges include RTTY and data emissions
and phone emissions J3E and R3E in a segment of the 10 meter
band, and all authorized emissions in the 2 and 6 meter bands,
See  97.301 and 97.303.
  /63 A Certificate of Successful Completion of Examination is
now issued by VEs. See Section 97.511(e), 47 C.F.R.  97.511(e).
  /64 Section 97.119(e) requires that an indicator must be in-
cluded after the call sign whenever the control operator is using
privileges based on holding a CSCE. The indicator AC is pro-
posed for the Communicator Class.
  /65 Currently, Section 97.505(a)(2), 47 C.F.R.  97.505(a)(2),
requires VEs to give credit to an examinee holding a certificate
of successful examination (CSCE) indicating the examination
was passed within the previous 365 days. Currently, Section
97.9(b), 47 C.F.R.  97.9(b). authorizes a licensee holding a
CSCE indicating that he or she completed the necessary exami-
nations within the previous 365 days to exercise the rights and
privileges of the higher operator class. The time limitation that
would apply to the use of a CSCE in conjunction with the
Communicator Class license authorizing the rights and privi-
leges of the Technician Class would be the duration of the
license term and renewal thereof.
  /66 Eighteen organizations function as VECs. They accredit
VEs, coordinate examination sessions, maintain the question
pools, provide instructions to VEs, review and forward com-
pleted license application forms to the Commission for process-
ing. Some 50,000 examinations are administered annually under
the VEC system.
  /67 Some 18,000 to 20,000 persons qualify for a Novice Operator
Class license annually. The examinations are administered by
two General, Advanced, or Amateur Extra Operator Class li-
censees selected by the examinee.
  /68 Some 10,000 to 15,000 persons qualify for the Technician
Operator Class license annually.
  /69 Currently, VEs and VEC may only be reimbursed by
examinees for expenses incurred in preparing, processing. ad-
ministering or coordinating an examination for a Technician,
General, Advanced, or Amateur Extra Class Operator license.
See 47 U.S.C.  154(f)(4)(J) and 47 C.F.R.  97.527.