View Full Version : Updating Your Address for your License
It seems we here at QRZ regularly get emails from (US ham) users, wanting to know why we are displaying their old address, when the user says they have updated their address with the FCC "months ago". QRZ receives their US ham data directly from the FCC automatically.
The problem is usually that the user has updated their CORES (COmmission Registration System) information, but NOT their ACTUAL LICENSE. One obvious clue is that these people will have never received a new, updated paper license certificate in the mail from the FCC after this update. Though they may have received a CORES registration confirmation in the mail.
Note: The address and contact information you have entered in CORES registration will not be automatically associated with your licenses. To change the address or other contact information on your license, you must file an Administrative Update in ULS or submit Form 605 manually.
What is CORES? If you wish to do business with the FCC, you must first register with CORES. You will be assigned an FCC Registration Number (FRN) when you register. This unique FRN will be used to identify you and your business dealings with the FCC. Think of it as your login account to conduct business with the FCC via the ULS.
Why is the CORES update not automatically associated with your license? Because CORES registration may be associated with several types of licenses besides your personal amateur license. For example, PLMR (Private Land Mobile Radio); Amateur Club Calls; etc. There are some cases where an address change to your CORES registration may not be applicable to one of more of the licenses associated with your CORES account.
As much as this may seem like a cop-out, it seems that the difficulty many people encounter trying to do their own updates in the ULS makes the small $6 fee to use The QRZ / W5YI-VEC Amateur License Update and Renewal Service (https://secure.qrz.com/lrs) a bargain.
From the FCC: Licensing: Changing Address (http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/amateur/licensing/changingaddress.html)
In accordance with Part 97.23, your license must show your correct mailing address, or your license is subject to revocation.
Oh, and if you look up your call and see the "Detailed Info" link in red, or on the details page, see your expiration date flashing in red, your license is within 90 days of expiration.
To renew your license, it MUST be within 90 days prior to expiration.
73,
Mark
Editor, QRZ
kd7eze
09-09-2003, 03:12 PM
Mark,
I did the QRZ addy change when I moved, but I never received an updated paper license. The only thing that changed was the info on the net. I still think the FCC should issue new licenses for the call area that you live in. At least you knew if you were working a 1 call, that he/she was in 1 land. Oh well, change is evident, even if not for the good of all.
KD7EZE
Obviously QRZ doesn't always update callsign information in a timely manner. It may be "automatic," but there's a glitch in the system somewhere.
Case in point: My XYL (N4TCH) received a paper license after renewal in February that had an incorrect zipcode (76801 -- dunno where THAT came from!http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. Two weeks ago, after noticing the mistake, she submitted an address correction with the correct zipcode (75068)and now has her paper license IN HAND, but QRZ still says her zip is 76801.
Sooner or later I supposed the automated system will "get it." QRZ would have you believe they're in sync with the Commission, but in this case, 'tain so.
AJ5F
Dave
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kd7eze @ Sep. 09 2003,08:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I did the QRZ addy change when I moved, but I never received an updated paper license.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You should have. If it updated on-line, it means the FCC processed it, and they should have sent out an updated license.
Mark
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AJ5F @ Sep. 09 2003,10:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Obviously QRZ doesn't always update callsign information in a timely manner. It may be "automatic," but there's a glitch in the system somewhere.
Sooner or later I supposed the automated system will "get it." QRZ would have you believe they're in sync with the Commission, but in this case, 'tain so.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Dave-
Like all things man-made, there are occasional glitches. QRZ is no exception. As often as not, the "glitch" has to do with the file coming from the FCC, rather than QRZ itself.
MOST of the time, it is "in sync" and up to date. And the occasional "glitches" don't only affect QRZ. There has been times when QRZ was the only one that had it right.
When someone experiences a "glitch" for themselves, I guess they ASS-U-ME it is the norm and affects everyone/everything.
Mark
N7MK:
Mark, I guess my question is: Since she has the new paper license with the correct zipcode, how long will it be before qrz.com updates the information?
Dave
AJ5F
KB5DPE
09-09-2003, 08:17 PM
QRZ was right on top of things with my upgrade. The same day that my upgrade showed up on FCC, it was also on QRZ. Although I didn't check either daily, the most it could have been off is two days. In my opinion, that's not bad.
N5MK:
One other thing I forgot to add, Mark. The correct zipcode was on the FCC database last Friday (05 Sept 03).
Dave
AJ5F
COREY
09-09-2003, 10:03 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
After we moved to our new address I went to the QRZ/W5YI, to have our license updated with the FCC.
All was done within 10 days including our new paper license.
How even with the same address, city, county and state, our coordinates and the grid number are not the same. And my little gps tells me that we are not eather coordinates. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
And a good to all http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AJ5F @ Sep. 09 2003,12:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Mark, I guess my question is: Since she has the new paper license with the correct zipcode, how long will it be before qrz.com updates the information?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You're right.. it should be in there. I'm checking on it with Fred.
Mark
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (COREY @ Sep. 09 2003,15http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">How even with the same address, city, county and state, our coordinates and the grid number are not the same. And my little gps tells me that we are not eather coordinates. <!--emo&http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You need to understand, you do not supply your coordinates or grid information to the FCC on your license application. Therefore, they don't supply it to us.
This information is derived from a USPS zipcode database, and is a somewhat arbitrary location within the geographic area of your zipcode. For this reason, the coordinates of everyone with the same zipcode should indicate the same, unless they've been edited. Close, but....
There are quite a few errors in this zipcode db as well, and some zipcodes aren't even listed.
The grid information is derived from the coordinates. So, if they are off, the grid information will be, too.
For accurate coordinate and grid information to be displayed, it needs to be entered by the user.
http://www.qrz.com/i/coordinates.html
Mark
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kd7eze @ Sep. 09 2003,08:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I still think the FCC should issue new licenses for the call area that you live in. At least you knew if you were working a 1 call, that he/she was in 1 land. Oh well, change is evident, even if not for the good of all.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Sorry! Can't pin the blame for that one on us.. HI. Can you imagine how confusing things might be if that were still the case, AND having the vanity program?
Mark
WA9SVD
09-10-2003, 12:04 AM
I also found the grid square and Lon/Lat coordinates to be slightly in error. (The Map Quest info was off by about two city blocks.)
When I asked GARMIN, they said that the locations derived from "digitized" maps are not as accurate as the coordinates determined by a GPS receiver. I've since corrected my info at various sites, and have the correct "Grid Square" on my QSL card.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Sep. 09 2003,17<!--emo&http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I also found the grid square and Lon/Lat coordinates to be slightly in error. (The Map Quest info was off by about two city blocks.)
When I asked GARMIN, they said that the locations derived from "digitized" maps are not as accurate as the coordinates determined by a GPS receiver. I've since corrected my info at various sites, and have the correct "Grid Square" on my QSL card.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
As I said, the coordinates are derived from a zipcode database, not from MapQuest, Maps On Us, or a "digitized map". We know it isn't precise, but there is no source available for everyone's exact coordinates. And many people haven't determined their own.
Mark
N8QGC
09-10-2003, 12:14 PM
No issues with QRZ here. I just moved from one QTH to another. I changed my info via the ULS system and the very next day QRZ had the new info.
Keep up the good work.
73 de John N8QGC
N7MK:
Mark, qrz.com now has the correct zipcode for N4TCH.
Thank you for your attention to this.
Dave
AJ5F
AB9FH
09-10-2003, 05:51 PM
Thanks for the clear explanation. I was able to update the license information for my daughter and myself.
I would suggest to all hams that they log on to CORES and ULS and see what information is out there. I checked the FRN shown on QRZ's database with my own records and the FRNs did not match. A search online showed she had 3 FRNs! I was able to clear that up by email. That's the sort of thing that could delay a license upgrade or renewal.
73 de AB9FH and KB9ZNC
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AB9FH @ Sep. 10 2003,10:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I checked the FRN shown on QRZ's database with my own records and the FRNs did not match. A search online showed she had 3 FRNs! I was able to clear that up by email. That's the sort of thing that could delay a license upgrade or renewal.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Or... cause you to miss out on a callsign on a vanity application!
M
kb5iav
09-11-2003, 01:33 AM
I think QRZ is pretty good at keeping the callsign database up to date. When I upgraded to Extra in January, it showed up on QRZ about a week before the paper license showed up in my mailbox.
As for renewals, I did mine through the ARRL, which included an address change, it went through without a hitch. BTW, ARRL didn't charge me a cent for it. I got the letter from W5YI to renew for $6, but why bother paying when you can get it for free?
73,
Jonathan
WA9SVD
09-11-2003, 03:20 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N7MK @ Sep. 09 2003,18:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Sep. 09 2003,17<!--emo&:0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I also found the grid square and Lon/Lat coordinates to be slightly in error. #(The Map Quest info was off by about two city blocks.) #
# #When I asked GARMIN, they said that the locations derived from "digitized" maps are not as accurate as the coordinates determined by a GPS receiver. #I've since corrected my info at various sites, and have the correct "Grid Square" on my QSL card.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
As I said, the coordinates are derived from a zipcode database, not from MapQuest, Maps On Us, or a "digitized map". #We know it isn't precise, but there is no source available for everyone's exact coordinates. #And many people haven't determined their own.
Mark[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Mark,
I understand what you are saying, but I've seen amateurs in the same ZipCode with different grid squares or coordinates. Curious. Or perhaps, like myself, they have also input their correct coordinates manually.
It's just interesting that the "MapQuest," "MAPS-ON-US," etc. sites all return exactly the same error of coordinates. Then again, maybe the mapping sites are using the same ZipCode (or similar) database!!! It's also interesting that when I actually went to the location the "mapping services" thought I was located, it DID match the grid square or lon/lat that the map sites reported. Margin of error, I guess. Then again, even for awards, I'm in DM03. Whether it's DM03ws or DM03wt is hardly a matter of life or death. I guess it really only matters if you are a rover in a contest, and need to determine your grid square. That's what GPS is for!
73 to all!
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb5iav @ Sep. 10 2003,18:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW, ARRL didn't charge me a cent for it. I got the letter from W5YI to renew for $6, but why bother paying when you can get it for free?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Free... IF you are a $39/year paid member. You're not paying any membership to W5YI-VEC, or QRZ. The administrative costs need to be covered somehow. And the rules allow for this, just as they do for VE sessions.
I'm not saying ARRL membership is a bad thing (I'm a member), and that you shouldn't use their service for free if you are a member. But to say it is "free" isn't entirely accurate.
If you can figure out the ULS, by all means, use it. It is free. I gave a link to the FCC site in my original article.
What prompted me to write this article, though, was the volume of emails we get from people who can't figure the ULS out, or do not update properly using it. We regularly get emails from people who say they updated on the ULS months ago, but when I check it out, their update isn't there.
Use the ULS if you understand it. Use the ARRL if you're a member. If not, here we are.
Mark
WA9SVD
09-12-2003, 07:16 AM
Mark,
I appreciate that you ARE providing a service to prevent the hassle some people experience when renewing their license, (or don't have reliable Internet access) and QRZ deserves to be compensated for the effort. And times have obviously changed.
But the last time I renewed, (I did it as soon as I was eligible to renew, and I was able to navigate the ULS myself with no problems at the time) about the same time, I received a "package" from ARRL with the renewal forms, stating that they would process my renewal for free if I was a member (which I was) or a small "processing" fee if I was not a member. (I don't recall the amount of the fee.) There was also some fine print stating that I could send in the forms myself, directly to the FCC, without paying a fee.
But about two weeks after that (AFTER my renewal was already listed in the FCC database) I received a similar "PACKAGE" from W5YI. They informed me that my license was about to expire and that the W5YI Group, one of the FCC Authorized VE testing groups would process my renewal, and the fee would be $10. There was NO mention that there was any other way to renew, and seemed to imply that this was part of the VE program, and was the proper or approved method of renewal.
I resented this attempt to extort a fee by rather shady tactics, and of course, laughed out loud, as I already had my renewed license in my hand. (Rather, in my wallet.)
If people have problems with ULS, and other aspects of the FCC process, and they wish to use ARRL or W5YI as a service, that's fine. (It's similar to letting AAA [the Auto Club] process license plate renewal. For a fee, or no charge if you are a member. You pay one way or another.) But It should be made clear that any "fee" (other than for a vanity call sign) goes entirely to the organization providing the service, and the FCC doesn't get a cent of that.
The "fees' may have changed since that time, but probably not much else.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Sep. 12 2003,00:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There was NO mention that there was any other way to renew...
You pay one way or another.) But It should be made clear that any "fee" (other than for a vanity call sign) goes entirely to the organization providing the service, and the FCC doesn't get a cent of that.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
We frequently mention at QRZ that you can renew for free at the FCC.
Does the ARRL or any other VEC mention that the fee goes entirely to their organization? Not often that I recall.
However, Part 97.527 tells everyone (we all read Part 97, right?) that the fees go to reimburse the VEs and VECs.
Mark
WA9SVD
09-13-2003, 12:52 AM
Mark, (N7MK:)
I have no problem with QRZ, ARRL, or anyone else providing a service (with associated fee) for renewal; and if individuals choose to use your service or that of others, that's their choice. (Similar to "U-Park vs. valet parking at a restaurant, ot ARRL converntion, for that matter.)
But the original forms I got for renewal from W5YI implied that that was the only way to renew, not that it was a "service" and that renewal could be done by the individual; it implied that renewal HAD to be through the W5YI VE system.
Those of us that knew the actual rules are the ones that bristled at what appeared as a "strongarm" tactic. Again, that was several years ago, and W5YI may be doing things differently now. It's just that the ARRL (again, I was a member) material explicitly said I could file my renewal either through the ARRL (for free as a member, or for a fee if not) or I could send in the form to the FCC, and provided the address to do so. The material I received from W5YI did not state I could file the renewal personally, (for free) and only provided an address to W5YI to send the renewal and fee. There was NO mention in the W5YI material to indicate that this was an "optional service."
As always, "Caveat Emptor."
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Sep. 12 2003,17:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But the original forms I got for renewal from W5YI implied that that was the only way to renew, not that it was a "service" and that renewal could be done by the individual; it implied that renewal HAD to be through the W5YI VE system.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Exactly how did it imply this? Because it didn't explicitly TELL you that you couldn't use another method, and how?
As I eluded to before, if someone were familiar with Part 97 as they are supposed to be, they would already be aware of the fact that there are various methods to renew.
So.. does this mean if you are driving down the highway, and the speed limit sign says "55" but doesn't explicitly say if you drive 75 you might endanger your life, that somehow the Dept of Trans didn't do their duty by not posting this possibility of danger?
I don't believe for non-members the ARRL info explains about going to the FCC to renew for free.
And I've never heard ANY VE (ARRL & W5YI included) that advised test applicants that there are SOME VEs that don't charge any fees for test sessions, because last time I checked, there were a few.
Mark
WA9SVD
09-13-2003, 08:18 AM
Mark,
I don't wish to belabor the point much more. This WAS several years ago, when the FCC was first implementing the ULS. For those that didn't/don't wish to be hassled, they can renew with QRZ, or ARRL, or whomever.
But at the time, the material I got from W5YI simply stated that I should fill in the form, pay the $10 fee and my license would be renewed "through the W5YI VE system." There was NO mention in the material that the form could simply be sent to the FCC without paying any fee.
(I wish I had saved the original papers.)
73, and I wish QRZ good luck in it's endeavours.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Sep. 13 2003,01:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There was NO mention in the material that the form could simply be sent to the FCC without paying any fee.
(I wish I had saved the original papers.)[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Again, I wouldn't expect someone else to teach me everything there is to learn in life. Somethings you just need to figure out and LEARN for yourself. Well, today's society seems to be trying to get away from that.
I wish you had saved the original papers, too. Because I'd be willing to bet that the wording wasn't nearly as nefarious as it's being made to sound.
I bet it didn't tell you "should" or "had" to renew through W5YI. And I'd hardly call NOT spelling out the other options an indictment. Many who were paying attention already new about the FCC route, and thought it was a hassle.. that "instant gratification with no effort" thing.
I think this all stems from a misconceived notion that was going around, that somehow W5YI was taking advantage of everyone and trying to get rich. $6 isn't much for this service, and considering there's a staff to take care of.
Mark
WA9SVD
09-13-2003, 07:21 PM
Mark,
One further point. Part §97.527 does indeed provide for the VE's to collect a fee, up to the maximum set by the FCC, but the rules specify that the fee is for expenses directly related to administering examinations. Unless the rules have changed recently, it does NOT specify that a fee can be charged for other "services," and evidently does not necessarily authorize such fees or services.
I don't object to the charging of a fee. If they provide a service, they are entitled, whether it be the ARRL, W5YI, QRZ, or anyone else. I just wish the group involved had been a bit more informative about the renewal process and options.
WA9SVD
09-13-2003, 08:07 PM
Mark,
An apology is in order. At the time in question, (1994)the fee requested by W5YI group was $5, not $10. And there was a mention that the fee went to W5YI, not the FCC.
I found some of the materials from my last renewal: (ca. 1994)
1. The ARRL sent a complete form 610 (applicable at that time) including the instruction page, AND an addressed envelope (but not stamped) to the FCC. Granted, this was a service provided to members of ARRL. But renewal was just fill in the form, include a copy of your license, stick a stamp on the envelope, and you were through.
The material I received from W5YI was only part of form 610; the front (information) page, but NOT the instruction page, that was included with the form I received from the ARRL or the FCC itself. (Only the instruction page provided the FCC address to be used for renewals.)
Instead, W5YI made up their own instruction sheet, with the instructions to "SEND THIS LETTER, FCC FORM 610, AND A COPY OF YOUR LICENSE ALONG WITH THE $5.00 FEE IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE TODAY!"
There was no mention that renewal could be done by a private party, or sent to an FCC address, and the instruction page was conveniently detached from the form 610 I received from W5YI, yet WERE included in the form 610 I received from the ARRL AND from the FCC.
So I still feel they were a bit misleading, at best. And the original "letter' from W5YI group had LARGE letters all over, saying "Urgent alert!" Your Amateur radio Operator License is about to EXPIRE! On the OUTSIDE of the envelope.
If you wish, I can send (via snail mail at present) copies of the documents I received from both organizations. Or contact me via e-mail. I don't want to clutter things up further here on QRZ.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wa9svd @ Sep. 13 2003,12:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One further point. Part §97.527 does indeed provide for the VE's to collect a fee, up to the maximum set by the FCC, but the rules specify that the fee is for expenses directly related to administering examinations. Unless the rules have changed recently, it does NOT specify that a fee can be charged for other "services," and evidently does not necessarily authorize such fees or services.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
The conclusion you are drawing here (that W5YI is not authorized to charge for services other than VE sessions) would also be an indictment of ARRL for charging non-members for the same "other services."
But, I don't believe this conclusion is correct in either case. They (W5YI or ARRL) are not doing anything wrong. They work directly with the FCC, so if it was wrong, I'm sure they would have been caught by the FCC by now.
Mark
WA9SVD
09-15-2003, 01:06 AM
Mark,
I didn't really mean to say that they are doing anything wrong; if they provide a service for renewal they have a right to charge a reasonable fee, but that's not set by the FCC. But my point was that the ARRL said send it to the FCC, at the cost of a stamp. The package from W5YI said the $5 fee WAS for processing and kept by W5YI, not the FCC. (That's the same as the VE fee for exams. The FCC doesn't get any of that money, either. But the VE exam fee isn't "optional," [unless the VE's decide to waive or reduce the exam fee from the maximum.]) The fact they did not provide the FCC's copy of the instructions but rather substituted their own instruction sheet, and conveniently omitted the FCC address for renewals, and only provided the W5YI address was a bit annoying, and I think the renewal information should have at least pointed out that the fee-based service was optional, and provided the proper address to the FCC. Again, the renewal information and form 610 was unsolicited. If I had contacted W5YI and ASKED for a renewal package, then I would certainly say I should have paid the fee, and renewed through their service.
Sorry we disagree on the point. QRZ is a great site, and please keep up the good, no GREAT work.
73