ARRL Encouraging Amateurs to File Comments Opposing FCC Fee Proposal

You are only considering people that are currently licensed and quite active in the hobby. Those people will readily pay whatever it takes.

But those that are less active, and those who don't yet have a license will be put off by the fee, to some extent or another. Many people simply will not join up, and many will let their licenses lapse. These two things are not good, in fact they are bad consequences of the implementation of this new law.

Many here only see it from a licensed ham perspective, but the implications will be severe.

 

If that can be pulled off successfully, that ought to qualify for an Extra Plus license

 

From a perspective of one who works in Washington, major organizations that are seeking to respond to a NPRM almost never file comments until the day the comments are due. Filing "early" allows opposing parties to file rebuttal comments in their affirmative comments and then get another opportunity in the rebuttal stage. The proverbial two bites at the apple...

And, I agree with N1FM. Federal agency staff involved in vetting comments during rulemaking proceedings often treat parroted, brief comments as one comment.

 

Does this mean that the FCC will be policing the ham bands again?

 

Well here I go, and I am ready for the hate mail.

In today's electronic competitive world, it would seem that the FCC is under constant pressure to free up radio frequency to cooperation that are willing to pay large fees for some of the frequencies we use.

Can you imagine seeing the spokes person for the FCC standing up in a business board meeting with a few tech giants breathing down his collar bidding for portions of a band or bands the we as amateur radio operators use and pay nothing for the use of, trying to explain why the amateur operators do not need to pay any kind of fee.

Look at it from a business perspective, it does not make since to allocate band privileges to a group that contributes nothing monetarily speaking to the government for these privileges when these frequencies can be allocated to corporations that will add millions of moneys to the FCC's coffers.

Be kinda hard to explain this to your boss why you are turning down millions of dollars for a hand full of individuals hobby.

I know it is more than just a hobby, to me anyway, and I am not loaded with money, I am a retired machinist, living on a small pension, and I pay more taxes then I think I ott to.

Maybe buy paying a small fee of $5.00 a year will give us some advantages when corporations are negotiating for band privileges.
We can then stand up and say we pay for these privileges, you can not just take this away so easily, maybe this would give us a leg to stand on.

And as far as a new perspective amateur radio operators, paying a fee of $50.00 for a ten year licenses, well if He or She is a school age person I would suggest they join a radio club and I would suggest that club Elmer that young person and if need be could chip in a few bucks to help pay the $50.00 fee.

I know when I was a young boy and I wanted that $150.00 bicycle I mowed lawns, cleaned up yards and earned enough money to buy the bicycle.

Did I take of that bike, I sure did, I did because I knew what it took to get it.
Maybe the same for a Radio licenses.

My two cents, now I am ready for the ridicule.

 

why does everything have to be reduced to $$$? that is a logical fallacy, equivalency, look it up. Your argument is wrong, dismissed!

the RF spectrum belongs to us, the People, and is a natural resource. How about setting aside some of it for public good? You know, like parks and recreation areas, forests, things you might enjoy.

(indeed, I don't agree that the gov't has any right to sell my natural resource, but that's a different discussion.)

 

Yep.

Also, its being assessed as an APPLICATION FEE.

THAT MEANS, for example, if you take a test and FAIL, you have to PAY IT EACH TIME YOU HAVE AN APPLICATION.

(SOME of )you guys are NOT thinking about 'newbies'. OR upgrades...

I don't see why you guys are emphasizing the '$5 per stuff' stuff... that's only on a RENEWAL. Or a first-out successful PASS on a SPECIFIC test.

SO each time you pass and UPGRADE you PAY $50. If you FAIL you are out of pocket....

Here is a more likely cost EXAMPLE....

TOOK TECH, passed: $50
TOOK GEN(later), failed: $50
TOOK GEN again, passed: $50
TOOK EXTRA (later), passed: $50
-----------------------------------------------------------
$200

The new application fee would be a tremendous detriment to upgrading, and will discourage those who have any doubts about passing. That is a HORRIBLE situation to put us in!

 

Lack of leadership that brought this to the docket in the first place.

 

HERE is how the ARRL (nicely) summarized the application fees proposed scope (below).....

PLEASE get out of this 'only $5 per year' loop. That's only if you are RENEWING.

OK?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Under the proposal, amateur radio licensees would pay a $50 fee for each amateur radio application for new licenses, license renewals, upgrades to existing licenses, and vanity call sign requests. "

 

Taking a test and failing would result in a fee only to the Volunteer Examiner team. There would be no application, renewal, or upgrade, therefore, no $50 fee to be paid to the FCC. Only vanity callsign requests would incur the fee regardless of whether they were granted or not. A $50 fee would be assessed for successfully passing a new license test, upgrading to a higher class license, and modifications to an existing license, such as a name or address change.

The only recurring fee would be for the renewal of an existing license, which would amount to $5 per year.

If a prospective ham can't afford to pay the proposed application and upgrade fees, he probably can't afford to enter and remain in the hobby. (I know, "it's a service, not a hobby") If a prospective ham doesn't want to pay the fee to enter or remain in the hobby, he probably isn't that enthusiastic about ham radio in the first place.

 

Thanks for the correction: you are saying the FAILURE of a test does NOT produce an FCC application...correct?

 

Yes, that is correct. Under the current VE system, failed tests for a new ham license, or failed tests for an upgrade to an existing ham license, are not submitted to the FCC. The failed test will incurr a fee from the VE, but not from the FCC.

 

The NPRM says that they do not plan to assess a fee for what they call "administrative updates", which includes address and name changes.

 

Again, thanks for that clarification.

 

Thanks for the correction, I missed that one.