ARRL Petitions FCC for HF Phone Privileges for Technicians

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by K4KYV, Mar 1, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
  1. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    These are not FCC rules, they are FCC policies. Rules are harder to change. Policies can be changed at a whim, or overnight.
  2. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Here's how that conversation should go...

    "So, if I get the license, I can talk all over the world?", like they've seen me doing.

    "Yes, if you get the General license, you can talk all over the world, from your house, using simple antennas..."

    "Cool..." :cool:
  3. WE4B

    WE4B Ham Member QRZ Page

    It would be interesting to see what makes people want to become a ham. For me, it was SWL and listening to police scanners as a youth.
    AC0GT likes this.
  4. K4KYV

    K4KYV Premium Subscriber Volunteer Moderator QRZ Page

    The only reason that 10m restriction is there is that it was first proposed in ARRL's Novice Enhancement petition, and the FCC went along with it, over (unwarranted, IMO) concern over CBers abusing the new privileges. Phone privileges on 80, 40 and 15 has nothing to do with CB, and the League gave no reason for extending the restriction to the hypothetical HF Technician expansion.

    One question regarding this whole proposal, if Technicians are not upgrading in sufficient numbers to General at present, wouldn't giving them voice privileges on HF make them even less prone to want to upgrade to General?

    I doubt this would entice very many potential ham radio newcomers to take out a Tech ticket, but I'm wondering how many "good buddies" who used to hang out on 2m repeaters before they got bored, would take a renewed interest enough to buy a plastic radio to get on the air on 75m and 40m slopbucket, but see no need to take the simple written test required to upgrade to General, and how would this be in the "public interest"?
  5. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Um, no, they're rules. See 47 CFR 97.301, 97.501 and 97.503, for example.

    Even if it was just policy, when an Administrative Agency sets out the conditions for changing a policy, and those conditions aren't met by a petitioner, the petition gets denied. That's how Administrative Law works. Changes have to be consistent with the enabling legislation, and existing rules within the Agency. Otherwise, the Agency can be sued for not following their own rules and/or policies and/or procedures. That's basically the only time an Administrative Agency can be sued, in fact.
  6. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    My thought is that adding these privileges would increase the incentive to upgrade. If a person never experiences HF, then there is no desire to operate HF. If a person has a usable space to operate on, he may decide to purchase a radio and use those privileges. Once he is active on some HF bands, and already possessing a radio capable of other bands, he will be more enticed to upgrade to get new bands and allocations.

    I'm not so sure the people hanging out on 2M are of any worse character than people that hang out on 75 or 40 already, so I don't know that is even an issue. The idea is to keep new licensees active, rather than drop out of the hobby because of disinterest. A person is not likely to upgrade if they have not had a positive experience in their entry level condition.
  7. W1VT

    W1VT Ham Member QRZ Page

    I remember some pretty awesome conditions on 10 meters--aren't they going to return if I wait long enough?
  8. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well those are the rules based on the policies enacted by the FCC. The policies are outlined in their NPRM's and other documents. The policies that you point out of not allowing techs expanded access to HF, since they can easily upgrade to general. That is a policy that they base their rulemeaking on.

    But that policy can change, if and when they want it to, for any reason. At the point that the policy changes, the rules are then subject to change, based on the new policy.

    That may or may not be true. But we all know that policies change overnight. Policies for federal agencies changed drastically when the new president took office. Some of the policy changes were 180 degree reversals. Some of them were challenged. But for relatively insignificant hobby regulations there probably won't be a lot of fallout.
  9. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page



    That's unclear at this point. ;)

    I guess if your antenna has a low-enough take-off angle, 10m is open a lot, regardless of the SSN. :cool:
  10. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Techs already have access to HF. You really don't do facts very well, do you? ;)

    Yes, it can, but only if it is done in a way that is consistent with existing policy and rules. The FCC explained what would be required in order for a petition for more HF access for Techs to be successful. To date, no such petition has addressed those requirements, and as such, they are going to fail. The FCC can't just turn on a dime -- they have to rule consistent with their own existing rules. The ARRL's most recent petition doesn't meet that standard, so it will fail, wasting a lot of time, money and other resources that they can't afford to lose.

    If you want to add more HF privileges to Technician licensees, you need to meet the standard that FCC set out, in their repeated rulings on the subject, for making those changes. ARRL's petition doesn't even come close.
    Then maybe you need to petition the President, rather than the FCC. :)

    Even with executive orders, rules have to be self-consistent. FCC rules on this matter are not going to change until the necessary prerequisites are met. To date, no petition has been offered that does that.
    WE4B likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page