New NCVEC 605 form bears serious consequences for those convicted of a felony

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by W2AI, Aug 17, 2017.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: l-assoc
ad: L-MFJ
  1. K1FBI

    K1FBI Ham Member QRZ Page

    Get rid of those no coders, get rid of those felons, get rid of those ESSB people, get rid of those on 75 meters.

    Soon you can go on the air and talk to yourself.
    Oh wait, that would be a broadcast and they would take your license too.
    K8PG, WU8Y and WZ7U like this.
  2. W3MMM

    W3MMM Ham Member QRZ Page

    The title:

    New NCVEC 605 form bears serious consequences for those convicted of a felony

    Is misleading.

    The new form asks "have you been convicted of a felony" (yes/no). If the answer is "yes" then the applicant sends info to the FCC about the felony, such that the FCC can determine if the applicant is eligible to hold that license under the Communications Act.

    Right off the bat, the form itself does not "bear serious consequences". In fact it seems that even with a "yes" answer, there may be no consequences at all, except a delay in granting the license.

    So let's look at the Communications Act, as is provides us guidance on what the FCC will be looking for when reviewing the information the applicant provides relating to their felony. Italics are mine:

    308 (b) All applications for station licenses, or modifications or renewals thereof, shall set forth such facts as the Commission by regulation may prescribe as to the citizenship, character, and financial, technical, and other qualifications of the applicant to operate the station; the ownership and location of the proposed station and of the stations, if any, with which it is proposed to communicate; the frequencies and the power desired to be used; the hours of the day or other periods of time during which it is proposed to operate the station; the purposes for which the station is to be used; and such other information as it may require. The Commission, at any time after the filing of such original application and during the term of any such licenses, may require from an applicant or licensee further written statements of fact to enable it to determine whether such original application should be granted or denied or such license revoked. Such application and/or such statement of fact shall be signed by the applicant and/or licensee in any manner or form, including by electronic means, as the Commission may prescribe by regulation.

    310 (d) No construction permit or station license, or any rights thereunder, shall be transferred, assigned, or disposed of in any manner, voluntarily or involuntarily, directly or indirectly, or by transfer of control of any corporation holding such permit or license, to any person except upon application to the Commission and upon finding by the Commission that the public interest, convenience, and necessity will be served thereby. Any such application shall be disposed of as if the proposed transferee or assignee were making application under section 308 for the permit or license in question; but in acting thereon the Commission may not consider whether the public interest, convenience, and necessity might be served by the transfer, assignment, or disposal of the permit or license to a person other than the proposed transferee or assignee.

    These are the clauses cited as necessary for the change to the form, and the change makes our forms consistent with similar forms used for other licensed services.

    At their root, one of the FCC's (and here I will paraphrase) missions is to oversee and protect our airwaves, a limited resource. Which is why we have licenses in the first place - if the resource were unlimited, or not valued, we may not have an FCC nor care what happens on them. But we do.

    I'm not a particular fan of this, and I doubt that the FCC is getting extra funding for the extra burden this will bring with it. However, this kind of thing is certainly within their mission and...if they aren't doing their mission they'll have much bigger issues than an unfunded mandate.
    N0NB and KE9EX like this.
  3. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    "First they came for the felons, then they came for the QRMers, ..." Nevermind.

    They already came for the no-coders and the people who haven't upgraded to Extra in the 10y cycle since the 2005 FCC R&O phasing out new Novice and Advanced licenses. Good grief. Talk about intolerance. Unbelievable.

    This whole idea of denial of federal benefits might actually be useful and effective if the US criminal justice system didn't have such a high false-positive rate for convictions.
    K6TEP and W4IOA like this.
  4. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Yes, it's an overall federal policy. Good or bad.
  5. W2AI

    W2AI XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I'm only the messenger conveying the news. That's what these forums are all about. Free exchange of information.:)
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2017
  6. W3MMM

    W3MMM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Yeah, that's it.

    On the surface, I'm not a big fan of this approach. However, I get that the FCC would do this simply for consistency's sake, so as to defend their doing it with other services where it does matter more.

    I can also imagine the 1 case in 10 years where an applicant has a relevant felony and the FCC really should deny the application...and this change gives them the mechanism to do so. The juice is hardly worth the squeeze though.
    N1FMV likes this.
  7. W2AI

    W2AI XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    You're correct. I should have written, "Filing the revised NCVEC 605 form MAY have serious consequences for those convicted of a felony upon review by the FCC." I attempted to keep the title of the posting short. Unfortuately, comments posted on the ZED have a 30 minute time-frame to edit the post.
  8. KF5FEI

    KF5FEI Ham Member QRZ Page

    As long as the VEs don't have to see or deal with the explanation themselves -- that would be very awkward.

    ...And thank Jeebus, sheep can't talk!
  9. W2AI

    W2AI XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    But the thing about that is the criminal conviction written explanation, itself, becomes public record and will be posted on the licensee's ULS data record unless the licensee provides the FCC with an additional explanation as to why this information should remain confidentially treated.
  10. W2AI

    W2AI XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Actually, the Felony conviction question first appeared on FCC Amateur Radio Station/ license application Form 610 in 1963. In 1977, the 610 form was revised and the felony conviction question was removed.

Share This Page