No subject

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

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) regarding the ARRL 2004 Licensing
Restructuring Proposal

The ARRL is petitioning the FCC to streamline the Amateur Radio licensing
system, a process the Commission began more than five years ago but left
unfinished in the last license restructuring (WT Docket 98-143) that went
into effect April 15, 2000. Based in part on the actions of World
Radiocommunication Conference 2003 (WRC-03) that deleted the international
Radio Regulations requirement for amateur applicants to demonstrate Morse
code ability for HF access, the League will ask the FCC to consolidate all
current licensees into three classes, retaining the Element 1 Morse
requirement--now 5 WPM--only for the highest class. The ARRL Board of
Directors approved the plan January 16, 2004, during its Annual Meeting in
Windsor, Connecticut.
If you have questions this FAQ does not cover, please send them to John
Hennessee, N1KB, n1kb at arrl.org at ARRL Headquarters. If you'd like to share
an opinion on this plan, please , contact your ARRL Division Director.


What are the essentials of the ARRL restructuring proposal?


A three-tiered licensing structure

A new and improved entry class license

Two licenses permitting HF access without a Morse code test

Retention of the 5 WPM Morse code test for our highest license
class--Amateur Extra

Existing Novices migrate into the "new" Novice class

Merging all Technician licensees, whether or not they passed a Morse code
exam, into General

Merging Advanced class amateurs into Amateur Extra


The FCC restructured Amateur Radio licensing in 2000. Why do we need another
restructuring?

The FCC did not finish the job in 2000. In particular, there is a need for a
new entry-level Amateur Radio license. The Novice license served
successfully as an introduction to Amateur Radio for most of its 50-year
history. The April 2000 license restructuring did away with the Novice
license and put nothing comparable in its place--making the Technician
license the de facto entry-level ticket.

The Technician license is far from "entry level" in the scope of privileges
it grants. These include authorization to run up to 1500 W PEP on VHF and
UHF bands, allowing all permitted modes of operation, including the ability
to control a satellite station. For most of those coming into the hobby
today, however, the Technician license provides few opportunities to
experience facets of ham radio beyond repeater operation. The quality of
that experience can vary widely depending on where the operator lives. More
important, many Technician class licensees lose interest or do not upgrade.

The ARRL Board's proposal seeks a newcomer's ticket for the 21st century
that offers the opportunity for today's beginners to sample a wider range of
Amateur Radio activity than current Technicians may, while still retaining a
motivation to upgrade. Limiting the scope of privileges means the license
examination does not have to include material inappropriate at the entry
level.

Under this plan, current Novice licensees--now the smallest and least active
group of radio amateurs--would be moved to the new entry-level class without
further testing.


This sounds like just another plan for the ARRL to sign up more members and
for the ham radio manufacturers to line their pockets from the sale of new
HF gear.

While money and enhanced equipment sales were not the motivations behind
this proposal, ARRL membership support is important, and so is a healthy
Amateur Radio industry. Were this proposal to result in additional ARRL
members and increased equipment sales, those outcomes certainly would work
to the advantage of the entire amateur community.

An ARRL with more members means a stronger organization that will be able to
even more effectively represent the interests of members and advocate for
the Amateur Service at large.

More Amateur Radio activity and the potential for increased equipment sales
would be good for everyone. A healthy and growing Amateur Radio market would
provide companies serving our interests with an incentive to do even more.
Incidentally, if this proposal becomes effective, it could boost the used
equipment market too.


How do you respond to those who say this ARRL proposal is further "dumbing
down" of the requirements to become a radio amateur?

Our research indicates that many newer amateurs--especially younger hams and
those who are not very active--feel the material they studied to get
licensed was not relevant to the activities available. As a result, they
have lost interest. Amateur Radio is not growing. Amateurs are less active
today than in the past. The average age of radio amateurs is increasing. A
very high percentage of current Novice and Technician licensees are not
active. All of these trends support the need for an updated approach to
licensing that makes sense to the prospective amateurs of today.

Change is a scary thing, and a lot of current amateurs feel threatened by
it. Many believe it's somehow unfair if newcomers don't have to clear the
same hurdles they did to get licensed. The fact is that the examination bar
has never been at a uniform height over ham radio's nearly 100-year history.
Current license holders do often perceive, however, that it was harder to
get a ham ticket in the "good old days" than it is today. But a review of
license manual material over the years will show that not much has changed
in terms of examination complexity, although technology has.

Passing any amateur examination does not magically result in a good
operator. It's just the key to the kingdom, so to speak. Experience and good
mentoring create skillful and knowledgeable operators, not the relative
difficulty or ease of the test. From late 1933 until 1942, for example, the
tests for the Amateur Radio license classes then in existence (essentially
two) required answering 10 questions out of a very small question pool!