SB QST @ ARL $ARLB065 ARLB065 FCC issues errata on streamlining NPRM ZCZC AG65 QST de W1AW ARRL Bulletin 65 ARLB065 From ARRL Headquarters Newington CT September 2, 1998 To all radio amateurs SB QST ARL ARLB065 ARLB065 FCC issues errata on streamlining NPRM The FCC has issued some corrections and clarifications to its recent Amateur Radio rules ''streamlining'' proposal, WT Docket 98-143. The 13-page Errata document addresses most of the questions and confusion raised by the original NPRM, released in early August. The FCC said the corrections were issued ''to conform the proposed rules to the proposals discussed in the text of the Notice.'' The FCC noted that in some instances the NPRM included sections of rules they did not propose to change. These have been deleted, and only sections of the rules where changes have been proposed remain. A major change from the original rulemaking proposal was to effectively reinstate the language in Section 97.505(a)(10)--the provisions for a physician's certification that an applicant is unable to pass a 13 or 20 WPM telegraphy examination. In the NPRM text, the FCC invited comment on this issue and on an earlier ARRL proposal, RM-9196. The ARRL had asked the FCC to require anyone applying for an exemption pursuant to a doctor's certification to first attempt the higher-speed test before getting exam credit. The Errata also clarify the Commission's intention to retain the current 365-day time limit for a Certificate of Successful Completion of Examination (CSCE) to remain valid. The FCC also has added the words ''Element 1(A), 1(B) or 1(C)'' to Section 97.301(e), referring to the 5, 13, and 20 WPM code examination elements, respectively. While this clarifies the need to at least have credit for the 5 WPM Morse code examination to gain Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges, neither the original NPRM nor the Errata list Element 1(A)--the 5 WPM code test--as a specific requirement for any license class. The FCC appears to be proposing to provide that a Technician licensee could gain HF privileges by passing a 5 WPM code test, but how this would actually be done in practice remains unclear. The FCC describes elsewhere in its proposed rules how applicants may claim credit for Element 1(A), however. A proposed change at Section 97.507(d) that would have substituted the words ''no less than 5 WPM'' has been dropped. The current wording says ''no less than the prescribed speed.'' The FCC also addressed apparently inadvertent rules changes in the NPRM to Section 97.305. Under the Errata, no changes are proposed. Language in the NPRM would have eliminated Extra class phone and image privileges in the 20 and 15-meter Extra class phone subbands and data privileges in the 20 and 15-meter Extra class CW subbands. In addition, the NPRM would have dropped data privileges from Novices and phone privileges for current Tech Plus operators on 10 meters. The FCC also eliminated all proposed changes to Section 97.307, including wording that seemingly would have limited Novice CW operation to ''only messages sent by hand.'' The FCC's Errata also indicate that the Commission intended to retain the current 200 W PEP power limit on the current Novice/Tech Plus HF bands (and on the 30 meter band and on 7.050-7.075 MHz within Region 1 or 3) in Section 97.313. The NPRM had proposed imposing the 200 W PEP power restriction on HF only when the control operator is a Novice. The FCC also made it clear that someone holding a Technician class license granted before February 14, 1991, could get examination credit for written Element 3(A). The Errata also add Element 1(B), the 13 WPM code test, to the elements that may be prepared by an Advanced class Volunteer Examiner. The Errata also correct several apparent typographical errors and make other relatively minor changes to the original NPRM. The Errata fail to address another discrepancy in the NPRM that was raised by the ARRL. The NPRM gives an applicant who held a Technician license (expired or otherwise) granted before March 21, 1987, examination credit for written Element 3(B). But the proposed rules do not extend similar credit to an applicant who had held a General or higher class license, once the grace period is past. NNNN /EX