Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What ever happened to the petition?  (Read 4895 times)
W4AN
Administrator

Posts: 94



« on: April 21, 2000, 03:33:59 PM »

Anyone know what ever happened to the petition that was sent to the FCC regarding restructuring?  Has there ever been anything said since then about it?  Maybe I missed it.

73
Logged
N0OFR
Member

Posts: 3




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2000, 01:13:59 PM »

I do not believe the FCC has acted on it.
Logged
NW7US
Member

Posts: 14


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2000, 01:43:53 PM »

Comments are still being solicited until late summer, 2000.  See http://www.qsl.net/n9bor/restructure.htm#Petition - look for the Feb 2000 news item.  August is the new cutoff date.

Logged

N5LF
Member

Posts: 15


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2000, 11:06:39 AM »

The Wormser, Adsit, & Dinelli petition for partial reconsideration is still under consideration by the FCC.  We've been told to expect it to be reviewed in the summer of 2000.  To read the petition (these 'petitions' actually are legal briefs), look at

http://www.qsl.net/n5lf

The FCC published a notice of the petitions in the Federal Register Apr. 25, 2000.  Opposition comments must be received by May 10 (15 days after the Fed. Reg. notice).  Replies by petitioners are due May 20 (10 days later).  These timelines are in the FCC's procedural regs.

The regs. do not mention how they handle comments supporting a petition -- only oppositions.  *BUT* the FCC does notice the fact that over 150 letters of support have been filed with them.  So, support comments do have an impact and become part of the public record.

All three of us petition authors want to stress the fact that whether or not you agree with the petition, we all absolutely must stand together, hand in hand, to welcome and encourage the newcomers in amateur radio!

Alan N5LF
Logged
Guest

« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2000, 12:20:03 PM »

The petitions are hopefully dying a quick death.  With the number of people who upgraded on April 15th or in the weeks since then, it looks like the alleged 150 comments in support of the Wormser petition are far outweighed by the actions of the thousands of upgraded licenses...  

I've heard a lot intentional interference and bad behavior on the bands by CW diehards who have made rude comments or even dit-bombed people with /AG or /AE after their calls. I've been hit by it too, and it has the effect of making CW less attractive. Dit-bombing is when someone comes in on top of a SSB (or CW!) contact with high speed CW making rude comments about the new upgrade or just sending a string of dits at 20+ wpm.  I bet that most of the the people doing this type of CW activism are among the claimed group of pro-Wormser commentators.


Logged
WD4NGB
Member

Posts: 13


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2000, 03:28:30 PM »

It took over a year from the cut off date on the last one, so I would not expect anything soon....
Logged
N2MG
Administrator

Posts: 0



« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2000, 09:19:11 AM »

"Dit-bombing" by the "claimed group of pro-Wormser commentators"?  This would be considered libelous by some...

If interested in reading the comments, go to

http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html

and click on "Search the ECFS system"

and enter 98-143 as the "Proceeding".

Better yet, make your position known by sending the FCC your own comments, pro or con.  Click on "Send a Comment..." and follow the directions.

Be sure to read N5LF's earlier post for a link to the original petition.

73
Mike
Logged
KF4MFQ
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: June 23, 2000, 03:11:39 PM »

I have not experienced any "dit-bombing" or any other form of intentional interference over my /AG call.  In fact, all of the OM's I've had QSOs with since my upgrade have been very supportive and helpful in welcoming me as a new General.

On another note, I'd like to thank Alan N5LF for the QSOs with our Pack 89 JOTA Operation last year.  That was my first JOTA activity, which I ran alone as the only licenced control operator and Alan passed out several QSOs with the kids.  Then, he was one of the few that returned our QSLs!

Thanks, Alan for representing the hobby so well for the benefit of the Scouts.

73 de Chris, KF4MFQ
Logged
KB9NGI
Member

Posts: 11




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2000, 01:18:59 PM »

The ARRL reported that all three reconsideration petetions were dismissed on technical grounds such as being filed to late or otherwise being flawed.   FCC notes indicate that to the extent they considered content, the FCC staff was not impressed by the filings and would have recommended they be dismissed in any case.


FWIW
73
de KB9NGI
Logged
N5LF
Member

Posts: 15


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #9 on: September 22, 2000, 11:56:16 AM »

As of September 22, 2000, the Petition for Reconsideration is STILL under active FCC review.  

The rejected petitions reported by the ARRL were three OTHER petitions (and three separate petitions)--not the Wormser, Adsit & Dinelli Petition for Reconsideration.

You can still read the Petition for Reconsideration at

http://www.qsl.net/n5lf

73 y'all!
Alan N5LF
n5lf@arrl.net
Logged
NM5A
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2000, 05:12:53 PM »

I'll be honest, I read the petition and see it as a last polite cough of the Old Guard.  

I can support having the FCC retain oversight of the question pool.

I can support limiting the number of "do-overs" at an exam session, though it has always been in the power of the VE's to refuse a re-test and I suppose I'd rather leave it up to the examiners than have it codified by the FCC.

Too many Extras have been processed to roll the 20wpm test back in. It's gone for good (and I do mean good.)

The Tech-plus database question is moot.

And if it was up to me, there'd be no exam credit for the 5wpm on expired licenses -- if you let your license lapse, take it again: it's only five minutes.

Logged
K4NR
Member

Posts: 32


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2000, 09:53:03 AM »

Dit-bombing?  Try posting a name and callsign rather than an anonymous troll...

73 de Tom, K4NR
Logged
N6JSX
Member

Posts: 217




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2001, 10:53:19 PM »

I have a procedural question to ask. When the FCC restructured the recent HAM licensing were we ever allowed to file comments on the "ACTUAL" changes before the FCC set the effectivity date?

I remember the FCC soliciting comments for consideration before they made their changes - but I never saw an actual FCC decree of changes - and then allowing HAMdom to comment BEFORE setting THE date. It seems as though the ONLY party in the know was the ARRL and they wanted this restructuring to gain more memberships/$alaries.

Is this still a democracy? Or are the FCC, Kings - that once they rule it is law with no recourse?

Oh, and yes - I'm still mad about how cheap they made the new CB Extra and in the process totally rejecting and snubbing the Advanced license holders!

73, Kuby, N6JSX/8 (Advanced class for life)
Logged

N5LF
Member

Posts: 15


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #13 on: April 13, 2001, 01:02:28 PM »

Well folks, the FCC has published their Memorandum and Order on the Petitions for Reconsideration. No big changes were made by the FCC over the earlier Report & Order from December 1999.  We followed the process through, the FCC read our recommendations and responded, and the final rules will be published regarding the restructuring of the Amateur Radio Service.

Now, we hams have a lot of work ahead of us. Let's pull together and do what hams have done for almost a century:  Get on the air, explore, teach each other, learn from each other, welcome newcomers and honor the OM & OG operators.  

Let's share the fascination we all have in radio communications, propagation, operator skills, and technology.  We are in this together for the long haul.

73 ES dit dit,

Alan N5LF
Logged
Guest

« Reply #14 on: April 14, 2001, 09:30:16 PM »

With the petition for reconsideration on restructuring dead, now is the time for those who still think CW is worthwhile to get in gear and actually prove it.  How about some slow speed nets to help people gain proficiency?  How about adding to the already impressive roster of QRP CW only rigs with some new kit efforts?  (Anybody from F.I.S.T.S. listening?)  If some reasonable efforts were made to actually use CW for something interesting then you won't be able to get people to stop using it!

Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!