I cadged this off QRZ.Com, but am requesting the permission of the author, Michelle Bradley, KU3N, founder of REC Networks.
On Wednesday, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in MD Docket 20-270 which implements portions of the Repack Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services Act of 2018 (or RAY BAUM’S Act), which gives the FCC statutory authority to collect application fees. As a part of the Act, the FCC is required to switch from a fee structure mandated by Congress 20 years ago to a new cost-based system. This change will result in some fees being reduced and in some cases, such as the Amateur Radio Service, new fees are being added.
Proposed new fees for Amateur Radio and reduction in GMRS fees
Section 8 of the RAY BAUM’S Act does not provide any kind of statutory exemption for filing fees in the Amateur Radio Service, which, historically has had no filing fees. Citing the costs involved in the automated processes, routine maintenance of the Commission’s Universal Licensing System (ULS) and limited instances where staff needs to be involved in the application process, the FCC is proposing an across-the-board fee of $50 for new and modified licenses in the personal radio services, which includes Amateur Radio and the General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS). For GMRS, this is a reduction of the current $70 fee. The FCC also proposes these fees for license renewals and requests for vanity call signs, the latter which had its filing fee eliminated several years ago. The FCC is proposing to still not charge for administrative updates, such as mailing address changes on amateur or GMRS applications. Amateur Radio will remain exempt from annual regulatory fees under Section 9 of the RAY BAUM’S Act.
Commenting on the changes
Once the NPRM is published in the Federal Register, filing deadlines for comments and reply comments will be established. Those dates will be announced by the FCC in a separate Public Notice. Comments will be accepted in the FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System under proceeding 20-270.
A copy of the NPRM, which includes the proposed fee structures, can be found here.
The RAY BAUM’S Act is part of Public Law 115-141 and can be found in this PDF document starting on page 734 (Division P). The relevant part of the law starts on Page 736, under Section 8.
Link to full article at REC Networks, which also discusses fee changes for commercial broadcast radio can be found at https://recnet.com/node/3182
Rob W4ZNG says
The biggest concern I have here is the effect on young prospective operators. The extra $50 is a lot of money for a 10 year old to scrape up (even if just wheedling it out of the parents). It would be good if the FCC had a much lower fee for minors.
Thanks for pointing out the proposed change and upcoming comment period.
Steve Goodgame K5ATA says
$50 pretty much takes my kids out of the game. I had 26 middle and high schoolers earn their licenses last school year. At $50 a pop I might have had 3. Pfft.
DC says
It does say “Amateur Radio will remain exempt from annual regulatory fees under Section 9 of the RAY BAUM’S Act.”
Kenneth Schildt says
If I know of a 10 year old who has studied to pass their license exam, I’ll pay the fee for them. Don’t be so cheap.
David Wasmer - AD0BE says
Over the last 15 years, the FCC has enjoyed an 80% increase in its annual budget. The FCC needs to have its budget cut, not increased.
The government doesn’t own the airways. We the people do and we delegate the management of our airways to our subordinate government. How did we allow the government to become so powerful that it can charge us fees for something it did not create and did not improve?
Portions of the airways should remain completely free from government fees and for use by the people, not by commercial or government interests. What’s next? Will the government charge us a “fee” to breathe the air that it did not create and did not improve? Will the government “grant” us air-breathing licenses so long as we pay their annual $50 fee?
Appropriately, the government charges fees for commercial use of the airways. This can and should cover the administrative and enforcement costs associated with managing our airways.
Appropriately, low power bands, such as the citizen’s band, require no license. Operators of higher power bands, the Ham bands, run the risk of interfering not just with other Ham operators on the same band but with other electronic devices such as televisions and computers. It is appropriate that a certain level of knowledge be demonstrated before one can operate at these higher power levels. But the amateur community does this on a voluntarily. The government cannot justify charging even one penny for a Ham license.
Walter Un says
If renewals cost $50, we’ll find out how many active amateurs we really have. Even after a year we’ll know the percentage.
Maybe the last Novice licensee will give up and we can simplify the band plans.
For new hams, especially young hams, this is a great opportunity for a club to sponsor license scholarships. I can see club members donating to a special scholarship fund. Welcome young members, pay some or all of their license fee, and get them on the air.
Lynn Lewis says
I think there should be no fees except for commercial licenses. It is very hard for seniors on social security to come up with extra cost of any kind.
Anonymous says
Same for this that are on disability like myself. Or even kids that I have Elmer and got into the hobby.
Anonymous says
During a pandemic with one parent or both are out of work this is an insult
Kenneth Gocha says
I believe this is one step that will drive a lot of potential new amateur radio operators away. They will turn to GMRS for the same price so they can avoid testing. This will hurt emergency and volunteer based communications in the long run.
Eric Burke says
This is the comment I just submitted to the FCC, feel free to borrow as you wish. I will post separately the method to submit a comment as it contains a link and I don’t know what this pages rules are on links.
Whereas, the ULS (Universal Licensing System) is used for both Commercial and Amateur Radio Services, Specifically HAM Radio Operators,
and as the cost of maintaining the ULS is relatively fixed and incurs no significant additional burden placed on the system by Amateur Radio Operators,
and as Individual Armature Radio Operators are by definition “Small Entities”,
and as Amateur Radio Operators provide a significant public service in times of National and Local Emergencies,
and as Amateur Radio License testing is conducted by Volunteer Examiners at NO COST to the FCC,
and as Amateur Radio has a long history of self regulation and policing that occurs at NO COST to the FCC,
I propose that the suggested License Fees of $50 per license and any modification are Excessive and Burdensome to the individual operators and also negatively impacts the community by weakening an essential resource with a long history of Public Service.
As the RAY BAUM act mandates a fee be established for all licenses,
I propose the Fee for all New Amateur Radio Licenses be set at $10, and fees for Upgrades and Modifications be set at $5.
I feel that these fees will be far less burdensome to the Amateur Radio Community, and still be sufficient to offset any minor costs that Ham Radio Operators have upon the FCC.
Best Regards,
Eric Burke
K4RZM
In reference to:
FCC 20-116
MD Docket No. 20-270
Appendix B,
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
Section 38
38. This Notice seeks comment on new application fees and consolidating or deleting some existing application fees. The fees proposed in the Notice are based on the Commission’s costs in processing the applications. This is now required under section 8 of the Communications Act.152 In many instances, the proposed fees are much lower than current fees. In some cases, the proposed fees are similar to current fees or slightly higher. There are some new fees proposed for applications that previously had no fees. The Commission is required to base the fees on costs, but commenters may propose different calculations of cost that would result in lower fees.
Eric Burke says
Instructions for posted a comment on this proposal (it took me a minute to figure out)
Go to:
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/
On top bar, hit Search for Proceedings.
In Specify Proceeding, enter: 20-220, Hit Search
Click +Express on the next page next to the filing info.
Fill out the form on the following page (Hit Enter after typing your name to make it stick)
Hit the Submit buttons.
C Blanton KI5CWY says
I agree with W4ZNG, this is too much for younger ppl and some elderly that are on fixed budgets. The ARRL needs to come down on there price of membership also. But, we shouldn’t be lumped in with GMRS. We take tests, and for some; they aren’t that ez. I’ve seen 10 yr olds pass it so problem and I’ve seen 10 yrs old pass it, but really have to study hard.
Also, for club call signs: will this apply also? I think this is unnecessary! They have given Techs more of the bands on HF, and now want $ for something we work hard for. I disagree with this proposal in many ways.
Steve KJ7THC says
As a young ham who hails from australia, here we pay a lot and it took me a long time to save to get my license, why would you wanna copy such a bad system. I pay 56 dollars a year to keep my australian license but i spent 20 dollars and have my american call for life.
I say no to this.
Peter says
One sure way to kill a great hobby is to impose a cost. For those sitting in a position to impose these fees and making a great salary do you really think a teenager will spend $50 on a license? Pete WB2FAS,
Robert J Crowley says
You know that the ARRL and others will fight any fees for the ARS. This spectrum is supposed to be for the public use – and although places such as parks, the spectrum does not need any care to exist or be maintained. The so-called “ham radio frequencies” are really the domain of the public, allowing recreation, experimentation sport and social interaction at a time when it is most needed. If they want to “wash out” weak hands from their database, raising the fee to $50 is the way to do it. But for what purpose, Mr. Ajit Pai? What purpose?
Gilbert Kevin Stevenson says
It’s a shame how our federal government just totally changed amateur radio will never be the same again outrageous prices for testing pretty soon it will be like CB radio operation. Goodbye to HF goodbye to the hobby. 😢😢😢
Bob Rosander says
Nope
Edward Vivian says
The amateur radio service consists of individuals who are willing to go above and beyond the call of ordinary citizenship.
We are self-regulating and self-policing, and much voluntary time is invested.
the government should consider giving a stipend to those who maintain their amateur radio service licensure.
Richard Swanson says
This will also scare away Hams who are on a low retirement income.
Dan KB6NU says
Here’s something that the ARRL can do right now. Set up some kind of scholarship fund to help kids and low-income folks pay this fee.
John Rogers says
What about the fact that the amateur radio service is valueable in times of emergency and also supports many volunteer efforts, are they forgetting that?
Hope ARRL lobbies against this.
John Field says
This article leaves me confused am i going to have to pay 50 dollars every time I renew my license ill go back to 11 meters and be a renegade like my rebel brother .
Dustin says
All good comments no disrespect to the fcc but this is all uncalled for. For a prospect ham wanting to get his or her license is discouraging. I can a fee for testing which I gladly payed but this is ridiculous
Greg Pearce says
Exactly how are they “justifying” this fee increase? Seems like nothong more than another gov’t money grab. And a way to gradually reduce the number of folks who can communicate to the outside world…
Gary says
Here’s something the ARRL can do right now, fight this. There are FCC licenses out there that are paid for once and never again. The equipment for this hobby is expensive enough, getting the ticket to play the game shouldn’t be, especially for those on a limited income trying to enter the game. You want to kill the hobby for youths this is a great place to start
Tom Parkinson - KB8UUZ says
I read the proposal completely. The only mention of a new fee for Amateur Radio is the Vanity Call Sign application. I did not see anything that said they are proposing a fee for a new (regular) Amateur Radio license, nor any fees for any renewals.
Chuck says
“Citing the costs involved in the automated processes.. etc, etc, etc. I hope no one’s buying into this. I’ve been reading articles raising the concern that new technology, among other things, is outdating ham radio and causing concern that the hobby is dying. This is no time to make these sorts of fee changes. At least not in the direction they’re proposing…
Ria Jairam N2RJ says
I personally don’t support this for new licenses, nor for renewals of non-vanity calls. Vanity calls as a one time fee? I’m kind of on the fence. It would help discourage people who hoard valuable 1×1 calls, making it expensive for them to do so. If you don’t want to pay the fee, then keep your assigned call. I paid $20 for a vanity without hesitation back in the day. It was the one I wanted and it was a good decision, and not frivolous.
This is my personal opinion only. The League may end up commenting differently and when that time comes I’ll stand behind their comments.
Paul , KB1NCD says
Will marine radio operators using the ham bands also be affected, that is operating a rig such as an ICOM M802 or M803 ? 73
Peter says
The FCC also proposes these fees for license renewals and requests for vanity call signs, the latter which had its filing fee eliminated several years ago. T
jeff n1kdo says
$50 for 10 years? Some people spend more on coffee. In a week.
Everything has a cost. What hams don’t pay for (e.g. keeping the ULS running) just comes out of some other line in the federal budget. This is a user fee, and imho not inappropriate. I was pretty surprised when the fees were dropped on vanity calls.
I’m willing to contribute to my local club to help subsidize youth getting licensed.
Edwin Ayala WP4MKJ says
I agree with Mr. Párkinson KB8UUZ. The fee is for vanity call sign application.
Yohei N8YQX says
For the sake of comparison, I looked at the cost of obtaining a Michigan driver’s license. It’s $25 for a new license, and $18 for the renewal. Michigan DL is good for 4 years.
The proposed $50 seems excessive considering that the FCC doesn’t do any work (such as check documents, test the candidate, take pictures, etc) and they don’t issue a physical license. I’m OK with paying a _reasonable_ fee for their service, but $50 seems excessive for basically retaining few kilobytes of personal data which gets updated every 10 years.
George J Whalen says
It is wisely said that “if you want less of something, tax it!” This unwise move on the FCC’s part is a sure demolition move on a proud 100-year-old public service group that funds itself, maintains and funds repeaters and privately held communications equipment, and provides VOLUNTARY SUPPORT to services, disaster relief and everything good and needful in our communities.
I appeal to our great president, Mr. Donald Trump, to issue an executive order preserving the FREE status of amateur radio in the United States of America. All amateurs should support this. 73, George J. Whalen, NY9A
Blair NS1H says
Based on my reading of the NPRM, the last sentence of section 24 indicates these fees would apply to Amateur Radio: “One such example is Amateur Radio Service licenses, which were not listed on the fee schedule in section 8 of the Act, but are now subject to fees under the broader mandate of the RAY BAUM’s Act.”
The table in section 25 (3rd column) shows a $50 cost-based fee will be applied to new license applications, renewals, rule waivers, and major & minor modifications. While they say administrative updates will remain exempt, I’m very curious as to what is considered a minor modification to an Amateur Radio license.
J. Patrick McDonald says
Personally speaking, this is nothing more than another money grab by the Feds. I can understand a reasonable increase to cover basic costs. I get it.
But, roughly 300% mark up multiplied by the number of Amateurs in the US. Plus, new Amateurs coming into the hobby. That is a hell of alot of “EXTRA MONEY.” Just think about that number. Currently, according to Google. There are 765,000 + hams with US licenses, as of August 28.2020. That’s an extra $24,480,00.00 in licensing fees. That’s over 24 Million dollars…you read it correctly. That’s only existing hams as of today. New hams coming in weekly, raises that total, way above that. Where does the madness end.
J. Patrick McDonald
KD6PZB
Lakeside, California
David -KG4WWN says
They are hoping this will reduce the number of Amateur radio users significantly, so that they can then use “nobody uses the service anymore” as a reason to auction off more bandwidth. They are especially trying to reduce youth involvement so that the hobby dies with the current users.
Gary Fautz KM4ECB says
Should treat the amateur license the same as the commercial, make the license a lifetime.
AL K3ZE says
When the FCC can prove to the Amateur Radio Community that it actually costs THEM $50.00 to issue a call sign and retain a few kilobytes of information in their database, then and only then will I pay the fee. It’s bad enough that they charge a recurring renewal fee for Vanity Callsigns when their part in the process is performed only once.
With imposing this fee, the FCC will be driving one more nail in Amateur Radio’s coffin.
kd0jzi says
So what are they going to do if we have another Hurricane Katrina, or 9/11 and they need Ham’s, and there are none cause they made the hobby so expensive?
W2TMA says
For those commenting that complainers are “cheap” and that $50 over 10 years is less than you spend for coffee…Until I see a valid justification for ANY fee increase from the ZERO we are paying now, my “cheapness” is far outweighed by our Government’s greed.
James Broden says
Ok so waive the fee for seniors and under 21. The fee is only $5 a year for the rest of us. Skip a McDonalds value meal once a year.
Jeffrey Long says
The “AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE” is NOT a “personal radio service.” It’s not. It’s the amateur radio service. PRS is GMRS and the like.
We operate under Part 97. Period.
If the need arises, we must fight so we don’t become lumped in with other services.
KD8JHC
David E Gomez says
What new and improved service are we going to get with the fee increase? From kp4nt.
Pm says
It’s a bit disingenuous to see complaints about a proposed $50 fee from operators who will happily drop multiple hundreds of dollars, or even thousands of dollars, on a new rig just because it has some new gimmick feature everybody got along fine not having. Fifty bucks is nothing compared to that cost. But if there’s one thing hams are, besides mostly being way past retirement age, it’s cheap. They’ll argue to death for a dollar but snap up expensive junk they don’t need. My licence is up for renewal this year but I haven’t actually used it in at least five years. I have to ask myself if I even want to bother.
Erik Olsen says
And then there are those of us who have not even bothered studying to get off of 2m/70cm due to cost of gear…
Clifford says
Looks to me like the FCC wants to finish killing off Amateur Radio. What about older folks that are on a fixed income? All this new revenue, What is the FCC going to do to clean up the Ham bands enforcement wise. No one at the FCC has done anything enforcement wise since Hollingsworth retired. 80 meters is worse than ever.
Arne P. Ryason says
If the people own the airwaves, then they should be collecting rent from the commercial users, based on advertising revenue. The so-called “amateur” radio operators should be paid out of this fund, for all the work they do, keeping skills and equipment honed, so they will be ready when the people need them. “Here’s your license and a little cash to buy your first rig.”
KAJX1730
Matthew (KD9ERS) says
All the feedback mentioned here is great.. no matter if your for paying money or not. But you need to make sure you get on the FCC site and speak your mind! Won’t do any good here. I am personally against the fee. The DCC records show they are operations below there budget and don’t need more income, so why are they asking to place fees on amateur radio, maybe to reduce the number of operators so they can re-allocate the spectrum? Take away most of the spectrum? Push away young prospects from becoming hams? I’m sure there is a reason behind it that is not being shared.
Bill Crow says
This is not a good idea. I’m teaching electronics and amateur radio to high school kids and $50 is way too much for kids to come up with for a license. We are trying to bring the younger kids into the hobby not push them away with such a high amount. Not good at all!
Sarah Wilson says
Watch what happens to 75M with a $50.00 fee. A repeat of 11M perchance. As licenses expire and Lapse, it’ll wind up with many of them ID’ing as, “Formerly KM6FYS”, for an example of the general attitude. It doesn’t take much grey matter to consider that the extra fees won’t be going toward enforcement.
If the FCC were interested at all in voluntary compliance with the consumer parts of the rules and regs, they would be removing walls from licensing, not putting them up.
Steve says
Typical greedy ass Fcc they want more money and are still as useful as a leaky condom. Selling off bandwidth just to line there pockets
Kirk Miller says
It’s unfortunate that the people that are already hams are going to be the biggest voice while it’s the new hams that are most likely to carry the weight. As an extra, $50 every 10 yrs isn’t so bad. However $150 plus testing and study materials may further the foothold that only those with money will have the opportunity to learn. Ham radio currently has 2 paths. Learn and build your own gear/kits or buy expensive radios. In order to preserve the current, creative spirit of ham radio, I would prefer to keep licensing open to all ages and financial statuses. Plus, the ARRL has already taken over a mountain of paperwork for the FCC. Is this really necessary? Or just another tax? It feels a lot like a greedy government asking, “What have you done for me lately?” ARES, Skywarn, MARS, and disaster relief in the form of communication after natural disasters… This increase may have deeper reaching implications. A smaller increase would be more reasonable.
KC8WAU says
I thought you weren’t supposed to post this article until April 1st.
Derrick KK6WMI says
I know plenty of HAMs who got their license in order to do volunteer emergency response. They do not own their own radios, they use equipment provided by local agencies during training or in the event of a disaster. Asking them to pay $50 on top of their testing fee will likely destroy this pool of volunteers.
Bill Lawry says
1) Government didn’t create or improve the air waves so what’s the justification for renting them to us.
2) This is our opportunity to save our hobby/public service by campaigning amongst our friends & neighbors to have free or nominal fees for issuing/maintaining licenses.
3) Beyond the free public service of emergency communications (ARES) and ad-hoc volunteers provide, Amateur Radio provides a proven support to Science, Technology, Engineering, & Mathmatics (STEM) education.
4) I think it would be an interesting exercise to survey the ham population wrt total monetary investment in our hobby. When I was in Jr HS I had $20 in a kit radio and whatever a 40 meter crystal & 6L6 & 5Y3 tubes, a WWII surplus key and some wire cost.
So let’s comment and especially have disaster victims that we have helped help us.
Bill Lawry – W2TJF/X
Currently studying for my Tech Tkt
Gerald Carlburg K5OKE says
This has been coming for a long time! They have been snipping away at the amateur bands so they can auction these for multi millions! They forget how much money hams spend to support NWS, ARES, FEMA and many other services. Thousands of hours in uncomfortable situations, where life and lim are at risk! Another way they say “Thank You”!
Daniel says
I think this is a bad idea, even as an adult $50 is slot of money specially if you’re on a tight budget like alot of seniors are. This will effect alot of people who volunteer there time and skills during emergency situation that HAM operations is required.
Daniel says
I think this is a bad idea, even as an adult $50 is alot of money specially if you’re on a tight budget like alot of seniors are. This will effect alot of people who volunteer there time and skills during emergency situation that HAM operations is required.
James Louloudes says
The reason we do not have a Licensee fee was because of a Federal Court order back in the 1970’s. That had to do with radio station fees. As far as I know it still in effect
Bruce Hansen says
During emergencies Hams provide an invaluable service to this country. Therefore Ham licenses should continue to be free and any services that the FCC needs to provide should be paid out of our tax dollars
K5ARN_Arne says
Why should US taxpayers subsidize the cost for FCC keeping up with amateur radio administration. Charge a reasonable fee to all users including hams, $50 every 10 years is not much. Remember how many times QRZ.com and other services download ULS amateur radio database or query the system every time a user requests info. The taxpayers now provide this service now for free……FCC pls charge a reasonable fee and I can live with $50 every 10 years!
R Price says
$50 is just enough to keep a lot of people out of Ham Radio or needing to cease their hobby. Of course this could be by design if the ability for people to freely communicate is no longer desired.
Jim says
i say NO WAY Here we are trying to get the younger people involved and they no more than likely cannot afford the price in getting there ham licence, and now they want to charge $50.00 I say no way.
garrett (gary) walsh says
In an effort to “cut costs” the FCC stopped issuing licenses on cards and certificates. If I have to pay for my license, I think the least the FCC can do is issue a license card and or a paper receipt so it can be displayed at your shack to prove you are a HAM operator in case you get raided. QRZ makes a nice mountable certificate that I proudly have mounted in my living room for $12.00. The FCC could at least provide a card and certificate for that $50.00 fee. I think the government is starting to take steps to privatize the FCC. I think this is all designed to privatize all government agencies to attract donors to head them. See what happened to the Post Office?
Paul - K8PD says
Over the past 20-30 years the FCC has consistently reduced their involvement with amateur radio licensing delegating things like testing, printing of license documents, and enforcement over to third parties and the licensees themselves. This has relieved the FCC of a considerable amount of administrative cost which was reflected in the fees charged to radio amateurs. It was also a recognition of the critical role these unpaid volunteers played in time of emergencies and natural disasters.
The FCC now proposes to monetize the amateur radio licenses without regard to the service’s contribution to local, state, and federal agencies or the fact that the service is largely self regulating and and already bearing much of he administrative burden the FCC bears for other radio services it licenses and regulates.
My biggest fear is the barrier to entry that this fee poses in a day where there are so many parallel activities vying for potential licensee’s attention. I know a fee of that magnitude may have been a barrier when I was at 14 year old Novice some 60+ years ago. It’s most likely I would have pursued another hobby, especially if each upgrade or renewal involved another $50 fee. The final thing I find absurd is the $50 fee for a printed copy of the license, especially considering that the ones they are printing today are of low quality on cheap photocopy paper. Frankly the average person could create a better looking license in half an hour using PhotoShop.
The uniqueness of the amateur radio service deserved some deference in my opinion. Amateurs need to make their voice heard in large numbers, not only in comments to the FCC docket but also in contacts to US Representative and your state’s US Senators. Now is the time to act, after the election they won’t pay as much attention.
Chris says
With so many entities crying for bandwidth, it probably sticks in the craw of some tech companies that we as amateur radio operators have the bandwidth we do. What better way for those companies to free up those frequencies than by lobbyists trying to convince the FCC that we do not matter even WITH all of the evidence to the contrary.
Steve Goodgame K5ATA says
As many have said, myself included, I have no major issue with paying a fee, if we get increased service/enforcement. Somehow I don’t think we will get increased service.
I DO, however, still have an issue with kids having to pay this fee. Someone posted that I ought not be so cheap… if a kid is ready to test, pay the $50 for them. I teach school… 26 kids earned their licenses in my class. As a teacher, I already spend a fortune buying gear and projects for the Padawans to work on…. to ask a teacher to pay $50 a pop for kids to test is just too much. Most parents in my district don’t have it. Many struggle to pay for a child’s lunch. Exempt kids and retirement aged folks if there is a justified need for a fee, but don’t take the opportunity away from kids to get licensed and fall in love with this hobby just because no one had $50 for them to test.
Richard Weil says
Eric Burke–it’s 20-270, not 20-220. Better check that your comment didn’t go to the wrong place. I’m having trouble finding the NPRM posting to leave my comment, so maybe it is not up yet though the ARRL claims it is.
Dave says
Of the billions of government waste, fraud, and abuse that go on year after year, and tens of millions of federal aid to Planned Parenthood, NPR, and others, bill sponsor Marsha Blackburn decides the Amateur Radio services should be in the same category as for profit and commercial radio services. Lacking from this law is a mandate for agencies to identify and implement efficiencies and cost savings measures. I bet with very little effort money could be freed up to offset the fees for Amateur licensing.
But its business as usual and the little guys get shafted. Government issued Amateur Radio licenses should be FREE for Americans.
Where was the ARRL during development of the bill before it became law ? I dont recall reading about the bill before now. In fact the government should get out of Amateur Radio all together, and give the responsibility to the ARRL. I wouldn’t mind paying them for license issuance and management. I know the money wont be wasted. But the government is one giant cesspool of waste.
The fee increase to $50 is chump change to those with thousand dollar radios but to others its the cost of a Baofeng radio and accessories, the entry level radio for many youthful Hams.
Eric Burke says
Commenting opened Today, 9/1/20. If you commented before it likely went to the wrong proceeding like mine did.
Here is a short link to 20-270 comment filing:
https://bit.ly/32O7WLi
David Gaines KF5VA says
TO EVERYONE WHO HAS COMMENTED HERE:
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE take the time to copy and paste your comment into the FCC comments section for this proposed new rule. Your position of favor or disfavor for the proposed fee doesn’t matter so much as your participation in the public comments process matters. Just voice your view to the FCC where it can have an impact.
Here is a short link to 20-270 comment filing (credit – Eric Burke’s post – thanks):
https://bit.ly/32O7WLi
Brian Dockery says
Why give the FCC more money? They don’t need the extra $50. As a person wanting to get back into amateur radio, how is the extra fee gonna help people who have disabilities or low income? I don’t see what the FCC is actually doing to help. They are only hurting, and for what, especially in the current environment and the current economy.
Griffin Klema says
Seems to me this is ripe for a legal challenge if the FCC decides to impose any fee whatsoever on amateur radio licensing. The law provides an explicit exception for “application fees” for any “noncommercial radio station.” 48 USC 158(d)(1)(C). It also exempts from regulatory fees all amateur radio licensees. 48 USC 159(e)(1)(B).
In any event, there is also a safeharbor provision that seems to provide for a further exception for amateur radio under 48 USC 159A(d) (allowing the FCC to waive the fee “where such action would promote the public interest.”)
So while the congressional mandate might have (generally) given the impression that the FCC must become cost-based, that doesn’t seem to apply to amateur radio licensees by explicit exception.
It seems that the FCC decided it has the authority delegated from congress to impose these fees because the commissioners concluded that the new law codified the exemptions under 47 CFR 1.1116 (see paragraph 220 of FCC 20-116). But that’s a BIG stretch, and rules of statutory construction before a judge will likely conclude the FCC is wrong in its determination. You don’t get to legislative intent unless the statute is unclear, and on these provisions, it’s not. The FCC has invited this very legal analysis, and I intend on providing it to them.
Steve says
Amateur Radio is arguably the only FCC-sanctioned non-commercial radio service that actually does any kind of public service. GMRS, FRS, MURS, CB, they’re all used for personal communications. Amateur Radio provides disaster services, public and private event communications, and many other valuable services, all with no compensation. In the event of a disaster, the government often looks to Amateur Radio for help, and in fact considers Amateur Radio a resource, which is why the Amateur Radio Parity Act is in process. To charge any fee for any part of Amateur Radio licensing is an absolute slap in the face to those of us who study, earn our licenses and actually volunteer our equipment and time to serve others.
Steve says
O EVERYONE WHO HAS COMMENTED HERE:
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE take the time to copy and paste your comment into the FCC comments section for this proposed new rule. Your position of favor or disfavor for the proposed fee doesn’t matter so much as your participation in the public comments process matters. Just voice your view to the FCC where it can have an impact.
Here is a short link to 20-270 comment filing (credit – Eric Burke’s post – thanks):
https://bit.ly/32O7WLi
Mark Norquist says
If we’re required to pay for access to the rf spectrum, shouldn’t we be afforded absolute protection to that spectrum from being reduced?
Robert Zolecki says
I’ll just operate without a license, by the time they catch me I’ll be dead anyway…Just like Chicago voters who vote when they are dead
Louis Doucette says
Why are 100 percent permanent and totally disabled veterans charged a fee?
Dan KB6NU says
Good question. You might want to add a comment to that effect to this NPRM.
Michelle Bradley says
Just saw this article. Permission granted. :) 73 de KU3N.
Dan KB6NU says
Thanks! :)