Number 33

OUR NEW TPMSP “CLASS”

There seems to be a surreptitious movement underway within a segment (“Bloc”) of our community that is bent on changing dramatically our operator class structure in a way that could greatly alter the fundamental character of our amateur radio service. This movement probably stems from at least two developments that have taken place. The first development is the rejection by the FCC in WT Docket No. 05-235 to pleadings from our Community for “some form of entry level HF license category parallel to the Novice-Technician level.”

The FCC decided, however:

Current examinations for amateur radio licenses ensure, at a minimum, that the applicant understands the Commission’s rules for the service and the fundamental principles of radio communication. None of the proponents of an introductory level license has shown how an introductory level license examination would achieve an equivalent understanding of the rules and of radio communications fundamentals. Further, the record is devoid of sufficient objective and quantifiable information that would cause us to conclude that the current examinations and/or the current FCC Amateur Radio Service license structure are a significant barrier to persons seeking an amateur radio license. Moreover, our action today in eliminating the Morse code proficiency test undercuts one of the primary purported advantages of a “code-free” introductory class of license. Accordingly, we believe that the current licensing structure, as modified herein, provides significant and sufficient incentives for participation in the amateur radio service, and based on the record before us at this time, we decline to establish a new introductory class of amateur radio license.[1]

The VECs reacted by rushing into use – well ahead of schedule – a smaller, far less technical, less comprehensive, basic Element 2 question pool[2] in order, as announced: “… to better position the Amateur Radio Service for growth in the years ahead.” See BE Informed No. 6 EVALUATION OF JULY 1, 2006 ELEMENT 2 QUESTION POOL. [3] The VECs’ former pools - for which the FCC expressed its confidence in WT Docket No. 05-235 – were thereby supplanted. The VECs’ reaction, apparently, was influenced by the Bloc,[4] and may reveal something of its intent. The second development is the fading appreciation for spectrum-based incentive licensing which denies certain HF privileges to all but those who pass additional written examinations. Members of the Bloc seem to consider this controversial requirement to be unfair to General and Advanced Class operators, particularly because it places these lower-qualifying operators at a disadvantage during HF operating contests. It appears, therefore, that the Bloc is relying upon Section 97.115, Third party communications, to achieve its objective.

That rule says:

(a) An amateur station may transmit messages for a third party to:(1) Any station within the jurisdiction of the United States.(2) Any station within the jurisdiction of any foreign government when transmitting emergency or disaster relief communications and any station within the jurisdiction of any foreign government whose administration has made arrangements with the United States to allow amateur stations to be used for transmitting international communications on behalf of third parties. No station shall transmit messages for a third party to any station within the jurisdiction of any foreign government whose administration has not made such an arrangement. This prohibition does not apply to a message for any third party who is eligible to be a control operator of the station.(b) The third party may participate in stating the message where:(1) The control operator is present at the control point and is continuously monitoring and supervising the third party's participation; and(2) The third party is not a prior amateur service licensee whose license was revoked or not renewed after hearing and re-licensing has not taken place; suspended for less than the balance of the license term and the suspension is still in effect; suspended for the balance of the license term and re-licensing has not taken place; or surrendered for cancellation following notice of revocation, suspension or monetary forfeiture proceedings. The third party may not be the subject of a cease and desist order which relates to amateur service operation and which is still in effect.(c) No station may transmit third party communications while being automatically controlled except a station transmitting a RTTY or data emission.(d) At the end of an exchange of international third party communications, the station must also transmit in the station identification procedure the call sign of the station with which a third party message was exchanged.

It is within paragraph (b) that Bloc advocates must believe they have found a way to negate the FCC decision: “The third party may participate in stating the message where the control operator is present at the control point and is continuously monitoring and supervising the third party's participation.” A circular-logic reading of this provision leads to their claim that non-FCC-licensed third-party-message-stating-participants (“TPMSPs”) also have access rights to spectrum which, heretofore, has been the exclusive domain of FCC-licensed amateur operators. Under this state of affairs, the resultant is a new unofficial class of hams: TPMSPs; authorized only by FCC-licensed operators, preferably by Amateur Extra Class operators (“Extras.”) Every Extra has qualified for all possible privileges by examination. The TPMSP class has simply to convince a willing Extra that they are qualified for some or all of those very same privileges, at least while being continuously monitored and supervised to the degree required by the Extra. The fact that the TPMSP may also hold an FCC-license grant of some lower-ranked operator license class apparently does not disqualify the person from also being a TPMSP. The Extra, however, is a person qualified to be the control operator of an amateur station and, as such, must ensure the immediate proper operation of the station.[5] Should a violation of the FCC rules occur while the TPMSP is acting as a surrogate control operator, therefore, it is that Extra who is accountable to the FCC.[6] The TPMSP, on the other hand, is accountable only to the Extra.[7]

Obviously, widespread tolerance of this new TPMSP “class” is fraught with disturbingly complex compliance challenges. For instance, there is no procedural means to inform our Official Observers, independent monitors or even the control operator of the station with which the third-party intercommunication is taking place, whether or not the responsible control operator is actually continuously monitoring and supervising the third party's participation in stating the third party message.[8] In fact, there is no protocol for confirming to those receiving the transmission that the control operator is actually present at the control point, or even to alert anyone that a third party message is being transmitted. This raises serious issues for international agreements related to alien reciprocal operation and international third party communications.

This unsettling development, moreover, could steer the amateur service away from serving its intended purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is, duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest.[9] It threatens to undermine irreparably the very legitimacy of the amateur radio service.

[1] REPORT AND ORDER AND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION adopted December 15, 2006 Paragraph 23.

[2] Passing written Element 2 is a requirement common to all classes of FCC amateur operator licenses.

[3] For VEs and instructors. It identifies 98 defective, freebee, trick and misleading questions, 38 of which are usable with the answers rewritten as shown. Also identifies 26 questions not needed to know in order operate a station properly with Technician Class operator privileges and 4 questions unnecessary because reference materials are widely available.

[4] Also see comments by the WCARS VEC in its report to the NCVEC dated June 2, 2006. To request a copy, send your e-mail to: winguin@bellsouth.net.

[5] See Control operator duties, 47 C.F.R. Section 97.105. An amateur station may only be operated in the manner and to the extent permitted by the privileges authorized for the class of operator license held by the control operator.

[6] Under Section 97.103, the station licensee is responsible for the proper operation of the station in accordance with the FCC Rules. When the control operator is a different amateur operator than the station licensee, both persons are equally responsible for proper operation of the station. The station licensee must designate the station control operator. The FCC will presume that the station licensee is also the control operator, unless documentation to the contrary is in the station records.

[7] The Extra would be well advised to issue written instructions to the TPMSP and the TPMSP should demand the same to protect against charges of engaging in unlicensed transmissions.

[8] Amateur stations may transmit various emission modes: International Morse code telegraphy (“CW”); telemetry, telecommand and computer communications (“Data”); facsimile and television (“Image”); tone-modulated international Morse code telegraphy (“MCW”); speech and other sound (“Phone”); Pulse; narrow-band direct-printing telegraphy (“RTTY”); spread spectrum (“SS”) and test.

[9] The NCVEC is on record in its RM-10870 as petitioning the FCC to make the amateur service accessible to as many citizens as possible.

Website hosting by Web.com