Before the

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | * | WT Docket No. 98-143         |
|                                  | * |                              |
| 1998 Biennial Regulatory         | ) | RM-9148                      |
| Review\--                        | * |                              |
|                                  | * | RM-9150                      |
| Amendment of Part 97 of the      |   |                              |
| Commission's Amateur Service     | * | RM-9196                      |
| Rules                            | * |                              |
|                                  | ) | RM-9831                      |
| Petition for Repeal of Rule 47   | * |                              |
| C.F.R. Appendix 2 to Part 97 and | * | RM-9867                      |
| All Other Rules Associated with  |   |                              |
| Same                             | * | RM-10018                     |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Petition for Amendment of the    | ) |                              |
| Commission's Rules to Establish  | * |                              |
| New Band Plan Authorization in   | * |                              |
| the Amateur Service              |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Amendment of Part 97 of the      | * |                              |
| Commission's Rules to Allow      | ) |                              |
| Increased Frequency Privileges   | * |                              |
| to Amateurs Having Proficiency   | * |                              |
| in Telegraphy in Accordance with |   |                              |
| the International Requirements   | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Amendment of Part 97 of the      | ) |                              |
| Commission's Rules Regarding     | * |                              |
| Examination Element Credit for   | * |                              |
| Advanced, General and            |   |                              |
| Conditional Class Amateur        | * |                              |
| Operator Licenses Issued Before  | * |                              |
| November 22, 1968                | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+
|                                  |   |                              |
+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

**Adopted: March 27, 2001 Released: April 6, 2001**

By the Commission:

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

Paragraph

I. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

II\. BACKGROUND 3

III\. DISCUSSION 5

A. Operator privileges of former Class A licensees 5

B. Maintenance of a Technician Plus Class operator licensee database 7

C. Telegraphy examination requirements 10

D. Telegraphy examination element credit 13

E. Number of questions on written examinations 19

F. Repeating failed examination elements 22

G. Petitions for rulemaking from Kippa-Hill, QCWA, and Speroni 24

H. Other matters 30

IV\. PROCEDURAL MATTERS 34

A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 34

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 35

C. Ordering Clauses 36

Appendix A\--List of Commenters

Appendix B---Final Rules

**I. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY**

1.  In the *Report and Order* in WT Docket No. 98-143, the Commission
    substantially revised the amateur service license structure by
    streamlining our licensing processes and eliminating unnecessary and
    duplicative rules.[^1] This *Memorandum Opinion and Order* addresses
    pending petitions for reconsideration of the *Report and Order*.[^2]
    Because the petitioners' suggested clarifications generally already
    were considered and rejected, or because they are beyond the scope
    of the proceeding, we have not modified any Part 97 provisions based
    on the petitions. We grant the request of petitioners that the
    amateur service database distinguish between Technician and
    Technician Plus Class licensees, however, to the extent that these
    database changes already have been implemented. Additionally, on our
    own motion, we adopt changes to our Part 13 rules to ensure the
    telegraphy requirements for commercial radio operator licenses
    remain unchanged and we make minor editorial changes to certain Part
    97 rules.

2.  We also deny two petitions for rulemaking seeking changes in
    frequency privileges for certain operator classes of amateur service
    licensees.[^3] Because a request for comprehensive restructuring of
    amateur service frequency privileges was considered and rejected in
    the *Report and Order*, we are denying these petitions as
    repetitive. In addition, we dismiss a petition for rulemaking
    seeking to upgrade to the Amateur Extra Class operator license
    certain individuals who were licensees in 1968[^4] and a petition
    for rulemaking seeking changes in the amateur service sequential
    call sign assignment system.[^5]

# II. BACKGROUND {#ii.-background .unnumbered}

3.  Part 97 of our Rules sets forth the requirements an individual must
    satisfy to demonstrate that he or she is qualified to be a licensee
    in the amateur radio service.[^6] In December 1999, the Commission
    substantially revised the amateur service license structure by
    streamlining our licensing processes and eliminating unnecessary and
    duplicative rules. Based on the amateur service community's support
    for a simplified and streamlined license structure, the Commission
    adopted rules that reduced the number of amateur service operator
    licenses an individual may qualify for from six to three,[^7]
    reduced the number of written examination elements from five to
    three, and reduced the emphasis on telegraphy to the minimum
    requirement that satisfies the international *Radio
    Regulations*.[^8] Because it decided that it would no longer issue
    certain classes of operator licenses, the Commission also adopted
    changes to the element credit rules so that licensees who, under the
    previous license structure, received credit for certain examination
    elements would not have to again pass that examination element to
    advance to a higher class of operator license.[^9] Since these
    revisions became effective, over 30,000 individuals have qualified
    for amateur service operator licenses that authorize greater
    operating privileges.

4.  We have before us five petitions for reconsideration of the *Report
    and Order*.[^10] For the most part, the petitioners oppose our
    efforts to streamline and simplify the amateur service license
    structure.[^11]

# III. DISCUSSION {#iii.-discussion .unnumbered}

## Operator privileges of former Class A licensees 

5.  Prior to 1951, there were three classes of amateur radio operator
    licenses.[^12] These licenses were the Class A, B, and C operator
    licenses. The Class A license was the highest class of operator
    license. The *1951 License Structure Decision* converted the Class
    A, B, and C operator licenses to the Advanced, General, and
    Conditional Class operator licenses, respectively.[^13] Three new
    classes of amateur radio operator licenses, including the Amateur
    Extra Class operator license, were established in the *1951 License
    Structure Decision*.[^14] No licensees were converted or
    grandfathered to Amateur Extra Class operators.[^15] As a result,
    the Class A, B, and C, operator licenses ceased to exist. In the
    *Report and Order*, the Commission considered but declined to
    upgrade to the Amateur Extra Class operator license those
    individuals who held a Class A operator license prior to 1951.[^16]
    Mr. Duran requests that we reconsider the Commission's 1951 decision
    to convert Class A licensees to the Advanced Class operator
    license.[^17] He requests that we upgrade the license of individuals
    who held a Class A operator license prior to 1951 to an Amateur
    Extra Class operator license so they may maintain their previously
    earned top amateur license status.[^18]

6.  We note, as an initial matter, that to upgrade from an Advanced
    Class operator license to an Amateur Extra Class operator license,
    an individual needs only to pass (by answering correctly at least
    thirty-seven of fifty questions) a written examination concerning
    the duties of an Amateur Extra Class operator licensee.[^19] This is
    not an unreasonable requirement given that a person who passes the
    examination is authorized, among other things, to use an additional
    175 kHz of spectrum. Nor do we believe it unreasonable to require a
    licensee who may have last tested in 1951 or earlier to pass the
    current applicable written examination element. In this regard, we
    note that technology, amateur service rules, and operating
    practices, among other things, have changed substantially
    since 1951. Finally, we also note that the Commission's decision was
    influenced by the request of other commenters in this proceeding
    that current licensees [not]{.underline} receive additional
    privileges without passing the required examination elements.[^20]
    The petitioner presents no new information or reason to change our
    decision. Accordingly, we will deny the Duran Petition.

## Maintenance of a Technician Plus Class operator licensee database 

7.  In the *Report and Order,* the Commission reduced the number of
    operator licenses from six classes of operator license to three.
    [^21] With regard to the Technician Plus Class and Technician Class
    operator licenses, the Commission found that there was no need to
    maintain a separate classification of Technician Plus Class
    licensees in the amateur service database because Technician Plus
    Class licensees personally hold documentation[^22] that they have
    passed a five words per minute (wpm) telegraphy examination.[^23]
    Therefore, it adopted its proposal to renew a Technician Plus Class
    operator license as a Technician Class operator license.[^24]

8.  The Qualls, ARRL, and WAD II petitions request we reconsider the
    decision not to maintain a database of Technician Class operator
    licensees who have passed a five wpm telegraphy examination.[^25]
    They state that combining Technician Class licensees who have not
    passed a five wpm telegraphy examination with those that have will
    increase enforcement problems for the Commission.[^26] ARRL states
    that the database of Technician Plus Class licensees available
    through our Universal Licensing System (ULS) is the only means
    available to an amateur radio operator to determine if a station
    licensed to a Technician Class operator heard operating on the 10
    meter amateur service band is authorized to use that band.[^27] It
    suggests that we use a separate field in the database, which it says
    already is in existence and operational, that uses a "P" code for
    Technician Plus Class operators and a "T" code for Technician Class
    operators.[^28]

9.  Subsequent to the release of the *Report and Order,* the software
    used in the ULS was modified so that ULS will show a "P" (for Plus)
    in the field designated for a licensee's former class of license
    when a Technician Plus Class license is renewed. This capability
    results in the amateur service database being able to provide a *de
    facto* Technician Plus licensee database. We believe that these
    changes satisfy both the desire of the majority of commenters in
    this proceeding for a three-class license structure and the request
    of the petitioners that they be able to distinguish between
    Technician and Technician Plus Class licensees. Because these
    database changes afford the relief sought by ARRL, we grant its
    request. We will not, however, grant the request of Qualls and WAD
    II that we add a fourth class of amateur radio operator license, a
    Technician Plus Class license, to the amateur service database.

## Telegraphy examination requirements

10. In the *Report and Order*, the Commission concluded that the public
    interest would best be served by reducing the telegraphy examination
    requirement to the minimum requirement that satisfies the *Radio
    Regulations* and that has been accepted as proving that the control
    operator of a station can ensure the proper operation of that
    station.[^29] Accordingly, it reduced the number of telegraphy
    examination elements from three to one---specifically, a five wpm
    telegraphy examination.[^30] In reaching this decision, it noted
    that one of the fundamental purposes underlying our Part 97 rules is
    to accommodate the amateur radio operator's proven ability to
    contribute to the advancement of the radio art.[^31] The Commission
    found that an individual's increased Morse code proficiency is not
    necessarily indicative of that individual's ability to contribute to
    the advancement of the radio art, and concluded that such a license
    qualification rule did not further the purpose of the amateur
    service or continue to serve a regulatory purpose.[^32] Both Mr.
    Qualls and WAD II object to our elimination of telegraphy
    examination elements above five wpm.

11. Mr. Qualls requests we reconsider the conclusion that the public
    interest will best be served by reducing the telegraphy examination
    requirement to the minimum requirement that meets the *Radio
    Regulations*.[^33] He points out that other countries have other
    telegraphy speed requirements in their domestic licensing
    regulations.[^34] He also states that some amateur radio operating
    activities are almost exclusively done using moderately high to high
    speed Morse code.[^35] We are not persuaded, however, that this
    decision is out of line with the requirements of other countries,
    assuming, *arguendo*, that the requirements of other countries have
    any relevance to the reasonableness of the Commission's license
    qualification requirements. In this regard, we note that subsequent
    to the adoption of the *Report and Order*, many other countries have
    reduced or are considering reducing their telegraphy examination
    requirements to five wpm, while looking toward eventual elimination
    of a mandatory telegraphy licensing requirement altogether.[^36] We
    conclude, therefore, that Mr. Quall's concern regarding our
    licensing requirements *vis a vis* those of other countries does not
    present a reason for reconsideration of this decision. With regard
    to his claim that some amateur radio operating activities require
    the use of moderately high to high speed Morse code, we note that
    the Commission concluded in the *Report and Order* that the issue of
    an individual's operating preferences was not germane to this
    proceeding.[^37]

12. WAD II requests that we reinstate the requirement that an individual
    pass a twenty wpm telegraphy examination requirement for the Amateur
    Extra Class operator license.[^38] It states that twenty wpm "is
    only a barrier to unmotivated individuals"[^39] and that a five wpm
    telegraphy examination requirement to qualify for a General Class
    operator license is adequate as a reasonable accommodation to give
    disabled individuals.[^40] As noted above, the Commission eliminated
    the twenty wpm Morse code proficiency examination as a federally
    mandated licensing requirement because it was not in furtherance of
    the purpose of the amateur service and it did not continue to serve
    a regulatory purpose.[^41] WAD II has not shown that the
    Commission's conclusions were in error. Further, we note that since
    the *Report and Order* was released, there does not appear to be any
    decline in the proper operation of amateur stations.[^42]

## Telegraphy examination element credit 

13. In the *Report and Order*, the Commission amended Section 97.505 of
    our Rules[^43] to provide that Novice Class[^44] licensees who
    upgraded to the Technician Class license would not lose examination
    credit for the telegraphy examination they had passed when they
    qualified for their Novice Class license.[^45] Without the revision
    to Section 97.505, a Novice Class operator who advanced to the
    Technician Class but did not qualify for a General or Amateur Extra
    Class operator license would lose credit for the five wpm telegraphy
    exam after the expiration date (plus two years) shown on the Novice
    license because the Technician Class operator license does not
    specify a telegraphy examination element. As a result, a Novice
    Class licensee who advanced to the Technician Class, but sought no
    higher level of license before the expiration of the grace period,
    would have to pass another five wpm telegraphy examination to
    upgrade to the General or Amateur Extra Class operator license.

14. The ARRL requests that we standardize examination element credit to
    provide that any person who provides proof of having passed at one
    time an FCC-recognized five wpm telegraphy examination should
    receive credit for the Element 1 telegraphy examination.[^46] It
    states that lack of examination credit for former licensees who did
    not hold either a Novice or Technician Class operator license was a
    problem under the old rules, which is continued in the current
    rule.[^47] It also states the present rule still discriminates
    between those who hold expired and non-renewable Novice and
    Technician Class operator licenses and those who hold expired and
    non-renewable General, Advanced, or Amateur Extra Class operator
    licenses.[^48] Mr. Matzinger agrees we should reconsider the
    amendment to Section 97.505.[^49] He requests, however, that we
    extend to Technician Class licensees who hold a Certificate of
    Successful Completion of Examination document for former written
    examination Element 3B, regardless of when it was issued,
    examination credit for the current written examination Element 3,
    thereby allowing these Technician Class licensees to upgrade to a
    General Class operator license without passing the current Element 3
    written examination.[^50]

15. The ARRL's request amounts to a lifetime credit for any person who
    has passed an FCC-recognized five wpm telegraphy examination. As an
    initial matter, we note that the issue of lifetime examination
    credit for persons whose licenses have lapsed was considered in WT
    Docket No. 95-57.[^51] In that proceeding, the Commission proposed
    to authorize Volunteer Examiners (VEs) to give examination element
    credit for any examination that the examinee previously passed.[^52]
    The comments in that proceeding opposed the proposal, however, and
    it was not adopted.[^53] Rather, the Commission stated that persons
    who allow their amateur operator license to expire (and go beyond
    the grace period for renewal) will have to pass the requisite
    examinations if they later decide to obtain another amateur operator
    license.[^54] Also, the Commission stated that attending an
    examination session was not a hardship because the VEs provided
    abundant examination opportunities.[^55] The ARRL has not shown that
    attending an examination session is a hardship for former licensees
    or that examination opportunities are not available. We conclude,
    therefore, that there is no basis to reconsider the decision reached
    in this proceeding. For the same reasons, we also conclude that
    there is no basis to grant Mr. Matzinger's request that we extend
    examination credit for former written examination Element 3B to the
    lifetime of a person.

16. With regard to Section 97.505, we note that the rule was revised
    because an examinee who was a Novice Class licensee and who upgraded
    to a Technician Class operator license after April 15, 2000, has
    passed the same telegraphy examination element as an examinee who
    held a Technician Class operator license issued before February 14,
    1991, *i.e*., both examinees have passed at least a five wpm
    telegraphy examination,[^56] and therefore, both examinees should
    receive the same telegraphy examination credit.[^57] Most examinees
    who hold a non-renewable General, Advanced, or Amateur Extra Class
    operator license also are eligible for telegraphy examination credit
    based on previous licensure.[^58] In this regard, we note the rules
    provide that if these examinees ever held a Novice Class operator
    license, or a Technician Class operator licenses prior to February
    14, 1991, they would receive, at a minimum, credit for the five wpm
    telegraphy examination.[^59]

17. We disagree with ARRL's claim that this rule discriminates between
    examinees who hold expired and non-renewable Novice and Technician
    Class operator licenses and examinees who hold expired and
    non-renewable General, Advanced, or Amateur Extra Class operator
    licenses. An examinee who holds an expired and non-renewable Novice
    Class operator license, or an expired Technician Class operator
    license, may also hold a current Technician Class operator license
    and therefore, must be given examination element credit for
    examination elements passed for the license(s) held. An examinee who
    has only a non-renewable General, Advanced, or Amateur Extra Class
    operator license is not a licensee and, therefore, will have to pass
    or receive credit for the requisite examinations if he or she later
    decides to obtain another amateur operator license.

18. WAD II also objects to the decision to extend examination credit to
    licensees whose licenses expired as long as forty years ago.[^60] It
    does not believe we should extend examination credit to individuals
    who hold Novice Class operator licenses that have expired and gone
    beyond the grace period for renewal.[^61] As we noted above,
    however, the Commission revised the rule to provide telegraphy
    examination credit for expired Novice Class operator licenses so
    that a Technician Class licensee who previously held a Novice Class
    operator license, when applying for a higher class operator license,
    would not have to pass again the five wpm telegraphy examination he
    or she passed to obtain the Novice Class license. We also note that
    this proceeding did not propose to change the policy or implementing
    rules that allow an individual who has qualified for a particular
    class of operator license to receive examination credit for the
    examination elements required for that class of operator license. In
    this regard, we note that pre-1987 Technician and General Class
    licensees, under the current and former rules, continue to receive
    examination credit for the General Class written examination
    element, regardless of how long ago this examination element was
    passed. Similarly, under the current and former rules, Advanced
    Class licensees receive examination credit for the Technician and
    General Class written examination elements, and the telegraphy
    examination element, even if the licensee qualified for this license
    over forty years ago and/or has not used telegraphy in decades.

## Number of questions on written examinations 

19. In the *Report and Order*, the Commission revised the number of
    written examination elements in the amateur service license
    examination structure to better correlate with the number of license
    classes, and revised the number of questions on each written
    examination element.[^62] Specifically, it required that the
    Technician Class and General Class written examination elements
    consist of thirty-five questions each, and that the Amateur Extra
    Class written examination element consist of fifty technically
    oriented questions, including questions about administering amateur
    radio operator license examinations.[^63]

20. WAD II requests that we increase to fifty from thirty-five the
    number of questions for the written examination elements required to
    qualify for the Technician and General Class operator licenses, and
    to one hundred from fifty the number of questions for the Amateur
    Extra Class written examination element.[^64] It states that the
    revision has reduced the proportion of technical questions on the
    written examination elements and reduced the cumulative number of
    questions needed for an applicant to obtain each license class.[^65]

21. As an initial matter, we note that the 50-50-100 combination of
    questions WAD II requests was considered in the *Report and
    Order*.[^66] The Commission did not adopt this combination of
    questions for the written examination elements but rather adopted
    the number of questions on each examination element that was
    suggested by the ARRL and the National Conference of Volunteer
    Examiner Coordinators (NCVECs).[^67] With regard to WAD II's concern
    that the decision reduced the cumulative number of questions needed
    for an applicant to obtain each license class, we do not believe
    that the cumulative number of questions an applicant must answer
    correctly to obtain each license class is a particularly relevant
    measure of whether an applicant is qualified to be an amateur
    service licensee. The Commission noted that the difficulty of an
    examination is determined by specific questions that appear on that
    examination, rather than simply the topics the examination
    covers.[^68] We believe the same standard is applicable to the
    number of questions on the examination element---a greater number of
    questions does not in and of itself result in an examination that is
    more valid or meaningful. We also note that WAD II has not shown
    that the written examination elements are not serving their purpose,
    *i.e.*, that they are not testing an applicant's knowledge
    concerning the duties and privileges of a particular class of
    operator license. With regard to WAD II's concern about the material
    covered on the examinations, we noted in the *Report and Order* that
    the Question Pool Committee of the NCVECs has a better ability than
    we do to insure that the question pools reflect current
    technology.[^69] We believe that WAD II should address concerns
    about written examination element issues to the Question Pool
    Committee of the NCVEC.

## Repeating failed examination elements 

22. Section 97.509 of our rules contains administering VE
    requirements.[^70] These requirements are standards suggested by the
    amateur service community that balance the needs of VEs and
    examinees, and that ensure the integrity of the examination system.
    They are not intended to limit unreasonably the flexibility of VEs
    to accommodate examinees and therefore, do not specifically address
    many situations that occur in the administration of license
    examinations, such as whether administering VEs may allow an
    examinee an opportunity to re-take a failed examination element at
    the same examination session. To our knowledge, the VEs accommodate
    examinees to the extent possible. Our understanding is that if a
    second version of the examination is available and the VEs have time
    to allow an examinee to take the second examination, generally they
    will allow an examinee a second chance to pass the examination. WAD
    II requests that we prohibit examinees from repeating failed
    examination elements at one examination session.[^71]

23. Generally, matters concerning the mechanics of examination
    administration reside with the administering VEs. We believe that
    decisions as to whether to allow an examinee a "second chance" at
    the same examination session are well within the discretion of the
    VEs. In this regard, we note that the volunteer examiner examination
    system has existed since 1984 and was designed to provide the
    maximum flexibility to meet the needs of VEs and examinees.[^72] As
    such, WAD II's request is inconsistent with the purpose of the VE
    system. Moreover, we do not agree with WAD II that we should impose
    standards of examination administration used by schools or
    certifying boards on administering VEs,[^73] because amateur service
    licenses are used primarily for avocation or personal purposes
    rather than as measures of professional or educational competency.
    As such, WAD II has provided no reason to prohibit administering VEs
    who are willing to allow examinees to repeat failed examination
    elements at one examination session from doing so. We also note that
    the determination of what constitutes a "session" is made by the
    administering VEs.[^74] Therefore, we will deny WAD II's request.

## Petitions for Rulemaking from Kippa-Hill (RM-9867), Speroni (RM-10018), and QCWA

24. The *Report and Order* considered whether simplification of the
    license structure should be undertaken as part of a comprehensive
    restructuring of the licensing process and operating privileges, and
    concluded that simplification of the license structure was
    independent of such a restructuring.[^75] The Commission determined
    that the amateur service community should have an opportunity to
    discuss and possibly reach a consensus regarding implementation of
    new technologies before restructuring of the amateur service
    operating privileges and frequencies.[^76]

25. On March 16, 2000, Dennis Kippa and David J. Hill filed a petition
    for rulemaking, RM-9867,[^77] that seeks to reduce the frequency
    segments within the amateur service frequency bands that can be used
    by amateur stations to transmit CW emissions.[^78] The petition
    states that because CW communications are archaic and have been
    abandoned by all Federal agencies except the amateur service, the
    Commission can no longer justify the broad reservation of the radio
    spectrum for CW only.[^79] On November 17, 2000, Joseph Speroni
    filed a petition for rulemaking, RM-10018.[^80] The petition seeks
    to increase the frequency privileges available to Novice Class
    licensees and Technician Plus Class licensees.[^81] The petition
    states that because the Novice Class operator license has been
    discontinued, frequency segments available to Novice Class licensees
    are less utilized and, therefore, these licensees have less
    opportunity to practice and develop their Morse code skills.[^82]

26. As an initial matter, we note that both the Kippa-Hill Petition and
    the Speroni Petition are repetitive of the ARRL's request that we
    restructure operating privileges.[^83] We have received no
    indication that the ongoing discussions concerning implementation of
    new and more modern communications technologies within the amateur
    service community have been completed, or that any consensus
    regarding implementation of new technologies emerged. Rather, the
    process appears to be continuing.

27. We also note that, contrary to the apparent preception of
    Kippa-Hill[^84] and Speroni,[^85] the amateur service rules do not
    establish any "CW only" or "HF CW" segments of amateur service
    frequency bands.[^86] Rather, CW is the only emission type that may
    be transmitted on any frequency for which the control operator is
    authorized.[^87] We conclude, therefore, that the premise of these
    petitions is faulty and does not provide a basis to change our
    rules. For this reason, we will deny them. Additionally, we believe
    that we should allow the amateur service community to reach a
    consensus regarding a comprehensive restructuring of operating
    privileges for all licensees before we expend our resources in a
    proceeding addressing this matter.

28. In addition, a petition for rulemaking has been filed by the Quarter
    Century Wireless Association (QCWA).[^88] It requests that we amend
    our rules to require that VEs give examination credit for written
    examination Element 4 to an examinee who can show he or she held a
    Conditional, General or Advanced Class operator license before
    November 22, 1968.[^89] The petition states that on this date,
    amateur radio operators holding these classes of operator licenses
    lost significant frequency privileges as a result of the
    Commission's *Incentive Licensing* decision,[^90] and that no useful
    purpose is served by continuing to deny the privileges withdrawn
    from these operators.[^91] It also states that today there are, at
    most, a few thousand licensees still affected by this decision,
    which they perceive was unjust.[^92] The effect of QCWA's request,
    if granted, would be to allow only individuals who held a
    Conditional, General or Advanced Class operator license before
    November 22, 1968, and who have not upgraded to the Amateur Extra
    Class operator license, to upgrade to this license without passing
    the required written examination.

29. As noted above, to upgrade from an Advanced Class or a General Class
    operator license to an Amateur Extra Class operator license an
    individual must answer correctly only thirty-seven questions on a
    fifty question written examination that tests an examinee's
    knowledge of the duties of an Amateur Extra Class operator. We do
    not believe that passing a written examination element is an
    unreasonable requirement given that a person who passes the
    examination is authorized to use significant additional
    spectrum.[^93] We also note that other commenters in this proceeding
    expressed the view that current licensees should [not]{.underline}
    receive additional privileges without passing the required
    examination elements[^94] and that use of authorized operating
    privileges, even for an extended time, has never been a basis for
    granting examination credit. In this regard, we see no reason to
    accord individuals who held a Conditional, General or Advanced Class
    operator license before November 22, 1968, element credit
    preferences different than those available to individuals who held
    these licenses at other dates. Accordingly, we are not persuaded
    that the petition presents any new facts that warrant requiring VEs
    to give examination credit to these licensees, and we will dismiss
    the QCWA Petition.

## Other matters

30. Two petitions have been filed by Stewart Teaze. One petition
    requests that we revise the amateur service license structure to
    include a new Communicator Class operator license to further
    encourage more young individuals to enter the amateur service.[^95]
    The second petition is styled as a proposal to institute an
    introductory-level Communicator license class in the amateur
    service.[^96] It reiterates the request in the first petition. In
    that both petitions request amendment of the amateur service license
    structure, we will treat both petitions as petitions for
    reconsideration of our decision in this proceeding. Because these
    petitions were filed later than thirty days after the date of public
    notice of the Commission's action,[^97] we dismiss them as untimely.
    We note, moreover, that Mr. Teaze's request appears to be moot in
    light of the recently announced project to encourage more young
    individuals to enter the amateur service.[^98] While we applaud the
    amateur service community's commitment to involve more young people
    in amateur radio, we also do not believe this goal is advanced by
    adding additional license classes to the amateur service license
    structure. Rather, we believe a streamlined and simplified license
    structure in which operating privileges are related to examination
    requirements will encourage individuals to join the amateur service.
       

31. On February 7, 2000, Eric R. Wolfe filed a petition for rulemaking,
    RM-9831,[^99] that seeks to repeal the current system of call sign
    districts and designators used in the sequential call sign
    system.[^100] In place of the current district designators,[^101]
    Wolfe proposed that we issue all future amateur radio licenses in a
    sequential numbering system of zero to nine without regard to the
    location of the licensee's primary physical residential address for
    station location.[^102] We will deny this petition because changing
    the sequential call sign system as the petition requests would
    result in our expending considerable resources modifying the amateur
    service sequential call sign system without any clear regulatory
    purpose being served. Additionally, we note that the present system
    is well understood by the amateur service community and there does
    not appear to be any regulatory or operating advantage to changing
    the sequential call sign system to assign call signs as Mr. Wolfe
    suggests. In this regard, we note that after the initial assignment
    of a call sign, a licensee who prefers another call sign can request
    a call sign of his or her choice using the vanity call sign system,
    thereby negating the standards incorporated in the sequential call
    sign system. Therefore, we will deny the petition.

32. We are making editorial amendments to certain rule sections to
    conform them with the Commission's decisions in the *Report and
    Order*. We consider these revisions to be non-substantive in nature.
    Specifically, we are amending Section 97.119 of our Rules[^103] to
    eliminate the indicator AA in the station identification procedure
    and Section 97.3[^104] to correct spelling and conform a definition
    with the rule in which it is used. This indicator is now unnecessary
    because we are not issuing any new Advanced Class operator
    licenses.[^105] In addition, we are revising certain Part 13 rules
    so that the elimination of the twenty wpm telegraphy examination
    element from the amateur service license examination system does not
    inadvertently result in a reduction in telegraphy examination
    requirements for commercial radiotelegraph licenses.[^106]

33. We also are amending Section 97.527 of our Rules[^107] to conform it
    with Section 403 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.[^108]
    Specifically, Section 403(a)(4)-(5) deleted the reference to the
    total amount of allowable cost reimbursement per examinee. The
    statute now reads:

> With respect to the acceptance of voluntary uncompensated services for
> the preparation, processing, or administration of examinations for
> amateur station operator licenses pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this
> paragraph, individuals, or organizations which provide or coordinate
> such authorized volunteer services may recover from examinees
> reimbursement for out-of-pocket costs. [^109]

As amended, this section removed the dollar limitation on the total
amount of allowable cost reimbursement that could be recovered from an
examinee. VEs and VECs may now be reimbursed in full for out‑of‑pocket
expenses incurred in preparing, processing, administering, or
coordinating an examination for an amateur operator license.

**IV. PROCEDURAL MATTERS**

## A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification {#a.-final-regulatory-flexibility-act-certification .unnumbered}

34. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)[^110] requires that an agency
    prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for notice-and-comment
    rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that "the rule
    will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a
    substantial number of small entities."[^111] Because small business
    entities, as defined in Section 601(3) of the RFA,[^112] are not
    eligible to make an application for an amateur service license or be
    a licensee in the amateur service, we certify that there will not be
    a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
    entities if the proposed rule amendments are promulgated. The
    Commission shall send a copy of this *Memorandum Opinion and Order*,
    including this final certification in a report to Congress pursuant
    to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
    1996.[^113] In addition, the *Memorandum Opinion and Order* and this
    final certification will be sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
    of the Small Business Administration, and will be published in the
    Federal Register.[^114]

## B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis {#b.-paperwork-reduction-act-analysis .unnumbered}

35. This *Memorandum Opinion and Order* contains neither a proposed nor
    modified information collection. As part of our continuing effort to
    reduce paperwork burdens, however, we invite the general public and
    the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to take this opportunity
    to comment on infor­mation collections burdens, as required by the
    Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-13. In addition to
    filing com­ments with the Secretary, a copy of any com­ments on the
    infor­mation collections should be submitted to Judy Boley, Federal
    Commu­nica­tions Commis­sion, 445 Twelfth St., S.W., Room 1-C804,
    Washing­ton, D.C. 20554, or via the Internet to <jboley@fcc.gov>, and
    to Edward C. Springer, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 New Executive Office
    Building, 725 Seventeenth Street, N. W., Wash­ing­ton, D.C. 20503, or
    via the Internet to edward.springer@omb.eop.gov.

## C. Ordering Clauses {#c.-ordering-clauses .unnumbered}

36. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained
    in Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition for partial
    reconsideration filed by the American Radio Relay League, Inc., on
    March 13, 2000, IS GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as indicated
    herein.

37. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petitions for partial
    reconsideration filed by Alan J. Wormser, Frederick V. Adsit, and
    Michael J. Dinelli on January 19, 2000, and February 29, 2000, ARE
    GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as indicated herein.

38. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition for partial
    reconsideration filed by Millard H. Qualls on February 28, 2000, IS
    GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as indicated herein.

39. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition for partial
    reconsideration filed by Fred A. Duran, Jr., on February 14, 2000,
    IS DENIED.

40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition filed by Stewart
    Teaze on March 17, 2000, IS DISMISSED.

41. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition filed by Stewart
    Teaze on March 20, 2000, IS DISMISSED.

42. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition for rule making,
    RM-9867, filed by Dennis Kippa and David J. Hill on March 16, 2000,
    IS DENIED.

43. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition for rule making
    filed by the Quarter Century Wireless Association on October 22,
    2000, IS DISMISSED.

44. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition for rule making,
    RM-10018, filed by Joseph Speroni on November 17, 2000, IS DENIED.

45. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in
    Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.429 of the
    Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.429, the petition for rule making,
    RM-9831, filed by Eric R. Wolfe on February 7, 2000, IS DENIED.

46. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that effective July 1, 2001, pursuant to
    Sections 4(i) and (j), 303(r), and 403 of the Communications Act of
    1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i) and (j), 303(r), and 403,
    Parts 13 and 97 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. Parts 13 and
    97, ARE AMENDED as set forth in Appendix B.

47. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Consumer Information
    Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this
    *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, including the Final Regulatory
    Flexibility Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
    Small Business Administration.

48. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the proceeding WT Docket No. 98-143 IS
    HEREBY TERMINATED.

49. For further information on this matter contact the Policy and Rules
    Branch, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless
    Telecommunications Bureau, at (202) 418-0680, TTY (202) 418-7233.

50. Alternative formats (computer diskette, large print, audio cassette,
    and Braille) are available to persons with disabilities by
    contacting Martha Contee at (202) 418-0260, TTY (202) 418-2555, or
    via e-mail to <mcontee@fcc.gov>. This *Memorandum Opinion and Order*
    can be downloaded at
    <http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Orders/2001/index.html>.

### FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION {#federal-communications-commission .unnumbered}

> Magalie Roman Salas
>
> Secretary

**APPENDIX A**

**Comments**

KEN ALAN, K6PSI

ROY W. ANDERSON, W1CRD

JACK BECKMAN

JAMES BROMLEY

RICHARD CARTER

ROBERT CASEY, WA2ISE #1

ROBERT CASEY #2

COLLIN DVORAK

JERRY L. FARRAR, KB5OAI

LAWRENCE HAGEMAN, WA9ZPQ

TRACY HOOKER, KA5ECS

FREDERICK M. SPINNER, W0FMS

JAMES B. STALZER, KBØMD

CARL R. STEVENSON, WA6VSE

ARTHUR TATE

ARTHUR TATE #2

RAYMOND YAKESH

BRAD ZIEGLER, KC0CDG

K4IDD

FRED A DURAN, JR., W4NKI

LARRY GUMP

BOB J. PITTMAN, K5EYE

ALAN J. WORMSER

FREDERICK V. ADSIT, NY2V #1

FREDERICK V. ADSIT #2

BILL ALLEN, KC5ADF

JOSEPH A. AMES JR., W3JY

ROY W. ANDERSON, JR., W1CRD

GEORGE ANESTIS, W3ANX

JIM APPLE, WB1DOG

F.R. ASHLEY, WB4M

HAROLD C. BACON

RICHARD BALDWIN

BARRY, N2RPL

RICHARD C. BEERMAN

ROBERT A. BERGMUELLER, KG4AQN

JIM BORING

WAYLAND BRADLEY, K4WS

MELVIN G. BRAFFORD

GARY A. BRANCH

THOMAS P. BRANCH

EMMETT E. BROOKS, W5HTW

EDWARD A. BROWN

HUGH BROWN

ERNEST DAVID BUCHANAN

MITCHELL P. BURGESS

KENNETH S. CANNADAY, W4NZC, and

SHELLEY L. PENDLETON, AE4HD

BILL CARR, KC5OCZ

REV. GEORGE CARR

RICHARD S. CARROLL

ROBERT CASEY, WA2ISE #1

ROBERT CASEY #2

ROBERT CASEY #3

JOANNA CIPRIAN, K5SLY

LARRY CLARK, K0RS

JOHN R. CMIEL, W9EM

DANNY J. CONNER, KD5UJ

TIMOTHY D. CONROY

JAMES COOK

JAMES C. COTILLIER

JAMES "JAY" CRASWELL, W0VNE

MICHAEL CRESTOHL, W1RC

JOHN CUNLIFFE, N2NEP

JERRY W. DAUGHERTY, W9FS #1

JERRY W. DAUGHERTY #2

JEFFREY L. DAVIS, N9AVG

ALAN DAY, K8AL

ERIK S. DEAN, NI6G

ROB DEVLIN, KC4GD

CHARLES E. DIAL

MICHAEL J. DINELLI, N9BOR #1

MICHAEL J. DINELLI #2

THEODORE E. DRAKE

PAT P. DUNCAN, W5RHU

BURTON E. EATON

PETER ECONOMOS, W9RMB

J.B. EDMONDS

EDWARD F. EROH, K3VA

ROBIN FAULKNER

WILLIAM R. FEISSNER

ERIC FORSLUND, N8XT

STAN GANTZ, W5GZ

TIMOTHY M. GARRITY

STEPHEN B. GERSTENSCHLAGER, K0EY

MICHAEL F. GILMER, N2MG

STANLEY C. GILSTRAP

ROBERT M. GINKOWSKI, WA6CW

HOWARD P. GOULD

DONALD B. GREEN

FRED G. GUILIANO, NG3J

ROGER L. GUTKA, WD8QYF

RODNEY L. HARPER, W4SI

GEORGE HARTSELL, W4GEO

BRITT HAY, NA5S

TIMOTHY H. HEATON, WB7NMY

RON HEGE

ROY CLINTON HERBERT

PETER HICKS, N5KD

DONALD T. HIGGINS, JR.

MACALEE HIME, AB5TY

TOMAS HOOD

RON HOOPER

GEORGE W. JONES

MICHAEL T. JONES, W4TL #1

MICHAEL T. JONES #2

GLENN JORDAN

RODNEY W. JUNGE, W7MXQ

DANFORD P. K. KAEO, JR.

MICHAEL J. KEANE, K1MK

C. BRIAN KELLY, W3RV

FRANCIS Y. KELSON, N8HI

RICK KENNERLY

DANIEL L. KLEMENT

PHILIP LAZAR

LARRY L. LEARN

DOUG LOUCKS, W7YV

JOHNNIE LYNES

MICHAEL J. LYNESS, AF4LQ

JOSEPH MACK, NA3T

ARNIE W. MACY, KT4ST #1

ARNIE W. MACY #2

VICTOR M. MAGANA, N1VM #1

VICTOR M. MAGANA #2

JOE MALLOY, W2RBA

STEPHEN MANDICH, K6NT, ET AL.

JILL MANSFIELD

DANIEL L. METZGER

MIKE, K7CF

JOHN B. MITCHELL

MICHAEL C. MIGLIACCIO, N3HLM

KEVIN MILHORN, N4KM

GREGORY A. MORRIS

ROBERT MURDOCK

ROBERT NAUMANN

CRAIG NILSEN, K3CN

JOSEPH NOECKER, K7FGN

RAY PALMER

WILLIAM K. PALOMAKI, KB7WGX

RONALD C. PEARSON, KA5HZV

BRUCE PLANTZ

JOHN A. RODENBARGER, WB9OFG

MIKE RUDZKI, N8MR #1

MIKE RUDZKI #2

JOHN G. SALLEY

ARNOLD SAMUELS

TIM SANDERS

STAN SCHENFELD, N2ONU

DENNIS SCHNEIDER, N6IDU

ARTHUR J. SCHULTZ, SR., W2UHI

LELAND C. SCOTT, KC8LDO

LEONARD A. SECHRIST

DANIEL J. SHEPHERD SR., N8IE

ROBERT L. SHRADER, W6BNB

ARTHUR G. SILVERS, W6AGS

HERBERT C. SPIERLING, N6BC

FREDERICK M. SPINNER, W0FMS

FRED SPINNER, W0FMS

JOHN J. STARK, KU4BT

CARL R. STEVENSON, WA6VSE #1

CARL R. STEVENSON #2

CARL R. STEVENSON #3

CARL R. STEVENSON #4

KENNETH P. STEWART, KF3DC

BRADLEY STONE

MARVIN K. SUNDAY

WALTER R. TALBOTT II, KC2ZA

ALEX TANNER, W8FAX

CHARLES F. TIFFT, W6RD

GREGORY L. THOMPSON, KC7GNM

JAMES G. THOMPSON, SR.

JAMES S. TOLBERT, WW3S

GEORGE TUNCIL, W6AEA

HERMAN M. TURNER, WK3P

ROBERT VARONE, W4ETN

ROD VLACH

J.L. CLIFFORD WAGONER

SEAN WARNER

MIKE WEBER, WA2RZJ

RICHARD H. WEBER, W9QZ

VERN A. WEISS

VERN A. WEISS

ROGER WENDELL

JAME E. WHEDBEE, N0ECN

MICHAEL G. WILEY, WB5GMK

DAN S. WILLIAMSON

TROYCE WILSON, KC5CBI

STEPHEN L. WOLFCALE, N9WAT

FRANK WONKE, JR.

STEVEN R. WOOD

JUDIE ZACHARIAS, KB9LPM

DAN B. ZEITLIN

KARL W. ZUEGE, KB1DSB

**APPENDIX B**

Chapter 1 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 13 and
97, are amended as follows:

Part 13 -- Commercial Radio Operators

1\. The authority citation for part 13 continues to read as follows:

**AUTHORITY: Secs. 4, 303, 48 Stat. 1066, 1082 as amended; 47 U.S.C.
154, 303.**

2\. Section 13.9 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as
follows:

**§ 13.9 Eligibility and application for new license or endorsement.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(d\) \*\*\*

\(2\) An expired or unexpired FCC-issued Amateur Extra Class operator
license grant granted before

April 15, 2000: Telegraphy Elements 1 and 2.

\* \* \* \* \*

3\. Section 13.13 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as
follows:

**§ 13.13 Application for a renewed or modified license.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(d\) \* \* \*

\(2\) An expired or unexpired FCC-issued Amateur Extra Class operator
license document granted before April 15, 2000: Telegraphy Elements 1
and 2.

# Part 97 - Amateur Radio Service {#part-97---amateur-radio-service .unnumbered}

4.  The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303.
Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105, as amended; 47 U.S.C.
151-155, 301-609, unless otherwise noted.

5.  Section 97.3 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(35) and (b)
    introductory text to read as follows:

§ 97.3 Definitions.

\(a\) \* \* \*

\(35\) *Question set*. A series of examination questions on a given
examination selected from the question pool.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) The definitions of technical symbols used in this part are:

\* \* \* \* \*

6\. Section 97.119 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(2), removing
paragraph (f)(3), and revising and redesignation paragraph (f)(4) as
(f)(3) to read as follows:

§ 97.119 Station identification.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(f\) \* \* \*

\(2\) For a control operator who has requested a license modification
from Novice, Technician, or Technician Plus Class to General Class: AG;

\(3\) For a control operator who has requested a license modification
from Novice, Technician, Technician Plus, General, or Advanced Class to
Amateur Extra Class: AE.

\* \* \* \* \*

7\. Section 97.527 is revised to read as follows:

§ 97.527 Reimbursement for expenses.

VEs and VECs may be reimbursed by examinees for out‑of‑pocket expenses
incurred in preparing, processing, administering, or coordinating an
examination for an amateur operator license.

[^1]: 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review \-- Amendment of Part 97 of the
    Commission\'s Amateur Service Rules, *Report and Order,* WT Docket
    No. 98-143, 15 FCC Rcd 315 (1999) (*Report and Order)* and Errata,
    April 19, 2000 (*Errata*)*.* The rules changes were published in the
    Federal Register on February 10, 2000. *See* 65 Fed. Reg. 6548
    (2000).

[^2]: Petitions for reconsideration must be filed within 30 days from
    the date of public notice of the Commission's action, as that date
    is defined in Section 1.4(b). *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.429(d). Public
    notice occurred when the rule changes were published in the Federal
    Register. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.4(b)(1). Therefore, to be considered
    timely, petitions for reconsideration of the *Report and Order* must
    have been filed before the close of business on March 13, 2000.

[^3]: Dennis Kippa and David J. Hill, *Petition for Rulemaking* (filed
    Mar. 16, 2000) (RM-9867) (Kippa-Hill Petition); Joseph Speroni
    *Petition for Rulemaking* (filed Nov. 17, 2000) (RM-10018) (Speroni
    Petition).

[^4]: Quarter Century Wireless Association, *Petition for Rulemaking*
    (filed Oct. 22, 2000) (QCWA Petition).

[^5]: Eric R. Wolfe, *Proposed Rule Change* (filed Feb. 7, 2000) (Wolfe
    Petition) (RM-9831).

[^6]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 97.501-97.527.

[^7]: The three operator license classes that an individual may qualify
    for are Technician Class, General Class, and Amateur Extra Class.

[^8]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 316 ¶ 3.

[^9]: *Id.* at 345 ¶ 52.

[^10]: Millard H. Qualls, *Petition for Partial Reconsideration* (filed
    Feb. 28, 2000) (Qualls Petition); Fred A. Duran, Jr., *Petition for
    Partial Reconsideration* (filed Feb. 14, 2000) (Duran Petition);
    *Petition of ARRL, The National Association for Amateur Radio, for
    Partial Reconsideration* (filed Mar. 13, 2000) (ARRL Petition);
    Stewart Teaze, *Petitions for Reconsideration* (filed Mar. 17, 2000
    and Mar. 20, 2000) (Teaze Petitions); Alan J. Wormser, Frederick V.
    Adsit, and Michael J. Dinelli (WAD), *Petition for Partial
    Reconsideration II (Revised)* (filed Feb. 29, 2000) (WAD II). This
    last set of petitioners also filed an earlier petition, before the
    rule changes were published in the Federal Register. Alan J.
    Wormser, Frederick V. Adsit, and Michael J. Dinelli, *Petition for
    Partial Reconsideration* (filed Jan. 19, 2000) (WAD I). We note that
    WAD II subsumes WAD I, and additionally requests clarification of
    the Federal Register version of a rule. For purposes of this
    *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, we will refer to both petitions as
    WAD II.

[^11]: A list of commenters is set forth in Appendix A.

[^12]: *See* Amendment of Part 12, Rules Governing Amateur Radio
    Service, *Report and Order*, Docket No. 9295, 42 FCC 198 (1951)
    (*1951 License Structure Decision*).

[^13]: *Id.*

[^14]: *Id*. After adoption of the *1951 License Structure Decision*,
    the amateur service operator license classes, in ascending order of
    frequency privileges, were Novice, Technician, Conditional or
    General, Advanced, and Amateur Extra Class

[^15]: *Id*.

[^16]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 323 ¶ 15.

[^17]: Duran Petition at 1.

[^18]: *Id.* at 2; *see also* Comments of Larry Walsh at 1.

[^19]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 97.501, 97.503(b)(3).

[^20]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 323 n.55.

[^21]: *Id*. at 327 ¶ 21.

[^22]: This documentation is usually either a Technician Class license
    issued before February 14, 1991, a Certificate of Successful
    Completion of Examination showing credit for telegraphy examination
    Element 1(A), or a Technician Plus Class operator license issued by
    the Commission. Additionally, the Commission's amateur service
    licensing records from 1946 to the present are available. These
    records show a licensee's class of operator license.

[^23]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 326 ¶ 20.

[^24]: *Id*.

[^25]: Qualls Petition at 1; ARRL Petition at 3-5; WAD II Petition at
    19-20.

[^26]: Qualls Petition at 1; WAD II Petition at 20.

[^27]: ARRL Petition at 3-5.

[^28]: *Id.* at 3.

[^29]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 329 ¶ 25

[^30]: *Id*.

[^31]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 97.1.

[^32]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 329 ¶ 25

[^33]: Qualls Petition at 1.

[^34]: *Id*. at 2.

[^35]: Qualls Petition at 1-2.

[^36]: *See*, *e.g.*, *QST*, November 2000, at 87. *See also*
    [http://www.wiavic.org.au/](http://www.wiavic.org.au/Morse) Morse
    Code Watch. Australia, Denmark, Israel, Sweden, United Kingdom,
    South Africa and Gibraltar, among other countries, have adopted 5
    wpm as their telegraphy examination element. Other countries,
    including New Zealand, Singapore, India, Malaysia, Pakistan, Papua
    New Guinea, Kenya, and countries in Europe are in various stages of
    seeking to lower their telegraphy examination requirement to 5 wpm.
    *See* http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/01/24/4/?nc=1. We also
    note that the Conference of Postal and Telecommunications
    Administrations\--CEPT\--has effectively lowered the Amateur Radio
    Morse code test speed to 5 WPM for all European countries. *See*
    http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/03/21/1/?nc=1.

[^37]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 333 ¶ 30.

[^38]: WAD II Petition at 14-19.

[^39]: *Id*. at 14.

[^40]: *Id*. at 19.

[^41]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 329 ¶ 25.

[^42]: *See QST*, August 2000, at 24; *QST*, September 2000, at 73.

[^43]: 47 C.F.R. § 97.505.

[^44]: A Novice Class licensee has passed at least a five wpm telegraphy
    examination and a written examination covering the privileges this
    license class authorizes.

[^45]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 345 ¶ 52.

[^46]: *Id.* at 9-10.

[^47]: *Id.* at 7-8.

[^48]: *Id.* at 9.

[^49]: Comments of Guy A. Matzinger dated December 5, 2000, at 1; May
    25, 2000 at 1; February 16, 2000, at 1; and February 4, 2000, at 1.

[^50]: *Id*.

[^51]: *See* Amendments to the Amateur Service Rules Including
    Amendments for Examination Credit, Eligibility for a Club Station
    License, Recognition of the Volunteer Examiner Session Manager, a
    Special Event Call Sign System, and a Self-Assigned Indicator in the
    Station Identification, *Report and Order,* WT Docket No. 95-57, 12
    FCC Rcd 3804 (1997).

[^52]: *Id*. at 3810 ¶ 17.

[^53]: *Id*. at 3811¶ 19.

[^54]: *Id*.

[^55]: *Id*.

[^56]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 97.505(a)(9). We also note that examinees who
    held Technician Class operator license issued before February 14,
    1991, are eligible to receive credit for the five wpm telegraphy
    examination, whether or not they hold a current FCC-issued amateur
    service license.

[^57]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 345 ¶ 52.

[^58]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 97.505(a)(5), (9).

[^59]: *Id*.

[^60]: WAD II at 20-21.

[^61]: *Id.* Individuals who hold Novice Class operator licenses that
    have expired and gone beyond the grace period for renewal can
    receive examination credit only for the telegraphy examination
    element.

[^62]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 339 ¶ 42-43.

[^63]: *Id*. at 339 ¶ 42.

[^64]: WAD II Petition at 12-13.

[^65]: *Id*. at 12.

[^66]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 342 ¶ 47 n.189.

[^67]: *Id.* at 343 n.196.

[^68]: *Id.* at 339 n.168.

[^69]: *Id.* at 339 ¶ 42.

[^70]: 47 C.F.R. § 97.509.

[^71]: WAD II at 13-14.

[^72]: *See* Use of Volunteers to Prepare and Administer Operator
    Examinations in the Amateur Radio Service, *Report and Order,* PR
    Docket No. 83-27, 54 Rad. Reg. (P&F) 2d 1068 (1983); *Memorandum
    Opinion and Order,* 49 Fed. Reg. 30313 (1984); *see also* Permitting
    Volunteer-Examiner Coordinators to Maintain Pools of Questions for
    Amateur Operator Examinations, *Report and Order,* PR Docket No.
    85-196, 51 Fed. Reg. 30645 (1986); *Memorandum Opinion and Order*, 2
    FCC Rcd 2815 (1987).

[^73]: *See* WAD II Petition at 13-14.

[^74]: An examinee who fails an examination in a morning session could,
    for example, re-take the examination at an afternoon session if the
    administering VEs have decided morning and afternoon examination
    opportunities are different "sessions." If the administering VEs
    decide to treat the day as one session, however, under WAD II's
    request, if granted, an examinee would be prohibited [by Commission
    rule]{.underline} from re-taking the examination even if the VEs
    were willing to re-administer it. Because the Commission does not
    administer the examinations, however, it has no regulatory interest
    in requiring that an individual wait any particular time before
    re-taking an examination.

[^75]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 325 ¶ 17.

[^76]: *Id*.

[^77]: *See* Kippa-Hill Petition. The petition was placed on Public
    Notice May 2, 2000. *See* Report No. 2408. No comments supporting or
    opposing the petition were received.

[^78]: CW is a common term used by amateur radio operators to denote a
    Morse code telegraphy transmission. It is an abbreviation for
    "continuous wave," the wave form of the transmission that is turned
    on and off by the keying device to form the dots and dashes that, in
    combination, form letters, numbers, and symbols in the Morse code
    alphabet. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 97.3(c)(1).

[^79]: Kippa-Hill Petition at 1. We note that the amateur service is not
    a Federal agency.

[^80]: *See* Speroni Petition. The petition was placed on Public Notice
    December 8, 2000. *See* Report No. 2456.

[^81]: *Id*. at 1.

[^82]: *Id*. at 1.

[^83]: *See Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 325 ¶ 17.

[^84]: Kippa-Hill Petition at 1.

[^85]: Speroni Petition at 1.

[^86]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 97.305(c).

[^87]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 97.305(a). We note that under the rules,
    Kippa-Hill's claim that there is a "broad reservation of the radio
    spectrum" for different emission types applies to all emission types
    [except]{.underline} CW.

[^88]: *See* QCWA Petition.

[^89]: *Id.* at 2.

[^90]: *See* Amendment of the Amateur Service Rules to Provide for
    Incentive Licensing and Distinctive Call Signs, *Report and Order,*
    Docket No. 15928, 9 FCC 2d 814 (1968).

[^91]: QCWA Petition at 2.

[^92]: *Id*. at 3.

[^93]: *See* para. 7, *supra.*

[^94]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 324 n.55 (citing comments of
    NCVECs, William H. Cottrill, Don Murano, and David L. Heller).

[^95]: Teaze petition filed March 17, 2000 at 1.

[^96]: Teaze petition filed March 20, 2000.

[^97]: *See supra* note 2.

[^98]: *See* *QST* February, 2000 p. 90. The ARRL Amateur Radio
    Education Project is an ARRL-sponsored initiative to provide a
    turnkey amateur radio curriculum at the middle school level to
    attract young people into amateur radio.

[^99]: *See* Eric R. Wolfe (Wolfe) Petition. The petition was placed on
    Public Notice March 9, 2000. No comments supporting or opposing the
    petition were received.

[^100]: Wolfe Petition at 1.

[^101]: A district designator is a number (0-9) or a letter and number
    combination that is from an alphabetized regional-group list for the
    licensee\'s operator class and mailing address. Each call sign has a
    one letter prefix (K, N, W) or a two letter prefix (AA-AL, KA-KZ,
    NA-NZ, WA-WZ) and a one, two, or three letter suffix separated by a
    numeral (0-9) indicating the geographic region. Certain combinations
    of letters are not used. *See*
    <http://www.fcc.gov/wtb/amateur/amatur.html> for an explanation of
    the sequential call sign system.

[^102]: Wolfe Petition at 1.

[^103]: 47 C.F.R. § 97.119.

[^104]: 47 C.F.R. § 97.3.

[^105]: *Report and Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 323 ¶ 14.

[^106]: Specifically, we are amending 47 C.F.R. §§ 13.9(d), 13.13(d), to
    grant credit for commercial telegraph examination elements only to
    holders of Amateur Extra Class operator licenses that were granted
    prior to April 15, 2000. Examination credit is granted these
    licensees because they have passed a telegraphy examination that is
    equivalent to the telegraphy examination required for certain
    commercial radiotelegraph operator licenses. Absent this amendment,
    an individual who holds an Amateur Extra Class operator license by
    virtue of passing a 5 wpm telegraphy examination could inadvertently
    receive credit for the 16 and 20 wpm commercial telegraph
    examination elements.

[^107]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 97.527.

[^108]: Public Law 104-104, § 403 (1996). Before 1996, 47 U.S.C. §
    154(f)(4)(J) provided that VEs and VECs , "may recover from
    examinees reimbursement for out-of-pocket costs. The total amount of
    allowable cost reimbursement per examinee shall not exceed \$4,
    adjusted annually every January 1 for changes in the Department of
    Labor Consumer Price Index."

[^109]: 47 U.S.C. § 154(f)(4)(I)

[^110]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 601 *et seq*.

[^111]: 5 U.S.C. § 605(b).

[^112]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(3).

[^113]: 5 U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A).

[^114]: 5 U.S.C. § 605(b).