When I had my Australian license VK3JNP the fee was only $50 AUS each year. Michael Monsour AC0TX
On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 9:15 AM Keith NM5G via BVARC <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh, and only a $1000 for an HF radio??? > > I bought a repack IC-7300 from MTC for $1000, tax and shipping included. > Plus, I got a $100 rebate check from Icom a month later. > > > > 73, Keith NM5G > > > > *From:* BVARC <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Michael Amos via > BVARC > *Sent:* Saturday, August 29, 2020 5:19 PM > *To:* BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Michael Amos <[email protected]>; [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service > Fees > > > > I agree however lets look at the more damaging picture here. How many > possible new hams will turn away with the thought of having to now pay $65 > to get his/her first license instead of the $15 to take the test. All > those kids whose dreams were smashed. I know it’s only $50 but for that > parent who is a little skittish about paying the government MORE money, > that might be the turn-off. > > > > Also, don’t forget that once the government gets that running again…. > What’s to stop them from increasing it? Where is the end to this? Picture > paying $100, $200, or more to just renew. And what are they going to do > with the money? Maybe help track down illegal transmitters on the bands? > Like those folks playing nasty recordings with vulgarity, etc? OR, maybe > they could put a halt on trying to take away the frequencies that are > already there. How about crack down on manufacturers that produce RF > splattering equipment to the general public. Or, even better, how bout > pushing the power companies to do a better job keeping their lines from > generating so much RF you cant even hear the NATURAL static. > > > > Just my soapbox. Sorry for opening it… Oh, and only a $1000 for an HF > radio??? Lol 😊 > > > > > > Mike – KG4NDS > > > > > > *From:* BVARC <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *JP Pritchard via > BVARC > *Sent:* Saturday, August 29, 2020 5:01 PM > *To:* 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' <[email protected]> > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service > Fees > > > > Okay KJ, I get your humor and I even hear your logic. But the question is > Why charge such a fee? Sure, it’s not a lot of money for many of us, but > for a lot of amateurs who are retired, or who’ve lost their job thanks to > Covid-19, there’s always somebody looking for another 50 bucks or another > 25. New hams face a bunch of expenses already, for new gear, etc. It’s like > a lot of the permit fees a person is asked to pay. Why are you charged > these fees? Mostly it’s just government at one level or another looking for > another source of revenue. The FCC is already clearing billions of dollars > by selling large chunks of spectrum to the wireless business. Another 50 > bucks will mean nothing to Uncle Sam, but may have meaning for someone > who’s just scrapin’ by. > > > > JP > > > > > > > > *From:* BVARC <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *KJ Anderson via > BVARC > *Sent:* Saturday, August 29, 2020 4:51 PM > *To:* BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <[email protected]>; 'john Parmalee' > <[email protected]> > *Cc:* KJ Anderson <[email protected]>; [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service > Fees > > > > Here’s how I see it: > > - $1000 for an HF radio > - $1000 for a second/backup/whatever spare HF radio (most of us don’t > have just one decent radio, be honest) > - $5000 for a modest tower, concrete, etc. > - $2000 in an actual antenna, feed line, rotator, etc. > - $1000 for two cars fully installed with mobile VHF/UHF radios and > antennas > - $500 for a gas generator and battery backups (some of us) > - $300 a year for field day supplies, the camping trip, food, > conventions, etc. > > > > If the FCC bills us $50 every 10 years (your license is now good for 10 > years due to the 2019 rule change), I’m not sure I can stay in this hobby > any longer, the costs of the FCC will make this hobby too cost prohibitive > for me…. > > > > A bit of tongue-in-cheek for a Saturday afternoon. > > > > 73!! > > > > KJ5EMP, KJ in Cypress > > > > *-------------------------------------------------* > > *KJ Anderson* > > 253-380-2636 > > www.linkedin.com/in/scrumnerd > > > > *From:* BVARC <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *JP Pritchard via > BVARC > *Sent:* Saturday, August 29, 2020 3:18 PM > *To:* 'john Parmalee' <[email protected]>; 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO > CLUB' <[email protected]> > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service > Fees > > > > I’m new to this game, but as far as I am aware, the FCC does very little > to support amateur radio, with the exception of allowing hams to use > certain frequencies. This would appear to be nothing more than a money > grab, having nothing to do with cost of administration, (since it sounds > like most of the administration is automated). They certainly contribute > very little to enforcing their own rules. I don’t mind paying for a toll > road if I’m a user, but a toll road requires constant upkeep and upgrades. > I don’t see the parallel to amateur radio. I hope the ARRL gathers its > forces against this proposal (to the extent that its bylaws allow) and > supports all ancillary efforts to kill this effort. That’s just my initial > thought on the matter. Tell me why I’m wrong. > > > > 73, K5JPP, JP > > > > > > > > f*rom:* BVARC <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *john Parmalee via > BVARC > *Sent:* Saturday, August 29, 2020 2:27 PM > *To:* [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > *Cc:* john Parmalee <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees > > > *FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees* > > 08/28/2020 > > Amateur radio licensees would pay a $50 fee for each amateur radio license > application if the FCC adopts rules it proposed this week. Included in the > FCC’s fee proposal are applications for new licenses, renewal and upgrades > to existing licenses, and vanity call sign requests. Excluded are > applications for administrative updates, such as changes of address, and > annual regulatory fees. > > The FCC proposal is contained in a *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM > <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-116A1.pdf>)* in MD Docket > 20-270, which was adopted to implement portions of the “Repack Airwaves > Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services Act” of 2018 — the > so-called “Ray Baum’s Act > <https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ141/PLAW-115publ141.pdf>.” > > The Act requires that the FCC switch from a Congressionally-mandated fee > structure to a cost-based system of assessment. In its *NPRM,* the FCC > proposed application fees for a broad range of services that use the FCC’s > Universal Licensing System (ULS), including the Amateur Radio Service that > had been excluded by an earlier statute. The 2018 statute excludes the > Amateur Service from annual regulatory fees, but not from application fees. > > “[A]pplications for personal licenses are mostly automated and do not have > individualized staff costs for data input or review,” the FCC said in its > *NPRM.* “For these automated processes — new/major modifications, > renewal, and minor modifications — we propose a nominal application fee of > $50 due to automating the processes, routine ULS maintenance, and limited > instances where staff input is required.” > > The same $50 fee would apply to all Amateur Service applications, > including those for vanity call signs. “Although there is currently no fee > for vanity call signs in the Amateur Radio Service, we find that such > applications impose similar costs in aggregate on Commission resources as > new applications and therefore propose a $50 fee,” the FCC said. > > The FCC is not proposing to charge for administrative updates, such as > mailing address changes for amateur applications, and amateur radio will > remain exempt from annual regulatory fees. “For administrative updates > [and] modifications, which also are highly automated, we find that it is in > the public interest to encourage licensees to update their [own] > information without a charge,” the FCC said. > > The FCC also proposes to assess a $50 fee for individuals who want a > printed copy of their license. “The Commission has proposed to eliminate > these services — but to the extent the Commission does not do so, we > propose a fee of $50 to cover the costs of these services,” the FCC said. > > The Ray Baum’s Act does not exempt filing fees in the Amateur Radio > Service. The FCC dropped assessment of fees for vanity call signs several > years ago. > > Deadlines for comments and reply comments will be determined once the > *NPRM* appears in the *Federal Register.* File comments by using the > FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS > <https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings>), posting to MD Docket No. 20-270. > This docket is already open for accepting comments even though deadlines > have not yet been set. > ________________________________________________ > Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club > > BVARC mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >
________________________________________________ Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club BVARC mailing list [email protected] http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
