wrote in message
ps.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "W2DNE"
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 6:40 PM
Subject: Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Iitoi" wrote in message
...

Bill Sohl Wrote:

IF (let's be hypothetical) the FCC did retain code for
Extra, then the American Disabilities Act (ADA) will
surely be raised by someone who need only point
to the use of waivers previously and no court in
this country would rule against such a clain.

The "waivers previously" were only for the 13/20 WPM tests, and
required the applicant to have passed a 5 WPM test. TTBOMK there has
never been any waiver of 5 WPM, thus no precedent in support of such
a
claim.

The ONLY reason waivers were not extended down to 5wpm
in the past was because the FCC believed the USA could not
waive the minimal code test because of the treaty. Now
that there is no treaty requirement, the logic that lead
to waivers of 13/20 wpm can and would be extended to
a 5wpm test IF such test remains. The precident stands
based on the general application of waivers for non-treaty
established code speeds.

True - up to a point.

It can also be argued that the precedent is limited only to
'higher-speed' code tests, and not to code testing in general.
IOW, there's a difference between a waiver of a higher level
of skill vs. a complete waiver of the skill.

Agreed... BUT there is no longer ANY international
treaty requirement for even a basic skill which, I believe,
is exactly why we have an open (almost closed now)
NPRM addressing ending ALL code testing.
It is also why, IMHO, the FCC won't go with any
code test at all for Extra.

As an analogy, there have been cases (not amateur radio)
where a disabled person was given additional time to
complete a test that, for everyone else, had a strict time limit.

That person essentially got a waiver of the time limit but not
of the test itself.

Opponents of the waiver said that the time limit was an
integral part of the test.

Also last I checked there was no precedent for a waiver of 5
word-per-min.

The precident is for waivers of code testing of non-treaty
required code knowledge. It matters not if that was 20, 13
or now 5wpm. Conceptually the precident is there.

But only for higher-speed tests, not for the basic skill itself.

And again, the basic skill was, in the past, an ITU treaty
requirement. It ain't anymore.

In any case, I'd agree that invoking ADA might work --- to require
possibility of test waivers for disabled, but not to disallow testing
outright.

The waivers in the past were only for disabled with a medical
certification statement.

Which took the form of a letter from any M.D. or D.O. stating that
it would take the person longer-than-usual to reach the skill
level necessary to pass the 13 or 20 wpm code test. There was no
requirement of an actual documented disability, nor that the
disability would make it *impossible* for the person to pass the test.
Nor did the disability have to be permanent and/or untreatable. The
doctor didn't have to write the letter, just sign it. Nor did the
doctor
need any particular qualifications to make the judgement.

Agreed..and such was "my" intent regarding medical
certficiation.

I don't know of anyone who sought a medical waiver who was
denied if they had the required doctor's letter.

Nor would they (IMHO) in the future IF any code
test remains.

Most of all, the waivers did not come about because of ADA.

Agreed as to the past.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK