"Alun" wrote

It might be more productive if someone could
produce some evidence one way or the other!

I can do better than evidence, I can provide proof....

The governing regulation is §97.527 which allows, but does NOT require,
VEC's to collect reimbursement for examinations. (In other words, there
is no requirement that VEC's collect money for ANY examination.)
Collection of reimbursement is AUTHORIZED but it is not MANDATORY.

Back in the early-mid 90's the ARRL VEC decided not to collect fees for
Novice examinations. This ****ed off the W5YI VEC who actually
petitioned the FCC to REQUIRE the collection of fees. FCC declined to
grant his petition.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"KØHB" wrote in news:mGDPb.22507$zj7.7765
@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:


"Alun" wrote

It might be more productive if someone could produce some evidence one
way or the other!

I can do better than evidence, I can provide proof....

The governing regulation is §97.527 which allows, but does NOT require,
VEC's to collect reimbursement for examinations. (In other words, there
is no requirement that VEC's collect money for ANY examination.)
Collection of reimbursement is AUTHORIZED but it is not MANDATORY.

Back in the early-mid 90's the ARRL VEC decided not to collect fees for
Novice examinations. This ****ed off the W5YI VEC who actually
petitioned the FCC to REQUIRE the collection of fees. FCC declined to
grant his petition.

73, de Hans, K0HB








I don't think that qualifies as proof. Oh well, never mind.

"Alun" wrote

From K0HB:

The governing regulation is §97.527 which allows, but does NOT
require,
VEC's to collect reimbursement for examinations. (In other words,
there
is no requirement that VEC's collect money for ANY examination.)
Collection of reimbursement is AUTHORIZED but it is not MANDATORY.

I don't think that qualifies as proof.

Since it is a citation of the actual federal rules, it is certainly more
convincing than your tenuous assertion that you "read somewhere".....

73, de Hans, K0HB

"KØHB" wrote in news:fZEPb.22599$zj7.10801
@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:


"Alun" wrote

From K0HB:

The governing regulation is §97.527 which allows, but does NOT
require,
VEC's to collect reimbursement for examinations. (In other words,
there
is no requirement that VEC's collect money for ANY examination.)
Collection of reimbursement is AUTHORIZED but it is not MANDATORY.

I don't think that qualifies as proof.

Since it is a citation of the actual federal rules, it is certainly more
convincing than your tenuous assertion that you "read somewhere".....

73, de Hans, K0HB











That's the problem though, isn't it? What we need is the statute, not the
rules, which prove nothing in the absence of Novice testing.

Alun wrote:

"KØHB" wrote in news:fZEPb.22599$zj7.10801
@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:


"Alun" wrote

From K0HB:

The governing regulation is §97.527 which allows, but does NOT
require,
VEC's to collect reimbursement for examinations. (In other words,
there
is no requirement that VEC's collect money for ANY examination.)
Collection of reimbursement is AUTHORIZED but it is not MANDATORY.

I don't think that qualifies as proof.

Since it is a citation of the actual federal rules, it is certainly more
convincing than your tenuous assertion that you "read somewhere".....

That's the problem though, isn't it? What we need is the statute, not the
rules, which prove nothing in the absence of Novice testing.

So if I understand your view, you'd like to see a statute as proof that
the statute does not exist. Does that sum it up?

Dave K8MN

"Dave Heil" wrote


| That's the problem though, isn't it? What we need is the statute,
not the
| rules, which prove nothing in the absence of Novice testing.
|
| So if I understand your view, you'd like to see a statute as proof
that
| the statute does not exist. Does that sum it up?

It's clear he doesn't wish to be confused with any facts which spoil his
rant.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Alun wrote


That's the problem though, isn't it?


It's not a problem for me.

What we need is the statute, not the
rules, which prove nothing in the absence
of Novice testing.

The rule cited shows that there is not a requirement to charge a fee
for any license examination of any class.

If you think otherwise, then I guess the burden of proof lies with
you, not with me. I've made my case by citing the governing
regulation.

Good luck on this one now!

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Alun" wrote

I don't think that qualifies as proof.

Here is a direct quote from the "Amateur Radio Newsline" broadcast of
Sept 12th, 1993, where the hissy-fit of W5YI is described. Since K7UGA
left the Senate in 1986, long before this incident, it's unlikely that
he responded with legislation which required free Novice exams.

Sunuvagun!

de Hans, K0HB


" VEC UPSET ABOUT FREE NOVICE TESTS

The ARRL says that it will not charge applicants for Novice
tests. This even though the W5YI VEC has filed a complaint with
the FCC alleging that the League's VEC operation is in violation
of the rules because it refuses to charge applicants for these
tests.
But Fred Maia W5YI who operates the VEC bearing his callsign
claims that its a matter of uniformity. That all VEC's who use
what is called the annual method of figuring reimbursement are
required to charge an examination fee for every test it gives,
including Novice exams. The ARRL says that it plans to continue
its policy of administering Novice tests free of charge because
it believes that this policy is consistent with an FCC tradition
established back in the 1950's. This, as a way of making it easy
for youngsters to get entry level licenses.
The League's President, George Wilson, W4OYI says that the
whole thing is nothing more than one of the ironies that keeps
ham radio politics interesting. Wilson notes that VEC's have
always had the latitude to set their own fees. He adds -- and we
quote -- "Frankly, we see no compelling Federal interest in
whether or not a class of nine year olds ought to be charged for
taking an entry level ham radio exam."
But Maia and his W5YI VEC operation see it very differently.
In his September 1st issue of his W5YI Report newsletter Maia
says that the potential financial benefit to the League
resulting from its policy is to serious to be ignored. He says
that free examinations when all other VEC's charge, attract
applicants who are the potential purchasers of examination
preparation materials. Maia believes that the purchasing
decisions of these people may be unduly influenced by their
choice of VEC's.

"KØHB" wrote in message hlink.net...
"Alun" wrote

I don't think that qualifies as proof.

Here is a direct quote from the "Amateur Radio Newsline" broadcast of
Sept 12th, 1993, where the hissy-fit of W5YI is described. Since K7UGA
left the Senate in 1986, long before this incident, it's unlikely that
he responded with legislation which required free Novice exams.

Sunuvagun!

de Hans, K0HB


" VEC UPSET ABOUT FREE NOVICE TESTS

The ARRL says that it will not charge applicants for Novice
tests. This even though the W5YI VEC has filed a complaint with
the FCC alleging that the League's VEC operation is in violation
of the rules because it refuses to charge applicants for these
tests.
But Fred Maia W5YI who operates the VEC bearing his callsign
claims that its a matter of uniformity. That all VEC's who use
what is called the annual method of figuring reimbursement are
required to charge an examination fee for every test it gives,
including Novice exams. The ARRL says that it plans to continue
its policy of administering Novice tests free of charge because
it believes that this policy is consistent with an FCC tradition
established back in the 1950's. This, as a way of making it easy
for youngsters to get entry level licenses.
The League's President, George Wilson, W4OYI says that the
whole thing is nothing more than one of the ironies that keeps
ham radio politics interesting. Wilson notes that VEC's have
always had the latitude to set their own fees. He adds -- and we
quote -- "Frankly, we see no compelling Federal interest in
whether or not a class of nine year olds ought to be charged for
taking an entry level ham radio exam."
But Maia and his W5YI VEC operation see it very differently.
In his September 1st issue of his W5YI Report newsletter Maia
says that the potential financial benefit to the League
resulting from its policy is to serious to be ignored. He says
that free examinations when all other VEC's charge, attract
applicants who are the potential purchasers of examination
preparation materials. Maia believes that the purchasing
decisions of these people may be unduly influenced by their
choice of VEC's.

Did this flap ever make it to the U.S. Dept. of Justice trust busters or the SEC?

Gotta just love Maia. He's more fun than Wayne Green.

w3rv

Did this flap ever make it to the U.S. Dept. of Justice trust busters or
the SEC?

Gotta just love Maia. He's more fun than Wayne Green.

w3rv

Maia, Wayne Green and Dick Bash should be drawn and quartered on the Nevada
sands.

Dan/W4NTI