June 2007 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:15721] Re: RE: RE: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act
by Bruce Frahm K0BJ 26 Jun '07

26 Jun '07

Andy, my own Rep. Moran KS 1st has been rather supportive. I suggest you try to find out if Stark has an aide that focuses on telecom or failing that, science. If he did have one, I'd have thought your letter would have gone to that person. But maybe it didn't. Point being, try to work directly with the most appropriate staff person. I don't know about at present, but a few years ago Moran's telecom guy was eager to get specifics and listen to detailed info. 73 Bruce K0BJ

1 0

[arrl-odv:15720] Re:RE: RE: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act
by Andy Oppel 26 Jun '07

26 Jun '07

Greetings, I wrote to my representative, Fortney (Pete) Stark (D, CA) last year and got a very disappointing response (see attached). Basically he believes that BPL has been studied, won't cause any interference, and that the FCC would never do anything to harm amateur radio. I tried to open up the issue at one of his town meetings, but he stonewalled me. He's not a bad guy, but his background is banking, so he just doesn't get technology. He's much more devoted to issues such as health care and Social Security. And not being into teaching pigs to fly, I have given up on him. I can't help but wonder how many other representatives either don't understand the technology well enough to take a side or inherently trust the FCC to do the right thing? -- Andy Oppel, N6AJO At 06:20 PM 6/25/2007, Joel Harrison wrote: >Frank, > >Since January we have been working specific, key congressional >representatives in support of HR462. This has resulted in several directors >being contacted directly for letters from specific congressional districts >which has occurred and has been very successful to date. > >My email of May 22 for each director and vice director to write a letter to >their own representatives, as well as to have the grassroots program begin >letters to their specific representative was for co-sponsors to HR462. While >we do want to generate as many co-sponsors as possible, that will not ensure >passage of the bill. Working key committee representatives, as we have been >doing since January, will, just as we did and were successful with last year >during the previous Congress when the House of Representatives passed our >bill. > >If my previous email was not informative enough, I will gladly clarify it, >however I have not heard from anyone along those lines, only responses from >the directors who have acted on it so far. > >73 Joel W5ZN > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Frank Fallon [mailto:n2ff@optonline.net] >Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 11:09 AM >To: arrl-odv >Cc: arrl-odv >Subject: [arrl-odv:15687] Re: RE: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act > >Joel and Dave, > >This is great news. Congratulations to the team! > >I hope that we will shortly have a web story up and a link to letters before >Field Day. Many Directors and SM's will be meeting a lot of our members that >weekend and it is good opportunity to push our members into action so that >they will contact their congressional representatives and senators over the >July 4th recess and get more cosponsors. > >Please remember that our grassroots program/network will not function as >designed unless we keep those key members informed. By my count they have >had only one message this year and that was Joel's May 22nd "Action Plan" >message. > >We need a point person at HQ to push this effort! > >73 de Frank...N2FF..... > >Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote: > > The number is S.1629. > > Dave HB9/K1ZZ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > *From:* Joel Harrison [mailto:w5zn@arrl.org] > > *Sent:* Thu 6/14/2007 9:44 PM > > *To:* arrl-odv > > *Subject:* FW: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act > > > > I'm very pleased to report to you that we now have a Senate version of > > HR462! > > > > The bill number will be available shortly. > > > > Senator Mark Pryor (Arkansas) filed the bill today. This is successful > > completion of an effort that has been ongoing for a little over two > > months that has involved the activity of a variety of people. Another > > important fact is that Entergy, the major utility in Arkansas and many > > parts of the U.S. operates a BPL system to collect electric usage data > > (no subscriber base) and has been very cooperative with radio amateurs > > from the very beginning about preventing interference to amateur radio > > stations and actually bought off and supports the language of the bill. > > > > More later. > > > > 73 Joel W5ZN > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > > *From:* John Chwat [mailto:john.chwat@chwatco.com] > > *Sent:* Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:18 PM > > *To:* w5zn(a)arrl.org; 'Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ'; cimlay(a)arrl.org > > *Cc:* 'Janet Worthington' > > *Subject:* FW: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act > > > > Congratulations to all-we now have a House AND Senate bill-we will get > > a Senate bill number tomorrow to forward---we have offered to draft a > > Dear Colleague for Sen.Pryor's staff. We will begin our networking > > (Director's too) for Senate Cosponsors once we get a bill number and > > get a Dear Colleague back.. > > > > John > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > > *From:* Glaze, Terri (Pryor) [mailto:Terri_Glaze@pryor.senate.gov] > > *Sent:* Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:55 PM > > *To:* Janet Worthington > > *Cc:* john.chwat(a)chwatco.com > > *Subject:* Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act > > > > The bill was filed today! > > Andy Oppel andy(a)andyoppel.com andy_oppel(a)alamedanet.net

1 0

Dennis Bodson Your Email is bouncing
by Joel Harrison 26 Jun '07

26 Jun '07

Dennis, I have tried to send you several emails over the past week and they all bounce. If you receive this message over the ODV reflector please respond to me individually. Your address that is bouncing is bodsond(a)worldnet.att.net All others please disregard. 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

RE: HR462 Cosponsorship Update
by Jim Weaver 26 Jun '07

26 Jun '07

Excellent results. Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: <mailto:k8je@arrl.org> k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel.: 513-459-0142 ARRL - The Reason Amateur Radio Is! Members - The Reason ARRL Is! -----Original Message----- From: Joel Harrison [mailto:w5zn@arrl.org] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 9:18 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: HR462 Cosponsorship Update As I mentioned in a previous email, the past few months we have been focusing on congressional representatives who are on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the committee that would actually debate and take action on our bill before it would even have a chance of making it to the House floor. Rep. John Barrow (D-GA) and Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC) have agreed to cosponsor HR462. Having cosponsors that are actual members of the Energy & Commerce Committee will go a very long way in the coming months in Committee deliberations. I appreciate the specific letters that were arranged from the Southeast and Roanoke Divisions at my request. 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:15687] Re: RE: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act
by Joel Harrison 26 Jun '07

26 Jun '07

Frank, Since January we have been working specific, key congressional representatives in support of HR462. This has resulted in several directors being contacted directly for letters from specific congressional districts which has occurred and has been very successful to date. My email of May 22 for each director and vice director to write a letter to their own representatives, as well as to have the grassroots program begin letters to their specific representative was for co-sponsors to HR462. While we do want to generate as many co-sponsors as possible, that will not ensure passage of the bill. Working key committee representatives, as we have been doing since January, will, just as we did and were successful with last year during the previous Congress when the House of Representatives passed our bill. If my previous email was not informative enough, I will gladly clarify it, however I have not heard from anyone along those lines, only responses from the directors who have acted on it so far. 73 Joel W5ZN -----Original Message----- From: Frank Fallon [mailto:n2ff@optonline.net] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 11:09 AM To: arrl-odv Cc: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:15687] Re: RE: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act Joel and Dave, This is great news. Congratulations to the team! I hope that we will shortly have a web story up and a link to letters before Field Day. Many Directors and SM's will be meeting a lot of our members that weekend and it is good opportunity to push our members into action so that they will contact their congressional representatives and senators over the July 4th recess and get more cosponsors. Please remember that our grassroots program/network will not function as designed unless we keep those key members informed. By my count they have had only one message this year and that was Joel's May 22nd "Action Plan" message. We need a point person at HQ to push this effort! 73 de Frank...N2FF..... Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote: > The number is S.1629. > Dave HB9/K1ZZ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *From:* Joel Harrison [mailto:w5zn@arrl.org] > *Sent:* Thu 6/14/2007 9:44 PM > *To:* arrl-odv > *Subject:* FW: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act > > I'm very pleased to report to you that we now have a Senate version of > HR462! > > The bill number will be available shortly. > > Senator Mark Pryor (Arkansas) filed the bill today. This is successful > completion of an effort that has been ongoing for a little over two > months that has involved the activity of a variety of people. Another > important fact is that Entergy, the major utility in Arkansas and many > parts of the U.S. operates a BPL system to collect electric usage data > (no subscriber base) and has been very cooperative with radio amateurs > from the very beginning about preventing interference to amateur radio > stations and actually bought off and supports the language of the bill. > > More later. > > 73 Joel W5ZN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > *From:* John Chwat [mailto:john.chwat@chwatco.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:18 PM > *To:* w5zn(a)arrl.org; 'Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ'; cimlay(a)arrl.org > *Cc:* 'Janet Worthington' > *Subject:* FW: Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act > > Congratulations to all-we now have a House AND Senate bill-we will get > a Senate bill number tomorrow to forward---we have offered to draft a > Dear Colleague for Sen.Pryor's staff. We will begin our networking > (Director's too) for Senate Cosponsors once we get a bill number and > get a Dear Colleague back.. > > John > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > *From:* Glaze, Terri (Pryor) [mailto:Terri_Glaze@pryor.senate.gov] > *Sent:* Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:55 PM > *To:* Janet Worthington > *Cc:* john.chwat(a)chwatco.com > *Subject:* Emergency Amateur Radio Interference Act > > The bill was filed today! >

1 0

HR462 Cosponsorship Update
by Joel Harrison 26 Jun '07

26 Jun '07

As I mentioned in a previous email, the past few months we have been focusing on congressional representatives who are on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the committee that would actually debate and take action on our bill before it would even have a chance of making it to the House floor. Rep. John Barrow (D-GA) and Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC) have agreed to cosponsor HR462. Having cosponsors that are actual members of the Energy & Commerce Committee will go a very long way in the coming months in Committee deliberations. I appreciate the specific letters that were arranged from the Southeast and Roanoke Divisions at my request. 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

[arrl-odv:15715] Field Day!
by Kay Craigie 25 Jun '07

25 Jun '07

Because Carter wasn't up to going to the Virginia Tech club Field Day site, which is WAY up in the hills towards the West Virginia state line, we did two separate class 1D operations from home. Conditions resembled a vacuum cleaner (think about it!). The most enjoyable QSO I had was with Vice Director Bullock when we ran into each other on phone. I didn't work much phone, so encountering a familiar voice was quite a surprise. If you participated in Field Day, I hope you had a good time and that the weather was as kind to you as it was to us. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:15711] Re: Regulation by Bandwidth Education - Practice Opportunity
by Jim Weaver 24 Jun '07

24 Jun '07

Bruce, Dick, et al, My only input into the discussion is that I have taken a poll of the GLD. In an attempt to avoid any stigma associated with Regulation by Bandwidth, I asked five questions on different items and avoided the term Regulation by Bandwidth. I haven't had the opportunity to analyze the results, but I feel pretty safe in saying a substantial majority of responders were opposed to the concept of Regulation by Bandwidth as they currently envision it. FWIW Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel.: 513-459-0142 ARRL - The Reason Amateur Radio Is! Members - The Reason ARRL Is! -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Frahm K0BJ [mailto:brucefrahmk0bj@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 7:25 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:15711] Re: Regulation by Bandwidth Education - Practice Opportunity Dick, I'll give you my quick take on your question/suggestion. First, you've chosen probably the easiest band to defend non-status-quo options -- due to the large amount of real estate on 10. That said, my concern pretty much applies to all the HF bands. You really don't need convincing that band segmentation by mode is becoming more and more irrelevant, difficult to define, etc. do you? You really want to know why the FCC doesn't just conform with the rest of the world's PTTs and specify the band edges and permissible max. bandwidths. I think that would be great -- EXCEPT I think a majority of Yank hams have far too little faith in gentlemen's agreements and aren't near ready to rely solely on such non-government agreements. We can point to the rest of the world and their experiences, and the way even we, now, use 160 M as evidence it WOULD work but these people still will not be comfortable with the thought of casting off that security blanket of FCC-mandated segmentation. In my defense of Reg. by bandwidth with constituents, I often mention that I'd like to see it be an intermediate step to becoming like the rest of the world "sometime" (maybe ~12 years hence??). I haven't had any of maybe fifteen or so return replies pursue me on that particular statement.... maybe we need to do some polling and see if I (we) am overestimating the angst W hams would have with going that route. Maybe those commenters had 'bigger bones to pick' with me...... Convincing the masses is the one fatal flaw I perceive in your idea. It's proving very hard to convince them ANY change is good. Bruce

1 0

[arrl-odv:15713] July QST
by Kramer, Harold, WJ1B 21 Jun '07

21 Jun '07

There are two errors in the July Issue of QST: >From Steve Ford: This is the story . . . As the July issue of QST was about to go to press, we realized that we would not have enough room to publish the entire resonance probe article without sacrificing other content in the issue. We made the decision to move the article to a later issue, but word of the change was not properly communicated to the Graphics department so that the cover could be changed accordingly. QST covers are sent separately from the main body of the magazine, so this error bypassed our usual checks. We have subsequently modified our process so that this should not happen again. A story about the error was published in the ARRL Letter. There was also a small error in my "Inside HQ" column. I stated that California has seven ARRL Sections. As some eagle-eyed readers have already pointed out, it actually has nine. I put a correction in the August column. These are unfortunate errors and I am sorry about them. Hopefully, we have learned from our mistakes and this has made us rethink and change some our quality control and editing processes to minimize these problems in the future. Harold

1 0

[arrl-odv:15712] Re:RE: Yaesu VIP Discount
by Huntington Howard-CADV02 21 Jun '07

21 Jun '07

Hi Tom, Here is my input. Dennis had mentioned this to me at Dayton when I asked him if Yaesu still has stock of the 6 meter transverter for Mark V. He seemed to think it was a go for us officials and suggested that I pursue it. He said it is common for those within the industry to allow such arrangements. I told him I would not likely use this regardless and in fact did not pursue it further. I believe the members would take a dim view of elected volunteers saving $ on nice new equipment as a result of being elected to a position. For staff it may be a different situation, that is for non officer staff. It reminds me of years ago when I heard of Motorola setting standards for employees accepting gifts from suppliers. Trinkets of insignificant value is ok. Also we can give trinkets to others if the Motorola trademark is written on the item. Another example is that the automotive industry has arrangements for employees to purchase most make of autos and even appliances at discounts. So, my opinion, bad idea. By the way I just ordered yesterday the Yaesu transverter at the same price anyone will pay. Howie, K9KM -----Original Message----- From: Tom Frenaye [mailto:frenaye@pcnet.com] Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 10:37 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:15697] Re: Yaesu VIP Discount The Ethics & Election Committee (or Elections & Ethics) is having a conference call this week. If anyone has additional input on the discount issue - please send it to ODV or to me directly before tomorrow night. By the way, this is also an issue for staff members, though E&E may not be the place to review it. -- Tom (for the E&E committee) Quoting Coy Day <n5ok(a)arrl.org>: > Chris, > > OOOPS! I didn't need a new rig anyway. Sorry I ever brought the subject up. > > Coy > -- > > w3kd(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> I hate to be a spoil-sport here, but I think this is a very dangerous >> matter indeed for policy making members of the ARRL, though obviously >> well-intentioned on the part of Yaesu. First of all, Joe (or Jo)Â >> Member On The Street is going to take a dim view of it, if he or she >> hears about it. But more importantly,Â it draws into question any >> policy decisions made by the Board about advertising policies, etc. >> >> For the same reason that you can't take government employees out to >> expensive dinners, Board members shouldn't subject themselves to >> having their judgments questioned as the result of benefits conferred >> on them by advertisers solely because of their role as an ARRL Board member. >> >> 73, Chris W3KD >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mike Raisbeck <k1twf(a)arrl.net> >> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> >> Sent: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 7:03 pm >> Subject: RE: [arrl-odv:15671] Yaesu VIP Discount >> >> >> >> >> >> weet !! However, are there any minuses to this? I wonder where it >> falls n the ethics spectrum. >> Mike >> 1TWF >> ----Original Message----- >> rom: Coy Day [mailto:n5ok@arrl.org] >> ent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 1:06 PM >> o: arrl-odv >> ubject: [arrl-odv:15671] Yaesu VIP Discount FYI I visited with Dennis >> at HamCom and he told me about a discount that Yaesu as for Officers, >> Directors and Vice Directors. If you are looking for a ew Yaesu, I >> suggest you e-mail Dennis at: k7bv(a)aol.com Coy -- Tom Frenaye, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093

1 0