February 2010 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

American Hospital Association waiver request
by James F. Boehner MD 27 Feb '10

27 Feb '10

Chris, What, in your opinion, would be the best outcome of your meeting with Bryan Tremont? Would it be only for the AHA to acknowledge that the ARRL BOD proposal would serve their needs, or for them to actually withdraw their proposal and support ours? Should Bryan not respond and you need another communication route with the AHA, I may be able to get you in touch with them via the SCHA. I do not think the AHA would object to our proposal; it should easily serve their purposes, and would offer them a more permanent solution. '73 de JIM N2ZZ ARRL Vice Director Roanoke Division ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio™ From: Chris Imlay [mailto:w3kd@aol.com] Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 12:42 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18616] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request Actually, Tom, AHA is not proceeding under the terms of the FCC's case-by-case waiver process. They are asking for their own waiver, unique to them, on their own terms. The FCC does have the authority to waiver rules for good cause shown, under certain criteria established by case law, so they can ask for whatever waiver they want, without being constrained by FCC's separate waiver process. But I for one do agree with you; their request is a bit vague, and therefore potentially objectionable on that basis. It is also arguable that the FCC has this established waiver process in place that is sufficient termporarily for AHA's purposes pending resolution of the rulemaking. But the AHA waiver is not in the same category as those filed under the FCC's current 97.113 waiver process. Whether or not we believe that the AHA waiver should have been filed within the scope of that procedure is another issue, but we can't really argue that point too hard, because the FCC's present requirements and conditions for 97.113(a)(3) waivers are not consistent with the Board's policy for modification of Section 97.113, so we don't want to hold the "government sponsored drills" limitation in the present waiver process as a "good" standard, even temporarily. I asked Scot Stone last evening when the AHA waiver would be on public notice, and he said either next week or the week after next. In the meantime, we have for several days had in an acknowledged request to Bryan Tremont, the AHA's communications lawyer, who Dave and I know reasonably well, to discuss this informally. Bryan has our FCC briefing paper on the Board's proposed 97.113 change. I am a bit concerned that he has not substantively responded to me yet. I continue to think he will, but if not, we will have to decide how to respond to the AHA's rather broad waiver request. The executive committee is of course considering the proper response to AHA when this hits public notice if we are not able to reach an acceptable understanding with AHA before that time. 73, Chris W3KD Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret, Imlay & Tepper. P.C. 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG -----Original Message----- From: Tom Frenaye <frenaye(a)pcnet.com> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Thu, Feb 25, 2010 11:04 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:18611] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request At 01:17 PM 2/22/2010, Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote: The attached waiver request was shared with us this morning. The language we are proposing for 97.113(a)(3) would seem to meet their needs. That said, it seems disingenuous of AHA to argue that participating in a drill that is required in order to maintain your employer’s accreditation is not “on behalf of” the employer. I don't believe the waiver can be granted under the conditions the FCC has articulated for waiver requests. The FCC release (DA 09-2259) said: Waiver requests should be submitted to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau by the government entity conducting the drill, and must provide the following information: (1) when and where the drill will take place; (2) identification of the amateur licensees expected to transmit amateur communications on behalf of their employers; (3) identification of the employers on whose behalf they will be transmitting; and (4) a brief description of the drill. We emphasize that the filing of a waiver request does not excuse compliance with the rules while that request is pending. The waiver must be requested prior to the drill, and employees may not transmit amateur communications on their employer’s behalf unless the waiver request has been granted. 1) The AHA is not a government entity, many hospitals are private, non-profit and for-profit. 2) The request does not come close to being specific - guess that's why they call it a blanket request. No places identified, no licensees, no dates, no real description. If they grant this request, the FCC will have effectively blown open the restrictions placed in the waiver and opened the process far beyond what we envisioned. -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

Re: Eco Terrorism At It's Finest
by Brian Mileshosky 27 Feb '10

27 Feb '10

Thanks, Bob. I've taken this quite seriously and have filtered my "EMFs" sufficiently to spare the poor, innocent children, but for some reason all the cuddly, fuzzy puppies in my neighborhood keep running into objects when I call "CQ". 73, Brian N5ZGT On Fri, 26 Feb 2010, Bob Vallio wrote: > <http://www.groupsrv.com/science/post-3250577.html#3250577>

1 0

RE: Eco Terrorism At It's Finest
by K8JE 27 Feb '10

27 Feb '10

Bob, I didn't read the entire file you sent, but did go over the basic document and skimmed a few replies. I don't know which I find more amazing -- the sometimes-conflicting document or the hams who know of no amateur who runs more than 100 watts. Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org, Tel.: 513-459-1661 ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio(TM) _____ From: Bob Vallio [mailto:rbvallio@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 7:30 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: Eco Terrorism At It's Finest <http://www.groupsrv.com/science/post-3250577.html#3250577>

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:18617] DXCC Status
by Cliff Ahrens 27 Feb '10

27 Feb '10

DXer's will be thrilled to hear this good news. Congratulations to all who assisted in the effort. The long awaited implementation of field entry of DXCC data scheduled for this year should relieve some of these perennial year-end "crunch" times. This weekend I'm checking almost 600 cards for an applicant's 5BDXCC application. With field entry of electronic data, the DXCC Desk would be relieved of the time-consuming task of keyboarding in the 25 pages of DXCC Record sheets in this application. The card checker could just make any corrections or changes needed in the data file, and then email the file to HQ to be reviewed and then imported into the DXCC records. That will save countless hours of staff time, and promote greater accuracy in the DXCC records! Cliff, K0CA From: Kramer, Harold, WJ1B [mailto:wj1b@arrl.org] Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:02 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18617] DXCC Status >From Dave Patton: As of today, Friday, 26 February, there are no applications waiting to be entered into the DXCC system including all of the applications that were received in January and February. Final processing and award fulfillment for these 2010 applications will be completed next week. This means that next week, our turn-around time will be 2 weeks for newly received DXCC applications. DXCC staff and some trained employees from other departments, put in a massive effort throughout February to process all of 2009's applications so that the DXCC Yearbook could be completed and all the DXers waiting for their awards would receive expedited service. The staff completed their work so well that they were able to dig into 2010's work, and exceeded expectations by completely catching up with the 2010 applications The MVP department will return to normal hours March 1. We wish to thank all involved for their diligent efforts and personal sacrifice to help us meet our goal. 73, Harold

1 0

Eco Terrorism At It's Finest
by Bob Vallio 27 Feb '10

27 Feb '10

<http://www.groupsrv.com/science/post-3250577.html#3250577>

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:18617] DXCC Status
by K8JE 27 Feb '10

27 Feb '10

Harold, Great news! One big one down, one giant one to go. Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org, Tel.: 513-459-1661 ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio(TM) _____ From: Kramer, Harold, WJ1B [mailto:wj1b@arrl.org] Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:02 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18617] DXCC Status >From Dave Patton: As of today, Friday, 26 February, there are no applications waiting to be entered into the DXCC system including all of the applications that were received in January and February. Final processing and award fulfillment for these 2010 applications will be completed next week. This means that next week, our turn-around time will be 2 weeks for newly received DXCC applications. DXCC staff and some trained employees from other departments, put in a massive effort throughout February to process all of 2009's applications so that the DXCC Yearbook could be completed and all the DXers waiting for their awards would receive expedited service. The staff completed their work so well that they were able to dig into 2010's work, and exceeded expectations by completely catching up with the 2010 applications The MVP department will return to normal hours March 1. We wish to thank all involved for their diligent efforts and personal sacrifice to help us meet our goal. 73, Harold

1 0

[arrl-odv:18617] DXCC Status
by Kramer, Harold, WJ1B 26 Feb '10

26 Feb '10

>From Dave Patton: As of today, Friday, 26 February, there are no applications waiting to be entered into the DXCC system including all of the applications that were received in January and February. Final processing and award fulfillment for these 2010 applications will be completed next week. This means that next week, our turn-around time will be 2 weeks for newly received DXCC applications. DXCC staff and some trained employees from other departments, put in a massive effort throughout February to process all of 2009's applications so that the DXCC Yearbook could be completed and all the DXers waiting for their awards would receive expedited service. The staff completed their work so well that they were able to dig into 2010's work, and exceeded expectations by completely catching up with the 2010 applications The MVP department will return to normal hours March 1. We wish to thank all involved for their diligent efforts and personal sacrifice to help us meet our goal. 73, Harold

1 0

[arrl-odv:18616] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request
by Chris Imlay 26 Feb '10

26 Feb '10

Actually, Tom, AHA is not proceeding under the terms of the FCC's case-by-case waiver process. They are asking for their own waiver, unique to them, on their own terms. The FCC does have the authority to waiver rules for good cause shown, under certain criteria established by case law, so they can ask for whatever waiver they want, without being constrained by FCC's separate waiver process. But I for one do agree with you; their request is a bit vague, and therefore potentially objectionable on that basis. It is also arguable that the FCC has this established waiver process in place that is sufficient termporarily for AHA's purposes pending resolution of the rulemaking. But the AHA waiver is not in the same category as those filed under the FCC's current 97.113 waiver process. Whether or not we believe that the AHA waiver should have been filed within the scope of that procedure is another issue, but we can't really argue that point too hard, because the FCC's present requirements and conditions for 97.113(a)(3) waivers are not consistent with the Board's policy for modification of Section 97.113, so we don't want to hold the "government sponsored drills" limitation in the present waiver process as a "good" standard, even temporarily. I asked Scot Stone last evening when the AHA waiver would be on public notice, and he said either next week or the week after next. In the meantime, we have for several days had in an acknowledged request to Bryan Tremont, the AHA's communications lawyer, who Dave and I know reasonably well, to discuss this informally. Bryan has our FCC briefing paper on the Board's proposed 97.113 change. I am a bit concerned that he has not substantively responded to me yet. I continue to think he will, but if not, we will have to decide how to respond to the AHA's rather broad waiver request. The executive committee is of course considering the proper response to AHA when this hits public notice if we are not able to reach an acceptable understanding with AHA before that time. 73, Chris W3KD Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret, Imlay & Tepper. P.C. 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG -----Original Message----- From: Tom Frenaye <frenaye(a)pcnet.com> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Thu, Feb 25, 2010 11:04 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:18611] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request At 01:17 PM 2/22/2010, Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote: The attached waiver request was shared with us this morning. The language we are proposing for 97.113(a)(3) would seem to meet their needs. That said, it seems disingenuous of AHA to argue that participating in a drill that is required in order to maintain your employer’s accreditation is not “on behalf of” the employer. I don't believe the waiver can be granted under the conditions the FCC has articulated for waiver requests. The FCC release (DA 09-2259) said: Waiver requests should be submitted to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau by the government entity conducting the drill, and must provide the following information: (1) when and where the drill will take place; (2) identification of the amateur licensees expected to transmit amateur communications on behalf of their employers; (3) identification of the employers on whose behalf they will be transmitting; and (4) a brief description of the drill. We emphasize that the filing of a waiver request does not excuse compliance with the rules while that request is pending. The waiver must be requested prior to the drill, and employees may not transmit amateur communications on their employer’s behalf unless the waiver request has been granted. 1) The AHA is not a government entity, many hospitals are private, non-profit and for-profit. 2) The request does not come close to being specific - guess that's why they call it a blanket request. No places identified, no licensees, no dates, no real description. If they grant this request, the FCC will have effectively blown open the restrictions placed in the waiver and opened the process far beyond what we envisioned. -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[arrl-odv:18615] FCC denies ARRL declaratory ruling request
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 26 Feb '10

26 Feb '10

The FCC just released the attached denial of our request for a Declaratory Ruling preempting state legislation in Florida (and later, New Jersey) that we submitted FIVE YEARS ago. While Chris is disappointed, as am I, it's significant that the denial is not based on the merits of our argument but rather on the fact that in the intervening time there have been no reports of the statutes being used against radio amateurs. We are invited to "file a new petition for declaratory ruling in the event of changed circumstances." One obvious motivator for the Commission's action is that they are trying to clear out a huge pile of pending items, although we also have heard that they're not unhappy for the states to be going after pirate broadcasters. Dave K1ZZ <<DA-10-342A1.pdf>>

1 0

[arrl-odv:18614] Legislative follow-up
by Kay Craigie 26 Feb '10

26 Feb '10

Thanks to Dave's research, legislation has been identified that speaks to the Board's action on the charitable mileage deduction. A bill that would fully achieve our goal is H.R. 345 sponsored by Representative Todd Russell Platts (R-PA). Other bills that would at least provide for some increase while allowing future adjustments for inflation without Congressional action include H.R. 524 sponsored by Representative John Lewis (D-GA) and S. 243 by Senator Benjamin Cardin (D-MD). Later today I will send letters to Chwat about the charitable mileage deduction to be delivered to the appropriate committee honchos in the House and the Senate. At the same time I will send Chwat a letter addressed to Senator Warner of Virginia, both as ARRL president and as one of his constituents, thanking him for introducing S. 2881 (the FCC technical advisor legislation) in committee. A number of Board members live in states represented on the Commerce committee, and I hope you will be able to write your Senators in support of S. 2881. To give you an idea of how I approached the subject, a copy of my letter to Senator Warner is attached. The information on how many Amateurs live in Virginia came from www.ah0a.org, in case you would like to include a statistic for your state. When sample letters for members to use on these two subjects are ready to go out the door, you will receive the documents. It occurs to me that we have several new Vice Directors who may not know what "Chwat" refers to, and I should have explained that in my previous e-mail. John Chwat & Co. is the government relations firm (www.chwatco.com) we use in Washington. Because it is most effective for members' letters to be hand-carried to the offices of Senators and Congressmen by one of Chwat's people, we ask that letters be sent in care of Chwat's office by postal mail, fax, or as an attachment to an e-mail. The contact information is as follows: John Chwat & Company, Inc. 625 Slaters Lane Suite 103 Alexandria, VA 22314 Fax: 703-684-7594 e-mail: john.chwat(a)chwatco.com 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0