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

RE: [arrl-odv:18572] RE: [arrl-odv:18562] Update on FCC Meetings, Friday, February 19, 2010 - Confidential, Privileged Communication
by David A. Norris 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

Dave, It's been my experience that MOST officers of flag rank are pretty damned impressive! Hi! That is indeed good news about the Board's position. 73 ES TNX David A. Norris, K5UZ Vice Director, Delta Div. -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:55 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18572] RE: [arrl-odv:18562] Update on FCC Meetings, Friday, February 19, 2010 - Confidential, Privileged Communication To Chris's well-chosen words I would add that we did not just tell PSHSB to expect a lot of comments but that the comments would reflect a wide range of opinion, all the way from "no change" to a broader relaxation of the rules than we are advocating. Both Jamie Barnett and David Furth seemed to be appreciative of the fact that the ARRL position on 97.113 resulted from a representative process that included input from this entire range of opinion within the amateur community. By the way, I don't impress easily but I find Adm. Barnett to be quite impressive. Dave K1ZZ

1 0

[arrl-odv:18580] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request
by Chris Imlay 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

Yes, here is the insider trading on this: When Dave and I met with Charles Mathias in Commissioner Baker's office, we were advised by Charles to speak with Bryan Tramont, a former big honcho staffer on the 8th floor at FCC some time ago, who we know and have had a lot of interaction with. Very competent guy. He landed at the Wilkinson, Barker, Knauer firm (as I was once invited to do at the time that W3PS died in 1981; I turned them down, but it is a good solid law firm, though too large and bureaucratic for me). Bryan now represents the American Hospital Association, and they filed the letter. Bryan sent it around to the Commissioners' offices and to PSHSB. It seems to me that the letter is more than a bit conceptually in error, and overbroad; I have not yet called Bryan, and perhaps there is not a reason to do so, other than to persuade him that ARRL's Board policy would accommodate the AHA. They are asking for short term relief though, and the real question is what our position is with respect to this waiver. I would like some guidance on this. It grates somewhat to have a non-Amateur Radio group attempting to determine policy for the Amateur Service. We reacted quite agressively many years ago when the NAB attempted to open the business communications rules to permit amateurs to provide certain types of electronic news gathering communications. They have their own broadcast auxiliary spectrum for that; just as hospitals have Part 90 radios for their internal communications, even internal emergency preparedness exercises. There is no reason their ham employees can't use those radios for that purpose. 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: Brian Mileshosky <n5zgt(a)swcp.com> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 2:24 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:18576] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request The League-proposed language may meet their needs, but one has to wonder about their motivation for making such a disingenuous argument in the first place. Hopefully this isn't an example of, in the words of either Chris or Dan at the last board meeting, "once the genie is out of the bottle..." 73, Brian N5ZGT On Mon, 22 Feb 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. > > Dave K1ZZ > > <<Am Hospital Assoc_Request for Blanket Waiver Sec 97 > 113(a)_DATA-STAMP_2-17-2010.pdf>> > ARRL Director, Rocky Mountain Division On the web at www.RockyMountainDivision.org 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: Brian Mileshosky <n5zgt(a)swcp.com> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 2:24 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:18576] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request The League-proposed language may meet their needs, but one has to wonder about their motivation for making such a disingenuous argument in the first place. Hopefully this isn't an example of, in the words of either Chris or Dan at the last board meeting, "once the genie is out of the bottle..." 73, Brian N5ZGT On Mon, 22 Feb 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. > > Dave K1ZZ > > <<Am Hospital Assoc_Request for Blanket Waiver Sec 97 > 113(a)_DATA-STAMP_2-17-2010.pdf>> > ARRL Director, Rocky Mountain Division On the web at www.RockyMountainDivision.org

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:18567] 27 and counting
by David A. Norris 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

Good Show Kay! I can remember passing that 13WPM test given by the FCC in Little Rock at the post office- my palms were sweating! I was 17- Wow! My first QSO however was on 40m CW Novice sub-band with WB5FDP and then W5VAE on a home brew 75W XTAL XMTR and my trusty old Sky Buddy RCVR! I also remember working some guy with the call of WB5IGF too- hi! That was 34 years ago! Yes, time flies when you're having fun and ham radio is all about fun! Congrats on the 27th anniversary of your first QSO! 73 ES DX David A. Norris, K5UZ Vice Director, Delta Div. -----Original Message----- From: Kay Craigie [mailto:n3kn@verizon.net] Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 7:37 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18567] 27 and counting Twenty-seven years ago today, I made my first ham radio contact while driving home from the FCC office in Langhorne, PA, where I'd passed the General exams. Time flies when you're having fun! 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

[arrl-odv:18578] ARRL Visa Card promotional material
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

If you happen to have any promotional material for the ARRL Visa Card in your stock of convention/hamfest/club meeting material, please destroy it. The new credit card law, the CARD Act, that went into effect today has rendered the material obsolete. US Bank-the creditor and issuer of the ARRL Visa Card-has asked us to destroy any old applications, brochures, and buckslips dated prior to Feb 2010. We have been supplied with new brochures, which include an updated application. Please let Bob Inderbitzen know if you would like to be re-supplied with new, updated brochures. Dave Sumner, K1ZZ

1 0

[arrl-odv:18577] Re:RE: American Hospital Association waiver request
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

I think the motivation is that they were doing it prior to the WTB's saying that it wasn't permitted, so they are trying to justify what they were doing retroactively. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Brian Mileshosky [mailto:n5zgt@swcp.com] Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 2:25 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18576] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request The League-proposed language may meet their needs, but one has to wonder about their motivation for making such a disingenuous argument in the first place. Hopefully this isn't an example of, in the words of either Chris or Dan at the last board meeting, "once the genie is out of the bottle..." 73, Brian N5ZGT On Mon, 22 Feb 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. > > Dave K1ZZ > > <<Am Hospital Assoc_Request for Blanket Waiver Sec 97 > 113(a)_DATA-STAMP_2-17-2010.pdf>> > ARRL Director, Rocky Mountain Division On the web at www.RockyMountainDivision.org

1 0

[arrl-odv:18576] Re: American Hospital Association waiver request
by Brian Mileshosky 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

The League-proposed language may meet their needs, but one has to wonder about their motivation for making such a disingenuous argument in the first place. Hopefully this isn't an example of, in the words of either Chris or Dan at the last board meeting, "once the genie is out of the bottle..." 73, Brian N5ZGT On Mon, 22 Feb 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. > > Dave K1ZZ > > <<Am Hospital Assoc_Request for Blanket Waiver Sec 97 > 113(a)_DATA-STAMP_2-17-2010.pdf>> > ARRL Director, Rocky Mountain Division On the web at www.RockyMountainDivision.org

1 0

[arrl-odv:18575] American Hospital Association waiver request
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

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. Dave K1ZZ <<Am Hospital Assoc_Request for Blanket Waiver Sec 97 113(a)_DATA-STAMP_2-17-2010.pdf>>

1 0

[arrl-odv:18574] RE: [arrl-odv:18572] RE: [arrl-odv:18562] Update on FCC Meetings, Friday, February 19, 2010
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

One more word that I should have remembered earlier (DX Contest hangover may be to blame): Adm. Barnett asked Chris and me to thank the members of the ARRL Board for your work on the 97.113 issue. Here are the profiles of Adm. Barnett and David Furth taken from the FCC news release announcing their appointments last July. Dave Chief of Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, Rear Admiral (ret.) Jamie Barnett: Admiral Barnett served 32 years in the United States Navy and Navy Reserve, retiring in 2008. His last active duty assignments were Deputy Commander, Navy Expeditionary Combat Command and Director, Naval Education and Training in the Pentagon. For the last two years, Admiral Barnett has been a Senior Research Fellow at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, a policy think tank focusing on science and technology issues of importance to the nation, including cyber conflict and cyber security. From 1984 to 2001, Mr. Barnett was a senior partner at Mitchell, McNutt and Sams, P.A. in Tupelo, Mississippi with a governmental law practice representing municipalities, counties, law enforcement agencies, schools and local government officials. Deputy Chief, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, David Furth: David Furth has served at the FCC since 1992 and in the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau since the Bureau's formation in 2006. Since January 2009, Mr. Furth has served as Acting Chief of the Bureau. Previously, Mr. Furth was an Associate Bureau Chief in PSHSB, focusing on public safety spectrum policy issues, particularly 800 MHz rebanding and the 700 MHz rulemaking proceeding. Mr. Furth also worked in the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau in various capacities, including Deputy Chief and Chief of the Commercial Wireless Division, Senior Legal Advisor to the Bureau Chief, and Chief Counsel and Associate Bureau Chief. Mr. Furth also served as a Legal Advisor to FCC Commissioner Rachelle Chong. Prior to joining the Commission, Mr. Furth was in private law practice in Washington, DC and San Francisco, California. From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 10:55 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18572] RE: [arrl-odv:18562] Update on FCC Meetings, Friday, February 19, 2010 - Confidential, Privileged Communication To Chris's well-chosen words I would add that we did not just tell PSHSB to expect a lot of comments but that the comments would reflect a wide range of opinion, all the way from "no change" to a broader relaxation of the rules than we are advocating. Both Jamie Barnett and David Furth seemed to be appreciative of the fact that the ARRL position on 97.113 resulted from a representative process that included input from this entire range of opinion within the amateur community. By the way, I don't impress easily but I find Adm. Barnett to be quite impressive. Dave K1ZZ

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:18567] 27 and counting
by K8JE 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

Kay, Congratulations for sure on your milestone. I'm sure the thrill is not gone. As a side not, I could not have make my first Q as a mobile. The spark equipment didn't fit well in the car. Hi! 73, 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 -----Original Message----- From: Kay Craigie [mailto:n3kn@verizon.net] Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 8:37 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:18567] 27 and counting Twenty-seven years ago today, I made my first ham radio contact while driving home from the FCC office in Langhorne, PA, where I'd passed the General exams. Time flies when you're having fun! 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

[arrl-odv:18572] RE: [arrl-odv:18562] Update on FCC Meetings, Friday, February 19, 2010 - Confidential, Privileged Communication
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 22 Feb '10

22 Feb '10

To Chris's well-chosen words I would add that we did not just tell PSHSB to expect a lot of comments but that the comments would reflect a wide range of opinion, all the way from "no change" to a broader relaxation of the rules than we are advocating. Both Jamie Barnett and David Furth seemed to be appreciative of the fact that the ARRL position on 97.113 resulted from a representative process that included input from this entire range of opinion within the amateur community. By the way, I don't impress easily but I find Adm. Barnett to be quite impressive. Dave K1ZZ

1 0