In a message dated 2/8/2005 8:17:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, w6rgg@sbcglobal.net writes:
Regardless of what was said at the board meeting, and the fact that the "EC reviewed it a few days ago," I feel it would have been beneficial for the readers of ODV to have known when it was to be filed, when it was to appear on our website, and to be therefore prepared for the questions from our members. It seems that we have usually been provided with an advance copy of items of this import.
Bob Vallio -- W6RGG
Well, mea culpa, Bob. The problem was that I couldn't determine how best to proceed. Once the EC had reviewed the draft, I filed it Monday afternoon. Today is Wednesday (early), so you are not too far behind the curve; especially since, as Joel says, what we were going to do and when was discussed at the Board Meeting. This time, I filed this on paper. Most filings in rulemaking proceedings we do electronically now. I expect a lot of opposition to it, and (1) I wasn't sure that e-filing this was the safest thing to do, since any problem could cause the filing to be bounced, with no opportunity to refile, and (2) I didn't want any more time than necessary to be provided to our opponents to address the issues in it. So, I filed this on paper, got a stamped copy, and sent a copy Fedex to HQ as-filed. What appears on our web site is the recon petition itself, and the exhibits, but it is not quite as-filed. The paper copy has a table of contents, a summary, a cover sheet, and other insubstantial changes. It may be that Joel Kleinman at HQ would scan the as-filed copy showing the FCC's date stamp. I wasn't sure. In any event, the delay in copying the Board with the as-filed document is my own fault, and the circumstances were a bit unusual. Be aware of one other thing: I had to skirt the rules here somewhat. There is a 25-page limit on recon petitions in rulemaking proceedings. We couldn't make our case, especially with respect to the technical argument concerning the FOIA materials, in the page allotment, but I didn't dare ask for a waiver of the page limit, for fear it would be denied. So we moved much of the material to exhibits. Given the volume of those, there is some risk that FCC could bounce this for violation of the page limit, in which case we go to the Court of Appeals and note that FCC released, after the R&O, 600 pages of material that they claim they relied on in adopting the R&O, but which we have never had an opportunity to address. So, FCC cutting us off at the recon stage plays into our hands. Because of FCC's own actions, and because our entire premise is that they have covered up evidence, I think it unlikely that they will bounce our recon petition. But they could, and we need to be aware of that and ready to move to the Court of Appeals on the irregularities in this proceeding. 73, Chris W3KD