All,
Sorry for the links, was on a mobile device earlier. Here are the PDFs.
My point about complexity is that the Ex Parte Disclosures are essentially minutes of meetings. They cover different points – I enjoyed particularly the NEC 4.2 VS NEC 5 results.
After seeing Greg’s presentations a couple of times, I agree with Ria that compliance is not difficult – particularly for those of us, who have formal education and decades as amateurs.
But for the “study the question and pass the test” amateurs, minutes of these interim meetings working toward a new version of Bulletin 65 can be overload and lead to more confusion.
Even though they’re public domain, wide distribution can confuse the issues and add complexity with ancillary subjects, particularly if it comes from the section manager and not from ARRL.
Finally, there’s a breach of trust when an ARRL Section Manager receives an email from a ARRL employee who trusted them with unpublished copyright information and unilaterally decides to share it in a public forum. We are, at the end of
the day, a good sized publisher and should all protection our IP.
73,
Mickey N4MB
From: Arthur I. Zygielbaum, K0AIZ <k0aiz@arrl.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2021 5:51 PM
To: Baker, Mickey, N4MB (Dir, SE) <mbaker@arrl.org>
Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:32431] Re: "RSFC dispatches" regarding the new FCC rules
Mickey,
All of those links lead me to an error message that Google mail is temporarily unavailable.
I can get directly into my Google mail with no problem. So I'm not sure what is causing the error.
Art
Arthur I. Zygielbaum, K0AIZ
ARRL Midwest Division Director
On 5/30/2021 1:11 PM, Baker, Mickey, N4MB (Dir, SE) wrote:
Some of you have already seen this information from the RFSC. I had not, but the whole of these documents do illustrate relatively the difficulty of being compliant with the new RF exposure requirement.
I believe that sending this out as a news item is premature – it needs context for the average amateur to understand.
The reason I’m sending this to the Board is that this was emailed to several lists by the Southern Florida Section Manager this morning. You may be asked about it.
It includes a yet-to-be-published QEX article that Kai Siwiak warned about redistribution… yet the SM decided to distribute it widely. Sigh.
Preview attachment Gregory D Lapin Ex Parte Disclosure 2021-05-06.pdf
Gregory D Lapin Ex Parte Disclosure 2021-05-06.pdf
Preview attachment Gregory D Lapin Ex Parte Disclosure 2021-05-26.pdf
Gregory D Lapin Ex Parte Disclosure 2021-05-26.pdf
Preview attachment ##-QEX 2021-07 Tell Exposure Considerations.pdf
##-QEX 2021-07 Tell Exposure Considerations.pdf
Preview attachment ##-Ex Parte Disclosure Letter for Meeting of 2021-04-12.pdf
##-Ex Parte Disclosure Letter for Meeting of 2021-04-12.pdf
From: Kai <k.siwiak@ieee.org>
Date: Sun, May 30, 2021 at 7:38 AM
Subject: "RSFC dispatches" regarding the new FCC rules
To: Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com>
Hi Mickey,
For your information, here are Greg Lapin's first three Ex Parte disclosures
documenting our meetings with FCC folks regarding new RF Exposure rules.
These are part of the public disclosure on the matter, but they are hard to find
on the FCC web pages.
I am also enclosing Ric Tell's QEX manuscript (to be published in the
July/August 2021 QEX) dealing with SAR measurements. Do not distribute except
with the ARRL copyright notice and permission statement intact.
Everything is in a state of flux, but we are pedaling as fast as we can!
The usual "roundup of suspects" from RFSC volunteers are also meeting regularly
with the Radio Society of Great Britain (RSGB) hams to coordinate with Ofcom
efforts.
Kindest regards,
Kazimierz "Kai" Siwiak, KE4PT
Member ARRL RFSC
QEX Editor
_______________________________________________arrl-odv mailing listarrl-odv@reflector.arrl.orghttps://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
