Brian, thanks. I didn't know of your status, but thanks. We will mention this to Fred Moorefield as well. I do realize that the decision is the Air Force's whether to extend their confidences in this area, and it may go nowhere, but Dan and I thought it worth a mention to Fred anyway. He seemed receptive. 73, Chris W3KD -----Original Message----- From: Brian Mileshosky <n5zgt@swcp.com> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> Cc: dhenderson@arrl.org Sent: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 12:15 am Subject: RE: Pave Paws Radars -- QST Article Chris (et al) – Board confidential. I have an active high-level clearance and a secure telephone on my desk at work. If appropriate with folks on my end, and if the Air Force is willing to extend need-to-know (the biggest challenge since a clearance, no matter what kind, means nothing without NTK), I would be happy to engage in communications with them. 73, Brian N5ZGT ARRL Director, Rocky Mountain Division From: w3kd@aol.com [mailto:w3kd@aol.com] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 7:20 AM To: arrl-odv Cc: dhenderson@arrl.org Subject: Pave Paws Radars -- QST Article Greetings. Dan Henderson asked me to edit his article on Pave Paws Radars for QST. I did so and he has now completed the piece and sent it to production. I think Dan has done a bang-up job of candidly telling people what is going on, what ARRL's role is in this process, the difficulties we have had in addressing it, and our ultimate reliance on FCC to protect the low level of entitlements of Amateur licensees here. I thought you should have a copy of it right away, and Dan sent the final version along so you could be alerted in advance. Please keep this article to yourselves until it is published in QST, but you must of course be able to respond to inquries about the issue, and this should help you do so. There are ongoing negotiations with the Air Force, of course, not all of which are discussed in this piece. We are scheduled to have our next conference call with them next week. We have candidly told them of our concern with their processes, and Fred Moorefield at the Air Force Spectrum Management Agency has pledged to calm the waters for us somewhat. We will see. The only other aspect of this that is not in the article (and please keep this entirely confidential) is that we have asked Moorefield to consider whether or not the fact that two of our incumbent Board members have high-level security clearances might allow the Air Force to provide to them some of the details of the radar's interference susceptibility. While they could not disclose that information, we would of course accept their assurance that the interference mitigation called for by the Air Force is actually necessary in the case of each repeater. We are in no position to accept that assurance ! from the Air Force directly. 73, Chris W3KD More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail! ________________________________________________________________________ More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com