Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Brian Kelly" wrote in message om... "Bill Sohl" wrote in message ... Did you know that Carl was in Geneva as a member of the US delegation? Seems pretty respected in ITU circles to me. Blather, he was just another observer with some commercial interest group he's involved with, had absolutely nothing to do with ham radio, not even close. Actually, I was a "Private Sector Advisor" member of the US Delegation (that's different than an "Observer" ... IARU was an "Observer" not a member of a Member State Delegation) I was officially listed on the Delegation as a private sector expert on Agenda Item 1.7, as well as the agenda items that my employer sent me for. (This is because I was heavily involved, through NCI, in the US prep process for the WRC on 1.7.) There were also two other private sector "experts" on the US Delegation for Agenda Item 1.7 ... Paul Rinaldo and Jonathan Siverling of the ARRL. (However, before anyone "flames" ARRL for not retaining the Morse requirement in the ITU Radio Regs, I would remind them of two things: 1) the IARU postion was that that requirement should go 2) members of the US Delegation are *bound* to support the US position, which was also that the Morse requirement should go.) Interestingly, when the US presented its Proposal on 1.7 at the CITEL meeting in Mexico City last year, the FCC International Bureau rep asked me to present the document in Plenary (I was also attending that meeting as a member of the US Delegation) ... I asked him "Why me, not you?" His response was "You know more about the issue and the background." What can I say? I participated in the process ... I don't recall you as having participated in any of the US WRC prep meetings, Brian ... nor did I see you listed as a member of the US Delegation to the WRC. 73, Carl - wk3c |