(Brian Kelly) wrote in
om:

Alun Palmer wrote in message
. ..
"Elmer E Ing" Elmer E wrote in
news:XIRTa.11189$ff.4959@fed1read01:

Better read URL:
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/07/22/1/?nc=1




I have read it now. IME, it is more typical for the rule making
process to take about a year. I guess the two year figure in this NG
comes specifically from this article. Whilst I think that two years is
a worst case scenario, one other useful piece of info does come out
from the article, i.e. that ratification is not required before the
FCC can act (although I'm not sure why not).

My XYL (a no-coder) has asked me to draft a petition to the FCC. Since
it looks like others may be waiting unnecesaarily for ratification, I
guess I should get to work on it. Does anyone here have any sensible
advice on how to draft an FCC petition? I'm sure there are people here
who have filed one before.

I strongly suggest you wait until the NPRM is published then add your
comments to the din which is a much simpler proposition. There won't
be any shortage of petitions for the NPRM, believe me.

w3rv


Too late, I've written it. All 22 pages of it. I would post it here, but
none of the rule changes are visible after you convert it to ASCII. I
could post a pdf version on the web if anyone is interested?

In a nutshell, it asks them to ditch Element 1 and give all Techs all the
novice subbands. I may as well go ahead and file it, now. The FCC want 5
copies, though, including the original. That's a lot of paper and ink!

Alun Palmer wrote in message . ..
(Brian Kelly) wrote in
om:

Alun Palmer wrote in message
. ..
"Elmer E Ing" Elmer E wrote in
news:XIRTa.11189$ff.4959@fed1read01:

Better read URL:
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/07/22/1/?nc=1




I have read it now. IME, it is more typical for the rule making
process to take about a year. I guess the two year figure in this NG
comes specifically from this article. Whilst I think that two years is
a worst case scenario, one other useful piece of info does come out
from the article, i.e. that ratification is not required before the
FCC can act (although I'm not sure why not).

My XYL (a no-coder) has asked me to draft a petition to the FCC. Since
it looks like others may be waiting unnecesaarily for ratification, I
guess I should get to work on it. Does anyone here have any sensible
advice on how to draft an FCC petition? I'm sure there are people here
who have filed one before.

I strongly suggest you wait until the NPRM is published then add your
comments to the din which is a much simpler proposition. There won't
be any shortage of petitions for the NPRM, believe me.

w3rv


Too late, I've written it. All 22 pages of it. I would post it here, but
none of the rule changes are visible after you convert it to ASCII. I
could post a pdf version on the web if anyone is interested?

In a nutshell, it asks them to ditch Element 1 and give all Techs all the
novice subbands. I may as well go ahead and file it, now. The FCC want 5
copies, though, including the original. That's a lot of paper and ink!

I tried to warn ya!

w3rv

On 24 Jul 2003 19:02:34 -0700, Brian Kelly wrote:

The FCC want 5
copies, though, including the original. That's a lot of paper and ink!

I tried to warn ya!

REAL filings at the FCC require NINE copies......and they do not go
to "The Commissioners".

Did you also warn him that stuff sent to "The Commissioners" will
get put in a certain round wire basket because that's NOT the
procedure for getting rules changed?

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
.net...
On 24 Jul 2003 19:02:34 -0700, Brian Kelly wrote:

The FCC want 5
copies, though, including the original. That's a lot of paper and ink!

I tried to warn ya!

REAL filings at the FCC require NINE copies......and they do not go
to "The Commissioners".

Did you also warn him that stuff sent to "The Commissioners" will
get put in a certain round wire basket because that's NOT the
procedure for getting rules changed?

You mean like the vanity call system NPRM, Phil?

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

Too late, I've written it. All 22 pages of it. I would post it here, but
none of the rule changes are visible after you convert it to ASCII. I
could post a pdf version on the web if anyone is interested?

In a nutshell, it asks them to ditch Element 1 and give all Techs all the
novice subbands.

It took 22 pages to say that?

73 de Jim, N2EY