| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Dear EC, Please note:
1)
That this update is being sent to the “EC reflector” which may or may not deliver it to all members of the EC. Resending it this way should resolve the issue of having
used a private address list.
2)
Roger’s editorials will be addressed along with any other editorials the final document prior to being filed with the FCC. In accordance with 8.2 of the OM I will work
with the LMSC chair in his filing of this with the FCC.
3)
It is my view that the contents of this FCC filing is not what 8.2 calls a “position statement” which seems to have a different meaning and also a five year life span.
Such a rule would cripple the ability of 802 to comment to the FCC, ITU-R, etc., especially where a change in technology or other matters causes 802 to have a change of opinion.
4)
The full form of the original email follows the table of who has or has not voted. As of 3/06/13 the results are listed below. Please let me know if I haven’t recorded your vote. Nikolich (NV) Thaler DNV
Gilb Disapprove Rosdahl DNV D'Ambrosia DNV Chaplin DNV Jeffree DNV Law Approve Kraemer Approve Heile DNV Marks Disapprove Lynch Approve Shellhammer DNV Das DNV Mody Approve Best regards, Mike From: Michael Lynch [mailto:MJLynch@mjlallc.com]
Dear EC, During the January wireless interim meeting in Vancouver 802.18 began work on a response to the FCC’s 3.5 GHz NPRM proceeding. It was not possible to complete the response at
that meeting so a series of conference calls were announced to complete the work. Two calls, one on January 24th and the second on January 31st, were used to complete the document Doc. 18-12-0109-06. The document was approved by 802.18 by a vote of 5 yes,
0 no and 1 abstention, submitted to and approved by the EC and filed with the FCC. During the discussion of any other business the group decided to continue to have the Thursday evening calls during the period of February 7th to March 14th. The positive result
of that action was the approval on February 28th of proposed reply comments to the FCC’s “Incentive Auction” proposal (Docket No. 12-268). This takes advantage of the FCC having extended the reply comment date to March 12th. I have asked Paul to allow me to conduct a ten day EC email ballot to approve submitting the reply comments (Doc. 18-13-0016-06-0000) to the FCC. Paul’s response to my request is: “I will authorize a 10 day EC email ballot, to be conducted by Mike Lynch, for the following motion.” Motion: “To approve, under OM Subclause 8.2, document 18-13-0016-06-0000 subject to the early close provision of OM Subclause 4.1.2.." Moved: Mike Lynch Seconded: Apurva Mody Link to the document: Reply comments are to be submitted to the FCC by March 12, 2013. The ballot will start March 2nd and end on March 11th, 2013. I am using the “private list” since once again there seems to be an issue with either delay or non-delivery when using the EC reflector. This has also impacted the 802.18 reflector. Best regards, Mike +1.972.814.4901 |