RE: Govt Policy on Stds & IEEE 802 BALLOT: $4K Funding for FCC to attend
Colleagues,
I would like then to propose along the lines of Geoff:
That the attendees of 802.11, 802.15 and 802.16 at the Hilton Head meeting
come to the registration desk and pay their share. To make the admin easier,
I would encourage that people can pay for a number of identified additional
persons.
I have asked to have a conversation with the General Counsel of the FCC
regarding the payment issue. However, I can not do so before Monday.
Regards
---------------
Vic Hayes
Agere Systems Nederland B.V., formerly Lucent Technologies
Zadelstede 1-10
3431 JZ Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
Phone: +31 30 609 7528 (Time Zone UTC + 1)
FAX: +31 30 609 7556
e-mail: vichayes@agere.com
http://wavelan.com/
> ----------
> From: Grow, Bob[SMTP:bob.grow@intel.com]
> Sent: 15 February 2001 1:01 AM
> To: 'pat_thaler@agilent.com'; JM132569@exchange.ColumbiaSC.NCR.com;
> stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> Subject: RE: Govt Policy on Stds & IEEE 802 BALLOT: $4K Funding for
> FCC to attend
>
>
> Pat:
>
> Thanks for thinking about the ethics of the creative funding idea. I
> agree
> with you completely that we should not be considering it. I am sure that
> those of us discussing the proposal weren't aware of the government gift
> policy. The discussion should return to the motion as written by Jim.
>
> --Bob Grow
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pat_thaler@agilent.com [mailto:pat_thaler@agilent.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 2:33 PM
> To: JM132569@exchange.ColumbiaSC.NCR.com; stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> Subject: RE: Govt Policy on Stds & IEEE 802 BALLOT: $4K Funding for FCC
> to attend
>
>
>
> At this point, several people have made suggestions that companies could
> provide 802 financial support for funding FCC attendance. This seems
> ethically flakey to me and reminds me of current campaign finance scandals
> where someone not allowed to contribute such as a foreign company gave
> money
> to someone so they could contribute it.
>
> The US government has very strict rules that don't allow companies to
> provide anything of value such travel or meals for government employees. I
> doubt that funneling the money through the 802 treasury would change that.
> I'm not clear even on why 802 as a whole is exempt from those rules though
> perhaps it is because 802 is not a government supplier. But it is pretty
> clear that companies X, Y and Z giving 802 money so it can pay travel
> expenses for an FCC employee who couldn't receive travel funding directly
> from the companies isn't legitimate. I don't even like seeing that
> suggested
> on this reflector.
>
> Regards,
> Pat
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Montague, John E [mailto:JM132569@exchange.ColumbiaSC.NCR.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 11:42 AM
> To: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> Subject: RE: Govt Policy on Stds & IEEE 802 BALLOT: $4K Funding for FCC
> to attend
>
>
>
> This looks like a situation where it is appropriate for 802 to invite
> sponsor corporations (those supporting individual member participation)
> and/or institutional members to volunteer financial support. If no
> corporation is willing to come to the fore with such support then the
> value
> of FCC (or other regulatory agency) participation is truly suspect.
> Further, if regulatory agency participation is essential to the standard
> and
> no corporation will support that participation then the value of the
> standard to the market place is suspect.
>
> My personal opinion is that it is appropriate for 802 to spend members' $s
> on a marketing effort like an initial visit from a regulatory agency such
> as
> the FCC, but not to support on-going participation.
>
> John Montague
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Thompson [mailto:gthompso@nortelnetworks.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 2:23 PM
> To: pat_thaler@agilent.com
> Cc: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> Subject: RE: Govt Policy on Stds & IEEE 802 BALLOT: $4K Funding for
> FCC to attend
>
> << File: 1d198b.jpg >> Pat-
>
> I agree that there is wiggle room but...
> It doesn't say anything about taking participation money
> It says almost everything possible (given that they aren't
> specifically addressing our issue) that they should at least pay there own
>
> way. Note that "c. What forms of support may my agency provide?" even
> provides for them giving us grants.
>
> My first message on the subject indicated my reluctance to give a US
> national agency special status.
>
> I think we are in violent agreement here.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Geoff
>
> At 11:39 AM 2/14/01 -0700, pat_thaler@agilent.com wrote:
> >From: pat_thaler@agilent.com
> >Message-ID:
> <1BEBA5E8600DD4119A50009027AF54A004DF6CD4@axcs04.cos.agilent.com>
> >To: "Thompson, Geoff [SC5:321:EXCH]" <gthompso@americasm06.nt.com>,
> > stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> >Subject: RE: Govt Policy on Stds & IEEE 802 BALLOT: $4K Funding for FCC
> to
> > attend
> >Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:39:16 -0700
> >
> >Geoff,
> >
> >The actual sentence on participation is: "Agencies must consult with
> >voluntary consensus standards bodies, both domestic and international,
> and
> >must participate with such bodies in the development of voluntary
> consensus
> >standards when consultation and participation is in the public interest
> and
> >is compatible with their missions, authorities, priorities, and budget
> >resources."
> >
> >That "must" leaves a lot of wiggle room including when participation is
> >"compatible with their ... budget resources." It comes down to agencies
> must
> >participate if they find it convenient.
> >
> >I think a critical point in this debate is the one Roger Marks raised. We
> >have striven for years to be accepted as a source of international
> >standards. It isn't right for us to extend support for FCC attendence
> unless
> >we are willing to do the same for the regulatory bodies of Canada, EU,
> >Japan, etc.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Pat
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Geoff Thompson [mailto:gthompso@nortelnetworks.com]
> >Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 9:22 AM
> >To: IEEE802
> >Subject: Re: Govt Policy on Stds & IEEE 802 BALLOT: $4K Funding for FCC
> to
> >attend
> >
> >
> >Colleagues:
> >
> >Please read carefully the OMB Circular that Jim has distributed before
> you
> >vote on the motion regarding the $4K allocation to pay for FCC
> attendance.
> >
> >My read of it brings forth (in my opinion) the following points:
> > 1) It does not apply to ITU, therefore we should not necessarily
> >follow FCC precedent for dealing with T1 which is the US TAG for ITU (a
> >treaty based standards organization).
> > 2) It applies to both using standards based products AND to
> setting
> >regulations which align to standards.
> > 3) Agencies MUST participate in relevant standards activities.
> > 4) The cost of participation is a normal budget item for the
> agency
> >involved.
> >
> >Just my opinion, but I believe that the circular indicates that it is
> >unnecessary and inappropriate for us to pay.
> >
> >Geoff
>
application/ms-tnef