|
|
|
|
IEEE-SA STANDARDS BOARD STANDARDS REVIEW COMMITTEE (RevCom)
1 CALL TO ORDER Chair Law called the meeting to order at 9.00 a.m. There was a round of introductions by all present. 2 REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Law requested to move P802.20 to the end of the ‘Proposed Standards for Review and Recommendation’ section (create item 5.4), because conflict of interest principles were going to be applied to this submittal only. There was a motion to approve the agenda with the requested change. The motion was unanimously approved. 3 APPROVAL OF THE 26 MARCH 2008 RevCom MINUTES There was a motion to approve the 26 March 2008 RevCom Minutes. The motion was unanimously approved.4 ProCom LIAISON REPORT Malcolm Thaden, ProCom liaison, delivered the report. [Please see the ProCom meeting minutes for further information.] Victor Berman requested access to the information on Study Groups that had been discussed at ProCom. Staff will ensure he will receive these materials. Gary Robinson stated that ANSI is working on trial-use rules and suggested that the IEEE-SA monitor this activity. Staff will ensure this happens. 5 PROPOSED STANDARDS FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION [All votes are unanimous unless noted otherwise.] 5.1 NEW P802.1ah/D4.2 (C/LM) Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks - Amendment 6: Provider Backbone Bridges Recommendation: APPROVE P802.20/D4.1m (C/LM) Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Standard Air Interface for Mobile Broadband Wireless Access Systems Supporting Vehicular Mobility - Physical and Media Access Control Layer Specification Discussion of this project was moved to item 5.4. P1474.3/D12.0 (VT/RT) Recommended Practice for Communications-Based Train Control (CBTC) System Design and Functional Allocations Recommendation: APPROVE P1599/D5.0 (C/SAB) Recommended Practice for Definition of a Commonly Acceptable Musical Application Using the XML Language Recommendation: APPROVE P1900.1/D4.0 (COM/SC) Standard Definitions and Concepts for Dynamic Spectrum Access: Terminology Relating to Emerging Wireless Networks, System Functionality, and Spectrum Management Recommendation: APPROVE [yes = 11; no = 0; abstain = 3 (Barber, Chaplin, Diab)] PC37.43/D11 (PE/SWG) Standard Specifications for High-Voltage Expulsion, Current-Limiting and Combination Type Distribution and Power Class External Fuses, with Rated Voltages from 1 kV through 38 kV, Used for the Protection of Shunt Capacitors Recommendation: APPROVE 5.2 REVISION There was a motion to table P754 to be the first item considered after 10 a.m., because the Sponsor wanted to participate and was not available before 10 a.m. The motion passed unanimously. The motion was taken from the table at 10 a.m. P754/D1.9 (C/MSC) Standard for Floating-Point Arithmetic Recommendation: APPROVE Prior to the recommendation to approve, there was a motion to disapprove. After some discussion about the project, the question was called, but there was an objection. The vote on calling the question failed to meet the required two-thirds approval [yes = 8; no = 6; abstain = 0]. Following further discussion, the mover and seconder withdrew the motion to disapprove, and a motion to approve was made. Note: Bob Davis participated via phone during the discussion of P754. There was discussion about the definition of “previously approved portions of the balloted document” (IEEE-SA OpMan 5.4.3.2). The Scope of Recirculations Ad Hoc committee was formed to clarify the issue (Chair: Wael Diab; Members: Bill Ash, Phil Barber, Clint Chaplin, Arnie Greenspan, Bob Grow, Rich Hulett, Mark Klerer, David Law, Moira Patterson, Dave Ringle, Sam Sciacca, Matt Wilkowski, George Willingmyre, and Malia Zaman). The ad hoc committee is intended to be a committee of RevCom and ProCom, therefore ProCom members will be invited to join. P1028/D10 (C/S2ESC) Standard for Software Reviews and Audits Recommendation: Conditionally Approve The motion was to conditionally approve based on the Sponsor agreeing to the deletion of the footnote in Subclause 1.1. Wael Diab was assigned as the RevCom mentor. Prior to the motion to conditionally approve, there was a motion to approve. A friendly amendment for conditional approval was proposed, but it was rejected by the seconder. A vote was taken on the motion to approve, and it failed [yes = 3; no = 8; abstain = 3]. The previously-suggested friendly amendment was reintroduced as a motion to conditionally approve [see above for exact wording]. P1394/D2 (C/MSC) Standard for a High Performance Serial Bus Recommendation: APPROVE PC37.2/D3.1 (PE/SUB) Standard Electrical Power System Device Function Numbers, Acronyms and Contact Designations Recommendation: APPROVE 5.3 REAFFIRMATION 497-2002 (PE/NPE) IEEE Standard Criteria for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation for Nuclear Power Generating Stations Recommendation: APPROVE [yes = 13; no = 0; abstain = 1 (Chaplin)] 1460-1996 (R2002) (SCC39) IEEE Guide for the Measurement of Quasi-Static Magnetic and Electric Fields Recommendation: APPROVE C37.23-2003 (PE/SWG) IEEE Standard for Metal-Enclosed Bus Recommendation: APPROVE C37.24-2003 (PE/SWG) IEEE Guide for Evaluating the Effect of Solar Radiation on Outdoor Metal-Enclosed Switchgear Recommendation: APPROVE C37.122.1-1993 (R2002) (PE/SUB) IEEE Guide for Gas-Insulated Substations Recommendation: APPROVE C37.123-1996 (R2002) (PE/SUB) IEEE Guide to Specifications for Gas-Insulated, Electric Power Substation Equipment Recommendation: APPROVE [yes = 13; no = 0; abstain = 1 (Chaplin)] C95.3-2002 (SCC39) IEEE Recommended Practice for Measurements and Computations of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields With Respect to Human Exposure to Such Fields, 100 kHz-300 GHz Recommendation: APPROVE 5.4 P802.20/D4.1m (C/LM) Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks - Standard Air Interface for Mobile Broadband Wireless Access Systems Supporting Vehicular Mobility - Physical and Media Access Control Layer Specification Claire Topp, legal counsel, explained that conflict of interest principles would be applied to the consideration of P802.20, and that only unconflicted members would be able to vote. The status of some RevCom members had been previously determined at the SASB level. Other members were determined by legal counsel to be conflicted on the basis of their affiliations. The status of the remaining members was to be determined by the unconflicted RevCom members. An executive session, during which the unconflicted RevCom members were to determine the status of the remaining members, was initiated. Once the status of all RevCom members had been determined, open session resumed. The final determination was:
Chair Law announced that there were eleven unconflicted RevCom members, six members were required to achieve quorum, and a majority of those voting was required for a motion to pass. Furthermore, he reserved the right to limit discussion in accordance with the rules used at the IEEE Board of Directors if necessary. There was a motion to approve P802.20. After some discussion, there was a vote [recommendation below]. Recommendation: APPROVE [yes = 7; no = 0; abstain = 2 (Drozd, Sciacca); recuse = 1 (Robinson)] 6 EARLY CONSIDERATION PROCESS Chair Law stated that, as is customary for RevCom, there would be no Early Consideration teleconference during the summer. 7 NEW BUSINESS Some points that were discussed were:
The OpMan currently contains differing language about the requirement for dealing with ballot comments not marked as reason for a disapprove vote. The Sponsor Responsibility with Regard to Non-MBS Comments Ad Hoc was formed to address this (Chair: Clint Chaplin; Members: Bill Ash, Phil Barber, Wael Diab, Arnie Greenspan, Bob Grow, Mark Klerer, David Law, Moira Patterson, Dave Ringle, Sam Sciacca, and Geoff Thompson). 7.2 RevCom Convention 6 – The 25/15 Day Policy – Law Chair Law led discussion on RevCom Convention 6. He explained that the 25/15 Day Policy was created when RevCom submittals were still conducted by mail, and that since submittals are now received electronically, it should be considered whether there still was a need for a ten-day time window between the date by which the Sponsor should submit materials and the date by which RevCom should receive them. Some points that were discussed were:
It was decided that no changes were required at this time. 8 NEXT MEETING An informal straw poll was taken about how many RevCom members expected to attend the next meeting. Twelve members indicated that they were planning on attending that meeting, one member was unsure at this time, and two declined. 9 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2.05 p.m. |
 | |||
| |||
