Re: Request for Extension

[Jay@Iperdome.com]

At 06:05 PM 8/26/97 +0100, Jeff Williams wrote:
>> In light of the recently disclosed extension given
>> to the PAB to file a response to the NTIA Request
>> for Comments, Iperdome today formally requested a
>> similar extension on behalf of the hundreds of
>> individuals, companies and organizations that
>> responded in the time frame specified.
>
>  Well I believe this is within your perview and only fair
>under the circumstances.  Though at least your original
>perposal was in on time and very well done as well.  There
>are others, and they know who they are, that don't seem
>to think that the same rules apply to them.  Hence I find
>this request reasonable in light of that situation.


For the record, Iperdome does not need to 
change its proposal.  

The purpose of our extension request to NTIA
was simply one of fairness.  If the PAB uses
the extra time to incorporate responses that
address points made in other submissions, 
then it is only fair that others have a 
like opportunity to respond.

[This should be easy to detect, simply compare
Kevin's submittal to the official PAB submittal]

Based on my discussions with NTIA, it appears
that the PAB did not get special permission to
submit their proposal late.  They were simply
informed that NTIA would continue to accept
proposals after the deadline.

I don't believe that the USG process will be
slowed down by these activities.


Regards,

Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.  
404-250-3242  http://www.iperdome.com