[EAS] Source of the "scary" text in Suffolk Co

[Sean Donelan]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2016, Ed Czarnecki wrote:
> It may not have been the FCC's intent, but it was surely the result.

Informal comments, outside of meetings, have zero regulatory authority.

I complained in a previous rulemaking about the FCC privately giving some
people its interpretations, and not telling other people about them.  When 
the FCC answers a question, it should publish the question and answer 
publically.

In the 1990s, the FCC used to frequently published clarifications for 
various EAS questions on its web site.  If you use archive.org, you'll 
find old versions of the FCC web site with extensive information and 
as well as FCC interpretations about the EAS.

But in the 2000s, the FCC re-organized, and the bureau now responsible 
for EAS ceased publishing answers, interpretations or clarifications about 
EAS anywhere (web site, public notices, federal register, etc.)  It also 
deleted all the published answers and interpretations from the 1990s.

I don't mind the FCC having informal meetings or discussions about FCC. 
That's how the FCC staff learns things, and gets educated.  They should
invite more people to meet with them.

Just please publish the interpretations given to some people.  The IRS, 
SEC and other Federal agencies frequently publish interpretations in 
response to private questions.  It would also avoid industry spending a 
lot of money based on potentially off-the-cuff remarks in a hallway.