electronic meeting - ieeegrouper.ieee.org/groups/scc20/dmc/minutes/electronicmeeting08.pdf · 3.1...

Draft PAR Confirmation Number 256166743.14734

Submittal Email: [email protected] Change Submitter Email

Type of Project: Modify Existing Approved PAR

1.1 Project Number: P1636

1.2 Type of Document: Standard for

1.3 Life Cycle: Trial

2.1 Title of Standard: Standard for Software Interface for Maintenance Information Collection and Analysis

3.1 Name of Working Group: Diagnostic and Maintenance Control Working

Group(SASB/SCC20/DMC_WG) Reassign Working Group

Contact information for Working Group Chair Mark Kaufman PO Box 1477 Brea, CA 92822 US [email protected]

3.2 Sponsoring Society and Committee:IEEE-SASB Coordinating Committees/SCC20 - Test and Diagnosis for Electronic Systems(SASB/SCC20) Contact information for Sponsor Chair: Mike Seavey 2040 Rand Road #110 Palatine, IL 60074 US [email protected] Contact information for Standards Representative:

4.1 Type of Ballot: Individual Page 4

4.2 Expected Date of Submission for Initial Sponsor Ballot: 2008-04

4.3 Projected Completion Date for Submittal to RevCom: 2008-12

5.1 Approximate number of people expected to work on this project: 15 Page 5

5.2 Scope of Proposed Standard: The scope of the Standard Software Interface for Maintenance Information Collection and Analysis (SIMICA) is an implementation independent specification for a software interface to information

Old Scope: The scope of the Standard Software Interface for Maintenance Information Collection and Analysis (SIMICA) is an implementation independent specification for a software interface to information systems

systems containing data pertinent to the diagnosis and maintenance of complex systems consisting of hardware, software, or any combination thereof. These interfaces will support service definitions for creating application programming interfaces (API) for the access, exchange, and analysis of historical diagnostic and maintenance information. The standard will use the information models of IEEE Std 1232/D4.0 - Artificial Intelligence Exchange and Service Tie to All Test Environments (AI-ESTATE) as a foundation.

containing data pertinent to the diagnosis and maintenance of complex systems consisting of hardware, software, or any combination thereof. These interfaces will support service definitions for creating application programming interfaces (API) for the access, exchange, and analysis of historical diagnostic and maintenance information. The standard will use the information models of IEEE Std 1232-2002 - Artificial Intelligence Exchange and Service Tie to All Test Environments (AI-ESTATE) as a foundation.

5.3 Is the completion of this standard is dependent upon the completion of another standard: No If yes, please explain:

5.4 Purpose of Proposed Standard: The purpose of the IEEE P1636 Standard Software Interface for Maintenance Information Collection and Analysis (SIMICA) is to specify a software interface for access, exchange, and analysis of product diagnostic and maintenance information. This will address the pervasive need of organizations to assess the effectiveness of diagnostics for complex systems throughout the product lifecycle. The use of formal information models will facilitate exchanging historical maintenance information between information systems and analysis tools. The models will facilitate creating open system software architectures for maturing system diagnostics.

5.5 Need for the Project:

5.6 Stakeholders for the Standard:

Intellectual Property 6.1.a. Has the IEEE-SA policy on intellectual property been presented to those responsible for preparing/submitting this PAR prior to the PAR submittal to the IEEE-SA Standards Board? Yes If yes, state date: 2008-09-05 If no, please explain: 6.1.b. Is the Sponsor aware of any copyright permissions needed for this project? No If yes, please explain: 6.1.c. Is the Sponsor aware of possible registration activity related to this project? No If yes, please explain:

7.1 Are there other standards or projects with a similar scope? No Explanation: Sponsor Organization: Project/Standard Number: Project/Standard Date: 0000-00-00

Project/Standard Title:

7.2 International Standards Activities a. Adoptions Is there potential for this standard to be adopted by another organization? Do not know at this time Organization: Technical Committee Name: Technical Committee Number: Contact person Name: Contact Phone: Contact Email: b. Joint Development Is it the intent to develop this document jointly with another organization? Organization: Technical Committee Name: Technical Committee Number: Contact person Name: Contact Phone: Contact Email: c. Harmonization Are you aware of another organization that may be interested in portions of this document in their standardization development efforts? Organization: Technical Committee Name: Technical Committee Number: Contact person Name: Contact Phone: Contact Email:

8.1 Additional Explanatory Notes: (Item Number and Explanation) The original PAR references IEEE Std 1232-2002. This standard is presently in revision. This Standard now needs to reference Draft 4 of 1232. This Standard has been to ballot and has been submittted to RevCom. This PAR change to reference Draft 4 of 1232 in the Scope is to align verbatum with the ballotted 1636.

Electronic Meeting

1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:38 PM

Subject: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:09:24 -0600To: [email protected]

All -

This message convenes an electronic meeting of IEEE SCC20 Diagnostic andMaintenance Control subcommittee. We announced the meeting just over 72hours ago, those who have agreed to participate are :

Tim WilmeringBill Gerstein Joe Stanco John Sheppard Tony Alwardt Alicia HeltonMichelle HarrisDaryl Busch John Ralph Ion Neag Mukund Modi Mike Stora

The purpose of the meeting is to resolve an issue r aised by REVCOM whendiscussing approval of P1636. 1636 failed to pass R evCom because thescope and purpose did not match the PAR. 1636 refe rred to 1232 D4instead of 1232-2002. So, in order to get another vote by RevCom wehave to change the PAR to reflect the same referenc e as in P1636, whichis reflected in the attached modified PAR.. <<Draft PAR Confirmation Number 256166743.doc>> There is an alternative - that is to change the ref erence in the P1636document, and then recirculate again.

The recommendation of the co-chairs and secretary i s to modify the PAR.Mike Seavey is working diligently behind the scenes to see that the PARchange can be approved and the standard approval re visited at the March2009 meeting.

SO - if it should be the will of the committee memb ers, is there amotion to amend the PAR as reflected in the attache d document?

Regards,

Tim___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-Chair Diagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommittee of IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>

Draft PAR Confirmation Number 256166743.doc

Content-Description:Draft PAR Confirmation Number 256166743.doc

Content-Type: application/msword

Content-Encoding: base64

RE: Electronic Meeting

1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Gerstein, Bill HS" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:19:26 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I will second the motion

Best Regards,William E GersteinHamilton SundstrandSr. Testability Staff Engineer

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:09 AMTo: [email protected]: Electronic Meeting

All -


Tim WilmeringBill Gerstein Joe Stanco John Sheppard Tony Alwardt Alicia HeltonMichelle HarrisDaryl Busch John Ralph Ion Neag Mukund Modi Mike Stora




Regards,

Tim___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-Chair Diagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommittee of IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

* <mailto:[email protected]>


1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:21:06 -0800To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I move to amend the PAR.

Mark Kaufman

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:09To: [email protected]: Electronic Meeting

All -


Tim WilmeringBill GersteinJoe StancoJohn SheppardTony AlwardtAlicia HeltonMichelle HarrisDaryl BuschJohn RalphIon NeagMukund ModiMike Stora




Regards,

Tim___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-ChairDiagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommittee of IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>


1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Gerstein, Bill HS" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:24:31 -0500To: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

Sorry about that, OK I will now move to second the motion


-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:21 AMTo: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman


All -






2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM


Regards,



1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:28:08 -0600To: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So, canthe motion be modified to be more specific? The in itial recommendationof the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attacheddocument attached in the call to order message.

The new motion will require a second, of course.

Tim_________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringBoeing Phantom Works - Support Technology'314.234.6781 * <mailto:[email protected]>

-----Original Message-----From: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10[ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:21 AMTo: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman


All -



The purpose of the meeting is to resolve an issue r aised by REVCOM whendiscussing approval of P1636. 1636 failed to pass R evCom because thescope and purpose did not match the PAR. 1636 refe rred to 1232 D4instead of 1232-2002. So, in order to get another vote by RevCom wehave to change the PAR to reflect the same referenc e as in P1636, whichis reflected in the attached modified PAR.. <<Draft PAR Confirmation Number 256166743.doc>> There is an alternative - that is to change the ref erence in the P1636


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

document, and then recirculate again.



Regards,



1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Alwardt, Anthony L" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:28:38 -0600To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]


-----Original Message-----From: Wilmering, Timothy J Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:09 AMTo: [email protected]: Electronic Meeting

All -






Regards,



1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Helton, Alicia" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:32:39 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]


Alicia Helton

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:09 PMTo: [email protected]: Electronic Meeting

All -






Regards,



1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:44:15 -0800To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per thepreviously circulated draft (attached).

Mark Kaufman

-----Original Message-----From: Wilmering, Timothy J [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting



Tim_________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringBoeing Phantom Works - Support Technology'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>

Draft PAR Confirmation Number 256166743.doc

Content-Description:Draft PAR Confirmation Number 256166743.doc

Content-Type: application/msword

Content-Encoding: base64


1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:46:10 -0600To: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

is there a second to this motion?

_________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringBoeing Phantom Works - Support Technology'314.234.6781 * <mailto:[email protected]>

-----Original Message-----From: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10[ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AMTo: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman

-----Original Message-----From: Wilmering, Timothy J [ mailto:[email protected] ]Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting





1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Gerstein, Bill HS" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:47:23 -0500To: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed chang es to the PAR per thepreviously circulated draft (attached)."




Mark Kaufman

-----Original Message-----From: Wilmering, Timothy J [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting





1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:57:24 -0600To: "Gerstein, Bill HS" <[email protected]>, "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10"<[email protected]>, [email protected]

Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the p roposed changes tothe PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein has secondedthat motion.

Is there any discussion?

In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and havenothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we will knowwhen we can proceed with the vote.

If of course, you do have an issue to discuss with the motion, now isthe time for you to share your thoughts with the pa rticipants.

Thanks,

Tim


-----Original Message-----From: Gerstein, Bill HS [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AMTo: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmerin g, Timothy J;[email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting





Mark Kaufman


With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So, can


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

the motion be modified to be more specific? The in itial recommendationof the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attacheddocument attached in the call to order message.




1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Gerstein, Bill HS" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:01:56 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

No Discussion


-----Original Message-----From: Wilmering, Timothy J [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AMTo: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Cor ona, PE10;[email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting





Thanks,

Tim





-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AMTo: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman






1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: Patrick Kalgren <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:03:40 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, "Gerstein, Bill HS"<[email protected]>, "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I have no discussion.

Pat

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:57 PMTo: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Cor ona, PE10;[email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting





Thanks,

Tim







2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM


Mark Kaufman






1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Gerstein, Bill HS" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:09:40 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I need to leave for a meeting until about 1:30. If there is nodiscussion that changes the motion I vote to approv e the current motion.I will check back when I return.


-----Original Message-----From: Wilmering, Timothy J [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AMTo: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Cor ona, PE10;[email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting





Thanks,

Tim





-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:39 PM

To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman





Re: Electronic Meeting

1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: Re: Electronic MeetingFrom: "John W. Sheppard, PhD" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:17:27 -0700To: [email protected]: [email protected]

Was the situation explained adequately? If so, I ha ve no discussion.

John W. Sheppard, PhD RightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Department of Computer Science Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717 V: +1 406 994 4835 F: +1 406 994 4376 E: [email protected]

Wilmering, Timothy J wrote: Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the p roposed changes to the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein has seconded that motion.


In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and have nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we will know when we can proceed with the vote.

If of course, you do have an issue to discuss with the motion, now is the time for you to share your thoughts with the pa rticipants.

Thanks,

Tim

_________________________________ Timothy J. Wilmering Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology '314.234.6781 * <mailto:[email protected]>

-----Original Message----- From: Gerstein, Bill HS [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12,2008 11:47 AM To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmerin g, Timothy J; [email protected] Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting

I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed chang es to the PAR per the previously circulated draft (attached)."

Best Regards, William E Gerstein Hamilton Sundstrand Sr. Testability Staff Engineer

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10 Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the previously circulated draft (attached).

Mark Kaufman

-----Original Message----- From: Wilmering, Timothy J [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28 To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; [email protected] Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting

With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So, can the motion be modified to be more specific? The in itial recommendation of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attached document attached in the call to order message. The new motion will require a second, of course.

Tim _________________________________ Timothy J. Wilmering Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology '314.234.6781 * <mailto:[email protected]>


1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:19:03 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, "Gerstein, Bill HS"<[email protected]>, "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

Tim, Question: Are there any negative ramifications to t he Par stating thatthe standard will use the information model of 1232 /D4.0 as afoundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soo n and then a -2009?

Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B)Golden Valley, MN 55422Phone - (763) 954-6538Fax - (763) [email protected]

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AMTo: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Cor ona, PE10;[email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting





Thanks,

Tim





2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM




Mark Kaufman






1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:24:19 -0600To: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, "Gerstein, Bill HS"<[email protected]>, "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

Darryl -

The P1636 that was balloted WAS based on the models of 1232 D4. So,whether or not there is a D5, we will not change th is version of SIMICAto reflect any models other than D4.

So, any changes that occur to the models between no w and when we go toballot with 1232 in January should be examined for their impact to P1636- fortunately, the dependencies are few, sand I thi nk inwell-established areas of the model.

Tim


-----Original Message-----From: Busch, Darryl (MN10) [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:19 PMTo: Wilmering, Timothy J; Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufma n, Mark A CIV NSWCCorona, PE10; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

Tim,Question: Are there any negative ramifications to t he Par stating thatthe standard will use the information model of 1232 /D4.0 as afoundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soo n and then a -2009?





In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and have


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we will knowwhen we can proceed with the vote.


Thanks,

Tim







Mark Kaufman






1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: Ion Neag <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:26:15 -0500To: "'Wilmering, Timothy J'" <[email protected]>, "'Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10'" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

Nothing to discuss.

Ion

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:57 PMTo: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Cor ona, PE10; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the p roposed changes tothe PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein hassecondedthat motion.


In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and havenothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we willknowwhen we can proceed with the vote.


Thanks,

Tim

_________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringBoeing Phantom Works - Support Technology'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>

-----Original Message-----From: Gerstein, Bill HS [ mailto:[email protected] ]Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AMTo: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmerin g, Timothy J;[email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed chang es to the PAR perthepreviously circulated draft (attached)."


-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman






1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: Re: Electronic MeetingFrom: "John W. Sheppard, PhD" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:26:37 -0700To: [email protected]: [email protected]

Let me take a shot at that.

There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draft will be used asa "starting point," I do not see them as significan t. The bigger problem is that, if wedo not make this specific change, we will be requir ed to do another recirculation balloton the standard.

Here are our options:

1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOM approval. REVCOMwould not need to see the standard again.

2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOM approval, andaddition recirculation of the document, and subsequ ent REVCOM approval. This is probablythe most painful.

3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requires recirculation of thedocument and subsequent REVCOM approval. In reality , while it is harder than #1, itreally isn't that much harder. But I the change to the standard is to reference the 2002draft. I don't think we really want to do that.

The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option 1 (the one thatis the focus of the motion) is the simplest change to get the standard approved.

John


Busch, Darryl (MN10) wrote: Tim, Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that the standard will use the information model of 1232 /D4.0 as a foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soo n and then a -2009?

Darryl Busch Principal Scientist Honeywell Advanced Technology Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Valley, MN 55422 Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495 [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Cor ona, PE10; [email protected] Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the p roposed changes to the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein has seconded that motion.


In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and have nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we will know when we can proceed with the vote.


Thanks,

Tim

_________________________________ Timothy J. Wilmering Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology '314.234.6781 * <mailto:[email protected]>

-----Original Message----- From: Gerstein, Bill HS [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12,2008 11:47 AM To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmerin g, Timothy J; [email protected] Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting

I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed chang es to the PAR per the previously circulated draft (attached)."

Best Regards, William E Gerstein Hamilton Sundstrand Sr. Testability Staff Engineer

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10 Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman

-----Original Message----- From: Wilmering, Timothy J [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28 To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; [email protected] Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting

With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So, can the motion be modified to be more specific? The in itial recommendation of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attached document attached in the call to order message. The new motion will require a second, of course.

Tim _________________________________ Timothy J. Wilmering Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology '314.234.6781 * <mailto:[email protected]>


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM


1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:44:52 -0500To: [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]

Thanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.


-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic Meeting


There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draft

will be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant. The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, we will be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.


1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOM approval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.

2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOM approval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequent REVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.

3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requires recirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. In reality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder. But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don't

think we really want to do that.

The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option

1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change to get the standard approved.

John

John W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished ProfessorDepartment of Computer ScienceMontana State UniversityBozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected]


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Busch, Darryl (MN10) wrote:Tim, Question: Are there any negative ramifications to t he Par stating thatthe standard will use the information model of 1232 /D4.0 as afoundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soo n and then a -2009?



Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the p roposed changes tothe PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein has

secondedthat motion.


In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and havenothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we will

knowwhen we can proceed with the vote.


Thanks,

Tim



I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed chang es to the PAR per

thepreviously circulated draft (attached)."

Best Regards,


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

William E GersteinHamilton SundstrandSr. Testability Staff Engineer



Mark Kaufman


With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,

canthe motion be modified to be more specific? The in itial

recommendationof the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attacheddocument attached in the call to order message.




1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:44:52 -0500To: [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]






will be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant. The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, we will be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.


1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOM approval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.

2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOM approval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequent REVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.

3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requires recirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. In reality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder. But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don't



1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change to get the standard approved.

John

John W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished ProfessorDepartment of Computer ScienceMontana State UniversityBozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected]


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Busch, Darryl (MN10) wrote:Tim, Question: Are there any negative ramifications to t he Par stating thatthe standard will use the information model of 1232 /D4.0 as afoundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soo n and then a -2009?



Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the p roposed changes tothe PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein has



In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and havenothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we will



Thanks,

Tim





Best Regards,


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

William E GersteinHamilton SundstrandSr. Testability Staff Engineer



Mark Kaufman




recommendationof the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attacheddocument attached in the call to order message.




1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:13:00 -0800To: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]

No further discussion.

Mark Kaufman

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected] ; [email protected]: [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected]




will be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant. The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.


1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.

2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.

3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder. But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don't



1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change to


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

get the standard approved.

John

John W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected]

Busch, Darryl (MN10) wrote:Tim,Question: Are there any negative ramifications to t he Par stating that

the standard will use the information model of 1232 /D4.0 as a foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soo n and then a -2009?

Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected]

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AMTo: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Cor ona, PE10; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the p roposed changes to the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein has



In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and have nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we will



Thanks,

Tim


-----Original Message-----From: Gerstein, Bill HS [ mailto:[email protected] ]Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AMTo: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmerin g, Timothy J;


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

[email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting




-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AMTo: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman




recommendationof the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attached document attached in the call to order message.




1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:13:00 -0800To: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]

No further discussion.

Mark Kaufman

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected] ; [email protected]: [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected]




will be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant. The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.


1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.

2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.

3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder. But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don't



1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change to


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

get the standard approved.

John

John W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected]

Busch, Darryl (MN10) wrote:Tim,Question: Are there any negative ramifications to t he Par stating that

the standard will use the information model of 1232 /D4.0 as a foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soo n and then a -2009?

Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected]

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AMTo: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Cor ona, PE10; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the p roposed changes to the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein has



In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a pa rticipant and have nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we will



Thanks,

Tim


-----Original Message-----From: Gerstein, Bill HS [ mailto:[email protected] ]Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AMTo: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmerin g, Timothy J;


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

[email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting




-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AMTo: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


Mark Kaufman




recommendationof the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attached document attached in the call to order message.



Electronic Meeting Participants

1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: Electronic Meeting ParticipantsFrom: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:24:32 -0600To: [email protected]

In looking things over , it came to my attention th at I did not list PatKalgren or David Rohacek as participants for this m eeting in my originalmessage - my apologies, your participation is clear ly welcome, despitemy clerical error!

7 out of 15 (including Pat have responded "no furt her discussion"thus far.

Tim___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-Chair Diagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommittee of IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>


1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: Re: Electronic MeetingFrom: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:26:52 +0000 (GMT)To: "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]

Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco

-----Original Message-----From: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Sent 12/12/2008 2:13:00 PMTo: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; owner-stds-dmc-member@LISTSER V.IEEE.ORGCc: [email protected]: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draftwill be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don't


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

think we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 12 32/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 s oon and then a -2009?>>> Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden V alley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC C orona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bil l Gerstein hasseconded> that motion.>> Is there any discussion?>> In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effe ct so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.>> If of course, you do have an issue to discuss wit h the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.>> Thanks,>> Tim>>> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected] c.com]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmer ing, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed cha nges to the PAR perthe


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

> previously circulated draft (attached).">>> Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] G> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).>>> Mark Kaufman>> -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:timothy.j.wilm [email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; stds-d [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflecte d in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.>> The new motion will require a second, of course.>> Tim> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: Re: Electronic MeetingFrom: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:26:52 +0000 (GMT)To: "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]

Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco


No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; owner-stds-dmc-member@LISTSER V.IEEE.ORGCc: [email protected]: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draftwill be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don't


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

think we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 12 32/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 s oon and then a -2009?>>> Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden V alley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC C orona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bil l Gerstein hasseconded> that motion.>> Is there any discussion?>> In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effe ct so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.>> If of course, you do have an issue to discuss wit h the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.>> Thanks,>> Tim>>> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected] c.com]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmer ing, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed cha nges to the PAR perthe


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

> previously circulated draft (attached).">>> Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] G> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).>>> Mark Kaufman>> -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:timothy.j.wilm [email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; stds-d [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflecte d in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.>> The new motion will require a second, of course.>> Tim> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Helton, Alicia" <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:28:07 -0500To: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, "Gerstein, Bill HS" <[email protected]>, "Kaufman,Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

No discussion.

Alicia Helton

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:19 PMTo: Wilmering, Timothy J; Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufma n, Mark A CIV NSWCCorona, PE10; [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

Tim, Question: Are there any negative ramifications to t he Par stating thatthe standard will use the information model of 1232 /D4.0 as afoundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soo n and then a -2009?







Thanks,

Tim



2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:40 PM






Mark Kaufman






1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Seavey, Michael I." <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:49:13 -0600To: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]

I have nothing to add, but am monitoring the progress....

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe StancoSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:27 PMTo: kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10; Busch, Darryl (MN10); [email protected];[email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic Meeting

Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco

-----Original Message-----From: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Sent 12/12/2008 2:13:00 PMTo: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected],[email protected]: [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; owner-stds-dmc-member@LISTSER V.IEEE.ORGCc: [email protected]: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draft


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

will be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don'tthink we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 12 32/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 s oon and then a -2009?>>> Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden V alley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC C orona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bil l Gerstein hasseconded> that motion.>> Is there any discussion?>> In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effe ct so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.>> If of course, you do have an issue to discuss wit h the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.>> Thanks,>> Tim>>> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:40 PM

> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected] c.com]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmer ing, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed cha nges to the PAR perthe> previously circulated draft (attached).">>> Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] G> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).>>> Mark Kaufman>> -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:timothy.j.wilm [email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; stds-d [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflecte d in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.>> The new motion will require a second, of course.>> Tim> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 3 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Seavey, Michael I." <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:49:13 -0600To: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]



Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco

-----Original Message-----From: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Sent 12/12/2008 2:13:00 PMTo: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected],[email protected]: [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; owner-stds-dmc-member@LISTSER V.IEEE.ORGCc: [email protected]: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draft


2 of 3 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

will be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don'tthink we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 12 32/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 s oon and then a -2009?>>> Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden V alley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC C orona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bil l Gerstein hasseconded> that motion.>> Is there any discussion?>> In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effe ct so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.>> If of course, you do have an issue to discuss wit h the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.>> Thanks,>> Tim>>> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering


3 of 3 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected] c.com]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmer ing, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed cha nges to the PAR perthe> previously circulated draft (attached).">>> Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] G> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).>>> Mark Kaufman>> -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:timothy.j.wilm [email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; stds-d [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflecte d in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.>> The new motion will require a second, of course.>> Tim> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: John Ralph <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:52:51 -0600 (CST)To: "Seavey, Michael I." <[email protected]>CC: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Nothing to add...if Option 1 seems like the "best" for long-term, I say that's what should happen.

John Ralph

On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Seavey, Michael I. wrote:


___________________________________

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Stanco Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:27 PM To: kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10; Busch, Darryl (MN10); [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Electronic Meeting

Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco

-----Original Message-----From: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Sent 12/12/2008 2:13:00 PM To: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected] Cc: [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; [email protected]: [email protected]: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.


2 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Valley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since the PAR says the draftwill be used as a "starting point," I do not see them as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This route requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the document, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn't that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference the 2002 draft. I don'tthink we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and REVCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Department of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 1232/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soon and then a -2009?>>> Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist


3 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Valley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein hasseconded> that motion.>> Is there any discussion?>> In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.>> If of course, you do have an issue to discuss with the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.>> Thanks,>> Tim>>> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmering, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed changes to the PAR perthe


4 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> previously circulated draft (attached).">>> Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).>>> Mark Kaufman>> -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:[email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.>> The new motion will require a second, of course.>> Tim> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: John Ralph <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:52:51 -0600 (CST)To: "Seavey, Michael I." <[email protected]>CC: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Nothing to add...if Option 1 seems like the "best" for long-term, I say that's what should happen.

John Ralph

On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Seavey, Michael I. wrote:


___________________________________

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Stanco Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:27 PM To: kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10; Busch, Darryl (MN10); [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Electronic Meeting

Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco

-----Original Message-----From: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Sent 12/12/2008 2:13:00 PM To: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected] Cc: [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting

No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; [email protected]: [email protected]: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.


2 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Valley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since the PAR says the draftwill be used as a "starting point," I do not see them as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This route requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the document, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn't that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference the 2002 draft. I don'tthink we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and REVCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Department of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 1232/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 soon and then a -2009?>>> Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist


3 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Valley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bill Gerstein hasseconded> that motion.>> Is there any discussion?>> In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effect so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.>> If of course, you do have an issue to discuss with the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.>> Thanks,>> Tim>>> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmering, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed changes to the PAR perthe


4 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> previously circulated draft (attached).">>> Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).>>> Mark Kaufman>> -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:[email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflected in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.>> The new motion will require a second, of course.>> Tim> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: mukund modi <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:58:51 -0800 (PST)To: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], "Seavey, Michael I." <[email protected]>CC: [email protected]

I have nothing to add......... Mukund

--- On Fri, 12/12/08, Seavey, Michael I. <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Seavey, Michael I. <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingTo: "Joe Stanco" <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]: Friday, December 12, 2008, 2:49 PM


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe StancoSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:27 PMTo: kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10; Busch, Darryl (MN10); [email protected]; [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic Meeting

Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco


No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; owner-stds-dmc-member@LISTSER V.IEEE.ORGCc: [email protected]


2 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draftwill be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don'tthink we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 12 32/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 s oon and then a -2009?>>> Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden V alley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC C orona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bil l Gerstein hasseconded


3 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> that motion.>> Is there any discussion?>> In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effe ct so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.>> If of course, you do have an issue to discuss wit h the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.>> Thanks,>> Tim>>> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected] c.com]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmer ing, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed cha nges to the PAR perthe> previously circulated draft (attached).">>> Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] G> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).>>> Mark Kaufman>> -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:timothy.j.wilm [email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; stds-d [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflecte d in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.>> The new motion will require a second, of course.>> Tim


4 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: mukund modi <[email protected]>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:58:51 -0800 (PST)To: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], "Seavey, Michael I."<[email protected]>CC: [email protected]


--- On Fri, 12/12/08, Seavey, Michael I. <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Seavey, Michael I. <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingTo: "Joe Stanco" <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]: Friday, December 12, 2008, 2:49 PM


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe StancoSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:27 PMTo: kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10; Busch, Darryl (MN10); [email protected]; [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic Meeting

Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco


No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; owner-stds-dmc-member@LISTSER V.IEEE.ORGCc: [email protected]


2 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draftwill be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don'tthink we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 12 32/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 s oon and then a -2009?>>> Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden V alley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC C orona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bil l Gerstein hasseconded


3 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> that motion.>> Is there any discussion?>> In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effe ct so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.>> If of course, you do have an issue to discuss wit h the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.>> Thanks,>> Tim>>> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>> -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected] c.com]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmer ing, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed cha nges to the PAR perthe> previously circulated draft (attached).">>> Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer>> -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] G> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).>>> Mark Kaufman>> -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:timothy.j.wilm [email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; stds-d [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting>> With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflecte d in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.>> The new motion will require a second, of course.>> Tim


4 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Harris, Michelle L" <[email protected]>Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 08:02:59 -0500To: [email protected], Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], "Seavey, Michael I."<[email protected]>CC: [email protected]

I have no further discussion. Michelle

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of mukund modiSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 5:59 PMTo: Joe Stanco; kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10; Busch, Darryl (MN10); [email protected];[email protected]; Seavey, Michael I.Cc: [email protected]: RE: Electronic Meeting


--- On Fri, 12/12/08, Seavey, Michael I. <[email protected]> wrote:From: Seavey, Michael I. <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingTo: "Joe Stanco" <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10"<[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>,[email protected], [email protected]: [email protected]: Friday, December 12, 2008, 2:49 PM



Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco

-----Original Message-----From: "Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10" <[email protected]>Sent 12/12/2008 2:13:00 PMTo: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected],[email protected]: [email protected]


2 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM


No further discussion.Mark Kaufman-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of Busch, Darryl (MN10)Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 10:45To: [email protected]; owner-stds-dmc-member@LISTSER V.IEEE.ORGCc: [email protected]: RE: Electronic MeetingThanks John & TimNothing further to discuss.Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden Val ley, MN 55422 Phone- (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) [email protected] Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-MEM [email protected]] OnBehalf Of John W. Sheppard, PhDSent: Friday, December 12, 2008 12:27 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: Electronic MeetingLet me take a shot at that.There are technical ramifications; however, since t he PAR says the draftwill be used as a "starting point," I do not see th em as significant.The bigger problem is that, if we do not make this specific change, wewill be required to do another recirculation ballot on the standard.Here are our options:1. Modify the PAR is this specific way. This route only requires NESCOMapproval. REVCOM would not need to see the standard again.2. Modify the PAR to be the most "correct." This ro ute requires NESCOMapproval, and addition recirculation of the documen t, and subsequentREVCOM approval. This is probably the most painful.3. Keep the PAR as is and change the standard. This route requiresrecirculation of the document and subsequent REVCOM approval. Inreality, while it is harder than #1, it really isn' t that much harder.But I the change to the standard is to reference th e 2002 draft. I don'tthink we really want to do that.The skids have been greased both with NESCOM and RE VCOM such that option1 (the one that is the focus of the motion) is the simplest change toget the standard approved.JohnJohn W. Sheppard, PhDRightNow Technologies Distinguished Professor Depar tment of ComputerScience Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717V: +1 406 994 4835F: +1 406 994 4376E: [email protected], Darryl (MN10) wrote:> Tim,> Question: Are there any negative ramifications to the Par stating that> the standard will use the information model of 12 32/D4.0 as a> foundation? Is it ok that there might be a D5.0 s oon and then a -2009?> > > Darryl Busch> Principal Scientist> Honeywell Advanced Technology> Vehicle Health Management & Decision Technology> 1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B) Golden V alley, MN 55422> Phone - (763) 954-6538 Fax - (763) 954-5495> [email protected]


3 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> > -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Wilmering, Timothy J> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:57 AM> To: Gerstein, Bill HS; Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC C orona, PE10;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting> > Mark Kaufman has submitted a motion to accept the proposed changes to> the PAR per the previously circulated draft. Bil l Gerstein hasseconded> that motion.> > Is there any discussion?> > In an electronic meeting, if you are listed as a participant and have> nothing to discuss, you must respond to this effe ct so that we willknow> when we can proceed with the vote.> > If of course, you do have an issue to discuss wit h the motion, now is> the time for you to share your thoughts with the participants.> > Thanks,> > Tim> > > _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>> > -----Original Message-----> From: Gerstein, Bill HS [mailto:[email protected] c.com]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:47 AM> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; Wilmer ing, Timothy J;> [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting> > I second Marks motion "to accept the proposed cha nges to the PAR perthe> previously circulated draft (attached)."> > > Best Regards,> William E Gerstein> Hamilton Sundstrand> Sr. Testability Staff Engineer> > -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:STDS-DMC-M [email protected]] On> Behalf Of Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 11:44 AM> To: Wilmering, Timothy J; [email protected] G> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting> > I amend my motion to accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the> previously circulated draft (attached).> > > Mark Kaufman> > -----Original Message-----> From: Wilmering, Timothy J [mailto:timothy.j.wilm [email protected]]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:28


4 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

> To: Kaufman, Mark A CIV NSWC Corona, PE10; stds-d [email protected]> Subject: RE: Electronic Meeting> > With all due respect, the motion is not clear as to is intent. So,can> the motion be modified to be more specific? The initialrecommendation> of the co-chairs was to amend the PAR as reflecte d in the attached> document attached in the call to order message.> > The new motion will require a second, of course.> > Tim> _________________________________> Timothy J. Wilmering> Boeing Phantom Works - Support Technology> '314.234.6781> *<mailto:[email protected]>>


1 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Harris, Michelle L" <[email protected]>Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 08:02:59 -0500To: [email protected], Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], "Seavey, Michael I."<[email protected]>CC: [email protected]

I have no further discussion. Michelle






Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco



2 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM




3 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM



4 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM



1 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Spier, Carolyn (US SSA)" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:13:32 -0500To: [email protected], Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], "Seavey, Michael I."<[email protected]>CC: [email protected]

Nothing to add. Carry Spiervoice: 603 885 9663cell: 603 860 4385






Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco



2 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM




3 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM



4 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM



1 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Electronic MeetingFrom: "Spier, Carolyn (US SSA)" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:13:32 -0500To: [email protected], Joe Stanco <[email protected]>, "kaufman, mark a civ nswc corona, pe10" <[email protected]>, "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], "Seavey, Michael I."<[email protected]>CC: [email protected]

Nothing to add. Carry Spiervoice: 603 885 9663cell: 603 860 4385






Nothing to discuss

Joe Stanco



2 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM




3 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM



4 of 4 1/6/2009 1:41 PM


Vote on Motion Before the Committee

1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 07:15:55 -0600To: [email protected]

All -

Re the issue of amending the P1636 PAR to harmonize its wording withthat of the P1636 document, we have a motion before the committee, madeby Mark Kaufman, and seconded by Bill Gerstein, to "accept the proposedchanges to the PAR per the previously circulated dr aft ." I then askedthe committee if there was any discussion on the ma tter @ 11:57 AMFriday. Having now heard from all but two declared participants thatthere is no further discussion on the motion before the committee, I amprepared to call the question.

Please respond "yea," "nay," or "abstain" to assert your vote on thismotion.

Regards,

Tim

___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-Chair Diagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommittee of IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>

Re: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: Re: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "John W. Sheppard, PhD" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 07:18:51 -0700To: [email protected]: [email protected]

I vote yay (in favor of the motion).

John


Wilmering, Timothy J wrote: All -

Re the issue of amending the P1636 PAR to harmonize its wording with that of the P1636 document, we have a motion before the committee, made by Mark Kaufman, and seconded by Bill Gerstein, to "accept the proposed changes to the PAR per the previously circulated dr aft ." I then asked the committee if there was any discussion on the ma tter @ 11:57 AM Friday. Having now heard from all but two declared participants that there is no further discussion on the motion before the committee, I am prepared to call the question. Please respond "yea," "nay," or "abstain" to assert your vote on this motion.

Regards, Tim

___________________________________ Timothy J. Wilmering Co-Chair Diagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcom mittee of IEEE SCC20 '314.234.6781 * <mailto:[email protected]>

RE: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:41 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Seavey, Michael I." <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:23:59 -0600To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I vote yay (also in favor of the motion)Mike

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Monday, December 15, 2008 7:16 AMTo: [email protected]: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

All -



Regards,

Tim

___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-ChairDiagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommittee of IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>


1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Gerstein, Bill HS" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:29:33 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I vote yea on this motion


-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Monday, December 15, 2008 7:16 AMTo: [email protected]: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

All -



Regards,

Tim



1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Spier, Carolyn (US SSA)" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:35:53 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I vote yea.

Carry Spiervoice: 603 885 9663cell: 603 860 4385


All -



Regards,

Tim



1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Helton, Alicia" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:36:52 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I vote yea on this motion.

Alicia Helton

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Monday, December 15, 2008 8:16 AMTo: [email protected]: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

All -



Regards,

Tim


Re: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: Re: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: Joe Stanco <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:37:02 +0000 (GMT)To: "wilmering, timothy j" <[email protected]>, [email protected]:

I vote yea on the motion

Joe Stanco

-----Original Message-----From: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Sent 12/15/2008 8:15:55 AMTo: [email protected]: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

All -Re the issue of amending the P1636 PAR to harmonize its wording withthat of the P1636 document, we have a motion before the committee, madeby Mark Kaufman, and seconded by Bill Gerstein, to "accept the proposedchanges to the PAR per the previously circulated dr aft ." I then askedthe committee if there was any discussion on the ma tter @ 11:57 AMFriday. Having now heard from all but two declared participants thatthere is no further discussion on the motion before the committee, I amprepared to call the question.Please respond "yea," "nay," or "abstain" to assert your vote on thismotion.Regards,Tim___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-ChairDiagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommitteeof IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781*<mailto:[email protected]>


1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Alwardt, Anthony L" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:38:45 -0600To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I vote yea on the motion.

-----Original Message-----From: Wilmering, Timothy J Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 7:16 AMTo: [email protected]: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

All -



Regards,

Tim



1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Modi, Mukund NAVAIR" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:52:15 -0500To: "wilmering, timothy j" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I vote to Yes to the motion.

Mukund

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Joe StancoSent: Monday, December 15, 2008 9:37To: wilmering, timothy j; [email protected]: Re: Vote on Motion Before the Committee


Joe Stanco

-----Original Message-----From: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]> Sent12/15/2008 8:15:55 AMTo: [email protected]: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

All -Re the issue of amending the P1636 PAR to harmonize its wording withthat of the P1636 document, we have a motion before the committee, madeby Mark Kaufman, and seconded by Bill Gerstein, to "accept the proposedchanges to the PAR per the previously circulated dr aft ." I then askedthe committee if there was any discussion on the ma tter @ 11:57 AMFriday. Having now heard from all but two declared participants thatthere is no further discussion on the motion before the committee, I amprepared to call the question.Please respond "yea," "nay," or "abstain" to assert your vote on thismotion.Regards,Tim___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-ChairDiagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommittee of IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>


1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: Ion Neag <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:02:11 -0500To: "'Wilmering, Timothy J'" <[email protected]>, [email protected]

I vote in favor of the motion.

Ion


All -



Regards,

Tim

___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-ChairDiagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommitteeof IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>


1 of 1 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Busch, Darryl (MN10)" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:02:38 -0500To: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>, [email protected]


Darryl BuschPrincipal ScientistHoneywell Advanced TechnologyVehicle Health Management & Decision Technology1985 Douglas Drive North (M/S MN10-112B)Golden Valley, MN 55422Phone - (763) 954-6538Fax - (763) [email protected] -----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] OnBehalf Of Wilmering, Timothy JSent: Monday, December 15, 2008 7:16 AMTo: [email protected]: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

All -



Regards,

Tim



1 of 2 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Subject: RE: Vote on Motion Before the CommitteeFrom: "Wilmering, Timothy J" <[email protected]>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:18:38 -0600To: [email protected]

Well, the votes came in quickly this morning!

We had 17 participants (not counting me) to vote on the motion, wealready have 12 affirmatives, and no negative votes , so the motioncarries. For the record:

Discussion YesTim Wilmering no N/ABill Gerstein no X Joe Stanco no X John Sheppard no X Tony Alwardt no X Alicia Helton no X Michelle Harris no X Darryl Busch no X John Ralph no Ion Neag no X Mukund Modi no X Mike Stora no Pat Kalgren no X Mark Kaufman no David Rohacek Mike Seavey no X Melissa Ford Carry Spier no X

Thanks all for your quick attention this morning. We will continue withthe process of Steering and IEEE approval, and the subsequentanticipated happy result for P1636...

Happy Holidays, see you in Orlando!

Tim


-----Original Message-----From: Wilmering, Timothy J Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 7:16 AMTo: [email protected]: Vote on Motion Before the Committee

All -



Regards,


2 of 2 1/6/2009 1:42 PM

Tim

___________________________________Timothy J. WilmeringCo-ChairDiagnostic and Maintenance Control Subcommittee of IEEE SCC20'314.234.6781* <mailto:[email protected]>

electronic meeting - ieeegrouper.ieee.org/groups/scc20/dmc/minutes/electronicmeeting08.pdf · 3.1...

Documents