[LEAPSECS] ITU-R SG7 to consider UTC on October 4

ashtongj ashtongj at comcast.net
Thu Aug 5 13:54:49 EDT 2010

I observe that the [U.S.] International Telecommunications Advisory
Committee is part of the U.S. State department. The part of that
committee discussed below is known in full as International
Telecommunications Advisory Committee, Radiocommunications sector, Study
Group 7: Science services, Working Party 7A (ITAC-R Study Group 7 WP 7A)

(Source: http://www.state.gov/e/eeb/adcom/itac/index.htm and

I would speculate that the members of Congress who authorized the change
change in basis of U.S. time from mean solar time to UTC presumed that
it was a bunch of technical mumbo-jumbo that could not perceived by
ordinary voters. If the leap second is dropped, the change will become
perceptible to ordinary voters, especially when there are several
seconds difference in the seconds field of legal time in the U.S.
compared to some other countries. When enough information about the
position of the U.S. WP 7A becomes available, it might be appropriate to
bring to the attention of members of Congress that an obscure portion of
a State Department committee is trying to change the meaning of the
language in legislation in a way that will be perceptible to voters.

Gerry Ashton

On 2010-08-04 1:30 PM, Steve Allen wrote:

> According to the ITU-R the next meeting of SG7 will happen in Geneva on

> 2010-10-04 and 2010-10-12.


> According to the US ITAC-R the issue of leap seconds in UTC

> will be considered by ITU-R SG7.


> The summary from V. Timofeev explains that last year ITU-R WP7A

> decided that they could not reach consensus and that they had

> addressed all the technical issues, so they advanced the proposed

> revision of Rec 460 to SG7. In the absence of approval from WP7A, SG7

> could not approve, nor send it back to WP7A, so the draft has waited.


> Timofeev has released a questionnaire to the delegations along with

> instructions that SG7 should only consider technical issues.

> Technical issues would mean the draft is to return to WP7A.

> Other-then-technical issues are to be referred to the

> Radiocommunication Assembly.


> The 4 (technical) questions are


> Do you support maintaining the current arrangement of linking UT1

> and UTC (to provide a celestial time reference)?


> Do you have any technical difficulty in introducing leap second

> today?


> Would you support the revision of Recommendation ITU-R TF.460-6?


> If it is agreed to eliminate leap second within 5 years after

> approval of the revision of Recommendation ITU-R TF.460-6, would

> that create technical difficulties for your administration?


> The US draft answers from USWP7A Chairman Wayne Hanson are


> no

> yes

> yes

> no


> The US SG7 will have a telecon on 2010-08-16.


> I expect that some of this content should appear at

> https://www.ussg7.org/default.aspx

> Other international delegations are presumably engaged in similar

> review processes.


> --

> Steve Allen<sla at ucolick.org> WGS-84 (GPS)

> UCO/Lick Observatory Natural Sciences II, Room 165 Lat +36.99855

> University of California Voice: +1 831 459 3046 Lng -122.06015

> Santa Cruz, CA 95064 http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/ Hgt +250 m

> _______________________________________________

> LEAPSECS mailing list

> LEAPSECS at leapsecond.com

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs


More information about the LEAPSECS mailing list