Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/612684
72 The PCB Magazine • December 2015 also needs to be controlled under ITAR, because it contains vital information about the function of the item for which it's designed. This took a lot of education with the State Department, because it's very different from the way most ITAR controls are written. Most of them are based on some intrinsic physical value. It's faster, it's stronger, it's a particular shape, etc. This was a big educational project for us and it took multiple years. We could not have done it without our member involvement. We had lead technology heads from Viasystems and TTM, who came with us and went to these meetings with State repeatedly and explained it, who went to meetings on the Hill and met with the House Armed Service Committee and explained it. I think that's really one of the strengths of IPC when it comes to government relations. One of the things we bring that's different from many of the other associations and organiza- tions in the same space, is when we lobby we have strong technical arguments to back it up. Not only do we want science-based laws and regulations, when we advocate for something, it's because there's science and technology be- hind it. Goldman: Also, you don't just go to Washington. Your members go there beside you. Your members are there as support and they testify also. Abrams: Not as support, as lead. We're there to support them. Goldman: And I'm sure their voices speak much more loudly. Abrams: Exactly. I can't emphasize that enough, I'm so glad you brought up that point. I can't emphasize enough how much a difference that makes when a member comes and takes IPC'S FERN ABRAMS: KEEPING UP WITH REGULATORY MATTERS FeATure inTerview