Laurel Letter of Pends and Discussion: September 19, 2002

                                    Society for Creative Anachronism
                                    College of Arms
                                    15910 Val Verde Drive
                                    Houston TX, 77083-4921
                                    713-918-2947
                                    herald@sca.org
             For the July 2002 meetings, printed September 19, 2002

To all the College of Arms and to all others to whom this missive
comes, from Fran{c,}ois Laurel, Zenobia Wreath, and Mari Pelican, health
and good friendship.

This letter contains the issues raised in the July 2002 LoAR for CoA
discussion. The text in this letter is copied verbatim from that LoAR;
it is provided here for convenience. As with a September LoI, these
matters are currently scheduled for the Laurel meetings in January
2003. Original commentary must be in the College's hands no later than
November 30, 2002. Responses and rebuttals to commentary must be in
the College's hands no later than December 31, 2002.

1. Margu{e'}rite de Toulouse. Device change. Argent, on a bend sinister
   vert an ivy vine throughout argent in dexter chief a butterfly
   sable.

The tincture of the ivy vine was omitted in the letter of intent,
leading the College to surmise that it was sable. This must be pended
for further research.

If this submission passes, the submitter will release her currently
held device, Per chevron engrailed argent and azure, a castle sable
and four fish naiant contourny Or.

(This device was item number 46 on Atenveldt's LoI of March 1, 2002.)

2. Requests for Reconsideration.  Issue.

The Administrative Handbook begins IV.E, Right of Appeal, with "A
submitter shall have the right to appeal any return to Laurel." By
this definition, appeals are not appropriate for items that have been
registered. I would like to define a way for the submitter to request
a review of a registration when authenticity changes, which can
sometimes be dramatic, were made at the time of registration.

With the inclusion of the "make my name authentic" option, in
combination with the other change options on the name submission
forms, it is possible to have a name registered with changes the
submitter has not been consulted on and possibly changed to such a
degree that it is not acceptable to the submitter. The submitter being
unhappy with the name that was registered does nothing to encourage
the use of an authentic name and does not help the College serve the
members of the Society. This proposed process is intended to provide
the submitter a way to provide feedback on the registered name that
was created using only the guidance provided by the submission form.

The proposed process for Requests for Reconsideration is limited to
submissions where the changes were specifically due to the
authenticity requests. While customer dissatisfaction might happen due
to the other requests, the difference is that we have more written
guidance on the other requests and are less likely to have such
unexpected changes made as a request to merely preserve the sound, or
preserve the meaning, of the name.

The following is a proposed definition of a Request for
Reconsideration to be added to the Administrative Handbook in section
IV, General Procedures for Submissions, following IV.E, Right of
Appeal. The current section IV.F, Heraldic Wills, will be redesignated
as section IV.G.

    F. Request for Reconsideration - A submitter may request
    reconsideration of changes made as a result of a request for
    authenticity in a name submission. All requests must either: (a)
    be supported by new documentation supporting the original name as
    complying with the requested authenticity, (b) submit a timely
    request for a name based on information provided in Laurel's
    decision, or (c) include a request that the original name be
    considered with no request for authenticity. Such reconsideration
    may be considered with the standards in effect at the time of the
    request. Requests for reconsideration must be submitted through
    the appropriate heraldic officers specified for such actions by
    the submitter's kingdom of residence. Such officers must forward
    the request in a timely manner, with or without recommendations,
    to Laurel. Requests for Reconsideration will be considered
    "resubmissions" for the purposes of section IV.D Payment of Fees.

Please present your discussion and comments on this proposed addition
to the Administrative Handbook to the College of Arms for the January
2003 meetings.



Pray know that I remain

In service

Fran{c,}ois la Flamme

Laurel Principal King of Arms