[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFI] ARRL to FCC...

To: rfi@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] ARRL to FCC...
From: David Cole <dave@nk7z.net>
Reply-to: dave@nk7z.net
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 13:40:10 -0700
List-post: <rfi@contesting.com">mailto:rfi@contesting.com>

As an aside--

We in the "legal grow" states thank you, and the ARRL for testing and
reporting those offending lights!  Here is an example as to why your
tests will help...

It is a real mess in my local area right now-- as soon as one grow
operation gets quiet, another starts making RFI...  There is one RFI
source that has been going on now for three years, and is 60 over S9 at
one fellows Amateur Operator's home, on all HF bands, every night, 80-10
Meters...  It is only 10 over S9 at my location 1/2 mile from him.  

I know the source is within several hundred yards of his antenna, but we
have been totally unable to pin it to a single home due to geography,
home placement, and underground power lines.  One literately needs to
climb a 45 degree hill with test gear just to test from his backyard.
This RFI source is affecting at least five hams now...   

We are doing another triangulation run this summer from very close in to
the source, and on as high a frequency as we possible...  I am building
several loops now...  That should help, then we contact the FCC...
Without a house to point at, we are simply at the mercy of this sort of
thing...  We have finally started giving handouts to the local pot sales
outlets covering what RFI is, and why it is bad...  

Until the FCC bans the import of all RFI generating lights, and enforce
that ban, our only real hope is what you and the ARRL are doing to get
the items banned as far upstream as possible...  So we really do
appreciate your efforts in this matter Ed!  Thank you and your staff
Thanks and 73's,
For equipment, and software setups and reviews see:
for MixW support see;
for Dopplergram information see:
for MM-SSTV see:

On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 19:24 +0000, Hare, Ed W1RFI wrote:
> From the measurements made by ARRL of consumer products show that the vast 
> majority of products that claim to follow the rules actually do follow the 
> rules.  
> The two exceptions have been some of the battery chargers and power supplies 
> imported from various countries and, of course, the grow lights ARRL recently 
> tested. 
> FCC does do some spot checking, but mostly in response to complaints.
> Yes, the rules permit rather high levels of noise. If hams have S9-ish 
> interference from a neighboring house, it is likely that the device does not 
> meet the rules.  When ARRL receives those types of complaints, we often 
> purchase one of the units in question and make measurements and, if there are 
> emissions-limit violations of more than the few dB of measurement uncertainty 
> we have, we file formal complaints with the FCC.
> Ed
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Laws [mailto:plaws0@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 2:55 PM
> To: Hare, Ed W1RFI
> Cc: rfi@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RFI] ARRL to FCC...
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Hare, Ed  W1RFI <w1rfi@arrl.org> wrote:
> > The FCC has already outsourced certification to the TCBs, Peter.  Can you 
> > elaborate a bit more on what additional outsourcing you think is possible?
> >
> > Ed, W1RFI
> Someone in the thread seemed to think the FCC should be doing the inspections 
> and on a large scale.  Not gonna happen, as you know, and if it did it would 
> be contractors, not the FCC ... just like it is with whatever testing is done 
> now.
> --
> Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

RFI mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>