[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: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 09:20:12 -0700
List-post: <rfi@contesting.com">mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
Hello Ed,

Thanks for the info on AM Ed, I will start checking down there as well
in our runs...  

All we are trying to do is reduce our risk in dealing with RFI, not zero
it...  :)  

I will be happy when the Grow Light situation is corrected and most of
not all are below limits...  Keep up the good work testing and
submitting to the FCC Ed, your, and the ARRL's work helps us all, THANK

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 Mon, 2014-07-28 at 14:26 +0000, Hare, Ed W1RFI wrote:
> Let me offer a few quick points, in between meetings.
> If you tell a neighbor that YOUR RFI problem is solved, but that you can't 
> speak for other frequencies such as police, fire, etc., I can't imagine any 
> real liability.
> Another point is that in all of the grow light measurements I have made, the 
> noise levels in the AM broadcast band were also way above the FCC limits, so 
> it is not a misrepresentation to say that there is interference to AM radio.  
> Ed
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RFI [mailto:rfi-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Larry Benko
> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2014 7:49 PM
> To: rfi@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RFI] ARRL to FCC...
> Dave,
> IMHO I think you post waaaaaaay too much!!!!!!
> Remember when all is said and done, more is said than is done.
> Larry
> On 7/26/2014 5:08 PM, David Cole wrote:
> > Hi Don,
> >
> > I don't think I am being slightly paranoid at all.  I think I am 
> > making a set of informed decisions, and seeking legal advice in making 
> > those decisions.
> >
> > I asked the lawyer a smiler question to your's, but with a very 
> > different emphases.
> >
> > You asked me "How are at risk of being sued for informing someone, 
> > especially a law-violator, that they are attracting attention by 
> > generating a nuisance in the community?"  This question sets up a very 
> > restrictive set of conditions, and does not cover near enough area to 
> > be useful.
> >
> > I asked the lawyer a different question, one more designed to cover as 
> > much area as possible, and one the lawyer helped me ask--  I asked 
> > "How can I minimize my and the clubs risk in dealing with RFI issues, 
> > using this handout, and following what it says we will do.  That sets 
> > up a set of conditions, which more accurately reflect reality, 
> > covering everything from home entry, to initial contact...
> >
> > By the way, as an aside, a lawbreaker can sue you too...  The fact 
> > someone broke the law has nothing to do with anything...  You can be 
> > sued because someone does not like the color of your hair...
> >
> > His answers were actually a bit of a surprise to me...  Here is an
> > example--  If you tell a person that they have now gotten rid of the 
> > RFI, and if at a later time, that person causes RFI on a different 
> > frequency, (because you only listened on 40 for instance, but he was 
> > also wiping out fire and ambulance), and the RFI is still wiping out 
> > Fire and Ambulance frequencies, (even if you did not know), and it 
> > costs them money, or worse yet, the ambulance fails to save someone, 
> > and RFI was involved, or they get sued, any number of people could 
> > then sue you for the costs involved in correcting the problem, or 
> > because someone died, and it will be because you advised them that 
> > they had no issue, and you were wrong.  Now this is a rather extreme 
> > case, but there are lots of little ways to get in trouble when advising 
> > people...
> >
> > So...  We inform of the problem, and that is really all we can do to 
> > minimize risk.  The whole thing is much like the waving another driver 
> > forward in traffic law-- if you wave someone around you in traffic, 
> > and they hit a kid, or bike, or other object, you have very much 
> > increased your risk of becoming part of any lawsuit which may arise 
> > from that incident, and given you initiated the movement, (you waved 
> > them on), of the auto that struck and killed a child...  Well... You 
> > get the picture...
> >
> > Please don't get the idea that I think all of this is good, it is not, 
> > but I must live in a world where this is possible, and so I deal with 
> > it by involving people that are trained in the craziness...  Lawyers!
> >
> > I vehemently disagree with you in your presentation methods...  You 
> > are suggesting I begin a process, which could turn litigious, by 
> > outright lying to the parties involved at the onset, by suggesting an 
> > AM broadcast radio is involved when one is not...  Not for me...  I am 
> > totally comfortable telling them I am an Amateur Operator, and that we 
> > need to correct a problem, using the least intrusive methods possible, 
> > but that we will get the problem corrected, even if it involves 
> > including the FCC.
> >
> > There are of course hundreds of ways to present this to the people 
> > involved, you should always present it in the most friendly, least 
> > obtrusive, kindest way possible.  However sometimes that simply won't 
> > work.  The goal is to make the RFI that is affecting me, or the ham 
> > that has asked me to help, go away.  No one cares if they are grow 
> > lights, or if it touch lamps...  The RFI though, must go away...
> >
> > Your thoughts about the power company not liking Hams is not what I 
> > have experienced here.  Our power company is enlightened, I guess, I 
> > know I like them...
> >
> > A few months ago, they asked us to find a source for them...  But that 
> > did not happen by accident, and we got lucky that the people at our 
> > power company are decent, and know their jobs.  We took a very 
> > business like, but friendly, non contentious attitude to our power 
> > company, and asked them how we could deal with an ever increasing RFI 
> > issue in which the Power Company is getting blamed in error, and costing 
> > them money...
> > We pointed out that by having an intercourse of ideas, we could save 
> > them money by reducing their truck rolls...  It worked...  And it 
> > saves them money, and it gets us faster service when we report 
> > something.  I can think of at least three and maybe four truck rolls 
> > we have stopped this year simply by having the ham ask us first.  We 
> > found the problem in the hams home...
> >
> > Three days ago, a fellow ham was about ready to call the power 
> > company, he called us first.  We got his in-home RFI noise level down 
> > from 10 over S9, to S5, to S6, with the addition of maybe 15 ferrite's, and 
> > four
> > hours of messing around in his house.   That saved the power company a
> > few hundred bucks.  In turn, if we call them and ask that something be 
> > looked at, they respond almost instantly...  Last call I made to them, 
> > there was a street lamp fluttering and making a ton of RFI... I 
> > reported it to them, and it was fixed two days later, and I got a call 
> > back from them, and email as well...  We get along very well with our 
> > power company here... On the other hand we NEVER call them until we 
> > are SURE that the issue is theirs...
> >
> > Thank you for the tip on High-Times...  I may look at that avenue.
> >
> > Anyway, thank you for the input, I will go off an dread the High-Times 
> > now...  Never heard of them, but it will be interesting!
> >
> >   
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

RFI mailing list

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