<What constitutes "harmful interference" and how does one put a quantitative
and consistently measurable method and tool in place to make that
measurement?>
We do NOT want a quantitative definition of harmful interference. Firat, if
the FCC were to set that criterion, we would not like the level that was set.
In all of the cases ARRL handles directly with the FCC, we base our assessment
of harmful interference on a number of factor, such as:
o The frequency
o The environment
o Antenna gain and separation from the source
o The presence of an identified single source of interference
o The practicality of correcting the interference
By not demanding that FCC draw a line in the sand, we have successfully engaged
the FCC on a number of cases of lower-level interference, just because the
source was known and the cure was relatively simple and practical.
The insistence of some amateurs that a specific level be cast in stone ever
perplexes me.
<In the 1950's FCC placed field strengths with limits on that parameter and
measurement methods which, at the time, were intended to represent "harmful
interference". >
I don't recall the FCC EVER having regulations that set a level of harmful
inteference. Do you have copies of those old rules?
<Further, there are no regulation on the solar power industry, in general. >
Solar systems must meet the Part 15 limits for radiated emissions above 30 MHz
and for emissions conducted onto the AC mains below 30 MHz. The operators of
solar systems must use them in a way that doesn't cause harmful interference to
licensed radio users.
Ed Hare, W1RFI
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|