RFI
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [RFI] BPL Protest Opportunity? Give up? NO!

To: <rfi@contesting.com>
Subject: RE: [RFI] BPL Protest Opportunity? Give up? NO!
From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" <w1rfi@arrl.org>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 20:38:17 -0400
List-post: <mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
When all this started, we had the anwers about interference, and I truly 
believed that when they were put on the plate, the right choice would be made.  
To some extent, that was correct, but the process is as much political as it is 
techncial.  That is not my role, but ARRL has also stepped up the political end 
of this, too.
 
I urge hams to use the info on ARRL's BPL page -- the "lead" story on BPL at 
http://www.arrl.org/bpl is intended for folks to use as a leave-behind with 
their Congressfolks.  It explains in relatively straightforward terms why 
Amateur Radio and others are so concerned about BPL.
 
You can add to that, citing things from the NTIA report, and filings like 
Boeing's, Aeronautical Inc.'s, APCO's and the NRTC/NRECA (two major rural 
utility groups).  Boeing and ARINC said that BPL poses a serious risk to 
aeronautical safety.  NTIA says it will interfere with aeronautical 
communication 40 km from the source. APCO is equally concerned with 
interference to low VHF public safety. (I have heard S7 to S9 BPL noise on 
35-48 MHz in the Amperion and Ambient BPL areas, along about a mile of overhead 
line).   A personalized letter to your Congressfolks will carry some weight. 
ARRL has intentionally not offered a "canned" letter, because those really 
don't work very well.   If you can, make an appointment with your Congressfolks 
and show them the interference video, with a personal explanation about what 
that will do to the Amateur Service and other critical HF use.

Ed Hare, W1RFI
 

        -----Original Message----- 
        From: Ed -K0iL [mailto:eedwards@tconl.com] 
        Sent: Sun 5/9/2004 9:25 PM 
        To: Hare,Ed, W1RFI; rfi@contesting.com 
        Cc: 
        Subject: RE: [RFI] BPL Protest Opportunity? Give up? NO!
        
        

        Ed,
        
        I wasn't calling on the ARRL to give up the battle front with the FCC.
         Quite the contrary; it's because of the great work that you and the 
crew
        are doing at the League that I feel my limited efforts are best spent
        aiming at the Congress and Bush.  We have to fight on all fronts if 
we're
        to find a weak spot at all.
        
        Keep up the great work!  And those that have the time and writing 
skills,
        keep filing those comments on the NPRMs as the come up.
        
        73,
         de ed -K0iL
        
        -----Original Message-----
        From:   Hare,Ed, W1RFI
        Sent:   Friday, 07 May, 2004 4:07 PM
        To:     rfi@contesting.com
        Subject:        RE: [RFI] BPL Protest Opportunity? Give up?  NO!
        
        > I'm not giving up, but I'm not wasting my time with the FCC any 
longer.
        
        The FCC started out with the premise that they were going to remove
        unnecessary restrictions on BPL. The NPRM removed no restrictions, but
        added two measures:  a mandate that BPL equipment must be designed to
        change frequency and power levels in response to interference complaints
        and a requirement to maintain a public database of BPL equipment and
        locations.  FCC did that in response to the input from spectrum users 
that
        you imply did no good.
        
        It is, IMHO, not a practical solution, but I, for one, do not intend to
        stop just because the FCC didn't fully understand the issues raised. Nor
        should anyone.  If what has been provided to the FCC has not been enough
        for them to understand why the solutions they propose are not practical,
        then the information needed to make the point needs to be developed and
        given to FCC. The ARRL's comments in the NPRM are a start at that, and 
the
        process of modeling and testing will continue through the reply comment
        period and beyond.
        
        The interference cases that are now about about 50 and counting 
(although
        for some inexplicable reason, some of the complainants have not reported
        their interference to the FCC, and some who have reported them to the 
FCC
        have not informed ARRL so their cases can be "counted" in our summary
        totals), and the process of documenting interference will continue, too.
         The BPL industry started out by saying "we will not cause any
        interference. They they claimed that they can correct any interference 
that
        might occur. Now, from the statements of some in the NPRM, they are 
asking
        that they be allowed to interfere, or at least that what interference 
they
        cause not be considered to be "real" interference.
        
        Those that want an organized list of the BPL filing comments can go to:
        
        http://www.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/NPRM_hyperlinks.html
        http://www.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/NOI_hyperlinks.html
        
        Ed Hare, W1RFI
        
        
        
        
        

_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>