Have you contacted the ARRL? They are the first step... You need to
keep very good logs of EVERY contact dealing with the RFI. I have had
very good luck with the FCC via a good log method.
I have tried to stay totally away from the reason for the lights, and
deal with just the RFI alone, I now call them Horticulture lights, not
I have had some contact with the FCC, and had very good luck there... I
had VERY good logs, one of my neighbors decided he did not need to pay
attention as defined in Part 15. I offered to buy new lamp transformers
for him. It was a bar light, not a horticultural light. He refused,
and basically said too bad...
The "Come Hither" letter from the FCC ended the problem within 30 days
of receipt. It did take 6 months to get to that point, and some of that
was my delay. I suspect the fact that I took logs of EVERY single
discussion I had had with this person, and supplied proof positive it
was from his home is why the FCC sent the letter. I have only asked for
one letter, and I am trying to not abuse it with bad data, or lack of
data... So be very careful, log everything, take notes, make
recordings, and separate you feelings from the issue, make sure you are
totally right, then and only then contact the FCC or the ARRL. A just
the facts mindset is what is needed... If you suspect it is a
horticulture lamp, mention it if you want, but call it a horticulture
lamp, not a grow light. If folks get the idea that you are some sort of
anti-pot warrior, your creditability goes in the dumper...
For Amateur Radio equipment reviews and setups see:
On Sun, 2013-06-02 at 16:48 -0600, Tom Thompson wrote:
> I live in one of those states, also (Colorado). In the last few years I
> have tracked down 5 growing operations that were polluting the
> spectrum. The sad part of this is that the electronic lamp ballasts
> could be made quiet. Most of the electronic ballasts come from China
> and have not undergone any part 18 testing even though they have FCC
> stickers. I spent about 2 hours with the FCC personnel in Denver
> discussing this. It did not seem high on their priority list and our
> local police are not interested. I don't know what the solution is but
> it is an ever increasing problem. Larry, W0QE, said that since we did
> measurements and he published them on his web site, The number of hits
> on that page has been increasing at an alarming rate.
> Tom W0IVJ
> On 6/2/2013 9:15 AM, David Cole wrote:
> > I do live in one of those states...
> > Having pot growing be legal, for any reason, sure makes it difficult to
> > keep a clean spectrum.
> > I can only hope that when Oregon fully legalizes growth of pot, (and it
> > will, right now it is medical only), it disallows home growing like, (I
> > believe), Washington State did... Oregon currently allows home growing
> > and sales if you are licensed.
> > If Oregon changes that to be only State Supplied, then that should tend
> > to reduce the number of non-legal grow operations, and hence the RFI.
RFI mailing list