[RFI] Response to news FCC okays BPL proposal

[Pete Smith]

At 12:04 PM 2/13/04 -0800, Cortland Richmond wrote:

>Before folks get into the griping and plotting (too late!) mode, I'd like
>to say this is not a defeat. The NOI was about whether the FCC should
>increase permitted conducted and radiated emission levels.  BPL didn't get
>what they asked for. They DID get a new, additional requirement to stop
>interfering when contacted locally; Part 15 only requires generators of
>interference to stop only when contacted by the Commission.
>
>Yes, they'll make a hash of the spectrum.  But not any more so than Part 15
>allowed them to before their unwise request for special treatment. And if
>all the folks they interfere with complain, there won't be many frequencies
>left for them to use. I am a MARS member, and the frequency matrices of the
>Tri-Service MARS programs, plus the Amateur bands,  would pretty much rule
>out their profitable use of HF.
>

Cort, is the NPRM out there yet?  I can't find it, if so.

I think there's a well-founded concern that once BPL is deployed in a 
flawed and interference-prone form, hams will be put in a terrible position 
-- that of a few individuals against the "public good."  Fortunately, there 
is still the NPRM process to go through.  We'll see how many teeth the FCC 
interference language really has, and know how much more work remains to be 
done. I hope you're righter than I am.


73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the World HF Contest Station Database
Updated 9 Jan 04
www.pvrc.org/wcsd/wcsdsearch.htm