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

[Hare,Ed, W1RFI]

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 at tconl.com] 
	Sent: Sun 5/9/2004 9:25 PM 
	To: Hare,Ed, W1RFI; rfi at 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 at 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