[SCCC] FCC Accepting Comments on Broadband over Power Line Technology

[Phil Goetz]

I discussed this subject with several people, including K1ZZ, at Dayton this weekend. 
Mike is correct, comments from as many people as possible are very urgently desired.  If
you select only one FCC item to comment on during your entire ham career, this should
probably be the one!  

At this point, as K1ZZ says, the FCC commissioners are acting somewhat like cheerleaders,
pushing for an early launch of Broadband over Power Line technology, rather than being
certain that it does not interfere with amateur radio (as well as other communications
services) before it is rolled out.

The FCC's electronic comment facility is available at
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi ... On the form provided by that page,
for item 1, "Proceeding", enter 03-104.

If you choose not to comment, well, I hope I'll be able to copy you through the
interference that could be generated if this system is not debugged before implementation!

73,

Phil, N6ZZ


Michael Tope wrote:
> 
> I urge everyone who has any interest in HF communications to
> file comments with the FCC in response to their notice of
> inquiry (NOI) on Broadband Powerline Communications.
> For those who are not familiar with it, BPL is a system whereby
> existing low and medium voltage power transmission lines
> will be used to deliver broadband data services to households.
> The system is seen by many in the telecommunications industry
> as very attractive since it uses existing power line infrastructure
> rather than requiring new fibers, coax, or twisted pairs to be
> strung. The problem with the system is that power transmission
> lines are only really good transmission lines at 60 hertz. At HF
> frequencies where the new system would operate, they start to
> look like pretty good antennas.
> 
> Studies by ARRL indicate that If BPL is allowed to deploy in the
> United States under the current FCC part 15 rules, it could easily
> mean S9 + level broadband interference from 2 to 30 MHz in all
> Metropolitan areas where BPL penetration is heavy. The Japanese
> have managed to prevent BPL from being adopted in Japan
> through a concerted effort on the part of JA amateurs. Once this
> genie is out of the bottle, it will be very hard to put it back in. The
> consortium that is behind this technology is backed by a number
> of top U.S. telecom manufacturers and they appear to have the ear
> of the FCC chairman, Michael Powell, a number of the FCC
> commissioners, as well as the NTIA administrator. The BPL industry
> will try to skirt the interference issue as this is its Achilles heal, so
> its important that amateurs make their concerns about interference
> known to the FCC.
> 
> If you have any interest at all in HF communications I again urge
> you to file comments in response to the FCC NOI.  BTW there
> is also some indication that BPL proponents are eying lower
> VHF up to about 80 MHz as well, so don't think that this won't
> effect you if your VFO never gets lower than 50 MHz. The filing
> deadline will probably be sometime in mid-June (the exact date
> is 45 days after the NOI is published in the Federal register).
> 
> For instruction on how to respond to the NOI, see the last few
> paragraphs of the following article:
> 
> http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/05/08/3/?nc=1
> 
> For more information on BPL, check out the following webpage
> from ARRL:
> 
> http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/
> 
> Ed Hare's report to the IEEE C63 EMC standards group on
> BPL gives a good technical overview of the interference potential:
> 
> http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/files/C63NovPLC.pdf
> 
> Finally if you have access to IEEE publications, the April issue
> of the IEEE Communications Magazine, has 5 articles on BPL
> technology.
> 
> 73 de Mike,
> W4EF..................................................................
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SCCC mailing list
> SCCC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/sccc