Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Expand Messages
  • Jim Lamberts
    Hi all, don t know if any one has hear about this I received it from a group know as tower talk. Sounds like we should send in our comments like they ask us
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 10, 2003
      Hi all, don't know if any one has hear about this I received it from a group
      know as tower talk. Sounds like we should send in our comments like they ask
      us to.

      This is a note to the club's full and associate members to ask you to take
      action during the latest phase of the FCC's inquiry as to the interference
      potential of broadband internet over power line service (BPL). Currently the
      FCC is accepting comments on their electronic comment filing system (ECFS)
      filed in response to previously filed comments to the FCC's original
      inquiry. In response to this notice of inquiry (NOI) the BPL industry filed
      comments indicating that field trials revealed no reported interference to
      other services. See for example this excerpt from the United Power Line
      Council's filed comments:
      B. Interference
      In this proceeding, the FCC inquires concerning the Potential for
      interference from BPL systems under the existing Part 15 emission
      limits,[1] and it inquires whether the existing measurement procedures are
      appropriate.[2] The UPLC is pleased to respond that there has been no
      interference reported in any of the field trials by its members.>

      The UPLC's full document is available at:

      This statement is easily refuted. The ARRL sent a representative to 4
      trial towns in which he drove around the streets in a vehicle equipped with
      a HF transceiver, and a mobile HF antenna. The RFI received was horrendous.
      A video of this trip showing the receiver S meter, and audio of the RFI is
      available for viewing at (for high
      speed connections)
      and for dial-up connections).
      Note that the RFI is constant while the operator is spinning the tuning knob
      on the transceiver and that the signal strengths likely would have been much
      greater with full sized/gain antennas.

      At the very least, on your own time please view the streaming video, then
      file a response at the FCC's ECFS, at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/
      Simply stating that UPLC's statement is misleading in that "no reported
      interference" does not necessarily mean there was none, and that in the
      trials monitored by the ARRL, the RFI was severe. Cite the video at the
      above URLs as a footnote. Since I'm not sure what the current policy is on
      doing this from here, it may be advisable to file from home. If
      you do not have an internet connection there, you may file from a public
      library or mail in your comment. Please keep your comments calm and factual
      by avoiding exaggeration or subjective contentiousness with words such as
      "stupid" and "idiotic." Nothing about the process is furthered by caustic
      comments or remarks with no factual basis.

      Thanks very much for your time and cooperation. The deadline for reply
      comments is Aug. 20th. BTW, stick with the video to the last trial--it is
      the worst one and a real eye-opener. At this time, the number of filed
      comments represents a tiny fraction of the total number of licensed hams.
      It is extremely important that we fight this every step of the way so that
      we can continue to enjoy our hobby in its present form.

      Jim KC8KE
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.