Amateur Radio Marginalized by FCC on BPL Issue

The FCC acted based on the information provided.

If ham radio was 'marginalized'(ARRL's wording, not the FCC's, which actually praised ham radio in the proceedings), it either is an accurate description of the situation in the greater sense, or an indication of a non-compelling position taken by those who commented with respect to ham radio , and that includes the ARRL; these are my opinions based upon my reads of the R&O. I urge you to read them to form your own opinion.

In any case, it is time to work with the Access BPL folks, as the FCC indeed recommends.

73,
Chip N1IR

 

yawn

 

Looks like this administration is bent on ruining not only the government of this great country, but radio as well. We need to vote these rascals out in three days...Powell, in his self assured wisdom, doesn't have a clue..(I am a straight ticket republican for 50 years, who has seen the light)

 

...wake me up when this is all over

 

Yes.

Why do so many of us not see this?

This is not why the amateur radio service exists.

The bulk of our activity is a bonus, not a right.

73,
Chip N1IR

 

WHAT ARE THESE PEOPLE THINKING? - We'll see what they think the next time there "lights go out & the boogieman is after them" -

 

zzzzzzzzz..... here too.

Chip already on the soapbox.  Here we go again.

The never ending speech on how wrong we all are.

Good God Chip, is there anything you think about other then BPL? You have made the same point about 50 times.

Really tiresome.  Think I'll spend my time in the courts if needed, and not listening to the same old thing over and over again.

And the court is where this is headed.  And in case anyone is confused, neither the FCC, GWB, or JFK has the final word on this one.  The courts will decide.

73,  W6NJ

 

Amen.  Same here for 37 years.  Tuesday, I'm making a different choice.

Michael Powell is absolutely daft.  And, so are the staff who have relegated anything but federal,aircraft, and radio telescope frequencies to 'non-essential' licensed services.  There's even a threat of administrative action for (in the FCC's opinion) what are deemed 'frivolous interference complaints.'

I guess they must think that of the situation out in Arizona, since they've taken no action on the complaint.

Here's the link to the Order:

FCC's BPL Sellout

This was a complete sham.  And, issued before the NTIA's second phase study was completed.  I filed a petition seeking a second rulemaking notice to accommodate the additional information forthcoming from NTIA (so that it could be in the record and commented on).  And, as I expected, it was denied.

Valid data, after all wasn't that important unless your service was deemed important to protect from interference.  And, of course, they wouldn't want any more validation of the interference problem.

Inflated, erroneous flap by manufacturers and incorrect fabrications by utilities were the primary drivers for their decision anyway. Personally, I'm going to laugh my a** off when the idiotic utility that intends to use BPL as a SCADA medium finds itself with lots of incorrect operations and inability to status or control their systems since only a few watts of nearby RF has been shown to stop BPL operation. In fact, time for us to think about a plethora of 10Meter and 6Meter beacons.

Thank goodness that the order was issued before next Tuesday, though.

And, thanks, Fred, for posting this quickly.

73,

Lee
W6EM
Bradenton, FL

 

I sure wish we didnt blame BPL on politics -- its economic... no matter who is in the White House -- BPL -- will fail or succeed on its own financial merits...

I really cant see either Kerry or Nader or anyone giving a rat's ass about BPL issues so saying that this or that ADMINISTRATION can/will do something is immature --

no matter who we elect (or don't) if BPL can make money, and thus be able to be taxed, or just benefit one future voter -- its going to happen....

But anyway -- it will be funny to watch when a few 1000sss all start doing 10 meter becons or continous CW near the power lines and completely knock out all BPL through their neighborhood grid... theorectically one guy with a mobile 40 watt 10 meter trans parked under the BPL line could shut off an entire neighborhood...

LOL

 

What can be said about this that hasn't already been said before?  Hmmm . . . well, did anyone notice that the FCC blessed the BPL equipment manufacturers & operators with a 1 1/2 year (18 month) span during which the existing (non-certified, non-compliant, without shutdown capability, with inadequate notching capability, etc.) equipment may continue to be manufactured, sold, and deployed- and that any existing systems as well as systems installed during that 1 1/2 year period are in effect "grandfathered" and thus are to a large degree exempt from many of the stipulations of the R&O?

A technology refresh by the manufacturers probably would have occured by that time anyhow.  So the FCC in effect indicated that there is no sense of urgency to protect the spectrum and licensed operations by deploying certified equipment during the initial buildout phase.  A lot of infrastructure can be made operational in 18 months!

Also- the FCC did nothing more than to "suggest" that BPL operators test systems deployed in the field to assure emission compliance.  Their only burden is to resolve interference cases via the stipulated guidelines, which place no real urgency on interference resolution where amateurs are involved (the process remains relatively unchanged from the existing process for power line interference,  which is so very very frustrating to us).  They have to maintain a database (not a big deal)- which can be  managed by a BPL proponent (what a wonderful idea- NOT).  

And then the FCC had the gall to indicate that they would punish any "frivolous" interference reports (which you know darn well was a threat aimed directly at amateurs).  Considering that the FCC seemingly feels that every interference report submitted by amateurs during the so-called "trials"- no matter how well documented- was basically "frivolous," then where does that leave us in the future?

So the R&O really places NO additional compliance burdens on the BPL operators in the short term, certainly nothing substantial (except for coordination/ avoidance related to certain "protected" frequencies and areas).  Any technological improvements necessary for compliance with the terms of the R&O can wait until the next generation of BPL equipment, sometime in 2006- and hereafter amateurs must walk a fine line when reporting BPL interference so that their cases are not labeled as "frivolous," thus resulting in reprisals from the FCC.

I am very disappointed with this complete sellout on the part of the FCC- no, that not right, I am absolutely livid.  A lot of people- from many services, not just amateurs- submitted detailed comments in an effort to identify issues and offer alternatives.  There was a great deal of solid substance within those comments, substance which was completely ignored (or belittled) by the FCC in the R&O.  One expects public servants, when presented with compelling evidence, to "do the right thing."  It would appear that the leader of the FCC regards himself not as a servant but instead a master . . . Mr. Powell should resign & assume his hard-earned position within the BPL industry.  He has broken faith and is no longer qualified to lead a major federal agency.

Ron WB5HZE

 

You know whats really sad about this?  BPL has been banned in most other countries that it was/is installed.  Leave it to this country because of politics/money (same thing), we will to have it in this country, needed or not.

Never mind it was a total, absolute, dismal failure in other countries.  Oh no, the USA can do better, we know better, we're smarter - no we're idiots. That's probably how we look to amateurs in other countries right now.

I believe BPL is also about poliitcal correctness.  How so?  The drive for equalality for the masses thats how so.  The poor disanfranchised who can't get broadband deserve to get like everyone else.  In very short order, I have grown to despise Powell, the wimps at NTIA and all the other players including the providers of BPL who know in their minds this stuff is no good, will never be good, if poor technology and was banned everywhere and yet they went for it.

It is so simple. Never mind all the technical studies, just this one simple fact we all know. Why is cable TV transmitted along a coaxial cable. Together now class, "because if it wasn't, it would interfere by signal radiation." Very good class. Now if one was to take an unshielded cable and place the same RF signal on it, what would happen. "It will radiate the signal instead of confining it to the cable". Again very good class, you are all so smart. Excuse me while I go puke.

K2WH

 

If you had done a little research, you would have heard from the horse's a** his exact and specific cheerleading words for BPL (Dubyah's Farmington, NM speech and elsewhere).

Kerry has said nothing about BPL.  Only broadband in general, which I'll assume you understand is not just BPL.

Economics?  No, its not economic in rural areas.  Which was supposedly why Powell was cheerleading for it.  For areas that ostensibly had no other choice.

Purely big bucks in W's hip pocket is where the money is/was.  From the likes of honest, forthright, ethical folks like Ken Lay.  His biggest contributor in the last election.  Lay was CEO of Enron, of course.

73,
Lee
W6EM

"Following the lead of Dwight D. Eisenhower's son John, and Ronald Reagan, Jr. on election day."

 

Ask yourself who has been selling Amateur Radio as a hobby.

The day that it is just a hobby will not happen, because that is the day it will end.

 

This is exactly what I expected, the FCC has just put the amateur radio service on the same level as the CB service was 30+ years ago. Mr Powell may be a nice guy in person but he's a technical moron (no offense Mr. Powell). Mr. Powell, you are overstating BPLs importance by several orders of magnitude. The fact that the NTIA wanted exclusion zones and frequency's that are prohibited from BPL is proof that BPL will cause interference to thoes using the HF band.

"We similarly do not find that Amateur Radio frequencies warrant the special protection afforded frequencies reserved for international aeronautical and maritime safety operations," the Commission said. "While we recognize that amateurs may on occasion assist in providing emergency communications," the FCC added. It described typical amateur operations as "routine communications and hobby activities."

This implys that the amateur radio service almost never gets involved with emergency communications. This is a weak argument and has NO merit.

Now is the time for lawsuits, the FCC has ignored the technical facts and is dragging their feet in resolving current BPL interference (i.e. Cottonwood Arizona). BPL is NOT groundbreaking technology, it's a spin off of the PLC network that the power company uses for grid control and is as old as amateur radio itself.

I for one will not give up, BPL providers can expect me to keep a blow torch lit under their ass to get any BPL interference resolved immediately. If they turn a blind eye to me I won't screw around, I'll just sue. It will certainly be interesting to see how all this works out in the end, I would suspect that BPL providers are going to find the interference complaints impossible to manage.



Craig - N7UQA