[CW] Latest BPL news

[N2EY@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/13/04 9:48:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
ken.d.brown@verizon.net writes:


> I do not quite understand what the latest BPL statement from the FCC is. 
> It is my understanding that part 15 has not been changed. Is this so, or 
> has there been a modification to part 15 to make it easier for BPL to 
> QRM? I thought that BPL was already legal, within the limitations of 
> part 15, and was in fact in service in a few areas. 

There are some test areas in operation. 

Was there some kind 
> 
> of temporary prohibition of BPL that has been lifted? What has changed?
> 

FCC regulates both wire and radio systems, and all such systems need approval 
unless totally private. That obviously wasn't the case with BPL, so it needed 
FCC approval. 

Some BPL folks were trying to get Part 15 levels *raised*, and FCC said no. 
Others were trying to turn the law on its head by making it so that licensed 
radio services would not be able to even *complain to FCC* that BPL was causing 
harmful interference!

It ain't over yet, either. This is just the NPRM - we'll be able to comment 
on it.

But consider this:

There are over 682,000 US hams, all of them licensed to use HF and/or 6 
meters. BPL systems as demnstrated affect all ham bands from 80-6. Yet so far FCC 
has only received 5100 comments on BPL, and at least some of them aren't from 
hams. 

So we have fewer than 1 in 100 US hams commenting on something that has the 
potential to wipe out all of our HF and one of our VHF bands. And if harmonics 
are involved....

73 de Jim, N2EY 


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---