[K3PZN-List] FW: ARLB005 ARRL Tells FCC to "Reconsider, Rescind and Restudy" BPL Order

[John Hart]

FYI
>From: "ARRL Web site" <memberlist at www.arrl.org>
>To: john_k3kwo at hotmail.com
>CC: Subscribed ARRL Members: ;
>Subject: ARLB005 ARRL Tells FCC to "Reconsider, Rescind and Restudy" BPL 
>Order
>Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 16:55:00 -0500
>
>SB QST @ ARL $ARLB005
>ARLB005 ARRL Tells FCC to "Reconsider, Rescind and Restudy" BPL
>Order
>
>ZCZC AG05
>QST de W1AW
>ARRL Bulletin 5  ARLB005
>From ARRL Headquarters
>Newington CT  February 9, 2005
>To all radio amateurs
>
>SB QST ARL ARLB005
>ARLB005 ARRL Tells FCC to ''Reconsider, Rescind and Restudy'' BPL
>Order
>
>The ARRL has petitioned the FCC to take its broadband over power
>line (BPL) Report and Order (R&O) back to the drawing board. In a
>Petition for Reconsideration filed February 7, the League called on
>the Commission to ''reconsider, rescind and restudy'' its October 14,
>2004, adoption of new Part 15 rules spelling out how BPL providers
>may deploy the technology on HF and low-VHF frequencies. Asserting
>that the R&O fails to adequately take into account the technology's
>potential to interfere with Amateur Radio and other licensed
>services, the League called the FCC's action to permit BPL ''a gross
>policy mistake.'' The R&O, the ARRL said, ''represents a classic case
>of prejudgment'' by an FCC that knew better but ignored evidence
>already at its disposal.
>
>''It is readily apparent that the Commission long ago made up its
>mind that it was going to permit BPL without substantial regulation,
>no matter what the effect of this flawed application of old
>technology is on licensed radio services,'' the League's petition
>declares. The ARRL accuses FCC Commissioner Michael Powell and his
>four colleagues of deliberately authorizing ''a spectrum pollution
>source'' that's proven to be incompatible with existing licensed uses
>of the HF spectrum.
>
>''The Commission wanted nothing to contradict its enthusiasm about
>BPL,'' the League said, and its Office of Engineering and Technology
>(OET) saw to it that evidence of the ''fundamental incompatibility''
>between BPL and incumbent HF radio services ''was suppressed, ignored
>or discredited.'' The FCC has not adjudicated a single interference
>complaints, the ARRL added, but has swept interference complaints
>under the rug.
>
>The ARRL further argued that Powell should have recused himself from
>voting on the R&O. The chairman, the ARRL says, violated the FCC's
>own ex parte rules by attending a BPL provider's demonstration
>October 12, after release of the October 14 agenda. Powell ''tainted
>this proceeding'' by taking part in the demonstration, and that alone
>is sufficient to have the Commission vacate and reconsider its
>action, the ARRL alleged.
>
>The League also said the FCC's ''late and incomplete'' responses to
>ARRL's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests fail to show any
>support for FCC's conclusions regarding interference to licensed
>services from BPL. The highly redacted information release contained
>nothing that supports the FCC's conclusions about BPL's interference
>potential and suppressed negative recommendations from its own
>technical investigators, the petition says. As a result, the League
>said, the Commission ''failed to conduct impartial, reasoned
>rulemaking.''
>
>The Commission used an unlawful ''balancing test'' that weighed BPL's
>purported benefits against its interference to licensed services,
>the League asserts, creating ''a hierarchy of licensed radio
>services'' based upon ''how much interference each service deserves.''
>The Communications Act, the League's petition points out, requires
>an objective determination from the outset that the likelihood of
>harmful interference from a proposed unlicensed service is virtually
>nil.
>
>The interference mitigation rules in the R&O are both ineffective
>and inequitably applied, the ARRL's petition further argues. Noting
>the new rules do not require BPL systems to shut down in the event
>of interference except as ''a last resort,'' the League said the
>practical effect is ''that systems will never have to shut down,''
>even if the BPL operator has not been able to remedy ongoing harmful
>interference to the Amateur Service. The new rules, the petition
>charges, accord priority to unlicensed BPL, ''regardless of the
>preclusive effect'' or the duration of interference.
>
>In its unanimous BPL decision, the Commission, the League says, has
>abandoned its fundamental obligation to avoid interference in
>telecommunication systems, instead requiring complainants to
>initiate contact with BPL providers and ''beg for resolution.'' The
>ARRL petition also faults the Commission's adopted measurement
>standards.
>
>The League's Petition for Reconsideration in ET Dockets 03-104 and
>04-37 is on the ARRL Web site,
>http://www.arrl.org/announce/regulatory/et04-37/recon_petition/.
>NNNN
>/EX