[Park] Corrections

[Dave Haney]

My apologies for a few spelling errors in the previously post (although I
seriously doubt that the  FCC spellchecks or indeed reads each comment
submitted). All they do is keep a tally of the positive and negative
viewpoints to any given proposal.

All that having been said, here is a corrected version (and YES, comments
are still being accepted. The October 4 date is used only as a reference
date to measure progress at this point in time).

============================================================================
==

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi

Enter: 03-104 in the line that says proceeding.
Fill in the necessary information. At the very bottom cut and paste this
text.
Over 4900 comments as of October 4th, 2003---WE NEED TO DO THIS! ALL
OPERATORS
SHOULD ENTER THEIR COMMENTS AND PASS THIS ONTO YOUR E MAL REFLECTORS/LISTS!
Lets get it over 100,000 comments quickly!


I am against the use of exposed or open line BPL. BPL poses a serious
problem
for any user of the HF Spectrum. This would include Amateur Radio Operators,
Short Wave Listeners, Military and Transportation services. BPL drowns out
many AM broadcast stations on the 550 Khz. to 1700 Khz. frequencies. The
broadcasters will complain that they are not able to reach the current
market with
their advertising and programming.

For example, in Emmaus, PA, where BPL has been already been placed into
service, many listeners in Emmaus cannot hear KYW AM 1060 KHz. in
Philadelphia,
running 50,000 watts power. BPL also renders the HF spectrum useless to
Amateur
Radio Operators within 100 meters of the exposed BPL lines.

Currently Cable Services deliver similar services via "Closed Circuit"
cables
and fiber optics. Leakage of the Cable Services into the HF spectrum are
severely dealt with by the FCC. Leakage if BPL into the HF spectrum will not
even
be a violation as open wire cannot suppress leaking of RF. If BPL is
permitted, it should be only on shielded and filtered lines, similar to
those required
by the cable TV industry. RF signals are not supposed to escape from or
intrude into the cable TV lines. Radio signals can coexist with cable
signals even
on the same frequencies. Havoc occurs when signals leak into and out of the
cables. Are the BPL users going to establish replacements for the current
amateur
radio emergency communications stations?

Currently, we hams frequently contend with noisy electric power lines,
hardware, and transformers which interfere with our reception. The FCC
requires the
electric utilities to repair and clean up those lines. Our local electric
utilities, Met Ed and PPL, are very cooperative, compliant, and helpful.
Please do
not allow any change by allowing "open wire BPL." During emergencies, how
will we communicate?

Even if BPL is turned off during emergencies, what hams will be left to
communicate? They will have quit in disgust, sold their equipment, and
dismantled
their stations. The FCC must protect the non-commercial communications
interests that invade the HF spectrum. To damage the HF infrastructure of
over 1
million licensed amateur radio operators is to remove the backbone of
emergency
communications.

There are better ways to accomplish the same goal that the power industry is
seeking. Lets build covered bridges around the problem, not clear the
village
of all the infrastructure.