[TenTec] Check your FCC rules FYI

Thu, 29 Apr 2004 05:31:39 -0700 (PDT)

Bill,

I was singling out the the President only because of
his recent remarks and the recent actions of the FCC
not as a political issue.

Concerning Kerry, he appears to believe that this
process should be accelerated by offering monetary
incentives. The present administration believes in the
market place sorting out things on its own. They would
enable pure competition and let the winner take all.

It appears from all the literature that Broadband must
become the top priority regardless of how it is
distributed. The lure of the power lines is the
infrastructure already in place. The problem with it
is the failure on the part of the decision makers to
recognize that this technology is still not ready for
wide distribution. There are still major limitations
with this system that have not been adequately
addressed and there are international treaty issues as
well.

One major problem here is that the decision makers are
looking at the $$$ and not considering the technical
side of the problem. The people backing this have no
idea about the engineering issues involved. They think
that they can bring into operation just by decree.

The present FCC ignored the record concerning the NOI
they released last year and have yet to make a clear
statement concerning the real world priority that BPL
will have in comparison to the licensed services. They
are hidding behind the Part 15 shutdown regulation and
the mitigation language in 04-37. Do you really think
that this Commission will enforce either of these
regualations, I think not. In fact, I think they will
rely on the local courts to resolve this issue. All it
will take is one Radio Amateur shutting down a segment
of the BPL network on repeated basis and you will the
Power Distribution Company in court looking for a
legal remedy.

Chairman Powell has stated for the record that this
Commission will take all steps necessary to insure the
success of BPL. Use your imagination, I have. They
could eliminate the Amateur Radio Service entirely,
they could issue quiet hours, or they could render the
service to Part 15 status making us equal to BPL in
priority, thus relagating the bands to other priority
users. This could on and on.

Recently reviewed a well written reply comment on the
FCC website that elaborated all the issues that I
would raise. It was filed for the NOI. I was able to
raise it by searching for "04-37" on www.fcc.gov URL
home page. Read this comment.

--- Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES is behind BPL.
>   What about Kerry??????
> 
> Several Democrats, including Sen. John Kerry
> (D-Mass.), the presumptive presidential nominee,
> sent a letter Friday to
> President George W. Bush criticizing his broadband
> policy.
> 
> "Simply stating a goal is not enough. Without
> aggressive and concrete action, we are concerned
> that the goal will not be
> met," wrote the senators. "The administration has
> not only undermined existing programs, it has not
> offered any positive
> alternatives. For example, we have supported tax
> credits for broadband deployment, as Sen. Jay
> Rockefeller (D.W.V.) has
> been proposing for several years, but you have not
> included any comparable proposal in any of your
> budgets or tax-cut
> packages. Nor have you exercised vocal leadership on
> regulatory, tax or other issues relating to
> broadband."
> 
> President Bush said recently that he wants universal
> broadband deployment by 2007. Kerry has said he
> wants to create
> jobs by investing in broadband.
> 
> Neither politician gave specifics, but the Senate
> Democrats did by singling out the Rural Broadband
> Program.
> 
> "Unfortunately, the record of your administration
> thus far has not embraced even modest steps to
> promote broadband usage
> and access. For example, Congress has provided over
> $2 billion in loan authority for rural broadband
> loans by the Rural
> Utilities Service, RUS has only distributed about
> $132 million in funding. Over $1 billion in loan
> requests sit pending
> at RUS, yet rather than looking for ways to
> streamline processing, RUS has created hurdles in
> the loan application
> process," reads the letter.
> 
> Wireless providers wishing to serve rural America
> with broadband connections-defined as 200 kilobits
> per second in each
> direction-were given a leg up when Congress included
> language in the farm bill to create a broadband loan
> program
> administered by the Rural Utilities Service.
> 
> The rural broadband loan program, which will offer
> low-interest loans, is good news for broadband
> wireless providers but
> there is a catch. The RUS fancies itself as a
> conservative bank so it does not want to jeopardize
> existing loans. To
> protect current borrowers, RUS allows them a
> two-year right-of-first refusal. Some in the
> wireless community have
> complained that this is discriminatory.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kenneth Stringham" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 4:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Check your FCC rules FYI
> 
> 
> Stu,
> 
> You are entirely correct, but there is one problem.
> The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES is behind BPL and
> he has said that the regulations will be changed to
> enable this technology. Apparently, he does not
> believe in the traditional conservation of spectrum.
> He would clear the HF spectrum of all licensed users
> if could by a pure decree, but he can not. He and
> his
> FCC must abide by the process, but they do not have
> to
> heed the comments made.
> 
> Mr. Bush has said that spectrum must be found for
> new
> innovative technologies. This means that the
> traditional way of allocating spectrum is history
> and
> will fall by the wayside. The Commission can not do
> this unilaterally, but it will use any and all means
> available to make this happen.
> 
> You will find that BPL will become the pseudo
> primary
> user on HF once it has been fully implemented,
> should
> it survive the initial throughs of implementation.
> I'm
> not sure that there is anything that we can do about
> this situation. The days of spectrum allocations
> appear to be numbered in favor any application that
> shows economic promise. I think this government
> plans
> to abandon its treaty obligations in favor of
> leading
> the way into the future.
> 
> Ken, AE1X
> 
> --- Stuart Rohre <[email protected]> wrote:
> > A part 15 device, (BPL) cannot cause interference
> to
> > any LICENSED radio
> > service.  It must shut down if it interferes.
> >
> > It must ACCEPT interference from any legally
> > operating LICENSED radio
> > service. It has no rights, check the back of most
> > any consumer device like
> > your computer, wireless phone (900 MHz) etc.
> >
> > Part 15 are not licensed, they are conditionally
> > allowed without a license
> > or right to spectrum over the air.  They do not
> have
> > the standing of radio
> > services of any class that must have a license to
> > operate.
> > -Stuart
> > K5KVH
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tentec mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> _______________________________________________
> Tentec mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tentec mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tentec

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 