eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net


QSL Managers
     

Ham Links
     



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

FCC Requires Arizona BPL Field Trial Operator to Work with Amateur Club:

from The ARRL Letter, Vol 23, No 48 on December 10, 2004
Website: http://www.arrl.org/
View comments about this article!

FCC Requires Arizona BPL Field Trial Operator to Work with Amateur Club:

The FCC has required Electric Broadband LLC (EB), which is running a BPL field trial in Cottonwood, Arizona, to maintain contact with a local Amateur Radio club. The Commission granted EB a Part 5 Experimental license WD2XMB for the company's BPL pilot on November 19, although the ARRL earlier this year asked the Commission to withdraw its authorization for the operation. Verde Valley Amateur Radio Association (VVARA) http://www.vvara.org/ BPL Committee Chair Robert Shipton, K8EQC, believes it might be the first time the FCC has ever imposed such a requirement.

"Our BPL committee in Cottonwood was surprised to see this stipulation," Shipton told ARRL. "Time will tell if it really matters or not."

Under a "Special Conditions" section in the WD2XMB experimental license, the FCC stipulated that the licensee "must establish and maintain a liaison relationship with the Verde Valley Amateur Radio Association." The Commission also required EB to respond to interference complaints "in a timely manner." System operators indicated earlier this fall that they would notch amateur frequencies, including 60 meters. Interference is still being experienced in the 60 meter band, VVARA says.

Shipton said Mountain Telecommunications Inc, which handles system operations, has worked with the VVARA and "expressed sincerity" in resolving interference to any amateur frequencies affected by their equipment. "Although progress with notching has been made, the representative samples in a trial that is statistically too small in geographical area will not demonstrate any significant results," Shipton said. "Our club questions whether a buildout that involves many more HF segments would be able to avoid the use of amateur spectrum."

EB and utility APS have been operating the BPL experiment at two Yavapai County, Arizona, sites since June, and relations with the amateur community have not always been so placid. The first Amateur Radio complaint, filed in June, cited VVARA testing at HF that asserted BPL interference was making attempts at ham radio communication useless. VVARA submitted a lengthy and comprehensive report to the two companies and the FCC in late July detailing interference issues.

In support of the VVARA effort, the ARRL has twice asked the FCC to shut down the Cottonwood BPL field trial for interfering with Amateur Radio communication. The League's own testing of the Cottonwood system this past summer indicated "extremely high" levels of radiated RF energy on amateur HF allocations--well in excess of the FCC Part 15 levels with which EB told the FCC it would comply.

The League's second shutdown request, sent October 11, accused the FCC of doing "absolutely nothing" to enforce its rules or to protect licensed services from interference. The ARRL said the Commission should not reinstate or extend the Special Temporary Authorization, under which the EB system had operated until the STA's expiration in September, and "no experimental authorization should be permitted for this system."

In an accompanying 12-page technical analysis, the ARRL also cast serious doubt on the accuracy--and possibly the integrity--of the BPL system's FCC-required six-month report, filed more than two months late.

The FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology, which handles grants applications for STAs and Part 5 Experimental licenses, has yet to respond to the League's assertions and requests regarding operation of the Cottonwood BPL field trial.

Replying to FCC inquiries prompted by Amateur Radio interference complaints, Electric Broadband has claimed to have spent "significant time and effort" looking into interference complaints from hams, running tests and "taking steps to mitigate any possible interference" the system might be causing, and it invited the FCC to visit and see for itself.

For additional information, visit the "Broadband Over Power Line (BPL) and Amateur Radio" page on the ARRL Web site http://www.arrl.org/bpl/. To support the League's efforts in this area, visit the ARRL's secure BPL Web site https://www.arrl.org/forms/development/donations/bpl/.

Source:

The ARRL Letter Vol. 23, No. 48 December 10, 2004

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
FCC Requires Arizona BPL Field Trial Operator to W  
by K1CJS on December 11, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Yep, it looks like the FCC is going to 'require' the BPL providers to comply with part 15 noise requirements just to make it look like they are doing something, but when it comes to the bottom line--the shutdown order--the FCC still won't do anything.

Typical of the way the FCC is enforcing its own rules and regs nowadays.
 
FCC Requires Arizona BPL Field Trial Operator to W  
by W7MJM on December 11, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
I'm confused.

I thought that BPL operators were considered to be Part 15 unlicensed users, required to comply with FCC Part 15 regulations regarding interference to and from licensed users of the radio spectrum.

It would appear from this article that the FCC is now granting experimental licenses (with amateur radio style call letters) to BPL operators, requiring them to comply with FCC Part 5 (?) regulations regarding interference to and from other licensed users.

While requiring BPL operators to cooperate with local and regional groups of amateur radio operators seems like a positive step, I am concerned about the implication that BPL operators may now be considered licensed users of the MF, HF and lower VHF spectrum.

What's going on here? Can anyone offer an explanation?
 
RE: FCC Requires Arizona BPL Field Trial Operator  
by KT0DD on December 11, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
HAHAHAHAHAHA...and do they really think the BPL Co. will comply?? I'll bet anytime VVARA calls, they just get blown off. This is a JOKE from the FCC. It's time for this to get into federal court, so the FCC is forced to do it's job! 73.
 
RE: FCC Requires Arizona BPL Field Trial Operator  
by WA4MJF on December 13, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
W7MJM,

Experimental stations have had
2x3 callsigns with X as the
first letter of the suffix for
many, many moons. That's why there
are no 2x3 ham calls with X as the
first letter of the suffix, unless
the FCC goofs, which happens.


It probably is experimental, as the
FCC said it was gonna apply the method
formerly known as type acceptance to
the BPL gear and I doubt that any
has been accepted so far.


Happy Holidaze!

73 de Ronnie
 
RE: FCC Requires Arizona BPL Field Trial Operator  
by WA4MJF on December 13, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Note to Mike, I got the
begging page when I submitted
the above post and it did not
double post so maybe you fixed
that bug, thanks.

Happy Holidaze!

73 de Ronnie
 
RE: FCC Requires Arizona BPL Field Trial Operator  
by W7MJM on December 13, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Thanks for the clarification, Ronnie. It's worse than I thought! =:-O
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Other News Articles
VK5RJ Still Gracing the Airwaves at Age 101:
rec.radio.amateur.moderated -- 5 Yrs. Old:
Tune-In To The World -- Amateur Radio Gets People Talking:
Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:
Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial: