[AMRadio] ARRL vs FCC over BPL
I check the FCC's online filing system from time to time just to keep tabs on what the ARRL is not telling us, and have found a document that describes a recent meeting between League people and the FCC. I wrote up this story that will soon appear on QRZ.com. It's also worth passing long here since I refer to the dreaded bandwidth controversy as among the risks to goodwill the League has staged in recent years. Note, too, that the IARU's top leadership is liable to move to Germany the next round. The two candidates announced to replace Larry Price and the second-in-command are both German licensees. This initially may prove to be a good thing, if purging onetime League staffers can mean something good at repairing the Regional Band Plans that are damaging to AM. - ARRL managers, lawyer meet with FCC on Powerline Internet Matter WASHINGTON -- Representatives of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) met with officials at the FCC July 9 to discuss a recent court ruling about the Commission's standards for allowable RF emissions from powerline-based distribution of internet service, nicknamed broadband over power lines, or BPL. The method delivers data through overhead utility lines and residential electrical wiring, and must radiate to some extent as a radio signal, potentially causing unintentional digital interference to primary reception by licensees in the Amateur Service and other users of shortwave spectrum. Of the two general types of BPL delivery systems, one uses in-house electrical wiring with limited potential to interfere beyond the home, while another method uses the elevated outdoor powerlines that can act as an antenna to transmit digital interference over a greater distance. Despite a lack of market enthusiasm for BPL technology caused partly by a rise in popularity of wi-fi, satellite, cellular, and other wireless digital methods of delivering internet service, the League, a non-profit publishing and subscription membership company, has spent considerable effort highlighting what it once portrayed as a grave threat to radio hobbyists. The ARRL's campaign included a controversial lawsuit filed against the FCC accusing the agency of failing to abide by rules mandating the disclosure of studies and deliberations affecting public rulemaking. A federal court in Washington agreed that the FCC was not completely candid in describing how it arrived at its standards for allowable RF emissions from BPL, and in June published an order to the agency to revisit the matter. But the League failed to convince the court to go further and force the FCC to accept outside studies the ARRL contends are valid in any review of potential interference. The FCC has said its rules use a standard of preventing interference from BPL that is actually harmful to communications, a prospective situation that has not been fully demonstrated by the ARRL. Otherwise, the agency asserts BPL emissions fall within longstanding limits imposed on other devices such as in-home remote controls, carrier current broadcast stations, and control signals used for energy conservation by the power companies. The club now acknowledges that the industry itself has refined modems and delivery infrastructure to voluntarily reign in the chance for interference. It is not yet clear whether there is permanent damage to a previously cooperative relationship between the FCC and the ARRL in the aftermath of litigation the group had filed. Controversy over the club's decision to sue the agency included complaints by subscribers that they were not consulted before League officials decided to risk goodwill and the standing of the Amateur Service among FCC staff. The ARRL had recently suffered an embarrassing series of foul-ups in front of the FCC and eventual failure of its threatened proposal to have mandatory government segregation of HF activities by bandwidth instead of the longstanding, popular system of organizing activities by mode. Creating a separate controversy over that matter, the League instead persuaded the International Amateur Radio Union to adopt similar segregation-by-bandwidth protocols, again without the support of U.S. licensees it was supposed to represent at the IARU. The ARRL staffer who proposed rigid bandwidth restrictions has since left the ARRL, and candidates announced to replace onetime ARRL officials now heading the IARU do not include any additional League staffers. Representing the club in Newington before the FCC has been Chris Imlay, a Maryland-based communications lawyer whose clients also include Kenwood, the Society of Broadcast Engineers, and a number of commercial radio and television stations. Imlay filed a summary of last week's meeting with the FCC and revealed that his client is willing to settle for the tighter technical standards against interference that BPL providers have voluntarily begun to implement, that are beyond those imposed
Re: [AMRadio] ARRL vs FCC over BPL
Wow! I only had to get to your 1st paragraph to find inaccurate reporting: From the ARRL home page dated July 15, 2008: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdfid_docu ment=6520033586 and http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200804/06-1343-1112979.pdf and http://www.remote.arrl.org/news/stories/2008/04/25/10064/ And, in your 3rd paragraph, more inaccurate reporting. Here's the real story: The Administrative Council (AC) of the International Amateur Radio Union (IARU) held its Annual Meeting on June 24-25, 2008 in Konstanz, Germany. Topping the agenda was the consultative process leading to nominations for IARU President and Vice President for the five-year term beginning on May 9, 2009. Current IARU President Larry Price, W4RA, announced in 2007 that he was not available to serve an additional term. The AC agreed that Vice President Tim Ellam, VE6SH, and Region 1 President Ole Garpestad, LA2RR, are suitably qualified to serve as IARU President and Vice President, respectively. Their nominations will be offered to the Member-Societies for ratification. The ARRL serves as the International Secretariat of the IARU. You can read the IARU news release, dated June 26, 2008: http://www.iaru-r2.org/wp-content/uploads/iaru-news-release-2008-ac.pdf Tim is from Canada and Ole is from Norway. Great fictional writing in the rest of your blurb; you should be doing paperbacks. Note: watch the wrap-arounds with the links. You can also go directly to the ARRL home page and IARU home page and click on the links directly. Pete, wa2cwa On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:27:27 -0700 (PDT) VJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I check the FCC's online filing system from time to time just to keep tabs on what the ARRL is not telling us, and have found a document that describes a recent meeting between League people and the FCC. I wrote up this story that will soon appear on QRZ.com. It's also worth passing long here since I refer to the dreaded bandwidth controversy as among the risks to goodwill the League has staged in recent years. Note, too, that the IARU's top leadership is liable to move to Germany the next round. The two candidates announced to replace Larry Price and the second-in-command are both German licensees. This initially may prove to be a good thing, if purging onetime League staffers can mean something good at repairing the Regional Band Plans that are damaging to AM. - ARRL managers, lawyer meet with FCC on Powerline Internet Matter WASHINGTON -- Representatives of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) met with officials at the FCC July 9 to discuss a recent court ruling about the Commission's standards for allowable RF emissions from powerline-based distribution of internet service, nicknamed broadband over power lines, or BPL. The method delivers data through overhead utility lines and residential electrical wiring, and must radiate to some extent as a radio signal, potentially causing unintentional digital interference to primary reception by licensees in the Amateur Service and other users of shortwave spectrum. Of the two general types of BPL delivery systems, one uses in-house electrical wiring with limited potential to interfere beyond the home, while another method uses the elevated outdoor powerlines that can act as an antenna to transmit digital interference over a greater distance. Despite a lack of market enthusiasm for BPL technology caused partly by a rise in popularity of wi-fi, satellite, cellular, and other wireless digital methods of delivering internet service, the League, a non-profit publishing and subscription membership company, has spent considerable effort highlighting what it once portrayed as a grave threat to radio hobbyists. The ARRL's campaign included a controversial lawsuit filed against the FCC accusing the agency of failing to abide by rules mandating the disclosure of studies and deliberations affecting public rulemaking. A federal court in Washington agreed that the FCC was not completely candid in describing how it arrived at its standards for allowable RF emissions from BPL, and in June published an order to the agency to revisit the matter. But the League failed to convince the court to go further and force the FCC to accept outside studies the ARRL contends are valid in any review of potential interference. The FCC has said its rules use a standard of preventing interference from BPL that is actually harmful to communications, a prospective situation that has not been fully demonstrated by the ARRL. Otherwise, the agency asserts BPL emissions fall within longstanding limits imposed on other devices such as in-home remote controls, carrier current broadcast stations, and control signals used for energy conservation by the power companies. The club now acknowledges that the industry itself has refined modems and delivery
