Dave: Outstanding editorial. Dennis _____ From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 4:31 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10294] May QST editorial May QST goes to the printer today. The attached editorial deals, of course, with BPL and the FCC's NPRM. The editorial follows the strategy laid out in my memo to the Executive Committee that I sent to ODV on March 18. It is fairly specific, within the space limitations of page 9 (we had to use a pretty small font this month), as to what we will be seeking in our comments on the NPRM. Because the editorial offers guidance on what members should say in their own comments, I plan to make it available on the Web sometime tomorrow. There is one aspect of our planned filing on which we'll need to make a decision, but the decision point isn't imminent. President Haynie and I have kicked it around a bit, and I think it's appropriate to raise the subject here so you can begin to think about it if you haven't already. When we have the radiated emission limit that is required in order to protect mobiles, we will need to decide whether to seek this limit for the entire spectrum or just for the ham bands. According to Jim and Chris, Ed Thomas is at least somewhat receptive to notching the ham bands. On the other hand, if we actively seek that we're more or less abandoning our potential coalition partners. Leaving aside the federal government HF interests, who presumably are capable of fending for themselves, about the only potential coalition partners who come to mind as having been much heard from are shortwave listeners and broadcasters, some public safety folks with low-band VHF interests, and RC modelers (the Academy of Model Aeronautics). ARINC's reply comments were very supportive of our position, but at present they are under a cloud because the FCC Enforcement Bureau says ARINC's description of a specific interference incident is at odds with the facts; we've sought clarification from ARINC. NAB's position was essentially "not in our back yard" (i.e., not in the lower TV channels) which wasn't especially helpful to us. If we're not going to get more help from non-amateur sources than we have up to now, there is a strong temptation to go for notching. On the other hand, if we could sell the idea of a stricter limit across the whole spectrum it would make BPL a less attractive venture. The problem is, it probably would be much more difficult to sell to the FCC. We have called another meeting of the "coalition" for Friday, April 2. After that meeting I hope to have more information about what sort of non-amateur support we can expect to receive, so we will be in a better position to make an informed decision. 73, Dave K1ZZ <<qs0405.doc>>