Perhaps we should immediately make an FOI request for all information relating to the Chairman's visit to Manassas including the written request for the presentation, the reply from the provider and telephone log records between the two parties in the past week. Jay, KØQB -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 12:53 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:11405] Re: FCC"s BPL news release and statements Chris received a reply from the General Counsel to the effect that since Powell requested the presentation, it was exempted from the sunshine period prohibition. He and I both believe this is post hoc rationalization. The FCC's BPL Report and Order will not be available for a while, but we can synthesize a lot of what's in it. The FCC news release says the Order: - Sets forth rules imposing new technical requirements on BPL devices, such as the capability to avoid using any specific frequency and to remotely adjust or shut down any unit. Comment: Presumably this is similar to what was in the NPRM. - Establishes "excluded frequency bands" within which BPL must avoid operating entirely to protect aeronautical and aircraft receivers communications; and establishes "exclusion zones" in locations close to sensitive operations, such as coast guard or radio astronomy stations, within which BPL must avoid operating on certain frequencies. Comment: Presumably this reflects what was in the NTIA's September 13 submission. If so, Access BPL emissions are PROHIBITED in the following 12 bands (MHz): 2.850-3.025 3.400-3.500 4.650-4.700 5.450-5.680 6.525-6.685 8.815-8.965 10.005-10.100 11.275-11.400 13.260-13.360 17.900-17.970 21.924-22.000 74.800-75.200 By quick count, there are 106 "exclusion zones" where the use of 2.1735-2.1905 MHz is prohibited within 1 km of coast station facilities. There are 10 areas where the use of 73.0-74.6 MHz is excluded within 80 km of VLBA radio astronomy facilities. - Establishes consultation requirements with public safety agencies, federal government sensitive stations, and aeronautical stations. Comment: There are 53 locations listed by NTIA as "coordination areas" in addition to other locations, including the Commission's own field offices and radio astronomy facilities, to distances ranging from 1 km to 80 km. In these areas, BPL use of 1.7-30 MHz (and in the case of radio astronomy, to higher frequencies) would be subject to advance coordination. To this list the FCC apparently has added public safety agencies, but we don't know to what extent. - Establishes a publicly available Access BPL notification database to facilitate an organized approach to identification and resolution of harmful interference. Comment: Public availability is something we lobbied hard for, and the BPL industry lobbied against. So this is a win for us, albeit a small one. To address industry concerns, the information contained in the database apparently will be limited to the bare minimum needed to identify the source and the responsible party. - Changes the equipment authorization for Access BPL systems from verification to certification. Comment: Another small win for us that was opposed by the BPL industry. This is an admission by the FCC that the potential for interference from BPL devices is greater than from run-of-the-mill Part 15 devices. On the other hand, certification of the device is not as valuable as certification that the installation meets Part 15 rules. - Improves measurement procedures for all equipment that use RF energy to communicate over power lines. Comment: We don't know exactly what these "improvements" are and probably will not be entirely satisfied with them. In the presentation by Anh Wride, as well in comments by Ed Thomas during the press conference after the meeting, there was reference made to "administrative" as well as technical requirements for interference resolution. Thomas was asked about it and he said there were step by step procedures that were not really new. Franca said at the press conference that there were no "deadlines" for the resolution of interference. Otherwise we expect the R&O to be similar to the NPRM: no change in the Part 15 limits (at least below 30 MHz), no change in the absolute obligation of the device operator to eliminate interference (but with the FCC determining whether the interference is truly "harmful"). Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Walstrom, Wade, W0EJ (DIR MW) Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 2:43 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:11404] Re: FCC"s BPL news release and statements It does not appear the Powell recused himself. They all gave the interference issue lip service, but only one gave any indication of taking that issue seriously. (sigh!) 73, Wade W0EJ