Thanks for putting this issue in proper perspective, Chris. 73, Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: W3KD@aol.com To: arrl-odv Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 6:48 AM Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10653] Re: BPL comment extension In a message dated 5/28/2004 12:56:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, frenaye@pcnet.com writes: Interesting that our request for an extension was turned down but this one was granted (3 weeks). -- Tom CARRIER CURRENT SYSTEMS, INCLUDING BROADBAND OVER POWER LINE SYSTEMS. Granted in part the Motion of NAC/Amherst , and extended the deadline for filing reply comments. (Dkt No. 03-104, 04-37). Action by: Chief , Office of Engineering and Technology. Reply Comments Due: 06/22/2004. Adopted: 05/26/2004 by ORDER. (DA No. 04-1552). OET <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1552A1.doc> <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1552A1.pdf> <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1552A1.txt> Not at all, Tom. Look at the reason for the extension. NTIA hasn't yet filed its comments and a technical proposal. FCC knows full well what that is going to be, because it was vetted at an IRAC meeting. They are waiting for the NTIA filing, because it will assist them in going ahead with their BPL proposal. They just used that bozo antenna consortium as a vehicle. Chris