Subject: [NEXTEL-1] "It Seems to Us . . ." Harmful Interference

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 11:49:52 -0400

"It Seems to Us . . ." Harmful Interference

By David Sumner, K1ZZ
ARRL Chief Executive Officer
August 1, 2004

Belatedly and grudgingly, the proponents of Broadband over Power Line
 (BPL) are beginning to acknowledge that their systems cause
interference
 to radiocommunication. They have a new refrain: it may be interference,
but it isn't harmful interference.

Every radio amateur should be familiar with the concept of harmful
interference. The definition is right there in Part 97:

Harmful interference. Interference which endangers the functioning of a
radionavigation service or of other safety services or seriously
degrades,
obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a radiocommunication service
operating
in accordance with the Radio Regulations. (FCC Rules, §97.3(a)(23))

This definition does not just apply to the Amateur Radio Service. It
originates in the Constitution of the International Telecommunication
Union
(ITU) and is faithfully reproduced in the international Radio
Regulations
as well as in the general rules and regulations (Part 2) of the FCC
Rules.

Amateur Radio is a radiocommunication service. BPL is not. In the
spectrum
management context, BPL has no rights whatsoever. In fact, the
international Radio Regulations - which have the force and effect of a
treaty - require that "Administrations shall take all practicable and
necessary steps to ensure that the operation of electrical apparatus or
installations of any kind, including power and telecommunication
distribution networks...does not cause harmful interference to a
radiocommunication service...." [emphasis added]

Mark this: Protecting the Amateur Radio Service from harmful
interference
from BPL is not optional for the FCC. It is required. The FCC couldn't
get
out from under that obligation if it wanted to.

For most of its 70-year history - that is, until very recently - the FCC
gave more than lip service to its obligation to protect licensed
services.
It is the reason that the following rule is enshrined in Part 15:

Operation of an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator is
subject to the conditions that no harmful interference is caused and
that
interference must be accepted that may be caused by the operation of an
authorized radio station, by another intentional or unintentional
radiator,
by industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) equipment, or by an
incidental
radiator. (FCC Rules, §15.5(b))

With this background it should be obvious why the BPL proponents are
grasping at the "it may be interference, but it isn't harmful
interference"
straw. They know they don't have a leg to stand on.

Going back to our definition, if a BPL system "seriously degrades,
obstructs or repeatedly interrupts" amateur radiocommunication then it
is
in violation. It doesn't matter how weak the signal is that you're
trying
to hear, or whether you're operating in the comfort of your own home,
portable or mobile: BPL cannot inflict serious degradation, repeated
misinterpretation, or repeated loss of information (these terms are
taken
from the ITU definition of "interference") on a radiocommunication
service.

If a violation occurs, what happens then? What should happen is obvious:
it
must be corrected immediately. Remember, the operation of the device is
"subject to the conditions that no harmful interference is caused and
that
interference must be accepted...." If the device causes harmful
interference then it must be shut down. Period. Remember, neither the
device nor its operator has any right whatsoever to use the radio
spectrum
if doing so causes harmful interference.

And if the operator, once informed of the harmful interference,
willfully
refuses to take immediate corrective action? Then a higher authority
than
the FCC kicks in: the Communications Act of 1934, by which the FCC was
created in the first place. Section 333 says, "No person shall willfully
or
maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio
communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this
Act
or operated by the United States Government." Clearly, the operator of a
device causing harmful interference who refuses to fix the problem
immediately is interfering willfully and is subject to stiff penalties.

This is exactly what has happened in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, where the
station
of Jim Spencer, W0SR, has been subjected to harmful interference from
BPL
for more than 12 weeks despite repeated demands to the operator, Alliant
Energy. The ARRL has interceded with the FCC's Enforcement Bureau on
Jim's
behalf, requesting that a monetary forfeiture of no less than $10,000 be
levied against Alliant Energy.

Power utility companies often receive complaints of harmful interference
to
licensed radiocommunication services resulting from sparking and corona
discharge. The radio users receiving such interference are entitled to
prompt resolution of the interference. However, no one would expect the
interruption of electrical service to scores of customers until the
sparking/corona problem can be rectified.

The situation with regard to BPL interference is entirely different. The
radio users receiving harmful interference from a BPL source have every
right to expect that the interference will be eliminated immediately
upon
notification to the operator.

According to §15.5(c) of the FCC Rules, "The operator of a radio
frequency
device shall be required to cease operating the device upon notification
by
a Commission representative that the device is causing harmful
interference. Operation shall not resume until the condition causing the
harmful interference has been corrected." Offenders may argue that they
are
not obligated to remedy interference until the FCC tells them to.
Nonsense.
That's like arguing that if you run a red light and cause an accident,
but
a police officer doesn't see you, then it's not your fault.

For a BPL system operator knowingly to continue to cause harmful
interference to a licensed radiocommunication service - amateur or
otherwise - is totally unacceptable. There is no reasonable reading of
the
international Radio Regulations, Communications Act, and the FCC Rules
that
could lead to a different conclusion.

http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/08/01/1/?nc=1

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/61FxlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

-- 
    "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL"
  Note The New address 
Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1

  "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS"
Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2

  "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP"
     The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security.
Subscribe to WFHSG:  http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEXTEL-1/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email-masked]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/