The FCC is shutting us off from the world....political payoff to ELECTRIC

power industry. Ever hear of BPL????? The 1st link below can't be copied....scroll to the May 21 addendum and you will get a clear picture of Bush....did you know this SOB in Mineapolis just a while ago spoke for the specific downgrading of regulations? No other President has done this. I wonder who wrote the words?? This SWL listener really understands and explains how the Bush Admin operates....whether it's Iraq or this issue!!! One of the best discussions I have every read.

BPL is broadband over power lines. It will cause such interference that it will destroy the SW bands, ham bands, mobile, emergency bands, even military and aircraft will be subject to horrible interference. Anything from 2mhz to 80mhz. Supposedly, they can "notch out" cerrtain ham bands..but the hams fear that they will come back and say they need more and take away ham frequencies...Or that interference by hams will result in the hams getting screwed as people complain. Oh, by the way, if I as a shortwave listener get wiped out, it's MY BURDEN to prove it's the BPL that's causing the problem... Guess who wins???

A sub-dept. of the Commerce Dept. has issued warnings and is against this. BPL has been shut down in Japan, UK, Switzerland, Austria, Netherlands, etc. because of all these problems. But here in the USA??? Of course not, because this is a payoff to the electric power industry...you know, the folks who brought us Enron and the power grid failure last year. And, yes, it harms AM radio, so you wonder, what about Clear Channel? Well, I don't think they care. Quest has already filed complaints about BPL affecting their underground DSL. The Bush Admin. doesn't care. Heck, CC and Quest are in other industries, Bush is paying of the Enron crowd!! (Besides, they've already done a VERY GOOD job with TV consolidation....I'm sure you'll see your favorite radio hate monger on TV if he can't be heard on radio!!)

Also, please be aware that the test that say that nothing is affected vis a vis hams.....well, the areas were small and NO HAMS LIVED IN THE TEST AREAS!!!!
Also note: we, the taxpayers are expected to SUBSIDIZE all this!

The piece on the politics of SW and BPL (cited above as the "first link")
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~srw-swling/bpl.htm

A simple explanation of why this is a BAD idea.....Excerpt....
http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/4520-7298-5123406.html
"HOULD YOU CARE about all this? Because BPL could have a negative impact on the entire world of radio communication. Remember what I said earlier about the radio waves flying off into space? Even the low-power signals BPL would employ can, under the right conditions, travel around the globe. That means BPL systems in the United States could cause interference in places far removed from whatever benefit BPL is supposed to provide.

Interference is pollution and, once it starts, can prove impossible to stop. If not properly managed, BPL has the potential to ruin large portions of the shortwave radio spectrum. Like old-growth forests, radio spectrum is precious and for much the same reason: They just aren't making any more of it. What we have needs to be wisely managed for the greatest public benefit.

BPL needs to be watched carefully to make sure a technology we don't really need--isn't there enough broadband out there already?--doesn't cause problems we'll never be able to resolve."

KEY SITE:
ARRL web page on this ....crammed with info, news stories about this...Explore this whole page---industry links, reports, tests, news stories about the test areas here in the US
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/


Link to AUDIO samples of this inteference! You won't believe it....samples of AM radio in apts, houses, etc.
1. info re: Japan's studies on BPL also known by other initials
http://www.jarl.or.jp/English/0-2.htm

*****
The last day for comment is June 1. I'll provide that link too. By the way, the accelerated the process and shut down any more comment after that date. Democracy in action!!!!!

ARRL web page on this ....crammed with info, news stories about this...
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/


Direct Link to FCC comment page on BPL
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/ecfs/Upload?hot_docket=1008700826%7C04-37%7CBroadband+Over+Power+Line+%28BPL%29&Send=Continue


Finally, a most eloquent commentary on our freedoms and this issue:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:4SSgByu12bQJ:www.grundigradio.com/bpl/FCCBPLcomments.pdf+shortwave+BPL&hl=en

This is the html version of the file http://www.grundigradio.com/bpl/FCCBPLcomments.pdf.


Etón Corporation
Comments on the Federal Communications Commission’s
Broadband-Over-Powerline Policy
November 14, 2003
Recently the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) began the process of changing the regulations that govern radio frequency interference. These changes are aimed at paving the way for the FCC to introduce a new technology known as broadband-over-powerline (BPL).
According to the FCC, BPL would bring broadband to “previously unserved communities” and be the catalyst for a “robustly competitive and diversified marketplace” that would lead to a “broadband Nirvana” in America.* While its proposal may be well intentioned, the FCC’s support
of this emerging technology threatens the existence of an established technology – Shortwave radio. Shortwave radio technology, though not as cutting-edge and as commercialized as BPL, is important to America because it represents our most basic freedoms guaranteed by the First
Amendment.

BPL technology is based on using 2-80 MHz of the radio frequency spectrum to transmit data over existing powerlines. According to the latest research done by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and the American Radio Relay League (ARRL), BPL threatens to create so
much “noise” in this frequency range that Shortwave radio, the original operator in this frequency spectrum, would be effectively drowned out. Without any proposed plans or remedies by the FCC to safeguard Shortwave broadcasting, BPL poses a real and imminent threat to this
medium.

To the majority of Americans who have never listened to worldband radio, the loss of Shortwave may appear to be acceptable compared to the benefits of faster and expanded internet services.

But to Shortwave enthusiasts and radio users, Shortwave is indispensable for its ability to transmit international broadcasts from around the world. On the surface, this may appear to be
only marginally valuable in this day and age of 24/7 news channels on television and internet access. Upon closer inspection however, Shortwave is markedly different from those other mediums and especially significant for its ability to broadcast news and information directly from other countries at no cost or low cost. As Americans, we have become accustomed to receiving our news in pre-packaged sound bites, selected and served by the mainstream media, biased opinions and perspectives mixed in. Shortwave allows its listeners to hear and its broadcasters to report news and information with a clarity and transparency unmatched by most domestic media.

Shortwave radio is in many ways the last of our untarnished resources. As Americans, we have always been taught and told that it is our freedom that makes us strong and separates us from everybody else. When it comes to news and information, our desire to have the freedom to
choose from a wide array of media and media channels is no different.

Shortwave radio represents a cost-effective and easily accessible means for all Americans to get global news straight from the source, a claim that no other technology can make. If this access was denied or
impeded in any way, and Americans left with less media choices or channels, then our right to freedom of the press would be unfairly and unacceptably compromised.

The FCC recently voted to allow media conglomerates the ability to increase their holdings in television stations and newspapers, another signal that fewer and fewer companies will end up controlling more and more of what we hear, see, and read. Ironically post 9/11, global news is more salient than ever. In today’s political climate, Americans are seeking international news, culture, and perspectives like never before in efforts to better understand the rest of the world.

We need more media choices to quench our thirst for information, not less. Shortwave is not just another vehicle, but arguably one of the best vehicles to bring the perspectives of foreign countries and cultures into our homes easily and inexpensively. At a time when the FCC seems content on letting BPL eclipse Shortwave, its value and significance is brighter than ever.

In fact, Shortwave’s value reaches beyond America’s shores to touch nearly every country in the world. Without a spectrum to operate from, even outbound American Shortwave programming that is currently accessible to millions and millions around the globe will be eerily silent. In short order, the global exchange of thoughts and ideas, the underlying premise of both radio and our right to free speech, will be brought to a screeching halt. To see the potential damage this can
have on the world, we only need to study history. In 1989, the Velvet Revolution paved the way for democracy as Communism fell in Czechoslovakia when Václav Havel was elected as President. Havel, a long-standing and outspoken critic of Communism, cited Voice of Free
Europe, a Shortwave institution, as one of his sources of strength and inspiration during his struggle for democracy. Though it may be hyperbole to attribute the demise of Communism in Eastern Europe to radio, it is clear that its reach is broad, and its influences deep. It would be a potential foreign policy failure for the United States if Shortwave radio disappeared. If the elixir of Shortwave could help just one country or even one community, then Shortwave’s existence would
be justified by helping bring hope and inspiration, and under the right circumstances, even democracy.

What the FCC is proposing with BPL is not so much poor technology as it is poorly planned technology. In its current form, the social costs of BPL exceed its social benefits. Ubiquitous broadband is a noble goal that FCC should have in its sights on. The issue here is to find a way
to apply this technology somewhere or somehow that does not impact Shortwave radio. Isn’t there bandwidth somewhere else in the radio frequency spectrum for BPL to occupy? Since 1994, the FCC has auctioned and sold off hundreds of frequencies for billions of dollars.
Granted, the United States government has generated significant revenue from these sales, but money cannot buy freedom. It is perplexing that the FCC, the landowner of the airwaves, cannot find a plot of frequency for BPL without encroaching the boundaries of Shortwave.

The FCC’s BPL proposal threatens to set this country down a slippery slope where new technology displaces existing technology without regard for its impacts on citizens and society. The FCC needs to find a way to promote BPL while preserving the freedoms of Americans.

Technology should be a tool for society to improve the lives of its people. If and when this promise is broken, then that technology needs to be reevaluated, rethought, or reapplied until it works properly.

* “Reaching Broadband Nirvana”, Kathleen Q. Abernathy, FCC Commissioner, United PowerLine
Council Annual Conference, September 22, 2003,
(http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239079A1.doc)

He's been keeping an eye on this, and it doesn't look good in any way, shape or form.... I don't know a lot about it, besides what he tells me, but I don't understand how this can be allowed to happen?!

I think we need to ride herd on this.

such as digitally encrypted satellite radio, wouldn't obliteration of free-over-the-air frequencies be consistent with the corporate agenda of squeezing more money out of information transmission?

to be snuck in on us.

Right now I listen to SW every day for my SANITY. This is a cheap way for people to have access to the world....

ANd they will take it away from us.

This is outrageous! Somebody should investigate that scumbag Michael Powell.

eom

eom

You name it. It is controlled by those who want to limit your access to information. Shortwave has been recognized as the tool of choice when society is disrupted. Therefore, it must be done away with.

I wonder what their devious little plan is for the internet? Maybe they are just counting on their brainwashing to hold in this sphere as well. Maybe they think people with continue to go to the Home Shopping site, and not be bothered with all this information "stuff." I would bet my cerebrum that there is some plan, either in the short or long term.

to tap into.....so lots of internet commerce, banking, etc could be negatively affected.

And then there is the question of privacy....much discussion over how easy it would be to to track content.....

They may try, but there is always a way. I hope we find it.

NOTE THE LAST PARAGRAPH...clearing the "underbrush" of regulation...

The little F.ck...this is the passage that is really revving up hams, etc. Because it means they're out to crush us.
Wireless, DSL, cable, phone wires all bring access. This BPL was originally intended to serve areas that were very remote. Instead, it looks like it could roll out in 1-2 year in BIG CITIES....because that's where the money is....


http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040426-6.html

President Unveils Tech Initiatives for Energy, Health Care, Internet
Remarks by the President at American Association of Community Colleges Annual Convention
Minneapolis Convention Center
Minneapolis, Minnesota



.....
The third goal is to make sure that we have access to the information that is transforming our economy through broadband technology. I'm talking about broadband technology in every part of our country. I was the governor of Texas for a while. I remember talking about access to information and there was always a group of people saying, that's fine, big cities get it but rural people don't. I'm talking about broadband technology to every corner of our country by the year 2007 with competition shortly thereafter. (Applause.)

Educators understand the great value of broadband technology. I mean, the -- I'm not surprised that people involved in the community college system, when you mention broadband technology nod their heads. It's the flow of information and the flow of knowledge which will help transform America and keep us on the leading edge of change. And we've got to make sure that flow is strong and modern and vibrant. And by the way, we've got to make sure that there's competition for your -- for your demand. We need more than just one provider available for not only community colleges but also for consumers. In our society, the more providers there are, the better the quality will be and the better the pricing mechanism will be.

Central Piedmont Community College in Charlotte is using broadband to conduct classes for students all across their state. You know, one of the interesting opportunities for the community college system is to provide education opportunities for people who work out of their home, for example. And the expansion of broadband technology will mean education literally will head into the living rooms of students. That will even make the system more flexible and more available and more affordable.

Same with health care. Again, if you're from a state where there's a lot of rural people, there's nothing better than to be able to transfer information quickly from a rural doc to a hospital for analysis in order to save lives. It's happening all around our country. The ability to send an x-ray image in seven seconds and have a response back in ten minutes with a preliminary analysis oftentimes will save lives. But you hear us talk about making sure health care is accessible and affordable. One way to do so is to hook up communities and homes to broadband. It's going to be a really good way for us to make sure the health care system works better and the education system works better. And it also is going to be an important way to make sure that we're an innovative society.

Now, the use of broadband has tripled since 2000 from 7 million subscriber lines to 24 million. That's good. But that's way short of the goal for 2007. And so -- by the way, we rank 10th amongst the industrialized world in broadband technology and its availability. That's not good enough for America. Tenth is 10 spots too low as far as I'm concerned. (Applause.)

Broadband technology must be affordable. In order to make sure it gets spread to all corners of the country, it must be affordable. We must not tax broadband access. If you want broadband access throughout the society, Congress must ban taxes on access. (Applause.)

Secondly, a proper role for the government is to clear regulatory hurdles so those who are going to make investments do so. Broadband is going to spread because it's going to make sense for private sector companies to spread it so long as the regulatory burden is reduced -- in other words, so long as policy at the government level encourages people to invest, not discourages investment.

And so here are some smart things to do: One, increase access to federal land for fiberoptic cables and transmission towers. That makes sense. As you're trying to get broadband spread throughout the company, make sure it's easy to build across federal lands. One sure way to hold things up is that the federal lands say, you can't build on us. So how is some guy in remote Wyoming going to get any broadband technology? Regulatory policy has got to be wise and smart as we encourage the spread of this important technology. There needs to be technical standards to make possible new broadband technologies, such as the use of high-speed communication directly over power lines. Power lines were for electricity; power lines can be used for broadband technology. So the technical standards need to be changed to encourage that.

And we need to open up more federally controlled wireless spectrum to auction in free public use, to make wireless broadband more accessible, reliable, and affordable. Listen, one of the technologies that's coming is wireless. And if you're living out in -- I should -- I was going to say Crawford, Texas, but it's not -- maybe not nearly as remote. (Laughter.) How about Terlingua, Texas? There's not a lot of wires out there. But wireless technology is going to change all that so long as government policy makes sense.

And we're going to continue to support the Federal Communications Commission. Michael Powell -- Chairman Michael Powell, under his leadership, his decision to eliminate burdensome regulations on new broadband networks availability to homes. In other words, clearing out the underbrush of regulation, and we'll get the spread of broadband technology, and America will be better for it. (Applause.) ....

period ends June 1....

The fix is in even before the comment period is over AND in light of the Commerce Dept. (NTIA) report that questions BPL....

There was an Art Bell rebroadcast about that last night


http://www.coasttocoastam.com

Jim Haynie would have been great to hear.....

nt

I think this info should be sent to lots of liberal sites AND
call your rep and Senators! They probably won't know a thing about it!

And AIR AMERICA, too!! This is the sort of thing Mike Malloy would have done wonders with...but maybe Randi Rhodes?? or Garafolo???

Also....I think Sen McCain was against media consolidation, right??
Why don't we contact his office?? I am calling and sending info tomorrow

1-800-648-3516 for switchboard, ask for his office

They held a hearing on May 19, just before Chimpy gave his speech on May 21....Look at the members...Heather Wilson ....Markey...Dingell............The hearing wasn't about "policy" just technology...however the AARL report says the industry guy was fishing for money.......AARL report follows the list....

http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/subcommittees/Telecommunications_and_the_Internet_Members.htm

Fred Upton, Michigan
Chairman

Michael Bilirakis, Florida

Cliff Stearns, Florida
Vice Chairman

Paul E. Gillmor, Ohio

Christopher Cox, California

Nathan Deal, Georgia

Ed Whitfield, Kentucky

Barbara Cubin, Wyoming

John Shimkus, Illinois

Heather Wilson, New Mexico

Charles "Chip" Pickering, Mississippi

Vito Fossella, New York

Steve Buyer, Indiana

Charles F. Bass, New Hampshire

Mary Bono, California

Greg Walden, Oregon

Lee Terry, Nebraska

Joe Barton, Texas
(Ex Officio)

Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
Ranking Member

Albert R. Wynn, Maryland

Karen McCarthy, Missouri

Michael F. Doyle, Pennsylvania

Jim Davis, Florida

Charles A. Gonzalez, Texas

Rick Boucher, Virginia

Edolphus Towns, New York

Bart Gordon, Tennessee

Peter Deutsch, Florida

Bobby L. Rush, Illinois

Anna G. Eshoo, California

Bart Stupak, Michigan

Eliot L. Engel, New York
John D. Dingell, Michigan
(Ex Of

REPORT on hearing from AARL


http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/05/20/1/
BPL Industry Official Disputes NTIA Report in Congressional Hearing

NEWINGTON, CT, May 20, 2004--A BPL industry witness told a House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet hearing May 19 that the extensive National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) broadband over power line interference study draws "generalized conclusions," some of which are inaccurate. Jay Birnbaum, vice president and general counsel of BPL provider Current Communications Group LLC was among those answering lawmakers' questions during the hearing, "Competition in the Communications Marketplace: How Convergence Is Blurring the Lines Between Voice, Video, and Data Services." ARRL CEO David Sumner said he found it "interesting" that a BPL spokesperson would try to downplay the significance of the NTIA's findings.

"Clearly, the report has the BPL industry worried--as well it should," Sumner said. "Anyone who gets past the introduction and actually reads the body of the NTIA study can only conclude that NTIA's findings are devastating to the case for BPL."

Among other observations, the NTIA acknowledged that BPL signals "unintentionally radiate" from power lines, but said there's "substantial disagreement as to the strength of the emissions and their potential for causing interference to licensed radio systems."

Rep Greg Walden, W7EQI (R-OR).

The subcommittee members questioning Birnbaum included Oregon Republican Greg Walden, W7EQI, one of two amateur licensees in the US House. Walden asked Birnbaum to address the BPL interference issues that the NTIA report and the amateur community have raised.

Birnbaum responded that he thinks interference concerns about BPL are unfounded and that the FCC agrees. BPL emissions from power lines, he asserted, are at very low levels and dissipate very quickly with distance. Current Technologies is field testing a BPL system in Potomac, Maryland, and has a 50-50 partnership with Cinergy to deploy a full-blown BPL system in the Cincinnati area. The Maryland system employs the HomePlug Alliance standard, which notches all HF amateur bands except 60 meters. It uses orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) technology.

The ARRL documented a visit to the Potomac test area on its Web site. The Potomac site is identified as "Trial Area #1" under "Video showing results of ARRL testing in MD, VA, PA and NY." BPL interference heard outside amateur bands at the Potomac site sounds like severe, irregular pulse-type noise.

Walden also questioned Birnbaum regarding how far away BPL interference might be detected. Birnbaum indicated that while there's disagreement on the issue, it's "literally undetectable" tens of meters away. He said FCC and NTIA engineers have found signal levels too low to measure. He also told Walden that a lot of complaints about BPL are based on outdated data and technology. Walden said he just wants the interference addressed technically--"especially driving under power lines."

The NTIA, which conducted measurements at three different BPL field trial sites, said that while radiated power "decreased with increasing distance," the decay was not always predictable. At one measurement location with a number of BPL devices, the NTIA said, "appreciable BPL signal levels (ie, at least 5 dB higher than ambient noise) were observed beyond 500 meters from the nearest BPL-energized power lines."

A BPL "extractor" on a power line in the Raleigh, North Carolina, area, where Progress Energy and Amperion have partnered to field test a BPL system.

The NTIA study further calculated that interference "is likely" to mobile stations in areas extending to 30 meters and to fixed stations in areas extending to 55 meters from a single BPL device and the power lines to which it's connected. Interference to systems with "low to moderate desired signal levels," such as those common in ham radio, is likely within areas extending to 75 meters for mobiles and 460 meters for fixed stations, the NTIA study said.

Responding to a question from New Hampshire Republican Charles Bass, Birnbaum said the BPL industry would be pleased if Congress could provide tax or financial incentives, especially for improving the power grid. He said utilities have not explored the broadband market in the past because some companies had bad experiences and the technology was not feasible five years ago.
Birnbaum suggested, too, that while utilities are slow to act, they will begin to deploy BPL systems over the next year or two. The biggest issue, he said, is the incentive for utilities to invest in broadband technology.

Though I'm not a ham, I've owned dozens of shortwave radios since the late 1950s. There is no way to measure the wealth of knowledge I've gained from this medium over the past six decades. A bible thumping
repuke relative once told me, "You've been listening to your damn shortwaves and surfing the Internet too much. You should go to church more and watch Fox News." Yep, these idiots will let the Bushits wipe out the shortwave band. It's good for us. The Internet is next!

:kick: :kick: :kick:

In the first place, I trust NOTHING that the Regime proposes. In the second place, I am technically-challenged in a few areas. I need enlightenment on two points:

1. What about the electrical noise that is inherent in power lines? What would this interference do to broadband connections, or would a digital transmission be unaffected by the "hum?"

2. The Regime is proposing to "transmit" broadband over an infrastructure that it already acknowledges is inadequate to handle the electrical needs of any given region when one or more stations go offline? I refer to the Midwest Blackout of August 14, 2003.

I'm counting on there being some Engineers at DU who can set me straight here. Thank you in advance, please use small words!

:bounce:
dbt

they are coopting...

As for the infrastructure...the BPL industry guy in the hearing (see the link to that above..the NTIA hearing of May ?) ever so gingerly asked for assistance for "investment" in improving the grid.

In other words...they won't broach the subject if it involves "taxes" but if they "help" the industry, then the hidden taxes that we wind up paying are OK!!

It's one big, dishonest game to help out the power industry....I would feel safer if Ken Lay were in jail right now...................