FCC Turning Blind Eye in BPL Proceeding, ARRL Charges

NEWINGTON, CT, Jun 24, 2004--The ARRL says the FCC apparently has
already made up its mind about broadband over power line (BPL) and
"wants no bad news" about the technology. In reply comments filed June
22 on the FCC's Notice of Proposed Rule Making in ET Docket 03-47, the
League called on the Commission to take "a fresh look" at BPL before
enabling its deployment. Again asking the FCC to put the proceeding on
hold for a year, the League recommended that the Commission in the
meantime require BPL providers to conduct FCC-monitored interference
testing with all stakeholders. The ARRL charged that while an
overwhelming majority of comments oppose BPL due to interference
concerns, the FCC continues to rely on what the League called "vacuous
assurances that BPL would not cause harmful interference." Test data and
a growing record of unresolved complaints indicate otherwise, the ARRL said.

"ARRL is of the view that this proceeding has been prejudged and will,
in the end, be decided not on the technical issues that should control
the outcome of this proceeding, but on the politics of the matter," the
League commented. "Given the evidence on the Commission's table, it
cannot now authorize BPL at the radiated emission levels proposed, and
without substantial restrictions."

Among those restrictions, the League recommended keeping BPL altogether
away from all Amateur Radio allocations, should the FCC decide to
authorize BPL under its proposed rules. As an alternative, the FCC
should guarantee that an interfering BPL system can be shut down
immediately in the face of a valid complaint, "not after a BPL provider
has taken months to discover that the interference cannot be resolved."

Where There's Smoke . . .

To date, the ARRL contended, the FCC has seemingly ignored the League's
BPL technical studies as well as the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) Phase 1 BPL study that clearly
demonstrate BPL's interference potential. Five additional technical
evaluations accompanied the ARRL's reply comments.

"The Commission is obligated by the Administrative Procedure Act to look
for fire where it is shown a good deal of smoke," the League said. "Here
there is far more than smoke in the record." Any decision in the BPL
proceeding "must be supported by substantial evidence," the ARRL asserted.