Quote from the American Public Power Association; "the burden should
be imposed on challengers to BPL to demonstrate interference in a
fact-based, empirical proof. Further, to the extent that interference
is demonstrated, there should be an attempt to accommodate BPL, even
if it means that existing communications providers may have to share
or transfer bandwidth."
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 496

Critical everyone submits a reply comment ASAP.

To file, go here;
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi
"Proceeding" field, enter "03-104"
"Document Type" select "Reply to comments"

Links for the key filings (pro BPL and anti BPL) are here;
http://www.arrl.org/~ehare/rfi/plc/B...yperlinks.html

Good reply examples are below;
Notes
You can cut paste - key is the comments you submit represent your
thoughts.
You can also reply to support comments i.e. the ARRL comments have
your support.

Andrew Leeds - response to UPLC
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514288 117

Lee McVey - response to Amperion
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 923

Nickolaus E. Leggett - response to NA Shortwave Association
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 539

Cortland Richmond - response to PowerWan
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 407

Lee McVey - response to UPLC
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 392

Cortland Richmond - response to Florida Light and Power
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 386

Arthur Guy - response to ARRL
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 323

Good general comments
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 303

Ashley Lane - response to Ameren
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 129

Nickolaus E. Leggett - response to ARRL
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514287 007

Cortland Richmond - response to Southern Linc
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514286 932

Nickolaus E. Leggett - response to National Academy of Science
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514286 161

Nickolaus E. Leggett - response to Amateur Radio Research and
Development Corp.
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514286 102

Lawrence Macioski - response to ARRL
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514083 272

Robert Read - response to ARRL
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs...t=6514082 900

"Mike Ro Farad" wrote in message news:i3AWa.19213$ff.18880@fed1read01...
Keep it calm, rational, and polite, please, for all of our sakes.

Great advice Carl, also good advice for this news group --
Let's exhibit a quality image of Amateur Radio
10-67 10-67 10-67 10-67 10-67 10-67 10-4?

Millie Am Pair for OM Mike Ro Farad



"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
Today the Ed Thomas, Chief of the FCC's Office of Engineering
and Technology, issued an order extending the Reply Comment
period in ET Docket No. 03-104 (BPL) until August 20, 2003.

Remember, paper filed comments are due at the correct address
by COB on the deadline day, electronic comments via the ECFS
have until midnight at the end of the deadline day.

FOLKS ... if you are going to comment, PLEASE don't "flame"
the FCC or the proponents of BPL ... just cite facts (the ARRL's
comments and the excellent technical analysis done by Ed Hare
are full of them ...).

Flaming will hurt us more than it will help us.

Keep it calm, rational, and polite, please, for all of our sakes.

73,
Carl - wk3c