Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
ARRL editorial on BPL
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/10/29/1/
excerpt "If anyone doubts the legitimacy of the interference issue, consider this. To protect aeronautical communications, the new rules establish numerous frequency bands that BPL must entirely avoid. If the interference isn’t real, why did the NTIA insist that the FCC take this step? Why do the new rules establish exclusion zones and consultation requirements to protect federal government, public safety, and certain other stations? We’re looking forward to reading the Report and Order to find out whether the FCC will require coordination around its own field offices, as the NTIA thoughtfully proposed on their behalf." The editorial is, of course, concerned with HAM issues and not with shortwave listening. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ARRL Propose New License Class & Code-Free HF Access | Antenna | |||
ARRL and the local scene | Policy | |||
ARRL's Incoming QSL Burro Screwing NON ARRL members! | Policy | |||
ARRL Dilemmas (Representative KC8LDO a problem-operator) | CB | |||
ARRL FUD about BPL | Shortwave |