 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||
|
|
![Previous (earlier) Story](/images/sty-down.gif "ARISS Puts ISS Phase 2 Equipment to Use as FM "EasySat""){kind=small} Previous: ARISS Puts ISS Phase 2 Equipment to Use as FM "EasySat" |  Next: Working AO-51 Calls for Courtesy, Common Sense |
NEWINGTON, CT, Aug 31, 2004--While the ARRL has accused the FCC of sweeping under the rug several Amateur Radio complaints of interference from unlicensed broadband over power line (BPL) devices, the Commission apparently is not ignoring other Part 15-related interference complaints from hams. With the assistance of the ARRL Laboratory, the FCC continues to dog complaints--some now longstanding--of power-line noise interference to Amateur Radio communication. Other cases of Part 15 device interference to radio amateurs have been a bit more exotic. For example, two recent citations issued by the Portland, Oregon, FCC field office involved interference from wireless microphones operating in the 70-cm band.
"The agent measured the field strength at 1500 uV/meter at a distance of 3 meters from the referenced wireless microphones and determined that the microphones were in noncompliance with §15.209 of the Commission's rules, which apply to intentional radiators," the FCC said.
Daniel Bathurst, WA7ABU, of Salem, Oregon, filed the complaint. In citations this month to FLECO Corp of Chino, California, and The Club Works Sound and Lighting of Salem, the Commission alleged that the devices, which operate on 432.55 and 439.55 MHz, also were not certificated for sale in the US. The FCC citation indicated that FLECO had sold the microphones to The Club Works.
Earlier this year, the FCC fined Best Wok, a Westville, New Jersey, restaurant $10,000 for operating transmitting equipment on 2 meters without a license. The eatery allegedly was using a so-called "long-range cordless telephone" to communicate with its delivery vehicle. The FCC noted that the telephone, said to have been obtained outside the US, also was not FCC certificated. It operated within the 2-meter satellite subband at 145.8376 MHz, the FCC said.
Other recent cases have stemmed from radio amateurs' complaints about their neighbors' Part 15 devices. In a Texas case that FCC Special Counsel for Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth described as "an unfortunate neighborhood situation," the neighbor allegedly not only failed to respond to two previous FCC letters but tossed out the toroid core devices the amateur, William Cooper, W5ZAF, had provided free and which, the FCC said, had resolved the interference. Ironically, Cooper--who's active in emergency communications--and his unnamed neighbor live in the town of Friendswood.
Hollingsworth told the neighbor that under Part 15, operation of a consumer product "such as a battery charger" must not result in harmful interference to a licensed radio service. Hollingsworth emphasized that it's the neighbor's responsibility to correct the interference--whether or not the neighbor accepts Cooper's help.
In a similar case in Colorado, Hollingsworth on August 10 wrote another amateur's neighbor regarding interference from an electric fence charger to the Amateur Radio and broadcast television reception of P. E. Muetz, K0AWS.
"Operation of a consumer device such as your fence charger under Part 15 of the Commission's rules must not result in harmful interference to a licensed radio service, and Part 15 of our rules clearly explains that," said Hollingsworth, who'd also spoken with the neighbor by telephone last April. In another coincidental quirk, the neighbor in the fence charger situation lives on "Friendship Ranch."
In a seeming turnabout-is-fair-play situation, the FCC contacted a Mattawan, Michigan, resident to follow up on complaints that the individual's TV set was causing harmful interference to the Amateur Radio operations of Robert Lawson, KG8QD. Sharon Bowers, deputy chief of the FCC's Consumer Inquiries and Complaint Division, noted that Part 15 obliges the TV set's owner to resolve the interference promptly. Under Part 15, a TV set or a computer monitor is considered an "unintentional radiator."
In July, the FCC contacted Illinois Power Company to report receiving complaints that the utility's equipment may be causing harmful interference to the amateur operations of Earl Shaffer, WB9UWA, of Normal.
"The complainant has attempted unsuccessfully to work through your usual complaint resolution process, and, as a result, the matter has been referred to our office," Bowers said in a form letter to the utility's CEO. In both cases she handled, Bowers provided the address, telephone number and e-mail address of the ARRL's Radio Frequency Interference Desk as a source of "help and guidance about radio interference that involves Amateur Radio operators."
| Previous: ARISS Puts ISS Phase 2 Equipment to Use as FM "EasySat" | Next: Working AO-51 Calls for Courtesy, Common Sense |
