 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||
|
|
 Previous: Which Speed for Winlink 2000 Packet? A Cautionary Tale |  Next: Washington Bill Seeks Excise Tax Exemption for Ham Radio Repeaters |
NEWINGTON, CT, Feb 27, 2007 -- The ARRL has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking to compel the FCC to provide several documents related to its dismissal of several broadband over power line (BPL) interference complaints from radio amateurs in Manassas, Virginia. The FCC on December 14 told five Manassas radio amateurs that it was throwing out their complaints, asserting that its measurements last October 25 and 26 showed the Manassas BPL system to be in compliance. The ARRL has disputed the FCC's findings and, on December 21, sought clarification in a letter to several FCC officials, including Enforcement Bureau Chief Kris Monteith and Spectrum Enforcement Division Chief Kathryn S. Berthot, who authored the dismissal letter. The FCC's silence to date prompted the FOIA request. ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, says that while Manassas-area amateurs indicate new BPL equipment has somewhat reduced interference, some severe interference exists, and the situation remains far from acceptable.
"The reasons for the Commission's dismissal, after months of delay, of five of the six Manassas complaints are inadequately documented, and no action appears ever to have been taken on a sixth complaint," Sumner commented. "The FOIA request was submitted only after the FCC failed, after more than two months, to respond to a letter from the ARRL pointing out apparent deficiencies in the Commission's investigation and requesting additional information to supplement Kathryn Berthot's terse and uninformative letter of December 14 dismissing the five complaints."
ARRL Chief Counsel Chris Imlay, W3KD, filed the FOIA request February 23, seeking essentially the same information and documentation it had asked the Commission last December to provide voluntarily. The League is looking for any documents that:
indicate whether or not the hams who filed interference complaints were notified in advance of the FCC inspection and testing in late October, and, if so, who;
indicate if anyone other than FCC staff observed the Manassas BPL system tests;
indicate which FCC staffers were involved in the testing and if any were from the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET);
indicate which FCC staff members determined the test procedures used during the October inspection;
indicate whether or not representatives of BPL system operator COMTek and equipment supplier Main.net had been notified in advance of the October inspection and testing;
identify the six areas of the BPL system where the FCC reported it conducted tests, how it determined those areas, why two test sites were segregated from the six identified earlier, whether test results on October 26 differed from those of the previous day and whether there were changes in the BPL system prior to the October 26 testing, and that
indicate specific test methodologies and equipment the FCC used during its testing, specific frequencies checked, radiated emission levels recorded, the distance from power lines and their height above ground, if any underground lines were tested and if they were notched on any bands.
The League also wants copies of all correspondence regarding the October 25-26 tests "between or among" OET, the Enforcement Bureau, Main.net, COMTek and/or the City of Manassas, including letters and e-mails.
BPL proponent the United Power Line Council hailed Berthot's December 14 dismissal as a "complete and total vindication" of the Manassas BPL system, but Imlay maintained in his December 21 response to the FCC that Berthot's letter raised more questions than it answered. For starters, he said, there's no independent means to evaluate the conclusions Berthot described.
One complainant, George Tarnovsky, K4GVT, said neither he nor the other five complainants was alerted to the planned FCC testing. The others are Donald "Butch" Blasdell, W4HJL; William South, N3OH; Arthur Whittum, W1CRO; Jack Cochran, WC4J, and Dwight Agnew, AI4II. Berthot's December 14 letter altogether overlooked Whittum's May 2006 complaint that BPL interference precluded communication with the EastCARS and MidCARS nets on 40 meters. As recently as February 26, Whittum reported experiencing harmful interference on 40 meters from emissions that appeared to be well in excess of FCC limits.
Last August, the ARRL had recommended that the FCC Enforcement Bureau and the OET to take independent measurements in Manassas, rather than relying on COMTek to provide the information. It further urged the Commission to contact all complainants ahead of time to provide "an opportunity for all concerned to witness the testing and to be assured that valid test methodologies were used," Imlay said. "Had that been done," Imlay wrote December 21, "and had the measurements been fairly and objectively made, and if the results were as the Commission stated in its December 14 letter, this matter would have been resolved. As it is, nothing is now resolved."
In requesting a fee waiver with its FOIA request, the ARRL noted that the FCC "has not previously disclosed its methodologies for investigating claims of interference to licensed radio services" from BPL. As a result, disclosure of the requested information would "lead to a significantly better understanding of the operations or activities of the government."
| Previous: Which Speed for Winlink 2000 Packet? A Cautionary Tale | Next: Washington Bill Seeks Excise Tax Exemption for Ham Radio Repeaters |
