Broadband-over-power-lines battle goes to court
WASHINGTON--A dispute that could affect the roll-out of broadband over power lines, which some hope will one day compete with cable and DSL services, went before a federal appeals court on Tuesday, but no immediate resolution occurred.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia heard arguments from attorneys for the Federal Communications Commission and the American Radio Relay League, which represents amateur radio operators, about FCC rules aimed at allowing BPL services to flourish.
Therein lies the dispute: The FCC says its rules, which date back to 2004, have struck the right balance between encouraging unlicensed BPL deployment and protecting existing licensed devices--including those run by public safety workers, TV broadcasters and amateur radio operators--from harmful interference on those airwaves.
The ARRL, however, contends the FCC's rules are inconsistent with federal law and aren't strict enough to prevent BPL signals from disrupting its members' communications. (The group says it's not just about protecting hobbyists, either: ham radio operators were widely praised as a valuable source of information after Hurricane Katrina downed normal communications channels.)
Specifically, for the first time in decades, the FCC decided against requiring that operations found to cause "harmful interference" be shut down immediately--a stance that ignores the "right of the license holder to be free from interference," Jonathan Frankel, the ARRL's attorney, argued in court Tuesday.
The FCC has also withheld portions studies that would "potentially" show BPL does cause harmful interference to other devices--and ignored reports of tests the ARRL argues offer "substantial" evidence of interference problems, Frankel said.
"We're talking about devices that radiate for football fields in length and all along power lines," Frankel said of the BPL gadgets. "When you drive down the street, (an amateur radio operator's) service is interrupted constantly."
Attorney C. Grey Pash, arguing for the FCC, defended the agency's approach. He said the FCC didn't require the so-called "cease-operations" rule because it didn't find ample evidence that BPL posed real potential for "harmful" interference.
Pash said the studies the FCC relied upon, including one by the U.S. National Telecommunications and Information Administration, found that so long as the FCC restricts the strength of the signals emitted by BPL devices--as it did through its rules--others sharing that spectrum "won't notice a difference" in the quality of their services. As for the ARRL's allegations the FCC scrubbed its reports, Pash said the redacted sections were staff opinions referencing earlier sections of the report, not "a bunch of new information."
The three-judge panel that heard Tuesday's arguments peppered both attorneys with questions but didn't signal how it planned to rule.
BPL: An infant industry
The outcome of the ARRL's appeal could be significant if it prompts revisions in the FCC's rules, as the agency says it has sought to keep potentially innovation-stifling requirements to a minimum.
To be sure, the commercial BPL industry is still in its infancy. According to the United Power Line Council, which represents public utility companies engaged in such projects, there were fewer than a dozen commercial deployments and about two dozen trials as of this July, mainly concentrated on the East Coast and in the Midwest.
The ARRL has always maintained it's not out to kill off BPL services. The group has suggested one solution to its complaints would be for the FCC to confine BPL operators to certain frequencies that are less likely to cause interference with amateur radio operators.
The FCC, for its part, says that's a needless restriction that would inhibit the design of BPL services and make them less efficient, reducing their benefit and raising their costs to the public. But if real-world evidence of harmful interference arises, the regulators have voiced willingness to reconsider their rules.
In the scheme of things, the HAMs need to take one for the team.
in New Zeland you should get in touch with your
cable provider. It sounds like their system has
an open spot somewhere. Cable is supposed to be
a closed system. But I know thats its easier to
blame it on something that you dont understand.
Good Luck
On the flip side the benefits of the U.S. developing this technology is beyond anything that consumers, government, science or education can imagine. It's like someone saying we should stay with tube radios because the air around radios will get cold if we use transistors.
Every part of our lives could be improved if BPL is developed the right way. Anyone who knows about HDMI 1.3a understands what BPL could bring about in the future. Imagine one day you get home and plug your new TV in and that?s it! Power and content through one simple plug. Now imagine hundreds of devices all being networked, interactive and functional by the consumer simply plugging it in!?
I'm sure that MSO operators and TELCO's are scared. They don't want competition unless they can control it.
The FCC is on target. They are promoting technology, choice, competition, jobs and the consumer. Some are scared. Imagine a consumer with choice? Anyone who has cable TV, uses a cell phone or a regular telephone knows the frustration of dealing with companies that totally control markets, communication platforms and your real freedom of choice.
I'd like to thank the FCC for looking to the future and thinking of the People of The United States vs. the monopolies that currently control the markets and special interests.
THANK YOU FCC
Tony Filson
http://www.ExecutiveSearch.TV
However, with the roadways become unusable for RF communications because of BPL emissions, the number of amateur radio operators putting expensive mobile radio gear in the autos will drop substantially. After all, everywhere they go, all they will hear are the BPL signals.
BPL is about using existing electric lines for data transmissions because the added cost will be minimal. It is NOT about new technology and holding back the internet.
There are NO alternate bands for ham operators to use, as was suggested by a poster. BPL will gobble up every existing ham band. There is no place to go and no place to hide.
There was a time, before the FCC was bought lock, stock and barrel by the lobbyists when one of their primary principles was "good engineering practice". This applied not only to amateur radio operators, but to other producers of RF frequency emissions. I want my FCC back!
Ed Cregger, NM2K
Your arguement belies a lack of understanding about ham radio capabilities, and a misunderstanding of the ARRL position in many ways. Although I suspect your mind is made up, I would still like to provide my assessment of your analysis.
First, I agree with you that in the event of widespread BPL implementation, ham radio operators will benefit from the complete elimination of power line noise, when and if the electrical power goes out. With no power on the lines, the interference from BPL will be totally gone. Almost all hams have gas powered electric generators for such an event - it is called the automobile. Until the gasoline runs out, hams will be there to help provide emergency communications for their neighboors.
You are absolutely correct that ham operators can operate on many frequencies far removed from those utilized by BPL. However, none of the frequencies outside of the those utilized by BPL have the capability for long distance communications. The frequencies utilized by BPL are the only frequencies capable of long distance terrestrial communications, and BPL spans all of those frequencies. This is the reason why it is not just ham radio operators who are concerned about BPL. (I should note that there are only a hand full of ham radio satillites, not nearly enough to satisfy the long distance communications needs of the ham radio community.)
I am not sure why you mention tube radios. I suspect you are trying to subliminally introduce a predjudice into the reader's mind that hams use old fashioned tube radios. Let me correct this impression. Tube radios have not been widely used by hams for approximately 25 years - if not longer. While some old-time-radio aficionados still enjoy tube radios, ham radios today are at manufactured with leading edge commercial technology; i.e., transistor VLSI and even incorporate software driven technology, such as digital signal processing.
To date, however, there is no technology that can effectively cancel, or even effectively reduce, the kind of interference produced by most of the BPL equipment and systems.
Regarding your plea for more competition, I agree that we need more competition in the market place. But even today, many political entities limit competition (by law), by granting these monopolies to one cable company or another. Wouldn't you agree that those laws should be removed?
With over a million hams in the USA and a greater number throughout the rest of the world, the real question is not whether we should sacrifice a few hobbyists for the promise of digital Nirvana. (As an aside, I seriously question the ability of BPL to provide the amount of bandwidth that you ask us to imagine.)
The question should be, how can BPL be implemented so as to not interfere with liscensed applications (such as ham radio). It has been proved that certain implementations of BPL can avoid significant interference.
Unfortunately, the FCC has not made the interference issue a priority, and dispite it's own laws regarding harmful interence, the FCC has doctored the scientific studies that it sponsored, and has made untenable interpretations of what constitutes harmful interference - untenable, that is, to those who have been, and are continuing to be, affected by BPL interference.
Thank you FCC.
At the same time we should't pollute with Radio spectrum. We have to come out with a via media solution by using combination of both FTTC and BPL technologies. In this mathod Digital signalls will be carried upto the LV distribution level instead of introduceing the Digital signals at HV level through FTTC.
- the ultimate solution - WIMAX. Data belongs in the air - not on a wire
- by videowares October 28, 2007 10:46 PM PDT
- Get real folks. You'll have to pry my ham radio equipment out of my cold dead hands before I let BPL interfere with my operation. Ham radio = 100 years and counting. BPL = Flawed technology for geeks that will dump it for the next thing in speed in 5 years.
- Reply to this comment
-
(12 Comments)And who wants your computer data port plugged into your 110? DSL and Cable, WIMAX takes care of my needs! Want a fast, secure connection. Try fiber to the home. Beats BPL six ways to Sunday!