Hi Joe, Interesting question regarding the FCC's actions about BPL. Over the years the regulators running the agency have changed from engineers to attorneys. In the 1960s and 1970s, the FCC top people had degrees in Electrical Engineering. Now the commissioners are attorneys. Persons working inside the bureaus in the commission want to retire and move to private practice. This creates an atmosphere, which tends to favor the needs of industries over individuals. I have known many attorneys and engineers who are counting the days when they can obtain a consulting job with a private firm. Mr. Powell has no background in communications and as the record states he is in charge of this Federal agency. The power companies are backing BPL as a source of revenue. The FCC has decided to ignore the hazards of this technology. Placing BPL in rural areas is extremely dangerous because if we have a major disaster rendering satellite communications unusable, point to point contacts will not be possible because of the interference generated by BPL signals coming from the power lines. In the mid 1990s the FCC became extremely interested in low levels of radio frequency exposure. Their own studies states even extremely low levels of radio frequency can be dangerous to humans. Their exam questions for the beginning amateur license list the most dangerous frequencies to humans are in the range of 30 to 300 MHZ. BPL has a strong field between the frequencies of 30 to 80 MHZ. I am surprised the commission has not asked about the levels of RF radiation in this part of the spectrum. I end this post by wishing the staff of the FCC good luck in future private practice jobs.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 9:17 AM Subject: RE: [SOCALWUG] Re: Broadband over Power Line (BPL) > For us novices out there the little film clip that showed and illustrated > the serious draw backs to BPL has left us will real concerns. Can you radio > men like Charles Pascal help us understand why the real world is not like > the story in little film clips? > I'm sure President Bush's agenda does not take this into account. > Thank you, > Joe Robertson > >
