Informal Objection

0132-EX-RR-2007 Text Documents

AMBIENT CORPORATION

2008-03-28ELS_89119

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In re Application of 1 AMBIENT CORPOMTION ) File No. 0132-EX-/@-~OO~ Application for Renewal of Radio Station W D 2mQ Authorization Under Part 5 of the Commission's Rules 1 To: The Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology VIA OFFICE OF TZI[IESECRETARY INFORMAL OBJECTION ARRL, the National Association for Amateur Radio, also known as the American Radio Relay League, Incorporated (ARRL), by counsel and pursuant to Section 5.95 of the Commission's Rules governing experimental authorizations, hereby respectfully submits its informal objection to the above-referenced application for renewal of Ambient's experimental authorization to conduct broadband over power line OEJPL) operations at variance fiom those permitted by the Commission's Rules (See, 47 C.F.R. jj15.601-15.615). The application for renewal, filed by Ambient Corporation (Ambient) I was filed July 24,2007 and is presently pending. As good cause for the denial of this renewal application, ARRL states as follows: 1. Ambient has, for the past five years, deployed interference-causing BPL facilities at, inter aiia, Briarcliff Manor, New York in Westchester County. It has been operating pursuant to the WDZXEQ experimental authorization, issued in 2005, and its ' predecessor, WB9XQT, first issued in 2002. Ostensibly, the Ambient system is WB9XQT, an STA, was first issued June 24,2002, providing for BPI, operation only in Westchester County, NY (File No. 02 18-EX-ST-2002; it was extended by STA granted December 24,2002 (0435-EX- ST-2002). WB9XQT was replaced by WDZXEQ, an experimental authorization for a two-yew period

operating in Briarcliff Manor for the purpose of testing BPL systems. However, since the issuance of the fust experimental authorization, rules have been enacted for the regular Part 15 operation of BPL systems and there is nothing that has been filed by Ambient which could justify the continuation of experimental operation of this system rather than operation pursuant to the Commission's rules governing virtually all other BPL systems. 2. ARRL filed complaints on October 12,2004; December 17,2004; January 7, 2005; March 17,2005; January 6,2006, March 29,2006, and May 31,2007, each of which reported ongoing, harmful interference caused by the un1awfi.d operation of Ambient's BPL system at Briarcliff Manor in violation of the terms of the experimental authorizations. The complaints included technical reports on the result of tests conducted by ARRL. The conclusion reached in each complaint, which ARRL now incorporates herein by reference, is that this facility was, and now still is, causing harmful interference to Amateur Radio stations. As such, it is in violation of the terms of the experimental authorization. Condition #1 of that Experimental authorization requires that if "any interference" occurs, the holder of the authorization will be subject to immediate shut down. Interference has repeatedly occurred, and it has been witnessed and verified by a member of the Commission's Enforcement Bureau s M . Yet no action has been taken whatsoever to terminate this experimental authorization in response to any of the complaints of harmful interference filed by ARRL and by at least one local Amateur Radio licensee. It would be unconscionable for the Commission to fkther renew this experimental authorization in the face of these unresolved complaints of interference. Furthermore, the Commission has finally, after years of inaction, commenced an - beginning July 28,2003 and expiring August I , 2005 (01 18-EX-PL-2003). It was extended to August 1, 2005 (0 11 8-EX-RR-2005) and again through August 1,2007 (01 18-EX-RR-2005). WD2XEQ i s a "nationwide" authorization,and is not limited to Briarcliff Manor, NY.

enforcement proceeding (See, Enforcement Bureau file number EB-06-SE-083). That proceeding is still under investigation, making renewal of this Experimental authorization completely inappropriate. 3. More fundarnentally, however, Section 5.71(b) of the Commission's rules provides that an experimental authorization will not be granted for a period longer than that which is required for completion of the experimental project. There is nothing offered in the pending renewal application that would justify the extension of Ambient's experimental authorization beyond the five years that it has been authorized to operate its interference-causing BPL system. Section 5.71(a) of the Rules states that the regular license period for stations in the Experimental Radio Service is either 2 or 5 years. An applicant desiring to apply for a 5 year license must provide justification for its need for a license of that duration. A license may be renewed upon an adequate showing of need. Here, the aggregate experimental license term including the STA periods totals more than five years to date. There is nothing in the renewal application that would justify any further experimental authorization period, and in fact it is apparent from the cited regulation that the Commission cannot extend the experimental period any further, because it has already been of five years duration, and because no good cause has been shown for the further extension. 4. The extension application offers, in fact, no justificationwhatsoever for a sixth or seventh year of experimental BPL operations, and no explanation why Ambient cannot operate pursuant to the BPL rules under Part 15, as virtually every other of the few BPL systems in operation now are doing. Ambient has had five years of experimental operation of the Briarcliff Manor BPL facility. It has failed during that time to provide

reports of the findings of its experimental operations as required by Condition #5 of the authorization20rto explain anything about its "significant advancements"in technology. It is operating a regular service based on an experimental authorization, in violation of Section 5.83, which provides that the grant of an experimental authorization to use certain frequencies is granted upon an experimental basis only and does not confer any right to conduct an activity of a continuing nature. This is clearly an activity of a continuing nature, and if it is to continue at all, it must be pursuant to the regular rules that have been enacted by the Commission governing BPL operation. 5. The continued operation of this facility pursuant to an experimental authorization subverts the Commission's regulatory "scheme" for BPL interference avoidance. For example, because the Ambient Briarcliff Manor BPL system is operated under an experimental authorization, the Commission has determined (inexplicably) that the BPL system does not have to be included in the publicly available database listing BPL, systems that are operational, and contact information to report interference. Therefore, those licensees in the Amateur Service or in other services using high- frequency bands who suffer interference from the excessive radiated emissions fiom the system have no indication how to complain about it, or ascertain the source of the interference. Causing Ambient to operate in accordance with the long-ago-enacted BPL rules rather than allowing it to hide behind an experimental authorization would at least be consistent with the Commission's regulatory plan for BPI,, however inadequate that See, the letter of the Chief, Spectnun Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau dated May 21,2007 to Ambient, stating in part that Ambient was required to file progress reports six months fiom the date of grant of the Experimental Authorization. The progress report was specifically required to include a description of measurements and results demonstrating compliance with the Commission's Rules, including the radiated emission limits of Section 15.109 of those rules. According to the May 21 letter, Ambient submitted its "most recent" six month report February 5,2007. In it, Ambient submitted no measurements at all. It merely stated that certain Amateur high fkquency bands were notched, and claiming"significant advancements" in its technology.

plan is in tenns of interfeknce avoidance. It also would create a level playing field for BPL competitors, who are operating in accordance with the Part 15 rules. As well, use of certificated equipment would be required of Ambient if it is forced to comply with the rules applicable to all other BPL systems. If it does comply with those requirements, perhaps at least some of the abundance of unresolved and unaddressed interference problems caused by Ambient would be reduced. 6. It is unclear why Ambient required a nationwide experimental authorization. If it is opekiting BPL systems other than the Briarcliff Manor system, it has not submitted any six-month periodic reports with respect to any of them. Accordingly, it has not complied with the terms of the expiring experimental authorizationand it should not be rewarded by a renewal of the authorization. 7. Finally, attached hereto is a letter from a member of the Westchester County Board of Legislators, William E. Burton, objecting to any renewal of the Ambient Experimental Authorization, due to the adverse impact on emergency communications provided for the County by Amateur Radio operators associated with the Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES), the Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES) and the Westchester ~ m e r g e n Communications c~ r Association(WECA).The letter notes a lack of cooperation by ConsolidatedEdison about the BPL interference, and cites the repeated BPL interference complaints by Mr. Alan Crosswell, the Radio Officer appointed by WECA. , Therefore, the foregoing considered, U ,the National Association for Amateur Radio, respectfully request8 that the Commission deny and dismiss the pending, above-captioned application for renewal or extension of the experimental authorizationof

Ambient Corporation for its BPL operations in Briarcliff Manor, New York and in other locations in the United States where it may be operating BPL systems. Respectfully submitted, ARRL, thc National Association For Amateur Radio 225 Main Street Newington, CT 061 1 1- 1494 By: Its General Counsel Booth, Freret, M a y & Tepper, P.C. 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, MI) 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 July 25,2007

William E. Burton Legislator, 9th District C k ,C o m i r t e s on Public Safeg 9r July 13,2007 Mr. Kris Monteith Chief, The Enforcement Bureau Federal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street,SW, Room 7-C723 Washington, D.C. 20554 RE: AMBIENT CORPORATION BROADBAND OVER POWER LINE SYSTEM AT BRIARCLEF MANOR, NEW YOIRK; EXPERMENTAL AUT.I3ORIZATION WD2XEQ, EXPERIMENTAL LICENSE FILE NO. 01 18- EX-PR-2005,EXPIRIES AUGUST 1,2007; ENFORCEMENT BUREAU FILE NO. EB-06-SE-083. Dear Mr. Monteith: I am writing in my capacity as Chairman of the WestChester County (New York) Board of Legislators' Committee on Public Safety and Security. I would like to share my concerns with the Commission about the Broadband over Power Line @PL) system operating in the WestChester County Villageof Briarcliff Manor and the interference it has caused to local amateur radio operato~s. As a populous suburban county in a major metropolitan region, WestChester is fortunate in having highly trained and qualified amateur radio operators to assist our emergency communicatiofls services. The professionalism of these volunteer radio operators is evident in both their assistance with day to day WestChester County communications needs, as well as in their availability to be OUT communicators of last resort, "when d else kils." These volunteers aIso assist at all levels of local government in WestChester and also provide service to such non-governmental organizationsas the American Red Cross. They serve both individually and as members of the Radio Amateur Civil Emergmy Service, the Amateur Radio Emergency Service, the Westchestm Emergency Communications Association, and of coursethe American Radio Relay League (ARRiL). TeI: 1914) 995-2812 Fax: (914) 995-3884 E-mail: Burton@westchesterfegislators.com

I am therefore concerned that the BPL experiment now being conducted in Briarcliff Manor is showing substantial interference with the local amateur radio frequencies. Data brought to me and my committee's aaention is very disturb'i. I am seeking the follow-through of the FCC in its monitoring and regulation of this experimental technology to ensure that harmful interference is eliminated through strict enforcement of FCC rules regarding BPL. Data provided by amateur radio operators in Westchestm County appears to show that the interference issue regarding BPL is well-known to several federal departments concerned with emergency pmparedness. For example, it is my understanding that the Department of Defense has weighed in before the New York State Public Service Commission on the potential that BPL has to cause serious intderence with both wired and wireless communicatio]3~ systems. I am also concerned about information brought to my attenlion that indicates that there is lax enforcement of FCC rules at the experimental BPL system operated by Ambient Corporation in Briarcliff-r. Significant evidence pnmmtd to me and my committee indicatestbat Ambient, Consolidated E&son (the sponsor of the Ambient BPL experiment), and the FCC itself have been unresponsive to complaints of harmful interference to the Amateur Radio service for over the past three years. Since March 3 1,2004, Mr. Alan CrossweLl, the Radio Officer appointed by the Westcheskr County Dqmhmmt of Emergency Services, has been making complaints to Ambient, Consolidated Edhn, and the FCC concerning Jmmfid intxderence to the Amateur Radio service caused by the Briarcliff Manor BPL experiment. The ARIU was brought in with its national laboratory manager, Ed Hare coming to Westchester for nummus tests in the numerous ARRL complaints before the Commission comemi.ug harmful interfmenceto amateur radio fkquency bands. I was gratified to learn of recent developments at the Brimliff Manor BPL site in June on the eve of tbe expiration of the ~nrentexperimental license. I am c o n e however, to have recently learned that Ambient may be planning to request a renewal of its e x p a h m t a l program without making vitally important improvements in its technology. I have also learned that, while certain offending equipment has only recently been removed after pears of complaints, &me is no assumme tbat Ambient may not "turn up the power" and again exceed emissions levels causing interference again after a license renewal. At a meeting held by my committee on March 5,2007, we met with ~ ~ t a t i vofeConsolidated s Edison and the New York State's Public Service Commission, about this hue. At that time the representative from Consolidated Edison agmdto work with the ARRL to resolve the communications inmference problems. That coopemtion has yet to take place. I am thus reawstba that the FCC not renew the exmrimental BriarcliffManor BPL license until my concerns about harmful interference are adeqmtely a d h s d

The Commissionshould require that Consolidated Edison and Ambient cooperate with the ARRL and its BPL technical experts forthwith. This would involve inviting the County's RACES Radio Officer(Alan Cromll)and/or those he designates (for example, the AARL) to attend the measurement sessions that a BPL provider is to conduct. This would include both the current experimental system as well as any fi&ure or"second g d o n " technology. Westchestm County needs to be "inthe process." By not renewingthe Ambient experimental license until all these concerns are ad&& the FCC can make it clan that complaints concerning harmful interference are taken seriously. That is the best way for the FCC to promote a new technology while protecting public safii in Westchesta County. Thank you for your consideration of t?xabove. Sincerely yours, William E. Burton, Chairman,Public Safety and Security Committeey Westchester County Board of Legislators

CERTIFlCATE OF SERVICE I, Christopher D. M a y , do hereby certify that I caused to be mailed, via first class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, a copy of the foregoing INFORMAL OBJECTION, to the following, this 2 5 day ~ of July, 2007. George Y. Wheeler, Esq. Holland & Knight 2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Counsel for Ambient Corporation Kathryn S. Berthot, Esquire* Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division Enforcement Bureau Federal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street, S. W. Washington, D.C. 20554 Julius Knapp, ChieP Office of Engineering and Technology Federal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 James Burtle, ChieP Experimental Licensing Division Office of Engineering and Technology Federal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 * denotes courier delivery


Document Created: 2008-03-28 10:59:51
Document Modified: 2008-03-28 10:59:51
© 2026 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC