Earl W Cunningham wrote:
>
> Hi, Ron,
>
> Years ago, So Cal Edison had a ham (I forget his call) working for them
> that speciallized in tracking down power line noises. He was quite
> sympathetic to hams, and therefore was quite helpful in eliminating these
> noises. After he retired, the sympathy disappeared, and Edison no longer
> seemed to care about hams.
>
> After they totally ignored a power line noise problem I had a few years
> ago, I thought I'd try a different tactic. The line noise (which
> originated about 1/2 mile from me) also showed up on the lower channels
> of my TV. When I called them again to complain about the TV interference
> caused by the power lines, they were very swift in correcting the problem
> and even called me afterwards to see if I was satisfied.
>
> I'm not sure, but maybe the power companies are under FCC constraints to
> assure that their power lines do not cause TVI.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> 73, de Earl, K6SE
>
Earl:
The converse may be equally likely. Up here, Pacific Gas & Electric has
a tendency to blow off FIRST complaints from customers deemed to be
technically unsophisticated, and therefore more likely to complain about
noise not attributable to PG&E and less likely to complain effectively
about a lack of response by the company. My experience has been that he
who complains with knowledge about the system, about noise and about the
political pecking order in the local division and the PUC complaint
process is more likely to be served. As a topband operator, it has
become a necessity to maintain that degree of knowledge and involvement.
As an example, my local PG&E contacts told me that, while I was getting
responses to my noise complaints--albeit tortoise-slow and only after
repeated sorties up the food chain--there were TV-watchers whose
complaints had never been acted upon.
I think it really depends upon the particular group of bozos with whom
one has to deal, and so the variation in response between power
companies and between divisions within that power company is highly
variable.
In my local division, the trickle-down attitude from division brass has
been that hams are a pain in the butt, that interference complaints are
an annoyance with which they do not wish to deal, and that spending
money on a ham--which of course is not what they spend the money on--is
a waste of time. When the boss states those views, is it any wonder that
one hears the same from the mouths of line foremen?
This is not surprising in a company which--just in the past year--has
been convicted of criminal negligence for allowing unsafe conditions
leeding to huge powerline-sourced brush fires, has been publicly exposed
for providing bonus incentives to line managers who did NOT spend their
maintenance budgets, and which diverted rate increase money earmarked
for tree trimming on other items, including bottom-line profit.
Only now, having been exposed to the light, are these cockroaches
scurrying about to replace the thousands of decayed and dangerous poles
that have been allowed to accumulate for several decades.
Small wonder that ham interference complaints are given short shrift.
--
Garry Shapiro, NI6T
160 meters: not a band, but an obsession
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
Submissions: topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-topband@contesting.com
|