[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Upcoming Compliance

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Upcoming Compliance
From: (Ward Silver)
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 09:58:41 -0800 (PST)
The ARRL should be releasing VERY SOON a batch of information on how to
evaluate one's station for potential compliance issues.  Part of the
problem is that the FCC has not moved the compliance date, but has yet to
actually release the bulletin controlling the evaluation process.

I have been working on this issue a bit and can attest that the vast
majority of installations will be in compliance by a wide margin.  Problem
areas seem to be mostly lowband dipoles low to the ground and high-gain
VHF yagis mounted where someone could be in the main lobe.  HF antennas
mounted at reasonable heights are nowhere near exceeding exposure limits
even at full power. 

This could, in fact, work in our favor in two ways.  One - this is good
ammunition against unreasonably low height restrictions.  Two - if we're
comfortably within all exposure and safety limits, shouldn't appliances be
able to deal with those levels gracefully?

I agree that there will probably be abuses and distortions of the intent
and facts. i.e., just like every other technical issue that gets into the
courts.  Over the next few years, the exposure issue will in all
likelihood go away because all of the studies being done are gradually
establishing that the risk from reasonble levels of RF is either zero or
so minute as to not be worth the worry.

So get busy raising those towers and slinging the shot into the very
highest branches!!

73, Ward N0AX

On Fri, 14 Nov 1997, David L. Thompson wrote:

> >
> >Speaking of neighbors and lawyers fees, 1Jan98 is right around the corner
> >and I haven't seen any definitive statement of how we confirm EMF limits
> >compliance that is AFAIK required on that date...
> >
> >Big Don
> >
> Most of us are worried about EMF compliance especially if we have neighbors
> that have complained about TVI, telephone RFI etc.  I talked with the local
> FCC FOB office and this could be a "MAJOR" problem if slick lawyers get
> involved...but lets not spend space discussing it here unless towers or
> antenna are part of the equation.
> For now lets get back to towers.........................
> Dave K4JRB
> --
> FAQ on WWW:     
> Submissions:    
> Administrative requests:
> Problems:       
> Search:         

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>