Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] antennas and towers near broadcast stations

To: TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] antennas and towers near broadcast stations
From: RICHARD SOLOMON <w1ksz@q.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 23:26:28 +0000
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Wait a minute, let me get my lawyer out of the closet.
 
73, Dick, W1KSZ> Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:16:36 -0500> From: 
jimjarvis@optonline.net> To: towertalk@contesting.com> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 
antennas and towers near broadcast stations> > > Bottom post... see below:> > 
(edited for space...)> Message: 6> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:47:25 -0600> From: 
"Its from Onion" <aredandgold@msn.com> Subject: [TowerTalk] > Antennas and 
towers near broadcast stations> > The FCC has without much notice in Amateur 
circles passed was: > "quietly snuck," a poor choice of words, a Rule that will 
affect non- > broadcast radio licensees including Radio Amateurs.> excerpt:> > 
Quote:> ?1.30002 Tower construction or modification near AM stations.> (a) 
Construction near a nondirectional AM station. Proponents > of construction or 
significant modification of a tower which is > within one wavelength of the AM 
station, and is taller than 60 > electrical degrees at the> AM frequency, must 
notify the AM station at least 30 days in > advance. The proponent 
 shall examine the potential impact of the > construction or modification as 
described in paragraph (c). If the > construction or> modification would 
distort the radiation pattern by more than > 2 dB, the licensee shall be 
responsible for the installation and > maintenance of any detuning apparatus 
necessary to restore proper > operation of the> nondirectional antenna.> (b) 
Construction near a directional AM station. Proponents of > the construction or 
significant modification of a tower which is > within the lesser of 10 
wavelengths or 3 kilometers of the AM > station, and is taller than 36 
electrical degrees at the AM > frequency, must notify the AM station at least 
30 days in advance.> The proponent shall examine the potential impact of the > 
construction or modification as described in paragraph (c). If the > 
construction or modification would result in radiation in excess of > the AM 
station's licensed standard pattern or augmented standard > pattern values, the 
licensee
  shall be responsible for the > installation and maintenance of any detuning 
apparatus necessary to > restore proper operation of the directional antenna.> 
(c) Proponents of construction or significant modification of > a tower within 
the distances defined in (a) and (b) herein of an AM > station shall examine 
the potential effects thereof using a moment > method analysis. The moment 
method analysis shall consist of a model > of the AM antenna together with the> 
potential reradiating tower in a lossless environment. The > model shall employ 
a simplified version of the methodology specified > in ? 73.151(c) of this 
chapter. The AM antenna elements may be > modeled as a Federal Communications 
Commission FCC 08-228 series of > thin wires driven to produce the required 
radiation pattern, without > any requirement for measurement of tower 
impedances.> (d) A significant modification of a tower in the immediate > 
vicinity of an AM station is defined as follows:> (1) Any change that
  would alter the structure's physical > height by 5 electrical degrees or more 
at the AM frequency.> (2) The addition of one or more antennas or a 
transmission > line to a tower that has been detuned or base insulated.> (e) 
The addition or modification of an antenna or antenna > supporting structure on 
a building shall not be considered significant.> (f) With respect to an AM 
station that was authorized pursuant > to a directional proof of performance 
based on field strength > measurements, the proponent of the tower construction 
or modification > may, in lieu of the study described in paragraph (c), 
demonstrate > through measurements taken before and after construction that 
field > strength values at the monitoring points do not exceed the licensed > 
values. In the event that the pre-construction monitoring point > values exceed 
the licensed values, the proponent may> demonstrate that post-construction 
monitoring point values do > not exceed the pre-construction values.> Al
 ternatively, the AM station may file for authority to > increase the relevant 
monitoring point value after performing a > partial proof of performance in 
accordance with ? 73.154 to establish > that the licensed radiation limit on 
the applicable radial is not > exceeded.> (g) Tower construction or 
modification that falls outside the > criteria described in the preceding 
paragraphs is presumed to have no > significant effect on an AM station. In 
some instances, however, an > AM station may be affected by tower construction 
notwithstanding the > criteria set forth above. In such cases, an AM station 
may submit a > showing that its operation has been affected by tower 
construction or > alteration. If necessary, the Commission shall direct the 
tower > proponent to install and maintain any detuning apparatus necessary to > 
restore proper operation of the AM antenna.> > 
LINK<http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-228A1.pdf>> > A 
vertical resonant at 1.8 MHz is 81
  degrees tall at 1.6 MHz and > would be if not detuned at the BC frequency 
forbidden within 2 miles > (approx) (or 10 wavelengths at its frequency if 
less) of a > directional AM station. An 80 meter vertical falls to it as well, 
as > well as many shorter towers according to their electrical length.> > 
Considering the impact the unnoticed Part 73 action has had in > Amateur 
circles, a reconsideration could be in order if only to > accept our comments.> 
-0-> > N2EA Comments: This is perfectly reasonable, on its face. > Commercial 
interests bear the responsibility of assuring> that their construction... 
towers or power lines, for example... do > not impact the pattern of a 
directional array AM station.> The cost of re-certifying a directional array... 
repeating the proof, > is something on the order of $20,000, in today's 
dollars,> before you add in the consulting engineer's fees. Been there, done > 
that, as they say. 4 times, in fact.> > I had a 4 tower AM station go out of li
 censed Field Strength > parameters, and had to operate on waivers, for> over a 
year, until we identified a high tension line at 2 miles > distant as the 
offending construction. Lawsuit> followed. It was $100k legal fees, out of 
pocket, until the utility > in question lost, paid up, and detuned their 
towers.> Then, we had to repeat the proof of performance, which entailed > 
almost $20k in labor, plus a consulting engineer's> fee of 14k.> > Like the 
idea that amateurs should be exempt from stupid driving > while distracted by 
our radios, we are not exempt> from causing inadvertent harm to commercial 
operations by our > construction. Much as we might like it to be otherwise.> 
Thoughtful consideration is in order, with all we do. (Like > climbing 
safely!)> > I think the real concern here is cell towers, not us, just to be > 
practical. Oh, and just to crank a few numbers,> a wavelength at 1 MHz is 936'. 
10 wavelengths is 1.8 miles. At > 1.5Mhz, that's 1.2 miles. Odds of us affect
 ing> them at that distance are quite small. But why should we be exempt, > if 
we cause harm?> > If we make a vertical resonant on our operating frequency, it 
is, de- > facto, non-resonant at the broadcast freq.> i.e. decoupled. And we 
shouldn't have to worry.> > Unreasonable rule making? I don't think so.> > 
N2EA> Jim Jarvis, MBA, President> The Morse Group, LLC> www.themorsegroup.net> 
Leadership and Supervisory Development * Strategic Planning * > Corporate 
Coaching> > > > _______________________________________________> > > > 
_______________________________________________> TowerTalk mailing list> 
TowerTalk@contesting.com> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

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