[TowerTalk] FCC RF Safety Regs Info Sept 1

[Roger Borowski]

Not a bad idea when it was "suggested" to comply. Once it becomes mandatory,
that opens up a whole new can of worms by telling the world that this RF
stuff IS BAD cause we NOW have a regulation that requires all Hams to comply
with "acceptable "SAFETY" levels". It just provides more leverage for those
with opposition to our antennaes and support structures. Watch the city
attorneys and zoning boards run with this!
-=Rog-K9RB=-

----- Original Message -----
From: <Fractenna@aol.com>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] FCC RF Safety Regs Info Sept 1


>
> I am of the opinion that the ARRL acted very responsibly and in our best
> interests in this matter. Invoking such a standard is a good hedge against
> potential future litigation--whether the suits have merit or not. It also
is
> a super way of making hams more aware of their antennas and how they work.
>
> It is these positive steps of late that have made me decide to rejoin the
> League.
>
> 73
> Chip N1IR
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
> Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>



--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com