[TowerTalk] FCC RF Safety Regs Info Sept 1

[Pete Smith]

At 09:18 PM 9/1/00 -0700, W4EF@dellroy.com wrote:
>
>I think this problem is overstated. I gave it some thought when a friend of
>mines tower
>permit went to public hearing recently. Handwringing over potential harm
>caused by
>amateur antennas that are typically many feet from exposed subjects, is
>easily put in
>prespective when you compare it with the proximity of the typical cellular
>telephone
>handset. How many "peasants with pitchforks" are going to deny a ham radio
>operator
>his tower permit in exchange for losing the convenience of their cell
>phones? Especially
>when you consider that a tower generally reduces public exposure levels when
>compared
>to the typical stealthy attic dipole.

Fortunately, the Telecommunications Acr of 1996 specifically pre-empts
local (non-Federal) regulation of towers based on purported RF effects.  I
suppose that was put in at the behest of the wireless communications
industry, but it also applies to ham installations. 

I'm less confident that the Federal regs on RF exposure are based on sound
science, but the best time to challenge them was over two years ago, when
they were still a proposed rule. 

73, Pete Smith N4ZR

The World Contest Station Database 
is back up and running at
http://www.qsl.net/n4zr 



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