[TowerTalk] New Proposed Texas Tower Regulation

Sun Feb 8 06:18:05 EST 2015

The following makes it sound as if  FAA approval is required for all 
antennas. It is not.  If your antenna is less than 200' And not in an 
airport area you only need worry about any existing zoning requirements.

Airport areas would be a bit more involved, but if you are more than 
(forget if it's 4.5 or 5 miles) from an airport and not on an airway 
through the mountains, you are generally safe.

I am on the runway center line, but not far enough out that I can go 
above 190 feet.  At only 100 feet no permit was required.

BTW, the wind tower siting towers are under 200 feet, not 300 at least 
here in the flat lands of lower Michigan.73

73

Roger  (K8RI).

On 2/7/2015 11:38 PM, Mark Stennett wrote:
> No tower is exempt from FAA siting requirements, regardless of height. You
> wouldn't put a 10 foot tower at the base of a runway, would you? All
> structures, permanent or temporary have to pass a number of FAA tests,
> including slope. Until recentl, I worked in broadcast radio doing
> engineering work for the last 30 years, 20 of those on a corporate level. We
> acquired a radio station once that had a studio microwave tower that was 60
> foot tall. Even though it was at least 10 feet shorter than the surrounding
> tree line, it was required to bear an Antenna Structure Registration Number
> and be top lit due to proximity to a local airport. It did not pass the
> slope test.
>
> This is a very sloppy bill. It would be far easier to leverage the FAA to
> tighten up the temporary structure rules than to try to make these guys
> tower experts. The tail is trying to wag the dog here.
>
> https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showNoNoticeRequiredToolForm
> [https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showNoNoticeRequiredToolForm]
>
> 73 de na6m
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Elmore <cw_de_n5op at sbcglobal.net>
> To: L L bahr <pulsarxp at embarqmail.com>
> Cc: "towertalk at contesting.com" <towertalk at contesting.com>
> Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 12:30:54 -0600
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] New Proposed Texas Tower Regulation
>
>
> This comes directly from wind observing towers for wind farm siting. They
> are all under 300' tell and do not subject to FAA obstruction marking
> requirements. These are erected essentially overnight and several aerial
> applicators have run into them because they have no obstruction lighting or
> markings.
>
> The curtiledge languages essentially exempts almost all of us.
>
> Kim N5OP
>
> "People that make music together cannot be enemies, at least as long as the
> music lasts." -- Paul Hindemith
>
>> On Feb 7, 2015, at 11:55, "L L bahr " <pulsarxp at embarqmail.com
> [mailto:pulsarxp%40embarqmail.com]> wrote:
>> FYI
>> Lee, w0vt
>>
>>
>> http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=84R&Bill=HB946
> [http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=84R&Bill=HB946]
>>
>>
>> Please read and pass this to all Amateur Radio Operators who have towers.
> This “COULD” be detrimental to all of us. There are things I am not
> certain of that I would like answers to or to clarify so that we could write
> to our legislature to either kill this bill or more narrowly define it so
> that it is not “ALL INCLUSIVE” in nature. It is my understanding that
> the Crop Duster Association is behind this because some pilot either through
> stupidity or an accident killed himself by flying into an obstruction. (I
> have many times pulled off the road and watched these guys. Several times I
> have witnessed them doing stupid reckless maneuvers) While I am an advocate
> for safety and common sense, I do not think everyone should “PAY” for
> the actions of a very small few. If a bill like this must exist, it should
> define a specific distance around the “WORK/FLY ZONE” and not every
> tower in the state. We should write our representatives to kill or modify
> this bill.
>>
>>
>> SECTION 1.  Subchapter B, Chapter 21, Transportation Code
>>
>>
>>
>> Section 21.071 (a) 1, 2, 3 clearly define “MOST” Amateur Radio towers.
>>
>>
>>
>> Section 21.071 (b) 1, 2 “APPEAR” to exempt many Amateur Radio Towers
> BUT does it? What is  the State’s legal definition of “curtilage”?
>>
>>
>> Section 21.071 (e) 2, “APPEARS” to exempt Amateur Radio Operators as
> “a facility licensed by the Federal Communications Commission or any
> structure with the primary purpose of supporting telecommunications
> equipment” but then goes on to specifically define commercial radio
> service. The “and” seems to separate the two?
>>
>>
>> Section 21.071 (f) 1, 2 “REQUIRES” notice and registration. You know
> FEES and PERMITS will soon follow.
>>
>>
>> Section 21.071 (a), (b) appears to make it retroactive after September 1,
> 2016.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Are there any lawyers among us who could speak to this and guide us in
> writing a proper request to our representatives regarding this?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What are your thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Larry Lowry
>>
>> Radio System Manager
>>
>> (936) 538-3770 Shop
>>
>> (936) 538-3711 Direct
>>
>> (936) 538-3775 Fax
>>
>> imagesWD5CFJ
>>
>> qrcode.17489151
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk at contesting.com [mailto:TowerTalk%40contesting.com]
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
> [http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk]
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com [mailto:TowerTalk%40contesting.com]
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
> [http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk]
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

-- 

73

Roger (K8RI)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com