RF Exposure Proposed Rule now in Fed.Reg. 360 comments filed mostly in favor

[K5UJ]

The previously mentioned and discussed FCC revision to the guidelines for RF exposure have now been published in the Federal Register:

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/06/04/2013-12713/reassessment-of-exposure-to-radiofrequency-electromagnetic-fields-limits-and-policies
and
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/06/04/2013-12716/human-exposure-to-radiofrequency-electromagnetic-fields

360 comments have been filed, mostly from people who believe RF is killing life as we know it.

Here is the schedule for comments:

Comments must be filed on or before September 3, 2013, and reply comments must be filed on or before November 1, 2013.

The dockets are: ET Docket No. 03-137, and Notice of Inquiry, ET Docket No. 13-84, FCC 13-39, adopted March 27, 2012 and released March 29, 2012.

Go here: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment_search/

and in the top box enter for example 03-137 for proceeding number.

A review of the existing filed comments will show that most of them are from people who claim they get headaches from RF and "doctors" who agree. example:

"Electromagnetic chaos within all technological creation causes malfunction on brain and human DNA
and lower the use of it and added extreme protection will benefit everybody."

It's important hams file rational comments to balance the hysteria of some of the currently filed comments. There are 360 filed so far, most from people who seem to think RF is dangerous to all living things. There are also comments filed by something called the EMR Policy Institute.  

[N0WEK]

I'm not too worried about my RF exposure but I am convinced you could get brain damage from reading most of those comments!

Much of it seems to come from the movement against "smart" power meters.

Way too many people with obvious mental issues who think the wires in the walls are talking to them.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

After listening to some of the amateurs on the bands during the evenings, I conclude that some have been exposed to way to much RF. I always wear my aluminum foil hat when I operate on the radio.

[Jim KF2SY]

After listening to some of the amateurs on the bands during the evenings, I conclude that some have been exposed to way to much RF. I always wear my aluminum foil hat when I operate on the radio.

Excellent.  Would you recommend the regular or premium hat?

http://tinfoil-hat.com/?page_id=6

[DMOD]

After reading some of the comments there appears to be a pattern emerging:

1. The EMR Institute is a anti-technology group

2. The EMR has its minions filing seperately which makes the opposition appear one sided

3. Some PhD's who want to further their career and continue with their government grants

4. some truly psychologically disturbed people who think "radiation" is the cause of all their problems because they haven't been taught to deal with life

5. people looking for any excuse to enagage in a class-action lawsuit

6. Our education system system has failed miserably

Phil - AC0OB

[Opcom]

1. The EMR Institute is a anti-technology group

2. The EMR has its minions filing seperately which makes the opposition appear one sided

It should be possible to use information to expose the minion parrot situation in a way that is not defamatory or insulting, and include that in a comment against more regulation.

[N8ETQ]

   Meat Helmet works for me!

/Dan

[flintstone mop]

I think our antennas and stuff might be overlooked by the PC folks. They may be distracted by the cell towers and remote meter reading devices.
A vertical antenna out of sight or 100 feet away from a neighbor or dipole in the trees might get their attention.
The BIG stations with towers and beam antennas have some 'splaining to do.
Let's hope sensibility wins out.
fred

[WBear2GCR]

quote:

12. The Commission proposes to delete the special exemptions from evaluation in the Amateur Radio Service in § 97.13(c) of its rules, to avoid specific exemptions for particular services and maintain consistency. Application of the general exemptions proposed here to amateur radio installations would preclude the possibility of overexposure and require further evaluation only when necessary, giving guidance for both fixed and mobile transmitting antennas. Parties that support maintaining the current exemption based on power alone are requested to explain how it provides adequate assurance that the public is protected against exposure to RF energy in excess of the Commission's limits and the extent of the burden imposed by this proposal.

I read this three times. What does it say??

                         _-_-


and have they lost leave of their senses entirely??

I can understand that in the gHz or near gHz region this is of concern... but elsewhere??

[WBear2GCR]

And this:

59. Contact Currents. Contact currents can be a safety issue in the vicinity of AM broadcast facilities. The Commission is not aware of similar hazards near other transmitters operated by Commission licensees aside from those used by AM stations. Considering the wavelengths necessary to induce significant currents on large objects, it is not expected that higher frequency RF sources would cause comparable problems, especially given the lack of complaints at these frequencies. The Commission requests comment on the appropriate strategy to promote awareness for construction and maintenance project contractors and planners where the potential for contact RF burns, whether serious or minor, could occur. For example, would it be beneficial for the Commission to provide publicly available maps showing areas where electric fields exceed 10 V/m from AM broadcast stations? If so, the Commission invites comment as to whether AM broadcast stations currently have this information and, if not, to explain the impact of collecting this information and making it available to the Commission. How much time should be required to do so and what would be the costs and benefits? The Commission seeks comment on whether the cost of dealing with potential AM burn hazards as they arise should be the responsibility of the station, the affected party, or both. The Commission also seeks comment as to whether it is the appropriate body to address this issue. While contact burns are a universally recognized hazard of variable severity, adoption of numerical limits on contact RF currents over a broad frequency range may not be effective in avoiding situations where burns actually occur. The Commission requests comment on the feasibility, efficacy, and burden of contact current limits versus other, perhaps informational, approaches such as mapping.

My read says in effect: "we don't know jack about this topic, but we're out on a fishing expedition anyhow" In otherwords, they want to make rules about a problem that doesn't really exist in practice?

Or maybe people and squirrels are getting burned up by 50kw AM broadcast stations?

[Steve - K4HX]

If you read Part 97, 97.13(c) to be exact, there are a list of exemption for amateur radio stations (basically, if you run less than a certain amount of power for a given band) no RF exposure evaluation needs to be done. I think the current proposal will do away with those exemptions.

If you are over the limits in the above paragraph, you must perform an evaluation per FCC's OET Bulletin Number 65, “Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields.”

Have you performed an evaluation of your current station?

quote:

12. The Commission proposes to delete the special exemptions from evaluation in the Amateur Radio Service in § 97.13(c) of its rules, to avoid specific exemptions for particular services and maintain consistency. Application of the general exemptions proposed here to amateur radio installations would preclude the possibility of overexposure and require further evaluation only when necessary, giving guidance for both fixed and mobile transmitting antennas. Parties that support maintaining the current exemption based on power alone are requested to explain how it provides adequate assurance that the public is protected against exposure to RF energy in excess of the Commission's limits and the extent of the burden imposed by this proposal.

I read this three times. What does it say??

                         _-_-


and have they lost leave of their senses entirely??

I can understand that in the gHz or near gHz region this is of concern... but elsewhere??

[WBear2GCR]

Lower down the formula for the power limit is given:

ERP ≥ 3,450 R^2/f^2 (mhz)  where R is the distance in meters from the source.

My calculator says that at 20m from a source on 3.8mhz the limit is something like 36kw??

Very confusing to me. But I am easily confused.

[Steve - K4HX]

Save yourself the hassle and use the online calculator.

http://hintlink.com/power_density.htm



Since 1996 some amateur radio stations were required to perform an evaluation. You are exempt, if peak-envelope-power (PEP) input to the antenna was less than listed below.


Band         Power
meters        (W)
160           500
80             500
40             500
30             425
20             225
17             125
15             100
12              75
10              50
6                50
2                50
1.25           50
0.7             70
0.33          150
0.23          200
0.13          250

All higher frequency allocations: 250w


Repeaters:

  Non-building-mounted antennas: If the distance between ground level and the lowest point of the antenna is greater than 10 meters and the power is less than 500 W ERP.
 
  Building-mounted antennas: 500 W ERP.


There is a pretty good explanation and evaluation procedure detailed at the link.

http://www.arrl.org/fcc-rf-exposure-regulations-the-station-evaluation

[Opcom]

the calculator seems to say that the distance from the center of the dipole to the area of interest (the neighbors house) is what matters. It's confusing but 750W at the center of the dipole makes mine well under the 'limits'. Maybe I did it wrong.

[Steve - K4HX]

I'm pretty sure you did it right. The reality is that with the current limits, it's almost impossible to be over them on the lower HF bands when using a dipole. Even on the upper bands with a beam, you or your neighbors have to be rather close to the antenna to be over the limits.