FCC Record, Volume 34, No. 14, Pages 11031 to 11845, November 25 - December 6, 2019 Page: 11,737
iv, 11031-11845p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
harbor would excuse noncompliance and, instead, suggested that the Commission should look at the facts
in any given case to determine responsibility.287 IBEW also opposes a safe harbor approach, noting in
particular that signs by themselves should not be considered sufficient to establish compliance.288 UTC
and AICC propose that new entrants should be responsible for mitigation at such sites.289
108. RF Check suggests that the Commission recognize that licensees alone cannot ensure
compliance and that a comprehensive, uniform solution that involves all parties is necessary.290 RF Check
proposes the creation of a database in which transmitting antennas are registered and their exposure areas
calculated, with the antenna and exposure areas visually depicted.291 This database would be accessed
and viewed by a worker at any worksite via smartphone.292 WIA supports a private sector neutral third-
party collecting and distributing RF safety information as consistent with its recommendation that the
Commission facilitate centralized training.293 We decline to mandate the registration of each transmitting
antenna in a database. Such proposal is overbroad and burdensome. With the implementation of 5G
technologies such requirement will impose costs to licensees and operators while its benefit is not
necessarily evident. Carriers are densifying their networks with an increasing speed, and though at times
they might place antennas in non-visible locations, most of them can be seen and recognized. Further, the
RF characteristics of such antennas vary, impacting the degree of RF exposure.
109. Such a comprehensive catalogue of sites and "safety" zones would further impose a
burden on all site owners, regardless of whether they are able to achieve effective compliance without
such participation. Moreover, mandating such participation would effectively delegate our responsibility
to an organization over which we have no oversight or control.294 Additionally, in the absence of full data
on all RF sources, reliance on such a system could expose unwitting users who rely exclusively on that
system to RF exposure in excess of our limits from sources not accounted for in that system.
Accordingly, we do not adopt a safe harbor for site compliance. If any licensee chooses to outsource its
compliance function to a third party, it can do so, but the licensee would remain wholly liable for
compliance.
110. Regarding the effectiveness of mitigation measures at transmitter sites to ensure
compliance,295 Narda argues that a locked rooftop with posted signs is not effective and that barriers are
needed because third-party workers who are given access may not be able to identify an antenna so as to
stay a certain distance away from it.296 EMRPJ also states that wireless sites with concealed or
camouflaged antennas are common, so workers with access to them have no knowledge of their exposure
287 See Boston & Philadelphia Reply at 6.
288 See IBEW Comment at 1-2.
289 See UTC Reply at 1; AICC Reply at iii.
290 See RF Check Comments at 3-4, 8.
291 Id.
292 Id.
293 See WIA Reply at 5.
294 See U.S. Telecom Ass'n v. FCC, 359 F.3d 554, 565-69 (D.C. Cir. 2004).
295 See 2013 RF Order and Further Notice, 28 FCC Red at 3530, para. 100 & n. 172.
296 See EMRPI Comments at 10; Narda Comments, ET Docket No.13-84, at 1; see also Wessel Comments at 2
(contends that few licensees with fixed rooftop transmitters have appropriate signs, associated training, or
procedures to identify exposure categories, and that access is often granted to individuals without knowledge or
ability to control exposure, so that restriction on access does not result in a "controlled environment" as defined in
IEEE Std C95.7-2005/C95.7-2014).11737
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 19-126
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 34, No. 14, Pages 11031 to 11845, November 25 - December 6, 2019, book, December 2019; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1637223/m1/715/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.