<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Devia ter escrito "consequência" .<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Gomes, CT1HIX
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.ct1hix.webs.com/">http://www.ct1hix.webs.com/</a></pre>
Em 05-04-2013 23:43, Gomes escreveu:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:515F53A4.4010309@sapo.pt" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Boas<br>
Afinal qual é a exposição segura de um radio amador à RF (radio
frequência)?<br>
Quais são os limites legais?<br>
Só ouço falar em Kw!<br>
Qual a concequencia de cada watt para a nossa saúde?<br>
Sinceramente, não sei nada sobre este assunto....<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Gomes, CT1HIX
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.ct1hix.webs.com/">http://www.ct1hix.webs.com/</a></pre>
Em 05-04-2013 14:22, João Gonçalves Costa escreveu:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:79AA8079D04E5B4D982F8651069146462693363A@AMSPRD0410MB361.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EstiloCorreioElectrnico17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">FCC seeks to reassess
RF exposure limits<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">On March 27, the FCC
released a First Report and Order, Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and a Notice of Inquiry (ET Docket
Nos. 13-84 and 03-137). The documents seek to reassess the
FCC's RF exposure limits and policies, as well as to
propose changes to the FCC's rules regarding human
exposure to RF electromagnetic fields.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">These proposed changes
would affect the Amateur Radio Service (Part 97) rules.
The First Report and Order can be found on the web in PDF
format at, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0329/FCC-13-39A1.pdf">http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0329/FCC-13-39A1.pdf</a>
.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">In the 201-page
document, the FCC noted that "[periodic review of the
government's rules and regulations to ensure they have
kept pace with current knowledge and changing needs is an
important characteristic of good government, and we here
will advance the process of providing a comprehensive
review and modification, where appropriate, of this
Commission's various rules pertaining to the
implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) requirements for environmental reviews,
specifically those reviews related to health and safety of
radiofrequency (RF) emissions from radio transmitters. Our
actions herein are intended to ensure that our measures
are compliant with our environmental responsibilities and
requirements and that the public is appropriately
protected from any potential adverse effects from RF
exposure as provided by our rules, while avoiding any
unnecessary burden in complying with these rules."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The document is
divided into three parts: a First Report and Order (First
R&O) and a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(FNPRM) in ET Docket No. 03-137, and a Notice of Inquiry
(Inquiry) in a new docket, ET Docket No. 13-84. In the
R&O, the FCC looks at several technical and semantic
issues -- initiated in 2003 -- to be revised and updated;
in the FNPRM, the FCC proposes to further update and
revise its procedures and treat all services equally.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">In the Inquiry, the
FCC seeks comments to determine whether its RF exposure
limits and policies need to be reassessed. "Since
consideration of the limits themselves is explicitly
outside of the scope of ET Docket 03-137, we propose with
the Inquiry to open a new docket to consider those limits
in light of more recent developments," the FCC said. "The
Inquiry is intended to open discussion on both the
currency of our RF exposure limits and possible policy
approaches regarding RF exposure. We look forward to
developing a complete record to determine whether the
current rules and policies should remain unchanged, or
should be relaxed or tightened."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">According to the FCC,
mitigation matters are "post-evaluation procedures to
ensure exposure limits are not exceeded, such as labels,
signs, barriers, enforcement and occupational issues." In
its Notice of Inquiry, the FCC included clarifications
related to the application of occupational exposure limits
for devices and at fixed transmitter sites. The FCC noted
that it "should be helpful to licensees to codify our
earlier adopted policy with regard the use of
occupational/controlled limits at Amateur Radio stations."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">This policy was first
established in the RF Report and Order of 1996, but it was
not incorporated in the rules at that time. It allows
amateur stations to be evaluated "with respect to
occupational/controlled exposure limits, as long as
appropriate training and information has been provided to
the amateur licensee and members of his or her immediate
household. Other nearby persons who are not members of the
amateur licensee's household must be evaluated with
respect to the general population/uncontrolled exposure
limits." The FCC will codify this policy by adding a
paragraph as a new sub-section in Section 1.1310 --
radiofrequency radiation exposure limits -- to its rules.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The FCC pointed out
that one goal of the general exemptions from routine RF
exposure evaluation proposed "is to avoid specific
exemptions for particular services and ensure a consistent
set of rules without exceptions." With this in mind, the
FCC is proposing to delete the special exemptions from
evaluation in the Amateur Radio Service in Section
97.13(c) of its rules.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">"We appreciate that
Amateur Radio operators are knowledgeable about the
appropriate use of their equipment, such that separation
distances are likely to be maintained to ensure compliance
with our exposure limits," the FCC said. "However, since
the existing amateur exemptions are based only on
transmitter power and do not consider separation distance
or antenna gain, exempt transmitting antennas that are
unusually close to people could potentially lead to
non-compliant exposure levels." The FCC said that a
separation distance of at least 24 feet would meet its
proposed exemption criteria, "considering a currently
exempt 50 W transmitter at VHF in accord with Section
97.13(c) and assuming an antenna gain of 6 dBd."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The FCC noted that
existing classification of amateur exposure as
occupational "is consistent with use of our proposed
general exemption criteria based on general population
exposure limits because awareness of exposure greater than
the general population limits is required in all
occupational settings, including amateur households.
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."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The FCC invited
comments on how this would affect the amateur community:
"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 our limits and
the extent of the burden imposed by this proposal. We
encourage interested parties to comment on the relative
costs and benefits of the proposed changes in this
section, as well as those of alternative approaches."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">"The ARRL has an RF
Safety Committee, consisting of experts in the field,"
explained ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ;
"The committee members, as well as Board members and staff
are reviewing the lengthy document and will formulate a
response."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Comments will be
accepted until 90 days after the R&O, FNPRM and Notice
of Inquiry are published in the Federal Register (this can
take up to six weeks after its release by the FCC). Reply
comments will be accepted until 150 days after publication
in the Federal Register.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Fonte: The American
Radio Relay League<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
CLUSTER mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CLUSTER@radio-amador.net">CLUSTER@radio-amador.net</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://radio-amador.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cluster">http://radio-amador.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cluster</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
CLUSTER mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CLUSTER@radio-amador.net">CLUSTER@radio-amador.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://radio-amador.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cluster">http://radio-amador.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cluster</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>