Localities Raise RF Concerns at FCC; CTA, Others Urge WPT Certainty
NATOA and other state and local government groups said localities need more support from the FCC in addressing residents' RF concerns, in replies to a December NPRM (see 1912040036). CTIA noted wireless devices are safe for all consumers based on FCC rules. CTA said regulators should use a flexible approach and address wireless power transfer (WPT) as it considers new RF rules. Replies are posted through Tuesday in docket 19-226.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
“Residents expect their local governments to address their concerns about RF emissions and wireless facilities, and may hold local elected officials accountable for decisions they did not make and were powerless to oppose,” NATOA said, joined by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, National League of Cities and National Association of Counties. “As local governments are bearing the brunt of the concerns, confusion and fears of residents and consumers with respect to RF emissions, it is incumbent upon the Commission to stand behind its regulations and provide local governments with the resources necessary to address residents’ questions and concerns.”
“The consensus of the U.S. and international scientific community is that there are no known adverse health risks from the levels of RF energy emitted at the frequencies used by wireless devices, including cellphones,” CTIA said. The FCC should remain the agency entrusted with RF regulations, the wireless association said. CTIA responded to earlier city concerns, noting the Supreme Court said the commission is the “’exclusive’ arbiter in the ‘technical matters’ of radio, which includes control for any environmental effects, including, among other things, RF emissions.”
“CTA joins other commenters in urging the Commission, as it takes any necessary actions to protect human safety, to also leave room for innovation,” the group said: “The best way to do this is through rules that are consistent with international, consensus-based standards.” Allow flexibility in the time period used for time averaging during testing of devices and “consider appropriate behavior-based time averaging periods to better reflect potential exposure during actual device use,” CTA said. Codify processes “for the authorization of WPT technologies to enable the swift and routine introduction of these devices, preserving staff resources in the process,” the group said.
“Act expeditiously to provide much-needed regulatory clarity for the industry,” the WPT Manufacturers trade association said. The coalition sees “general agreement that the appropriate regulatory treatment of WPT” is as industrial, scientific or medical equipment under Part 18 of FCC rules.
“There are tremendous public benefits that WPT offers, not the least of which is aiding in our nation’s economic recovery by promoting the development and marketing of new technologies,” said GuRu, a WPT manufacturer, which noted widespread interest by its peers. “Ossia joins the overwhelming consensus exhorting the Commission to clarify the rules governing WPT and to swiftly remove regulatory roadblocks to the nascent WPT industry,” it said.
ARRL raised concerns about the implications of new rules for amateur operators (see 2006180033). ARRL’s principal "concern with the Commission’s proposals for below 10 MHz and above 6 GHz is the need for clear and practical means for radio amateurs to determine compliance,” the group said: “Any such measures must be straight-forward and accessible to the radio amateur operators using the bands at issue by applying Maximum Permissible Exposure levels for stations evaluations.” Rules for wireless power transfer devices must protect amateur operators from harmful interference, ARRL said.