HomeMy WebLinkAboutTab 15 5005 1044 Route 28 Radiofrequency Study & ReportDov,qtn L. HAES, JR., CHP, CLSORadiation SafetY SPecialistPO Box 198, Hampstead, NH 03841 617-680-6262Email : donald-haes-chp@comcast.netSeptember 4,2020RE: Installation of radio base station antennas and associated equipment for the proposedBlue Sky Towers III, LLC monopole at 1044 Route 28, South Yarmouth, MA'PunpospI have reviewed the information pertinent to the proposed installation at the above location.To determine regulatory compliance, theoretical calculations of maximal radio-frequency (RF)fields have been prepared. The physical conditions are that T-Mobile and AT&T proposes to installpersonal wireless services (PWS) directional panel antennas (several antennas each in three,,arrays" aimed along three different azimuths) on a proposed Blue Sky Towers III, LLC monopole'For proposed location, see Figure 2. The monopole is proposed to be 120 feet tall, above groundlevel (AGL). The proposed installation will allow T-Mobile and AT&T to continue deploymentof their wireless telecommunication systems. The monopole is designed to host two additionalpWS provider's antennas (See Figure 3). This report includes not only the T-Mobile and AT&T,but the hypothetical condition of being "loaded" to capacity'This report considers the contributions of allthe proposed T-Mobile and AT&T, along withtwo additional hypothetical PWS transmitters operating at their typical FCC licensed capacities'The calculated values of RF fields are presented as a percent of current Maximum PermissibleExposures (%MpE) as adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC),i'ii and thoseestablished by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH)'iiiSunInnnRvTheoretical RF field calculations data indicate the summation of the proposed T-Mobileand AT&T maximum pws RF contributions would be within the established RF exposureguidelines; see Figure 4. The additional calculations also suggest that even if the monopole hadtwo additional PWS provider's antennas attached, the site would comply with all established RFexposure guidelines; see Figure 5.This includes all publicly accessible areas, and the surrounding neighborhood in general.The results support compliance with the pertinent sections of the Massachusetts Department ofpublic Health regulations regarding PWS facilities, and the FCC's guidelines for RF exposure.Based on the results of the additional theoretical RF fields I have calculated, it is my expertopinion that this facility would comply with all regulatory guidelines for RF exposure.Note: The analyses, conclusions and professional opinions are based upon the precise parameters and conditions olthis particular site; Monopoleat 1044 Route 2g, South yarmouth, MA. Utilization ofthese analyses, conclirsions and_professional opinions for any personal wireless servicesinstallation, existing or proposed, other than the aforementioned has not been sanctioned by the author, and therefore should not be accepted asevidence ol regulatory compliancePage 1 of13
ExposuRp Ltnntrs ANn GUnELINESRF exposure guidelines enforced by the FCC were established by the American NationalStandards Institute (ANSI)i" and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement(NCRp)." The pp. exposure guidelines are listed for RF workers and members ofthe public. Theapplicable FCC RF exposure guidelines for the public are listed in Table l, and depicted in Figure1. All listed values are intended to be averaged over any contiguous 3O-minute period. Note thatlimits for 'oRF workers" are five times those listed in Table 1.Tabte 1: Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) Values in Public AreasFrequency BandsElectric FieldsMagnetic FieldsEquivalent Power DensitY0.3 - 1.34 MHz614 (V/m)1.63 (A/m)(100) mWcm21.34 - 30 MHz82atf $tm)z.tetf (Nm)(100) mWcm230 - 300 MHz27.5 (Ylm)0.073 (A/m)0.2 mWcm2300 - 1500 MHzf 11500 mWcmz1500 - 100,0001.0 mWcm2-r-brdff.b dsdFry&ffi&-&.rtm.0r00.0e.rit-! .r.lo0l'O0.r0.0,0 J{X}FrcqEscy (ltEz)3,00030,000Figure 1: FCC Limits for Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE)NOTE: FCC "sVo Rule" - When the exposure limits are exceeded in an accessible area due tothe emissions from multiple fixed RF sources, actions necessary to bring the area into complianceare the shared responsibility of all licensees whose RF sources produce, at the area in question,levels that exceed 5% of the applicable exposure limit proportional to power. u'Page 2 of 13
Factltrv Locarton ANn Butt u-OurFigure 2: Proposed Monopole Location1.044 Route 28, South Yarmouth, MA(Picture courtesy Google Earth Pro@ and may not represent cuwent conditions,)Figure 3: Hypothetical Loading of Monopole1044 Route 280 South Yarmouth, MA(Picture courtesy PRO TERRA, LLC..)(P) AT&T RFEOUIPIENIoTHERS), IYPRF(F)(BY(P) T-UO8iL€ RFEQIJIPISNTPage 3 of 13
INTROOUCTORY IXT.ONNNITION: MAKING SSNSO OF THE 66G',SThere are many references to the so-called "generation" of wireless technologies in use. Each new,.generation,, of wireless technologies has colloquially been designated a numbered "G"'l The latest "G"to come out, the fifth generation of wireless technologies or so called "5G", has attracted extensiveresearch interest, both inside and outside the scientific community. According to the 3'd generationpartnership project,2 5G networks should support three major families of applications: (i) Enhancedmobile broadband; (Z) Machine type communications, and (3) Ultra-reliable and low-latencycommunications. There are also enhanced "vehicle-to-everything" communications which are expectedto be supported by 5G networks. These situations require much more "connectivity" than the latest fourthgeneration (aka"4G" or o'Long Term Evolution (LTE)") networks can handle'Thus, new networks must be able to handle this high system throughput, in addition to supportingexisting older technologies still in use. This is being accomplished through additional spectrumassignments both higher and lower than currently assigned frequencies used by PWS facilities' In fact,currently deployed 5G networks are operating at frequencies once used by television stations.Nonetheless, frequencies assigned by the FCC for 5G use are all within the bands currently underregulatory oversight, including setting safe limits of exposure to RF energy for both workers, and membersof the public. Just recently (12020) the FCC has reaffirmed the efficacy of their regulatory exposurelimits to RF energy, including those for 5G. From an RF safety standpoint, there is nothing peculiar aboutthe fifth generation of wireless technologies that would set it apart from any of the other advancements oftechnologies; including the first two generations (first analog then digital communications), the thirdgeneration (the first to be referred to a numbered-series as "3G"), and the currently deployed fourthgenerations (LTE). Recently published studies in peer-reviewed journalsuii have shown typical exposuresto RF energy from operating 5G systems to be well-within the exposure limits'The FCC currently has categories for Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS): Category "A"refers to a lower power base station, Category ooB" must be deployed outdoors and has higher maximumpower limits compared with category 'oA" devices, and category "c". The maximum allowableEquivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP; the total RF power radiated by the antenna') is 30 dBm(l watt), 47 dBm(50 watts), and 62dBm (1585 watts) for the listed categories "A", "B", and'0C", per 10MHz of bandwidth, resPectivelY.r pWS ,,Generations": lG: Analog voice; 2G: Digital voice; 3G: Mobile data; 4G: LTE and mobile Intemet; 5G: Mobilenetworks interconnect people, coritrol machines, 6bjects, and devices with multi-Gbps peak rates and ultra-low latency'2 soURCE: (https://www.3gpp.ore/about-3gpp) The 3'd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) unites [Seven]telecommunicutions ,tandurd-f"ueiopment organizations (ARIB, ATIS, CCSA, ETSI, TSDSI, TTA, TTC), known as,,organizational partners,, and provides their members with a stable environment to produce the Reports and specificationsthat define 3GPP technologies. page 4 of 13
THBORBTTCAI RF Frpln CnlculnTIONS - GROUXD LBVnr,SMnruoooLocYThese calculations are based on what are called "worst-case" estimates. That is, the estimatesassume 100% use of all transmitters simultaneously. Additionally, the calculations make the assumptionthat the sunounding area is a flat plane, and there is no degradation of signal strength due to the presenceof foliage, building materials, atmospheric conditions, etc. The resultant values are thus conservative inthat they over predict actual resultant power densities'The calculations are based on the following information (See Table 2 datafor T-Mobile and AT&Tcalculations, and Table 3 for hypothetical data representing a "fully loaded" monopole):l. Effective Radiated Power (ERP).2. Antenna height (centerline, above ground level (AGL))'3. Antennavertical energy patterns (See AppendixA); the source of the negative gain (G) values.,,Directional" antennas are designed to focus the RF signal, resulting in 'opattems" of signal lossand gain. Antenna energy patterns display the loss of signal strength relative to the direction ofpropagation due to elevation angle changes. The gain is expressed as "GE".Note: "G" is a unitless factor usually expressed in decibels (dB); where G = 10 (dB/ro)For example: for an antenna gain oi3 dB, the net factor (G) = 10 Qtro) :2F'or an anienna /oss of -3 dB, the net factor (G) : 10 ci/to) : g'5To determine the magnitude of the RF field, the power density (S) from an isotropic RF source iscalculated, making use of the power density formula as outlined in FCC's OET Bulletin 65, Edition97-01 :uiiiS=-N-4'n'NWhere:P -+ Power to antenna (watts)G -+ Gain of antennaR + Distance (range) from antenna source to point ofintersection with the ground (feet)pz : (Heighg2 + (Horizontal distance)2Since: p . G : EIRP (Effective Isotropic Radiated Power) for broadcast antennas, the equation canbe presented in the following form:SEIRP4'n'R2In the situation of off-axis power density calculations, apply the negative elevation gain (G E) valuefrom the vertical energy patterns with the following formula:S= EIRP'Gl4 'n'R2Page 5 of13
Ground reflections may add in-phase with the direct wave, and essentially double the electric fieldintensity. Because power density is proportional to the square of the electric field, the power density mayquadruple, that is, increase by a factor of four (4). Since ERP is routinely used, it is necessary to convertERp into EIRp by multiplying by the factor of 1.64 (the gain of a half-wave dipole relative to an isotropicradiator). Therefore, downrange power density estimates can be calculated by using the formula:S:4'(ERP'1.64)'GE4'n'R2: ERP'64.6rfi.R2.ERP .6EpzTo calculatetheo/o MPE, use the formula:%MPE= -S-' looMPEThe results of the calculations for the potential maximum RF emissions resulting from thesummation of the proposedT-Mobile and AT&T PWS system (See Table 2 inventory) are depicted inFigure 4 as plotted against linear distance from the base of the monopole in any direction' The results ofthe calculations for the potential maximum RF emissions resulting from the summation of the proposedT-Mobile and AT&T pWS plus twofuture hypothetical additional Pll'S caftier's transmitter and antennainstallation (See Table 3 inventory) are similarly depicted in Figure 5. Note that the values have beencalculated for a height of 6' AGL in accordance with regulatory rationale, and assumes all antennas aredirected along the same azimuths.Also depicted on the graphs are values for a height of 16' AGL (height of a typical 2"d story)' Alogarithmic scale was used to plot the calculated theoretical %MPE values in order to compare with theMpE limit values of 100% (public) and 500%o (note that 100% Worker limit : 500o/o Public limit), whichare so much larger that they would be off the page in a linear plot. The curves are variable due to theapplication of the vertical energy pattems (See Appendix A)'OnsBRv.q,rIoNS IN C6NSIDERATI9N yITH FCC Rut Ps $1.1307(n) & 51'1310Will it be physically possible to stand next to or touch any omnidirectional antenna and/or stand infrontof a directional antenno?No; access to the monopole will be restricted, and the site will adhere to RF safety guidelines regardingthe transmitting antennas, including appropriate signage'Page 6 of 13
ANrrxNn INveNroRvTable 2: Proposed and Possible Antenna & Transmitter Inventory120' Monopole at 1044 Route 28, South Yarmouth, MATypical UseTypical Parameters:ERP & Transmit FrequenciesTypical AntennaConfigurationAntennaCenterline(AGL)Proposed by T-MobilePCS/LTE-1900AWS-1700AWS-2100LTE.TOOBack-Haul3156 watts ERP;: 1900 MHz4357 walts ERP; = 1700 MHz3708 watts ERP;= 2rToMHz2507 watts ERP; = 1950 MHz3974 watts ERPx27-31GHzEMS RR 6519Kathrein 742351Kathrein 742351Powerwave77622' MW "Dish"1 15',Proposed by AT&TLTE-7OOUMTS-850AWS-2100PCS/LTE-1900wcs-23001968 watts ERP;= 777 MHz2260watts ERP; = 850 MHz2566 watts ERP; = 2170MHz2625 watts ERP;= 1950 MHz5613 watts2350 MHz80010122OPA-65R-LCUU100'Table Notes:AWS: Advanced Wireless ServicesLTE: Long Term Evolution (a.k.a' "4G")PCS: Personal Communication SystemUMTS: Universal Mobile Telecommunications ServicesWCS: Wireless Communication ServiceTable 3: Hypothetical Antenna & Transmitter Inventory1200 Monopole at 1044 Route 28, South Yarmouth, MATypical UseTypical Parameters:ERP & Transmit FrequenciesTypical AntennaConfigurationAntennaCenterline(AGL)HypotheticalPWS Carriers*700" (LTE)850 "Cellular"AWSPCS-LTE3035 watts ERP;= 750MHz3035 watts ERP;= 850 MHz5049 watts ERP; = 2looMHz4357 watts ERP; = 19oo MHzSBNHH-1D65BLNX-6514DS.A1M85'850 "Cellular"PCS-LTE1200 watts ERP;:850 MHz2720 watts ERP; = 19oo MHzDB93ODD65LNX-6514-DS-VTM70'Page 7 of13
--.16' AGL-dI AGL-l,tr'E (Ihblic)-nfltf, (Srqkr)1m0.00%lffi,filYo%MPE10.00%l.0OVo0.10%50000ltxto2flt03&10,{xloDistrnctftoD Brsc Feetl5.021c*OlVcRBsuIrS OF THEORETICAL RF FININ CUCUINTIONSFigure 4: Theoretical Cumulative Maximum Percent MPE - vs. - Distance(Combined T-Mobile + AT&T RF Contributions)Figure 5: Theoretical Cumulative Maximum Percent MPE - vs. - Distance(Combined RF Contributions Representing a 66Fully Loaded" Monopole)--.16racf,,-6IAGL-IIPE o'!bnc)-!ilrf,(sirlr)r000.0094100.0t)%% ]VIPElo-txll.tlF/o0.10'/o5{Xl00100020003000'1000Distatrcefrcnl Brse lteetl1.694oPage 8 of13
CoNct-ustoxTheoretical RF field calculations data indicate the summation of the proposed T-Mobile andAT&T maximum pWS RF contributions would be within the established RF exposure guidelines; seeFigure 4. The additional calculations also suggest that even if the monopole had two additional PWSprovider,s antennas attached, the site would comply with all established RF exposure guidelines; seeFigure 5.This includes all publicly accessible areas, and the surrounding neighborhood in general' Theresults support compliance with the pertinent sections of the Massachusetts Department of Public Healthregulations regarding PWS facilities, and the FCC's guidelines for RF exposure'The number and duration of calls passing through PWS facilities cannot be accurately predicted.Thus, in order to estimate the highest RF fields possible from operation of these installations, the maximalamount of usage was considered. Even in this so-called "worst-case", the resultant increase in RF fieldlevels are far below established levels considered safe.Based on the results ofthe additional theoretical RF fields I have calculated, it is my expert opinionthat this facility would comply with all regulatory guidelines for RF exposure'Feel free to contact me if you have any questions.Sincerely,Donald L. Haes,Jr.Certified Health PhYsicistNote: The analyses, conclusions and professional opinions are based upon the precise parameters and conditions ofthis particular site; Monopole at 1044Route 2g, South yarmouth, MA. utiiization oftheie analyses,;;;;l*i"". andprofessional opinions for any personal wireless services installation, existingor proposed, other than the aforementioned has not been sanctioned by the author, and therelori should not be accepted as evidence of regulatory compliancePage 9 of 13
Dor,qtn L. HAES, JR., CHP, CLSORadiation SaJbtY SPec ialistPO Box 198, Hampstead, NH 03841 617-680-6262Email : donald_haes-chp@comcast.net12J4SrnrenanNT oF CBRrIntcATloNI certiff to the best of my knowledge and belief, the statements of fact contained in this report aretrue and correct.The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions andlimiting conditions, and are personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions and conclusions'I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject ofthis report and I haveno personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined energy level or directionin-energy level that favors the cauie of the client, the amount of energy level estimate, theattainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event.This assignment was not based on a requested minimum environmental energy level or specificpower density.My compensation is not contingent on an action or event resulting from the analyses, opinions, orconclusions in, or the use of, this report.The consultant has accepted this assessment assignment having the knowledge and experiencenecessary to complete the assignment competently.My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared, in,.onforrity wittr the American Board of Health Physics (ABHP) statements of standards ofprofess ional respons ibil ity for Certifi ed Health Physicists.Date: Seotember 4"2020Ilonald L. Hacs, Jr.Certificd Heatth PhYsicist56.78Page 10 of13
APPENDIX AVertical & Horizontal Energy Patterns80S-960 MHzHorizontal patt€md6o-polarizsllonVerllcal patlem46''pslarizatlon0.5"-12.5o electrlcaldowntilt1710-2180 MHzHorlzontal pattom!45'golarlzatlonVer{cal paltem*45o-polarlzatbno.5o-1 oq €l€drlcsl do|ntlltAnterna Pattern Vev€r| :e:.:::.:-;,+-:r'=:'-t4-:.'. i a| :c.,:r-:rr".t :r-:::af .+-+,:5:r a t+r.: !.: ': :i irf l;Hds: -;i lo oAzimuthElevation: ra,fi L;(r: |n.r.:n clrPage 11 of13
Dotvato L. HAES, JR., CHP, CLSORadi at io n SaJbty Spec i al i s t617 -680-6262PO Box 198,NH 03841Email: donald haesaSUMMARY OF QUALIF'ICATIONSAcademic Training -o Graduated from chelmsford High School, chelmsford, MA;June 1973.o completed NavalNuclear Naval Nuclear Power school, 6-1211976.o Completed Naval Nuclear Reactor Plant Mechanical Operator and Engineering LaboratoryTechnician (ELT) schools and qualifications, Prototype Training Unit, Knolls Atomic PowerLaboratory, Windsor, Connecticut, l-91 1977 .o Graduated Magna Cum Laude from University of Lowell with a Bachelor of Science Degree inRadiological Health Physics; 5 / 1987 .o Graduated from University of Lowell with a Master of Science Degree in Radiological Sciencesand Protection; 5 I 1988.Certification -o Board Certified by the American Board of Heatth Physics 1994; renewed 1998, 2002,2006,2010'2014, and 20 I 8. Expiration 12131 12022.o Board Certified by the Board of Laser Safety 2008; renewed 2011,2014,2017. Expirationt2/3U2020.aaaEmployment History -o Consulting Health Physicist; IonizingA.,lonionizing Radiation, 1988 - present.o Radiation, RF and Laser Safety Officer;BAE Systems,2005-2018 (retired).o Assistant Radiation Safety Officer; MIT, 1988 -2005 (retired).o Radiopharmaceutical Production Supervisor - DuPontA',lEN, 1981 - 1988 (retired).o United States Navy;Nuclear Power Qualifications, 1975 - l98t (Honorably Discharged)Professional Societies -o Health Physics Society [HPS].o American Academy of Health Physics IAAHP]o Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IIEEE];o Intemational Committee on Electromagnetic Safety [CES] (ANSI C95 series).o Laser Institute of America [LIA].o Board of Laser Safety [BLS].o American National Standards Institute Accredited Standards Committee IASC Zl36]o Committee on Man and Radiation [COMAR].Page 12 of13
ENoNorosi. Federal Register, Federal Communications Commission Rules; Radiofrequency radiation,'environmental effects evaluation guidelines Volume 1, No. 153, 41006-41199, August 7,1996' (47 CFRPart 1; Federal Communications Commission).ii. Telecommunications Act of 1996,47 USC; Second Session of the l04sCongress of the United Statesof America, January 3,1996.iri. 195 CMR 122.000: Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Non-Ionizing Radiation Limits for:The General public from Non-Occupational Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields, Employees fromOccupational Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields, and Exposurefrom Microwave Ovens.iu. IEEE Cgs.l-1g9g: American National Standard, Sof"ty levels with respect to human exposure to radiofrequency electromagneticfields,from 3 kHz to 300 GHz (Updated in2020).u. NationalCouncil on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP); Biological Efficts and ExposureCriteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic F iel ds, NCRP Report 86, I 986.ui. Federal Register, Federal Communications Commission Rules; Vol. 85, No. 63 / Wednesday, April l,2020 /Rules and Regulations 18145.uii. Jamshed, Muhammad Ali (Institute of Communication Systems (ICS), Home of 5G Innovation entre(5GIC), University of Surrey, Guildford GUz 7XH, U.K). Electro-magnetic field exposurereduction/avoidance for the next generations of wireless communication systems. IEEE Journal ofElectromagnetics, RF, And Microwaves in Medicine and Biology, Vol' 4, No' 1, March 2020'vlii. gB1 Bulletin 65: Federal Communications Commission Office of Engineering and Technology,Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrecluency ElectromagneticFields; Edition 97-01, August 1999.Page 13 of13