HomeMy WebLinkAboutMattituck F.D. FCC Compliance Engineering Report, Scinetx, 090414 A
SCINETX
.LLC
1836 LONG RIDGE ROAD
STAMFORD, CT 06903
PHONE 203-355-3676
ENGINEERING REPORT
DATED SEPTEMBER 4, 2014
THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED AND SIGNED BY
LOUIS G. CORNACCHIA, B.E.E., PRESIDENT
EVALUATION OF RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS
RESULTING FROM THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION
OF THE EXISTING MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
RADIO COMMUNICATION FACILITY WITH
ANTENNAS (SITE #7141-RAWLAND),ALL TO BE
MOUNTED EXTERIOR TO THE PROPOSED ELITE
TOWERS LP UNIPOLE, TO BE LOCATED AT
DISTRICT 1000, SECTION 140, BLOCK 3, LOT 11.1,
1000 PIKE STREET, MATTITUCK, TOWN OF
SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
B
REPORT TABLE OF CONTENT
L INTRODUCTION C
2. EMF POWER DENSITY C
3. ANALYSIS D
4. FREQUENCY BANDS E
5. PRINCIPAL FEATURES OF PROPOSED APPLICATION F
6. POWER DENSITY CALCULATIONS I
SUMMARY- TABLE IIA-1 K
ANALYTICAL RESULTS-TABLES II - IIE M
7 INTERFERENCE Z
8. RESUME AA
9. FCC EMF STANDARDS REVIEW. CC
C
1. INTRODUCTION
This report is the result of an extensive study of Electromagnetic Field Intensities (EMF—
Power Densities)which could be emitted from the proposed Modification Mattituck Fire
District Radio Communication Facilities,(Site# 7141-Rawland), including the proposed
Town of Southold Radio Communication network, Verizon Wireless Facility and a future
wireless carrier, all with antennas, to be mounted within and exterior to the proposed
Unipole, to be located at District 1000, Section 140,Block 3, Lot 11.1, 1000 Pike Street,
Mattituck, (Town of Southold),New York. The study incorporates the most conservative
considerations to determine practical combined cumulative worst case Power Densities
(EMF) which could result from the herein proposed Radio Communication Facilities the
Mattituck community could theoretically encounter.
2. EMF POWER DENSITY
The issue of EMF density compliance is pre-empted from the municipality regulatory
powers beyond the applicants stating that it has examined the emissions in accordance
with "OET Bulletin No. 65 - Edition 97-01,August 1997" with analytical adjustments to
equations per Richard Tell Associates and Ed Mantiply of the FCC Office of Engineering
Technology. Further, the applicant will be in compliance with the all applicable
FCC/NCRP General Public or "unrestricted environment" Standards. The EMF levels
attributed to the cumulative combined emissions contributed by the proposed Application
Communication Facilities, are far below EMF continuous Exposure levels as per
ANSUIEEE C95.1-1992 (47 CFR § 1.1310), Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) Continuous Exposure Standards, OSHA, 1986 NCRP and NYSDOH limits.
Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 states that;
"No State or local government or instrumentality thereof, may regulate the placement,
construction and modification of personal wireless services facilities on the basis of
environmental effects of radio frequencies emissions to the extent that such Facilities
comply with the Commissions (FCC) Regulations concerning such emissions".
This law directs the Federal Communications Commission(FCC) to offer assistance to
state and local governments in communications facilities issues. On August 1, 1996 the
FCC adopted portions of the 1991 ANSUIEEE, and NCRP Maximum permitted exposure
(MPE) criteria.
Note: In consideration of the adoption by the FCC of the Telecommunications Act of
1996,passed by Congress and signed into law by the President, the Town of Southold,
NY, is Federally pre-empted and therefor cannot regulate the placement, construction and
modification of communications services facilities in the Permit Application process on
the basis of`BMF Power Density"and"Non Harmful Interference" compliance.
D
3.ANALYSIS
The theoretical sum of the combined cumulative emissions from the proposed
Modification to the existing Mattituck Fire District Communication Facility including the
proposed Town of Southold Communication System,Verizon Wireless Facility and a
future wireless carrier, all with transmitting antennas,the Mattituck community could be
exposed to, would be less than 5.00% of all applicable FCC MPE General Public EMF
Standards. This combined cumulative percentage of EMF levels which could be emitted,
would be below the applicable FCC MPE General Public EMF Standards by a factor
greater than 100. (See Table IIA-1)
This EMF level and all other levels presented in Table II-L, are theoretical maximas that
could occur only under worst case events, assuming conditions such as in phase
reflections occurring steady state, all transmitters operating simultaneously and
continuously and excluding resistance or attenuating characteristics of construction
material used in schools,homes and other similar structures. In reality, actual field
measurements continually provide readings of power density levels, far lower than the
more conservative analytical levels indicated.
(Note: All future co-locating carriers must complete an FCC Compliance analysis,
including the proposed Modification of the Radio Communication Facilities emissions as
determined herein,providing a new combined cumulative EMF emissions impact.)
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is the applicable Federal Law with respect to
consideration of environmental effects of RF emissions in the siting of Radio
Communication Facilities. It is the conclusion of this report,that the proposed Facilities
Applications will meet the Federal Communications Commission(FCC)present criteria
and the FCC criteria as it is affected by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, with
respect to environmental considerations of RF emissions.
Further, all modified existing and additionally proposed Communications Facilities Radio
Frequency Bands cannot interfere with television reception, telephones or radio
reception,primarily due to the installation of broad mitigating filters between Broadcast
Bands as mandated and monitored by the FCC. (See Table I)
This critical analysis* incorporated Radio antenna emission characteristics and included
the following assumptions which exceed realistic conditions of operations, but will yield
worst case EMF - Power Densities ordinarily not realized and never exceeded.
a. All antennas are located at the lowest elevation indicated in the construction
drawing to absorb errors in actual locations and to bring the antenna cluster closer
to facilities and citizens than would normally be the case.
b. All antennas will be transmitting continuously, 24 hours a day.
C. All channels will be communicating simultaneously.
d. Power levels emitting from the antennas are increased by a factor of 4.0 to take
into account possible in-phase reflections at any point in the community,which
is rarely the case, and if so, are never continuous.
E
e. At all distances greater than 2000 feet, the Power Densities decrease by a factor of
four(4) with every doubling of distance.
The proposed modification of existing and future Wireless Facility Antenna Installations
in question, are an assembly of low power antennas that emit radio energy at levels 10 to
100 times below those of Commercial Broadcast Antennas. Given the distances between
the antennas studied in this report and the community field points in question, as well as
the overall community, the densities of the radio energy are extremely low.
* Reference Basis for calculations:
A- "Evaluating Compliance With FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to
Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields. OET Bulletin No. 65 -Edition 97-01 "
with analytical adjustments to equations per Richard Tell Associates and
Ed Mantiply of the FCC Office of Engineering Technology
B- Copies of data, sketches, specifications and drawings dated 08/20/14
as submitted by Herbst Musciano, RA, Architects, are the basis for our studies,
calculations and analysis.
4. FREQUENCY BANDS:
According to the FCC,microwave (MW) frequencies cover the approximate
band from 300 MegaHertz (MHz)to 300 GigaHertz (GHz). One MegaHertz
(MHz) is a million cycles and One GigaHertz (GHz) is a billion cycles per
second. Table I lists several other communication and interrogation frequencies
used in the United States. Clearly, a large fraction of commercial and private
telecommunication involves MW Frequencies.
TABLE I
(Some Non-Ionizing Frequency Definitions*)
Type of System Frequency Interval
FM Radio 88 MHz to 108 MHz
VHF TV 174 MHz to 216 MHz
UHF TV/LTE 470 MHz to 806 MHz
Mobile Phone: Cellular/PCS/AWS 806 MHz to 2.6 GHz
Typical Radar Systems 200 MHz to 3.0 GHz
*The frequency bands presently employed by the Fire District&Wireless Industry,have,in fact,
been a part of the EMF environment for over sixty years.
REFERENCES
• Narda-Microwave-East
• FCC OET Bulletin 65, Edition 97-01
• Advanced Engineering Mathematics-Wylie
• http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/planck,html
• Antennas, John D. Kraus
F
5. The principal features of the Modification Mattituck Fire District Radio
Communication Facility and Town of Southold Communication System together
with the herein included proposed Installations and the assumptions considered in
the analysis are as follows;
a) All proposed modified existing communication systems and proposed Wireless
facilities antennas, will be mounted exterior to and within the proposed Unipole as
indicated by the Herbst Musciano Drawings. The elevations of the antennas of the
proposed Modification Fire District and Town of Southold antennas will be exterior
mounted on the proposed Unipole at 30, 40, 60 and 120 feet AGL. The closest an
individual could approach the lower transmitting antenna is 24 feet. This assumes a 6 foot
tall person standing directly below the antenna as described in Herbst Musciano
drawings. The proposed Modification Fire District and Town of Southold antennas will
consist of Omnidirectional, Collinear Omni, stacked collinear array of dual dipoles, and
Directional YAGI antennas.
b) The proposed Verizon Wireless and future Wireless radio antennas will be
mounted within the Unipole. The elevations of the centerline of the proposed Verizon
Wireless and future carrier antennas will be 115, 105 & 95 feet AGL respectively. The
closest an individual could approach the lower transmitting antennas is 89 feet. The
physical arrangement of these antennas is illustrated in drawings provided by Herbst
Musciano.
The proposed Verizon Wireless Directional antenna clusters would consist of three
Sectors employing one (1) Tri-Band directional antenna for LTE,PSI and AWS for each
sector @ 115 Feet AGL. The future Wireless LTE/Cellular/PCS frequency spectrums,
will require three (3) directional antennas for each sector @ 105 & 95 feet AGL.
(Assumed 0 degree downtilt for all antennas in this analysis.)
C) The maximum number of channels assigned to the antenna array for proposed
Modification Mattituck Fire District, Town of Southold,Verizon Wireless and Future
Wireless carriers, in any sector, including the maximum power from the transmitting
omnidirectional/directional antennas in each sector, and the proposed broadcast
frequency bands are as indicated :
MODIFICATION MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
Maximum ERP/Channel 100 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 1
Antenna centerline height above grade 126.7 feet
MODEL & Gain-Sinclair-SC329-HF2SNF (D00-G06) (one Ant.) 6 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 465 MHz
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure - 310 microwatts/cm.sq.
G
MODIFICATION MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
Maximum ERP/Channel 100 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 1
Antenna centerline height above grade 66.8 feet
MODEL & Gain-Commander- 1142-2CN (one Antenna) 1.3 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 46.34-46.46
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure -100 microwatts/cm.sq.
MODIFICATION MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
Maximum ERP/Channel 100 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 1
Antenna centerline height above grade 46.8 feet
MODEL & Gain- Commander- 1142-2CN (one Antenna) 1.3 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 46.34-46.46
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure -100 microwatts/cm.sq.
MODIFICATION MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
Maximum ERP/Channel 45 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 1
Antenna centerline height above grade 62.9 feet
MODEL & Gain- RFS - BA1010-2 (one Antenna) 1.0 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 155 MHz
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure -100 microwatts/cm.sq.
MODIFICATION MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
Maximum ERP/Channel 45 WERP
Number of Channels/sector I
Antenna centerline height above grade 64.7 feet
MODEL& Gain- RFS - 201-7N (one Antenna) 5 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 450-460 MHz
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure -300 microwatts/cm.sq.
MODIFICATION MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
Maximum ERP/Channel 110, 110 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 2
Antenna centerline height above grade 30 feet
MODEL&Gain-Laird Tech. Y(B)4506 (two antennas) 10.2 dBd
Frequency of transmission -(MHz) 483,486 MHz
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure -322 microwatts/cm.sq.
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Maximum ERP/Channel 110 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 1
Antenna centerline height above grade 126.7 feet
MODEL & Gain-Sinclair-SD314-HF2P2SNM (one Ant.) 8 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 483 MHz
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure -322 microwatts/cm.sq.
H
VERIZON WIRELESS INSTALLATION
Maximum ERP/Channel LTE 1260 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 1
Antenna centerline height above grade 115 feet
MODEL & Gain-Amphenol CWWX063X25X00 (one Ant.) 14.16 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 777 - 787
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure-500 microwatts/cm.sq.
VERIZON WIRELESS INSTALLATION
Maximum ERP/Channel PCS 1260 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 1
Antenna centerline height above grade 115 feet
MODEL & Gain-Amphenol CWWX063X25X00 (one Ant.) 14.68 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 1970 - 1990
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure-1000 microwatts/cm.sq.
VERIZON WIRELESS INSTALLATION AWS
Maximum ERP/Channel 1260 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 1
Antenna centerline height above grade 115 feet
MODEL & Gain-Amphenol CWWX063X25X00 (one Ant.) 15.16 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 2110 -2130
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure-1000 microwatts/cm.sq.
FUTURE WIRELESS B/C Blocks - LTE
Maximum ERP/Channel 260/260 WERP
Number of Channels 2
Antenna centerline height above grade 105 & 95 feet
Gain 11.3 dBd
Frequency of transmission- (MHz) 734-740/740-746
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure-500 microwatts/cm. sq.
FUTURE WIRELESS A Block- Cellular
Maximum ERP/Channel UMTS 365/365 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 2
Antenna centerline height above grade 105 & 95 feet
Gain 12.5 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 869.04-879.99/890.01-891.48
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure-560 microwatts/cm.sq.
FUTURE WIRELESS A-3/A-4/E-1 Blocks - PCS
Maximum ERP/Channel UMTS-LTE 836/556/556 WERP
Number of Channels/sector 3
Antenna centerline height above grade 105 & 95 feet
Gain 15.5 dBd
Frequency of transmission-(MHz) 1930-1945/1965-1970
Maximum continuous General Public Exposure -1000 microwatts/cm.sq.
I
d) The coverage pattern from the voice/data antennas is in three (3) sectors and
is considered to transmit circularly, 360 degrees. This provides a worst case situation,
resulting in the maximum possible power density.
e) It was assumed that the elevation of the community, at a radius within 2000 feet,
is equal to the elevation at the base of the proposed Unipole, with exceptions as noted.
f) All field points are at Radial distances indicated from the base of the proposed
Unipole where the vertical line of the Transmitting antennas intersects.
6. POWER DENSITY CALCULATIONS-Analytical Data
The SCINETX REPORT represents worst case scenarios
in determining EMF analysis. One of the considerations is the
maximum number of channels which could be transmitted
by each of the existing antennas in each sector. Further, in
determining maximum public exposure to EMF emissions, potential
close proximity of the antennas must be defined ("near field" region,
or"far field" region). The following will examine procedures followed
in accordance with FCC OET Bulletin 65- Edition 97-01, with
analytical adjustments to equations per Richard Tell and Ed Mantiply
of the FCC Office of Engineering Technology.
Proposed Modification of existing Mattituck Fire District Communication Facility
including Modification of existing Town of Southold Communication System,
proposed Verizon Wireless Facility and the future Wireless carrier transmitting
antennas EMF Analysis:
k= 984 = (wave length in feet)
frequency (MHz)
"Antennas"-by John D. Kraus, Mcgraw Hill 1950 Section 2
R(NF)=D2
4k
R(FF)=0.6D2
k
D =height of antenna panel
"OET Bulletin No. 65 - Edition 97-01, August 1997" (Pages 27 &29))
J
FOR PROPOSED TRANSMITTING ANTENNA EMISSIONS ANALYSIS AT ANY
POINT IN THE NEAR FIELD:
The power density in the near field region can be determined as follows:
Snf= On axis maximum power density in the near field
Snf'--180 Pnet
*PRD
Pnet=Input power to antenna
D=antenna height
R=distance from C/L to point of interest=l foot
*=beamwidth
a=panel gain
Front to back ratio= normally 30 dbd
"OET Bulletin No. 65 - Edition 97-01, August 1997"-page 23).
FOR PROPOSED TRANSMITTING ANTENNA EMISSIONS ANALYSIS AT ANY
POINT IN THE FAR FIELD COMMUNITY:
When power density predictions of field points in the community are calculated Far Field
equations can be used.
For far field(ff) EMF analysis: Sff= n F EIRP
4jTR2
Where:
S(ff) =power density
EIRP =power output of antenna relative to an isotropic radiator
= P(erp) x 1.64 (correctionfactor)
R = distance from point in question to center of emissions of
antenna
r = The ground reflectivity
n = number of channels
In cases where antennas incorporating directional arrays and where antennas are pointed
to the horizon, the far field equation shown will result in overly worst case prediction.
Therefore the equation can be modified by the antenna vertical radiation pattern where a
relative gain can be derived:
Sff = n F EIRP Fo
4jTR2
Fo=Relative field factor(relative numeric gain)
"OET Bulletin No. 65 - Edition 97-01, August 1997" (Pages 21 - 23)
K
TABLE IIA-1
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.& PERCENTAGE OF STANDARDS
RESULTING FROM
PROPOSED MODIFIED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT,TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,PROPOSED
VERIZON WIRELESS AND FUTURE CARRIER ANTENNA
INSTALLATIONS
Field Point-AU point in the community(&-16.0 feet AGL or as otherwise indicated
Antenna System Elevation C/L Power Standard Calculated Percent of
Feet WERP/Chan FCC/NCRP EMF Density Standard
General Public
MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT-465 MHz
(existing/Modified) 126.7 100/1 310 0.005 N/A
MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT-46.34-46.46 MHz
(existing/Modified) 66.8 100/1 100 0.83 0.83%
MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT-46.34-46.46 MHz
(existing/Modified) 46.8 100/1 100 0.88 0.88
MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT- 155MHz
(existing/Modified) 62.9 50/1 100 2.23 2.23
MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT-450-460 MHz
(existing/Modified) 64.7 45/1 300 0.11 0.11
MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT-483 &486 MHz
(existing/Modified) 30 110/2 322 1.0 0.31
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD-483 MHz
(existing/Modified) 126.7 110/1 322 0.03 N/A
VERIZON WIRELESS CARRIER 777-787 MHZ
(proposed) 115 1260 500 0.16 0.03
VERIZON WIRELESS CARRIER 1970-1990 MHZ
(proposed) 115 1260 1000 0.25 0.03
VERIZON WIRELESS CARRIER 2110-2130 MHZ
(proposed) 115 1260 1000 0.20 0.02
FUTURE WIRELESS B/C Blocks UMTS-LTE
(proposed) 105-95 260 500 0.42 0.07
FUTURE WIRELESS A Block UMTS -CELLULAR
(proposed) 105-95 365 560 0.22 0.03
FUTURE WIRELESS A-3/A-4/E-1 Blocks UMTS-PCS
(proposed) 105-95 836/556 1000 2.1 0.21
Total Percentage of All Antenna Sources 4.75%
L
NOTE:
1. Unless Indicated- Total Percentage of Each Antenna Source less than 0.01% is shown
as N/A.
2. WERP - effective radiated power in watts per channel
3. Total Percentage of All Antenna Sources - EMF emissions contributed by transmitting
antennas in differing frequency bands are regulated by MPE Standards for the specific
bands in which the emissions are analyzed. When adding the emissions resulting from
transmissions in differing frequency bands,the resulting percentages of the emissions
compared to the governing MPE standards are added.
Per the FCC, percentages of EMF Density levels of applicable Standards, as specified by
the FCC OET Bulletin No. 65 Edition 97.01, are addressed as follows:
"Therefore, in mixed or broad band fields,where a number of different frequencies are
involved,the contributing of all RF sources must be considered. When different limits
are recommended for different frequencies,the fraction of(or percentages)the limit
incurred within each frequency interval should be determined, and the sum of all such
fractions (or percentages) should not exceed 1.0 (or 100 percent)"
(See section 4.1 in Appendix A).
M
TABLE II
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
MATTITUCK Percentage of the 1996
FIRE DISTRICT Telecommunications Act
Field Points 465 MHz FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—126.7' (C/L) Exposure
(3 10 Standard
Point 1 0.005 N/A
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.005 N/A
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.07 0.02%
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.07 0.02%
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.03 0.01%
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.01 N/A
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
N
TABLE IIA
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
MATTITUCK Percentage of the 1996
FIRE DISTRICT Telecommunications Act
Field Points 46.34-46.46 MHz FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—66.8' (C/L) Exposure
100 Standard
Point 1 0.78 0.78%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.83 0.83%
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.26 0.26%
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.22 0.22%
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.09 0.09%
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.01 0.01%
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
O
TABLE IIB
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
MATTITUCK Percentage of the 1996
FIRE DISTRICT Telecommunications Act
Field Points 46.34-46.46 MHz FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—46.8' (C/L) Exposure
100 Standard
Point 1 0.94 0.94%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.88 0.88%
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.32 0.32%
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.21 0.21%
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.14 0.14%
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.01 0.01%
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
P
TABLE IIC
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
MATTITUCK Percentage of the 1996
FIRE DISTRICT Telecommunications Act
Field Points 155 MHz FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—62.9' (C/L) Exposure
100 Standard
Point 1 0.39 0.39%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 2.23 2.23
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.96 0.96
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.56 0.56
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.10 0.10
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.006 N/A
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
Q
TABLE IID
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
MATTITUCK Percentage of the 1996
FIRE DISTRICT Telecommunications Act
Field Points 450-460 MHz FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—64.7' (C/L) Exposure
100 Standard
Point 1 0.02 0.02%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.11 0.11
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.12 0.12
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.22 0.22
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.05 0.05
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.006 N/A
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
R
TABLE II-E
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
MATTITUCK Percentage of the 1996
FIRE DISTRICT Telecommunications Act
Field Points 483&486 MHz FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—30' (C/L) Exposure
322 Standard
Point 1 3.07 0.95
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 1.0 0.31
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 4.43 1.37
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 3.05 0.94
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.49 0.15
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.03 N/A
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
S
TABLE II-F
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
MATTITUCK Percentage of the 1996
TOWN OF Telecommunications Act
Field Points SOUTHOLD FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
483 MHz 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—126.7' (C/L) Antenna Emissions Exposure
322 Standard
Point 1 0.17 0.05%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.03 N/A
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.28 0.08
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.58 0.18
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.24 0.08
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.02 N/A
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
T
TABLE II-G
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
PROPOSED VERIZON Percentage of the 1996
WIRELESS LTE Telecommunications Act
Field Points 777-787 MHZ FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—115'(C/L) Exposure
500 Standard
Point 1 0.15 0.03%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.16 0.03
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.39 0.08
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.14 0.03%
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.27 0.05
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.17 0.03
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
U
TABLE II-H
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
PROPOSED VERIZON Percentage of the 1996
WIRELESS PCS Telecommunications Act
Field Points 1970-1990 MHZ FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—115'(C/L) Exposure
1000 Standard
Point 1 0.06 N/A
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.25 0.03
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.25 0.03
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.14 0.01
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.10 0.01
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.08 N/A
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
V
TABLE II-I
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
PROPOSED VERIZON Percentage of the 1996
WIRELESS AWS Telecommunications Act
Field Points 2110-2130 MHZ FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—115'(C/L) Exposure
1000 Standard
Point 1 0.94 0.03
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.20 0.02
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 1.15 0.11
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.44 0.04
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.16 0.02
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.28 0.03
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
w
TABLE II-J
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
FUTURE WIRELESS Percentage of the 1996
734-746 MHz Telecommunications Act
Field Points Antenna Emissions FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—105' - 95' (C/L) Exposure
500 Standard
Point 1 0.15 0.01%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.42 0.07
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.36 0.07
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.46 0.09
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.28 0.06
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.07 0.01
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
X
TABLE II-K
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
FUTURE WIRELESS Percentage of the 1996
Cellular Telecommunications Act
Field Points 869-880 MHz FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—105' - 95' (C/L) Exposure
580 Standard
Point 1 0.12 0.02%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 0.22 0.03
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.19 0.03
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.51 0.08
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.34 0.05
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.09 0.01%
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
Y
TABLE II-L
EMF LEVELS IN MICROWATTS/CM.SQ.
PROPOSED MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT
PROPOSED SITE: 7141 - (RAWLAND)
MATTITUCK, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK.
FUTURE WIRELESS Percentage of the 1996
PCS Telecommunications Act
Field Points 1965-1970 MHz FCC/ANSI/IEEE C95.1-
Antenna Emissions 1992 General Public
ANTENNA ELEVATION—105' - 95' (C/L) Exposure
1000 Standard
Point 1 0.61 0.06%
R= 9.5'-Base of Unipole
Elev. —6.5'
Point 2 2.1 0.21
R=64'-Nearby FD building.
Elev. — 16'
Point 3 0.96 0.10
R=124'-Nearest residence
Elev. - 16'
Point 4 0.87 0.09
R=200' -Nearby residence
Elev. 16'
Point 5 0.73 0.07
R=500' - Other residences
Elev. -16'
Point 6 0.29 0.03
R=2000'- Other residences.
Elev. -16'
Note:N/A=factor less than 0.01%
Z
7. INTERFERENCE
The issue of Harmful Interference compliance is pre-empted from the
municipality regulatory powers beyond the applicants stating that it has examined the
proposed Application Wireless Facilities as herein described, in accordance with FCC
"OET Bulletin No. 65 -Edition 97-01,August 1997" regarding transmission of non-
ionizing frequency emissions. Information submitted herewith is provided in response to
the Village of East Hampton,NY, Code. The emissions broadcast from the proposed
Wireless Facilities transmitters are in the non-ionizing (VIER) 698-806, 806-896, 1850-
1990 MHz frequency bands, These regulated Wireless broadcast bands, previously
assigned to television channels and fixed mobile communications networks,will not
cause harmful interference to humans or animals.
Both,Physicist Max Planck, on the formulation of Planck's Constant and Albert Einstein,
in applying Quantum Theory to "the Photoelectric Effect", received the Nobel Prize in
Physics for their original research and papers on these proofs. The contributions of
Einstein's work clearly proved that electromagnetic fields (photons)have an"energy"
level related to "frequency x Planck's Constant",which is not related to the level of
power(watts)transmitted from an antenna. The higher the frequency,the higher the
"energy" level. Only Electromagnetic fields (EMF), resulting from frequencies so high
(higher than blue light-ultraviolet light region and higher), defined to be in the "ionizing
spectrum", can interfere with the molecular structure of matter(Photoelectric effect). In
fact, frequencies in the Ionizing spectrum (i.e.-ultra violet light,X-rays, gamma rays)
have energy levels high enough to cause mutations in human tissue. This activity (as with
sunlight and skin cancer) can cause destabilization of the molecular structure of matter to
the extent that an electron leaves the orbit of the atom to which it was originally bound. If
such an event occurred in human tissue,mutations of cells would be determined to occur.
Frequencies licensed and employed(non ionizing spectrum)by the wireless industry are
far below the ionizing spectrum,having much lower"energy"levels, thereby not able to
initiate damage to human cell (mutations).
FREQUENCY ENERGY LEVEL-
Measured in - eV=electron Volts
eV - is referred to Plancks constant
Planks constant-eV(ENERGY)=hf
where:
h= 6.63x10 joule second
f=frequency @ 2420 million Mhz(@ frequencies greater than blue light)
Plancks constant=eV= 12.4=energy binding electrons to atoms
@ this frequency spectrum, energy is classified as "ionizing"
Wireless Broadcast Frequency Bands (photons) carry considerably less energy
(0.001 eV), less than the weakest chemical bonds and are therefore classified as
"non-ionizing" (VIER) frequencies
AA
8. RESUME
NAME: Louis G. Cornacchia
STATUS: Married,Four Children
EDUCATION: Manhattan College, BEE
Iona College, Computer Language Choices
Manhattanville College,Business Law Courses
PRESENT: SCINETX LLC -President
Engineering Consultants with Micro wave/Wireless Industry.
Mr. Cornacchia has been employed in the Electronics Industry as Electronic Engineer
after receiving his BEE from Manhattan College, School of Engineering. Mr. Cornacchia
was employed by Hazeltine Electronics Corp. as Engineer,Designing Signal Processor
and Radar Display Modules for The SAGE System, Primary Early Warning System or
DEW LINE, the TPS-I-GROUND BASED SEARCH RADAR SYSTEM and AWACS
(A6E)RF/Power Systems. Subsequently,Lou was employed by Loral Systems Design
Team developing the AN/ALQ58 Reconnaissance System and developed(two man team)
the precursor YIG TUNER- [ALR-20] Crystal Scanner covering the full 200 megahertz -
12 gigahz Frequency Range Surveillance System for interception of Enemy Navigational
Fire Control and Homing Devices for purposes of Identification and Signal Jamming for
a specific SAC Bomber. Seven years after receiving his degree Mr. Cornacchia was hired
as Chief Engineer by Victory Electronic to Develop the Image Intensifier or Night Vision
Scopes (Using Star Light) for the Fort Dix Army Command. Further,Mr. Cornacchia
designed/developed a solid state short circuit proof magnetic amplifier for a tank turret
driver for the Fort Dix Army Command. As Project Manager at Norden Systems,Mr.
Cornacchia designed and developed specific Test Equipment for the proposed FI I ID-E
Avionics and developed unique,more aggressive programs incorporating Built-In Test
Equipment(BITE)within the cockpit control center,to detect on-coming circuit failures
of the F I I ID-E Avionics to increase reliability and was responsible for presentation of
same to Air Force procurement Officer, General Esposito,who authorized change of
Automatic Test Equipment Military Specifications to accommodate this innovation.
Presently, BITE is installed in F-14, F-15-many other later craft, i.e., Growler-
fighter/bomber and a not yet released Tactical Military Helicopter.
A partial listing of companies SCINETX and Charger Tech has been contracted with,
employing state of the art Engineers with the Defense Industry, Technicians and
Programmers, are as follows:
Port Authority NY/NJ Airborne Instruments Labs United Technologies
Northrop Grumman Verizon Wireless AT&T Wireless
Sirius Satellite Radio Loral Electronics Systems Cingular
ITT New York Telephone Co. Sprint/Nextel
Fairchild Camera Div. Shore Media Inc. T-Mobile
Syracuse Scientific Corp. IBM Fox News
Martin Marietta Allied Signal -Bendix
BB
Mobile Radio Cellular EMF Studies and Testimonies Provided by SCINETXLLC for the
following Communities. Case law decisions* favoring Applicant, where "SCINETICS
CORP"was mentioned as providing Critical written technical support data and Expert
testimony in applicant's application process. (Partial Listing):
Hillsborough,New Jersey Valley Cottage,New York Fair Lawn,New Jersey*
New York City,NY Hastings,New York Bedminster,N J
Martinsville,NJ Little Silver,NJ* Hazlet,New Jersey*
Readington,NJ* Garwood,New Jersey* Dix Hills,NY
Uniondale,NY Armonk,New York Bayville,NY
Jurisdictions in Nassau and Suffolk Counties in which Lou Cornacchia has provided
expert testimony and has been qualified as an expert witness:
Towns
Hempstead,New York Oyster Bay,New York Huntington,New York
Babylon,New York Islip,New York Brookhaven,NY
Riverhead,New York Southold,New York Southampton,NY
Cities:
Glen Cove,New York, Long Beach,New York Stamford, CT
Villages:
Cedarhurst,New York East Hills,New York Freeport,New York
Hempstead Village,NY Lawrence,New York Lynbrook,NY
Malverne,New York Matinecock,New York Mineola,NY
Munsey Park,New York Muttontown,New York Rockville Centre,NY
Valley Stream,New York Amityville,New York Lloyd Harbor,NY
Northport,New York Patchogue,New York Port Jefferson,NY
OTHER ACTIVITIES:
School Board President -New Rochelle,New York.
SDA District Chairman - Boy Scouts of America,
New Rochelle,New York.
CC
8. FCC EMF STANDARDS REVIEW
The U.S. Congress adopted"The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969" (NEPA)
which requires all government agencies to take into account the potential environmental
impact of their actions. The agencies must consider whether their actions significantly
affect the "the quality of the human environment". To implement this mandate, the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted rules covering the NEPA in
licensing and approving facilities and operations under its jurisdiction.
The FCC was required by NEPA to make a determination as to whether the facilities or
operations it approves,may significantly affect the human environment with regard to RF
emissions. As there were no federal standards for exposure to RF emissions,the FCC
chose to rely upon a recognized non-government standard. The FCC selected the
"American National Standard Safety Level With Respect to Human Exposure to Radio
Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, "300 KiloHertz (kHz)to 100 GigaHertz (GHz)"
prepared by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) in 1982. The protection
guides recommended by ANSI were the guidelines the FCC had identified for using in
evaluating environmental significance with respect to Human Exposure to RF emissions.
In 1986 the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Sub-
Committee SC-53,published recommended limits for occupational and public exposure
(NCRP - "Biological effects and exposure criteria for radio frequency electromagnetic
fields." NCRP Report No. 86,National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements,Bethesda,Maryland). Sub-Committee SC-53 independently retained
Radiation Frequency Protection Guidelines (RFPGs) similar to those of the 1982 ANSI
Standard but with one notable exception: two tiers appear, one for occupational exposure
and one for exposure of the general public.
The EPA, aware of the FCC's Notice of Existing Rule Making (In the matter of
Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radio Frequency Radiation,
August 13, 1993. ET Docket No. 93-62), recommended adoption of the 1986 NCRP
Limits. The Telecommunications Act of 1996,Public Law 104-104-February 8, 1996
recommended adoption of portions of the ANSI - IEEE C95.1 - 1991/NCR Standards,
and in August of 1996, the FCC did adopt the ANSI - IEEE C95.1 - 1992 two tier
Standards, implemented for all applications submitted beginning September 1, 1997.
The Power Densities which could be emitted by the proposed Wireless Antenna
Installations are many orders of magnitude below the Health Standards adopted or
proposed in the United States and any Health Standard applied anywhere in the world.
The issue of EMF compliance is preempted from the municipality regulatory powers
beyond the applicants stating that it has examined the emissions in accordance with "OET
Bulletin No. 65 -Edition 97-01,August 1997" with analytical adjustments to equations
per Richard Tell Associates and Ed Mantiply of the FCC Office of Engineering
Technology and that the applicant is in compliance with the applicable FCC/NCRP MPE
General Public or "unrestricted environment" Standard and is recognized by the New
York State District of Health (NYSDOH).
DD
The results of this theoretical worst case safety analysis clearly indicate that the
combined cumulative EMF emissions which could be emitted by the proposed wireless
installations would be many orders of magnitude below FCC EMF Continuous Exposure
levels as per ANSUIEEE C95.1-1991 NCRP (47 CFR § 1.1310),Federal
Communications Commission(FCC) General Public Continuous Exposure Standards,
OSHA, and NYSDOH limits. Therefore, in the scientific consensus based on
overwhelming evidence, the resulting emissions are well below threshold effects. When
EMF levels encountered, are at or below the FCC Standards, no health effects occur,
therefore in accordance with Federal Communications Commission OET Bulletin 65,
Edition 97-01,no cumulative effect is possible regardless of exposure duration.
10,000 OSHA STANDARD • 10,000 microwatts/cm2
9,000 UP To WALKIE TAL
RF ,000 microwiattsFT ANTENNA
UP TO 10,00FIELD DISTURB /cm2ANCE A A cm
8,000 UP 7-p 0 Watts/cm2.Distributed
000 microi,rattSA
s CM8, MONITOR
Distributed
7,000
U
6,000 MIC
UP TO 5,000 mic owaE OVEN
FCC OCCUPATIONAL STANDARD tS m2 @ 5 cm
• 5,000
�. '1900-2400 MHz
Z
p 4,000
cc
w
3
a 3,000 FCC OCCUPATIONAL STANDARD
2,750 800-900 MHz
2,000
1900-2400 MHz
FCC GENERAL CORDLES
1,000 PUBLIC STANDARD dp81LE ROPpSED 30 microwatts/EPHONE
RADIO ANT C 1 cm
,Liu S rHNUHa-su ENNAS
0
1.0 microwatt/cm2 POWER(EMR)SOURCES
9ciN
0 0 R P 0 R A T I O N
R-FOTR MAGNETIC SPECTRUM
NON-IONIZING RADIATION IONIZING RADIATION
ELF. VF RADIO FREQUENCIES X-RAY$ 7-11A�J_
AM Radio: 536-1605 kHz
LIGHT
CB Radio: 27 MHz
Cordless Phones:49 MHz/900 MHz
TV Ch 2-6: 54 -86 MHz
FM Radio:88 - 106 MHz
Marine Radio: 160 MHz
TV Ch 7-13: 174 - 216 MHz
TV UHF Ch14-69:470-800 MHz
Cellular Radlo, SpeclaII7^d Mobile Radio,Paging:806 - 946 MHz
Antitheft Devices:10-20 kHz.indlor 915 MHz
Microwave Oven: 915 and 2450 MHz
Personal Communication Services: 1600 -2200 MHz
Intrusion Alarms;Door Openers/Baby Monitors:l0MHz
POWER Mlcrowavo Radio:1 -40 GHz
FREdUENCY
Satolntn Communications:100 MHz- 275 GHz
1o, 1o61oG -E 10 1olG - 1 0 4-4
60 Hz 1 kHz 1 MHz 1 GHz Frcquoncy(Hz) -
•