5004 40219851
IMPACT OF PROPOSED FEDERAL GUIDANCE
FOR RAD 10FREQUENCY (RF) RADIATION
ON NON-BROADCAST SOURCES
Office of Radiation Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C.
1985
Agency
230 South Dearborn Street
c*'C'ago, nnnois 60604
-------
Impact of Proposed Federal Guidance
on Non-Broadcast Sources
The impact of proposed Federal guidance on non-broadcast sources
was derived through the use of the frequency assignment files for U.S.
Government and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authorized
radiofrequency (RF) radiation sources. These files are maintained by the
Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center (ECAC), and were processed by
ECAC, using criteria supplied by the Office of Radiation Programs (ORP), to
assemble a data base (i.e., the EPA Master Data Base) containing frequency
assignments having potential environmental significance. This EPA Master
Data Base contains frequency assignment records, and for each record, the
associated RF radiation characteristics and the predicted power densities
which could be produced at specific distances from system antennas. The
Master Data Base was separated into the following categories: (1) earth
station main beam, (2) earth station off-axis, (3) civilian fixed beam
radar, (4) civilian scanning beam radar, (5) military fixed beam radar,
(6) military scanning beam radar, (7) other (10.0 kHz to 100.0 kHz),
(8) other (100.1 kHz - 30.561 MHz), (9) other (30.5611 MHz - 960.0 MHz),
(10) other (greater than 960.0 MHz).
In order to arrive at an estimate of impact, further analysis was
performed on the EPA Master Data Base. Power densities, corresponding to
Guidance Option 1 (See NPR), were used in the analysis of guidance impact on
non-broadcast sources. Records with power densities predicted to exceed the
proposed guidance at 100 meters were written into a smaller working file,
maintaining the separation of records into categories.
Frequency records within each category in the working file were then
sorted by longitude and latitude and the number of unique locations
exceeding the guidance counted. This process was repeated for each category
and each distance to produce the final statistics. Removal of duplicate
locations was only performed within categories, since frequency assignments
in a different category are likely to represent different sources even if
they occur at the same locations. The intention of this sorting procedure
was to identify the number of geographically unique locations at which some
equipment may exceed the proposed guidance.
It is common for a single Government source to have several frequency
assignments and conversely, a single frequency assignment to be associated
with several equipments. This analysis assumes that all Government sources
are represented by at least one frequency assignment in the Government
Master File. There may be several equipments operating on a single
frequency assignment and they may not all be at the same location. Although
this data base deficiency may affect the quality of the impact deter-
minations, we are not aware of any other automated data bases containing the
necessary information which would permit a more accurate accounting of
actual equipments in the field.
-------
The results of this analysis, shown in Tables 1-5 and Figure 1, are
interpreted as the numbers of unique, unclassified sites containing emitters
predicted to exceed the EPA proposed Federal guidance at the distances
shown. Certain qualifications of the above analysis should be pointed out:
1. No attempt is made to sum the power densities in cases where
multiple emitters occur at the same site. EPA experience has shown that in
most cases multiple co-located non-broadcast emitters do not produce
radiation in the same direction at the same time.
2. The results represent sites and not emitters. The sorting methods
used in this analysis do not differentiate between multiple frequency
assignments for a single source and multiple sources at a single site.
3. Classified sources are not considered in this analysis. However,
comparison with the ECAC analysis which did include classified sources
indicates that the inclusion of these sources would have a relatively small
effect on the results.
Given the qualifications listed above, this analysis indicates a
relatively small impact on non-broadcast sources. Only 164 sites are
predicted to exceed the stated guidance level at distances of 100 meters
when the conservative 20 dB sidelobe reduction factor and 100 percent duty
cycle (for shortwave sources) are used in the models (Table 1). When a more
realistic 30 dB sidelobe reduction factor and 10 percent duty cycle are
employed, the prediction drops to 56 sites (Table 4). The numbers are
further reduced at greater distances from the sources. The relatively small
number of non-broadcast sites estimated to be impacted at the most stringent
of the Guidance options would be further reduced for the other options and
therefore, the impact analysis was not repeated.
-------
I
Irt
o. >»
It
84>
. ^
** S
«O V)
^s
o o
M V>
"5 O>
*
f
i
J
J
«
H
2
k1
h
0
a.
k
H
to
k'
U
0
0
r
8
C
U
c
c
c
ft
ft
1
2
C
k
C
8)
H
>
C
2
k
C
£
«
Z
Z
0)
0)
ft
bi
h
Z
o
e
bl
0
z
c
e
H
C
1
c
ft
c
k'
k
C
fi.
bl
C
k
05
C
fi.
c
ft
fl.
c
2
M
fi
b!
bl
X
bl
ITS Or SITES PROJECTED
iNCE Tfl EXCEED GUIDANCE
NUHUER PERCENT
P 02
52
ii z
« 111
Ul
«
o
-------
*
^
a.
Ul
o
ft} CU
O *-
0. 3
0 0
^ (^
0.
go
f- 14-
o
0» 0*
u £
X
«A £
« ii
if §
3 tfl
O
44
*B QJ
^ .Jj
CD C
J g>
e °
§
o
M
i/i
15
C
0*
«*- u
o e
fa
*O 3
1"
*
CM
0)
»
J
1
I
L*
Z
Ul
H
0
X
u
r
H
CD
lil
U
ft
2
C
to
^
x
v»
c
u
fi
c
c
ft
£
1
Z
c
Z
li
0)
H
to
Z
£
c
^
jf
c
£
£
2
(C
U
u
Z
^
a
H
2
E
j
2
iii
c
u
IL
4
1
Iii
A
cc
c
c
ft
i
Z
ft
0
u
y
U
X
(I)
ac
i
5
ti>
|
u.
UI
^
en
M
e
e
9
a
e
CM
2
o
5
CM
e
5
in
.
CM
5
*4
>.
O
u
Ul
*
u
SOURCE
oaaaoaaxm 4
M
*" n M r>.
,
nj*tvv>« !)!)« i «
^ n w tvi i«
i
C 2
i i M
I 1 s 3 . *
i « 1 * 5 ; s .
«z«x to o » w
ac « ac « » K M
U Ul a O Xx
l«i*--gl<
uiuwooNirt-u.
* X « Z ^ X U.
axaxfsi*«2°
UIXUXX««<«»-Z
X « X « X UI«O
M, U M U Ul M
u,tnu.iA o ac t-
o » to u «
X X >- >- »-
««acac->' S
>>-<-txX~f5:K 5
MI^M»<^»>l»t>< O
UUXXOOOOUI "
uoxxoa.aacw
-------
I
J
c
hi
&
Q
g"
£
°-ai
_ o
51
5 8
«>
> K
si
*«it
^o,
£*
5*
c£
5'
§.5 "
°- c
A *
in
& >»
-£
* 9)
5*
a SP
§5
VI ^
«
tl *
** O)
* s.
O K
6 B
i^
*"S
§*
2-E
*SP>
o c
M °
T: »
SLy
-^ C
^
ft
C
z
z
Ul
c
2
C
c
H
^
u
1
<
ft
a'
C
L'
k
C
e.
k
A
2
K
&.
»,
K
0.
H
A
In'
>
k'
U
X
k'
^*
tn
Ui
»-
te
E
UI
u
E
IT.
|
U.
UI
i
0)
*
J^
^
e
e
IM
«P«
IP
ft.
»
*
«
IT
M
«p«
X
'
jh ^tf ^te ^B ^B ^B ^B ^ft ^K
W ^ IP ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
4
&r««to^rcuoj*4»
Rrf tM
ss^s*"?--
J S 5
U, « «E U « U
u«ie««»-zo«
u0>«0)u^no;«
U.3X3'-i53Du.
ot
*
-------
\ »
\»
9
N
X
o-
11
»- iL
\\\\\
- n « *
I
e
-------
-------
2
g
5 *
** !2
ALLV
h
k
2
k1
h
C
(L
0)
Ul
H
H
05
k'
U
ft
D
C
8)
k
8)
C
U
e
«
c
ft
ft
i
2
C
2
k
0)
W
8)
X
J
«
2
C
k
C
V
ft
{
V
Z
k>
U
2
C
fi
H
3
a
i
c
ft
k!
fi
k!
k
C
1
k'
C
k'
8)
0
fi.
c
K
fi.
U
2
H
fi
k!
U
U
X
k1
tr>
«
u
£
*
£
8
U. 0
Ul
_J M
(J
U
>
I §
H «*
4
S^K
^P
« 0) !fl
1 C '
£ £
« *
Su
u
»- £ «VI
u 5
"i §
_J CD
U.
u< z
c E
QC O
S ^ £
U. Ul «
i i
»« ^>
K (D
IJ *
^ ^K ^&
s
Ul 7
Sfe
e
w
0 ^
» o
CO «\J
«
n
g :
»« ««
s
Ul
s
g
*
u
*
«-oeceeeee «
^c^eee »
I
1
1
«« rj
N«« tn
cob -i
u!ln{«KXu« »-
ucn«cnu&.cnco« o
jj ^* 4p ^% ^H g^ «^ » 1 L.
» v ^K ^ ^ mi S ^ ik ^
-------
-------
cr
1
ml
O
LU
H-
(75
u.
o
o:
ui
CD
O
00
o
CM
m
o
-------
U.S. environmental Protection Agency
Region V. Library
£30 South Dearborn Street
Illinois 60604
------- |