PO01275C Tabor East Neighborhood Meeting. Monday, April 20, :30 PM 8:30 PM

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "PO01275C Tabor East Neighborhood Meeting. Monday, April 20, :30 PM 8:30 PM"

Melvyn Gray
5 years ago
Views:

1 PO01275C Tabor East Neighborhood Meeting Monday, April 20, :30 PM 8:30 PM 1

2 Opening Remarks, Introductions, Explanation of Agenda and Procedure Lenny Borer Moderator 2

3 Portland Office for Community Technology: Role, Regulations & Process 3

4 Wireless Informational Neighborhood Meeting 4

Office for Community Technology jennifer.

5 Office for Community Technology

6 6

7 To decrease industry requests for these kinds of wireless towers 7

8 by allowing carriers to collocate on utility poles instead 8

9 38.2% of Oregon households are wirelessonly, 14.5% are wireless mostly, and another 15.5% are dual use. Nearly 70% of Oregon households clearly depend on wireless devices for communications. Many households that retain a landline don t actually use it. 9

10 E911 Call Data E911 Call Wireless Call Growth Source: Portland Bureau of Emergency Communications Total E911 Calls Landline E911 Calls E911 Wireless Calls As of June, 2013 over 73% of all E911 calls were originated using a wireless phone 10

11 In a 1-year period, there were 86,119 E911 calls made on T-Mobile s network alone. Roughly 239 calls a day. 11

12 Proposed Facility (PO01275C Tabor East) Search Ring Existing and Future Wireless Coverage 12

13 The Search Ring 13

14 Current coverage in the area 14

15 Why in this neighborhood? The following few slides will answer this question, taking into account that : The current coverage hole is centered to this location and the 4 block radius around Yamhill & 71 st. Because of higher ground elevation the surrounding sites cannot provide adequate coverage (please note that the closest site is less than 0.4 miles away to SE). There is a significant difference in terrain elevation between chosen candidate and alternate locations. Even if we compensate by increasing antenna height, the coverage hole will remain virtually unchanged. Because of terrain morphology and propagation losses we need a local site. (Approximately 90dB of the original signal (15/16 of it) are lost a block away from a site). 15

16 Predicted coverage for C candidate Location: SE Yamhill & 71st Ave Ground elevation: 390 ft. Antenna height: 58 ft. 16

17 Predicted coverage for Y candidate Location: SE Stark & 76 th Ave Ground elevation: 280 ft. Antenna height: 100 ft. 17

18 Predicted coverage for Z candidate Location: SE Yamhill & 82nd Ave Ground elevation: 260 ft. Antenna height: 60 ft. 18

19 Proposed Facility (PO01275C Tabor East) Site Selection & Alternatives, Design & Zoning Compliance 19

20 Site Selection & Alternatives Investigation The following options were all considered and evaluated during our site search and candidate selection process: No existing structures were located within the search ring that would achieve the necessary height for coverage objectives. PGE representative accompanied Odelia Pacific and T-Mobile representatives in the field to determine feasibility of pole replacements. 20

21 Architectural Drawings Proposed Design 21

22 Architectural Drawings Proposed Design 22

23 Architectural Drawings Proposed Design 23

24 Architectural Drawings Proposed Design 24

25 Photo Simulations Photo Simulation Location Map 25

26 26

27 27

28 28

29 29

30 30

31 31

32 32

33 33

34 34

35 35

36 36

37 37

38 38

39 39

40 40

41 41

42 Compliance with Federal Radio Frequency Standards Andrew H. Thatcher, MSHP, CHP, Certified Health Physicist 42

43 Discussion of Radiofrequency Exposure from Proposed Base Station and Review of Health Studies Andrew H. Thatcher, MSHP, CHP T-Mobile Tabor East Community Meeting April 20, 2015

Maximum outdoor exposure from proposed T-Mobile antennas operating at 100% power 8.6 µw/cm² (@460 ) Max indoor exposure = 0.

44 Maximum outdoor exposure from proposed T-Mobile antennas operating at 100% power 8.6 µw/cm² ) Max indoor exposure = 0.21 µw/cm² Likely outdoor exposure < 2 µw/cm² Maximum outdoor exposure is more than 115 times less than the public limit. Indoor exposure is 4,600 times less than limit.

45 100 Typical Radiofrequency Exposures in our Lives Exposure (µw/cm²) The Public exposure limit is: 200 µw/cm² for FM 425 µw/cm² for TV (UHF) 570 µw/cm² for cellular 1,000 µw/cm² for PCS Cordless phone Bluetooth Baby 7 feet FM TV WiFi Base station maximum outdoor exposure Typical base station outdoor exposure Base station maximum indoor exposure

46 Standards Used in the World International Commission of Non Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Guidelines (more than 60 countries) Re-affirmed in 2009 Argentina, Australia, Austria, Brazil, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, France, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong, Japan, Hungary, Ireland, Malaysia, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovak, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Taiwan, Tanzania, Turkey, Uganda, UK, Venezuela, etc. FCC Standard: Bolivia, Canada, Estonia, Panama, USA Below ICNIRP and IEEE Belarus, Bulgaria, China, Lithuania, Poland, Russia Belgium, Chile, Greece, India, Israel, Italy, Liechtenstein, Switzerland

47 EU Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks 2015 The results of current scientific research show that there are no evident adverse health effects if exposure remains below the levels recommended by the EU legislation. Overall, the epidemiological studies on radiofrequency EMF exposure do not show an increased risk of brain tumours. Furthermore, they do not indicate an increased risk for other cancers of the head and neck region. Previous studies also suggested an association of EMF with an increased risk of Alzheimer s disease. New studies on that subject did not confirm this link.

49 Swedish Council: Ten Year Update (2012) We now know much more about measurements and absorption of RF fields and also about sources of exposure to the population and levels of exposure. A considerable number of provocation studies on RF exposure and symptoms have been unable to show any association. Overall, the data on brain tumor and mobile telephony do not support an effect of mobile phone use on tumor risk, in particular when taken together with national cancer trend statistics throughout the world.

50 2012 Expert Committee appointed by the Norwegian Institute of Health, commissioned by the Ministry of Health and Care Services and the Ministry of Transport and Communications : "The knowledge base in this health risk assessment provides no reason to assert that adverse health effects will occur from the typical public exposure. This also applies to the use of wireless communications in the office environment." "Exposure from base stations and radio and television transmitters is significantly lower than from using a mobile phone and the available data do not suggest that such low exposure could increase the risk of cancer." "There is negligible uncertainty in the risk assessment associated with other sources, such as base stations, wireless networks, television transmitters and the use of mobile phones by other individuals."

51 RFR Exposure and Health Effects Summary Lack of a plausible Biological Mechanism for health effects Epidemiology provides little evidence, Animal and cellular study results provide no replicated indication of health effects Lack of a Dose/Response relationship The exposure from towers to public is too small to result in any effect. No replicated studies have identified any non-thermal effects at these levels nor is there any reason to believe that effects of any type would be observed at these levels

52 RF Summary Radiofrequency exposures have been studied since the early 1950s. Current analysis shows that exposures the relatively new technology is no different than exposures from older FM and TV exposures. This area of study is well established over 25,000 published studies. Focus on the major organizational reviews for guidance on possible health effects.

53 Closing Remarks and Questions 43

Regulatory status for using RFID in the UHF spectrum 3 May 2006

Regulatory status for using RFID in the UHF spectrum 3 May NOTE: The following countries were updated since the last publication of 3 March : Thailand, Romania. The table attached provides an overview