As a practical matter, most antenna site managers recognize that filing an BA with the FCC to address possible human exposure to RF fields that are above the FCC limits would not be a rewarding experience or particularly productive. Tower developers regularly file EAs for a number of reasons, which are specified in the FCC "NEPA" rules (47 CFR 1.1307). The triggering factors for an EA involve such things as the development of facilities that "may have a significant environmental effect." For instance an BA would be required for antenna facilities to be located in a designated wilderness area or wildlife preserve; facilities that may affect threatened or endangered species or Indian religious sites; facilities that may affect properties or areas of historical significance; facilities that might be in a floodplain; etc. However, no wireless carrier or broadcaster would relish the idea of filing an BA with the FCC because their antenna facilities may potentially expose people to high levels of RF energy.

From the standpoint of possible FCC enforcement action for facilities that do not comply with the RF exposure rules, it is the FCC licensees who are on the hook, not the facility manager who doesn't hold a FCC license. Of course, on multi-user facilities, site customers (carriers, licensees) generally look to the site manager to coordinate or manage the compliance process. At properly managed multi-user antenna facilities, the site manager knows and documents the frequencies, operating powers, and locations of all antennas and can determine (either through predictive modeling or measurements) where areas of concern (hot spots) are likely to be located on a rooftop or on or near a tower. The site manager would then work with site customers to take the appropriate measures to ensure that neither workers nor members of the public are exposed to RF field in excess of those specified in 47 CFR 1.1310.

Of course, real life antenna site situations can be complicated. For instance, site customers are not always cooperative. Sometimes they will not provide the necessary information about the frequencies and power levels at which their systems operate. Other times they will take the attitude that their antennas or transmitters are "categorically exempt" and as such, they may inaccurately claim that they, as licensees, are not obliged to participate in "site wide compliance" efforts. Sometimes they take their own independent action (for instance installing signage around their equipment) that may not be consistent with overall rooftop RF compliance policies. Sometimes site managers operate rooftop facilities (sometimes in conjunction with in-building telecommunications management) for commercial real estate/building owners or managers. In some cases, building owners may not cooperate. We have heard of many instances where building owners do not allow certain types of signage to be installed or refuse to implement certain access restrictions or don't give their workers any RF avoidance training or guidance.

The recent FCC public notice noted that facility managers and tower owners aren't subject to FCC enforcement for non-compliance with the RF exposure guidelines. Most site managers recognize, however, that they may be subject to enforcement by OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) or state agencies under the OSHA General Duty clause for failing to provide a safe and healthful work environment.

The RF Compliance Committee, chaired by Wesley McGee of SiteSafe, is in the early stages of planning a one-day seminar to address RF compliance. This program would feature experts from the FCC, OSHA, and industry. The program will be tailored to the information needs of carriers, building owners, and facility managers.