I know when I file FAA studies I always pick a single frequncy range in the unlicensed spectrum, say 902-9258 or claim 5.65-5.7G. I figure its not their business anyway.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 6:23 AM Tim Hardy <thardy...@gmail.com> wrote: > From an FAA perspective, purposefully so. In 2004, they tried a massive > power play to take authority from the FCC through Rule change that would > have required licensees and applicants to get prior FAA approval for any > change or addition to a previously cleared tower. Industry raised hell, > and in 2007 FAA issued this Co-location Policy: > > https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/downloads/external/content/CVCC_FR_2007.pdf > > Funtimes! > > On Oct 28, 2019, at 11:03 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > > “structure will emit frequencies” seems pretty vague. > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Lewis Bergman > *Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2019 8:30 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer > > Good points. I would suppose that an existing tower is unlikely to have > been built without it but you never know. > But since the whole discussion started with legal issues that is likely > the biggest one. It wasn't brought up until later that a 350' tower was > close by. > As you said, the FAA site has a criteria tool that tells you if you have > to file. Nice catch. > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:22 PM Tim Hardy <thardy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Lewis, > > I don’t have a comment on the NEPA side of this, but it should be pointed > out that towers under 200’ can still require an ASR. The 200’ requirement > is one of many and the only way to know for sure is to run the FAA Notice > Criteria tool here: > https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showNoNoticeRequiredToolForm > > Here are some other instances where towers of any height can require an > ASR: > > You must file with the FAA at least 45 days prior to construction if: > > - your structure will exceed 200ft above ground level > - your structure will be in proximity to an airport and will exceed > the slope ratio > - your structure involves construction of a traverseway (i.e. highway, > railroad, waterway etc...) and once adjusted upward with the appropriate > vertical distance would exceed a standard of 77.9(a) or (b) > - your structure will emit frequencies, and does not meet the > conditions of the FAA Co-location Policy > <https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/downloads/external/content/CVCC_FR_2007.pdf> > - your structure will be in an instrument approach area and might > exceed part 77 Subpart C > - your proposed structure will be in proximity to a navigation > facility and may impact the assurance of navigation signal reception > - your structure will be on an airport or heliport > - filing has been requested by the FAA > > Thanks, > > Tim > Sent from my iPad > > > On Oct 28, 2019, at 4:45 PM, Lewis Bergman <lewis.berg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Well, First, an ASR isn't required on anything 200 foot or under. So is it > over 200 foot? If yes and you don't plan on renting space out to someone > else you technically don't need an ASR. You can get an ASR for almost any > structure regardless of height. ASR's make some things easier, like getting > licensed PTP links and letting people find the tower that might want to > rent it for instance. If it is over 200 foot or already has an ASR, > > I won't bore you with the story but the fact it has no NEPA will likely > only matter to a carrier. You can actually get an ASR and self certify that > a NEPA isn't required in about 15 minutes if you have all the info in front > of you and know what you are doing. The only reason you need a NEPA anyway > is that the Feds say you need one to get an ASR, which is a Fed thing. No > ASR needed, no NEPA required. NEPA can be frustrating. I spent months doing > the work, hiring experts, etc, etc. all to come to the conclusion that no > NEPA was required. It seems cyclical but the bottom line is you can do all > the studies and if they come back clean the only place it is recorded is in > the E-106 study, not the ASR.I'll show you an example of what I mean. The > tower below had a full NEPA/NHPA > ASR 1302897 > <https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistration.jsp?regKey=2702592> > Here is the Enviro section. As you can see, it says " Environmental > Notification is complete and an Environmental Assessment is not required. " > You don't know it isn't required until you do it, but the effect of doing > is the same as if you just clicked the box that it isn't required, one > isn't needed. You can't submit an assessment if one isn't required, at > least not the last time I did one. Kind of Catch 22 but if you tell the FCC > that they can't even underatand why you would say that. > *Environmental Compliance* > Does the applicant request a Waiver of the Commission's rules for > environmental notice? > Is the applicant submitting an Environmental Assessment? > No > No > Is another Federal Agency taking responsibility for environmental review? > Does the applicant certify to No Significant Environmental Effect pursuant > to Section > No > Yes > Reason for another Federal Agency taking responsibility for environmental > review > Basis for Certification > > Environmental Notification is complete and an Environmental Assessment is > not required. > Name of Federal Agency > Local Notice Date > > 05/25/2017 > National Notice Date > 05/30/2017 > > Anyway, up to you for what its worth. The bottom line, you are not > required to do anything if you don't want an ASR. If you do, you have to > start playing the Feds games. > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:30 PM Roland Houin <rho...@fourway.net> wrote: > > My concern is that there are rumors that this site may not have been > compliant with fcc requirements. > Tower installed after 2000, no nepa? > Want to make sure that there aren’t any suprises… > Thanks for the advice.. > > Roland > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *ch...@wbmfg.com > *Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2019 3:13 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer > > Funny, when I saw the original post my first thought was: “do whatever > Lewis says to do” > > *From:* Lewis Bergman > *Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2019 6:11 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer > > In my experience, lawyers are really good at screwing up deals. But, if > you are buying an asset, there aren't a lot of legal issues that follow > assets other than sales taxes. I'm not saying you don't need a lawyer, just > that a lot of lawyers gum up the negotiations so bad you can't get a deal > done. To save money and time you should a very well defined idea of what > the lawyer is going to do for you and communicate that. They aren't experts > in everything and they charge you for the time it takes them to learn stuff. > > > The last tower I bought from Crown Castle all I got was a bill of sale. No > contract, no nothing. > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 11:08 AM Roland Houin <rho...@fourway.net> wrote: > > Does anyone have recommendation for a lawyer etc to handle tower issued. > I’m thinking of purchasing a tower, & want to make sure it’s compliant > with todays legal issues. > > Roland > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > Lewis Bergman > 325-439-0533 Cell > ------------------------------ > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > Lewis Bergman > 325-439-0533 Cell > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > -- Lewis Bergman 325-439-0533 Cell
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
