Today I've seen more than 200 pieces if e-mail concerning the
FCC's new RF safety rules. I'll add just two more thoughts:
1) the ARRL Web site now has several items listing some of
the medical research that led the FCC to adopt RF safety
standards; and 2) let's not succumb to lawyerphobia.
Nowhere do the new rules create a private cause of action
(i.e., a right to sue) for exceeding the RF safety standards.
In fact, only two months ago the ninth circuit U.S. Court of
Appeals ruled that the FCC has exclusive jurisdiction to
enforce its own rules. The ninth circuit held that the courts
may not entertain lawsuits alleging violations of FCC rules.
(see Wilson v. A.H. Belo Corp., 1996 U.S. App. Lexis 15328)
If somebody sues alleging a violation of the new FCC rules,
that lawsuit will be a prime candidate for an early dismis-
sal.
Broadcasters have been subject to the FCC's RF safety rules
since 1985, and they are certainly bigger legal and regula-
tory targets tham hams (they have far more money and taller
towers). Broadcasters haven't experienced the legal apocalypse
that some are now predicting for hams.
73,
Wayne Overbeck, N6NB
woverbeck@fullerton.edu
>From k2wk@crystal.palace.net (Walt Kornienko) Thu Aug 8 06:59:23 1996
From: k2wk@crystal.palace.net (Walt Kornienko) (Walt Kornienko)
Subject: Follow-up message from a "frisky dog"
Message-ID: <199608080559.BAA09067@crystal.palace.net>
Overbeck writes:
> Also, as a former communications
> attorney I seriously question the suggestion that these
> rules will cause angry neighbors to file a bunch of lawsuits.
> No sane lawyer is going to take such a case on a contingent
> fee, and darned few neighbors can afford most lawyers' hourly
> rates.
Excuse me, but my experience has shown that neighbors
will go to outlandish extremes to get rid of "the problem."
The attorney's that my neighbor has hired are gladly cashing
all the checks they receive. In a sense the attorneys are
laughing all the way to the bank.
In my case, I applied for and received a valid building permit
for a 90' tower, which incidentally, required NO variances.
My neighbor didn't like it and tried to get the town to "take
back" the permit. The neighbor lost at the local level and
has now taken the matter to State Superior Court. The neighbor
has brought suit against me, my wife, the town and the town's zoning
board. All because they simply don't like my tower. Don't underestimate
the lengths some individuals will go to impose their esthetic on others.
Their attorney only fuels their insanity by telling them that given enough
money they will out spend me and achieve their desired result. The real
insult to me and my family is that the American justice system has been
perverted to the point that anyone can sue anyone else for virtually
anything and force one to defend themselves, spending lots of money
in the process. All this hassle and expense only to defend what is
legal, permitted and, even sanctioned by the FCC. Welcome to America!
*****************************************************************
* *
* 73 de Walt Kornienko - K2WK (FRC) *
* *
* k2wk@crystal.palace.net or K2WK@N2BIM.NJ.NOAM *
* Snail: 52 Sunset Inn Rd Lafayette, NJ 07848 *
* 201-579-1966 (machine) or 201-579-3660 (shack) *
* *
* "You are today where your thoughts have brought you." *
* -author unknown *
* *
*****************************************************************
|