Small Cells Amplify State RF Safety Concerns; WIA, Cities Press FCC to Update Rules

The Oregon Senate voted 25-0 Thursday for a bill, now pending in the House, directing the state Health Authority to examine peer-reviewed, independently funded scientific studies about exposure to microwave radiation, including wireless network technologies in schools, and report back by Jan. 2, 2021. The New Hampshire legislature recently passed a bill to set up a committee to study environmental and health effects of 5G technology. The Louisiana House voted unanimously last month for a resolution asking the Health and Environmental Quality departments to study effects of 5G technology and report back 60 days before the 2020 session. The Montana House voted 62-34 in February to pass a resolution urging Congress to amend the Telecom Act to account for health effects of small-cell siting in residential areas. It died in the Senate.

Massachusetts lawmakers heard four bills on wireless RF safety at a Joint Committee on Public Health hearing Tuesday: H-1874 to develop best practices for wireless usage in schools that consider health and safety, S-1271 to educate medical patients about environmental health risks including wireless, S-1272 to register wireless facilities to allow radiation monitoring, and S-1273 to ban “especially dangerous wireless facilities, emissions, and products” (see 1906060023). Public health advocates warned about RF emissions at a recent Wisconsin committee hearing on a state small-cells bill (see 1905290032).

Wireless safety has long been an issue at the city level, but concern seems to be rising with the coming of small cells, said National League of Cities Principal Associate-Technology and Communications Angelina Panettieri. “Until recently, I would have guessed that the stereotypes were fair” about the type of people raising such concerns, but NLC members say “they’re hearing more and more of this from what they call serious people -- constituents who are usually pretty level-headed and aren’t the ones in city hall with a different complaint every week,” she said. “That’s really what’s got our elected officials concerned.”

“The closer to the public small cells are deployed, the louder the calls for scientific proof that small cells do not pose a danger to the public,” emailed NATOA General Counsel Nancy Werner. “Whether it be the pedestrians walking below the small cells in the rights of way or the residents that could be less than 30 feet away in some northeastern cities with historically small setbacks, small cells are closer to the public than macro towers.”

“We need to do something,” said Wireless Education Technology Safety Educator Cecelia Doucette, who testified in support of the Massachusetts bills at last week’s committee hearing. “I do see a lot of momentum growing as people are waking up and finding 5G small-cell antennas mounted in their front yard or backyard,” she told us. Doucette used to help schools get grants for tablets and other wireless-powered equipment but later read studies about possible health risks and became an advocate.

Committee leaders appeared to be “truly listening” at the hearing, though they didn’t ask Doucette any questions, she said. Industry didn’t testify, she said. Massachusetts bills don’t get passed quickly, often taking many sessions, but lawmakers’ interest “is way better than when I started,” said Doucette. The advocate isn’t opposed to industry sitting at the table with scientists and legislators, she said. “There are many in the industry who are tired of the bad players in their field.”

Adelstein Backs Update

“The FCC should expeditiously review and update its RF rules as needed based on sound science,” said WIA’s Adelstein in a statement to us. "Relying on the best scientific data by the most qualified independent experts will allow the FCC to make well-informed decisions to ensure safety of the public, and we welcome any guidance they provide. WIA members firmly adhere to FCC guidance as they are deeply committed to ensure that wireless facilities pose absolutely no health risks to the public.”

The FCC docket to refresh the 1996 rules has been open since 2012, NATOA's Werner emailed: “In an era where local governments are told they must start to act on a small cell application in 10 days, it’s a little hard to understand how the FCC can allow a matter to linger for over 23 years.” Doucette said, “Here we are, six years later, with people getting sicker and sicker.”

Local governments can’t make zoning decisions based on RF safety concerns; they can explain the law to residents and try to convince the FCC to update its aging RF standards, Panettieri said. Cities aren’t qualified to say if they think RF emissions are safe, but they would like to share refreshed federal standards with their communities to calm public health concerns, she said.

Some congressional Democrats have pressed the FCC for 5G RF information (see 1905100072). Montgomery County, Maryland, last week told the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that last summer’s FCC infrastructure orders inappropriately ignored possible 5G RF health and safety issues (see 1906100021). The FCC didn’t comment Friday.

“Radiofrequencies used by wireless devices and networks have been studied extensively and have not been shown to cause health problems, according to the consensus of the international scientific community," said CTIA Senior Vice President Nick Ludlum in a statement. "Existing FCC safety regulations protect public health and wireless devices operate well below safety limits. We welcome continued review of the science by the FCC and other expert agencies.”