NOI Press Release December 19, 2001

CITIZENS AND PROFESSIONALS FOR THE RESPONSIBLE USE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION (EMR)
PO Box 221, MARSHFIELD, VT 05658 TEL: (802) 426-3035 FAX: (802)426-3030

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 19, 2001
Contact: Janet Newton

FEDERAL AGENCIES DECLINE TO PROTECT HUMANS FROM RADIOFREQUENCY RADIATION RELYING ON OLD RESEARCH AS BASIS FOR RADIATION LIMITS - FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC) DISMISSES NOTICE OF INQUIRY

Relying on standards developed from pre-1986 research and incorrect assumptions that other federal health agencies are minding the store, the FCC walked away from its responsibility to prevent people from being hurt by harmful amounts of non-ionizing radiofrequency radiation (RF) when it dismissed the EMR Network Petition for Inquiry on December 11, 2001. The FCC issues federal permits to RF-generating transmitters, and licenses the airwaves upon which this radiation is carried. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the FCC to consider the impact of FCC actions on the quality of the human environment. Sticking its head in the sand, the FCC asserted that other federal agencies are responsible for addressing the issue.

RF-emitting devices whose radiation has demonstrated biological effects on the human body such as mobile cellular and digital phones, mobile phone base station antennas and broadcast antennas are on the increase. The issue of whether cell phone use could cause increases in brain cancer is now frequently mentioned in the press. The FCC RF radiation limits for human exposure are based on old research completed before 1986. The EMR Network provided the FCC with the opportunity to update the RF limits by filing a Notice of Inquiry regarding FCC standards. The EMR Network requested that the FCC initiate a proceeding to inquire about the need to revise FCC's regulations on environmental effects of RF radiation and that the FCC use the information from such an inquiry to reexamine the current US guidelines for human exposure to RF emissions from FCC-regulated transmitters. On December 11, 2001, Acting Chief of the FCC's Office of Engineering & Technology Bruce A. Franca dismissed the September 25, 2001, Petition for Inquiry filed by the EMR Network.

Only a year ago the FCC told the United States Supreme Court that it is competent to recognize good proposals for RF safety guidelines. Cellular Phone Task Force v. FCC, 205 F.3d82 (2d Cir.2000) FCC brief to Supreme Court pp.21-23. In the Petition dismissal the FCC now says that it is well established that the FCC is not an expert agency in health-related issues. The FCC relies on other agencies, such as the EPA and FDA, to develop the health and safety related policies that the FCC enforces. The FCC places the responsibility on the EPA, FDA, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) to determine the criteria for U.S. radiation exposure limits.

If efforts to revise or update our RF safety limits based on research in the field or on other factors are appropriate, that determination should be made by these [EPA, FDA] or other federal agencies with primary expertise in and responsibility for ensuring public health and safety, and should not be made in the first instance by the FCC. Accordingly, any proceeding or inquiry should be initiated by and maintained under the auspices of such agency or agencies, and the determination of whether such an inquiry or proceeding is appropriate at this time should also be made by such agency or agencies. Franca Sept. 25, 2001.

What might look good in theory presents a Catch-22 for the public because in the real world the federal health agencies are not involved. The FDA's role is limited to medical and consumer equipment radiation, not radiation from antennas, etc. OSHA and NIOSH missions are workplace-specific and do not apply to the general public. There is no Congressionally funded research at EPA, the agency to which Congress assigned the "lead role" in 1970, into the biological effects of RF/MW radiation. The EPA supplied the following summary in response to a request from Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut in the summer of 2000.

Since the NCRP committee that was revising RF exposure guidelines has disbanded, the only input left comes from IEEE, a private standards body, and from industry-sponsored research. The public is not only unwelcome, but treated with threats and hostility by the IEEE subcommittee setting the standard. In 1999, the federal RF Interagency Work Group did ask the IEEE subcommittee to examine 14 issues with the present standard, but the IEEE has not publicly responded. Preliminary indications are that this subcommittee will ignore many indications of adverse health effects at levels lower than the present standards and set a standard that will allow more radiation to the public.

Although the dismissal of the EMR Petition is not a determination on the substantive merits of the matters it raises, citizens are left with no agency to take responsibility for this important public health issue. Which federal agency, then, is minding the "public health store" for RF exposures? The EMR Network has thirty days to decide whether to appeal this dismissal.