Concludes U.S. National Toxicology Program Expert Panel On Cell Phone Radiation
Watch News Report
Protect the ones you love.
Environmental Health Trust Launches New Capital Campaign
LEARN MORE
phonegate
Cell Phone Radiation Exceeds Limits When Tested At Body Contact Position
Learn More
CBC News Investigation
Read More
Cell Phones Violate Radiation Safety Limits When Tested Against The Body
Watch the report
The Internet Of Things Poses Human Health Risks
Read More
Scientists Question The Safety Of Untested 5G Technology At International Conference
Wireless Radiation and Health
Read More
Expert Forum on Environmental Health Research and Policy Priorities
American Academy Of Pediatrics Issues New Recommendations To “Reduce Exposure To Cell Phones”
Read More
Countries worldwide are taking action on cell phones
Learn More
$25 Million U.S. Government Study Finds Cell Phones Cause Cancer
Read More
STUDY FAQ'S
Save the Girls
Doctors warn that unusual breast cancers are occurring in women who stored cell phones in their bra.
Learn More
our mission
The Environmental Health Trust carries out cutting edge research to understand and reduce environmental health risks.
Featured
Small Cells, Mini Cell Towers, Wireless Facilities and Health: Letters From Scientists on the Health Risk of 5G
Small Cells, Cell Towers, Wireless Facilities and Health
Letters From Experts on The Impact of Wireless Antennas on Public Health
Many people ask “What scientific research has been done on the radiation from small cell wireless facilities? What is the current scientific opinion of the scientists who are studying the issue?”
The answer is that the scientists studying the health effects of 5G and wireless radiation are deeply concerned and are calling for a halt to the rollout of 5G and a halt to increasing radiofrequency radiation exposures to the public.
Please see on this page a short list of letters from expert scientists, doctors and public health experts sent to government officials regarding the issue of streamlining small cells in neighborhoods. In these letters scientists share the research supporting their opinion that wireless exposure to the public should be minimized and the deployment of small cell antennas into neighborhoods should be halted.
Watch a Best Best & Krieger LLP webinar covering CA SB 649, and "what localities should be doing now to protect their interests — at the local, regional, state and federal levels."
Webinar walks us through much of the legal infrastructure pertaining to cell siting both at the state and federal levels. Although this webinar focuses particularly on California and SB 649, there is much that can be applied to other states.
California SB 649 would strip the local control of communities to determine wireless facility placement in their rights of way. The State of California Department of Finance has made the recommendation to oppose SB 649 stating, "this bill goes too far by usurping city and county zoning authority for infrastructure development, and it potentially imposes reimbursable, state-mandated costs on cities and counties."
The AARP, the Sierra Club and the Environmental Working Group oppose this Bill. Over 200 cities, and the League of California Cities are opposed to SB 649. 45 out of 58 California Counties are in opposition to this bill.
This page maintains an updated list of news reports, videos and factsheets related to SB 649. Please scroll down to see the wealth of material generated by this ill advised bill that would streamline 5G cell antennas into neighborhoods and increase exposure to wireless frequencies.
On this page EHT is maintaining documentation on letters of opposition sent to the State, videos of news reports and videos of testimony given to the State lawmakers. Please check in regularly.
If you want to join others in California working to stop this bill please contact Californians For Safer Tech.
Forces cities and counties to lease out their public property for wireless equipment;
Eliminates negotiated leases, and places a $250 cap on what they call an attachment rate instead;
Eliminates public input, full local discretion, and ability to reduce equipment blight by using encroachment and building permits instead of discretionary permits;
Eliminates ability to remove equipment that is blighting neighborhoods.
"Big Telecom and its allies in the White House have quietly carried out a campaign to secure rapid and cheap access to those poles, at taxpayer expense. Here in California, state legislators recently advanced a bill introduced by Senator Ben Hueso that would allow wireless service providers to install their equipment on public street poles at below-market rates — and to do so nearly wherever and whenever they choose — all in the name of “streamlining” local permit approvals."
The State of California Department of Finance has made the recommendation to oppose SB 649.
The analysis report defines that SB 649 is likely to create a million dollar unfunded mandate, fails to cure basic wireless digital divide issues; and is fails to address important issues of community aesthetics. Read the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE BILL ANALYSIS OF SB 649.
The Environmental Working Group is in strong opposition to SB 649.
Sacramento Bee op-ed, Why wireless industry is a triple rip-off for Californians, League of California Cities Executive Director Carolyn Coleman, California State Association of Counties Executive Director Matt Cate and Rural County Representatives of California Executive Director Greg Norton, June 27, 2017
List of US State Bills Streamlining Wireless Small Cells/DAS/Nodes on Rights Of Way
United States Statewide Bills that Preempt Local Authority For Wireless Facilities
Allowing Wireless Small Cells/DAS/Nodes Microwave Antennas on Rights Of Way Streetlights and Power poles in Neighborhoods
5G requires millions of mini cell towers to be built nationwide. From coast to coast, states are moving forward with Bills to preempt local authority and allow companies to place wireless antennae in neighborhoods in front of homes with zero to minimal community input. In some states, fierce community opposition has lead to blocking these streamlining Bills. In other states, these Bills have passed. Please see this running list of states and their Bills with useful links to news stories and videos about the new legislation.
Note: This is nut updated for most States since Fall 2017
Please contact us with information we are missing and/or new letters to include. As far as we know.
It appears the following states have already passed 5G bills: Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Virginia These are in process: Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois (currently on the Governor's desk), Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Washington. More to come. If you have updates please send text linked and ready to go and we will verify and add it in.
EHT will try to regularly update this list. If you see information that needs to be added or corrected please contact us at [email protected]
States with Bills to Support Local Control and Halt Preemption
The bill proposes to require the council to establish a statewide plan for siting small cells and DAS in the public rights of way. In addition, it would require that any process established include the participation of the municipality where this equipment will be sited. Technology is changing drastically, and there is a need for the added capacity antenna systems provide. There is currently no statutory framework in place that keeps up with changing technology, and wireless companies are able to install antenna systems without the meaningful input from towns where these antenna systems are located. This bill proposes a moratorium on all jurisdictional matters relating to small cells and DAS until the plan and process are approved by the legislature.
Verizon wireless and Industry trade groups were opposed to this bill.
Sen. Slossberg Announces Passage of Senate Bill 536 “Slossberg’s bill would establish a state-wide plan and process for siting these small cell canister antennas, similar to the process that currently exists for cell phone towers. Critical to this process would be participation by the municipality where an antenna may be placed, along with members of the community. This process would give community members and elected officials a voice in the siting of these small canister antennas.”
New York Senate Bill 6687 2017 Bill Directs the public service commission to prohibit the attachment of wireless equipment or any other like attachments to existing utility poles in certain circumstances.
“The Town of Oyster Bay finds that wireless telecommunications facilities may pose significant concerns to its residents, and the character and environment of its neighborhoods..The process will establish a fair and efficient process for review and approval of applications; assure an integrated, comprehensive review of environmental impacts; and protect the rights of the Town and its residents, to the maximum extent allowed under the law.”
“...no person shall be permitted to site, place, build, construct, modify or prepare any site for the placement or use of wireless telecommunications facilities without having first obtained a building-permit from the Department of Planning and Development and any and all other approvals as required herein or under other applicable law. A new wireless facility must, in addition to a building permit, obtain a special use permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals.”
Several Districts, communities and elected officials have organized to halt preemption. Montgomery County is redoing zong and Cities in Prince George’s County have joined to prepare and plan a way to maintain local control. A 2016 Bill to streamline small cells resulted in community outrage.
2017 Update: Montgomery County and Prince George's County have drafted new zoning that would remove public notoce and public hearings for cell antennas in neighborhoods in front yards on rights of ways.
This video is testimony given in a Prince George's County Greenbelt City Council meeting before the draft zoning was introduced but shows that the local towns want to stop small cells from being placed on their front yards.
City by City, small cells (antennas in neighborhoods) are being proposed and cities are mounting a strong opposition. See a video of public testimony here.
“Lancaster Pennsylvania passed a cell tower ordinance in September. It prohibits wireless transmission equipment on any property deemed historically significant, gives the city control over “time place and manner” of construction and repair work and requires equipment to “blend with the existing surroundings ... to the greatest extent possible.”
“About 60 Pennsylvania cities and towns — among them Philadelphia and many of its suburbs — opposed the utility designation in comments to the commission, saying the status granted those firms overly broad powers with little regulatory oversight.”
Senate Bill 213 bars cities and counties from denying permits to companies building cell towers less than 50 feet high on public right-of-ways, as well as installing antennas on utility poles and traffic lights. Several cities including West Lafayette, Crawfordsville and Lafayette are among those in Indiana which have begun legislating to head off the effects of a bill giving sweeping new rights to cell phone companies. Crawfordsville Mayor Todd Barton,speaking on WBAA’s “Ask The Mayor,” calls the bill “atrocious.”
City fights law on cell structure locations, Saturday, April 29, 2017, Indiana Journal Gazette "Fort Wayne joined cities and councils throughout Indiana in pushing back against a law that would limit municipalities' ability to regulate the location of cellular equipment in the public right of way."
Texas
Senate Bill 1004: Takes away the ability of cities to control how public rights-of-way are used. • Mandates the use of street signs, traffic structures, and street lights for antennas for cell phone companies. • Subsidizes the cell phone industry with below market rental rates and capped application fees
"It’s an issue of private companies using taxpayer property for their own gain,” Bennet Sandlin, executive director of the Texas Municipal League, told The Dallas Morning News. “This bill is completely off the charts in terms of fairness.”
Opposition to Small Cell Streamlining Bill resulted in several changes
The measure was passed as a stand-alone bill (HF 739) on the House floor on May 20. The following day, it was included in the omnibus jobs bill, SF 1456, which will now go to Gov. Dayton for approval. View the final omnibus jobs bill (pdf) The League of Minnesota Cities had issues with the permitting process, the space between the cells and whether municipalities had the ability to reject permits. The organization ended up making 34 changes to the bill before it became neutral to its passage.
SB 1451, known as the Small Cell Facilities Deployment Act, would limit municipal authority to regulate, site or charge permit fees for small wireless facilities.
2017 -- S 0342: Small Cell Siting Act: Following the House’s passage of the bill, the legislation was referred to the R.I. Senate, where Sen. Louis P. DiPalma, D-Middletown, has sponsored companion bill S0342.
No State Bills at this time. The article below describes how “ South Dakota's senior U.S. senator is the chair of the powerful Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, with oversight of the national telecommunications laws and regulations. In March, Thune introduced the Mobile NOW Act, a bill to open up spectrum to telecommunications companies and smooth the path for 5G technology, and moved it through his committee to the Senate floor.”
HB 2365: HB 2365 was signed by Gov. Doug Ducey on March 31 allowing wireless carriers such as Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint to install, operate and maintain small-cell equipment in city and town rights-of-way, according to the League of Arizona Cities and Towns.
Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey wrote a letter published saying that his signature on House Bill 2365 makes his state the first to “streamline” the deployment of 5G wireless communication.
The telecommunications industry won passage of legislation, SB 1282 (McDougle), in 2017 that speeds deployment of wireless infrastructure in Virginia including small cells and micro-wireless facilities, imposing limits on local zoning authority.
News Update March 13, 2018: All the bills passed the General Assembly -- some in a close vote. The bills go to Governor Ralph Northam for his consideration. Virginia Municipal League eNews, March 9, 2018, Ask for Veto of Wireless Bills
UPDATE: New bills pushed forward in the 2018 session of the Virginia General Assembly would further erode local control, and concern structures up to 50 feet above ground level and co-locations on structures that are not small cell facilities. The primary 2018 bills are HB 1258 (Kilgore) and SB 405 (McDougle).
Del. Kilgore and Sen. McDougle also introduced related bills, HB 1427 and SB 823 , that would cap fees that may be charged to wireless companies for usage of public owned rights-of-way.
A 2018 session bill, HB 1131 (Gooditis), to repeal articles of the Code of Virginia that were set by the SB 1282 wireless infrastructure bill in 2017, was recommended to be stricken from the docket by a House subcommittee.
Scenic Virginia, Your Help Needed: Call Your Representatives to Oppose HB 1258 and SB 405 Virginia Association of Counties, Capitol Contact Alert, Feb. 2, 2018: House Panel Guts Local Control Over Zoning "...allows wireless companies to place cell towers up to 50 feet tall within rights-of-way without local control. Additionally, for towers of greater height, the bill hamstrings localities' ability to obtain information and address citizen concerns through the public hearing process."
Excerpt from a 2018 City of Newport News resolution: "...the wireless equipment installations can have significant impacts on the health, safety, welfare and aesthetics of localities but those companies have little, if any, interest in taking into account those concerns that potentially conflict with their profit margins." A Cell Tower Next Door? New Bill Would Take Away Local Control, Martinsville Bulletin, Jan. 31, 2018
CS/SB 596 (Hutson) and HB 687 (La Rosa) preempt local government control of city-owned rights-of-way for installation of wireless antennas and equipment. Among their various other provisions, the bills bar local governments from prohibiting or regulating the installation of wireless facilities on or next to existing cellular phone towers and utility poles within municipally owned rights of-way.
CS/CS/HB 687: Utilities Signed into law by governor.
HB17-1193: Small Cell Facilities Permitting And Installation Clarifies that expedited permitting process established for broadband facilities applies to small cell facilities and small cell networks. Clarifes that rights-of-way access afforded to telecommunications providers for construction, maintenance, and operation of telecommunications and broadband facilities extends to broadband providers, small cell facilities, and small cell networks. Provides that telecommunications provider has right to locate or collocate small cell facilities and small cell networks on local government entity’s light poles, light standards, traf c signals, or utility poles in rights- of-way owned by local government, subject applicable law. Effective: July 1, 2017.
The Missouri Municipal League was opposed to the 2017 HB 656 - Small Cell Deployment Act that would add small wireless facilities to the "Uniform Wireless Communication Infrastructure Deployment Act “passed into law in 2013 and grant wireless companies the right to use the public right of way to deploy wireless antennas. These bills limit a municipality’s ability to control the placement of antennas and “adjacent” equipment.
HB 331 proposes to prohibit municipalities from evaluating a cell site applicant’s business decisions with respect to the design of its service, customer demand for service, or quality of its service in a certain area. A municipality would also not be allowed to evaluate a cell tower application based on the availability of other potential locations for wireless site placement. Additionally, the type of wireless infrastructure, such as DAS, could not be dictated by the local authority.
The Municipal League and the Missouri Association of Counties opposed the passing of this bill.
LB 389, the Small Wireless Facilities Act, would cap application and permit fees at $250 and eliminate other lease, fee or tax payments, However, local governments would keep control over permitting.
As part of 2013 Act 20, the “Budget Bill”, this law preempts local regulation of cell phone towers. Although the new law allows local regulation under a number of circumstances, it also limits local regulation in some critical areas such as height limits, setbacks, and location of towers.
AB 348, regulating the location of mobile cell tower sites. The bill initially created a loophole for small cell towers to be erected without setbacks.
Fierce Opposition to Wi-Fi Poles Along Commuter Rail.
MBTA signed a contract that would allow InMotion Wireless to place wireless radiation-emitting monopoles along the commuter rail route. Citizens and municipal leaders across the Commonwealth have voiced strong opposition to the MBTA Plan in news reports:
Massachusetts has seven bills dealing with wireless radiation.
Massachusetts 2017 Bills on Wireless and Health
Massachusetts, United States of America 2017 Legislative Update on Bills on Wireless and Health
In 2017, Massachusetts introduced seven bills to address wireless radiation and public health:
S.1268 Resolve creating a special commission to examine the health impacts of electromagnetic fields (Senator Karen E. Spilka).
S.1864 An Act relative to utilities, smart meters, and ratepayers’ rights (gives people the no-fee choice of keeping their non-radiation-emitting water, gas and electrical meters instead of "smart" utility meters; Senator Michael O. Moore).
S.107 An Act relative to disclosure of radiofrequency notifications (requires warning labels on radiation-emitting products; Senator Julian Cyr).
S.108 An Act relative to the safe use of hand-held devices by children (requires specific language on packaging as modeled by an ordinance unanimously passed in Berkeley, California; Senator Julian Cyr).
H.2030 An Act relative to best management practices for wireless in schools and public institutions of higher education (asks the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to set wi-fi standards for all schools; Representative Carolyn Dykema).
S.2079 An Act reducing non-ionizing radiation exposure in schools. (Senator Donald F. Humason, Jr.)
S.2080 An Act increasing medical awareness and insurance coverage of non-ionizing radiation injury and reliance upon credible independent medical research. (Senator Donald F. Humason, Jr.)
2015 Massachusetts State House Briefing organized by the Environmental Health Trust on the latest scientific evidence of human health impacts from exposure to wireless radiation, including cell phones, wireless routers, baby monitors, smart meters and other devices. The briefing includes remarks by Environmental Health Trust founder Dr. Devra Lee Davis, and Mr. Frank Clegg of Canadians for Safe Technology (C4ST).
In 2016 the following recommendations on Minimizing Exposure to RF were drafted.
BEST PRACTICES IN THE USE OF WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY
Members of the Worcester School's Standing Committee on Teaching, Learning and Student Supports consulted with the Massachusetts Department of Epidemiology about developing wireless precautionary guidelines that include:
Use wired communication devices instead of wireless devices
Limit children’s use of cell phones except for emergencies
Keep cell phones and other sources at a distance
If using wireless devices like computers, laptops, tablets, and printers, place the wireless router away from where children and adults usually spend time.
Major US Government Study Finds Increased Brain Cancer in Rats
$25 Million US Government Study Finds Increased Cancer From Cell Phone Radiation
"The occurrences of two tumor types in male Harlan Sprague Dawley rats exposed to RFR, malignant gliomas in the brain and schwannomas of the heart, were considered of particular interest, and are the subject of this report. "
Unprecedented Information Livestreamed from Harvard and Yale Experts on Children & Wireless Radiation
Doctors Present Evidence of Wireless Radiation Impacts on Children
Press Contact: Janet Vasquez, JV Public Relations NY (212) 645-5498
Medical Symposium Highlights New Research on Exposure, Brain Development and Behavior
Who: Leading medical and public health experts:
Hugh Taylor, MD, PhD, Chair of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine
Martha Herbert, MD, PhD, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard University
Devra Davis, PhD, MPH, Environmental Health Trust
Maya Shetreat-Klein, MD, Brainmending
Catherine Steiner-Adair, EdD, Harvard Medical School
What: The nation's leading experts on wireless radiation exposure will participate in a livestream press conference prior sponsored by the Environmental Health Trust to their panel entitled Wireless and Children: Why and How to Protect Infants, Toddlers and Young Children from Avoidable Exposures to Wireless Transmitting Devices at the Pediatric Academic Societies Annual Meeting in Baltimore taking place at the Baltimore Convention Center.
When: Tuesday, May 3rd, 10 am to 11 am EST
Where: Online Press Conference (link will be active starting May 3rd @ 10AM EST): http://tinyurl.com/jur82y6
Background: The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified both microwave radiation and radio frequency radiation as Group 2B (possible) human carcinogens. Brain models and computer simulations show that children absorb more microwave radiation than adults. A child's skull, which is thinner and smaller, absorbs ten times more radiation than that of an adult. International studies provide significant evidence on the effect of cell phone radiation on acoustic neuroma and glioma. The PAS symposium will highlight new clinical findings about the impact of wireless radiation on the infant and child brain, and propose practical clinical advice on how to reduce exposures.
Dr. Taylor will discuss Pregnancy and Wireless Safety: What Experimental Studies Tell Us About Learning Disabilities and Clinical Practice. Dr. Davis will reveal new modeling of microwave exposures to the child brain and body and the latest international policies to reduce and control microwave exposures to children. Dr. Herbert will present the Rationale for Research and Precautionary Clinical Intervention Regarding Autism-EMF Link. Dr. Steiner-Adair will discuss The Big Disconnect: How Technology Can Undermine Parenting in the Modern World. Dr. Shetreat-Klein will discuss How to Protect the Brains of the Future.
This is an unprecedented opportunity to hear and interview experts on children's exposure to wireless radiation, obtain state of the art video modeling of radiation exposures to the young brain and copies of practical advice to clinicians and parents about why and how to reduce exposures.
