Subject:  FW TE/7  Standards Committee (fwd)
Date:     Thu, 20 Aug 1998 090553 -0500 (CDT)
From:     "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To:       emfguru@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------


......In the message below (from Sarah in Australia), you will see
the classic 'bureaucratic answer' (from a New Zealand bureaucrat)
to a serious, informed inquiry  about possible EMF hazards -- recently
confirmed in the USA to the extent that such hazards are deemed at least
"possible.".....  If I were this bureaucrat, I would hang my head in shame
that I had written such a letter.....Please see (again, if not already
read....) my "Inertia" message of a week or so ago......guru.....

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 13:32:41 +1000
From: "Benson, Sarah (Sen L. Allison)" 
To: "'rbeavers@llion.org'" 
Subject: FW: TE/7  Standards Committee



> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Ian Hutchings [SMTP:Ian.Hutchings@moc.govt.nz]
> Sent:	Thursday, 20 August 1998 9:16 AM
> To:	'Sarah.Benson@aph.gov.au'
> Subject:	TE/7  Standards Committee
> 
> 20 August 1998
> 
> 
> Dear Sarah Benson
> 
> 
> Thank you for your e-mail of 10 August 1989 to Rod Corrigan of
> Standards
> Australia concerning the work of the Standards Committee TE/7.  Your
> letter
> was considered by the Committee on 12 August and I am now in a
> position to
> reply.
> 
> In your letter you suggest that "EMR free zones" be considered for
> metropolitan areas on the grounds that there numbers of people that
> are
> experiencing distress and there are possible adverse health effects
> from
> electromagnetic signals.
> 
> The work of the Committee is indeed to ensure that adequately low
> levels are
> established for electromagnetic fields (EMF) such that there are no
> known
> adverse effects on the health of persons who might be exposed to such
> levels.  In today's society there are numerous sources of EMF
> including
> radio and television transmitters, individual cellphones, the less
> frequent
> cellphone base installations, mobile communication equipment, and a
> host of
> radio and electronic devices.  Indeed the community has an undoubted
> expectation to maintain and capture the benefits of modern
> telecommunications and broadcasting services provided that this can be
> done
> safely.  As such it is likely to be impractical to exclude RF emitters
> from
> specific zones, or include limits on particular activities (i.e.
> encroachment of residential development) within specific distance
> limits
> from fixed emitters, in the general Australian metropolitan areas.
> However
> it would certainly be interesting to ascertain the actual
> implementation
> details you may have available of the Swedish developments and I will
> also
> try to directly follow up on this aspect.
> 
> Whilst there should always be robust debate on what specific exposure
> levels
> are appropriate, it is necessary to recognise that the subject is one
> which
> needs a firm basis of medical and scientific research to be available
> to
> those involved.  Unfortunately this is not always the case.  For
> example,
> despite the expressed community concern over cellsites and their
> radiated
> signals, it is unlikely that such signals approach more than a few
> percent
> of the levels recognised as being satisfactory by the world scientific
> community.
> 
> The present role of the TE/7 Committee is to review and revise the
> present
> interim Standard and this task is now well in hand.  However the
> question of
> application of a standard in a regulatory way, including exclusion
> zones
> such as you suggest, is a matter that falls somewhat outside the
> competence
> of the Standards process.  Considerations of a regulatory nature would
> be
> more properly done within an organ of Government and would no doubt
> need to
> include factors such as the extent of present services and EMF signal
> levels, the effect of an exclusion zone approach, questions of
> compensation
> to owners of licensees and the like.
> 
> Whilst the Committee feels unable to take your suggestion further in
> terms
> of the Standards process, I have taken the liberty of copying both
> your
> e-mail and this reply to the Australian Communication Authority for
> their
> information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ian Hutchings
> Chair AUS/NZ Standards Committee TE/7
> 
> Ministry of Commerce, New Zealand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cc	Robert Johnston, ACA Canberra



Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html