Subject:  (Beth) Fw Cellular Towers -Reply (fwd)
Date:     Thu, 20 May 1999 201226 -0500 (CDT)
From:     "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To:       emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------


......I think it a good idea that everyone see this....  An example
of the support provided in the most minimal and basic public need
-- information -- as we (the public) are being served by one of our
RICH health bureaucracies, the EPA.......

Obviously, the poor soul who wrote the letter on behalf of the EPA 
"didn't know from nothing" what he was talking about or trying to answer 
-- worse, he is just as obviously an industry contractor!!!!

Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
rbeavers@llion.org................
...It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness... 
.................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS...............

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 06:10:49 -0500
From: devisalv@mindspring.com
To: rbeavers@llion.org
Subject: Fw: Cellular Towers -Reply

Hi Roy -

This is the response I got from the EPA. Probabally nothing in here that you
have not heard before.

Beth
-----Original Message-----
From: TOM DESSENT 
To: devisalv@mindspring.com 
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 8:12 AM
Subject: Cellular Towers -Reply


>Dear ,
>
>I cannot find any references to EPA involvement with cellular phone or
similar nonionizing
>electromagnetic radiation.  I spent about an hour this morning searching
the web for information on cell
>phone transmission towers, radio frequency radiation effects, and
regulations.  From what I have read, it
>seems there is no conclusive research; scientists can't say whether cell
phone transmissions do or do
>not have significant biological effects.
>
>One of the better summaries I found concerns cell phone tower siting in San
Francisco.  (See
>http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/telco/samples/wtsguide.htm)  Here are a
couple of pertinent
>paragraphs from the report:
>------
>Safety Standards
>
>The FCC requires all transmitting facilities that it licenses to comply
with the ANSI Standards for human
>exposure to radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic fields. The ANSI standard
is considered a "consensus
>standards," agreed upon by committees composed of university,
telecommunications industry and
>government representatives.  The FCC currently requires cellular, ESMR and
PCS providers to comply
>with ANSI Standards for radio frequency emissions as a condition of the
license. The Act prohibits local
>jurisdictions from imposing more stringent safety standards than that
accepted by the FCC.
>
>Power density is a means of determining the level of exposure to RF and EMF
emissions.
>Measurements of equipment can assure compliance with existing exposure
standards. The current
>ANSI Standard recommends general public exposure to EMR not to exceed 550
microwatts per square
>centimeters at the 800 MHz frequency for exposure of 30 minutes or more; of
567 microwatts per sq.cm.
>for 30 minutes or more at the 850 MHz frequency; and 600 microwatts per sq.
cm. for 30 minutes or
>more at the 900 MHz frequency. By comparison, a 110 watt light bulb emits a
power density of EMR of
>approximately 200 microwatts per sq.cm. at a distance of six feet.
>------
>I don't know who you could contact to measure the radiation level at your
home.  How about the phone
>company using the towers?  They might have the required measurement
equipment, which appears to
>be rather expensive (for example, see http://www.lessemf.com/rf.html, one
company's online catalogue).
>Or perhaps the FCC would have suggestions.
>
>Best wishes,
>Tom Dessent
>Lockheed Martin Corp.
>Internet support contractor for US EPA Office of Air & Radiation
>http://www.epa.gov/oar/
>
>
>>>>  05/18/99 11:56am >>>
>Dear Mr.. Dessent -
>
>The FCC regulates cell towers. THE EPA must have some responsibility to
>measure the amount of RF radiation. If not the EPA then who? You can look
up
>the FCC Telecommunication Act of 1996. That may give you some insight into
>the situation. Any guidance you can give me will be much appreciated.
>
>I must know what radiation level my family is being exposed to. We need to
>make a decision if we should move or not. We are very invested in our home
>financially and emotionally. This is a big decision. It must be an informed
>decision.
>
>Thanks for anything you can do.
>
>Beth
>
>




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