2015-11-21 In US T-Mobile fined for exceeding exposure limits by 300%

  • An engineer who has worked with the telecom industry raises concerns about the current FCC guideline (the US’s exposure guideline, similar to our Safety Code 6) due to the proliferation of wifi and wireless devices. The guideline considers the emission from only one device or antenna while we’re living, working and attending school with many surrounding us all the time.

http://www.networkworld.com/article/3004112/wi-fi/why-the-fccs-safety-guidelines-for-wi-fi-need-to-be-re-evaluated.html

 

  • Below in letters is a copy of an email about the FCC fining T-Mobile for violating RF exposure limits by up to 300% as well as failing to restrict access to antennae. In both the US and Canada, the companies are allowed to “self-monitor”, which means no agency is ensuring that we are not being exposed to levels of RF that exceed the already dangerously inadequate guidelines. It’s time that Industry Canada began to do its job which includes ensuring that telecoms are obeying laws, following regulations and guidelines rather than just making life easier for the corporations.

 

  • Other countries are raising concerns about vulnerability of the Smart grid to cyberattack. This from India:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Thiruvananthapuram/national-smart-grid-vulnerable-to-cyber-attack-says-expert/article7902961.ece

 

  • TOU = Time of use billing and “next generation” Smart technology are being “offered” in London, Ontario to help people make better use of their smeters. Time of use is especially hard on those who can least afford it – those who are home all day, needing heat or air conditioning, like young families, the elderly, and the disabled.

 

“From May 1 to Oct. 31, electricity rates fluctuate throughout the weekday from a low of eight cents to more than 16 cents per kilowatt hour. (A kilowatt hour is recorded every time your home consumes 1,000 watts of electricity; think of a 100-watt light bulb burning for 10 hours.)

Smart meters keep track of it all. Baking a cake or drying a load of laundry between 7  a.m. and 7 p.m. on a weekday uses the same amount of electricity as any other time of day. But it will cost you a lot more, especially if you could delay the activity until after 7 p.m., or do it on the weekend, without having any detrimental effect on your lifestyle….

One such early application being tested in the London pilot project is in partnership with Bidgely, a California-based company that bills itself as “your personal energy adviser.” Though customers can already monitor their hourly consumption through enrolling in “My London Hydro” on the utility’s website, Bidgely’s software takes it one step further by tracking energy usage down to the minute, and by appliance category (refrigeration, cooling, heating). It then graphically displays it in “real time” charts, and graphs on its website or your smart phone.”


  • More studies are reporting diagnostic tools to confirm electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), a condition that is affecting more and more people as the level of wireless radiation increases.

 

The term electromagnetic hypersensitivity or electrosensitivity (EHS) referred to a clinical condition characterized by a complex array of symptoms typically occurring following exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) even below recommended reference levels and is followed by remission through the complete isolation [1, 2]. The most frequently claimed trigger factors include video display units, radio, televisions, electrical installations, extremely low-frequency ranges of electromagnetic fields or radio-frequencies—including the so-called dirty electricity due to poor isolation of electric wires and telephonic lines, wireless devices, and wi-fi—fluorescent lamps and low-energy lights, appliances with motors, photocopiers, microwave transmitters, and high tension power lines (reviewed in [3, 4]).

EHS is characterized by a broad range of nonspecific multiple-organ symptoms implying both acute and chronic inflammatory processes, involving mainly skin and nervous, respiratory, cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and gastrointestinal systems, in most cases self-reported in absence of organic pathological signs except skin manifestations (reviewed in [2, 5]).

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/mi/2014/924184/

The question being raised is when will the governments and the utility commissions take the steps required to protect the public?

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/11/electromagnetic-hypersensitivity-from-microwave-technology-finally-medically-proven.html

*************************

Letters:

FCC Fines T-Mobile for Cell Tower Violations in Arizona

Electromagnetic Radiation Safety, November 12, 2015

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) fined T-Mobile $60,000 today for failure to prevent public access to mobile phone antennas on the rooftop of an office building in Phoenix, Arizona.

On two occasions, the FCC found that the radiation from the rooftop cell antennas exceeded the radio frequency (RF) maximum permissible exposure (MPE) limits. The FCC determined that T-Mobile “willfully and repeatedly violated” FCC rules regarding RF exposure limits. Moreover, T-Mobile’s inadequate warning sign and broken plastic barriers failed to comply with FCC rules that restrict access to areas that present a “potential public safety hazard.” The building owner complained to the agency that his staff had difficulty gaining RF exposure safety assistance from the carriers that use the rooftop.

The RF exposures on the roof were from 175% to to 300% of the general population MPE limit of 1 milliwatt per square centimeter.

Since T-Mobile is a “multi-billion dollar enterprise,” the FCC justified the amount of the fine “to ensure that the forfeiture liability serves as an effective deterrent and not simply a cost of doing business.”

Perhaps, this ruling by the FCC is a response to the following two events:
A year ago the Wall Street Journal published an article which alleged that 10% of the cell phone towers in the US (approx. 30,000 cell towers) emit more radiation than the FCC allows; yet the FCC has issued only 2 citations for this violation since 1996. 

‘Cellphone Boom Spurs Antenna-Safety Worries: Many Sites Violate Rules Aimed at Protecting Workers From Excessive Radio-Frequency Radiation.” Ianthe Jeanne Dugan and Ryan Knutson, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 2, 2014. http://on.wsj.com/1vfMjL7
Recently, Sen. Blumenthal and Rep. Eshoo sent a letter to the FCC asking the agency to enforce its cell tower regulations.

John Eggerton, Hill Hot over Workers’ Exposure. FCC Source: Look for Order on Exposure Issues by Year-End. MultiChannel News, Sep 17, 2015
http://bit.ly/1KU2mea
However, is a $60,000 fine a sufficient deterrent for a multi-billion dollar enterprise?
FCC ruling: http://bit.ly/1NtCEZ2

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley
**************************

Newsletter prepared by Sharon Noble

Thomas Sowell - Quote