E-Rate & school connectivity

Re: FCC Seeks Comment on RF Exposure Issues Subject to D.C. Circuit Remand in Environmental Health Trust V. FCC - ET Docket No. 13-84 As a Doctor who has been injured from radiofrequency radiation, I have a sincere interest in updated, evidence-based regulations of the FCC to protect all living things from the known biological harm of RFR. The FCC is currently not fulfilling its mandate to promote the “safety of life and property” (Communications Act of 1934). Since 2018, living near a cell tower, sleeping close to a smart meter and having a wifi router from a neighbor within 10 feet of my sleeping space, I have had neurological harm. Since then, when I'm near a wifi router or another person's phone or smart watch, I get burning pain on my skin in the area closest to the pulse-modulated RF radiation. I also get severe fatigue, brain fog, a pressure headache, and the next days to weeks I feel "hungover" from the exposure. It makes normal functioning very difficult. When I sleep next to someone with a smart watch on or sleep in a house/hotel with wifi on, my sleep is very poor- I wake up many times and have trouble falling asleep. When I sleep at home with our wifi router turned off and phones off, I wake up much more rested and do not wake up in the middle of the night. I fear for my young daughter and unborn baby, since research shows their brains absorb much more radiofrequency radiation, and it is pervasive in classrooms, places of worship, as well as playgrounds. I am calling for more research on the biological harms from radiofrequency radiation, particularly pulse-modulated RF radiation. As more cell towers proliferate and new bands of frequency are being used, there needs to be a halt to all new infrastructure until solid research has been done to investigate the impacts on living beings- humans, flora and fauna. The current FCC guideline is based on an antiquated study from 30 years ago. Telecommunications have changed drastically over that time period, so those guidelines are now irrelevant. What studies have the FCC done to evaluate RFR's effects on cellular health and oxidative stress, which manifest into countless disease states? What about neurobehavioral outcomes, like children learning in school near a wifi router, or productivity and concentration in the workplace? How are migrating animals and insects affected by the never-ending bombardment of frequencies running through their bodies? How does that impact ecosystems and ultimately human health? Europe has more stringent standards on pulse-modulated RF radiation to protect the health of its citizens and wildlife- why don't we mirror their regulations as a starting point and add on as more research has accumulated? The cost of inaction is far too high- if the FCC fails to produce relevant research to protect the health of all living beings, what is the cost to all of humanity? The cost of healthcare is already astronomical in the US. Could limiting the number of towers, satellites, smart devices, band frequencies and the power produced by these structures decrease the amount of human suffering and cost of "mystery" chronic disease states? Before any new technology is developed, I urge the FCC to study chronic radiofrequency radiation exposure at ambient levels in a cohort study as well as RCT studies to assess the cellular and physiological changes with acute exposure to pulse-modulated RF radiation. Please see the references attached as evidence to support my claims. The inaction of federal agencies, including the FCC, in studying the biological and environmental effects of RFR and pulse-modulated RF radiation is extremely disappointing. As a Doctor and one who has been injured by RFR, I see the damage this has on my patients as well. I did not consent, nor do I consent today, to the continuous, involuntary exposure to biologically active RF radiation. Please allocate necessary funding to study RF radiation's effects on living beings. It is the ethical, responsible action to do that. Sincerely, Dr. Colton References: Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P, Müller K, Oberfeld G, Ohnsorge P, Pelzmann P, Scheingraber C, Thill R. EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 2016 Sep 1;31(3):363-97. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2016-0011. PMID: 27454111. Kaszuba-Zwoińska J, Gremba J, Gałdzińska-Calik B, Wójcik-Piotrowicz K, Thor PJ. Electromagnetic field induced biological effects in humans. Przegl Lek. 2015;72(11):636-41. PMID: 27012122. International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G. Environ Health. 2022 Oct 18;21(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9. PMID: 36253855; PMCID: PMC9576312.

I am sensitive to electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) and radio frequencies (RFs) caused by cell phones, electricity, WiFi, cell towers, and other wireless and electronic devices. To say that the discovery of my sensitivity greatly impacted my life, is an understatement. It nearly RUINED me, I had thoughts of ending my life. It has certainly ruined my career as a public school teacher. I can no longer teach in person because I cannot tolerate being around antennas, cell phones, smart meters, and all of the other miscellaneous wireless devices. I am forced to work from home and do not make nearly the amount of money that I used to make. I began having health issues in 2016. My symptoms included leg numbness, brain fog, balance issues, gastrointestinal issues, heart issues, and list goes on. I had never had any health issues prior, at that time I was in my mid 40s. That year, in 2016 was the first year they put WiFi on the ceiling of my classroom. Additionally, I was in a classroom with several iPads and cell phones. Through my health insurance, I had several tests done. The doctors told me it might be MS or a brain tumor. Over a 4 year period, I had blood tests, MRIs, nerve tests, endoscopy, colonoscopy, ekg, and several visits to address the many symptoms that I was experiencing. In the spring of 2020, 5g towers were being deployed all over my city and around my neighborhood. I started developing ear infections, heart issues, and my body felt like it was vibrating all the time. I knew that I hit the end of the road with Western Medicine, all the tests were inconclusive and there was nothing they could do for me. So, I decided to take matters into my own hands. I got rid of my WIFI and cell phone, I fully wired my home and began sleeping with the electricity off in my bedroom at night. I was still living in a housing tract and was surrounded by cell towers, so my symptoms did not completely go away, but they were greatly reduced by the changes I made. Today, I live with a lot of land separating me from my neighbors. I have a shield on my smart meter, as my electric company will not entertain an analog meter and I am 3 miles from the nearest cell tower. I do not allow cell phones or other wireless devices in my home. I now live a relatively comfortable life with minimal symptoms as long as I stay home. When going out to run errands or traveling I often experience the following: headaches, watery eyes with head pressure, trouble focusing, brain fog, inability to think clearly, balance issues and many other health symptoms depending on the type of EMF or RF and the concentration. I cannot be comfortable out in public, my trips are usually very short. There is plenty of research out there that shows the dangers of wireless radiation. In 1971, the Naval Medical Research Institute in Maryland researched the biological effects and clinical manifestations attributed to radio frequency and microwave radiation. I highlighted the symptoms that I have personally experienced as a result of wireless radiation. In the Naval Medical Research Institute report, they found that the radiation caused all of the following and more: heating of organs, corneal damage, altered menstruation, altered fetal development, liver enlargement, decreased lactation in nursing mothers, altered renal function, changes in the oxidative processes in skin and organs, altered blood flow rate, electrocardiographic changes, myocardial necrosis, dehydration, death, headaches, insomnia, cranial nerve disorders, seizures, convulsions, altered heart rhythm, structural alterations in synapses of vagus nerve, stimulation of parasympathetic nervous system and inhibition of sympathetic nervous system, depression, impotence, anxiety, lack of concentration, tremors, dizziness, scalp sensations, chest pain, increased irritability, blood disorders, vascular disorders, biochemical changes, metabolic disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, endocrine gland changes, and genetic and chromosomal changes. (Navy-Microwave-and-RF-Effects-Brief-1971.pdf)

The FCC says it operates under a "Public Interest Mandate", however by ignoring mounting evidence that radio frequency radiation is harmful, it is not fulfilling that mandate. There are many, many scientific studies that provide evidence that this technology is harmful. FCC should have exercised the Precautionary Principle ("When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause-and-effect relationships are not fully established scientifically") when cellular technology was first being introduced instead of believing the industry "experts" who were just interested in selling and expanding this technology as fast as possible. My job required that I used a cell phone as soon as they became widely available. I now have a brain tumor behind my right ear - exactly where I used to hold my cell phone to my head. The technology is dangerous and it is the job of the FCC to exercise its "Public Interest Mandate" and protect the public and not cave to the interests of corporations who just want to make a buck even if their products are harmful - sound like the tobacco industry? There are many experts in this area that can provide technical guidance and guidelines to the FCC. Some suggestions may include limiting cell tower locations, limiting the RF power of cell phones, requiring wired internet access to all homes, requiring copper wire land lines in all homes, the list can go on and on. Please have the courage to protect the citizens of the US.

I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: I am a 34 year old woman whose life has been profoundly affected by a chronic, debilitating health condition, and who has spent nearly two decades searching for answers. My chronic migraines began when I was 15 years old. Around that time, a cell tower was constructed approximately 0.2 miles directly behind my family’s home. I cannot claim that this tower caused my illness, but the timing of these events has remained significant to me throughout my health journey. My symptoms quickly became so severe that I had to reduce my high school schedule. I woke up nearly every morning with debilitating migraines and vertigo, often unable to function. At one point, I missed more than 30 consecutive days of school. My family and I went from doctor to doctor, desperately searching for the underlying cause. I was prescribed countless medications in an effort to manage my symptoms, many of which came with adverse effects. My education suffered, my grades declined, and what should have been a formative, exciting period of my life became a daily struggle to get through the day. Rather than improving with age, my condition became progressively more severe. By age 26, I was experiencing symptoms that I associated with exposure to wireless devices and infrastructure. My arms would go numb while using my phone. I experienced stabbing pains in my head and stomach when people with cell phones came near me or when I was in areas near cell towers. As newer wireless technologies were introduced, I became increasingly concerned about the relationship between these exposures and my symptoms. My family went to extraordinary lengths to try to help me. We invested significant money in completely hardwiring our home and removing all wireless devices in an effort to reduce my potential exposure and find some measure of relief. This was not a casual lifestyle choice; it was a response to the debilitating reality of my daily life and our desperation to find answers. My family has had to make significant adjustments to our home and way of living because of the severity of my condition. The fact that my health concerns have required these kinds of sacrifices speaks to just how profoundly this has affected not only my life, but the lives of the people who love and support me. Also, when 5G technology was introduced in stadiums, attending sporting events became extraordinarily difficult for me because of the debilitating migraines I experienced. Travel became another challenge. Wi-Fi on airplanes, Bluetooth connections, and the wireless devices used by people around me became sources of concern as I struggled to manage my symptoms. Activities that most people take for granted; attending a game, boarding a plane, going into public spaces, or simply being around other people, became obstacles I had to weigh against the possibility of becoming severely ill. The consequences have extended far beyond physical pain. This condition has isolated me from experiences, relationships, opportunities, and the independence that most adults work toward building. I have struggled to maintain the health necessary to work consistently and support myself. Today, at 34 years old, I remain financially and physically dependent on my parents in ways I never imagined would define my adult life. I would give anything to have the freedom to attend a sporting event without fearing the consequences, travel without anticipating debilitating pain, work toward financial independence, and participate in everyday life without having to calculate the potential cost to my health. No one should have to spend nearly two decades fighting to reclaim a life they feel they have lost, while wondering whether an environmental exposure could be contributing to their suffering. People deserve answers. They deserve rigorous science, transparency, and a regulatory process willing to examine difficult questions. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence before it and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.

EMF radiation emitting towers needs to be reigned in. The health effects that we already know about are profound. Radio Frequency limits must be lowered. Of course the issue is big tech and big money and now having rolled this out in such a huge way and then say "oops", is a big lift with enormous push back. We need limits and better testing and reduction of exposure. We have been allowing the tech companies to race from 2G to 6G and beyond. NO, we need a halt to this before everyone is sick and sickly. I, for one person, have extremely disrupted sleep in the presence of towers and wifi. This technology was rolled out with no proper long term safety studies and the safety foundations are resting on antiquated numbers from long, long ago (i.e. does it raise temps) Questions: What does it do to cells, the immune system, T cells, mitochondria, a pregnant woman and the developing fetus? I have palpitations and a heart rate around 110 in the presence of towers and moderate EMF signals. Is there a significant portion of the population that has more sensitivity to this as I do? Is it causing cancers? Let us use the Precautionary Principle to protect people and the unborn and back off and lower the exposure levels. An Inconvenient Truth it may be, but do not let that stop the FCC from doing the right things for Americans and future generations. Science shows cells and life can be harmed, sleep patterns disrupted and thus Radio Frequency Limits need to be SIGNIFICANTLY LOWERED.

DIGITAL technology is pulsed. Human and wildlife biology is accustomed to natural radio waves, and is not adjusted to the impact of intermittent pulses generated without relief from cell masts. Therefore, digital technology must be either superseded or used with the greatest precaution. THIS submission identifies four areas where there are gaps in necessary protection for long term public health, as follows: CELL masts capable of RF transmission are being installed in residential streets— # Without long term effects having been proven safe for human and wildlife health; and # Without reported adverse effects having been avoided or remedied; and # Without the democratic agreement of residents living within reach and sight of the technology; and # Without adequate monitoring of transmission levels. THE regulatory authorities are failing to protect human and wildlife wellbeing in those four ways. Through disregard of public wishes, the FCC is denying the public control of our own health. ISSUES of public concern regarding positioning of cell masts in residential areas: # The telecom companies are not required to remedy loss of good health, nor pay for shielding materials to avoid effects, nor compensate loss of pleasure in life. # There is no provision for the public to have rights of objection to the choice of site for a cell mast, nor rights to compensation and fair settlement. # Recourse to legal processes is beyond the means of most households. That is, the costs of shielding materials, re-designing bedrooms where children sleep, and “leaving all fair” should fall on the telecommunication companies and not on the householder.

Besides tinnitus proliferation and NEPA requests last decade to FCC for studies showing EMF safety, which both "bought" parties blew off for profit..... re Cell phone EMF’s (ElectroMagnetic Frequencies) and their serious impacts I sort of jokingly initially referred to the problems of isolation, narcissism, "anti-"social media vs actual direct communication, general dumb-downing, etc., initiated primarily by intro of common cell use in the early 2000's, by referencing the owners’ "addicting" cell phones ( which I call StupidPhones or ViewBlockers and do not use, while I do LOVE safe hardwired fiber optics and internet). It was only a few months ago now that I changed my own thinking about that somewhat meant to be a "teasing " term, "addictive". This is when I fully realized that these people are truly ADDICTED, and denial is one of the MAIN signs of addiction. Hence the question I have been too often asked, "How can you possibly live without one???" is not a casual sort of joke, but an honest but unacknowledged admission of genuine addiction. I have shared the following info with c 150+ different individuals and organizations and only 2 have ever brought the subject back up to me, one a lawyer friend, now convinced, who has argued in front of the Supreme Court in the past, and another, a nationally renowned ornithologist who said he would now add this threat to insects, in particular, outlined below to his already existing list of 1) habitat loss , 2) overuse of herbi-pesticides (which I have battled against alone and with my students for decades), and 3) climate change (a pathetically self-exculpatory abstracted term for those in our world-exploiting “consumer culture”) From a recent search "EMF harms to Insects" PLENTY to look at..... if one looks Here are a first few This first one below reiterates the dearth of focused newer studies ( due to unwillingness of cell addicts, + Telecom influence to obfuscate and squelch). My "anecdotal" evidence of YEARS (2009 until 5G arrival in early '23) of ALWAYS seeing probably hundreds of honey and other bees, + other insects, EVERY time I would go on a run through our burbs on all the yr round flowering plants or other insects around lights at night here is, in our poor at self-examination anthronarcissistic culture, unfortunately worth little. These days since early '23, I sometimes see ZERO insects on say a similar to the past heavily flowered 9 mile jaunt. Now I revel if I see 1 dragonfly or butterfly or one bat or maybe YAY even a few honeybees, usually only on one out of many nearby blooming plants, such as an in bloom Texas Ranger, which since my arrival here in 2001 always were formerly adorned with happily foraging bees. Much referenced in this article, that sounds horrible to me already, uses phrases such as "deserves further research of such and such type ". Denial and addiction hahah ! Even the "old" and "not focused" or dismissed as 'irrelevant' studies are so troubling to me that I can SO easily see how the cell industry has capitalized on human's fascination with and addiction to these devices as OVERWHELMINGLY and quickly as possible, while practicing what I call omitformation... just like with tobacco, the covid mRNA shots, or Roundup, or petro and global warming etc Don't LIE, OMIT just leave out and obfuscate anything that might deter profit. And with those amounts of $, one can buy all sorts of elections, legislation, appointees, rules, permits, loopholes, subsidies, etc. while ignoring any adverse science and ramming through basically untested tech. Take the $ and run before you have to (maybe) pay up later when the truth emerges ( eg Bayer Monsanto and current glyphosate settlements) The worst examples of fox guarding the hen house. The Telecom bought and dominated FCC rammed through 5G with virtually ZERO safety testing. Biological effects of electromagnetic fields on insects: a systematic review and meta-analysis and https://ehtrust.org/new-scientific-review-insects-threatened-by-emfs-including-5g-and-cell-tower-and-wireless-radiation/ and I do not always agree with all Mercola puts out, but value the work he does to collate and reference his sources This also, I think, talks about often poohpoohed EMF sensitivity in humans? https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2024/04/14/health-risks-of-5g.aspx?ui=93a5ed18b3438ac769725b337148474558c3bc7313758107668f5eef905cd1e6&sd=20170417&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20240414_HL2&foDate=false&mid=DM1557196 here are the links to the beekeeper association's' related studies I shared out a few yrs ago, now 3 yrs old https://www.beeculture.com/electromagnetic-radiation-part-1/ https://www.beeculture.com/electromagnetic-radiation-part-2/ Not sure exactly where I have also read about re cell radiation links to ADHD ( finally ! as I watched my students dumb down and lose focus since cell proliferation, even the very brightest we might send off to Exeter et similis), to hormone disruption in all animals, interference with plant cycles, various cancers from extra close regular exposure ( a small but well done study of Israeli electrical workers) etc etc .. NO PROBLEM HERE !!! just Scroll away and ignore wherever you are and whomever you might be with and your impact on the planet ! (why I call them ViewBlockers) $$$$$$$$$$ "normal" see... we "All" do it ! As I have mentioned to many before I believe, although I'd be happiest with close to zero cell EMF bombardment, the bees etc "seemed" OK with yrs of just 3 and 4 G and the same stupid overuse of herbicides and pesticides I have battled against for years that has not changed significantly since 5 G arrival. .......and more "anecdotal" evidence. when far enough away from urban sub-urban 5G's limited range of blanketing , say out at Corn Creek DNWR HQ miles from the expanding burbs (still !) or out in the wilderness desert and mts near me, I still see more insects. ( hard to believe but supposedly there are over 700 species of bees native to our Clark County !!!! must be some awesome specialization) PLENTY to see ......If one wants to look into all this, which virtually "NO ONE" seems willing to do, " Enough bad news already ?? vs learning anything negative about my "convenient" cell phone security blanket ?" Thanks Scott PS Although THEY will not tell you this , apparently your own cell phone emits its most dangerous EMF radiation levels when you have lowest bars as it is not receiving enough EMF's from elsewhere to connect.....please use speaker phone especially then ! Be well !

I bought my first cell phone in 1993 and from that day to this, I cannot use the phone for anything except text messaging. The reason for this is because text messages take only a second to transmit while calls require transmission signaling continuously. If anyone called me, in less than a minute, my head would be feeling like it was about to explode. Clearly, that was my body telling me that it did not want to be anywhere near signaling for phone calls that, while invisible, certainly impacted my body! I support doing more research on the health and safety impacts of cell phone radiation and I understand that such testing is currently done with plastic dummies, rather than on humans. In addition, the radiation levels allowed in the United States seem to be in excess of those in other countries. Finally, technology has evolved so much since cell phones were initially released and standards most definitely need to be updated to acknowledge that we have gone from 2G to 3G to 4G to 5G and I hear 6G will be released soon as well. Given that I have had such issues for so long, it seems wise to operate from the precautionary principle and err on the side of safety, especially since technology has changed so much over these years as well. Thank you for your consideration and for representing the health & safety of Americans! Sincerely,

I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. This issue matters to me because my life, my career and my health has been irreparably harmed by the ubiquitous and insidiously ever increasing RF exposure. I am unable to live a normal life or perform in my career. My family has ostracized and then accepted my situation, although visits are fewer and short due to their dependence on their devices for their being and livelihoods. It breaks my heart to watch them utilize their wireless devices and to realize they have no choice in today’s world and recognizing the difficulty I have experienced by not using them and doing my best to avoid the RF radiation. I have had to become a recluse and cannot even go to a city park as they all have towers, placed there to avoid public scrutiny. Fear of being ostracized goes to a whole new level because the device addiction predicates that people are afraid to know or literally do not want to know deleterious effects of RF radiation. While I was still practicing medicine, I came to recognize that people would rather swallow poisonous chemicals with multiple side effects (otherwise known as pharmaceuticals) or have the AV nodes in their heart atria burned (“ablation therapy”) and undergo chemotherapy rather than recognize the cause of their anxiety, lack of cognition, insomnia, headaches, joint pain, insulin resistance, type II diabetes, high blood pressure, tachycardia, a-fib, cancer, etc., etc. I have researched the subject and written a book, still yet to be published because I was warned it would never be picked up by major publishers as they will not bite the hand that feeds them. Media rarely touches the topic for the same reason. Yet thousands upon thousands of people continue to proliferate their ownership and use of wireless devices while increasing their “pills for the ills”, undergoing procedures and opting in for surgeries, because, you know, “my insurance pays for it”. It is estimated that thirty percent of the population is experiencing symptoms from RF radiation exposure. If an evaluation of the pharmaceuticals used to address symptoms were included in that analysis, then 98% of the population would be shown to have one or more symptoms from the man-made frequencies that the FCC has allowed to proliferate in our environment at an unprecedented rate with no regard for safety. The FCC’s failure to adequately protect humans was seemingly purposeful since it has allowed legislation to pass in 1996 that prohibits communities and people from objecting to towers and antennae placement based on health or environmental influence. The FCC is a captured agency via lobbying and the the revolving door of the wireless industries’ and FCCs board positions and in my not-so-humble opinion, the agency should be dismantled. My ‘opinion’ is also supported by complete disregard of the Court ruling that directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. That’s right - on August 13, 2021, the D.C. Circuit ruled the FCC failed to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination. Specifically, five years ago, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. In July 2026, the FCC adopted a fourfold increase in power limits for wireless devices, with no public health analysis of what that would do to exposure. It has moved to end environmental safety reviews for cell tower projects. This is unfathomable! The FCC has an immediate obligation to fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. Since the FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health, it must work with the HHS and other health agencies to evaluate the plethora of studies that DO show harm. WE DON’T NEED MORE STUDIES. Other countries have been gracious enough to provide valid studies that prove harm. Yet, the FCC continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence before it and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.

Re: Health effects of Wireless Radiation, Cell towers, and Smart Utility Meters To the FCC 13-84: I am a resident of Hurricane, Washington County, Utah. I have been diagnosed with electromagnetic radiation (EMR) syndrome, also described as electromagnetic hypersensitivity. I write to request that the Department of Health and Human Services assess the health and safety of wireless infrastructure and of devices that place high-frequency voltage transients on building wiring, including smart utility meters; support independent, biologically based safety testing; and promote meaningful accommodations for people who cannot tolerate these exposures. Personal Circumstances It is critical that I limit exposure to electromagnetic radiation. My household uses a hardwired landline telephone and wired Ethernet. We have shielded our home with protective paint and other mitigation measures, at substantial cost. Even with those steps, I have become increasingly isolated in order to avoid exposures that I experience as medically serious. My autoimmune problems have worsened. My symptoms include, but are not limited to, loss of balance, headaches, chest pain, anemia, elevated blood sugar, hypotension, increased heart rate, and insomnia. I have groceries and prescriptions delivered. A walk outside is often painful. Doctor and dentist visits are very difficult. Hospitals I have used have not provided low-exposure accommodations. Smart Utility Meters I opted out of the electric smart meter. I was charged $228 to do so and then paid $22 per month for the opt-out meter. That opt-out meter produced high levels of electromagnetic interference on the wiring in my house. Average readings exceeded 1,650 mV. To my knowledge, no biologically based pre-market safety testing of this equipment was conducted. Hurricane City Power company did not measure the interference and did not respond for months to my request for an analog meter. When the meter was replaced with an analog meter, average interference readings fell to about 20 mV. The company then charged me $380 for the meter and required a $48 monthly reading fee. Washington County Water Conservancy District Manager Ron Thompson refused to allow me to opt out of the “smart” water meter, despite a letter from my physician. I have also measured radio frequency emissions from neighbors’ meters reaching my property, as well as Wi-Fi from surrounding residences. Other jurisdictions have begun to treat customer choice as a policy issue. Colorado’s H.B. 25-1175, enacted in 2025, requires large investor-owned electric utilities to give residential customers advance notice before installing advanced metering infrastructure and to honor a request for a noncommunicating meter. The statute does not create an unlimited statewide ban on installation and does not cover water meters. I cite it only as an example of a notice-and-choice framework that remains unavailable to many utility customers, including water customers in my area. The bill is available at https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb25-1175. Cell Tower Near My Home A cell tower was placed next to my home on property owned by the Washington County Water Conservancy District, without notice to residents. There was no meaningful opportunity for public comment because residents were not notified. No environmental review was conducted. The tower is in the fall zone of a water tank and is close to residences. The tower was originally approved for three antennas. Many additional antennas have since been added, including a 5G upgrade and antennas for an internet provider. There was again no environmental review for the 5G upgrade. In 2009, a cell tower was approved—again without notice—within about 100 feet of my property and between two residential developments. No cellular service was provided for the next three years. In 2011, AT&T contracted to place cellular antennas on the tower. Additional antennas have been added or “upgraded” since then, including 5G service, without notice or review under the National Environmental Policy Act. Other internet providers have also been added. Upon activation of service on this tower in 2013, radiation levels increased and the quality of cell service declined sharply. Before the nearby tower was activated, I had about four bars of reception. After activation, I often have no bars, and occasionally one bar. Many neighbors report the same problem. This result is contrary to what residents expected. The previous nearest tower was about seven miles away. Because there were few obstructions, service at my location had been relatively good. Antennas on the new tower are directed toward the Hurricane Cliffs, which rise about 1,000 feet above our home. Reflected, out-of-phase signals can degrade service and can redirect scattered energy back toward the residential area. I contacted the Federal Communications Commission. The agency showed no interest in measuring or testing the signals. Other, more remote sites were available and would have reduced reflection from the cliffs. When my husband and I asked an employee of the tower company why this site was chosen, the answer was economic: it was cheaper to build where electrical and road infrastructure already existed. Some residents have been forced to install indoor small cells in their homes in order to obtain usable service. According to Verizon, coverage from such equipment can extend to multiple users. That radiation can reach neighboring properties. Loss of Wired Service Relying on landline DSL for internet and telephone service is no longer workable. CenturyLink is not maintaining the copper landline, and electromagnetic interference has made that line effectively useless. In a utilities easement near my home there are two radio frequency-emitting water meters, one radio frequency-emitting electric meter, a fiber-optic utilities box, and an electrical transformer. Their close proximity may be contributing to the landline interference. Fiber-optic service is available, but it is owned by an internet provider rather than by Washington County, which limits competition. Fiber also does not support traditional alarm-line service in the same way, and the optical equipment at the premises does not function when household electricity fails. Interference with Implanted Medical Devices A friend who used our tennis court later received a pacemaker. After the implant, he could no longer play on the court because the pacemaker stopped working there. When he entered our shielded home, the pacemaker functioned again. This occurred twice. The American Heart Association notes that certain electrical and radio frequency sources can interfere with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. See https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/arrhythmia/prevention--treatment-of-arrhythmia/devices-that-may-interfere-with-icds-and-pacemakers. My husband’s grandchild, who has epilepsy, collapsed while playing on our tennis court. My husband has an Inspire implant to treat sleep apnea. He is concerned that electrical and wireless interference could impair the device and, in turn, his breathing. Radio frequency levels at St. George Regional Hospital have been high enough that the Inspire implant did not work there. The manufacturer’s materials discuss electromagnetic interference. See https://manuals.inspiresleep.com/. Neighborhood Health Observations I cannot prove that any individual illness was caused by the tower or by smart meters. I report the following because residents are frightened, some have moved or chosen not to build, and the pattern is why I ask the Department to investigate rather than leave the matter solely to the Federal Communications Commission. Individuals have died, and several people have told me they believe their symptoms are related to the tower or to smart utility meters. A neighbor had prostate cancer that was not initially thought to be fatal. The disease progressed despite extensive treatment, and he died. I noticed a smart utility meter on the wall outside the bedroom where the head of his bed was placed. The smart meters in our development are relatively high-powered because of large lot sizes of one acre or more. A neighbor died of a heart attack while walking along the road. Another neighbor had a heart attack while walking along the road. My late husband had a heart attack while walking along the road. Four other neighbors have had heart attacks. One neighbor who lived next to the cell tower had bowel cancer, was in remission, and later died of a pulmonary embolism. A neighbor allowed an internet provider to place an antenna on his home, over his office, to serve the surrounding area. He died of cancer. A woman who had been in remission from multiple myeloma came out of remission. Some residents have moved because of the tower. One decided not to build on their lot. As I understand the occupancy of the development, there are 41 lots, of which about eight are vacant; about 33 homes; and about 22 full-time residences. Among those households I am aware of three cancer deaths, eight heart attacks, including three fatal heart attacks, and one suicide of a person suffering severe pain. These are community observations, not a controlled study. My stepson and his wife lived in Magna, Utah, close to a cell tower. He died of stage 4 metastatic stomach cancer at age 54. His wife died shortly afterward. The spread of wireless radiation has been life-altering for me. I cannot use my pool or tennis court, and I cannot enjoy a walk. I am struggling with repeated infections and an immune system that no longer functions as it should. Requested Action The Department should take responsibility for assessing the safety of wireless devices and of equipment that places high-frequency voltage transients onto building wiring, including smart utility meters. Existing federal exposure limits and siting practices have not answered the health questions raised by people in my situation. I agree with the following recommendations of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields: 1. Update national exposure limits on wireless, power-frequency, and other non-ionizing electromagnetic fields to reflect current scientific evidence and to protect against biological effects. 2. Fund independent research on long-term, cumulative biological and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. 3. Require independent pre-market safety testing and independent post-market surveillance for wireless and other electromagnetic-field-emitting devices. 4. Ensure compliance tests for cell phones and Wi-Fi devices reflect children’s physiology and real-world use, including direct body contact. 5. Halt introduction of new technologies until rigorous pre-market safety testing is performed. 6. Inform families about the scientific literature on health risks and about ways to reduce exposure from phones, wireless devices, electronics, and other sources of electromagnetic fields. 7. Adopt a risk-mitigation approach that reduces children’s daily exposure at home and school and limits their use of wireless devices. 8. Promote safer designs, including wired networks, low-emission equipment, and devices that minimize user exposure. 9. Establish low-electromagnetic-field spaces in schools as a priority. I also ask the Department to support: A. Non-punitive analog or noncommunicating meter options for customers with medical need, including water as well as electric service; B. Meaningful public notice and health-focused review before cell towers are sited near homes or upgraded with additional antennas or 5G equipment; C. Preservation and maintenance of wired telephone and internet options; D. Low-electromagnetic-field accommodations in hospitals and clinics, especially for patients with implants or reported electromagnetic sensitivity; and E. Coordination with the Federal Communications Commission that does not treat thermal exposure limits as the end of the health inquiry, consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Environmental Health Trust v. FCC, available at https://www.fcc.gov/document/dc-circuit-decision-environmental-health-trust-v-fcc. The proliferation of wireless infrastructure is, for me and for several of my neighbors, not a convenience issue. It is a housing, medical-access, and daily-function issue. I respectfully ask the Department to treat it as a matter of public health. Respectfully submitted, Rosemarie Russell 854 W 3390 S Hurricane, Utah 84737