Adapted from an article by Christopher Ketcham, May 8, 2020 | Original New Republic article here.
A new generation of Densified 4G/5G Wireless Service is headed our way but is thudding into a mountain of resistance — as the FCC’s so-called “small Cell” Streamline Agenda is crumbling before our very eyes.
Key 2019-2020 Rulings in the US Courts of Appeals, the 2020 Presidential election, the expected replacement of FCC Chairperson Pai with FCC Chairperson-To-Be Rosenworcel, have reset/will reset the FCC’s so-called "small Cell" Streamline Agenda — Reset Back to Local Control and Home Rule. Recent attempted FCC overreach is inconsistent with the underlying statute from which the FCC derives its authority — the 1996 Telecommunications Act (1996-TCA) — an important point which has been/will be clarified by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals (and, soon, by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals). In 2019-2020, the FCC has been a serial-loser in the Courts.
-
On Aug 9, 2019 — the Ruling in Case No. 18-1129, United Keetoowah et al. v FCC: "“We rule that the Order’s deregulation of small cells is arbitrary and capricious because its public-interest analysis did not meet the standard of reasoned decision-making.”
-
On Oct 1, 2019 — the Ruling in Case No. 18-1051, Mozilla et al. v FCC: "in any area where the Commission lacks the authority to regulate, it equally lacks the power to preempt state law. After all, an “agency may not confer power on itself,” and “[t]o permit an agency to expand its power in the face of a congressional limitation on its jurisdiction would be to grant to the agency power to override Congress.”; this oral argument summarizes the winning arguments, simply and effectively.
-
On Mar 13, 2020 — the Ruling in Case No. 19-1085, IRREGULATORS et al. v FCC: "On page 9, the court rules that states are free to employ their own cost accounting and are not bound by the FCC’s separations rules. Despite what the opinion says almost every state did indeed believe it was bound by separation and could not change cost allocations. Now it is clear the states misunderstood the matter. This means people can now go to a state and seek to end the cross-subsidies presently flowing to Wireless Cos. States can reduce the fees charged ratepayers and can reallocate $Billions in costs. They can reduce local rates and cut off the cross-subsidies to Wireless."
-
On Feb 10, 2020 — the arguments in Cases No. 18-72689, City of Portland et al. v FCC re: the repeal of FCC Order 18-133, the Small Cell Deployment Order and Case No. 19-70144, *American Electric Power v. FCC * re: the repeal of FCC Order 18-111, the No Moratorium Order; this intervenor brief summarizes the winning arguments simply and effectively
-
On Aug 5, 2020 — the briefings in Case No. 20-1138, EHT/CHD v FCC; this intervenor brief summarizes the winning arguments, simply and effectively.
An All-Too-Common Problem . . .
On a hot day last summer, Debbie Persampire, a 47-year-old homemaker who understands that the established science concludes that Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) — aka Wireless infrastructure antennas — are poisoning her children. She took me on a tour of her irradiated house on Long Island.
Her kids were at school, her husband was at work, and the house, a modest, tidy split-level typical of the suburbs, was spectacularly quiet. She brandished a handheld battery-powered device called an Acoustimeter to measure the RF Microwave radiation (RF/MW) and waved me on up the stairs to the second floor, into the rooms where her children sleep.
Outside, roughly 70 feet from the bed of her son, who is 12 years old, and the bed of her daughter, who is 10, was the source of her problem: a cell site, a nondescript box the shape of a small steamer trunk that was affixed to a utility pole just beyond the fence line. Crown Castle, the nation’s largest provider of wireless telecommunications communications infrastructure (the owners of this disastrous cell tower), installed the unit in May 2017, and it began operating seven months later. It emitted, like all cell sites, a constant stream of pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Microwave Radiation (RF/MW) .
Problems With So-Called “small” Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs)
sWTFs are falsely branded. They are 25 million times more powerful than Macro Cell Towers, once you consider the metric that matters — the intensities of the toxic pollutant (RF/MW radiation) that reaches second- and third-story bedrooms:
What Really Matters: Excessive Effective Radiated Power (ERP)
That Results in RF Microwave Radiation Intensities in 2nd-Story+ Bedrooms
| Cell Tower | Vertical Distance Off Ground | Horizontal Distance Away | Power in bedroom (2nd-story+) |
|---|---|---|---|
| small cell | 35 feet | 60 feet | 50,000 avg. radiation units |
| Macro cell | 200 feet | 2,500 feet | 0.002 avg. radiation units |
Conclusion: 50,000 µW/m² from a so-called “small” cell is 25 million times more powerful than 0.002 µW/m² (-85 dBm) from a Macro cell —
Note: -85 dBm is a signal strength which provides 5 Bars of telecommunications service on a cell phone (source: link to The Truth About 4G/5G in Sacramento )
Sacramento, CA: 60 feet from home → children immediately sickened (© Windheim EMF Solutions) | San Francisco, CA: 10 feet from home → brain tumor diagnosed in three months | Santa Rosa, CA: 20 feet from home → home sold at 23% discount ($150,000+ loss in property value).
Resident of Sacramento, CA:
We hired certified Building Biologist Eric Windheim to take measurements in and around our home. The 4G readings inside my nieces’ bedroom were some of the highest he had ever measured indoors, 460,000 microwatts per square meter; significantly higher than typical cell antenna exposure. It is no surprise to me now that my nieces (and other family members) started experiencing health problems (headaches, nosebleeds, inability to sleep, flu symptoms — all well-documented symptoms of microwave radiation sickness) soon after the antenna was installed and powered on. Eric helped us to install shielding in the home and suggested we move the children into a back room away from the antenna. About a week after taking these steps, their symptoms went away.
The Wireless industry falsely brands these pole-mounted WTFs as so-called "small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) because the industry focus on dimensions, not on the relevant metric — the electromagnetic power through the air that reaches bedrooms.
FCC Definition of a sWTF:
- WTFs that are 50 feet or less in height
- WTFs that have an antenna with a volume of 3 cubic feet or less
- WTFs that have ancillary equipment with a volume totaling 28 cubic feet or less (which acually exclused many relevant items: ).
You must be logged in to post a comment.