HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/03/2011, AGENDA council agenba
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
6:30 p.m. SPECIAL MEETING Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx
ROLL CALL: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Andrew Carter and Kathy
Smith, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh and Mayor Jan Marx
ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION TOPIC
PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM
CLOSED SESSION
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL— Existing Litigation
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9 (a)
Secrest v. City of San Luis Obispo
San Luis Obispo County Superior Court Case No. CV 060225
ADJOURN TO A REGULAR MEETING.
® City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to
including the disabled in all of its services, programs, and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805) 781-7410.
Please speak to the City Clerk prior to the meeting if you require a hearing amplification device. For more agenda information,call
781-7100.
Any writings or documents provided:to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for
public inspection in the City Clerk's office located at 990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo,during normal business hours.
SmAor /K&rzas
tF&C 54ft r rn e,J
From: Linda McElver[SMTP:LMCELVER@CHARTER.NET] CC- Me- v7,V a
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 20117:37:09 AM
To: Council, S1oCity fia " Cry �1a2 ���
warn Ace- ALuc,
Subject: Smart Meters Amrov
Auto forwarded by a Rule r1
C &/t4c.
Ma-mA.roW
Honorable Mayor Jan Marx, and San Luis Obispo, honorable City council members
Dear Mayor Marx & Council members,
I am sending you a link and the text from a disability website about the voluntary Cleaner
Air signage for sensitive populations. However,the signage government link has been
apparently changed. We still are a recognized disabled community in CA and we need
your help in regards to the Smart Meter invasion in our homes.
PGE has not responded to my inquiries and requests to opt out and I fear you are
not being alerted to this mistreatment. PGE informed me that disabled populations
needing protection will be the ones forced to pay to not be harmed. It's all a mess and I'm
disgusted. I will be forced to investigate the discrimination legal issues concerning this.
The ask us to call in, but I don't trust that, then there is no public record of requests. We
need this to be transparent, in writing and not hidden by PGE. Perhaps a government
agency could handle the disability requests for opting out and bill PGE for managing
them to insure compliance with any federal disability laws and basic civil liberties for all
citizens.
I retired from activism and closed the Canaries Foundation. I was asked to lead a national
lobby in 2004 for this disability, disabled people have been calling me for help.
I suggest that the city of SLO rise to the occasion and protect vulnerable disabled
populations until safety is proven for all persons, including the disabled. Ask them for the
studies that prove it's safe for the most vulnerable EMF sensitive patients. I am asking
for protection for myself. I do not want any meter on my house. Can you make PGE
provide me with off the grid solar, or wind turbines for power. I would like to see
alternatives provided for the disabled for the cost of their regular power. The city needs to
either ban this completely or provide alternatives that are no increased cost to the
disabled, above their current power costs. Or maybe the city could fund the installation
of solar off the grid systems and the residents pay the city back over the units life time.
with supplemental funding provided by PGE if it costs more than what the disabled
person pays for power. But I hear that the meters might adversely affect many disabled
by just being in the neighborhood. I guess this will be an experiment in harm that will
come out eventually after many have suffered. Think about our cigarette industry's claim
to safety in the 1950's. They didn't know, they can't prove safety.Beware of statements
that there is no evidence of harm. Instead put the burden of proof that produces a
study that proves the most sensitive populations are safe.Not the opposite,that they
can't find any study, why because none is funded. Is the City or county public health
officer willing to guarantee to the public that even the most sensitive population will be
protected? This is home invasion, we have to have access to our homes.
Or is this like Gulf War syndrome where it took our government decades to admit that
men and women in the military were harmed,that they are not crazy. It's a real injury.
Has the city decided how much damage is acceptable to protect someone?
What evidence does the city need?
First the city council needs to be reminded that CA recognizes our disability. We are not
pounding on doors, we are sick and generally stay home,but now our homes are
threatened. I do not go to the Farmer's market because of the BBQ smoke. I do not do a
lot of things because of the exposures. I don't go to church on holidays because it's full
and the perfume causes severe brain and asthma symptoms. I'm not a person who tries to
ruin things for others, I'm just trying to live a nice life in my home and have some access
to community. I can live a more normal life in this city. I am here to stay.
I believe it is against federal law to burden unfairly disabled persons.That is
discrimination. CA recognizes EMF sensitivity and sensitivity in general.
I moved here to SLO in 1994 because of the smoking ban, I wanted to live in the
community that is courageous and forward thinking that puts people first over
corporations greed. That policy of quality of life paid off in getting awarded as one of the
top four places in the world to live. I think something like this in the limelight will show
that SLO really doesn't care. Please step up to the plate and ban these meters until PGE
sets up a policy that pays for independent studies that prove disabled are protected and
pays for alternative housing off the grid, etc. for those who need it. Hint, there are
sensitive rats they can run studies on. We could get some scientists to possibly run the
studies if we had funding that would not be industry biased studies.
If you notice in the CA Cleaner Air signage states.
"Incandescent lighting provided in lieu of fluorescent or halogen lighting, and electrical
systems and equipment shall be operable by or on behalf of the occupant or user of the
room, facility, or path of travel."
Electrical panels shall be operated on behalf of the disabled..That means it gives us the
right to ask for the power to be shut off, or offensive irritant lighting and other devices to
be shut off in a public building until we are through. Generally when I lead a group of
activists on the Hill in Washington DC,many members of Congress sent staff to meet
with the disabled outside the building. We were heard on many levels. Now for example
the Veterans of the Gulf Wars are not crazy but truly injured from their exposures in the
war. Rugs and other building products are getting Greener, it's because of the people
disabled like us that corporations and communities shifted. We need another shift and we
need it quick. Thank you,
Linda McElver
Former President of the Canaries Foundation, Inc.
San Luis Obispo,
home address:
1930 Castillo Court
San Luis Obispo, Ca 93405
I would be happy to talk with you on the phone if you wish more information. 805 459
4275 If this is a necessity of PGE then why not ask PGE to fund a disabled housing
community that is off grid. Set a billion dollars aside. I would be happy to pay my
current power costs for such a housing community that was wireless, off the grid and
pesticide free, away from farms, freeways and in generally cleaner air , housing built
greener or to individual standards. I would want to own a home in this community. I
would love to live in a sub community that is truly interested in public health issues of
the vulnerable populations, and not hurting their neighbor. PGE could fund it and be paid
back by rents and sales of the houses and town homes and apartments. I'm talking about a
mini city within a city limits. A model community designed by experts that already work
with vulnerable populations that is so progressive the world is impressed with our
ingenuity and ability to meet the needs of the most vulnerable populations. It would
work if the land is secured, the community could be added as more and more disabled
wanted to live there under those covenants. We the disabled just want to have a
reasonable life. When government causes our homes to become inaccessible, we have to
fight. I would be willing to volunteer to help create such a vision or to assist in any way
possible to protect the most vulnerable populations. We could change the world away
from corporate greed to truly protecting public health by protecting the most vulnerable
first.
Think about SLO's affect on the world when it dared to ban smoking. Well this is another
issue for our beloved city to truly impress the world.
This is the link to the following information:
htti)://users.Imi.net/wilworks/events/elnerair.htm
I have provided this information to the city council on other occasions. However, the CA
government may need to be contacted if you wish to confirm the signage. Regardless, it
shows that we are a recognized disability. We do need access to our homes.We need
protection from corporations who find us disposable. Please help.
Environmental
EHN
Health P.O.Box 1155
Larkspur,Ca6[omia,94977
Network. Support and Information Line
(SAIL)415.541.5075
A 501(c)(3)non profit agency
Cleaner Air Signage and Pictogram
ADOPTED!
Cleaner Air Fact Sheet
"03-25-04-New! Cleaner Air Fact Sheet: DSA recently developed a
'Cleaner Air' fact sheet to assist Building Officials on the the
requirements for using the Cleaner Air symbol at publicly funded
facilities or at any facility leased or rented by the State of California. ..."
htta://www.documents.das.ca.gov/dsa/i)ubs/cleanerair factsheet.odf
November 2001 —Special thanks to Michael Mankin, Chief, Office
of Access Compliance, California Division of the State
Architect;
Elizabeth Randolph and Linda Huber, DSA staff,
Jim Abrams, California Hotel and Lodging Association; and to
Sharon Toji, designer of the Cleaner Air sign.
Thanks also to ERN Advisory Board member Susan Molloy, to Mary
Lamielle, Executive Director of the National Center for Environmental
Health Strategies, Inc. (NCEHS), and to Dr. Lawrence Plumlee for their
untiring efforts down through the years on behalf of not only the
already chemically injured, but everyone.
We all are stakeholders when it comes to breathing!
EHN also thanks Linda McElver, President Canaries Foundation, Inc.
and her members for joining Susan Molloy, Connie Barker and me as
we worked toward passage of the Cleaner Air Signage and Pictogram in
California. Susan,Connie, Linda and I also went to Sacramento to
speak before the California Building Standards Commission on Nov. 28,
f
2001.
We all renewed our efforts for the meeting of ANSI (Americans National
Standards Institute) A117 Committee on Architectural Features and its
Design of Public Buildings and Residential Structures for Persons with
Disabilities, which was held Wednesday, December 12, 2001. Mary
Lamielle and Dr. Plumlee attended the meeting. ANSI approved only
the pictogram. But the image top and center on this page is now the
official symbol for depicting access to cleaner air.
This revised, approved pictogram was adapted by Connie Barker, EHN
and Ecology House boards,from the black and white version provided by
the state of California.All who wanted the colored version owe her your
thanks.As do L Thank you, Connie! —barb
California Building Standards Commission
Wednesday, November 28th, 2001
ANSI (Americans National Standards Institute) Al 17
Committee on Architectural Features and its Design of Public
Buildings and Residential Structures for Persons with
Disabilities
Wednesday, December 12., 2001
And then, word came down that it was eventually voted against by
ANSI. So, That now? — barb
Sharon Toji, designer of Cleaner Air sign
e-mail: accesscommaa,earthlink.net
httv://www.accesscommunications.bigster).com/
California Proposal Adopted! I Letters to California
ANSI Proposal I ANSI Adopted I Letters to ANSI
Following is the text as it appears in the Building Codes PDFfile,pages 90
and 91. — barb
httn://www.bsc.ca.gov/documents/45-day yeriod/dsaac-cbc45-et.pdf
1117B.5.12 Cleaner-Air Sign. "STRICTLY FOR PUBLICLY FUNDED
FACILITIES OR ANY FACILITIES LEASED OR RENTED BY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. NOT CONCESSIONAIRES." This symbol
shall be the standard used to identify a room, facility, and paths of travel that
are accessible to and usable by people who are adversely impacted by
airborne chemicals or particulate(s) and/or the use of electrical fixtures and
or devices. When used,the symbol shall comply with Figure 11 B-40.
1117B.5.12.1 Color and size of symbol.The symbol shall be used when the
following minimum conditions are met. The symbol,which shall include the
text "Cleaner Air" as shown, shall be displayed either as a negative or
positive image within a square which is a minimum of 6-inches on each side.
The symbol may be shown in black and white or in color. When color is
used, it shall be Federal Blue(Color No. 15090 Federal Standard 595B) on
white or white on Federal Blue, there shall be at least a 70% color contrast
between the background of the sign from the surface that it is mounted on.
Strictly for publicly funded public facilities or any facilities leased or rented
by State of California. Not concessionaires.
1117B.5.12.2 Conditions of Use. Use of the cleaner-air symbol is voluntary.
The Clean Air Symbol shall be permitted for use to identify a path of travel,
and a room or a facility when the following is met:
1. Floor or wall coverings, floor or wall covering adhesives, carpets, or
formaldehyde-emitting particleboard cabinetry, cupboards, or doors
have not been installed or replaced in the previous 12-months.
2. Incandescent lighting provided in lieu of fluorescent or halogen
lighting, and electrical systems and equipment shall be operable by or
on behalf of the occupant or user of the room, facility, or path of
travel.
3. Heating, ventilation, air conditioning and their controls shall be
operable by or on behalf of the occupant or user.
4. To maintain "Cleaner-Air" designation, only non-irritating,non-toxic
products will be used in cleaning, maintenance,disinfection,pest
management, or for any minimal touch-ups, which are essential for
occupancy of the area. Deodorizers or Fragrance Emission Devices
and Systems (FEDS) shall not be used in the designated area. Pest
control practices for Cleaner-Air areas shall include the use of bait
stations using boric acid, sticky traps, and silicon caulk for sealing
cracks and crevices. Areas shall be routinely monitored for pest
problems. Additional non-toxic treatment methods, such as
temperature extremes for termites, may be employed in the event of
more urgent problems. These pest control practices shall not be used
48 hours prior to placement of the sign and the facility shall be
ventilated with outside air for a minimum of 24-hours following use
or application.
5. Signage shall be posted requesting occupants or users not to smoke or
wear perfumes, colognes, or scented personal care products.
Fragranced products shall not be used in the designated Cleaner-Air
room, facility, or path of travel.
6. A log shall be maintained on site, accessible to the public either in
person or by telephone, e-mail, Fax, or other accessible means as
requested. One or more individuals shall be designated to maintain
the log. The log shall record any product or practice used in the
Cleaner-Air designated room, facility, or path of travel, as well as
scheduled activities, which may impact the Cleaner-Air designation.
The log shall also include the product label as well as the material
Safety Data Sheets (MSDS).
1117B.5.12.3 Removal of symbol..If the path of travel, room and/or facility
identified by the Cleaner Air Symbol should temporarily or permanently
cease to meet the minimum conditions as set forth above,the Cleaner Air
Symbol shall be removed and shall not be replaced until the minimum
conditions are again met. 1117B.
Sharon Toji, designer of Cleaner Air sign
e-mail: accesscomm(1earthlink.net
http://www.accesscommunications.bipstei).com/
Letters written in support of CBSC adopting Cleaner Air Signage
-The 2001 California Cycle-
Susan Molloy I ERN I Canaries Foundation I Barb Wilkie
Meeting: November 28
10 a.m.
400 "R" Street, Sacramento
Dear Friends,
Do you face barriers to your safe access to housing and medical facilities?
The designated Contact Persons, for our questions regarding modifications to
the California Building.Standards, are:
Mike Nowman
State Housing Law Program Manager
Department of Housing and Community Development
l
Tel.: (916)445-9471
E-mail: mnowmanahcd.ca.gov
Fax: (916) 321-4712
Susan M. Botelho
Chief, Facilities Support Section
Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development
Tel.: (916) 654-2012
Fax: (916) 654-2973
Our proposal for"Cleaner-Air" signage, language, and a pictogram marking
the rooms and hallways in which we might have the most hope for access
within California State facilities, is scheduled to be heard by the California
Building Standards Commission on November 28, 10 a.m. at 400 "R"
Street, Sacramento.
Please attend if you are able- a public show of support for this effort is
essential,but CALL FIRST to be sure the CBSC schedule hasn't been
changed (again).
Get the schedule updates or other details from Michael Mankin,Access
Compliance office, Division of the State Architect, at (916)3224700 or
Linda Huber at (916)324-9495.
THANKS!
Susan Molloy
- EHN's letters written in July and in November 2001. EHN's letters appear
in reverse chronological order.
Nov. 27, 2001
Michael Nearman and Stanley,Nishimura, Executive Director
California Building Standards Commission (CBSC)
2525 Natomas Park Drive, Suite 130
Sacramento, CA 95833
Dear Mr. Nearman and Mr Nishimura:
i
I write on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Environmental Health
Network of California(EHN --www.ehnca.ore):in strong support of CBSC's
adoption of the Cleaner-Air signage and pictogram Nov. 28, for the 2001
Code Adoption Cycle. EHN advocates on behalf of access for individuals
who have become chemically and/or electromagnetically injured. We have to
know where the fresh wax,pesticides,paint, fragrance-emitting devices, etc.
are. Our barriers are invisible.
The US Access Board has acknowledged that synthetic chemicals adversely
affect health and access for those already chemically injured. In July 2000
they adopted a fragrance-free meeting policy. The words that we find
significant are:
"... While many questions are yet to be answered, the Board believes
in doing what it can where it can. As a result, the Board has adopted a
policy for its meetings and public gatherings that will help reduce
exposure to personal fragrances. Under this policy, the Board
requests that all participants refrain from wearing perfume, cologne
and other fragrances, and use unscented personal care products in
order to promote a fragrance-free environment. ..."
httT)://www.access-board.gov/news/frajzrance.htin
In September of this year, the Board undertook the issue of indoor air
quality. See Board to Undertake Research on Indoor Air Quality(9/17/01)
Solicitation for Bids Issued. This bid process closed October 30,
2001. http://www.access-board.gov/news/indoorair-notice.htm
In December 1998, the Sierra Club's Conservation Committee and Executive
Committee adopted a resolution regarding fragrance-free public venues. The
resolution follows.
The already chemically injured need safer paths of travel and cleaner air
when attending to their needs in publicly funded facilities. Please adopted the
proposed cleaner air signage and pictogram that is part of your,2001 Code
Cycle: I I17B.5.12 Cleaner-Air Sign [Figure I IB-40].
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Barbara Wilkie
President EHN
Attachments:
98.12.01 Excessive Use of Fragrance Products in Public Places
[The Siena Club's resolution was printed out for the
Commission.lhtty:Hsanfranciscobay.sierracl ub.orgpolicy/december l 998.htm
Brochures: Creating A Healthy Home
Healthy home brochure by Environmental Health Coalition of Western
Mass.
Fragrances are not just pleasant odors ...
Fragrances are toxic chemicals you breathe and absorb through your
skin
Fragrance brochure by Environmental Health Coalition of Western Mass.
hq://users.Imi:net/wilworks/ehnlinx/e.htm#EHC W M
July 21, 2001
Michael Nearman and Stanley Nishimura, Executive Director
California Building Standards Commission(CBSC)
2525 Natomas Park Drive, Suite 130
Sacramento, CA 95833
Dear Mr. Nearman and Mr Nishimura:
I am writing on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Environmental Health
Network of California(EHN -- www.ehnca.ora) in strong support of CBSC's
adoption of the the Cleaner-Air signage and pictogram during the proposed
change in this 2001 Code Adoption Cycle.
EHN advocates on behalf of access for individuals who have become
chemically and/or electromagnetically injured. Our Board has determined
that the proposed sign and symbol would do much to enable us to fulfill our
responsibilities and to obtain services to which persons with disabilities are
entitled by state and federal law.
The complete text appears on pages 90 91 of the Monograph, available by
PDF file(http://www.bsc.ca.pov/documents/45-day veriod/dsaac-cbc-45-
et. d . The proposed change would include:
1117B.5.12 Cleaner-Air Sign [Figure 11B-40]. "STRICTLY FOR
PUBLICLY FUNDED FACILITIES OR ANY FACILITIES
LEASED OR RENTED BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA. NOT
CONCESSIONAIRES."
1117B.5.12.1 Color and size of symbol.
1117B.5.12.2 Conditions of Use.
1117B.5.123 Removal of symbol.
As it now stands, California citizens who may have a lower tolerance for
airborne pollution, estimated at 15.9 percent of the population by California
Department of Health Services in 1996,[1] are put in harm's way by virtue of
the fact that no one-- not even one of us --has clear indication of the
invisible,nonetheless formidable barriers to our safe access. For the
substantial subset of people who, for whatever reason, are vulnerable--
infants and children, the elderly,people who have previous chemical injury,
and those with pre-existing or inherited conditions -- there has been no
effective protection. Those who experience adverse events when
encountering the chemical and/or electromagnetic barriers, often feel as
though we have just walked into a solid wall, or off a precipice.
This symbol, if intent is adhered to,will do much to guide us safely as we go
about our business in publicly-funded facilities or any facility leased or
rented by the state of California, excluding concessionaires.
Sincerely,
Barbara Wilkie
EHN President
[1] A Report on MCS : The Interagency Workgroup on
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
August 24, 1998
Predecisional Draft
htti)://.www.health.gov/environinent/mcs/lI.htin
V
Personal letters by Barb Wilkie, appearing in reverse chronological order.
Nov. 27, 2001
Michael Neannan and Stanley Nishimura, Executive Director
California Building Standards Commission(CBSC)
2525 Natomas Park Drive; Suite 130
Sacramento, CA 95833
Dear Mr. Nearman and Mr Nishimura:
As a person who lives with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity-- symptoms
which include chemical-induced asthma,migraines, sinusitis, rhinitis,
laryngitis, fibromyalgia, aphasia ... I can assure you that by adopting
1117B.5.12 Cleaner-Air Sign [Figure 11 B40) as part of your 2001 Code
Cycle, you would do much to improve the quality of my access to state
buildings and the quality of my health while in state buildings on personal
business..
The US Access Board has acknowledged that synthetic chemicals adversely
affect health and access for those already chemically injured, and because of
this, the Board is now pursuing efforts to improve indoor air--turning IAP
into IAQ (Pollution to Quality). See 'Board Adopts Policy to Promote
Fragrance-Free Environments" at htta://www.access-board.gov/
news/fraQrance.htm and "Solicitation for Bids Issued," which closed October
30,2001. httv://www.access-board.gov/news/indoorair-notice.htm.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)has
spelled out for us a few known indoor air pollutants in their "Common
Indoor Air Pollutants." They list:
"Combustion contaminants (carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,
nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, environmental tobacco smoke);
Biological pollutants (animal dander; molds, dust mites,
bacteria);volatile organic compounds (formaldehyde,fragrance
products, pesticides, solvents, cleaning agents); heavy metals
(airborne lead,mercury vapor); and Radon."
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/external/fag/indoor.htm
The barriers we face to our access are invisible. Not a single individual --the
still healthy nor the already chemically injured -- can see the chemicals
(odors) emitted by such commonly used janitorial and maintenance products
as pesticides, cleaners, fragrance-emitting devices, paint, new carpets,
adhesives, fresh wax, etc. We need signage to indicate the hallways that will
be less problematic to travel to reach areas where the air is safer in which to
conduct our business. The Americans with Disabilities Act assures us a right
to access. The California Building Standards Commission can do something
about that right in this year. I cannot imagine spending another three long
years waiting for signage that serves all the public as both common
sense and common courtesy.
The Califomia Building Standards Commission can do much for the already
chemically injured by adopting 1117B.5.12 Cleaner-Air Sign.
We are all stakeholders when it comes to breathing.
Sincerely,
Barbara Wilkie
July 23, 2001
Michael Nearman and Stanley Nishimura, Executive Director
Califomia Building Standards Commission (CBSC)
2525 Natomas Park Drive, Suite 130
Sacramento, CA 95833
Dear Mr. Nearman and Mr. Nishimura:
Re: 2001 Code Adoption Cycle as described in pages 90-91 of Monograph,
1117B.5.12 Cleaner Air Sign, Figure I IB-40
I am writing in strong support of CBSC's adoption of the Cleaner-Air
signage and pictogram during the proposed change in this 2001 Code
Adoption Cycle. The proposed change would include:
1117B.5.12 Cleaner-Air Sign [Figure 11 B-40].
1117B.5.12.1 Color and size of symbol.
1117B.5.12.2 Conditions of Use.
1117B.5.12.3 Removal of symbol.
We who are already living with chemical and electromagnetic sensitivity
and/or injury are denied access to the very buildings and for services for
which we are most likely to find ourselves seeking help. And while it has
been business as usual in denying us our just rights toward equal access, our
numbers grow.
It is not a case of misery loves company,rather, it is a case of not officially
recognizing that cleaner air benefits ALL people, while allowing access to
the,already injured. Perhaps this will become that critical first step down the
path of cleaner air throughout buildings, not just along a designated safer
path of travel.
If CBSC doesn't take a just stand for cleaner air by adopting these proposed
changes, you.may rest assured that publicly-funded facilities or any facility
leased or rented by the state of California,will not take that step, and
therefore we who are already living with chemical injury will continue to be
without vital services. And frankly, from personal experience, I know that
government agencies will not take that step toward access --be it an
accessible restroom, a doorway, a flashing and buzzing emergency signal, or
cleaner air--unless it is decreed. Therefore, I beseech you to adopt the
changes supporting 1117B.5.12 Cleaner-Air Sign.
Sincerely,
Barbara Wilkie
Canaries Foundation, Inc.
November 27, 2001
RE: Cleaner Air Signage
Dear California Building Standards Commission,
I request action on California Building Code, Part 2, Chapter 11 B, Section
111713.5.12 through 11 17B.5.12.3. In summary, I support adoption of this
signage and pictogram to be used voluntarily by State agencies. This will
help to enable access to the state's medical, social services,rehabilitation,
library, and civic facilities, among others, for people whose disabilities can
only be accommodated by protection from commonly encountered
environmental triggers.
As the president the Canaries Foundation, Inc., I speak for healthy and
disabled people who demand NO Acceptable Risk and NO Junk Chemical
Industry Science. (Our position statement can be found at our unfinished
website www.noacceDtablerisk.com)We thank you for considering this
urgent issue of access for a long neglected disabled people, the hundred
million Americans with chronic illnesses that are potentially affected by
environmental factors, (Pew Charitable Trusts).
EPA representatives have explained to me that anyone not in perfect health is
of course at risk when exposed to pesticides. When my son had asthma
attacks on school playing-fields due to Roundup, EPA scientists explained to
me that there is no testing required insuring the safety of a child with asthma.
There's no warning on the label. They stated that EPA scientists agree that
the secret inert ingredients of petroleum distillates are the probable cause of
life threatening asthma attacks at levels less than one part per billion. You
can 't smell the level of pesticides that can put us in the hospital.
So when the chemical industry, says there is no scientific evidence,that's
because humans aren't guinea pigs. I suggest that you request that the EPA
testify. I suggest that you ask them for all the full product testing and see if
the testing protects sensitive persons.
The EPA Allercare report explains why Allercare, a dust mite pesticide
product, was voluntarily removed from the market by the Johnson
Corporation. This product was bought by many asthmatics,many became
chemically intolerant and had very severe reactions..It concludes in the
report on page 10: "Therefore, it appears likely that many, if not most of the
moderate and major(severe) reactions to Allercare Dust Mite Carpet Powder
are due to the added fragrance." Page 10. So as you can see chemicals are not
safe when used as directed, and if sick disabled people use them they can
have severe reactions. The fragrance industry has no safety regulations.
To date the EPA doesn't have a standard to protect people WITH asthma. If
they did, they would require full product testing on baby mice with asthma.
At www.yesticide.or [Northwest Coalition for Altematives to Pesticides]
there is a paper on secret inerts. Quite simply the chemical industries are our
own national terrorists. In inerts they can hide more toxic ingredients. They
don't have to include inerts in all the safety testing. Inerts make up to 99%of
a product. The only conclusion that can be scientifically drawn is that there is
NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE OF SAFETY FOR ANYONE, especially sick
people,because our government doesn't require full product testing.
Considering Dursban,my children and I were exposed to legal levels in the
late eighties and early nineties. After suffering for years with pesticide
illness. A whiff of a related pesticide almost killed me. It was a product well
watered in and determined by the Florida Department of Pesticide
Regulation to be properly applied four days before by a licensed pesticide
applicator. When the emergency squad got to my home, they couldn't find a
pulse; I was almost dead. I was revived by oxygen. They told me I should be
on their Pesticide Sensitive Registry. I have been disabled and home bound
for the majority of my life since 1990.
When my children experienced the similar symptoms after pesticide
exposures, I was very concerned. I called the Dow Elanco Corporation to see
when it would be safe for my sensitive 5-year-old child to enter his best
friend's house that was being treated with Dursban. Dr. Robert Stone, the
medical director told me to keep him out 8 days.
This was years before the Dow Corporation was fined for failing to report to
the EPA Dursban injuries. This was about 8 years before it was phased out of
public use in June of 2000.This pesticide is recognized as causing chemical
intolerances by the EPA. This information can be found on page 37 of the
Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisoning. "Follow-ups of case
series have occasionally found some individuals reporting persistent
headaches,blurred vision, muscle weakness, depression, memory and
concentration problems, irritability, and/or development of intolerance to
selected chemical odors." A free copy of this book will be sent to you if you
call (703) 305 7666. Now the product is phased out of public use. So what
are we to do with 3%of the population with chemical intolerances? Is there
any new standard to protect this disabled group? NO. Will more and more
people become disabled by this chemical? Yes. Dursban (Lorsban) is used
right next to California public schools on farms.
As the acceptable risk for the Dow Corporations profits, I believe you can
see how this Cleaner Air signage is the first major step in to giving millions
of Californians safer access. My son isn't getting an education because of his
disability. He can't tolerate school, the school won't provide a reasonable
education because he's too smart. We have notification, but we don't have
pesticide free access.
You see it's up to parents to come up with $50,000- $200,000 for lawyer and
court fees to enforce the civil rights education laws. If the State of California
doesn't want to provide a safe and accessible education for my son, I'm not
going to risk his inheritance in a court battle to force them educate my son.
He's missed four years with no hope for the remaining four years for access.
He has slim chances of ever finding suitable work. Maybe this Cleaner Air
signage will find it's way to some school that cares about accommodating
these children and he will be able to go to school. There are about 5 other
children that one Home Instructor told me she knows also can not tolerate
the school environment. While the Departments of Environmental Health
and Public Health, are allowed to have an accessible risk policy, I expect the
Disability Access for this sensitive population not to be ignored any further.
My child was the victim of National Terrorism by the Dow Corporation. No
one cares if he goes to school; or is able to work. No one cares about the
burden he will be on society just because of that greedy corporation that
didn't fully test the full product.
Our foundation is currently producing our first national public service video
on Pesticides and the Glassy Winged Sharp Shooter issue, which I served as
the non-governmental public health representative on the State of California
GWSS Environmental Task Force. This issue of access and lack of
protection for all, especially the sick should be the topic of our next video. I
would love to include this Clean Air Signage information of what is adopted.
The cleaner air signage is a critical beginning to right the wrong of all the
suffering of so many people. It shows that California cafes about its entire
people. One more reason why this signage is long over due,my husband is a
director at Veritas Software, the fifth largest software company in the world,
their health insurance company recently sent out letters to their asthmatic
patients recommending that they avoid fragrances. Tell me how a high
school student does that? Imagine the petroleum distillates not only cause
asthma, they may be the main reason why asthma is the largest cause of
school absenteeism in America. A member of my coalition would like to see
safer State Parks too, since so many disabled people sleep in their cars and
flee to parks when neighborhoods become too toxic. Please for the sake of all
the suffering people adopt this code today.
Sincerely,
Linda J. McElver
President
Canaries Foundation, Inc.
PO Box 3253
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-3253
Phone: (805) 547-1568
Fax: (805) 543-6249
Email: lmcelver(a�noacceptablerisk.com
Website: www.noacceptablerisk.com
Adopted
December 12, 2001, Washington D.C.
Americans National Standards Institute (ANSI)
Written by Lawrence Plumlee_, MD., who was present for this momentous
occasion. -- barb
Dear Friends,
It's quite appropriate for your clinics which are designed to be safe places for
people with chemical sensitivities to begin to display this symbol. As yet
there is no official decision on what a definition of'cleaner air'is, and this
will be discussed as the states begin to implement codes on the use of the
new signage. I'm very happy that we got our foot in the door on this.
Chemical sensitivity activists have already managed to get this signage and a
definition of it adopted by the state of California. Susan Molloy at worked
for 17 years to make this victory happen.
The ICC (International Codes Council) serves as the Secretariat for the ANSI
(Americans National Standards Institute) Accredited Standards Committee
Al 17, the Committee on Architectural Features and Site Design of Public
Buildings and Residential Structures for Persons with Disabilities. The
Committee develops the ICC/ANSI Al 17.1 Standard on Accessible and
Useable Buildings and Facilities.
This morning, the ANSI Al 17 Committee on Architectural Features and its
Design of Public Buildings and Residential Structures for Persons with
Disabilities met and approved the cleaner air symbol found on the intemet
as follows: If go to htty://www.inticode.orQ, on the right hand side is a list of
various notices. Scroll down to Meeting Notice & Proposals, click on
Proposals for the 2003 edition of A117.1, and go to chapter 7, page 28. There
you will see the "Cleaner Air" symbol which the committee adopted today.
[Or see top of this page for a reasonable facsimile.]
The verbal justification was changed to indicate that this symbol will be used
when required to indicate cleaner air. The rest of the verbage was dropped.
Sharon Toji.and Mary Lamielle have worked for this for a long time and
were there with me. Susan Molloy has also worked for adoption of this sign
for cleaner air since 1983, and others have also. This signage was adopted in
California last week, with a more elaborate explanation of what it means.
Our allies at the meeting agreed that this is all the Committee would do for
us today,but all of us considered it a step forward that we now have an
official clean air symbol. This will then be sent out for comment by states
and the public,but is likely to remain an official symbol for clean air after
the comment period. So we can cite the decision today as we work for
adoption of this signage in our own states.
Sincerely,
Larry
Americans National Standards Institute Proposal (ANSI)
December 12, 2001, Washington D.C.
Proposed: ANSI 703.7.2.5 Cleaner Air Symbol.
Visit http://www.inticode.or�
On the right hand side is a list of various notices. Scroll down to Meeting
Notice &Proposals, click on Proposals for the 2003 edition ofA117.1 These
are PDF files. The one you want for Cleaner Air is Chapter 7. -- barb
The Cleaner Air Symbol shall be used to identify a path of travel, and a room
or a facility when the following conditions are met:
Floor or wall coverings, floor or wall covering adhesives, carpets, or
formaldehyde-emitting particleboard cabinetry, cupboards, or doors
have not been installed or replace in the previous 12-months.
Lighting shall be incandescent and electrical systems and equipment
shall be operable by or on behalf of the occupant or user of the room,
facility, or path of travel.
Heating, ventilation, air conditioning and their controls shall be
operable by or on behalf of the occupant or user.
Signage shall be posted with instructions for maintenance personnel
to use only non-irritating, non-toxic products for cleaning,
maintenance, disinfections, or pest management of the area.
Deodorizers or Fragrance Emission Devices and Systems (FEDS)
shall not be used in the designated area.
Signage shall be posted requesting occupants or users not to smoke or
wear perfumes, colognes, or scented personal care products in the
designated Cleaner Air room, facility, or path of travel.
Removal of Symbol. If the path of travel,room and/or facility
identified by the Cleaner Air Symbol ceases to meet the minimum
conditions are set forth above the Cleaner Air Symbol shall be
removed and shall not be replace until the minimum conditions are
again met.
ANSI Adopted, Dec. 12, 2001
Letters written in support of ABSI adopting Cleaner Air Signage
ANSI - EHN's I ANSI - Barb Wilkie
EHN, PO. Box 1155, Larkspur, CA 94977
Lawrence Brown, CBO
ICC Program Manager
5203 Leesburg Pike, Suite 600
Falls Church, VA 22041-3401
703-931-4533 x15
Fax: 703-379-1546
lbrownna,inticode.ori
Dear Mr. Lawrence Brown:
RE: 703.7.2.5 - Cleaner Air Symbol.
The Environmental Health Network QiNJ of Larkspur, California supports
with some reservation the adoption of Cleaner Air Symbol 703.7.2.5. We
feel that it is extremely important to officially proclaim a single, clearly
understood symbol, and supporting language, indicating the Cleaner Air path
of travel to the Cleaner Air room or facility in which to conduct one's
business. But the language adopted in California on Nov. 28, 2001 was more
inclusive. For example, California determines this sign will be an indicator
for all "people who are adversely impacted by airborne chemicals or
particulate(s) and/or the use of electrical fixtures and or devices."
Chemical barriers are invisible but clearly,they do exist. They adversely
affect access for a wide cross-section of the public. The need for an easily
recognized symbol indicating cleaner air is imperative. The proposed symbol
and language will do much to grant access to those heretofore denied access
because of"airborne chemicals or particulate(s) and/or the use of electrical
fixtures and or devices."
EHN is pleased to see the use of safer products for cleaning and maintenance
projects, as well as personal care products, included in the proposal. It is
critical that the Cleaner Air Symbol be removed if the minimum conditions
for use are compromised; that includes the inadvertent use of scented
products. However, EHN feels the community requiring the Cleaner Air
Symbol would be better served by spelling out the use of non-irritating, non-
toxic products such as bait stations, sticky traps, etc., as outlined by the state
of California in it's policy, 1117135.12 followin ).
ERN strongly supports the request that occupants not smoke, or wear any
scented products. While the public is led to believe that fragrances are
benign substances, they are not. It is imperative that people are scent-free
when dealing with members of our community.
Synthetic scents are created from a large percentage of petrochemicals (LO -
100 percent, Perfumer's World). During the past two decades, synthetic
scents have been formulated to waft further and last longer on the ambient
air. Formulated fragrances have been added to a growing array of personal
care and cleaning and maintenance products. Products with scents have been
widely advertised, without any cautionary statements, adding to their
popularity and to their omnipresence.
Synthetic scents contain chemicals that are known irritants and sensitizers, as
well as known or suspected carcinogens, neurotoxins(adversely affecting
central nervous system) and teratogens (adversely affecting embryonic and
fetal development). Source: Analyses, FDA Petition, Docket Number 99P-
1340.
Synthetic scents are capable of causing respiratory impairment, which in turn
denies access to the people who are already living with a variety of
disabilities that are exacerbated by such products.
Women who are pregnant, people with infants and young children, and
people living with debilitating diseases such as chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease(COPD), asthma, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, lung
cancer, migraines, central nervous system disorders,multiple chemical
sensitivity, electromagnetic sensitivity, etc., deserve the right to know the
path of safest travel for that major life activity: BREATHING. We also have
a right to know of a room or a facility that has cleaner air, providing us with
access equal to that enjoyed by people living without these disabling
conditions.
Adopting the Cleaner Air Symbol 703.7.2.5 would do much to acknowledge
this right to access of the ever-growing number of people whose breathing is
adversely affected by indoor air pollution. Looking at the statistics for
asthma alone, it is evident that figure has jumped from 10 million people
adversely affected by asthma in 1992 to an estimated 17.3 million in 2000. In
addition,that 1992 figure of 10 million people represented a jump of 30
percent over the previous decade. (Source: Twenty Most Common
Chemicals Found in Thirty-One Fragrance Products by Julia
Kendall,httn://users.Imi.net/—wilworks/ehn20.htm)
If building management teams provide safer paths of travel to facilities or
rooms with cleaner air, accompanied by symbols identifying them, and make
a strong commitment to do everything in their power to adhere to the
language of the proposal, much will be accomplished to vouchsafe the right
of access to people living with respiratory disabilities.
EHN, while urging you to adopt the Cleaner Air Symbol, strongly advises
the adoption of California's more inclusive opening statement,the language
of their number four, which describes some non-toxic pest management
solutions, and the on-site log as described in number six. California's
language is pasted in below for your convenience.
Thank you for your time and consideration of our concerns.
Sincerely,
Barbara Wilkie, President
Connie Barker
Emily Earhart
Sue Hodges
Attachments:
Proposed: ANSI 703.7.2.5 Cleaner Air Symbol.
"The Cleaner Air Symbol shall be used to identify a path of travel, and a
room or a facility when the following conditions are met:
Floor or wall coverings, floor or wall covering adhesives, carpets, or
formaldehyde-emitting particleboard cabinetry, cupboards, or doors
have not been installed or replace in the previous 12-months.
Lighting shall be incandescent and electrical systems and equipment
shall be operable by or on behalf of the occupant or user of the room,
facility, or path of travel.
Heating, ventilation, air conditioning and their controls shall be
operable by or on behalf of the occupant or user.
Signage shall be posted with instructions for maintenance personnel
to use only non-irritating, non-toxic products for cleaning,
maintenance, disinfections, or pest management of the area.
Deodorizers or Fragrance Emission Devices and Systems (FEDS)
shall not be used in the designated area.
Signage shall be posted requesting occupants or users not to smoke or
wear perfumes, colognes, or scented personal care products in the
designated Cleaner Air room, facility, or path of travel.
Removal of Symbol. If the path of travel, room and/or facility
identified by the Cleaner Air Symbol ceases to meet the minimum
conditions are set forth above the Cleaner Air Symbol shall be
removed and shall not be replace until the minimum conditions are
again met.
California's Cleaner Air Signage
Adopted November 28, 2001
1117B.5.12 Cleaner-Air Sign. „STRICTLY FOR PUBLICLY FUNDED
FACILITIES OR ANY FACILITIES LEASED OR RENTED BY STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. NOT CONCESSIONAIRES.% This symbol shall be the
standard used to identify a room, facility, and paths of travel that are
accessible to and usable by people who are adversely impacted by airborne
chemicals or particulate(s) and/or the use of electrical fixtures and or
devices. When used, the symbol shall comply with Figure 11 B-40..
1117B.5.12.1 Color and size of symbol. The symbol shall be used when the
following minimum conditions are met. The symbol, which shall include the
text„Cleaner Air% as shown, shall be displayed either as a negative or
positive image within a square which is a minimum of 6-inches on each side.
The symbol may be shown in black and white or in color. When color is
used, it shall be Federal Blue(Color No. 15090 Federal Standard 595B) on
white or white on Federal Blue, there shall be at least a 70% color contrast
between the background of the sign from the surface that it is mounted on.
Strictly for publicly funded public facilities or any facilities leased or rented
by State of California. Not concessionaires.
1117B.5.12.2 Conditions of Use. Use of the cleaner-air symbol is voluntary.
The Clean Air Symbol shall be permitted for use to identify a path of travel,
and a room or a facility when the following is met:
1. Floor or wall coverings, floor or wall covering adhesives, carpets, or
formaldehyde-emitting particleboard cabinetry, cupboards, or doors
have not been:installed or replaced in the previous 12-months.
2. .Incandescent lighting provided in lieu of fluorescent or halogen
lighting, and electrical systems and equipment shall be operable by or
on behalf of the occupant or user of the room, facility, or path of
travel.
3. Heating,ventilation, air conditioning and their controls shall be
operable by or on behalf of the occupant or user.
4. To maintain„Cleaner-Air'/ designation, only non-irritating; non-
toxic products will be used in cleaning,maintenance, disinfection,
pest management, or for any minimal touch-ups, which are essential
for occupancy of the area. Deodorizers or Fragrance Emission
Devices and Systems (FEDS) shall not be used in the designated area.
Pest control practices for Cleaner-Air areas shall include the use of
bait stations using boric acid, sticky traps, and silicon caulk for
sealing cracks and crevices. Areas shall be routinely monitored for
pest problems. Additional non-toxic treatment methods; such as
temperature extremes for termites,may be employed in the event of
more urgent problems. These pest control practices shall not be used
48 hours prior to placement of the sign and the facility shall be
ventilated with outside air for a minimum of 24-hours following use
or application.
5. Signage shall be posted requesting occupants or users not to smoke or
wear perfumes, colognes, or scented personal care products.
Fragranced products shall not be used in the designated Cleaner-Air
room, facility,or path of travel.
6. A log shall be maintained on site, accessible to the public either in
person or by telephone, e-mail, Fax, or other accessible means as
requested. One or more individuals shall be designated to maintain
the log. The log shall record any product or practice used in the
Cleaner-Air designated room, facility, or path of travel, as well as
scheduled activities, which may impact the Cleaner-Air designation.
The log shall also include the product label as well as the material
Safety Data Sheets (MSDS).
1117B.5.12.3 Removal of symbol. If the path of travel, room and/or facility
identified by the Cleaner Air Sym-bol should temporarily or permanently
cease to meet the minimum conditions as set forth above, the Cleaner Air
Symbol shall be removed and shall not be replaced until the minimum
conditions are again met...I 117B.
Barbara Wilkie wrote:
Lawrence Brown, CBO
ICC Program Manager
5203 Leesburg Pike, Suite 600
i
Falls Church, VA 22041-3401
703-931-4533 x15
Fax: 703-379-1546
lbrown(a�inticode.org
Dear Mr. Lawrence Brown:
RE: 703.7.2.5 - Cleaner Air Symbol.
Thank you for accepting support of"703.7.2.5 Cleaner Air Symbol" via
email message.
I live with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity..When encountering various
chemical products, such as synthetic scents in personal care and household
and janitorial cleaning and maintenance products, pesticides, fertilizers, fresh
wax, fresh paint, recently cleaned carpets, ... I develop disabling diseases
such as asthma, migraines, and/or neurological symptoms affecting my gait.
Even though our chemical barriers are invisible they are nonetheless
formidable. Therefore it is of utmost importance that "703.7.2.5 Cleaner Air
Symbol" be adopted. This signage will do much to serve the ever-growing
community of the already chemically injured.
While we cannot see our chemical barriers, we.will be able to follow signs
directing us along safer paths of travel to safer rooms in which to conduct
our business. But a thought to bear in mind: This Cleaner Air signage not
only offers protection for the already chemically disabled, it also offers an
option to those who wish to follow the safer path.
We are all stakeholders when it comes to breathing.
Sincerely,
Barbara Wilkie
Complementary information:
Cleaner air means no artificial scent of"clean" or "fresh," or of the seasons,
or of Mother Nature's bounty.
Raw Materials of Perfumery
httv://www.perfumersworld.com/chems/material.htm
Our modern synthetic fragrances pollute the air indoors and out.
SeeCommon Indoor Air Pollutants by the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/extemal/fag/indoor.htm
Ubiquitous Synthetic Scents
"Frangrance." That's all you'll read on a label of a product that contains
scent. You can even read "Fragrance-Free" on the label of a product that
contains synthetic scent. That's OK by the FDA. However, that misleading
information can cause all sorts of health problems for the already fragrance-
sensitized individual,plus increases the likelihood of dealing with attitudinal
problems caused by those who have yet to learn that their perceived
"personal right" to use and wear scented products can adversely affect the
health of untold others.
Whether you use fragrance products or not, when you see Fragrance:
Think hydrocarbons.
Think asthma and other adverse respiratory events.
Think migraines and other headaches.
Think brain and central nervous system adverse events.
Think the formulas changed from mainly plant and animal essences to
petrochemical formulations over the past couple of decades or so.
When you read:
UNEXPLAINED skyrocketing rates of asthma and other chronic diseases.
Think fragrances.
Not that our modern fragrances -- found in a myriad of personal care
products, as well as in household and janitorial cleaning and maintenance
products -- are the only cause for these unexplained rising rates of chronic
diseases. But to not look to our modern synthetic scents as a,possible cause is
outrageous.
The fragrance industry is self-regulated and further protected by trade secret
laws. Trade secret status has done nothing to protect the industry from "rip-
off' scents being manufactured-- modern analyses methods obviously have
made that goal obsolete. However,trade secret status does a mighty fine job
of protecting the industry from an informed consumership and astute doctors.
When you read that asthma is highest among certain demographics, think
fragrances. Look to those the industry has targeted for sales. Do a little
research. You'll find that African-Americans, Hispanics and infants and
children (of all ethnicities) are the targets for fragrance sales.
Our elderly belong to another group of people who are suffering those
"unexplained" rising rates of asthma. Just visit most skilled nursing facilities;
hospitals, retirement residences. What do you find? The over-powering scent
of our modern synthetic fragrances. One can find places of care that rely on
honest cleaning rather than masking odors with aftificial scents,but it can
take some doing. I've been there, done that!
Based on personal experience, I am not amazed that our elderly are suffering
increasingly from asthma or congestive heart failure, etc. And, I surely don't
think of soaring asthma rates as "unexplained." Not when I see soaring
asthma rates marching in lockstep with the change in fragrance formulas,
coupled with the proliferation of synthetically scented products during the
same time frame.
The FDA can require it's alert message to be affixed to all fragrances
released to market without substantiation of safety. Do you think a product
made to be smelled (inhaled)by large numbers of people-- users and non-
users --is adequately tested when that testing is focused upon the skin
reactions of only the primary user?
If not, please write to the FDA in support of Petition 99P-1340.Request that
the FDA require its warning on synthetic fragrances released to market
without adequate testing. That regulation is in place, the FDA has not
implemented it.
That FDA alert would read: "WARNING: The safety of this product has not
been determined." See FDA Authority Over
Cosmetics.http://vm.efsan.fda.gov/—dms/cos-206.html
When you read FDA Authority Over Cosmetics, take note of what all the
FDA cannot do regarding the fragrance industry. Remember the FDA's
mission is protecting the public health.
As Lynn Lawson informs us in her book, "Staying Well in a Toxic World:
Understanding Environmental Illness, Chemical Sensitivities, Chemical
Injuries, and Sick Building Syndrome," Ralph Nader had commented, "Due
to some adroit lobbying years ago by the cosmetic industry, the FDA has to
beg for safety,rather than demand it:" (Copyright 1993, Noble Press; Page
287.)
Fragrances? Think FDA Petition . . . Write today. Write right.away.
FDA Petition,Docket Number 99P-1340, includes analyses of fragrances.
hM://www.ehnca.org/FDA13etition/bkgrinfo.htm
Reference Docket Number 99P-1340, and e-mail, fax or mail your
comments to the FDA.
Email Address -- fdadockets(a,oc.fda.gov
FAX Number— 301.827.6870
Letters may be mailed to:
Dockets Management Branch
The Food and Drug Administration
Department of Health and Human Services, Rm. 1-23
12420 Parklawn Dr.
Rockville, MD 20857
A few letters to the FDA in support of 99P-1340,which appear on
EHN's site
http://users.Imi.net/—wilworks/FDAt)etition/letindex.htm
April 2003: Health Care Without Harm
htty://www.noharm.ors/
• The Issue: Cleaners and Disinfectants, Fragrances and Pesticides
http://www.noharm.orgjpesticidesCleaners/issue
• The Issue: Green Purchasing
http://www.noharm.org/ag nPurchasin issue
The Issue: Healthy Building
I
http://www.noharm.orwbealthyBuildiniz/issue
Sharon ToJ4 designer of Cleaner Air sign
e-mail: accesscomm(@earthlink.net
http://www.accesscommunications.bigstel).com/
Return to Access Info
http://www.ehnca.org/ehnlinx/a.htm#Access
Return to EHN's special section on access and accommodation,Take Heart!
http://users.Imi.net/—wilworks/ehnhomyg/takheart.htm
Return to Action Letters
htty://www.ehnca.org/actnletr/acletin.htm
Return to Air
httn://www.ehnca.org/ehnlinx/a.htm#Air
Return to Events
htti):Husers.Imi.net/wilworks/events/eveindex.htm
Return to Government, California
htti)://www.ehnca.org/ehnglinx.htm#Califomia
Return to Posters
http://www.ehnca.org/ehnlinx/p.htm#Posters
EHN's homepage is www.ehnca.org
From: Daniela Arnon [mailto:danielaarnon@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 1:52 PM
Subject, Fwd: Excellent article on PG&E Not-So-Smart Meters
Dear SLO City Council Members;
By the way, Is Judy Vick, of the Emf Safety Network, scheduled to.give us a presentation
on the dangers of this technology? If so, when?
Best Wishes,
D.Arnon
Begin forwarded message:
Here is an article on smart meters you will find fascinating:
hard emr. em9I1:
o COUNCIL o CDD DIR
o CnYMOR c HTDIR
o AM CM °MEQ RED FILE
o ATIDRM o PW DIA
ocI�Asrouc o PAW&RIMM
� MEETING AGENDA
o TAIAUM o UMDIA
o S o tneDm DATE -�_� -- ITEM
swcrry P,et irnrnaJ
o gI,pCRYNEWS n WUNCIL
o CRY MOR
o cl 1�K
Dumb and Dangerous
The Problems With Smart Grids
By B. BLAKE LEVITT and CHELLIS GLENDINNING
How is it that so many intelligent, inside-the-beltway environmentalists are buying into an eco-
health-safety-finance debacle with the potential to increase energy consumption, endanger the
environment,harm public health, diminish privacy, make the national utility grid more insecure,
cause job losses, and make energy markets more speculative?
Answer: by not doing their homework.
Welcome to the Smart Grid- a government-funded money machine capable of intruding into
every aspect of our lives. Smart Grid technologies - initially funded to the tune of$3.4 billion
through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and slated to cost $11 billion
through 2011 - are enough to make even diehard liberals demand a claw back of misspent tax
dollars.
On the surface, Smart Grids sound `green' —with promises of saving energy, creating new
power-line corridors run on wind and solar, way-stations to power-up electric vehicles, energy-
efficient upgrades to an aging power infrastructure, and real-time customer knowledge of
electricity use.
And there's the enticing communications factor: a nationwide high-speed broadband information
technology barreling down high-tension electric corridors called Broadband-Over-Power-Lines
(BPL). What could be more perfect for communicating facts about the planet, funding enviro-
candidates,pushing legislation, and organizing Earth Days?
But few who actually study how these new systems functionwant anything to do with them.
Other than those who stand to make enormous profits and the physicists or engineers who dream
up such stuff, Smart Grids are giving knowledgeable people the willies.
What Is a Smart Grid?
These days the word "smart"is attached to anything even marginally digital -- and indeed it's an
effective marketing tool because who wants anything dumb?
But is the Smart Grid really smart?
The problem: smart metering will turn every single appliance into the equivalent of a
transmitting cell phone, and this at a time when public concern about the safety of exposure to
the radiofrequency radiation (RF) of wireless technologies is on the rise. Heads up: that's every
dishwasher,microwave oven, stove, washing machine, clothes dryer, air conditioner, furnace,
refrigerator, freezer, coffee maker, TV, computer, printer, and fax machine.
The average U.S. home has over 15 such appliances, each of which would be equipped with a
transmitting antenna. While older models can be retrofitted, General Electric (GE) and other
appliance manufacturers are already putting transmitters into their latest designs, and the U.S.
Department of Energy(DOE) is already giving out tax credits.
Meanwhile,people who don't want to use such appliances won't be able to deactivate the
wireless component without disabling it and voiding warranties. Citing"electricity theft," it
could also be illegal to do so.
Yet, not one safety concern regarding the cumulative effects of 24/7 exposure to RF radiation
seems to have occurred to the backers of Smart Grids. And this is despite the fact that all
appliances will transmit wireless data with peak power bursts far above current safety standards -
at frequencies between 917 MHz and 3.65 GHz in the ultra-high frequency/microwave ranges of
the electromagnetic spectrum, several times a minute.
And that's just the indoor part. All transmitters inside your home or office will communicate
with a Smart Meter attached to the outside of each building._(1)That meter, in turn, will transmit
at an even higher frequency to a central hub installed in local neighborhoods. In what are called
"mesh networks," signals can also be bounced from house-meter to house-meter before reaching
the final hub. So exposures will not just be from your own meter,but accumulating from
possibly 100-to-500 of your neighbors' as well.
That's a hefty barrage of radiation.
Some gas, water, and electric utilities are now using such smart networks, each with its own
metering system and separate exposures - creating a multi-frequency wall of radiation that, in the
history of living creatures, is unheard of.
In addition, the meters and the antennas will act as transceivers, allowing both you via mobile
phone or computer— and take note: your utility company- to remotely control your appliances.
According to Jenny Anderson and Julie Creswell writing in the New York Times, one such
system in the Midwest already allows the utility to cycle furnaces and air conditioners on and off
every 15 minutes, with the stated purpose to reduce peak-loads on electric grids.
On closer scrutiny, Smart Grids look like another Build-It-Now-Deal-With-The-Consequences-
Later fiasco. At a time when health concerns about the safety of cell phones, antennas, and Wi-Fi
hotspots are mounting around the globe, Smart Grids will require literally billions of new
transmitters, each pumping"electrosmog"into the environment - for which there will be no
mitigation, no conscientious objection, and no escape..
We Already Know a Lot about RF and the Environment
Living creatures are fantastically sensitive to low-level, non-ionizing radiation that includes
everything from visible light to the earth's natural electromagnetic fields.
Birds,butterflies, fish, marine mammals, bees, and other insects are particularly sensitive to the
earth's natural electromagnetic background, using it to guide their migrations, sense of direction,
circadian rhythms, food-finding, and reproductive activities. Soil bacteria are also tuned to the
natural currents of the planet.
But human-made radiation creates different exposures - with unusual signaling characteristics
like digital pulsing, phased array and saw-tooth waveforms, and at much higher power intensities
than anything found in nature. RF is actually a form of energetic air pollution- and if air were
legally considered "habitat"like water and land, RF might be regulated differently.
Studies show that myriad wildlife abandons terrain when cell towers are installed. Cows have
increased cancers, lower milk production, agitation,
Electromagnetic-Fields-Levitt-B-Blake-9780595476077.jpg-
immune system disorders,more mastitis,miscarriages, and birth defects in offspring near cell
towers. Birds with nests near antennas display lower reproductive rates, and chicks are born with
birth defects. In simulations of whole colony collapse disorder,bees have disappeared entirely
when transmitting cell phones were placed next to their hives. It is thought that RF interferes
with their navigational abilities by coupling with a natural magnetic material called magnetite in
bee abdomens.
Meanwhile, hundreds of studies done with laboratory animals found numerous cancers, immune
disorders, and increased mortality from chronic, low-level exposures. This body of work should
make us ponder the accuracy of the data—and humaneness - when biologists attach RF
transmitters to elk,marine mammals,big cats, and other species to study them.
Trees also endure die-back near towers. Whole forests near broadcast antennas in Europe have
suffered. Military-weapons designers have long used treetops with high moisture content as
waveguides for missiles.
Some of this work goes back six decades in bioelectromagnetics and biophysics journals-- and is
available for any curious environmentalist to see.
... and We Know about RF and Humans
Research on RF and human health dates to the 1940's when World War II's radar revealed
infertility and cataracts in military personnel.
David O. Carpenter, MD, MPH, is the director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at
the State University of New York at Albany, School of Public Health. Along with EMF/RF
consultant Cindy Sage in California, he co-edited the 2007 BioInitiative Report, which calls for
significantly more stringent RF exposure standards than now exist.
Environmentalists may know Dr. Carpenter, who blew the whistle on PCB contamination in
farm-raised salmon. He is also an expert on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields. To
him, the decade-long, 13-country World Health Organization's 2010 Interphone Study confirms
what previous reports and many experts have been saying all along: RF exposures at current
levels are already unsafe.
According to Interphone, talking on a cell phone for 1,640 hours over a 10-year period- the
equivalent of 30 minutes a day-- increases an adult's risk of malignant glioma brain cancer by
40%.
"While this [Interphone] study is not perfect," Dr. Carpenter said, "it should serve as a warning
to governments that the deployment of new wireless technologies may bring risks to the public
that are widespread, involuntary, and increase long-term health care costs."
His assessment ipso facto includes Smart Grids.
Over 70 studies have found effects at frequencies with very low-power intensity, many with
implications for human health. Fifteen studies report effects among people living 50-to-1500 feet
from a cell tower—including cancers,immune system effects, fertility problems, heart
arrhythmias,miscarriages, sleeplessness, dizziness, concentration difficulties,memory loss;
headaches, skin rashes, lowered libido, fatigue, and malaise.
And many of these symptoms mirror what some people are reporting within days of Smart
Meters installed at their homes.
In addition, several studies report increases in the permeability of the blood-brain barrier, which
protects brain tissue from bacteria, viruses, and toxins. One study found increases in stress
markers in human saliva near cell towers. Also reported are calcium ion changes in cells - with
implications for the ability to metabolize. Other studies link exposures to Alzheimer's, Lou
Gehrig Disease, and Parkinson's.
In fact, every system of the body appears to be sensitive to low-level electromagnetic fields - and
why not? Living cells are electromagnetic-systems..
Research by Magda Havas, Ph.D., of Trent University in Canada, and U.S. epidemiologist
Samuel Milham, M.D., links something called"dirty electricity"with diabetes, malignant
melanoma, and cancers of the breast, thyroid, uterus and lung. Dirty electricity is an industry
term that describes a multi-frequency exposure when higher frequencies like RF couple with the
lower frequencies running along power lines. BPL is 100%dirty electricity-that's how it
functions - and people barraged by it can now measure RF radiation emanating from their light
sockets.
Of special concern are people with implanted medical devices like deep-brain stimulators for
Parkinson's, some pacemakers, insulin pumps, and in-home hospital equipment. The
radiofrequency interference(RFI) inherent to Smart Grids can cause such equipment to go
haywire, or even to stop. And RFI from ambient exposures has caused wheelchairs to go off
peers or into traffic; automatic ignition switches in cars refuse to start until cars are towed to RF-
free blocks; and surgical beds have jumped during operations.
RFI is also suspected in sudden acceleration of automobiles.
Low I.Q. for Smart Grids and Government
Think of the static on your radio. Now imagine Smart Grid's multiple frequencies overlapping
with animate objects ... like your brain. The UHF used in Smart Grids couples best with brain
tissue.
Several federal agencies actually do have a stake in RF safety,but the Federal Communications
Commission's (FCC) standards are the only ones in effect in the U.S. A major problem is that
the FCC regulates only short-term, acute, high-intensity,thermal effects in humans, while no
criteria exist to protect wildlife.
And there's more. FCC standards only regulate for whole-body exposure, not for specific organs
- like brain tissue which absorbs energy differently. Plus, FCC allowances are averaged over 30
minutes. With Smart Grids such time-averaging makes the peak pulses that blast for a fraction of
a second when first activated vanish on paper.
These are holes through which the Queen Mary could sail.
According to Richard Tell, an electrical engineer formerly with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency(EPA) - in a 2008 report on Smart Grids for Hydro One Networks,
Inc./Toronto - antennas on appliances may transmit at a density of.18watts, each at ballpark 4.5
seconds per hour. But external meters on houses transmit at around 1 watt at less than 2 minutes
per hour.
Such figures may sound low - until the use of many appliances at the same time and exposures
from the neighbors' meters is lumped in.Nowhere in utility estimates are such peak pulses
factored—which, Tell has said, can be 20 times higher or more.
Still, he notes, the radiation from Smart Meters is 15,000 times lower than what FCC ultra-high
standards.
Too,the industry claims that meters transmit every four hours—but engineers like Stephen Scott
of EMF Services/California measure spikes every few seconds, especially from banks of meters
attached to housing and office complexes, while others have measured firing between 9-and-15
times a minute.
Utilities don't release numbers for peak pulses,but one estimate by Southern California Edison—
since voided for P.R. reasons - puts peak pulses at 229,000 microwatts per square centimeter at
eight inches from the transmitter. That means if you sleep next to a wall with a smart appliance
on the other side, strong UHF signals could be spiking several times a minute all night long-
right into your brain.
Compare that to cell phones that emit approximately 250-to-300 microwatts per square
centimeter when placed directly against the head.
Vampires and Cyber Attackers Make the Honor Roll
For decades, knowledgeable environmentalists have advised people with remote-control
appliances to unplug them because of`vampire" energy. Plugged-in remotes are never
completely"OFF"; otherwise they wouldn't be able to receive the signal to turn back"ON."
So what will happen to our aggregate energy use when all appliances become smart vampires?
No proponents thought to ask that question.
Though supposedly"secure," Smart Grids can be penetrated by both wired and wireless
networks. In August of 2009,hackers robbed 179,000 Toronto Hydro customers' names,
addresses, and billing information from their e-billing accounts. Security consultant Mike Davis
of IOActive, Inc/Seattle has shown how easy it is to install computer worms that can take over
the whole grid, and such worms can be programmed to alter billing information, gather
information on electricity use for sale to third parties, or shut down hundreds of thousands of
households.
Ross Anderson and Shailendra Fuloria at Cambridge University's Computer Laboratory note that
hostile government agencies or terrorist organizations could bring whole countries to their knees
by interrupting electrical generation. More so than traditional grids, they stress that Smart Grids
create a new strategic vulnerability as the cyber equivalent of a nuclear attack. Smart Grids are
also easy to sabotage with simple jamming devices.
And if the problems aren't human-created, nature could step in. The sun's normal 11-year
sunspot cycle-ramping up right now,promising to pump sporadic blasts of electromagnetic
energy toward earth- could wreak chaos upon Smart Grids.
Dumb: Privacy Gone, Liability Shifted, Billing Errors Galore
Privacy is an issue as well. When the utility company records home energy use in real time-
with data held at a central hub,potentially accessible from a hacker's laptop—the knowledge
that you are not home becomes available.
Plus, do you really want the utilities remotely-controlling your appliances?
And what about liability? Although grid engineers claim the systems are encrypted, encryption
often fails. Imagine the utility- or even a passing cell-phone user-inadvertently turning on your
oven when you're on vacation. Or shutting off the furnace on a subzero night. For insurance
purposes, who is liable? What about civil rights violations? Or the legal ramifications of a utility
partnering with the police?
In the purest sense,,Smart Grids offer new opportunities for electronic trespass.
Then there are the billing errors. Some customers in California have seen their bills triple- from
$200/month to $600-when Smart Meters were installed. After a class action suit was filed
against Pacific Gas & Electric(PG&E), that utility admitted that 23,000 of their Smart Meters
"might"be defective, though they denied they were responsible for the billing errors.
Dumb is as Dumb Does
Smart systems can wreak havoc with electronics too. People are complaining of ceiling fans
turning on in the middle of the night, speeds spontaneously changing, paddles reversing
direction, and circuit boards burning up. A few meters have exploded. Others have fried
electronics. Fires have started. In New Zealand firefighters report 422 fires in 2010 involved with
Smart Meters.
Oddly, given such dire safety issues,neither U.S. utilities nor their experts seem capable of
answering simple questions. At a public forum in Sebastopol in 2010, PG&E pulled its speakers
i
when they didn't get the format they wanted - all questions in writing and in advance. Then, at a
subsequent gathering, PG&E sent two experts - Michael Herz and Leeka Kheifets -- neither of
whom knew how often meters send or repeat RF signals, called the"duty cycle."The two could
not answer what the exposure would be for an apartment complex with banks of multiple meters,
nor answer technical questions about peak-signal strength. And they didn't know the make or
model of the meters so that people in the audience could look up the information.
One Sebastopol activist, Sandi Maurer, said in frustration: "How can we trust a company to
deploy such a massive RF installation on every home, if they can't even answer basic safety
questions?"
But not all utilities are rushing forward. In 2010 Dominion Virginia Power delayed a $600-
million program because Virginia's State Corporation Commission questioned its economic
wisdom,noting that the savings to ratepayers would be less than the rate increases needed to pay
for the build-out. Hydro One/Canada came to the same conclusion in 2007, and last year
lawmakers in the Netherlands struck down a bill that would have made Smart Meters mandatory.
The U.K.is reconsidering a smart metering system as well, and in 2009 the European Parliament
ordered member states to study the economic feasibility of Smart Grids..
Electricity= Big Bucks
All the while private, largely unregulated hedge funds have been entering energy markets,
betting on the potential financial bonanza. It's the big players who stand to profit, of course
with your tax dollars going to the likes of GE, IBM, Siemens, Intel,Texas Instruments, AT&T,
Verizon, Motorola, and other behemoths.
GE is the largest manufacturer of Smart Meters in the world. It has signed contracts with
CenterPoint Energy and Grid Net to deploy WiMax-enabled radios for use in Smart Meters.
WiMax is the fourth generation network that was earmarked by the FCC and the Obama
administration to bring wireless Internet to rural areas—so clearly the technologies are moveable
pieces, depending on who owns the chessboard.
But it's the taxpayer-customer who gets the double whammy: underwriting the infrastructure via
tax dollars; enduring rate hikes and medical bills -- and then there's the burden of having to new
appliances.
Plus, for citizens, real-time metering reveals when you wake up, go to work, make dinner, do the
laundry, use the computer, go on vacation. While proponents see real-time knowledge in the
hands of consumers as a form of empowerment, they ignore the gorilla-in-the-room: tiered
pricing. Today,many utilities set flat, state-regulated rates for kilowatt hours,but tiered pricing
will change that.
Critics say that tiered pricing penalizes the elderly, self-employed, unemployed,homemakers,
and those with small children all of whom use more energy during the day. But a darker
possibility exists: a utility could create special billing tiers just for you. In other words, if you
work the evening shift and cook dinner at midnight,your rate could be highest when everyone
else's is lowest.
Then there's mandatory shut-offs for people who don't pay their utility bills - after which the
unfortunate customer will have to buy a prepaid wireless-enacted electric meter like a prepaid
phone card. Fantasy? Such a system was enacted in South Africa in the 1990's.
Inside-the-Beltway Enviros
Before the Obama administration even took office, their pre-transition coordinator for climate
and energy policy, Carol Browner,met with IBM CEO Sam Palmisano.
Browner was the director of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)under Clinton and
is now Obama's coordinator for climate and energy policy, while IBM works with the
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation think-tank in DC to develop three focus
areas: increased broadband access, digitized medical records, and Smart Grids.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Palmisano told Browner that a$10 billion investment was
needed to jumpstart Smart Grids. Palmisano also claimed that Smart Grids would create 239,000
new jobs -with half of those resulting from start-up businesses. But his promise was not
computed against the jobs lost, such as hundreds of thousands of unemployed meter readers. Nor
did he consider the fact that new information technologies are typically seen as a way to
consolidate through fewer employees.
Other former Clinton Administration officials on board for Smart Grids include Al Gore -
because of supposed lower carbon emissions - and Reed Hundt, chairman of the FCC in the
1990's when that agency championed massive auctions of the public airwaves for cell-phone
technology.
Hundt went on to become co-founder of Frontline Wireless and Sigma Networks. Sitting on
several corporate communications company boards, including Intel and China Telecom, he is
also co-chairman of the Coalition for the Green Bank, a capital-raising nonprofit that is lobbying
Congress for more Smart Grid money--through environment committees.
The Food and Drug Administration and FCC have a stake in Smart Grids, as do the EPA and
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). But neither EPA nor FWS has the funding or manpower
to address the RF effects of Smart Grids or consider the effects of a new infusion of radiation
into the environment.
U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar has oversight over FWS. Salazar was a U.S. Senator
(D-CO, 2005-to-2009)before he left to join Obama. He was also Colorado's Attorney General
from 1999 to 2005 and gets low grades from environmentalists as one of a handful of Democrats
to vote against setting limits on offshore drilling and global warming.
And he is no stranger to RF politics. A go-around on RF's health and environmental effects
raged from 2000 to 2006 in Colorado. At issue was a high-definition TV tower to be erected on
Lookout Mountain near Denver, overlooking a community already burdened by one of the
country's largest antenna farms. After rancorous public hearings, the county board voted against
the new tower. But Salazar attached a midnight rider to another bill right-pre-empting local
decision makers.
Steven Chu He is former director of the DOE's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and
professor of Physics and Molecular Cell Biology at the University of California. He has also held
positions at Stanford University and AT&T Bell Laboratories—all of which develop/deploy RF
technologies. He is now Obama's Secretary of Energy, and in 2009 Chu issued a statement
telling the states to take the federal stimulus money and not stand in the way of Smart Grids.
But perhaps the biggest lack of intelligence lies in the energy and environment committees of the
U.S. House of Representatives and Senate. Smart Grid legislation first passed in 2007 as part of
the Energy Independence and Security Act under the Bush administration. Additional legislation
was contained in the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 at the House Committee
on Energy& Environment, formerly chaired by Henry Waxman (D-CA). A companion bill was
in the Senate., while in 2010 twelve bills were considered, some of which were revived in 2011.
Everyone, including the Committee of Environment and Public Works - formerly chaired by
Barbara Boxer(D-CA) with a grid-related subcommittee chaired by Bernard Sanders(I-VT)—
has had a hand in Smart Grids.
Now some Republicans, especially Tea Party activists who view Smart Grids as massive big
government intrusion, may be fighting Smart Grid proposals— a situation that is creating an odd
alliance between the extreme right and some activists who find themselves on the same side.
Smart Grids-Boondoggle or Economic Stimulus?
2010's federal appropriations for Smart Grids was $11 billion.
But some financial analysts say it will take over$900 billion over the next two decades to
upgrade high-tension lines,meters, central control facilities, and substations. In addition, they
say to truly digitize and digitalize grids, it will cost hundreds of billions more, into 2030,because
every utility's computer network will need to be upgraded, new renewable-energy sources will
be needed to plug into new access points, and recharging stations and power lines will need to be
built. Proponents brag that the construction will be a bonanza.
But Smart Grids may be little more than a Trojan Horse donned in a "green"hat. After all the
government mandates and stimulus money for Smart Grids, a veritable gold rush ensued - with
utility companies,hedge funds, meter vendors,patent owners, and colossi like Google and
Verizon vying for taxpayer bucks.
In fact, few jobs were created.
Ironically, environmentalists are also pushing for Smart Grids without studying the
environmental/health impacts or even calculating if such systems will save energy. Plus,
provisions in the stimulus package exempt Smart Grids from National Environmental Policy Act
review and allow federal preemption for siting high-tension corridors through environmentally-
sensitive areas.
But the biggest enviro-irony is that most Smart Meter models don't"run backwards"; if you
install solar panels or other renewable-energy sources and want to sell energy back to the grid,
without very expensive additional equipment the new metering makes that impossible.
People Are Getting Smart
Connecticut Light and Power is currently petitioning the Department of Public Utility Control to
allow Smart Meters to be placed on 1.2 million homes, over the objections of the state's Attorney
General George Jepsen. A pilot program of 10,000 such meters found no energy savings in 2009,
he said,but would cost ratepayers $500 million.
Maine has begun a statewide Smart Grid project-- over citizen opposition. Smart Grids already
exist in parts of Virginia, Florida, Texas,New Mexico, and the Midwest, while PG&E in
California has installed several million meters on homes and businesses; 73%of buildings in
Alameda County already have them. As of June 1, 2010, the California Public Utilities
Commission reports 2000 health-related and 1500 non-health-related complaints. The PG& E
executive in charge of the Smart Meter program,William Devereaux,was discovered infiltrating
activist groups opposed to Smart Grids, and the utility admitted to monitoring online groups to
track their strategies.
And yet California customers are signing petitions, organizing calling campaigns, forming
neighborhood groups,holding forums, throwing protests, getting arrested for blocking from
neighborhoods, suing the state, and threatening to go off the grid. Sebastopol in Sonoma County
is calling for `opt-out' campaigns whereby customers refuse transmitters. And thus far, Berkeley,
Scotts Valley, San Francisco, Sebastopol, Capitola, Fairfax, Camp Meeker, Cotati, Bolinas, and
Watsonville, as well as Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa counties, have requested moratoriums..
In 2010 Assemblyman Jared Huffman(D-San Rafael) requested that the California Council on
Science and Technology evaluate health effects, and Marin County Supervisor Charles
McGlashan has called for state hearings - with his county board declaring that the state should
shut down all Smart Meters until billing,health, and safety issues are resolved.
High I.Q.'s in Europe
In 2007, Germany's Environment Ministry issued a warning to German citizens to avoid wireless
technology when possible and return to cabled means of communication. The French national
library banned Wi-Fi in libraries when librarians became ill. And the European Environmental
Agency called for action to reduce public exposure to radiation from mobile phones, Wi-Fi, Wi
Max, and other antennas.
In 2008 the European Parliament proposed publicly displayed maps of RF-contaminated areas so
people could avoid them, while the U.K.'s Association of Teachers and Lecturers came out
against Wi-Fi in classrooms.
Sweden has declared some beaches and public buildings RF-free areas where cell phones and
wireless computers cannot be used so that people with electromagnetic hypersensitivity- a form
of environmental allergy that Sweden classifies as a functional disability- can take a breather
from contamination.
Individuals have also rallied. Spanish activists hold an annual International Day Against
Electromagnetic Pollution. British and Irish citizens have taken to civil disobedience,bulldozing
1 ( �
down cell towers. And Israelis have torn down cell towers with their bare hands and chased
landlords who lease rooftops to tower companies through the streets..
All the while, a truly intelligent way to help an aging infrastructure does exist. Using closed
cables, fiber optic boasts no environmental RF exposures, no dirty electricity, is resistant to
sabotage and weather disruptions, and provides TV and high-speed Internet. For$11 billion, the
U.S. could bring fiber optic to every home just as Japan has done.
And some towns aren't waiting. Chattanooga TN already has a municipally-owned fiber optic
network. The community of Dunnellon FL is proposing a fiber-optic system for every home and
business - without increasing taxes. Meanwhile, Google is seeking prototype communities for a
fiber-optic system that could possibly be licensed for utility metering. Unfortunately, Google has
also wandered into wireless smart metering too.
The fact is: Smart Grids are dumb. Given known biological effects of RF -- together with the use
of financial resources better spent on true sustainability--this new roll-out adds yet another
threat to the planet.
But, in this current stampede toward everything"green,"many environmentalists are flunking
the I.Q. test. We all need to smarten up.
B. Blake Levitt is a medical/science journalist, former New York Times contributor, author of
Electromagnetic
An Iu1fters Ald locRlnprfMl: , g A !Ed11Gan
f
e jrqlmrom
agfietic
Fimields
PROTECT' OURSELVES
r
yob`- An
`♦'
> Y
I� �
-
» _•f � - d� , 999
3 Ll p � — c:Li
` I
II
From: drearman@charter.net [drearman@charter.net)
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 11:48 PM
To: Council, S1oCity; Marx, Jan
Subject: PLEASE protect us. . .NO wirless Smart Meters in SLO
Dear Mayor Marx and City council members,
I am a practicing holistic Chiropractor in San Luis Obispo.
Many of my patients are very sensitive to RF/EMF. In fact, I have
patients who live in North County (with Smart meters) who are
experiencing a severe increase of symptoms of head trauma they
sustained years ago. Another patient is having an increase of body
issues associated with auto immune diseases. As for myself I can no
longer sit in the living room of my boyfriend's home who has a Smart
meter on the outside wall as I get a headache and dizzy when I do so.
Electrical EMF sensitivity is an actual Medical Diagnosis in Sweden.
In Europe children and pregnant women are WARNED to stay away from
EMF/RF.
I could go on with many examples.
There are so very many emails I could forward to you about the
scientific proof of the DANGERS of these wireless Smart Meters.
Please keep in mind when you hear the presentation by PGE they are
quoting research done by PAID CONSULTANTS of the wireless cell industry
and of PGE. Also, the data they present from the WHO is not addressing
the cumulative effect of EMF.
Nor are they being forthright with the actual EMF being emitted
24/7 from these meters. They are like mini cell towers on our homes.
Your neighbor's SM is endangering the health of your own family.
You have been elected to protect your citizens. (and I thank
you) PGE is doing "FORCED COMPLIANCE" . We have not had a choice. . . .
this is WRONG. Many many people never received a letter in North
county that these meters were being "deployed" . (the word "deployed"
as PGE uses says it all. . .this is a war they are placing on our
homes) .
We deserve a COST FREE choice to not have a wireless smart meter.
People who are already ill/disabled and who are the most sensitive are
usually the one's with reduced incomes and cannot afford the
ridiculously high fee PGE is proposing.
Please join other CA communities and pass on ordinance to NOT
have wireless Smart meters in our lovely town. These meters do not
save energy. People must be better educated about how much our actual
energy costs and then make behavioral changes. Most people I have
talked to say they will most likely NEVER go on the PGE website to see
their energy expenditure. PGE is saving money with the SM. We are not
saving energy.
Also, people who work from home or retired are being penalized
with this system.
There are documented cases of SM catching fires. The SM have
not been UL tested. Will our insurance companies pay a claim due to a
fire from a meter that has not passed all normal testing?
The insurance industry has stated years ago they will not
pay for health claims due to damages from wireless technology.
During a City Council meeting in Grover Beach when asked if at a later
time it is found that the SM are causing health issues is PGE prepared
to be financially responsible (like the cigarette industry) ?
The PGE employee quickly stated "you are using wireless
microphones,etc"
so you cannot prove you became sick from a SM. Thus, they are already
"wiping their hands" of all financial responsibility and ethical
responsibility.
Very sad. The other wireless EMF around us is NOT as strong as a SM.
As a community our health cannot afford these Smart Meters.
Please help us and protect us . . . . . . . .I am begging you.
As a doctor I have devoted my life to educating people about their
health.
I hope I am doing this with my email and to the public at the your
meeting on Tuesday May 3.
Please SAY NO to wireless Smart Meters.
Sincerely,
Dr. Margaret C. Carman
1319 Garden Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805-541-5736
BIG THANKS to Dr. Carpenter and to Maine's Smart Meter Safety
Coalition who "recently caught up with Dr. David Carpenter, a Harvard
Medical School-trained physician who headed up the New York State Dept.
of Public Health for 18 years before becoming Dean of the School of
Public Health at the University of Albany, where he currently directs
the Institute for Health and the Environment"
(www.smartmetersafety.com)
Dr. Carpenter states, We have evidence...that exposure to
radiofrequency radiation...increases the risk of cancer, increases damage
to the nervous system, causes electrosensitivity, has adverse
reproductive effects and a variety of other effects on different organ
systems. There is no justification for the statement that Smart Meters
have no adverse health effects. "
Dr. Carpenter further advises, "An informed person should demand that
they be allowed to keep their analog meter"
(For those of you already Smart Metered, demand to have the analog
meter restored, call your your utility and your state public utility
commission)
TO VIEW THE VIDEO:
http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=3946<http: //emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=3946
<http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=3946>
From: Daniela Amon<danielaarnon(a,earthlink.net>
Date: April 30, 20116:47:45 PM PDT
Subject: Fwd: Here is an action cities and the BOS could support on the smart
meter opt-out
Begin forwarded message:
Date: April 26, 2011 11:55:16 AM PDT
Subject: Here is an action cities and the BOS could support on the smart
meter opt-out
For Immediate Release: April 26th,2011
COALITION OF LOCAL CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENTS AND CONCERNED CITIZEN
GROUPS FILE FORMAL PROTEST WITH THE CPUC:
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS OPPOSE AND CHALLENGE THE INADEQUATE AND COSTLY PG&E SMART
METER OPT-OUT PROPOSAL
Yesterday the Town of Fairfax and the Alliance for Human and Environmental Health,a west Marin coalition,
riled a formal protest with the CPUC,challenging PG&E's opt-out plan for Smart Meters. This morning,the
Marin County Board of Supervisors voted to formally join the Protest.
The Protest urges the CPUC to challenge the PG&E opt-out proposal based on legal,fiscal,and technology
grounds. The Protest includes Ordinances and Resolutions of four California Counties and seven Cities and Towns in
PG&E service territory,all of which have called for moratoriums of this program until impacts on public health,data
privacy,law enforcement,and community concerns are evaluated.
Marin Supervisor Steve Kinsey of Marin County stated,
"The road to energy efficiency doesn't need to ignore the concerns of local communities.This petition really boils
dowri to'One size does not fit all in California". We can achieve Smart Meter benefits without imposing PG&E's
singular approach."
The Protest urges the CPUC to honor the legal authority of local governments,abide by local Ordinances,and work out
an economically viable,regional alternative to the PG&E proposal.
"PG&E's Smart Meter program will not conserve electricity or give consumers the information they need to better
manage their electrical usage.On the other Band,the program's time of use billing and data collection capabilities will
raise rates and generate.increased profits for the utility and its shareholders. PG&E's opt out proposal will also
effectively discriminate against consumers who would prefer to opt out for health or other reasons."Said Larry
Bragman,Mayor of Fairfax.
Echoing those concerns,was Barry A. Smith,Executive Director of Alliance for Human and Environmental Health,a
west Marin coalition:
"Constituents and consumers have the right of a strong democratic choice in a program that has such widespread cost,
privacy,security,and health concerns. We encourage the CPUC to enact a viable opt-out plan to Smart Meter
installation that is reasonable and effective.The plan needs to enable local governments to exercise a community-wide
opt-out that is consistent with their already passed Ordinances."
The group seeks to correct cost,scope,and equity deficiencies in the PG&E plan. The Protest was filed by Attorney
Jim Tobin,who stated:
"This Protest urges the CPUC(1)to establish an opt-out program that recognizes the right of local government bodies
to exercise such an opt-out on behalf of their constituents pursuant to their legal authority;(2)to immediately order
PG&E to comply with validly adopted ordinances and resolutions prohibiting further Smart Meter installations pending
a CPUC decision in this case;and(3)to investigate and correct the overstated costs PG&E claims should be paid for
opting out and establishing reasonable means of meter data reporting for customers that have opted out individually or
collectively."
i
Other formal Protests challenging the PG&E opt-out proposal have been filed by Mendocino County,Lake County,the
CPUC's Division of Ratepayer Advocates,EMF Safety Network,and TURN. In addition,UCAN,a San Diego based
consumer interest group,has asked that the CPUC also require San Diego Gas and Electric to adopt an opt-out
plan. AB 37,legislation pending in the California legislature,would require similar plans statewide.
Contact:
• Steve Kinsey, Marin County Supervisor,(415)499-7331,skinsey(1c0.marin.Ca.us
• Larry Bragman,Mayor of Fairfax,bragman@msn.com
• Barry A.Smith,Alliance for Human and Environmental Health(415)663-8025:cell:(415)233-
1071,bsrnithaa allianceheh.org
• Jim Tobin,Tobin Law Group(415)732-1700,iim(a)tobinlaw.us
Page 1 of 9
Chippendale, Sue
From: judy Vick [venturemind@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 8:55 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Letter to Mayor Marx and the San Luis Obispo City Council; from Judy Vick: Wireless Smart
Meter Presentation, May 3rd
Attachments: SLO BOS on SM 3.8.11.pdf
Dear Mayor Marx and members of the San Luis Obispo City Council,
I am writing this letter to provide you with the information on wireless smart
meters that I will be presenting to the Council this Tuesday, May 3rd. I hope you
will have time to review the information and references, prior to the meeting.
Since wireless smart meters began being installed in northern San Luis Obispo
County late last year, I have led the campaign in San Luis Obispo County to urge
our elected officials to ask the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to
provide us with an opt-out from the wireless smart meter program.
Let me first say, I am grateful PG&E provides good jobs for residents of this
County and that PG&E does some very good things for our County. I also want to
point out that this is not just a PG&E issue, it is an issue with all utility companies
in California, as wireless smart meters are planned for our gas and water meters,
as well as our electric meters.
There are serious consumer issues involved in moving toward wireless technology
for our utilities. Interestingly, this is an issue that is uniting concerned citizens
from all political persuasions, as you can see from the references I have provided
below (in blue).
There should have been a customer "opt=in" to the wireless smart meter program,
when it was originally proposed as a primarily wired program in 2006, for 1.7
billion ratepayer dollars. Or perhaps when PG&E switched *the smart meter
program to wireless in 2009, when they came back to the CPUC to request an
additional half billion dollars of ratepayer money. But instead, PG&E "deployed"
mandatory installation of wireless smart meters for all customers, regardless of
the fact that wireless smart meters are not mandated by the federal government
and are not a requirement of a smart grid.
(Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company for Authority to Increase Revenue
Requirements to Recover the Costs to Upgrade its SmartMeterTM Program,
3/12/2009).
Author Orlean Koehle, a prominent Republican in northern California,
5/2/2011
Page 2 of 9
' 1
researched the utility comppanies claim that they are following federal law
by mandating these instaliations. When she consulted a lawyer, she
found that was not the case, "Upon reading the bill (2005 Energy Policy
Act), it does not mandate utility companies to install smart meters in
homes; they are only to offer them and install them upon customer
request," Koehle said as she read from the lawyer's response. Koehle
also emphasized that the California Constitution gives us the right to
protect our health, safety, privacy and property.
http://www.noozhawk.com/article/042811_smart meter forum/
A 2008 report by San Francisco Environment and the San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission, cautioned that the plan to equip homes with so-called smart meters
should be put off until the gadgets are proven to save money for ratepayers and
be safe for the environment, echoing the criticism of reports across the country on
smart meters, which said the meters' savings don't outweigh the costs. The
report recommended PG&E first employ a pilot program of 300,000 to 500,000
test homes.
http_//www.sfexaminer.com/local/meters-may-not-be-smart-move?
category=l6#ixzzlJS7ZXmTA
Ratepayers have now paid billions of dollars in excess of the proposed costs for the
wireless smart meter program. This is money ratepayers can ill afford in this
economy. And they are paying in more ways than one, with their health and
wellbeing, property, safety and security.
The number of California local governments that oppose the smart meter program
are steadily growing, 40 and counting, including the San Luis Obispo County Board
of Supervisors and the cities of Morro Bay and Grover Beach. In addition to the
City of San Luis Obispo addressing this issue this week, the City of Arroyo Grande
will be considering an action in late May. The County Health Commissioners (9)
also voted unanimously to support the County Board of Supervisors resolution to
the CPUC, opposing mandatory installation and advocating for an opt-out option.
Thirteen of the 40 California local governments that have formally opposed
wireless smart meters have passed ordinances, banning the meters. You have to
stop and ask yourself, why is there so much resistance across California (and in
other states and countries) over a simple utility meter?
(To see the list of the communities in California that are opposed, see this link
below:)
http:..//st_opsmartmeters.org/howyouu_can.-stop=smart-meters/ca-local-governments-on-board/
First of all, smart meters don't save energy. People save energy. The results
5/2/2011
Page 3 of 9
promised by utility companies have never been demonstrated in any test or actual
program done in the country. When asked for data on consumer energy savings
from communities with wireless smart meters, PG&E has not produced it.
Consumer organizations such as Public Citizen, The California Public Utilities
Commission Division of Ratepayer Advocates, The Utility Reform Network (TURN)
and the Consumer Law Center have refuted PG&E's consumer benefit claims. The
California Small Business Association opposes smart meters due to their energy
pricing scheme, which will substantially increase costs to small businesses. Even
the San Francisco Sierra Club opposes wireless smart meters, and called for a ban
on the meters in the city. Public Citizen launched a national campaign to expose
the faulty assumption that smart meters will save energy. Instead, Public Citizen's
analysis of the program found that smart meter installations have thus far
prioritized utility budget efficiency, profiting utility companies, not household
budget efficiency. "Pouring through utility dockets, utilities make it clear that the
vast majority of projected savings from smart meters is from laying off utility
workers--and not from consumers' lowering their energy use and bills. Utilities
highlight savings from remote disconnection--mainly for nonpayment. This raises
serious consumer safety and health 'issues." For this, people are paying double
and triple what they used to pay for energy. And people and businesses who are
unfortunate enough to not be able to avoid using energy at peak times, pay more
for energy than those who do not. Residents of Bakersfield filed a class action
lawsuit for excessive billing from wireless smart meters after they were installed.
http://www.citizen.org/documents/Energ_yInv_estmentForumP_res.pd_f.
http://yubanet.com/california/DRA-and-CSBA-Request-Relief-from-New-Electric-
Pricing-Scheme-That-Will-Ca use-Disruption-to-500-000-PG-E-Small-Business-
Customers.php
Mark Toney, Executive Director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN), exposed the
fact that utility companies' critical peak pricing includes a 10 fold increase in cost
for energy use during heat waves. He noted that many people die every year
from heat, more than other natural disasters. How many more people will be at
risk, not using energy during heat waves, for fear of excessive energy bills?
http://www.turn.org/article.php?id=875
http //www.noozhawk.com/articleL042811 smart meter forum_
Insult to injury, in addition to the program not delivering on promised benefits,
electrical fires, appliance damage and interference with existing household
electrical systems have been reported from smart meter
installations. Additionally, a report by the Government Accountability Office (the
investigative arm of the U.S. Congress) revealed that the wireless smart meter
system will be easy for hackers to remotely shutoff power, and cause widespread
5/2/2011
Page 4 of 9
outages as well as threaten national security systems. The security weaknesses
could also allow hackers to snoop on customers and steal personal data.. A paper
out_of the University of Cambridge highlights privacy concerns from smart meters
as well as security risks caused by linking home-area wireless networks from
smart meters.
http://5topsmartmeters.org/press releases/jan_26th-_2011^wellington-
whist_I_ebl_ower-interview/
http://ncwatch.ty_pepad.com mediaL011/Ol/smartmeter-security_is_a_grow nng_
concern.html
http.//news.cn(zt.tom/8301-27080 3-20007672-245.html
But at the forefront of the heightened resistance to the wireless smart meter
program, is the fact that people are getting sick. There is regular testimony at the
California Public Utility Commission from people who report injuries from wireless
smart meters and are demanding an end to the smart meter program. For every
person testifying at the CPUC, there are many others writing the CPUC and their
elected officials for help. You can read personal account after personal account at:
http•//emfsafetynetwork org/?page id=2292
Testimonies of health effects from the wireless smart meters are echoed
here in San Luis Obispo County. North County residents (where the
meters have already been installed) have testified about health effects at
the SLO County Board of Supervisors hearings and at the County Health
Commission meetings. Supervisor Patterson has referred a number of
North County residents to me for help, who report being injured.
(See the Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors Resolution to the
California Public Utilities Comm., attached)
Many people who have never been activists, are getting involved on this issue to
protect themselves, their families and their communities. They are spending their
personal time attending city council meetings, county board meetings,
walking neighborhoods, writing letters to their elected officials, going on local radio
and television to try to stop this harmful program. Those in Northern California
who are especially dedicated are physically blocking contractors from installing the
wireless meters and devising ways to prohibit their analog meters from being
removed from their property. Meanwhile, utility companies continue to promote
the benefits of the meters and continue installations at a rapid pace.
There are significant and unnecessary health problems from wireless smart meters
5/2/2011
_ Page 5 of 9
identified by dozens of scientists. The microwave radiation (also referred to as
electromagnetic radiation, emf, and radiofrequency radiation) emitted from the
meters is harmful to health, causes DNA breakages and a myriad of symptoms.
Our bodies are bio-electric, as measured by EKGs and EEGs. Interference from
microwave radiation can alter the electrical activity which regulates the function of
our hearts, brains and other organs. Heart rhythm disturbance, sleep disruption,
headache, tinnitis or ringing in the ears, unexplained rashes, are some of the
common symptoms.
http://sa_gereports.com/smart meter rf/?pa.ge_id=282
http://emfsafetynetwork.org/?s ccst±
www.bioinitiativereport.org
Additionally, 3-5 % of the population is considered electrically hyper-sensitive and
30-35% of the population is moderately sensitive. In Sweden,
electrohypersensitivity (EHS) is an offically fully recognized functional impairment.
Electromagnetic radiation also interferes with sensitive medical equipment and
medical implant devices. 8-10% of the population have medical implant devices,
such as insulin pumps, cochlear implants and heart pacemakers.
httW./ www.national-toxic-encephalopathy_founda.tion.orgLesen.pgf
The Seletun Scientific Statement (2011) recommends that global governments
adopt new exposure guidelines for electromagnetic radiation--pointing to biological
hazards and risks to the genetic code from unchecked proliferation of wireless
technologies. The recommendation is based on scientific studies reporting health
impacts at much lower exposure levels. Many researchers now believe the
existing safety limits are inadequate to protect public health because they do not
consider prolonged exposure to lower emission levels that are now widespread.
http://www_smartmeterdan --org/_index.php/position-statementsj76-seletun-
scientific-statement-press-release
http:j/sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/docs/letters/011e final to CCST.pdf
Other countries have recognized the problem of emf exposure from wireless
5/2/2011
Page 6 of 9
technology and are returning to wired systems. The European Environment
Agency, an agency of the European Union that advises 32 countries on public
policy, is calling for lowering public exposure to electromagnetic fields: "Waiting
for high levels of proof before taking action to prevent well known risks can lead to
very high health and economic costs, as it did with asbestos, leaded petrol and
smoking.'
http:/J9lossary.en.eea.europa.eu/terminolog.y/sitesearch?term=children+and+emf
The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) recently acknowledged health
effects from low level, "non-thermal (non-heating)" chronic emf exposure: "CDPH
suggests further review of the literature on non-thermal effects, which is
complicated and controversial, but does not support a claim of no non-thermal
health effects from radio frequency electromagnetic fields."
http_//emfsafetynetwork.org/?.p=3856
Daniel Hirsch, Professor of Nuclear Policy at University of California explains that
the whole body cumulative radiation exposure from wireless smart meters is 10OX
more than cell phone exposure. He adds that the wireless smart meter program
deployment "is a large experiment on a very large population."
http://stopsmartmeters.org/2011/04/20/daniel-hirsch-on-ccsts-fuzzy math/
The problem with the wireless smart meter individual household opt-out, is that it
does little in the real world to protect public health, security or privacy, unless_
most of us opt-out. Wireless smart meters are mounted in close proximity to our
every day lives, attached to our homes and businesses, and places where we
spend a lot of our,time. Wireless smart meters emit electromagnetic pulses that
can travel for a mile or more, and manufacturers of the meters advertise that the
emf pulses travel through mountains. These same emf pulses go through the
walls of our homes and our bodies. Many people report their utility meter is
mounted on the exterior side of their bedroom wall, and often in places easily
accessed by children. If you choose to opt-out--but your neighbor does not, you
are still exposed. If you opt-out but you live in a condo, and share a wall that
mounts 15 smart meters for your condo neighbors, how can you protect yourself
and your family? If you opt-out, but live by a smart grid repeater station for your
neighborhood, you can do little to reduce your exposure. In addition, we
are experiencing an accumulation of electromagnetic radiation that our
5/2/2011
Page 7 of 9
environment has never seen before, from the rapid proliferation of cell towers,
wifi, cell phones, electronic equipment, etc.
The CPUC chose to exempt the wireless smart meter program from
an environmental impact report, the type of review that is usually required of such
a massive state-wide program. So the burden of proof regarding harm has shifted
to the consumer. But it shouldn't be. The CPUC needs to take responsibility to
protect consumers and our environment now, by calling for independent testing
and evaluation of the wireless smart meter and the smart grid. In the meantime,
there should be a moratorium on any further installation of wireless smart meters,.
until utility companies can prove the wireless meters are safe. And we should
demand evidentiary hearings on wireless smart meters.
As a result of consumer pressure, the CPUC directed PG&E to propose an opt out
of the program. As it is proposed, the PG&E Opt-Out plan is a $270 up-front fee
to opt out, a $14 monthly surcharge and a yet-to-be determined exit fee, if you
move. The opt-out costs are prohibitive for many individuals and families, which
may be the intention, to try to stop the widespread and growing opposition to the
wireless smart meter program.
Ratepayers should not be penalized for the failure of the smart meter
program. Utility companies should restore analog meters at no cost to
customers. Consider that utility companies have profited from customers who
have paid twice and three times their regular energy bills since their wireless
smart meters were installed, and from laying off meter readers. Additionally,
utility companies should be required to pay reparations to ratepayer-victims who
have suffered ill health, fires, explosions, damage to existing electronics and/or
theft of personal information.due to forced smart meter installation.
For those who do not have a wireless smart meter, PG&E just announced a
compromise, filed with the California Public Utilities Commission, 4/26/11. It is an
agreement to honor customers' requests that a smart meter not be installed, until
the California Public Utilities Commission has clearly defined the final opt-out plan,
and has allowed customers time to opt out. Customers can call PG&E at 1-866-
743-0263 to request that a smart meter not be installed. The. CPUC could take 5
months or more to finalize an opt-out program. After the opt-out program is in
place, PG&E will contact customers to determine whether they still want to opt-
out, given the final opt-out plan.
Customers who still have an analog meter, should be able.to keep it at no charge.
There should be no additional monthly fees to have an analog meter. PG&E can
estimate usage based on the prior year, or customers can self-read and report
monthly by phone or email. A meter reader can check twice a year so that any
underage or overage can be adjusted. Or, meter readers should keep their jobs
5/2/2011
Page 8 of 9
and let.them continue to read meters.
It took a long time to make the connection between cigarettes and lung cancer,
with the tobacco industry obstructing the truth. We should not make the same
mistake again.
Please consider enacting an ordinance prohibiting installation of wireless
smart meters in the City of San Luis Obispo. It is the strongest message
you can send to the CPUC, joining 13 of 40 California local governments
opposed to the mandatory installation of wireless smart meters, who have
done the utmost to protect their community. And for the most part, PG&E
has honored those local laws. To date, PG&E has not countered any of
these communities ordinances with legal action. I can provide contact
information for the legal counsel for these communities for your
reference.
Thank you for your very serious consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Judy Vick '
EMF Safety Network Representative
San Luis Obispo County
venturemind@hotmail.com
emfsafetynetwork.org
Here is the link to the EMF Safety Network protest filing to the CPUC on PG&E's wireless smart meters opt out
proposal:
http://emfsafetynetwork.org/Wp_-Conten uloads/2011/04/Protest=EMF Safety=Network 25=Apr_11,pdf
To contact the.California Public Utilities Commission: public.advisoKa)c un c.ca.gov
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102-3214
(415) 703-2782
To contact Governor Brown: http://qov.ca.gov/m contact by
Governor Jerry Brown
c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 445-2841
Fax: (916) 558-3160
Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6089 (20110502)
5/2/2011
Page 9 of 9
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
5/2/2011
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS-OBISPO. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL
(1)DEPARTMENT (2)MEETING DATE (3)CONTACTIPHONE
Board'of Supervisors March 8, 2011 James Patterson.
(805)781-5450
(4)SUBJECT
Request by Supervisor James. Patterson for approval of a letter andres.ol.ution requesting the
t California Public Utilities Commission to, direct Pacific Gas and Electric Company to suspend
installation of.SmartMeters in San Luis Obispo County until the California State:Legislature acts upon
proposed legislation, AB 37 (Huffman).
(5)SUMMARY OF REQUEST
This-request is made pursuant to the numerous complaints and concerns received by the Board of
Supervisors regarding the safety and°:reliability of SmartMeters currently being:installed in the County
by Pacific Gas and Electric Company. The letter, supported by the resolution, requests the California
Public Utilities Commission to direct PG&E to suspend installation of SmartMeters until the California '
Legislature acts-on current proposed legislation, AB 37,(Huffman).
(6)RECOMMENDED ACTION
it is recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve.theattached fetter and resolution and direct .
I the Clerk,of the Board to send the letter and resolution to the CPUC.
(7)FUNDING SOURCE(S) (8).CURRENT YEAR FINANCIAL IMPACT (9)ANNUAL COST (10)BUDGETED?
NIA NIA NIA ❑ No Eyes '®N/A
(11)OTHER AGENCY..INVOLVEMENT/IMPACT(LIST):
NIA
(12)WILL-REQUEST REQUIRE.ADDITIONAL STAFF? E No Eyes,;Haw Many?
Permanent�. ❑Limited Term_ ❑Contract_ ❑Temporary Help._
{13)SUPERVISOR DISTRICT(S) '(14)LOCATION MAP i.(1'5)Maddy Act Appointments
❑1st, []2nd,❑3rd,❑4th,[]5th,®AII' [_]Attached Z.NyA, _ Signed-off by Clerk of.the Board'
NIA
(16)AGENDA PLACEMENT (17)EXECUTED DOCUMENTS
®Consent 0.Hearing(Time Est. )' E Resolution s.(Orlg) ❑Contracts(Orig F 3 Copies)
_„r,
Presentation ❑Board Business(Time Est. � ❑Ordinances(Orig) '❑NIA
®Email Resolution and Ordinance to CR_Board_Cterk(in Word)
(18)NEED EXTRA EXECUTED COPIES? (19)BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED?
❑Number ❑Attached ®'NIA' ❑Submitted ❑4I5th's Vote Required ®NIA
I(20,)OUTLINE AGREEMENT REQUISITION NUMBER(OAR) (21)W-9 (22)Agenda Item History
Z No ❑Yes Z NIA Date
(23)ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE REVIE4V-,�
i
i%
f
Rev.6-09 "A-7
March 8,2011
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I; '
1055 MONTEREY,ROOM D430 • SAN LTIIS OBTSPO,CALIFORNIA 93408-1003 805.781.5450 w
FRANK R. WF.CHA.W.Supervisor District One
March 8,2011 BRUCE GIBSON,,Supervisor District Two
ADA:14 HILL,.Supervisor District Three
Michael R. Peevey, President PA 01 TELYEIRA,Supervisor District Four
California Public Utilities Commission JA1l4ESR.PAT7ERSON.Supervisor DistrictFnY
505 Van Ness Ave. `
San Francisco,CA 94102
Re: Suspend SmartMeter Installation Until Legislative Action on A337(Huffman)
Dear President Peevey,
The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors adopted the attached resolution requesting the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)to direct Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)to suspend installation of
wireless SmartMeters until such time as the California legislature acts on pending legislation, AS 37 (Huffman);
that would give consumers options to the installation of wireless SmartMeters.
During the past several weeks our Board has received numerous complaints and expressions of concern
regarding the installation of wireless SmartMeters in homes in San Luis Obispo County. Several citizens have
testified that they are experiencing serious health issues since the installation of SmartMeters in their homes.
Other issues raised by local residents regarding SmartMeters include accuracy, loss of privacy, security, risk of
fire and damage to in-home electrical appliances.
The complaints are too numerous and the issues potentially too significant.and far reaching to ignore. PG&E's
effort to notice,educate.and inform its customers about SmartMeters has been woefully inadequate.
It is the opinion of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors that the CPUC, as the regulatory body, - ;
should take immediate action to order PG&E to suspend installation of the wireless SmartMeters until such
time as the consumer is given a choice of having an alternative to the wireless SmartMeter.
We appreciate your immediate attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Adam Hill,Chairman
San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors
Cc:
Assemblymember Jared Huffman
Assemblymember Katcho Achadjian
Senator Sam Blakeslee
Pacific Gas & Electric Company
A-7
2
March 8,2011
Y
IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA
day_,2011
PRESENT:
ABSENT: -
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION(CPUC)
TO DIRECT PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY(PG&E)TO SUSPEND THE -
INSTALLATION OF SMARTMETERS IN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY UNTIL THE
CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE ACTS ON LEGISLATION GIVING CUSTOMERS
OPTIONS TO THE INSTALLATION OF WIRELESS.SMARTMETERS
The following resolution is hereby offered and read:
WHEREAS, .the CPUC is the state agency with.regulatory authority over the installation .of
SmartMeters(Public Utilities Code sections 8360.8369);and
WHEREAS, numerous San. Luis Obispo County residents have expressed to the Board of
Supervisors concerns regarding the installation of wireless SmartMeters in-their homes;and
WHEREAS,several county residents have testified to experiencing adverse health.effects after the .
installation of such meters and are concerned that the scienceregarding the health Impacts of electro-
magnetic frequency(EMF)emitted by wireless SmartMeters is inconclusive;and
WHEREAS,residents have expressed concams that wireless SmartMeters have caused electrical.
shorts and fires in some SmartMeter installations;and
WHEREAS,concems have also been raised regarding the accuracy of the meters and lack of.data
.privacy and security with the installation and operation of SmartMeters;.and
WHEREAS:the installation of hard wired smart meters could eliminate a number of these concerns;
and
WHEREAS,Assemblymember Jared Huffman has authored legislation(AB37)which would require
the CPUC.Io identify options for customers.who decline the installation of wireless SmartMeters;and
WHEREAS,it is the responsibility of the San Luis County Board of Supervisors to ensure.the.health
and safety of our citizens.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,.that the Board of Supervisors,County of San Luis Obispo,
State of Cafrfomia,does hereby inquest the California.Public'Utilities Commission to direct.PG&Eto suspend
the Installation of.SmaitMeters In San Luis Obispo County until the Califomia State LeglsJature acts on
legislation giving customers options to the.installation of wireless Smart Meters.
'Upon motion of Supervisor seconded by
Supervisor and on the following roll call vote,to will:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution Is hereby adopted.
Chairperson,Board of Supervisors .
ATTEST:
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Deputy Clerk
APPROVED AS TO.FORM
AND LEGAL EFFECT "
WARREN R.JENSEN'
Count Counsel
By:
qty County,cv5nsel.,
Dated: 2O.// .. A-
7
3
March 8,2011
�. counc,l memoizanbum
city of saii-suis osispo;a�m�mstuaton aEpa►ztmEnt
DATE: April 13, 2011
TO: Mayor and City Council
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
FROM: Michael Codron,Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Red File: Presentation by PG&E and EMF Safety Network on Smart Meters
Please find attached information that was provided to Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director, by
Marty Meltz, an expert on radio frequencies such as those found in smart meters.
hard comr email.
0 CGUNCD. a CDD W
O Crry MGa 0 F[f DIB
0 AWCM a MECHO
a AnOR sY a rwDM = RED FILE
o a.E MMO a PWCECMU
• PM a PAW gUXDI - MEETING AGENDA
a 'numm a UMDHt
a MV7UM a IMDM S Il EIC-Rs
a swcrrYNm awUKM DATE ITEM # 5Raf m
:3 ary max P/L�SC�Y(A fJ O t
a CLM
CADocuments and Setfings\schippen1ocal SetGngs\Temporary Internet FIIes10LK981red file memo.
Forum
COMAR TECHNICAL INFORMATION STATEMENT: EXPERT
REVIEWS ON POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS OF
RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND
COMMENTS ON THE BIOINITIATIVE REPORT
The Committee on Man and Radiation (COMAR)*
Key words: electromagnetic fields; exposure, radiofrequency;
Abstract—The Committee on Man and Radiation(COMAR) health effects; public information
is a technical committee of the Engineering in Medicine and
Biology Society (EMBS) of the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers(IEEE).Its primary area of interest is INTRODUCTION
biological effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation,
including radiofrequency (RF) energy. The public interest MANY srUDtEs have been undertaken on biological effects
in possible health effects attributed to RF energy, such as
emitted by mobile phones, wireless telephone base stations, and potential health and safety issues related to radiofre-
TV and radio broadcasting facilities, Wi-Fi systems and quency(RF)energy,dating back to the World War II era.
many other sources,has been accompanied by commentary This has resulted in an extensive scientific literature that
in the media that varies considerably in reliability and contains several thousand scientific papers, including
usefulness for their audience. The focus of this COMAR
Technical Information Statement is to identify quality over 600 studies using mobile phone signals. The World
sources of scientific information on potential health risks Health Organization (WHO)database of this literature is
from exposure to RF energy. This Statement provides freely available to the public(http://www.who.int/peh-emf/
readers with references to expert reports and other reliable research/database/en/index.html).
sources of information about this topic, most of which are
available on the Internet. This report summarizes the Review of this large body of scientific literature on
conclusions from several major reports and comments on RF bioeffects requires special effort and expertise. The
the markedly different conclusions in the BioInitiative literature is highly variable in relevance to health, scien-
Report (abbreviated BIR below). Since appearing on the tific quality, and the success (or failure) of independent
Internet in August 2007,the BIR has received much media
attention but,more recently, has been criticized by several investigators to confirm results reported by others. Eval-
health organizations (see Section titled "Views of health uating potential health risks requires analyses of a variety
agencies about BIR").COMAR concludes that the weight of of different lines of scientific evidence including studies
scientific evidence in the RF bioeffects literature does not of humans, animals, cells, mechanisms, dosimetry, etc.
support the safety limits recommended by the Biolaitiative
group. For this reason, COMAR recommends that public Consequently, a careful review of the scientific literature
health officials continue to base their policies on RF safety related to biological effects of RF fields(as well as other
limits recommended by established and sanctioned interna- potentially toxic agents) requires examination of many
tional organizations such as the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers International Committee on Electro- studies, and considerable expert judgment must be used
magnetic Safety and the International Commission on Non- in arriving at final conclusions.The most reliable reviews
Ionizing Radiation Protection, which is formally related to are carried out by panels of experts with a broad range of
the World Health Organization. expertise and operating under well-defined procedures
Health Phys.97(4):348-356; 2009 for selecting and evaluating data.
As an example of this approach, WHO has a series
• The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., of well-regarded Environmental Health Criteria (EHC)
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society,Committee on Man and documents that are designed to provide expert scientific
Radiation,3 Park Avenue, New York,NY 10015-5997. advice to policy makers in member states. The EHC for
For correspondence contact: Marvin C. Ziskin, Center for Bio-
medical Physics.Temple University Medical School, 3420 N. Broad extremely low frequency(ELF)fields(WHO 2007),such
Street,Philadelphia,PA 19140, or email at ziskin@temple.edu. as produced by power lines, states in its Preamble:
(Manuscript accepted 11 May 2009) effects, need i
either with di
"All studies, weer ositive or ne atve
0017-9078/09/0 P g
Copyright®2009 Health Physics Society to be evaluated and judged on their own merit, and then
348
I 1
COMAR Technical Information Statement 0 THE COMMITTEE ON MAN ANo RADwnON 349
all together in a weight-of-evidence approach. It is Reviews by standards-setting organizations
important to determine how much a set of evidence Comprehensive reviews of the scientific literature
changes the probability that exposure causes an out- related to biological effects of RF fields are prepared by
come. Generally, studies must be replicated or be in standards-setting organizations and organizations that
agreement with similar studies. The evidence for an develop international guidelines, of which the most
effect'is further strengthened if the results from different influential around the world are IEEEIICES and ICNIRP,
types of studies (epidemiology and laboratory) point to respectively.The ICES subcommittee that developed the
the same conclusion." latest edition of the RF safety standard (IEEE 2005) had
The EHC on ELF fields was written by a Task 132 participants from 24 countries from government,
Group of 25 members who were approved by the universities, industry, and the public. The variety of
Assistant Director General of WHO, with additional disciplines is listed below. ICES operates under the
input by as many as 150 individuals around the world extensive rules, requirements, and audit procedures of
who were sent drafts of the ELF-EHC to review (van the IEEE Standards Association to ensure openness,
Deventer and Foster 2008).WHO has started work on the transparency and due process at every level.
preparation of the draft EHC document for RF fields and The most recent revision of the IEEE C95.1 RF
the final document is estimated to be published in 2011. safety standard (IEEE 2005) was based on a review of
One can be assured that the preparation of the RF more than 1,300 peer-reviewed research papers covering
document will use a similar approach as that used in the a 53-y span of the RF literature. The review included
ELF-EHC document including a weight-of-evidence ap- epidemiology and other human studies and animal, in
proach in evaluating the scientific literature. vitro, mechanistic, dosimetric and engineering studies as
This approach contrasts with the tendency of the media well as other relevant papers.The studies addressed acute
to write about individual studies or reports deemed newswor- (short-term), intermittent and chronic (long-term) expo-
thy and to speculate about their significance, or of advocacy sures,including lifetime exposure of animals,at a variety
groups to focus on selected evidence to press a particular case. of exposure levels. Some of the exposures were at levels
too low to produce significant heating ("non-thermal'
REVIEWS exposures);others were at.levels high enough to produce
This Technical Information Statement(TIS) consid- obvious RF heating ("thermal" exposures). The fields
included continuous-wave RF energy, pulsed RF energy
ers several kinds of reviews: such as used in radar, and ELF-modulated RF energy
• Reviews by a standards-setting organization, notably such as used in communications systems. The scientific
the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers review was published in the IEEE standard (see IEEE
International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety C95.1-2005, Annex B, "Identification of levels of RF•
(IEEE/ICES), which works under the auspices of the exposure responsible for adverse effects: summary of the
IEEE Standards Association and develops IEEE stan- literature," pages 34-77). To assist with the assessment '
dards C95.1 (IEEE 2005)and C95.6 (IEEE 2002),and of the extensive RF literature, ICES commissioned the
by an organization that develops guidelines, i.e., the series of review papers published in a special issue of the
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation peer-reviewed journal Bioelectromagnetics (Supplement
Protection (ICNIRP 1998), which is formally related 6, 2003, 213 pages).
with WHO (see "Reviews by standards-setting orga- The other major international group, ICNIRP, de-
nizations" below); velops guidelines (ICNIRP 1998) and consists of a Main
• Major reviews by expert panels under the auspices of Commission of 12 members plus a chairman and vice
health agencies or other branches of government, chairman; the Commission is assisted by a panel of 33
which evaluate the primary scientific literature related consulting experts from a variety of disciplines. Nearly
to possible health effects of RF fields(see"Reviews of all of these individuals are employees of government
the primary scientific literature by expert groups under health agencies, with a few others employed by univer-
government auspices" below); and sities and none employed by industry. The ICNIRP
• The review called the BioInitiative Report(BIR 2007) guidelines, which are closely similar to the present IEEE
that was written by an independent group. The differ- standard,were published in 1998.It is to be noted that the
ences in the BIR and the expert reviews considered IEEE standard and the ICNIRP guidelines are in agree-
here in regards to selection of committee members,the ment on the following major points with regards to RF
development of the report, and conclusions and rec- safety: a)the dosimetric quantity specific absorption rate
ommendations are discussed below in "BioInitiative (SAR) as the basic restriction for frequencies from 100
Report." kHz to a few GHz,b)the threshold SAR for adverse health
,i c
350 Health Physics October 2009, Volume 97,Number 4
effects,c)whole-body and localized exposure limits,and d) vivo, and in vitro research. In conclusion, no health
safety factors for both occupational and public exposure effect has been consistently demonstrated at exposure
limits.The ICES and ICNIRP limits are designed to protect levels below the limits of ICNIRP (International Com-
against all proven hazards of RF energy. mittee on Non Ionising Radiation Protection)established
in 1998. However, the data base for evaluation remains
Reviews of the primary scientific literature by limited especially for long-term low-level exposure" (p.4).
expert groups under government auspices Available at:http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committeest
Appendix A provides references and Internet links 04_scenihr/docs/scenihi_o_007.pdf. (See also Toxicol 246:
to recent expert reviews of the primary scientific litera- 248-250; 2008.)
ture recommended by COMAR.
To give the reader a sampling of current views of UK Government (2008). "The published evidence
expert groups, the quotations below were taken from for health effects of radiofrequency(RF)electromagnetic
analyses completed in 2007-2008 by Ireland, WHO, a fields in general is reviewed in Health Effects from
European Commission scientific committee and the Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields: Report .of an
United Kingdom. The consistent conclusion that there Independent Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation.
are no adverse effects from exposure to RF fields below The report found that, as a whole, the research published
internationally accepted limits is readily apparent. since the report of the Independent Expert Group on
Mobile Phones does not give cause for concern. The
Ireland Expert Group on Health Effects of Elec- weight of evidence now available does not suggest
tromagnetic Fields (2007). "So far no adverse short or that there are adverse health effects from exposures
long-term health effects have been found from exposure to RF fields below guideline levels." Available at:
to the RF signals produced by mobile phones and base http://www.numberlO.gov.uk/output/PageI4249.asp.
station transmitters" (p. 3). In addition, Appendix B lists statements by health
"The ICNIRP guidelines provides adequate protection agencies and expert panels from around the world on RF
for the public from any EMF sources" (p.4). Available at: safety issues that summarize the scientific literature
http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/NR/rdonlyres/9E29937F-1A27- without providing extensive technical details. Some of
4A16-A8C3-F403A623300CIO/ElectromagneticReporGpdf. these statements comment on the current scientific un-
certainty and gaps in knowledge [see WHO (Appendix
World Health Organization (2007). "Despite ex- B), Canada (Appendix B), and UK Mobile Telecommu-
nications and Health Research Programme (Appendix
tensive research, to date there is no evidence to conclude B)]. Also, WHO (http://www.who.int/peh-emf/research/
that exposure to low level electromagnetic fields is rf research_agenda_2006.pdf).and the U.S.National Re-
harmful to human health" (Key Point #6). Available search Council(http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_
at: http://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/ id=12036#toc) have developed RF research agendas to
indexl.html. address unresolved issues.
"To date, all expert reviews on the health effects of
exposure to RFfields have reached the same conclusion: BioInitiative Report
There have been no adverse health consequences estab- In August 2007, an independent group issued a
lished from exposure to RF fields at levels below the report called the"BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a
international guidelines on exposure limits published by Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Elec-
the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation tromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF)" (BIR 2007). This
Protection (ICNIRP 1998)." Children and Mobile report offers conclusions and recommendations that are
Phones: Clarification statement (second paragraph). Avail- very different from those of IEEEIICES, ICNIRP, and
able at: htq)Y/www.who.int(peh-emf/meedngs/ottawa-juneO5/ health agencies(e.g.,WHO)around the world,both in its
enfmdex4.htm1. assessment of the scientific evidence and in its policy
recommendations. A paper summarizing the BIR has
European Commission, Scientific Committee on been published recently (Hardell and Sage 2008). The
Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks BIR considers both ELF(e.g., electric power frequency)
(SCENIHR) (2008). Possible Effects of Electromag- fields as well as RF fields. For conciseness, this TIS
netic Fields (EMF) on Human Health. "Since the considers only the BIR text about RF fields.
adoption of the 2001 opinion extensive research has been The BIR was written by 14 individuals under the
conducted regarding possible health effects of exposure direction of a 4-person organizing committee. Most of its
to low intensity RF fields, including epidemiologic, in 21 sections are authored by single individuals or(in a few
COMAR Technical Information Statement 0 THE COMMITTEE ON MAN AND RADIATION 351
cases) pairs or trios of authors the section "Key Scien- animal model" (BIR 2007, Section 7, p. 16). As dis-
tific Evidence and Public Health Policy Recommenda= cussed below, a weight-of-evidence assessment of the
tions"was written by a pair of individuals and appears to animal tumor studies shows that the BIR conclusion to
reflect their views only.There is no indication of how the promote the result in Repacholi et al. and reject the
members of the committee were chosen or how balance Utteridge et al. study is wrong. Other expert groups and
was provided in the group of contributors, a majority of health agencies have also given little weight to the
whom have public records of criticism of existing expo- Repacholi et al. study in their review of the broader set of
sure standards and guidelines. relevant evidence.
In Section 2, the BIR states that it was written "to The results of a second follow-on study (Oberto et
document the reasons why current public exposure stan- al. 2007) agreed with the results in Utteridge et al. that
dards for non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation are no there was no relation between RF exposure and tumor
longer good enough to protect public health." Conse- development. Thus, two studies employing improved
quently, COMAR views the BIR as an advocacy docu- experimental protocols compared to those in the 1997
ment, rather than a balanced review of the scientific study failed to confirm the effect on tumor development.
literature. As mentioned,the BIR discussed only two animal studies
In contrast to the expert reviews by ICES and health investigating tumor development in RF-exposed animals.
agencies cited above, the BIR states that adverse health For comparison, the ICES review, which was published
effects have been demonstrated from exposure to RF before the BIR was written, included 35 studies on this
fields at levels below current guidelines: "The lower topic and the weight of evidence of these studies showed
limit for reported human health effects has dropped no association between RF exposure and tumor develop-
100-fold below the safety standard (for mobile phones ment (see IEEE C95.1-2005, Annex B, Clause B.7.1
and PDAs); 1000- to 10,000 fold for other wireless(cell "Animal cancer bioassays," pp. 66-68). More than ten
towers at distance; WI-FI and WLAN devices). The entire additional studies on this topic (see WHO database at
basis for safety standards is called into question, and it is http://www.who.int/peh-emf/research/database/en/index.
not unreasonable to question the safety of RF[energy]at html) have been published since the ICES review and the
any level" (BIR 2007, Section 17, p. 21). A careful results of the more recent studies have strengthened the
reading of the BIR does not find supporting evidence for weight of evidence showing no association between RF
the conclusions in this quotation. exposure and tumor development in laboratory animals. In
As a scientific review, the BIR has a number of the BIR,the absence of a review of the large number of long
weaknesses including internal inconsistency. The state- term animal tumor studies is a major omission and, as a
ment that "A weight-of-evidence approach has been used result,the BIR presents an incomplete scientific assessment.
to describe the body of evidence between health end- that led to unsupportable claims of adverse biological
points and exposure to electromagnetic fields (ELF and effects and mechanisms of interaction.
RF)" (BIR 2007,Section 17,p.5) and the text in another
section referring to the weight-of-evidence approach as Genotoxicity. The BIR concluded that ". . . RF
"unscientific" (BIR 2007, Section 7, p. 15) are not exposures can be considered genotoxic (will damage
consistent. DNA) under certain conditions of exposure, including
A major weakness of the BIR is a selective, rather exposure levels that are lower than existing safety limits"
than a comprehensive,review of the literature in various (BIR 2007, Section 1, p. 17). This conclusion is incon-
topical areas.Two examples discussed here are a)animal sistent with the conclusions from weight-of-evidence
tumor studies and b) genotoxicity (DNA damage). assessments by the UK Independent Expert Group on
Mobile Phones (IEGMP 2000), called the Stewart Re-
Animal tumor studies.The BIR comments on only port, and the U.S. National Research Council Expert
two studies investigating tumor development in labora- Panel (NRC 2008). Some of the evidence for the BIR
tory animals exposed to RF energy. One of these studies conclusion was based on the results of Lai and Singh
(Repacholi et al. 1997) reported increased tumor devel- (1995, 1996),who reported DNA breaks in the brain cells
opment in exposed mice. Because of the potential health of rats exposed to RF energy (BIR 2007, Section 6), and
significance of the effect,a follow-on study by Utteridge on the results from Rudiger's lab showing DNA breaks in
et al. (2002) was conducted, but no change in tumor cells cultured in vitro (Diem et al. 2005; Schwarz et al.
development was found. The BIR rejected the Utteridge 2008;BIR, Section 1, p. 17). Follow-on research to the
et al.results for the reasons given in Section 7(p. 16)and Lai and Singh reports at another university included an
stated"the results of the Repacholi study are still looked extensive study comparing different DNA damage meth-
upon as showing a relation between RF and cancer in an ods and included an attempt at exact replication of the
352 Health Physics October 2009,Volume 97,Number 4
original studies; the results failed to demonstrate an The BIR repeatedly states that current safety stan-
increase in DNA damage due to RF exposure(Lagroye et dards are inadequate and that the standards-setting pro-
al. 2004). Other research (Malyapa et al. 1997) also cesses are flawed because they "have little, if any, input
failed to confirm DNA damage. The Stewart Report from other stakeholders outside professional engineering
concluded that the evidence of Lai and Singh for DNA and closely-related commercial interests" (BIR 2007, p.
damage "is contradicted by a number of other studies in 5). This is incorrect. The ICES Technical Committee 95
vivo and is not supported by in vitro work" (IEGMP Subcommittee (SC4) that developed the RF safety stan-
2000, Paragraph 5.134, page 70). dard (C95.1-2005) is open to anyone with a direct and
The in vitro results published by Rudiger's lab could material interest in the activities of the subcommittee.
not be confirmed by an independent lab that attempted an During the development of IEEE C95.1-2005, SC4 had
exact replication (Speit et al. 2007). More recently, 132 participants from government, universities,industry,
Rudiger's results have been the subject of a scientific- and the public; they represented 24 countries and 14
misconduct investigation that revealed that some of the disciplines including medicine, epidemiology, biology,
data used in at least one publication by the group had biophysics, physics, risk assessment, risk communica-
been fabricated (Vogel 2008). tions, and engineering. It is noteworthy that the partici-
The recent U.S. National Research Council report pants included representatives from the U.S. Federal
(NRC 2008),developed by an international expert group, Communications Commission,Food and Drug Adminis-
concluded that ". . .most investigators in the field agree tration, National Institute of Occupational Safety and
that no compelling body of evidence exists to support Health, and Occupational Safety and Health Administra-
the hypothesis that RF fields are genotoxic" (page 39). bon. The unlimited access, transparency, and broad
These and other expert groups clearly gave little weight to multi-discipline expertise of the international participants
the studies by Lai and Singh and Rudiger's group in the in the IEEE/ICES Committee stand in contrast to the
face of a large body of other related evidence. By failing small ad hoc group of 14 authors of the BIR.
to conduct a comprehensive review of the many animal COMAR notes that if the limits in the BIR were
applied consistently, such limits would prevent, or at
tumor studies and focusing on isolated and disputed
least greatly complicate, the installation and use of
results from a few studies, the BIR arrived at unsup-
traditional radio and TV broadcasting services, airport
ported conclusions regarding the genotoxic potential of
pexposure. radar systems, police and other emergency communica-
RF The BIR mixes discussion of social and scientific tions systems, wireless telephone and wireless Internet
systems, and many other applications of the radiofre-
issues.For example,the scientific review of effects of RF quency spectrum—all of which have important benefits
fields on stress proteins has a long editorial section to public health and safety. Therefore, the BIR recom-
headed with "The troubling context of today's science" mendations would in effect potentially increase risks by
with speculation about the "mind set" of scientists degrading effectiveness of many safety systems employ-
working in the field, and other ad hominem comments ing RF energy.
which greatly detracts from the overall objectivity of the
BIR review.
Views of health agencies about BIR
Additional concerns about the BIR have been iden-
Exposure limits tified by the following scientific groups from Europe and
Without providing a rationale in support of their Australia.
recommendations, the BIR recommends"precautionary"
limits for human exposure to electromagnetic fields that EMF-NET, a coordinating committee of the Eu-
are very much lower than limits in effect in more than 40 ropean Commission 61h FrameWork Programme (30
countries. For example, the BIR recommends a general October 2007).The BIR is "not a consensus report of a
public exposure limit of 0.614 volts per meter for working group, but rather an assembly of chapters
exposure to RF energy,which is a factor of about 100(in written by various scientists and consultants." The
terms of field strength) or 10,000 (measured in terms of "Summary for the public" is "written in an alarmist and
incident power density) below present limits that are in emotive language and the arguments have no scientific
effect in the U.S. and most other countries around the support from well-conducted EMF research." "There is
world. A major weakness of the BIR is the absence of a a lack of balance in the report; no mention is made in
rationale to support reduction of internationally accepted fact of reports that do not concur with authors' state-
RF exposure limits. ments and conclusions. The results and conclusions are
_!C. .nth ...�,'. ..,('
1
l
COMAR Technical Information Statement 0 THE COMMITTEE ON MAN AND RADIATION 353
very different from those of recent national and interna- such as IEEE/ICES and ICNIRP, which are formally
tional reviews on this topic. . . If this report were to be recommended by WHO.
believed, EMF would be the cause of a variety of
diseases and subjective effects. . . None of these health
effects has been classified as established in any national
Acknowledgments—This TIS was reviewed and approved by the members
or international reviews that assessed biological and of COMAR, all of whom have expertise in the general areas of the
health effects from exposures below internationally ac interactions of electromagnetic fields with humans.Although it represents
cepted EMF limits when the whole database of scientific a consensus of the opinions of COMAR Members,it does not necessarily
reflect the opinion of the IEEE in general. At the time of the vote, the
literature is reviewed according to well-accepted inter- membership of COMAR consisted of:
national risk assessment methods and criteria." Eleanor R.Adair,PhD
RajAvailable at: htt ://webjrc.ec.euro a.eu/emf-net/ Howard
Barisal. PhD
p J p Howard Bassen, MS
doc/EFRTDocuments/EMF-NET%20Comments%20 David Black,MBChB
on%20the%20Biolnitiative%20Report%20300CT2W7,pdf. Ralf Bodemann,PhD
Aviva Brecher,PhD
[See EMF-NET 6th Framework Program Coordination Jerrold T.Bushberg,PhD
Action, Effects of the Exposure to Electromagnetic Philip Chadwick,PhD
PE
Fields: From Science to Public Health and Safer Work- Jconed,
Joohnhn D'Andrea,PhD
place, Comments on the BioInitiative Working Group Richard L. Doyle, MS
Report (BioInitiative Report), October 30, 2007.] Joe Elder,PhD
Linda S.Erdreich,PhD
Kenneth R.Foster,PhD, PE
The Netherlands Health Council (2 September Riadh Habash,PhD,PE
inion as to the scientific value of the BIR, James Hatfield,h
2008).In its opinion Daniel D. Hoolihan
the Health Council concluded "that the BioInitiative Veronica Ivans
report is not an objective and balanced reflection of James Jauchem,PhD
Sheila Johnston, PhD
the current state of scientific knowledge. Therefore, the Rob Kavet,ScD
report does not provide any grounds for revising the B.Jon klauenberg,PhD
current views as to the risks of exposure ectroma ex to elJames H.Lambert,PhD,PE
g Gregory D. Lapin,PhD,PE
netic fields." Martin L.Meltz,PhD
Available at: http://www.gezondheidsraad.nl/sites/ Joseph Morrissey,PhD
df. Accessed 4 August 2009. John Moulder,PhD
default/files/200817E.
p g Michael R. Murphy,PhD
John M.Osepchuk,PhD
Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bioeffects Ronald isC. Petersen, MS
9 Y Peter Polson,PhD
Research (ACRBR) (18 December 2008). "Overall we Kenneth R.Proctor
think the BioInitiative Report does not progress science, Pere J. Riu,PhD
Mays Swicord,PhD
and would agree with the Health Council of the Nether- Paul A.Testagrossa
lands that the BioInitiative Report is 'not an objective An Thansandote,PhD
and balanced reflection of the current state of scientific Mohammad-Reza Tofighi,PhD
Eric van Rongen,PhD
knowledge.'As it stands it merely provides a set of views David D.Royston
that are not consistent with the consensus of science, and W•James Sarjeant,PhD
Richard A.Tell,.MS,CHAIR
it does not provide an analysis that is rigorous enough to Arthur Varanelli,MS
raise doubts about scientific consensus." Robert D.Weller,PE
Available at:httpl Donald W./www.acrbr.org.au/FAQ/ACRBR% Jona d W. PhD
Zipse,PE
20Bioinitiative%2OReport%2018%a2ODec%202008.pdf. Marvin C.Ziskin,MD
Most recognized of COMAR products are the TIS on areas of
technical interest or safety concerns and recommendations conceming
CONCLUSION electromagnetic fields.A list of COMAR Statements and Internet links are
available to the public at http://ewh.iece.org/soc%robs/comar/.
COMAR, in agreement with the three comments
above,concludes that the weight of scientific evidence in REFERENCES
the current RF bioeffects literature does not support the
safety limits recommended by the BioInitiative group. BioInitiative Report. A rationale for a biologically-based pub-
For this reason, COMAR recommends that government lic exposure standard for electromagnetic fields (ELF and
authorities and public health officials continue to base RF) [online]. 2007. Available at: httpJ/www.bioinifative.
org/reportlindexhan Accessed 10 Manch 2009.
their policies on RF safety limits recommended by Diem E, Schwarz C, Adlkofer F, Jahn O, Rudiger H. Non-
established and sanctioned international organizations thermal DNA breakage by mobile-phone radiation (1800
354 Health Physics October 2009,Volume 97.Number 4
MHz) in human fibroblasts and in transformed GFSH-R17 National Research Council. Identification of research needs
rat granulosa cells in vitro. Mut Res 583:178-183; 2005. relating to potential biological or adverse health effects of
Hardell L, Sage C. Biological effects from electromagnetic wireless communication devices.Washington,DC:National
field exposure and public exposure standards. Biomed Academies Press; 2008. Available at: http://www.n4p.pdu/
Pharmacother 62:104-109; 2008. catalog.php?record_id=12036#toc. Accessed 9 March 2009.
Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones. Mobile phones Oberto G, Rolfo K, Yu P, Carbonatto M, Peano S, Kuster N,
and health.Chilton,Didcon,Oxon: UK National Radiolog- Ebert S,Tofani S. Carcinogenicity study of 217 Hz pulsed
ical Protection Board, IEGMP; 2000. 900 MHz electromagnetic fields in Piml transgenic mice.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. IEEE Radiat Res 168:316-326; 2007.
Standard for safety levels with respect to human exposure to Repacholi MH, Basten A, Gebski V, Noonan D, Finnie J,
electromagnetic fields,0 to 3 kHz. New York: IEEE; IEEE Harris AW. Lymphoma in Eµ-Piml transgenic mice ex-
C95.6-2002; 2002 (Reaffirmed 2007). posed to pulsed 900 MHz electromagnetic fields..Radiat Res
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. IEEE 147:631-640; 1997.
Standard for safety levels with respect to human exposure to Schwarz C, Kratochvil E, Pilger A, Kuster N, Adlkofer F,
radio frequency electromagnetic fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz. Rudiger H. Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (UMTS,
New York: IEEE; IEEE C95.1-2005; 2005. 1950 MHz) induces genotoxic effects in vitro in human
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protec- fibroblasts but not in lymphocytes. Int Arch Occup Environ
tion.Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying elec- Health 81:755-767; 2008.
Sp
tric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz). to G, Schutz P, Hoffman H. Genotoxic effects exposure
Health Phys 74:494-522; 1998. to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMM F) in cul-
tured mammalian cells are not independently reproducible.
Lagroye I, Anane R, Wettring BA, Moros EG, Straube WL, Mut Res 626:42-47; 2007.
Laregina M, Niehoff M, Pickard WF, Baty J, Roti Roti JL. Utteridge TD, Gebski V, Finnie JW, Vernon-Roberts B,
Measurement of DNA damage after acute.exposure to Kuchel TR. Long-term exposure of Eµ-Pim 1 transgenic
pulsed wave 2450 microwaves in rat brain cells by two mice to 898.4 MHz microwaves does not increase lym-
alkaline comet assay methods. Int J Radiat Biol 80:11-21; phoma incidence. Int 1 Radiat Biol 158:357-364: 2002.
2004• van Deventer E, Foster KR. Risk assessment and risk commu-
Lai H, Singh NP. Acute low-intensity microwave exposure nication for electromagnetic fields: a World Health Organi-
increases DNA single-strand breaks in rat brain cells. zation perspective. In: Wiedemann PM,Schutz H,eds.The
Bioelectromagnetics 16:207- 210; 1995. role of evidence in risk characterization-making sense of
Lai H,Singh NP.Single-and double-strand DNA breaks in rat conflicting data. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH; 2008.
brain cells after acute exposure to radio frequency electro- Vogel G. Fraud charges cast doubt on claims of DNA damage
magnetic radiation. Radial Res 69:513-521; 1996. from cellphone fields. Science 321:1144-1145; 2008.
Malyapa RS,Ahem EW,Straube WL,Mortis EG,Pickard WF, World Health Organization. WHO Environmental Health Cri-
Rou Roti JL. Measurement of DNA damage after exposure teria 238, Extremely low frequency fields. Geneva: WHO;
to 2450 MHz electromagnetic radiation. Radial Res 2007. Available at: http://www.who.int/peh-emf/publicationst
148:608-617; 1997. Complet_DEC_2007.pdf.,Accessed 10 March 2009.
APPENDIX A
COMAR Recommended Scientific Reviews by 3. International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety
Government Agencies and Expert Panels Concerning (ICES), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engi-
Health Effects and Safe Levels of Radiofrequency Ex- neers (IEEE) (2006). IEEE Standard for Safety Levels
posure (2003-2008). [Additional reviews are listed on with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Fre-
the GSM Association Web site at http://www.gsmworld. quency Electromagnetic Fields. 3 kHz to 300 GHz.
com/health/links/independent.shtml and listed with a IEEE Standard C95.1-2005, Annex B, Identification
summary at http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/ of levels of RF exposure responsible for adverse
HPAweb_C/l 194947376017 (see 2 below).] effects: summary of the literature, pp. 34-77. IEEE,
1. U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and 3 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5997.
Measurements (NCRP) (2003). NCRP Commentary 4. Health Council of the Netherlands (2007). Electromag-
No. 18, Biological Effects of Modulated Radiofre- netic Fields:Annual Update 2006(pp.53-98 in English).
quency Fields, 7910 Woodmont Avenue, Bethesda, httpJ/www.healthcouncil.nUpdfphp?ID=1505&p=1.
MD 20814-3095. 5. Ireland Expert Group on Health Effects of Elec-
t. UK National Radiological Protection Board(NRPB) tromagnetic Fields (2007). Health Effects of
(2004/2005). Mobile Phones and Health (2004), Electromagnetic Fields.httpJ/www.dcenr.govie/NR/rdon
Volume 15, Number 5. httpJ/www.hpa.org.uk/web/ lyres/9E29937F-1A27-4A16-A8C3-F403A623300C/
HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1194947333240. 0/ElectromagneticReport pdf.
Summary of 24 Recent Reports (2000-2004) on 6. European Commission Scientific Committee on
Mobile Phones and Health (2005). http://www.hpa. Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks(2007).
org.uk/web/HPAwebFil&HPAweb_C/I194947376017. Possible Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (EMF)
COMAR Technical Information Statement 0 THE Comm=ON MAN AND RADIATION 355
on Human Health. httpJ/ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/ 10. Swedish State Radiation Protection Authority (SSI)
committees/04_scenihr/docs/scenihr-o-007.pdf. (2008).Fifth Annual Report from SSI's Independent
7. Finland(2007).HERMO-Health Risk Assessment of Expert Group on Electromagnetic Fields, Recent
Mobile Communications. A Finnish Research Pro- Research on EMF and Health Risks, 2007. httpJ/
gramme 2004-2007.httpJ/www.uku.fi/hermo/english/ www.ssi.se/ssi_mpporter/ssiWport.html?MenueType=
Final_report.shtml. 2&Menu2=Publikationer.
8. UK (2007). Mobile Telecommunications and Health 11. UK,The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Research Programme (MTHR). Report 2007. http:// (2008). Position Statement by The Institution of
www.mthr.org.uk/docurnenWNrrM.report-2007.pdf. Engineering and Technology: The Possible Harmful
9. European Commission (2008). Possible Effects of Biological Effects of Low-level Electromagnetic
Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) on Human Health- Fields of Frequencies up to 300 GHz. http://www.
Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Emerging theiet.org/publicaffairs/bepag/postat02final.pdf.
and Newly Identified Health Risks(SCENIHR).Toxicol 12. UK Government (2008). Official site of the Prime
246:248-250; 2008. http)/ec.eu upa.eu/healdVptLrisk/ Minister's Office. Phonemasts-epetition response.
committees/04_scenihr/docs/scenihr o 007.pdf. httpJ/www.numberlO.gov.uk/output/Page 14249.asp.
APPENDIX B
Public statements by health agencies and 5. German Research Centre Julich, Programme Group
expert panels concerning health effects of Humans, Environment, Technology (2005). http://
electromagnetic fields www.emfLrisiko.delprojekte/pdf/risikodialog-eng.pdf-
I. UK Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones "Overall, the hypothesis that EMF from mobile phone
(IEGMP) (2000). http://www.iegmp.org.uk/report/ communication has a hannful effect is not substanti-
text.htm: "The balance of evidence to date suggests ated" (p. 67).
that exposures to RF radiation below NRPB and 6. Health Canada(2006).http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/iyh-vsv/
ICNIRP guidelines do not cause adverse health prod/cell_e.html: ". . . some studies claim that bio-
effects to the general population" (p. 3). logical effects may occur at RF energy levels below
2. World Health Organization (2004). http://www.who. the Safety Code 6 [Canadian national exposure]
int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/indexl.html: "De- limits [which are similar to U.S. and ICNIRP health
spite the feeling of some people that more research limits]. These biological effects are not well estab-
needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is lished and their implications for human health need
now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based further study. Right now, there is no convincing
on a recent in-depth review of the scientific litera- scientific evidence to support lowering the limits."
tures the WHO concluded that current evidence does 7. New Zealand Ministry of Health,National Radiation
not confirm the existence of any health consequences Laboratory (2007). http://www.nrl.moh.govt.nz/faq/
from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields. cellphonesandcellsi[es.asp: "The balance of current
However, some gaps in knowledge about biological
effects exist and need further research." research evidence suggests that exposures to the
radiofrequency energy produced by cellphones do
3. Health Council of the Netherlands. Mobile phones not cause health problems provided they comply
and children: Is precaution warranted? Bioelectro- with international guidelines. Reviews of all the
magnetics 25:142-144; 2004: "The Health Council research have not found clear, consistent evidence of
therefore sees no reason to recommend limiting the any adverse effects."
use of mobile phones by children."
4. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 8. Ireland Expert Group on Health Effects of Elec-
Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (2005). tromagnetic Fields (2007). http://www.dcenr.gov.
httpJ/www.cdc.gov/nceblradiadon/factsheets/cellphone- ie/NR/rdonlyres/9E29937F-IA274AI6-A80-F
facts.pdf: "In the last 10 years, hundreds of new 403A623300C/0/ElectromagnedcReport.pdf: "There
research studies have been done to more directly are no data available to suggest that the use of mobile
study possible effects of cell phone use. Although phones by children is a health hazard" (p. 3).
some studies have raised concerns, the scientific 9. States of Jersey (2007). http://www.scrutiny.gov.je/
research, when taken together, does not indicate a view_doc.asp?panelid=0&reviewid=0&target=Reports
significant association between cell phone use and &doc=documents/reports/S-260-48911-3052007.htm:
health effects." Regarding emissions from mobile masts, ". . . it is
356 Health Physics October 2009,Volume 97,Number 4
equally clear that there is no scientific evidence to au/pubs/eme/factl.pdf: "The weight of national and
show that an actual risk exists." international scientific opinion is that there is no
10. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, substantiated evidence that exposure to low level RF
Japan (2007). http://www.soumu.go.jp/joho_tsusin/ EME [electromagnetic energy] causes adverse
eng/Releases/NewsL.etterNo118No118_06Nol18_06. health effects."
htm]: "Consequently, this committee cannot recognize 14. UK Position Statement by The Institution of Engi-
that there is any firm evidence of effects on health, neering and Technology(2008):The Possible Harm-
including nonthermal effects, from radio waves at ful Biological Effects of Low-level Electromagnetic
strengths that do not exceed the policy for protection Fields of Frequencies up to 300 GHz (2008). httpJ/
from radio waves." www.theiet.org/factfiles/bioeffectsrindex.cftn: "In sum-
11. UK Mobile Telecommunications and Health Re- mary, the absence of robust new evidence of harmful
search Programme (MTHR) (2007). http://www. effects of EMFs in the past two years is reassuring
mthr.org.uk/documents/NfrliR_report_2007.pdf. "The and is consistent with findings over the past decade"
MTHR Programme was set up to resolve uncertainties (p, 3),
identified by previous evaluations of the possible health 15. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2008). http://
risks associated with the widespread use of mobile www.fda.gov/cdrh/wirelessthealth-children.htm]: "The
phone technology. None of the research supported by scientific evidence does not show a danger to any users
the Programme and published so far demonstrates that of cell phones from RF exposure, including children
biological or adverse health effects are produced by and teenagers."
radiofrequency exposure from mobile phones... The 16. U.S. National Cancer Institute (2008). Fact Sheet on
Committee has recognized that, while many of the Cellular Telephone Use and Cancer Risk. http://
concerns raised by the Stewart Committee [see 1 www.cancer.gov/cancertopicstfactslieet/Risk/cellphones:
above]have been reduced by the Programme and work "Incidence data from the Surveillance,Epidemiology and
done elsewhere, some still remain. It has therefore End Results (SEER) program of the National Cancer
proposed a further programme of work to address Institute have shown no increase between 1987 and 2005
these. in the age-adjusted incidence of brain or other nervous
12. World Health Organization(2007). Fact Sheet#304. system cancers despite the dramatic increase in use of
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs304/en/ cellular telephones..."
index.html: "Considering the very low exposure 17. U.S. Federal Communications Commission (2008).
levels and research results collected to date, there is htip://www.fcc.gov/cgb/cellular.html: "There is no
no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF scientific evidence that proves that wireless phone
signals from base stations and wireless networks usage can lead to cancer or a variety of other
cause adverse health effects." problems, including headaches, dizziness or memory
13. Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety loss."
Agency, Committee on Electromagnetic Energy
Public Health Issues(2008):http://www.arpansa.gov. ■ ■
Bioelectromagnetics Supplement 6:St96—S213(2003)
Radiofrequency Exposure and Mammalian Cell
Toxicity, Genotoxicity, and Transformation
Martin L. Meltz'
Department of Radiation Oncology and Center for Environmental Radiation Toxicology,
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio,San Antonio,Texas
The published in vitro literature relevant to the issue of the possible induction of toxicity,genotoxicity,
and transformation of mammalian cells due to radiofrequency field (RF)exposure is examined. In
some instances, information about related in vivo studies is presented. The review is from the
perspective of technical merit and also biological consistency, especially with regard to those
publications reporting a positive effect.The weight of evidence available indicates that,for a variety of
frequencies and modulations with both short and long exposure times,at exposure levels that do not(or
in some instances do) heat the biological sample such that there is a measurable increase in
temperature,RF exposure does not induce(a)DNA strand breaks,(b)chromosome aberrations,(c)
sister chromatid exchanges (SCEs), (d) DNA repair synthesis, (e) phenotypic mutation, or (F)
transformation(cancer-like changes).While there is limited experimental evidence that RF exposure
induces micronuclei formation,there is abundant evidence that it does not.There is some evidence that
RF exposure does not induce DNA excision repair,suggesting the absence of base damage.There is
also evidence that RF exposure does not inhibit excision repair after the induction of thymine dimers
by UV exposure,as well as evidence that indicates that RF is not a co-carcinogen or a tumor promoter.
The article is in part a tutorial,so that the reader can consider similarities and discrepancies between
reports of RF-induced effects relative to one another.Bioelectromagnetics Supplement 6:S 196-5213,
2003. ®2003 Wiicy-I-i...Inc.
Key words: microwaves; cell death; mutation; chromosome damage; DNA damage and
repair;transformation
INTRODUCTION Attention was usually given to understanding safety
The advent of cellular telephones and other issues,since there were a number of early reports in the
wireless technologies and their wide spread and ever- peer reviewed literature that suggested a possible
increasing use, has led to increasing public, govern- human health issue.
mental,and scientific attention to the issue of whether or This review is not all-inclusive. It focuses on
not adverse effects result from exposure to radio- publications which have appeared in the past 15-20
frequency electromagnetic fields.While there are many years that involve mammalian (human and rodent)
natural and man made sources of radiofrequency fields systems.This particular review also does not deal with
(RFs)in the environment[Stuchly, 1977;Meltz, 1991], the entire realm of biological effects. The author for
established.scientific evidence in support of an adverse many years has advocated that a biological effect
human health effect due to RF exposure is largely reported in the literature may not be a health hazard to
nonexistent. However, the very fact that there are humans. A biological effect can be any chemical,
opportunities for so many human exposures is reason
enough to give the matter attention, both in the short
term and to at least some extent, into the future. In
addition,concern about possible adverse effects due to *Correspondence to: Martin L. Meltz, Department of Radiation
long duration, low level exposures continues unabated. Oncology and Center for Environmental Radiation Toxicology,
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio,7703
Research in the field of radiofrequency biological Floyd Curl Drive,San Antonio,TX 78229.
effects is.not new. It has been under way for more than E-mail: meltz@uthscsa.edu
40 years, both in the United States and in other
countries. Until relatively recently, most of the biol- Received for review 18 October 2002; Final revision received
ogical research had been funded by defense agencies of 18 August 2003
various governments, since radiofrequency signals are DOI 10.10021bem.10176
emitted by radar and communications equipment. Published online in Wiley Interscience(www.interscience.wiley.com).
®2003 Wiley-Liss,Inc.
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF 5197
structural, metabolic, physiological, or morphological "initiator," i.e.,capable of being an "initiating" event
alteration detected in a biological molecule, cellular leading to cancer related changes in a cell;alternatively,
structural component or organelle, or living biological it could be a secondary or tertiary event, e.g., a
system,resulting from exposure to an agent.The effect subsequent chromosomal alteration,needed for the full
would be demonstrated by comparing a response to an development of malignant cancer.
exposure against a sham exposure. The third area examined is mammalian cell
A molecular alteration may or may not result in a transformation. In this type of in vitro assay, treatment
measurable biological alteration at the subcellular or with an agent results in cancer-like changes in at least
cellular level, and subcellular changes may or may some of the cells exposed. A positive result after treat-
not lead to measurable alterations at the cell level. If ment with the agent(alone)would be suggestive that the
such changes were to occur and be measurable, the agent was a complete carcinogen.The technique could
changes may or may not extend themselves to directly be used to examine the hypothesis that the RF was not a
adjoining tissue, or in either case result in effects on complete carcinogen, but either a cocarcinogen or a
adjoining cells or cells in tissues at a distance. As- promoter. This would assume that RF induction of
suming that there is a tissue response,it would remain to cancer was explainable by an initiation-promotion-
be determined whether there will be a physiological progression model for carcinogenesis; there is no
outcome that is out of the range of normal physiological evidence in the literature that this is the case. In any
variability in any one person, and therefore result in a event, a positive in vitro result would need to be sup-
physiological alteration of importance to health. Any ported by appropriate in vivo studies.
substantiated biological effect could prove to have This review is by design more technically critical
no physiological effect, could be harmful, or could be then previous reviews [e.g., Brusick et al., 1998;
beneficial. Verschaeve and Maes, 19981, in that methodological
The focus of this review is on a number of in vitro and biological aspects of individual studies that have
studies in which the possibility of toxic, genotoxic, or frequently only been summarized as having results
transforming effects of radiofrequency (microwave) which are either positive or negative,will be discussed.
exposure have been examined. In a limited number of A positive is not a positive unless the experimental
instances, in vivo laboratory investigations related to methodologies and analysis were properly done; the
these in vitro studies will be mentioned. There is an literature is replete with studies which do not meet this
important reason for beginning a review of the in vitro test. The same assessment can be applied to studies
literature with these topics. If we are concerned with reporting an absence of an affect.
adverse human health effects, we must first be con-
cerned with whether or not the exposure of concern is List of Review Criteria
toxic, i.e., the agent is able to kill cells (of which the A list of features which were recommended for
tissues in our bodies are comprised). If this were to inclusion in any published article was published in a
happen,an alteration of function of tissue(s)could lead chapter entitled "Biological Effects versus Health
to clinically harmful physiological alterations in the Effects: An Investigation of the Genotoxicity of
body, and ill health. If enough cells in a tissue were Microwave Radiation" [Meltz, 1995].The list,quoting.
killed,the outright failure of an organ to function could from that chapter, includes:
occur,and human death could result.As will be reported
below, there is an absence of reports in the literature I. Was the biological organism identified?
describing cell killing by RF exposures. The available 2. Were the experimental methods reported in
evidence is that there is no cell toxicity after acute and/ enough detail to allow the study to be reproduced
or chronic in vitro and in vivo RF exposures when in another laboratory, and also to allow an
measurable increases in temperature do not occur(a low investigator competent in the field to determine
level exposure and therefore presumably an"athermal" if it was performed property?
situation). 3. Was the assay performed in accord with accepted
If cell killing is not an issue,then the next area of (standard) protocols?
concern is genotoxicity due to RF exposure at low 4. Was the microwave exposure system described?
doses,where the cells with altered DNA would survive. 5. Were the physical parameters of the exposure
Genotoxicity is often associated with cell death; reported, including frequency, mode (continuous
however, it is also the basis for causing inherited wave[CW] or pulsed wave [PW]), power, power
mutations, if the DNA of the oocytes.or sperm of the density, location in the near or far field?
exposed person is altered/mutated. Evidence of geno- 6. Was the dose reported by describing the specific
toxicity would also indicate that the RF was a potential absorption rate?
S198 Meltz
7. Was the temperature measured continuously during death.It is therefore critical to know if exposure of cells
the exposure (in contrast to measurements being to RFs can cause the death of the exposed cells.
made before and after the exposure), and was the Cells in the body exist in different proliferative
temperature measurement technique described? states.They can be permanently nondividing and func-
8. Was the temperature and the time at that tem- tional, such as (most) nerve and muscle cells. Alter-
perature stated? natively, they can be the daughters of dividing cells
9. Were independent treatment flasks exposed.as which have differentiated and themselves are no longer
replicates (to the same condition)? able to divide; these cells now play a structural or
10. Was the experiment repeated? functional role.The cells lining the villi of the intestine
11. Were appropriate positive and negative controls prior to sloughing off into the lumen are an example of
performed? this type of cell. In some cases, cells that are not
12. Was the data statistically analyzed, and,was the typically dividing can be "called upon" after tissue
analysis appropriate? damage (cell killing) to proliferate. Examples of this
13. Did the authors accept their own statistical result, type of cell include endothelial cells lining the
or go on to make comments about specific changes vasculature, cells of the liver, and cells in certain
that were not statistically significant? glands.Certain cells of the immune system also can be
stimulated to proliferate, as part of their normal
In addition to these "criteria," some studies are physiological function. Finally,the cells may be "stem
noted as being totally inconsistent with what is known cells." These cells continually divide and are the
from in vitro and in vivo investigations of other toxic precursor to other,more differentiated cells.Survival of
agents; some of these inconsistencies will also be these cells can be critical to both organ survival and
addressed herein. It could be hypothesized that the recovery of an organ after damage.Stem cells are found
effects of RF are inconsistent with what is known about in the bone marrow, at the base of the villi in the
all other toxic and genotoxic agents; one would be intestine,in the skin, and in the testes.
required to demonstrate a substantiated toxic or If cells never divide and are killed by an exposure,
genotoxic effect of RF before this speculative hypoth- they will undergo interphase death.The same is the case
esis could be addressed. for proliferating cells, which die before the first cell
It will become evident to the reader that the author division after exposure.This death can be by apoptosis
has given more critical technical and biological (programmed cell death), necrosis (death of a field of
attention to those articles reporting evidence of toxicity, cells in the same area in a tissue), or functional death
genotoxicity, and transformation due to RF exposures (the cells may be living, but no longer capable of
than to those articles reporting an absence of such performing their normal function). If a cell is in a state
evidence.This reflects the presentation of the author at of proliferation when exposed to a toxic agent, it can.
the U.S.Air Force Symposium at which an overview of die an interphase death,but it can also die a reproductive
the article was presented.It should be evident to almost death:after one or more divisions,the daughter cells of
everyone that it is the positive reports of RF effects that the cell initially exposed will simply stop dividing. If
have regularly received media attention, it is the posi- cell division is essential to an organ, the organ can be
tive reports that have concerned elected officials and temporarily or permanently damaged, leading to
regulators at the local,national,and international levels, temporary dysfunction of the organ or organ death. If
and it is the positive reports which have been or are this were to happen,clinical symptoms would become
being replicated in international studies. This is not to evident.
say that such a technically critical review of the negative
reports is not needed; in view of the possible In Vitro Studies
(upcoming)decision by IARC as to whether or not RF
is a known,probable,or possible human carcinogen or a Viability assessed using the colony formation
noncarcinogen, such a review is very important. It is assay. The gold standard of measurement of cell death,
planned for a future article. prior to the realization of the importance of apoptosis,
was the measurement of reproductive integrity using a
CELL VIABILITY (TOXICITY) AFTER IN VITRO colony formation assay.This approach usually does not
OR IN VIVO RF EXPOSURES work for normal human cells, but it can be used for
studying the reproductive integrity after treatment of
If enough cells in a tissue are killed, the result many continuous rodent and human cancer cell lines.In
could be tissue damage;and if enough tissue is damag- these studies, a known number of untreated (control)
ed, the result could be severe dysfunction or organ cells is seeded into dishes, flasks, or agar gels. After
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF S199
incubating for 7-14 days,those cells that attach to the exposure at several different power densities with
substrate can form identifiable colonies. These are increasing exposure times caused reproductive death,
counted, and the ratio of colonies to cells seeded gives as measured by colony formation assay. The studies
the control "plating efficiency." Usually,the number of as described, however, appear to be seriously Hawed
days of incubation is sufficient to allow untreated cells (see below). The effects reported could be due to
to result in colonies of 50 or 100 cells.After any single incubating the cells over time at different temperatures.
treatment with a possible toxic agent, the plating Unfortunately, the authors themselves pointed out in
efficiency of the treated cells is determined in a similar one of the articles [Garaj-Vrhovac et al., 1991, p. 148]
manner, and compared to the plating efficiency of that they did not know the temperature in the membrane
the controls. The ratio gives a surviving fraction. The in which the cells were located during the exposure.The
surviving fraction is measured for different exposure situation appears to be the same for all three articles
conditions. There has been some use of this viability Garaj-Vrhovac et al. [1990, 1991, 1992].
assay in RF investigations.
Two studies appear to have been specifically Viability assessed by looking for an indication of
designed to determine whether RFs can kill cells by a apoptosis. Takahashi et al.[2002]explored whether or
mechanism other than heating; these were by Living- not RF causes apoptosis or programmed cell death.
ston et al. [1979] and Sapareto et al. [1982]. In the These authors looked for apoptosis in glial cells of"Big
Sapareto et al. [19821 study, for frequencies of 896 or Blue Mice" which had been exposed in vivo in the near
434-460 MHz, the authors found that the decreased field to a 1.5 GHz TDMA (mobile telephone Time
clonal survival of two mammalian cell lines exposed in Division Multiple Access pulsing pattern) signal. The
growth medium was attributal to the heating by the brains were exposed at the reported SARs of 0.67 or
microwave fields, and not to an electromagnetic 2.0 W/kg for 90 min/day,5 days/week,for 2 or 4 weeks.
property of the RR In the earlier Livingston et al. Using a commercial terminal end labeling assay, the
[19791 article,a comparison was made of the surviving authors reported that they found no evidence of
fraction of Chinese hamster ovary cells after water bath apoptosis. In addition to this direct evidence, there is
heating vs. microwave (CW-2450 MHz) heating for "circumstantial" evidence from the studies(described
increasing times at 44°C.The RF exposure was said to below)of the possible induction of DNA strand breaks
be intermittent to allow maintenance of the medium after RF exposure. If apoptotic cells were present in the
temperature. No difference in the cell survival curves gels used for the comet assay, extensive DNA frag-
was observed. The exposure systems used in these mentation would be immediately obvious when the gels
studies were unique to the studies and therefore would were examined for distance of DNA migration.Not one
allow concern as to the reported outcome. of the authors mentioned observation of apoptosis.
Balcer-Kubiczek and Harrison[1985, 1989, 1991]
also examined the ability of RF exposures to decrease Viability assessed using the dye exclusion assay and
plating efficiency(survival), measured using a cloning other methods. Several "vital' dyes, such as trypan
efficiency assay. In the first of three articles on RF blue,are commonly used to measure cell viability.If the
induced mammalian cell transformation [Balcer- cells are alive and their membranes are intact,the viable
Kubiczek and Harrison, 19851, they reported that a cells,treated and control,will exclude the dye whenever
2.45 MHz RF exposure for 24 h at an SAR of 4.4 W/kg the assay is performed at different times after treatment.
reduced the plating efficiency by 50%, suggesting that Use of such dyes immediately or a short time after acute
the cell viability was decreased by 50%. However, in RF exposure is likely not to reveal dead cells, for
their next article [Balcer-Kubiczek and Harrison, the simple reason that they have not had time to die.
1989],using the same C3H/l OTl/2 cells exposed under This assay is a "snapshot assay"; it cannot provide
the same conditions for the same time, they clearly information as to what will happen to the viability of
stated that they could not reproduce the initial the treated cells at any time after the assay is performed.
observation. They demonstrated an absence of RF Cells that are not dead at the time of the assay could
toxicity.The same was the case in a third study,in which die shortly thereafter (or later), and the dye exclusion
the signal was pulse modulated at 120 Hz [Balcer- result would therefore provide an underestimate of cell
Kubiczek and Harrison, 1991]. killing.
In a series of articles by Garaj-Vrhovac et al. The available data about RF killing of cells using
[1990, 1991, 19.92], that are frequently quoted as the technique of vital dye exclusion is limited. Cleary
reporting RF induction of chromosome aberrations or et al. [1996]exposed CTLL-2 cytolytic T lymphocytes
micronuclei formation, evidence was presented in one to a 2450 MHz signal for 2 h, at SARs ranging up to
of the articles [Garaj-Vrhovac et al., 1991] that RF 50 W/kg.The temperature was said to be maintained at
I �
S200 Meltz
37`C.They reported(p.915)that"RF exposure had no A chronic study of blood related endpoints was
effect on CTLL-2 morphology or survival regardless of described by Toler et al. [1988]. The authors exposed
SAR"The authors did not provide experimental data in male Sprague—Dawley rats to a 435 MHz RF signal at
support of this conclusion. Tice et al. [2002] exposed an estimated mean whole body SAR of 0.3-0.35 W/kg
human blood leukocytes and lymphocytes to 837 MHz for 22 h/day, 7 days/week, for 6 months. The factors
(analog), 837 MHz TDMA, 837 MHz CDMA (Code that they monitored in the blood included, but were
Division Multiple Access), and 1909.8 MHz PCS not limited to, plasma ACTH, corticosterone, prolac-
(Personal Communications Services) signals for 3 or tin, catecholamines (misc.), hematological endpoints
24 h,at average SARs of I—10 Wlkg.The temperature (misc.), and cardiovascular endpoints (misc.). They
was reported to be 37 f 1 °C. They reported that reported no differences in any of these parameters in the
there was no evidence of toxicity for any of the RF RF exposed animals compared to the sham exposed
exposure conditions examined. The authors did not group.
provide experimental data in support of this conclusion.
In summary, the available in vitro studies of the Evidence of the absence of tissue necrosis. Another
effect of RF on cell viability do not indicate, where no indicator of cell death after RF exposure in vivo would
heating (hyperthermia) is involved. evidence of cell be the observation of tissue necrosis. An increasing
killing by the RFs. The absence of in vitro evidence of number of studies have been undertaken to examine
cell toxicity after RF exposure is of relevance to in vivo the possible induction of tumors in rodents upon RF
effects, because any effects that were to be observed exposures. The authors in each of the studies below
would not likely be associated with cell killing. listed a number of tissues that had undergone histo-
pathological examination when the animals were
In Vivo Correlates of the Absence terminated after extended exposures to a variety of
of RF Induced Cell Death frequencies and modulations.One of the first pieces of
evidence indicating that RFs do not cause necrosis is the
Evidence of clinical (functional) impairment. One work of Chou et al. [1992] described above. After
of the most extensive studies of the effects of RF on histopathological examination of all organs and tissues,
physiological function is the chronic lifetime rodent no mention was made of any observation of RF induced
study of Chou et al. [1992]. While the public focus tissue necrosis.
about this study is on its hypothesis generating In the study by Repacholi et al. [1997],mice were
suggestion that RFs can induce tumors,its examination exposed to a 900 MHz pulsed wave signal with a 0.6 ms
of 155 clinical parameters over the lifetime of the pulse width, 216 Hz pulse repetition frequency. The
exposed animals is usually overlooked. The clinical SAR was reported to range from 0.008 to 4.2 W/kg;
parameters monitored included,but were not limited to, 0.13-1.4 W/kg (average). The animals were exposed
serum corticosterone levels, immunological activity, for two 30 min periods per day;for up to 18 months.No
hematological profile,blood chemistry,thyroxin levels, temperature was reported. After histopathological
urinalysis,metabolic activity,total body analysis,organ examination of the thymus, lymph nodes(if enlarged),
mass, and histopathology (all tissues and organs). spleen, liver, lung, kidney, adrenal, large and small
In the study,Chou et al.[1992]exposed Sprague— bowel, urogenital system, eyes, brain, and any tissue
Dawley rats, beginning at 8 weeks of age, in circular appearing abnormal at autopsy,no mention was made of
waveguides to a 2450 MHz,pulsed wave signal,square any observation of RF induced tissue necrosis.
wave modulated at 8 Hz. The SAR was reported to be Toler et al. [1997] exposed female mammary
0.4 W/kg,decreasing to 0.15 W/kg as the animals grew cancer prone mice to a 435 MHz signal, pulse wave,
in size.The exposures were for 25 months,21.55 h/day. with a 1.0 µs pulse width at a 1.0 kHz pulse repetition
The core temperature of the animals was not reported. rate.The SAR reported was 0.32 W/kg.No temperature
With one exception in young animals, which disap- was reported. The animals were exposed 22 h/day,
peared over their lifetimes, there was no evidence of 7 days per week,for 21 months.After histopathological
altered physiological function based on the 155 clinical examination of the mandibular and mesenteric lymph
parameters measured.The absence of such an alteration nodes, salivary gland, femur(including bone marrow),
would imply that if cell killing did occur,over the period thyroid, parathyroid, small intestine, large intestine,
of these chronic lifetime exposures,the number of cells liver, gall bladder, ovaries, lungs and mainstream
killed was not sufficient in each of the large number bronchi,nasal cavity,heart,esophagus,stomach,uterus,
of organs associated with the 155 clinical indices brain, thymus, trachea, pancreas, kidneys, adrenals,
examined to result in a measurable physiological urinary bladder,pituitary,spinal cord and sciatic nerve,
alteration. eyes,mammary gland, pharynx, skin, and spleen, no
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF S201
mention was made of any observation of RF induced animals in the study,in contrast to the Repacholi study,
tissue necrosis. had tissues collected for complete pathological exam-
Frei et al.[1998a]exposed mammary tumor prone ination. The standard set of tissues examined included
C3H/HeJ mice to a continuous wave 2450 MHz RF thymus, spleen, enlarged regional lymph nodes, bone
signal. The reported SAR was 0.3 W/kg. The animals marrow in sternum and ribs, brain, lung, heart, liver,
were exposed 20 Way, 7 days per week, over 18 kidney, small and large intestine, eyes, and any iden-
months. No temperature was reported. After histo- tifiable tumor mass or tissue abnormality. The authors
pathological examination of the brain,trachea,esopha- did not report any observation of RF induced tissue
gus, thyroid gland, salivary gland, mandibular lymph necrosis.
node,pancreas,pituitary gland,thymus,adrenal glands, The combined negative in vitro and chronic in
heart, stomach, jejunum, colon, liver, gall bladder, vivo studies indicate that RFs with different frequencies
spleen, lung, skin,mammary gland,mesenteric lymph and modulations and SARs resulting in exposures at
node, duodenum, ileum, caecum, rectum, kidney, what some have called nonthermal levels of RF
urinary bladder,ovaries, uterus,nose, skeletal muscle, exposure, is evidently nontoxic. This is an extremely
bone (femur), bone marrow (femur), and all gross important statement.It should be noted that many of the
lesions,no mention was made of any observation of RF above in vivo studies did not provide information about
induced tissue necrosis. core temperature.One could assume that the authors did
Frei et al.[1998b]performed a second completely not expect that the whole body average SARs which
independent study, similar in all aspects to the above they employed would result in an increase in core
except that the SAR of the 2450 MHz signal was temperature.
increased to 1.0 W/kg. The exposure time was again
extensive, 20 h/day, 7 days per week, over 18 months.
After histopathpological examination of all of the GENOTOXICITY
tissues mentioned above, there again was no mention Levels of Biological Complexity in
made of any observation of RF induced tissue necrosis. the Investigation of Genotoxic Effects
Adey et al. [1999] exposed Fischer 344 rats to a
836.55 MHz, NADC RF signal. The "slot' average . Studies in this area have been performed at a
SARs reported at the brain were 1.0-1.6 W/kg. The variety of levels of biological complexity. These
exposure times were up to 24 months,beginning prior to include,but are not limited to
birth,2 h/day,4 consecutive days/week.No temperature
was reported.The brain and spinal cord were examined A. damage to isolated DNA (exposed in solution),
histopathologically. No mention was made of any B. damage to DNA after exposure of cells (in vitro or
observation of tissue necrosis. In a second study, in vivo),
performed independently, Adey et al. [2000] exposed C. damage to chromosomes (aberrations, micronuclei
Fischer 344 rats to an 836.66 FM signal, modulated by formation (due to either chromosome damage or
recorded speech. The SARs are not certain, since the mitotic segregation effects)),
Table 1 data for this exposure is exactly the same as the D. sister chromatid exchange (SCE) induction,
Table l SAR data in the 1999 article, unless the SARs E. induction of DNA repair synthesis (indicative of
were exactly the same.The brain and spinal cord were base damage), and
again examined histopathologically, and again no F. induction of phenotypic mutations.
mention was made of any observation of RF induced
tissue necrosis.
In the Takahashi et al. [2002] study mentioned Importance of DNA Damage
above, after exposure of the mouse brains in vivo to a The molecule in the cell that has received the most
1.5 GHz, TDMA signal for 4 weeks, the authors re- attention with respect to potential RF damage,because
ported that no histopathological changes, in particular of its importance for cell function, cell proliferation,
gliosis or degenerative lesions, were noted in the brain cell viability,mutation and cancer,is deoxyribonucleic
tissue. acid (DNA). This is the molecule in which the genetic
In a study designed to improve upon the information of the cell and the entire biological
methodologies of the Repacholi et al. [1997] study, organism, comprised of different cells, is maintained
Utteridge et al.[2002]exposed transgenic Pim I mice to and conserved over time. Alterations in the genetic
an 898.4 MHz, GSM modulated signal. The animals information in the reproductive cells of an organism,
were exposed for I h/day, 5 days/week, for up to e.g.,the sperm or ovum,can lead to inherited mutations
104 weeks,at SARs of 0.25, 1.0,2.0,and 4.0 W/kg.All in the next or subsequent generations of offspring. In a
S202 Meltz
developing embryo or fetus,DNA alterations,at least in as X-rays or gamma rays. Since the frequency of
some of the cells,can lead to death before birth, gross ionizing radiation is some thousands to millions of times
structural abnormalities,mental retardation or decreas- higher than the typical frequencies in the microwave
ed IQ, or temporary or permanent growth retardation. range,such bond breakage is energetically impossible.
DNA alterations in the cells of a child or adult could
lead to cancer in that individual. Death of a large DNA Exposed in Solution:
number of cells in one organ of an exposed individual, Experimental Results
due to DNA damage, could lead to changes in the Studies of DNA breakage due to RF exposure
physiological function of that organ, affecting health were performed in solution by Sagripanti and Swicord
and the physiological state of the person exposed. [1986]. The initial results reported were positive.
Unfortunately, the use of copper electrodes immersed
Possible Types of DNA Damage in the solution containing the DNA led to the pos-
Different organisms have different amounts of sibility/probability of the generation of free radicals due
DNA, found in different numbers of chromosomes. to the presence of the copper in solution.The breakage
There are a several alterations that can occur in the DNA was not due to the direct action of the RF [Sagripanti
molecule if it were to be "attacked" directly by an et al., 19871.
agent. These include local denaturation (separation of
small regions of the two DNA strands),base damage(of Indirect DNA Damage Hypothesis
the thymine,adenine,guanine,or cytosine bases),sugar In a living organism, the DNA molecules in the
damage (of the deoxyribose sugar), cross linking of cell are "bathed" in the complex nucleoplasm of the
the two strands, DNA—protein cross links, or DNA nucleus. The DNA itself is highly compacted and in a
single (SSB) or double (DSB) strand breaks. The complex local environment of water molecules(bound
damage could be alkali labile,i.e.,occurring as a result and/or unbound), histones (basic proteins), RNA
of initial DNA base damage by agent treatment of the molecules, and numerous other biomolecules involved
cell,and appearing as DNA single strand breakage upon in controlling the RNA transcription and DNA replica-
alkali treatment to denature the strands during the SSB tion processes (including periodic attachments to the
assay procedure. nuclear matrix). If direct action resulting in DNA
damage does not occur, one could still postulate an
Direct Damage Due to Absorption indirect action.This would be based on the hypothesis
of the RF by DNA in Solution that the exposure resulted in the generation of free
If the DNA is to be directly damaged;then there radicals due to the ionization of water or other
must be some evidence that DNA in solution can absorb molecules. The latter would require bond breakage,
RF energy directly.If this absorption was occurring in a and as mentioned above, this is not energetically
different manner than the way that RF is absorbed in possible.
water, one would expect that the absorption might be Finally, one could hypothesize that the reactive
frequency dependent. This was proposed theoretically species,if they were to be produced,would be the result
by Prohofsky and his coworkers[Kohli et al., 1981]and of a biochemical reaction initiated in the cell as a result
Mei et al. [1981], among others. The theoretical idea of the RF exposure. If this were occurring, genetic
was that there could be acoustic absorption modes and damage other than DNA SSBs would be readily evident.
that these could depend on the size of the DNA As will be described below, there is no established
molecule. biological evidence that such genetic damage occurs.
After some initial reports that frequency specific This still remains an intriguing hypothesis and needs to
absorption in plasmids of DNA could occur [Swicord be further explored in connection with reported,
and Davis, 1982;Edwards et al., 1984, 1985],follow-up although not established biological effects.
investigations revealed that this was not the case[Foster In addition to or as a result of the different types
et al., 1987; Gabriel et al., 1987]. This is an important of DNA damages listed above, molecular mutations
observation, since without evidence of a direct and also could occur. These could be deletions of short
unique absorption mechanism that could result in re- sequences of DNA, base changes, or base deletions.
distribution in some manner of the absorbed energy in These types of DNA alterations could lead to phe-
the molecule,the alternative is that some type of direct notypic mutations in those cells with the altered DNA
bond breakage was occurring. This direct bond break- that remain viable. As will be indicated below, there is
age would require an amount of energy per photon or also no evidence that RF causes such phenotypic
wave equivalent to that found in ionizing radiation,such mutations.
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF 5203
Recent Evidence That RF Does Not Induce compared to control cells than increases in the
DNA SSBs or DS13 migration of the DNA in the RF exposed cells compared
The issue of DNA strand breaks due to RF was to control cells; in all instances, only small percentage
raised dramatically by the series of reports from the increases in migration were reported. If the argument
laboratory of Lai and Singh [1995, 1996, 1997]. The presented in the article by the authors were accepted,
studies were performed using whole animal exposures i.e., that the RF exposure might be stimulating DNA
in circular waveguides ata frequency of 2450 MHz.The repair in the cells,the article to a large extent is actually
first article reported only on the induction of SSBs in the a direct contradiction of the work of Lai and Singh
cells of the brain of the exposed animals,with a reported [1995, 1996, 1997]. It is very possible that the con-
whole body average SAR of 0.6 W/kg.The brain SARs, tradictory results within the article itself are simply the
based on measurements in another article,were said to result of experimental noise; there is no consistent
range from 0.5 to 2.0 W/kg.The total exposure time to pattern even within the data tables presented by Phillips
either a 2450 MHz CW signal or to a 2450 MHz PW et al. [1998].
signal(2 ps pulse width,500 pulses per s)was 2 h.In the Maes et al. [1997] exposed whole blood samples
first Lai and Singh [1995] article (and only in the first to a 935.2 MHz, GSM signal for 2 h, with the SARS
article),the brain tissue was removed from the animals reported to be 0.3-0.4 W/kg. The temperature in the
in an effort to detect the DNA SSBs immediately after medium was not reported.The technique used to detect
the 2 h RF exposure. In addition,the brains of both the DNA SSBs was the alkaline comet assay.The cells were
CW and PW RF exposed animals were removed for the assessed for DNA SSBs after the 2 h RF exposure. No
SSB assay after waiting an additional 4 h after the RF SSBs were detected.
exposure ended. Vijayalaxmi et al. [2000] exposed human blood
The results reported were of great interest for three samples to a 2450 MHz,PW signal for 2 h,with a mean
reasons. First, it was the first published report of the of 2.14 W/kg(range: 8.18-5.0 W/kg).The temperature
induction of SSBs by RFs. Second, immediately after in the medium was 36.9 t 0.3°C.The technique used to
the RF exposure,there was clear evidence of SSBs after detect the DNA SSBs was the alkaline comet assay.The
the CW exposure, but not after the PW exposure. This cells were examined for DNA SSBs immediately after
was the first clear report of a difference between CW and RF exposure or 4 h post exposure. No DNA strand
PW exposures.Third,for the PW exposure,even though breaks were detected.Tice et al.[2002]exposed diluted
there was no evidence of SSBs immediately after the human blood to 837 MHz (analog), 837 MHz TDMA,
exposure,SSBs were present in a large proportion of the 837 MHz CDMA,and 1909.8 MHz PCS signals for 3 or
cells at 4 h after the exposure. It would have been of 24 h,at average SARs of I—10 W/kg.The temperature
considerable interest if the difference in the effect was reported to be 37 f 1 °C. They examined the
between the CW and PW exposures immediately after leukocytes for DNA strand breaks using the single cell
the end of the 2 h RF exposure and 4 h post exposure had gel (SCG) assay. For all treatment conditions, they
been further examined, especially with regard to the found no evidence of DNA strand breaks for any of the
kinetics of the appearance(or lack thereof)of the breaks signals,at any SAR tested up to 10 W/kg,for either time
during the first 2 h of exposure and 4 h later. An Point.
examination of a dose response of the observations in Malyapa et al. 11997a] exposed human U 87MG
the initial article would also he of great interest. glioblastoma cells or mouse OH I OT1/2 fibroblasts to
a 2450 MHz signal,for 2,4,and 24 h,at SARs of 0.7 and
1.9 W/kg.The temperature in the medium was reported
In Vitro Studies Showing the Absence to be 37 f 0.3 °C. The technique used to detect DNA
of RF Induced DNA Strand Breaks SSBs was the alkaline comet assay. The cells were
The studies listed below, which have been under assessed for DNA SSBs immediately after exposure for
taken in different laboratories using different rodent and the above times. The cells were examined also at 4 h
human cell types at different frequencies and modula- after the 2 h RF exposure.No DNA SSBs were detected
tions and with SARs ranging from 0.3 to 10 W/kg and at either time.
exposure times from 2 to 24 h,did not reveal induction Malyapa et al. [1997b] exposed human U 87MG
of DNA strand breaks by RF exposure. glioblastoma cells or mouse OH IOTI/2 fibroblasts
The work of Phillips et al. [1998] in the Molt-4 to 835.62 MHz, FMCW, and 847.74 MHz, CDMA
human cell line,has often been mentioned as supporting signals for various times up to 24 h, at an SAR of
the work of Lai and Singh [1995, 1996, 1997].There is 0.6 f 0.3 W/kg. The temperature in the medium was
no consistency in the data, with more evidence of a reported to be 37 f 0.3°C.The technique used to detect
decrease in migration of DNA in RF exposed cells DNA SSBs was the alkaline comet assay.The cells were
S204 Meltz
examined for DNA SSBs after 2, 4, and 24 h of RF orders are often at increased risk for cancer induction by
exposure. No DNA SSBs were detected at any of these genotoxic agents, including sunlight exposure. In the
times. normal situation,if error-free repair occurs and removes
Li et al. [2001] exposed mouse C3H 10TI/2 the DNA damage prior to DNA synthesis, a mutation
fibroblasts, growing exponentially or in plateau phase, would not be passed on to the daughter cells.
to 847.74 MHz, CDMA or 835.62 MHz, FDMA Different molecular events occur in different
signals for 2, 4, and 24 h, at SARs of 3.2-5.1 W/kg. types of DNA repair. Among these are DNA repair
The temperature was reported to be 37.0 t 0.3 T.The synthesis, which can occur after base damage induced
technique used to detect the DNA SSBs was the alkaline by a genotoxic agent,and DNA SSB and DSB rejoining.
comet assay. The cells were assessed for DNA SSBs DNA repair synthesis is a slower process, taking as
immediately after exposure for the above times. The much as 20 h or longer depending on the amount of
cells were examined also at 4 h after the 2 h RF initial damage within the exposed cells. DNA SSB
exposure. No DNA SSBs were detected. rejoining is very rapid, being close to complete within
DNA Exposed in Tissues in Animals 2 h. DNA DSB rejoining takes longer [Foray et al.,
1996] and may not always occur, leading to cell death.
Malyapa et al. [19981 attempted a near replication Other types of DNA repair include post replication
of the study by Lai and Singh [1995]. Male Sprague— repair and recombinational repair.
Dawley rats were exposed to a 2450 MHz CW fort h at The only investigation of whether or not RF
an SAR of 1.2 W/kg. No temperature information was exposures can induce DNA repair synthesis was
provided, as was the case in the Lai and Singh articles reported by Meltz et al. [19871. This repair process,
[1995, 1996, 19971. The technique used to detect the examined by measurement of repair replication in pre-
DNA SSBs was the alkaline comet assay.The cells were existing DNA strands,would be expected to occur after
assessed for DNA SSBs immediately after the 2 h RF damage to the bases in the DNA. By implication, the
exposure and also at 4 h after the 2 h RF exposure. No absence of the induction of repair synthesis would
DNA SSBs were detected. suggest that the RF exposure did not damage the bases
The weight of the experimental scientific data in DNA.
does not support the observations of Lai and Singh Meltz et al. [19871 exposed MRC-5 normal
[1995, 1996, 19971.There is no reason to expect that the human diploid fibroblasts to several different signals,
effect of a physical agent, if it directly damages the including 350, 850, and 1200 MHz, continuous and
DNA,can only be seen in the brain exposed in vivo,and pulsed wave (350 MHz, 5000 pps, 10 µs pulse width;
not in other cell types in vitro. If the agent were to 850 MHz,5000 pps, 10 or 100µs pulse width; 1.2 GHz,
indirectly damage the DNA through the induction of 80000 pps, 3 µs pulse width).The SARs ranged from
free radicals, there is no reason to explain why it does 0.39 to 4.5 W/kg(5 and 10 mW/cm2)and depended on
not happen during,but only after,the completion of a 2 h the frequency. They examined whether or not radio
PW exposure, while it occurs during, but possibly not labeling due to repair synthesis of parental (pre-
after,a CW exposure, since the same extent of damage existing) DNA occurred during the 3 h RF exposure.
appears to be present immediately and at 4 h after the The DNA repair studies were purposefully performed
CW exposure [Lai and Singh, 1995]. where the temperature of the medium was either at 37 or
The overwhelming evidence demonstrates that RF 39 °C. The higher temperature was used to test the
does not induce DNA SSBs.If RF induced DNA DSBs, hypothesis that it would "pre-stress" the cells. The
there would be evidence for SSBs using the alkaline results demonstrated an absence of induced DNA repair
assay, unless one suggested that every piece of broken synthesis for all of exposure conditions examined.
double stranded DNA,from the smallest to the largest, Therefore, there is no indication that repairable base
was cross linked.This has not been demonstrated. damage occurred as a result of the RF exposures.
Absence of Genetic Alterations After RF
Exposure in Vitro or In Vivo Does RF exposure result in the inhibition of DNA
repair synthesis? Individuals with genetically inher-
DNA repair. Error-free repair of damaged DNA (and, ited defects in the DNA repair process in their cells,
possibly repair allowing errors to remain)can occur in e.g., Xerodenna pigmentosum, can inherently be at
the cells of all persons, while some individuals with increased risk for sunlight induced skin cancer. It was
genetically inherited diseases have obvious defects in therefore hypothesized that if RFs could interfere with
the DNA repair process. These diseases include, for the repair of DNA, by analogy this could increase the
example, Xeroderma pigmentosum and Ataxia Celan- risk of an adverse effect.This possibility was tested by
gectasia. Individuals with these types of genetic dis- first exposing the cells acutely to UV-C radiation to
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF S205
damage the DNA, and then monitoring the subsequent cells to the RF and the genotoxic chemical mitomycin C
DNA repair synthesis. For this study [Meltz et al., (MMC)at a concentration of I x 10-8 M. Because the
1987], the MRC-5 normal human diploid fibroblast RF exposure resulted in an increase in the temperature
cells were exposed to UVC (21 J/m). Over the of the medium, simultaneous water bath and chemical
subsequent 1, 2, and 3 h of repair labeling, the cells treatment temperature controls were performed. There
were then exposed to either 350, 850, or 1200 MHz was no difference between the RF/chemical induction
pulsed wave signals at SARs ranging from 0.39 to of SCEs and the water bath (temperature control)/
4.5 W/kg (I, 5, and 10 mW/cm2). This DNA repair chemical induction of SCEs, indicating that the RFs
study was also performed at temperatures of 37 and (as electromagnetic fields)did not alter the chemically
39 T. Just as there was no induction of DNA repair induced induction of SCEs.
synthesis by RFs, there was no evidence that the RF Ciaravino et al.[1991]repeated the study a second
exposures at the different frequencies examined time, again with multiple replicate flasks per exposure
interfered with three of the enzymatic steps of the condition and again with repeated experiments and with
DNA repair synthesis process: recognition of the the same 2450 MHz pulsed wave signal with the SAR at
damage to the DNA, nicking of the DNA, or repair 33.8 W/kg and temperatures increasing from 37 to
synthesis. A weakness of this study was that statistical 39.7 f 0.2°C during the 2 h exposure.The RF exposure
analysis was not performed. The authors attempted to again did not induce SCEs. In this series of studies, the
deal with this by replicating experiments where there genotoxic chemical Adriamycin, which interacts with
was evidence of a change in the repair;in doing so they DNA in a different manner than MMC,was used to look
also replicated some of the exposure conditions for a synergistic (or other)effect.The CHO cells were
indicating an absence of an effect. incubated with Adriamycin at two different concentra-
tions, 7.75 x 10-7 or I x 10-6 M during the RF
SCE induction. The SCE assay is used as a sensitive exposure. Again, there was no difference between the
indicator for the genotoxic action of some agents,such RF/chemical induction of SCEs and the water bath
as UV light and some chemical mutagens. The exact (temperature control)/chemical induction of SCEs.
mechanism for formation of SCEs is still unknown; it Maes et al. [1993] subsequently explored the
may have something to do with damage to the process of induction of SCEs by exposure of human blood
DNA replication,rather than to direct genotoxic action lymphocytes to a 2450 MHz signal. The exposure
of the agent on chromosomes.In any event,SCE results time was 30 or 120 min;the SAR was reported as being
in small pieces of the adjoining arms of chromosomes 75 W/kg.The temperature was reported as being 36°C,
being exchanged between those arms. The occurrence which is suspect considering the high SAR reported..
of SCEs could potentially lead to adverse genetic While the result was negative for SCE induction, the
consequences over the lifetime of the cell. It should be methodology must be challenged. It appears from the
noted that SCE induction is not typically observed after description in the methods section that a metal syringe
ionizing radiation exposures, although such exposures needle was immersed in the blood sample during the RF
are clearly genotoxic. exposure.This could have led to artifacts and is not an
An extensive series of investigations involving RF acceptable procedure. The authors also indicated that
exposures alone and RF exposures during simultaneous the temperature uniformity in the sample during the
treatments with different genotoxic chemicals, were exposure was "guaranteed"; this is simply not a
carried out by Ciaravino et al. [1987, 1991]. The pro- scientifically acceptable statement.
cedures were similar to the assay procedures in use at In a series of studies, Maes et al. [1996, 1997,
that time in the Gene-Tox program of the U.S.EPA.The 2000, 20011 explored the possible interaction of RF at
studies involved replicate exposure flasks and replicate different frequencies and modulations and MMC. The
experiments.The chemicals were selected because they authors did not perform a simultaneous exposure in
were known to interact with the DNA of cells via dif- these studies; the cells were fust exposed to the RF
ferent mechanisms. signal and then subsequently treated with MMC. The
Ciaravino et al. [1987] exposed CHO cells to a SARs were lower than those reported by Ciaravino et al.
2450 MHz pulsed wave signal at an SAR of 33.8 W/kg [1987, 1991];it is not clear that the SARs were uniform
for 2 h. The temperature was observed to increase or properly determined. In the first study [Maes et al.,
during the 2 h exposure from 37 to 39.2'C.There was 1996],human blood was exposed to a 954 MHz, GSM
no evidence for the induction of SCEs by,the RF signal 5 cm from a base station antenna, with a
exposure. As a further challenge, it was hypothesized calculated SAR of 1.5 W/kg. The exposure duration
that the RF exposure could alter the extent of SCEs that was for 2 h. Immediately after RF exposure,cells were
would be induced by a simultaneous exposure of the stimulated to divide by addition of PHA in the pre-
t �
S206 Meltz
sence or absence of MMC.The temperature was said to increased from 37 to 40'C during the 2 h RF exposure.
be 17'C during the RF exposure.The authors reported A wide range of different types of chromosome aber-
that the RF exposure alone did not induce SCEs at this rations was scored: No evidence was found that RF
frequency. They did report that those cells that were caused an increase in chromosome aberration fre-
exposed to RF and then treated with MMC showed an quency in the cells above that in simultaneous water
increase in .SCEs compared to chemical treatment bath temperature controls.
alone. In the second study [Maes et al., 19971,the cells To further stress the cells in an effort to detect a
were exposed to a 935.2 MHz signal at an SAR of 0.3— potentially adverse RF effect, the cells were simulta-
0.4 W/kg for 2 h.The temperature in the medium is not neously treated with RF and the genotoxic anticancer
clear.This signal also did not induce SCEs. In the third agent Adriamycin or the genotoxic anticancer agent
study [Maes et al., 2000], the cells were exposed to a MMC in independent experiments. As expected, the
455.7 MHz signal at an SAR of 6.5 W/kg for 2 h. The chemical agents alone caused an increase in chromo-
temperature was reported to be 17 f 1 'C ,but it is not some aberrations in the cells. When the RF exposures
clear that this was the measured sample temperature were performed during the chemical treatment, with
during the exposure.This signal did not induce SCEs.In the temperature in the medium increasing because of
the fourth study [Maes et al., 20011, the cells were the high SAR, no change was observed relative to the
exposed to a 900 MHz, GSM signal at SARs of 2 and similarly chemically treated and non-RF exposed, but
3.5 W/kg for 2 h. The temperature in the medium was temperature controlled (water bath heated)cells.
not stated.This signal also did not induce SCEs. Vijayalaxmi et al. [1997a, 2001a,b] performed
After first reporting an interactive effect between three independent studies examining the possible
the RF exposure and the subsequent MMC treatment induction of chromosome aberrations in human per-
[Maes et al., 19961,the interactive effect in the second ipheral lymphocytes due to RF exposure. In the first
article [Maes et al., 1997] was considered to be weak, study, Vijayalaxmi et al. [1997a] exposed freshly
the interactive effect was described as inconsistent in isolated human blood to a 2450 MHz continuous wave
the third article [Maes et al., 2000], and then the signal at a mean SAR of 12.5 f 0.1 W/kg for a total of
interactive effect was reported to be absent in the fourth 90 min. The exposure was intermittent, i.e., a repeated
article [Maes et al., 20011. sequence of 30 min on, 30 min off. The temperature
In summary, the evidence for a broad range of increased during each 30 min RF-on interval, decreas-
different RF frequencies and modulations by different ing during each following 30 min RF-off period. The
laboratories is that RF exposure does not induce SCEs. temperature never returned to 37'C,but never exceeded
It also now appears that RF exposure does not alter the 39'C. No evidence of induction of chromosome
extent of chemically induced SCEs compared to aberrations in the lymphocytes due to the RF exposure
temperature controls. was observed.
In the second study, Vijayalaxmi et al. [2001 a]
Does RF exposure induce gross chromosomal exposed freshly isolated, diluted human blood to
aberrations or increase chromosome aberrations an 847.74 MHz CDMA signal at an SAR of 4.9 or
caused by genotoxic chemicals? Many of the early 5.5 W/kg for 24 h. The temperature was reported to be
studies reporting that RF exposures caused chromo- 37 f 0.3 'C. Again, no evidence of induction of
some damage or aberrations are problematic in terms of chromosome aberrations due to the RF exposure
the exposure system used, the temperature measure- was observed. In the third study, Vijayalaxmi et al.
ment or control, the lack of an adequate description of [2001b] exposed freshly isolated human blood to an
the methods used,and/or the analysis of the data.Many 835.62 MHz FDMA signal at a mean SAR.of 4.4 or
articles describing chromosome aberration induction 5.0 W/kg for 24 h. The temperature was reported to
and RF exposure can be found by the reader in both the be 37 t 0.3 'C. Again, there was no evidence for the
IEEE and WHO databases. induction of chromosome aberrations.
One of the most thorough series of studies ex- Maes et al. [1997]exposed human blood samples
amining the question of whether RF exposure can cause to a 935.2 MHz GSM/CDMA signal at a reported SAR
chromosome aberrations was reported by Kerbacher of 0.3-0.4 W/kg for 2 h.No temperature was reported.
et al. [1990];protocols similar to those employed at the No evidence of the induction of chromosome aberra-
time in Gene-Tox program of the U.S. EPA were tions was observed: Maes et al. [2000] then exposed
followed. Replicate treatment flasks were included in human blood samples to a 455.7 MHz signal at an SAR
each experiment,and experiments were always repeat- of 6.5 W/kg for 2 h. The temperature was reported to
ed. CHO cells were exposed to a 2450 MHz pulsed be 17 f I`'C. Again, no evidence for the induction
wave signal at an SAR of 33.8 W/kg.The temperature of chromosome aberrations was observed. In a more
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF S207
recent article, Maes et al. [2001] reported on the advantageous because it is much more rapid, costs
exposure of human blood samples to a 900 MHz GSM much less, does not require the skills of a trained
signal at SARs ranging from 0.4 to 10 W/kg fort h.No cytogeneticist, and can allow for many cells to be
temperature was reported. As in the two previous screened using automated techniques.A MN,however,
studies, no evidence of the induction of chromosome can be formed via two different known mechanisms.A
aberrations in the lymphocytes was observed. MN can be a small encapsulated piece of a chromo-
As mentioned above,a series of articles by Garaj- some, an acentric fragment, which is a piece of a
Vrhovac et al. [1990, 1991, 1992] reported chromoso- chromosome lacking a centromere, that lags behind in
mal damage after exposure of mammalian cells to RF. the cytoplasm of a cell at the time of cell division. It can
All of the studies were said to use the exposure system also appear in the cytoplasm of differentiating blood
described in the first article [Garaj-Vrhovac et al., cells that loose their nuclei as they differentiate.
19901. After careful examination of the description of Alternatively,it can be an encapsulated whole chromo-
the methods used in all three articles,the following can .some that was not properly "distributed" into the
be stated:(a)there is no information about the container daughter nucleus at the time of cell division. If the
that the cells were in during the RF exposures, (b) it is latter is the case, the presence of the MN may not
not at all clear that the cells were in medium during the truly represent a chromosome damaging (genotoxic/
exposures nor was the volume of any medium stated, mutagenic) event; it may instead be evidence of the
(c) the distance between the antenna horn and the disruption by the treatment of the mitotic machinery of
14 sample" was not provided, (d) the "controlled tem- the cell.
perature conditions" referred to may be the room Attention to the ability of RF to induce micro-
temperature,rather than the "sample" temperature,(e) nuclei was accentuated after an abstract of research
the temperature was not measured during the exposure, performed by the Integrated Laboratory Systems(ILS)
(f)the use of a surface probe to measure the temperature group under contract to Wireless Technology Research
after the exposure suggests that the temperature LLC(WTR)was presented at the 21 st Annual Meeting
measured was at the surface of the membrane holding of the Bioelectromagnetics Society[Hook et al., 1999].
the cells, and (g) the "sample" that was placed on the The abstract reported that at wireless frequencies and
table surface for the RF exposure may have been a wet modulations using SARS of 5 and/or 10 W/kg after a
membrane containing the cells. Obviously, several of 24 h,but not a shorter exposure time,an increase in MN
these items are speculative,since the term "sample" is in cytochalaysin B (CB) induced binucleate cells was
never defined in the articles. Since guesswork is re- observed. The studies were recently published [Tice
quired to attempt to understand how the experiments et al., 20021. The investigators exposed human blood
were performed, they cannot be depended upon for leukocytes and lymphocytes to 837 MHz (analog),
making scientific judgements. 837 MHz TDMA, 837 MHz CDMA, and 1909.8 MHz
The conclusion from the above studies is that PCS signals for3or24h,ataverageSARsofI—IOW/kg.
RF exposures at several different frequencies and The temperature was reported to be 37 f 1 °C. There
modulations for exposure times ranging from 90 min was no evidence for induction of MN by any of these
to 2 h at SAR levels that did not increase the average signals,even at SARs of 10 W/kg,when the exposures
medium temperature in which the cells were exposed, were of 3 h duration. For all of the signals, when the
did not induce chromosome aberrations. There is also exposures were for 24 h at 10 W/kg, significant
evidence at SAR levels where a temperature increase increases in MN compared to sham irradiated controls
did occur that the RF exposures did not induce chromo- were observed.When the SAR was lowered to 5 W/kg,
some aberrations. Further,there is evidence that an RF significant increases were observed only for the analog
exposure at a high SAR, where the temperature of the and TDMA RF signals. .
medium was increased, did not alter the frequency of A second positive report of MN induction,
mutagen-induced chromosomal aberrations beyond qualified by the authors, is from an in vivo study by
that occurring due to mutagen treatment in the appro- .Vijayalaxmi et al. [1997b, 1998]. These authors
priate water bath temperature controls. examined micronuclei induction in cells from the bone
marrow and peripheral blood of cancer prone mice
Induction of micronuclei. As an alternative to the exposed to a continuous wave 2450 MHz signal for
time consuming task of examining metaphase spreads 20 h/day, 7 days/week, for 18 months. The exposures
microscopically to detect gross structural chromosome were part of a study to determine whether the RF
aberrations, investigators have employed detection resulted in tumor formation in the mice [Frei et al.,
of micronucleus (MN) formation as a surrogate of 1998b]. The initial conclusion that was published
chromosome aberration induction. The MN assay is [Vijayalaxmi et. el., 1997b] was that a statistically
S208 Meltz
significant increase in MN was not observed in the cells average values of the former are 20% higher than the
from the exposed animals,compared to those from the latter. In scoring the MN, the numbers of binucleated
sham exposed animals. After a mathematical error was cells scored were different for every donor and even
discovered in the statistical analysis, a correction was different for the RF exposed versus incubator control
submitted and published [Vijayalaxmi et al., 1998], samples for each of the donors.For all of these reasons,
indicating that there was a statistically significant the results must be considered questionable.
increase in the MN in both cell types, but not in the At the time of the first of the positive reports,
animals found to have tumors.The correction unfortu- mentioned above, of MN induction by RF exposure of
nately had a typographical error in the number—the mammalian cells, Vijayalaxmi et al. [1997a] reported
increase was said to be 1 in 200 polychromatic erythro- the absence of the induction of MN after exposure of
cytes.Another correction appeared in a later issue of the human blood in vitro to a continuous wave 2450 MHz
Journal, reporting that the increase was actually 1 in signal at a mean SAR of 12.5 W/kg for 90 min
2000 PCEs. The authors pointed out that while the in– (intermittent on and off).Subsequently,in an attempt to
crease was statistically significant,they did not consider examine the response reported by Hook et al. [1999),
the extremely small numerical change to be biologi- Vijayalaxmi et al. [2001 a]determined that exposure of
cally significant, especially in light of the extensive diluted human blood in vitro to a 847.74 MHz CDMA
RF exposure and the observation that there was no signal at mean SARs of 4.9 or 5.5 W/kg for 24 h, the
statistically significant increase in tumors in the RF same exposure time as used by Hook et al. [1999] and
exposed animals. Tice et al. [2002],did not result in the induction of MN.
In addition to the above,d'Ambrosio et al. [2002] An additional study by Vijayalaxmi et al. [2001b] also
recently reported that RF exposure of diluted blood reported that after exposure in vitro of diluted human
exposed in vitro to a 1.748 GHz GMSK modulated blood to a 835.62 MHz FDMA signal at SARs of 4.4 or
signal for 15 min at a reported maximum SAR of 5.0 W/kg for 24 h, no increase in micronuclei was
approximately 5 W/kg, resulted in the induction of observed.
micronuclei. The exposure system consisted of two Bisht et al. [2002] reported on the induction of
coax-to-wave guide adapters connected end to end; a micronuclei after exposure in vitro of C3H IOTI/2
flask with cells was somehow supported within the mouse fibroblast cells to either an 835.62 MHz FDMA
resulting cavity. Based on the SAR determination or 847.74 MHz CDMA signal.The SARs for the FDMA
method described,the SAR measured was for the flask, signal were 3.2 or 5.1 W/kg,and for the CDMA signal
the supporting structure (unspecified) of the flask, the 3.2 or 4.8 W/kg.The exposure times were for 3,8, 16,or
media in the flask, which were said to have slightly 24 h, and the temperature reported was 37 °C. The
varying volumes (not reported), and the cells. If this authors reported the absence of the induction of
average value is correct, it is possible, contrary to the micronuclei by the different exposures.
statements of the authors,that the SAR in the medium in McNamee et al. [2002a,b] reported on the in-
the flask where the cells were located was considerably duction of micronuclei after exposure of human
higher than 5 W/kg.The heterogeneity/homogeneity of leukocytes in diluted human blood from five subjects
the E field in the flask, the resulting SAR, and any to a 1.9 GHz CW signal [McNamee et al.2002a]at 0.0,
possible thermal hot spots are not known or reported. 0.1, 0.26, 0.92, 2.4, and 10 W/kg for a 2 h exposure
The authors used a second method to make heating and period.The temperature was reported to be 37 t 0.5°C.
cooling measurements in nine positions in the flask and The authors repeated the experimental design,but used
to calculate SARs, which differed at some points by a 1.9 GHz PW signal [McNamee et al. 2002b]. The
more than 50%. It is not clear how the temperature authors reported the absence of induction of micro-
measurements were made within the metal of the nuclei in all cases.
presumably closed system. One additional study, involving examination of
These and other technical matters of the exposure the induction of micronuclei as a result of a 24 h RF
system need to be addressed.The authors also used only exposure in vivo, was reported by Vijayalaxmi et al.
one flask of cells for each exposure condition for each [2001c].Male Sprague–Dawley rats were exposed to a
donor; there were no replicate exposure flasks and no continuous wave 2450 MHz signal at a whole body
repeated experiments with any donor. The authors did average SAR of 12 W/kg for 24 h. Polychromatic
not perform sham exposure controls,but used as a sur- erythrocytes from the bone marrow and peripheral
rogate incubator controls;the exposed and nonexposed blood of the rats were examined for MN induction. No
cells were handled in different ways. If one compares evidence for MN induction was found.
the average percentage of binucleate cells with MN Based on the above information,the induction of
from the first seven donors to the next nine donors,the micronuclei by RF exposures,even for continuous 24 h
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF S209
exposures at moderate to high SARs,is not established but did not exceed 38.9°C.The endpoint examined was
at the biological level, as contrasted with the expert- the induction of forward mutations at the thymidine
mental level. This statement is meant to convey con- kinase(TK+/—) locus. This assay is used regularly in
fidence that the Tice et a]. [2002] study does describe examining the mutagenic potential of drugs and chemi-
observed induction of MN,but is also meant to convey cals for regulatory purposes.The authors reported that
that it may not be a real biological phenomena. The these RF exposures, at SAR levels considerably above
weight of the evidence appears to indicate that RF the RF exposure guidelines published by international
exposure does not result in the induction of micronuclei. organizations [ICNIRP, 1998; IEEE, 1999], did not
As of the time of final preparation of this review, a increase the mutation frequency compared to water bath
formal investigation of this result is underway. The temperature controls performed simultaneously.
study design was not available, and so it would be The authors were the first to undertake a more
important to determine if the study examines the in vitro demanding hypothesis: that an RF exposure could
issues of not only increased temperature at high SAR increase the mutation frequency induced in the L5I78Y
regions in the exposure vessels, but also the possible TKf cells when they were treated simultaneously with
effects of local pH change and local hypoxia for cells the RF exposure and known genotoxic and mutagenic
which have settled upon each other over a 24 h period,if chemicals.The hypothesis was that the RF exposure
conical tubes are used. could alter the mutation frequency by altering one or
more of the steps involved in "fixing" the mutation in
Phenotypic mutation. The detection of phenotypic the cells. These steps could include uptake of the
mutations by selection has been one of the most chemical because of a membrane effect;transport of the
important genotoxic assays,since for such a mutation to chemical across the cytoplasm into the nucleus;
be observed,the daughter cells must remain viable and metabolism of the chemical to a reactive state, if this
also proliferate clonally. In contrast, those cells with was required; altering the availability of sites on the
gross observable structural abnormalities(chromosome DNA, thereby altering the extent of the damage;
aberrations)or unrepaired DNA DSBs are likely to die. effecting any error prone repair occurring as a result
These latter cells therefore cannot become cancer-like of the damage; or affecting the subsequent fixation of
cells. A phenotypic mutation, since it appears in all of the damage by affecting the subsequent DNA synthesis
the daughter cells of the initially damaged cell, results and cell proliferation.If any of these steps were altered
in an observable and inheritable change in all of the, during or because of the simultaneous chemical and RF
daughter cells.This could be a change in morphological exposure, there could be an increase or a decrease in
appearance,a change in a membrane property,a change the chemically induced mutation frequency. In addi-
in an enzyme activity, etc. It also could lead to a tion,two different chemical mutagens were examined,
molecular change resulting in unregulated cell growth, MMC [Meltz et al., 1989] and proflavin [Meltz et al.,
a cancer-like change.One phenotypic mutation may not 19901. The chemicals act in different ways: the MMC
lead to cancer or cancer in a specific organ.Sometimes, can break DNA strands and induce cross links; the
multiple mutations and aberrations in specific locations proflavin intercalates between the DNA strands.Again,
in cellular DNA are required. In addition, if damage the authors reported that the RF exposures did not
occurs in the DNA of a nonproliferating cell, that induce phenotypic mutations or alter the extent of the
damage may never be expressed as a phenotypic increase in mutation frequency produced in the cells by
mutation. either of the genotoxic chemicals MMC or proflavin,
Although the induction of phenotypic mutations compared to water bath temperature controls performed
have been investigated in lower organisms in the past,it simultaneously.
is unfortunate that there are almost no published studies
in more recent rimes of whether or not RF at different Molecular mutation, in vivo exposure. A recent
frequencies and modulations can cause phenotypic study by Takahashi et al. [2002] investigated the
mutations. Very detailed work in this area has been re- mutagenic activity of RF exposure using an in vivo
ported by Meltz et al. [1989, 1990]. In both indepen- model system. "Big Blue Mice" were exposed to a
dently performed series of investigations, L5178Y I GHz TDMA signal for 90 min/day, 5 days/week,for
mouse leukemic cells were exposed to a 2450 MHz 4 weeks. The SARs were reported to be a whole
pulsed wave signal for 4 h.The mean SARs[30 W/kg in body average of 0.27 W/kg with a brain average SAR of
Meltz et al., 1989;40 W/kg in Meltz et al., 19901 were 2 W/kg.Exposure ata brain average SAR of 0.67 W/kg
such that the temperature in the medium increased was also performed. The method by which the SARs
above the initial temperature of 37 °C during the 4 h were determined was not reported.The authors looked
exposure period.The medium temperature increased to, for mutation at the molecular level,i.e.,for independent
S210 Meltz
mutations of the lacl transgene in the brains of the and the same cells, in addition to reporting the absence
exposed animals. No statistically significant evidence of an effect by RF alone, the authors reexamined the
of mutation was found. interaction of RF, X-rays, and tumor promoter. They
state that "on a statistical basis, the presence of the
Transformation Events After RF Exposure additional component due to microwaves in combined
In Vitro treatments with X-rays and tumor promoter cannot be
Cellular transformation has been used to assess demonstrated with the present protocols" (p. 535).
the potential ability of an agent to cause cancer-like They did report in this article that if a tumor promoter
changes in cells after different treatments.The assay is was present after exposure, there was a significant
more time consuming, more labor intensive, more increase in transformed colonies. They concluded
costly, and more difficult to analyze than most of the (p. 534) "thus, in the experiments reported here,
mutation assays. The transformation assay has been microwaves appear to act as an initiator in a two-stage
performed with only a limited number of cell systems; transformation assay."This conclusion,however,isnot
cell line selection is often required. If transformation is supported by the weight of evidence indicating that RF
observed in vitro, additional in vivo tests are still is not genotoxic.
required; confirmation that the resulting transformed In the third article [Balcer-Kubiczek and Harri-
cells are able to form tumors in animals is needed.The son, 1991],the authors exposed the C3H/l OTl/2 cells to
cell transformation assay can be used as a model system 26 different exposure conditions.Among them were RF
to investigate the ability of different agents to promote alone at different SARs: 0.1, 1, or 4.4 W/kg, RF at
the initiating activity of another agent, as well as to different SARs+TPA,X-rays alone at different doses,
investigate whether the agent is itself an initiating agent X-rays at different doses+TPA,or combinations of RF
and not a complete transforming agent. The latter at different SARs and X-rays at different doses in
requires treatment of the cells, after the first agent different sequences, with and without TPA. The data
treatment, with a known promoting chemical to cause reported an increase in transforming frequency with
the transformation. Still a third approach would be increasing SAR, but only when TPA was added.
to see if two agents together caused transformation, Unfortunately in this and the second article, there was
while neither could by itself, they then would be only one exposed cell sample for each exposure
"cocarcinogens." condition;the statistics appear to be for the assay plates
All of these approaches were employed in inves- prepared from each of these single exposed samples.
tigations by Balcer-Kubiczek and Harrison in a series of The trend is suggestive of an effect. However, as noted
three articles. In all three articles,Balcer-Kubiczek and previously,the hypothesis of RF being an initiator must
Harrison [1985, 1989, 1991] performed 24 h exposures be challenged.
of C3H l OT1/2 fibroblast cells to 2450 MHz RF,pulsed In a more recent investigation, Roti Roti et al.
wave, at a reported SAR of 4.4 W/kg. The maximum [2001]examined the ability of an 847.74 MHz,FDMA
medium temperature was reported to be 37.2 T. In all RF signal, or an 847.74 MHz CDMA signal to
three studies, the authors reported that there was no transform mouse C3H IOT1/2 fibroblasts. Multiple
evidence for transformation upon RF exposure alone. (I8)independent flasks were exposed to each exposure
In the first article[Balcer-Kubiczek and Harrison, condition for 7 days at an SAR of 0.6 f 0.3 W/kg.The
19851, an increase in transformation frequency was medium temperature was 37 °C. No evidence of trans-
observed if the cells were exposed for 6 h to RF, then formation by the RF exposures was reported. In an
acutely to 1.5 Gy of ionizing radiation,followed by 18 h additional experiment, cells were exposed to X-rays,
of additional RF exposure,before trypsinizing the cells and then exposed to theRF signals.No effects of the RF
and plating them for colony formation and focus exposures on transformation by the X-rays were
formation in medium with the tumor promoter TPA. observed. These authors did not investigate the in-
Unfortunately in this experiment[Balcer-Kubiczek and teraction of RF with TPA.
Harrison, 19851, the authors did not report a needed
control,i.e.,what happens if the cells are exposed to RF
And the tumor promoter without the X-rays.The authors Tumor Promotion, In Vivo
reported that the RF was not a cocarcinogen; the Two recent studies provide an in vivo correlation
transforming.efficiency was not increased in combined to the in vitro studies indicating that RF does not have
treatments with X-rays or benzo(a)pyrene with no TPA promotional activity. The first [Adey et al., 1999]
present. looked for the induction of tumors in Fischer 344 rats
In the second article [Balcer-Kubiczek and due to a chronic RF exposure with an 836.55 MHz
Harrison, 19891, for the same RF exposure parameters NADC signal. Promotion was examined using a nitro-
I
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF 5211
sourea to induce tumors in the CNS. The exposures by the technique of in vitro cell transformation.
were for up to 24 months, beginning prior to birth. There is no evidence contradicting this observation.
2 h/day, 4 consecutive days/week. No increase in the 7. There is limited evidence that RF exposure is not a
incidence of nitrosourea induced tumors was reported cocarcinogen from studies involving either X-ray
due to the RF exposure. A second study by Adey et a]. exposure or treatment with the chemical carcinogen
[2000], using the same animal model and approach, benzo(a)pyrene.
examined the effects of an 836.66 FM signal. This
investigation also revealed the absence of an increase in Most of these conclusions are based on studies
the incidence of nitrosourea induced tumors due to the where the temperature of the biological sample was
RF exposure. reported not to increase above the physiological
temperature of 37 °C for both short and prolonged
CONCLUSIONS exposure times. Some studies did involve elevated
temperatures due to the RF exposure or water bath
A number of important conclusions can be drawn heating. Clearly, the results discussed challenge the
from the discussion of all of the studies described statement that studies of RF bioeffects at "athermal"
above. (or"nonthermal"or"normothetmal")conditions have
not been performed. Many such studies have been
1. There is extensive evidence that RF exposures at performed. The weight of evidence, as stated above,
different frequencies, at SAR levels that do not indicates an absence of toxic or genotoxic effects of low
result in exposing cells at elevated temperatures level exposures to RF electromagnetic fields.
over time, are not toxic. This is the case for both
in vitro and in vivo exposures, both acute (short
term) and chronic (long term). REFERENCES
2. There is an abundance of evidence that RF
exposures at various frequencies and modulations Adey WR. Byus CV, Cain CD, Higgins RJ. Jones RA, Kean CJ.
at SAR levels that do not result in exposing cells at Kuster N,MacMurray A,Stagg RB,Zimmerman G,Phillips
H-•Haggren W. 1999.Spontaneous and nitrosourea-induced
elevated temperatures over time, do not cause a
primary tumors of the central nervous system in Fischer 344
wide range of different types of genotoxic damage. rats chronically exposed to 836 MHz modulated microwaves.
The measures of genotoxic damage that are absent Radiation Res 152:293-302.
after RF exposures, by the weight of evidence, A.dey WR, Byus CV, Cain CD, Higgins RJ, Jones RA, Kean CJ,
include the induction of DNA SSBs or DSBs, the Kuster N, MacMurray A.Stagg RB,Zimmerman G. 2000.
induction of chromosomal aberrations, and the Spontaneous and nitrosourea-induced primary tumors of
the central nervous system in Fischer 344 rats exposed to
induction of SCEs. frequency-modulated microwave fields. Cancer Res 60:
3. Limited evidence is available indicating the 1857-1863.
absence of induction of phenotypic mutations by Balcer-Kubiczek EK.Harrison GH. 1985.Evidence for microwave
RF exposure and the inability of RF exposure to carcinogenesis in vitro.Carcinogenesis 6:859-864.
interfere with DNA repair synthesis after the DNA Balcer-Kubiczek EK,Harrison GH. 1989. induction of neoplastic
transformation in C3H/IOTl2 cells by 2.45-GHz micro-
is damaged by another agent (UV). There is no waves and phorbol ester.Radiation Res 117:531-537.
evidence contradicting either observation. Balcer-Kubiczek EK, Harrison GH. 1991.Neoplastic transfotma-
4. There is some evidence indicating that RF exposure tion of C3H/10Tl/2 cells following exposure to 120-Hz
does not interact synergistically with several modulated 2.45-GHz microwaves and phorbol ester tumor
different chemical mutagenic agents. The evidence promoter.Radiation Res 126:65-72.
Bisht KS,Moros EG,Straube WL,Baty JD,Roti Roti JL.2002.The
which initially appeared to contradict this was not effect of 835.62 MHz FDMA or 847.74 MHz CDMA
reproduced over time in the same laboratory that modulated radiofrequency radiation on the induction of
reported it. micronuclei in C3H IOTI/2 cells. Radiation Res 157:506-
5. There is limited evidence that RF exposure, using 515.
Brusick D, Albertini R, MCRee D, Peterson D, Williams G,
some exposure systems, results in the induction of
Hanawalt P,Preston P. 1998.Genotoxicity of radiofrequency
micronuclei;considerable other evidence exists that radiation.Environ Mol Mutagen 32:1-16.
this does not occur.The induction of micronuclei is Chou C-K,Guy AW,Kunz LL,Johnson RB.Crowlet JJ,Krupp JH..
not consistent with the demonstrated absence of 1992. Long-term, low-level microwave irradiation of rats,
chromosome aberrations and DNA strand breaks. Bioelectromagnetics 13:469-496.
This matter is under further formal investigation. Ciaravino V,Meltz ML,Erwin DN. 1987.Effects of radiofrequency
radiation and simultaneous exposure with mitomycin C on
6. There is limited evidence that RF exposure does not the frequency of sister chromatid exchanges in Chinese
result in cancer-like changes of cells, as measured hamster ovary cells.Environ Mutagen 9:393-399.
i
i
S212 Meltz
Ciaravino V,Meltz ML,Erwin DN. 1991.Absence of a synergistic Kohli M.Mei WN,Prohofsky EW,Van Zandt LL. 1981.Calculat-
effect between moderate-power radio-frequency electro- ed microwave absorption of double-helical B-conformation
magnetic radiation and Adriamycin on cell-cycle progres- poly(dG)poly(dC). Biopolymers 20:853-864.
sion and sister-chromatid exchange. Bioelectromagnetics Lai H. Singh NP. 1995. Acute low-intensity microwave exposure
12:289-298. increases DNA single-strand breaks in rat brain cells.
Cleary S, Du Z, Cao G. Liu L-M, McCrady C. 1996. Effect of Bioelectromagnetics 16:207-210.
isothermal radiofrequency radiation on cytolytirT lympho- Lai H,Singh NP. 1996. DNA single-and double-strand breaks in
cytes.FASEB J 10:913-919. rat brain cells after acute exposure to low-level radio-
d'Ambrosio G. Massa R, Scarfi MR, Zeni O. 2002. Cytogenetic frequency electromagnetic radiation.Int J Rad Biol 69:513-
damage in human lymphocytes following GMSK phase 521.
modulated microwave exposure. Bioelectromagnetics 23: Lai H. Singh NP. 1997. Melatonin and a spin-trap compound
7-13. block radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation-induced
Edwards GS.Davis CC,Suffer JD, Swicord ML. 1984. Resonant DNA strand breaks in rat brain cells. Bioelectromagnetics
microwave absorption of selected DNA molecules.Phys Rev 18:446-454.
Lett 53:1284-1287. Li L,Bisht KS,LaGroye I,Zhang P,Straube WL,Moros EG,Roti
Edwards GS,Davis CC,SafferJD,Swicord ML. 1985.Microwave- Roti JL.2001.Measurement of DNA damage in mammalian
field-driven acoustic modes in DNA.Biophysical J 47:799- cells exposed in vitro to radiofrequency fields at SARs of
807. 3-5 W/kg.Radiation Res 156:328-332.
Foray N, Badie C, Alsbeih G.Fertil B, Malaise EP. 1996. A new Livingston GHK,Johnson CC,Dethlefsen LA. 1979.Comparative
model describing the curves for repair of both DNA double- effects of water-bath-and microwave-induced hyperthermia
strand breaks and chromosome damage. Radiation Res on survival of Chinese hamster ovary(CHO)cells.Radio Sci
146:53-60. 14:117-123.
Foster KR, Epstein BR, Gealt MA. 1987. "Resonance" in the Maes A, Verschaeve L, Arroyo A, De Wagter C. Vercruyssen L.
dielectric absorption of DNA?Biophysical J 52:421-425. 1993. In Oitro cytogenetic effects of 2450 MHz waves on
Frei MR, Berger RE, Dosch SJ,Guel V,Jauchem JR, Merritt JH, human peripheral blood lymphocytes. Bioelectromagnetics
Stedham MA.1998a.Chronic exposure of cancer-prone mice 14:495-501.
to low-level 2450 MHz radiofrequency radiation. Bioelec- Maes A, Collier M, Slaets D. Verschaeve L. 1996. 954 MHz
tromagnetics 19:20-31. microwaves enhance the mutagenic properties of mitomycin
Frei MR,Jauchem JR.Dusch S1,Merritt JH,Berger RE.Stedham C.Environ Mol Mutagen 28:26-30.
MA. 1998b.Chronic.low-level(1.0 W/kg)exposure of mice Maes A,Collier M.Van Gorp U.Vandoninck S,Verschaeve L.1997.
prone to mammary cancer to 2450 MHz micowaves. Cytogenetic effects of 935.2-MHz(GSM)microwaves alone
Radiation Res 150:568-576. and in combination with mitomycin C.Mutat Res 393:151-
Gabriel C,Grant EH,Tata R.Brown PR,Gestblom B,Noreland E. 156.
1987.Microwave absorption in aqueous solutions of DNA. Maes A,Collier M,Verschave L.2000.Cytogenetic investigations
Nature 328:145-146. on microwaves emitted by a 455.7 MHz car phone. Folia
Garaj-Vrhovac VD,Horvat Z,Koren Z. 1990.The effect of micro- Biologica(Praha)46:175-180.
wave radiation on the cell genome.Mutat Res 243:87-93. Maes A. Collier M, Verschaeve L. 2001. Cytogenetic effects of
Garaj-Vrhovac V, Horvat D. Koren Z. 1991. The relationship 900 MHz (GSM) microwaves on human lymphocytes.
between colony-forming ability, chromosome aberrations, Bioelectromagnetics 22:91-96.
and incidence of micronuclei in V79 Chinese hamster cells .Malyapa S, Ahem EW, Strube WL, Maros EG, Pickard WF,
exposed to microwave radiation.Mutat Res 263:143-149. Roti Roti JL. 1997a. Measurement of DNA damage after
Garaj-Vrhovac V.Fucic A,Horvat D. 1992.The correlation between exposure to 2450 MHz electromagnetic radiation.Radiation
the frequency of micronuclei and specific chromosome Res 148:608-617.
aberrations in human lymphocytes exposed to microwave Malyapa RS, Ahern EW. Straube WL, Moros EG, Pickard WF,
radiation in vitro.Mutat Res 281:181-186. Roti Roti JL. 1997b. Measurement of DNA damage after
Hook GJ.Vasquez M,Clancy JJ,Blackwell DM,Donner EM,Trice exposure to electromagnetic radiation in the cellular phone
RR,McRee D. 1999.Genotoxicity of radio frequency fields communication frequency band(835.62 and 847.74 MHz).
generated by analog, TDMA, CDMA, and PCS cellular Radiation Res 148:618-627.
technologies evaluated using the single cell gel electrophor- Malyapa RS, Ahem EW, Chen B. Straube WL, LaRegina M.
esis(SCGE)and the cytochalasin B micronucleus(CB-MN) Pickard WF,Roti RotiJL. 1998. DNA damage in rat brain
Assay. Abstract 1-4, Twenty-first Annual Meeting of the cells after in vivo exposure to 2450 MHz electromagnetic
Bioelectromagnetics Society,Long Beach,CA,June 20-24. radiation and various methods of euthanasia. Radiation Res
1999. 149:637-645.
ICNIRP. 1998. Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying McNamee JP, Bellier PV, Gajda GB, Miller SM. Lemay ER
electric,magnetic,and electromagnetic fields(up to 300 GHz). Lavallee BF,Marro L,Thansandote A.2002a.DNA damage
Health Phys 74:494-522. and micronucleus induction in human leukocytes after acute
IEEE. 1999.IEEE standard for safety levels with respect to human in vitro exposure to a 1.9 GHz continuous-wave radio-
exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields,3 kHz to frequency field.Radiation Res 158:523-533.
300 GHz.IEEE Std C95.1, 1999 edn.New York:Institute of McNamee JP, Bellier PV, Gajda GB, Lavallee BF, Lemay EP,
Electrical and Electronics Engineers,Inc.pp 1-73. Marro L, Thansandote A. 2002b. DNA damage in human
Kerbacher JJ, Meltz ML, Erwin DN. 1990. Influence of radio- leukocytes after acute in vitro exposure to a 1.9 GHz pulse-
frequency radiation on chromosome aberrations in CHO modulated radiofrequency field.Radiation Res 158:534-537.
Cells and its interaction with DNA-damaging agents. Mei WN,Kohli M,Van Zandt LL,Prohofsky EW.1981.Long-range
Radiation Res 123:311-319. forces in DNA. In: Illinger KH, editor. Biological effects
Toxicity and Genotoxicity of RF S213
of nonionizing radiation. Washington, D.C.: American DNA damage and micronuclei induction in cultured human
Chemical Society.pp 95-100. blood cells. Bioelectromagnetics 23:113-126.
Meltz ML. 1991.Physical mutagens. In: Li A.HeBich R,editors. Toler J,Popovic V,Bonasera S,Popovic P,Honeycutt C,Sgoutas D.
Genetic toxicology: A treatise. Caldwell, NJ: The Telford 1988. Long-term study of 435 MHz radio-frequency
Press.pp 203-256. radiation on blood-borne end points in cannulated rats.
Meltz ML. 1995. Biological effects versus health effects: An Part II: Methods, results, and summary. J Microw Power
investigation of the genotoxicity of microwave radiation.In: Electromagn Energy 23:105-136.
Klauenberg BJ, Grandolpho M,Erwin DN,editors. Radio- Toler JC, Shelton WW Frei MR,Merritt JH,Stedham MA. 1997.
frequency radiation standards.Biological effects,dosimetry, Long-term,low-level exposures of mice prone to mammary
epidemiology, and public health policy. NATO ASI Series, tumors to 435 MHz radiofrequency radiation.Radiation Res
Series A:Life Sciences,Vol.274.pp 235-241. 148:227-234.
Meltz ML. Walker KA, Erwin DN. 1987. Radiofrequency Utteridge TD,Gebski V.Finnie JW,Vernon-Roberts B,Kuchel TR.
(microwave)radiation exposure of mammalian cells during 2002. Long-term exposure of Eµ-Piml transgenic mice to
UV-Induced DNA repair synthesis. Radiation Res 110: 898.4 MHz microwaves does not increase lymphoma
255-266. incidence.Radiation Res 158:357-364.
Meltz ML, Eagan P, Erwin DN. 1989. Absence of mutagenic Verschaeve L, Maes A. 1998. Genetic, carcinogenic, and tcrato-
interaction between microwaves and mitomycin C in mam- genic effects of radiofrequency fields.Mutat Res 410:141-
malian cells.Environ Mol Mutagen 13:294-303. 165.
Meltz ML, Eagan P, Erwin DN. 1990. Proflavin and microwave Vijayalaxmi, Natarajan M, Meltz ML, Wittler MA. 1997a.
radiation: Absence of a mutagenic interaction. Bioelectro- Proliferation and cytogenetic studies in human blood
magnetics 11:149-157. lymphocytes exposed in vitro to 2450 MHz radiofrequency
Phillips JL, Ivaschuk O, Ishida-Jones T, Jones RA, Campbell- radiation.Int J Radiation Biol 72:751-757.
Beachler M. Haggren W. 1998. DNA damage in MOLT-4 Vijayalaxmi,Frei MR.Dusch SJ,Guel V,Meltz ML,Jauchem JR.
lymphoblastoid cells exposed to cellular telephone radio- 1997b.Frequency of micronuclei in the peripheral blood and
frequency fields in vitro.Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 45:103- bone marrow of cancer-prone mice chronically exposed to
110. 2450 MHz radiofrequency radiation. Radiation Res 147:
Repacholi MH.Basten A,Gebski V,Noonan D.Finnie J,Hams AW. 495-500.
1997. Lymphomas in Eµ-Pim I transgenic mice exposed to Vijayalaxmi,Frei MR,Dosch SJ,Guel V.Meltz ML,Jauchem JR.
pulsed 900 MHz electromagnetic fields. Radiation Res 1998. Correction of an error in calculation in the article
147:631-640. "Frequency of micronuclei in the peripheral blood and bone
Roti Roti JL,Malyapa RS,Bisht KS,Ahern EW,Maros EG,Pickard marrow of cancer-prone mice chronically exposed to
WF, Straube WL. 2001. Neoblastic transformation of C3H 2450 MHz radiofrequency radiation" (Radiat Res 1147,
10TI/2 cells after exposure to 835.62 MHz FDMA and 495-500, 1997).Radiation Res 149:308-312.
847.74 CDMA radiations.Radiation Res 155:239-247. Vijayalaxmi,Leal BZ,Szilagyi M, Prihoda TJ, Meltz ML. 2000.
Sagripanti J-L,Swicord ML. 1986.DNA structural changes caused Primary DNA damage in human blood lymphocytes exposed
by microwave radiation.Int J Radiat Biol 50:47-50. in vitro to 2450 MHz radiofrequency radiation.Radiation Res
Sagripanti J-L,Swicord ML,Davis CC.1987.Microwave effects on 153:479-486.
plasmid DNA.Radiation Res 110:219-231. Vijayalaxmi,Bisht KS,Pickard WF,Meltz ML,Roti Roti JL,Moros
Sapareto S.Li GC,White KA,Hahn GM,Vaguine VA,Giebeler RH EG. 2001 a. Chromosome damage and micro-
Jr,Tanabe E. 1982.Microwave cytotoxicity:Lack of in vitro nucleus formation in human blood lymphocytes exposed
evidence for nonthermal effects at high power levels. in vitro to radiofrequency radiation at a cellular telephone
Radiation Res 89:124-133. frequency (847.74 MHz,CDMA). Radiation Res 156:430-
Stuchly MA. 1977. Potentially hazardous microwave radiation 432.
sources.J Microwave Power 12:369-381. Vijayalaxmi,Pickard WF,Bisht KS,Leal BZ,Meltz ML,Roti Roti
Swicord ML, Davis CC. 1982. Microwave absorption of DNA JL, Straube WL, Moros EG. 2001b. Cytogenetic studies in
between 8 and 12 GHz.Biopolymers 21:2453-2460. human blood lymphocytes exposed in vitro to radiofrequency
Takahashi S,Inaguma S,Cho Y-M,Imaida K,Wang J.Fujiwara Q. radiation at a cellular telephone frequency (835.62 MHz,
Tomoyuki S.2002.Lack of mutation induction with exposure FDMA).Radiation Res 155:113-12 1.
to 1.5 GHz electromagnetic near fields used for cellular Vijayalaxmi, Pickard WF, Bisht KS, Prihoda TJ, Mcltz ML, La
phones in brains of Big Blue Mice. Cancer Res 62:1956- Regina MC, Roti Roti JL,Straube WL,Moros EG. 2001 c.
1960. Micronuclei in the peripheral blood and bone marrow cells of
Tice RR, Hook GG. Donner M, McRee DI, Guy AW. 2002. rats exposed to 2450 MHz radiofrequency radiation. Int J
Genotoxicity of radiofrequency signals. 1. Investigation of Radiat Biot 77:1109-1115.
From: Paul Menton[SMTP:PMENCONI@GMAIL.COM] S�3 t t C' f�1TG
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 12:47:19 PM
-TO , a� ��
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: In support of Smart Meters �sf� 2
Auto forwarded by a Rule CLea*
I am writing in favor of PG&E's installation of Smart Meters.
While they certainly have their downsides, I believe their shortcomings
have been exaggerated to the point of hysteria. I am an electrical
engineer, and have worked in electronics for several decades. While
electromagnetic radiation (EMF) is not my specialty, over the years I
have followed the considerable controversy over its dangers to human
life: for every report showing a danger, there is one, or two, or more,
showing the opposite.
Basically, in spite of decades of study, we still don't know how much is
too much.
I believe in erring on the side of safety, and no-one can be absolutely
certain that these meters are safe. But if a 15-second transmission
from a Smart Meter is injurious to human health, what about
continuous emissions from Wi-Fi? Bluetooth devices? Cell phones (that
transmit periodically when on, even if not in use)? Frankly, the
radiation emanating for the wiring in our homes poses afar greater
danger to us than the radiation from Smart Meters.
I don't mean to take the position that there is so much danger a little
more can't hurt. Rather, if we are seriously concerned about the
dangers of non-ionizing radiation (EMF), there's lots of places to look,
with Smart Meters ranking near the bottom of the danger list.
I believe the real problem is an overwhelming dissatisfaction with
PG&E and energy utilities in general, a dissatisfaction that I mostly
share. However, focusing our collective angst on something as trivial
as an electric meter seems less than pointless.
Ironically, Smart Meters can be of great service. As a home energy
auditor specializing in residential electrical use I spend hours installing
hundreds of dollars of equipment to collect data for my clients; data
that I could get in a few minutes at my desk, if they had a Smart
Meter. (For that matter, they can get it themselves, free, without my
help!) And that's not even considering theirimportant role in the
upcoming "Smart Grid," the crucial upgrade to the electrical
generation, transmission, and distribution infrastructure needed to
provide reliable power in the decades ahead.
When you review this important matter, I trust that you will look at it
in a balanced manner, considering all sides of the issue (and not just
the angry mob with pitchforks!).
Thank you,
Paul Menconi, P.E.
BPI Certified Building Professional
Energy Efficiency Solutions
www.ees-sio.com
PS While I certainly support freedom of choice, and would welcome a
non-Smart Meter option, as a rate payer I have no interest in
subsidizing such an plan.
i.
From: nreinstein805@charter.net[SMTP:NREINSTEIN805@CHARTER.NETI
Sent: Monday, May 09, 20116:51:22 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: Smart meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear ]an and other city council members,
I lived in SLO for 20 years, and moved to Atascadero 3 years ago. A smart meter
was installed on my house, behind my bedroom, in Atascadero. I have had major
problems with tinnitis since that time, and it's getting worse. There is no other
cause that I know of other than the installation of the Smart Meter. I urge you not
to allow them in SLO. I can't wait until there is an opt out, even if I have to pay $20
a month to not have it.
Sincerely,
Nancy Reinstein PhD, RD
Mark Denton of Nipomo called on May 9, 2011, and wanted the City Council to know
that he does not want Smart Meters installed in his home and cites health reasons.
Sue Chippendale
City Clerk's Office
plaO44�lr
l✓ C J►� e Ce-X-Xe, L ' ' Z
Presentation On RADIOFREQUENCY FIELDS
to the City Council of San Luis Obispo
May 3,2011
By Martin L.Meltz,Ph.D.
GOOD EVENING MAYOR MARX, and MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
I AM DR.MARTIN MELTZ,AND I AM A RESIDENT OF THE SLO AREA
I RETIRED AS A FULL PROFESSOR WITH TENURE FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER IN SAN ANTONIO IN 2007.
I WAS CHIEF OF THE RADIOBIOLOGY GROUP AND DIRECTOR OF THE
CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION TOXICOLOGY.
I AM A RADIATION BIOLOGIST.
I HAVE PERSONALLY EXPOSED ANIMAL AND HUMAN CELLS TO X-
RAYS, CESIUM 137 GAMMA RAYS,AND COBALT 60 GAMMA RAYS, AND
PERFORMED RESEARCH TO STUDY THEIR EFFECTS.
THESE ARE FORMS OF IONIZING RADIATION,AND HAVE THE ABILITY
TO DAMAGE DNA, CELLS AND TISSUES,AND THEY CAN RESULT IN
INHERITED MUTATIONS AND CANCER
PLEASE LET ME BE VERY CLEAR. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT RADIO
FREQUENCY FIELDS AND EMISSIONS, A FORM OF NON-IONIZING
RADIATION, WE ARE NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO TALKING ABOUT
THESE DANGEROUS TYPES OF RADIATION.
I AM NOT HERE TO DEFEND OR CRITICIZE PG&E, OR ADVOCATE FOR
OR AGAINST SMART METERS.
I WAS RECENTLY ELECTED VICE-CHAIRMAN OF COMAR,THE
COMMITTEE ON MAN AND RADIATION OF THE ENGINEERING IN
MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY SOCIETY,AND I SERVE ON ICES,THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON ELECTROMAGNETIC SAFETY OF THE
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC
ENGINEERS.
ICES DRAFTS THE STANDARDS THAT ARE USED IN PART BY THE FCC
TO SET ITS OWN RULES FOR EXPOSURES THAT ARE FOLLOWED BY
INDUSTRY.
I HELPED DRAFT THOSE STANDARDS.
1
I
I PERSONALLY HAVE OPERATED RF TRANSMITTERS,TO EXPOSE
HUMAN AND ANIMAL CELLS TO DIFFERENT FREQUENCIES OF RF,
BOTH PULSED AND CONTINUOUS WAVE,ALONE OR IN COMBINATION
WITH DANGEROUS CHEMICALS,AT BODY TEMPERATURE AND
ELEVATED TEMPERATURES,AND AFTER DANGEROUS UV EXPOSURE.
I DID THIS RESEARCH ON BEHALF OF THE U.S.AIRFORCE FOR 18
YEARS,TO TRY TO ESTABLISH WHETHER OR NOT RF WAS HARMFUL
AND DANGEROUS.
THE EVIDENCE FROM ALL OF THESE INVESTIGATIONS IS THAT
EXPOSURE TO RADIO FREQUENCY FIELDS,AT THE LEVELS
ALLOWABLE FOR EXPOSURE BY IEEE AND ICNIRP STANDARDS,IS NOT
HAZARDOUS TO ANIMAL OR HUMAN CELLS OR THEIR GENETIC
MATERIAL:
RF DOES NOT CAUSE
DNA SINGLE STRAND BREAKS,
CHROMOSOME ABERRATIONS,
SISTER-CHROMATID EXCHANGES,
MUTATIONS IN LIVING CELLS,
REPAIR OF DNA IN CELLS
INHIBITION OF REPAIR OF UV DAMAGE IN CELLS,
INCREASES IN GENOTOXIC DAMAGE DURING SIMULTANEOUS RF
AND CHEMICAL EXPOSURE THAT IS ANY DIFFERENT THEN THAT
CAUSED BY EQUIVALENT WATER BATH HEATING
IN ADDITION,THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE OF QUALITY RESEARCH,
AFTER SHORT, LONG AND LIFETIME RF EXPOSURES OF ANIMALS,
SHOWS THAT
RF DOES NOT CAUSE TUMORS IN ANIMALS,
RF DOES NOT EFFECT THE GROWTH OF ANIMALS,
AND RF DOES NOT CAUSES CHANGES IN PHYSIOLOGICAL FUNCTION IN
ANIMALS.
IN CLOSING,I WISH TO POINT OUT SEVERAL THINGS.
1) RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN RADIO
WAVES,AND A FORM OF NON-IONIZING RADIATION.IN FACT,EACH
RAY OF VISIBLE LIGHT IN THIS ROOM,ALSO A FORM OF NON-IONIZING
RADIATION,HAS MORE ENERGY IN EACH WAVE THAN ANY OF THE
RADIO WAVES THAT MANY PEOPLE EXPRESS CONCERN ABOUT.
2)THERE IS NO MECHANISM KNOWN TO SCIENCE WHICH COULD
ACCOUNT FOR RF ENERGY BEING ABSORBED BY THE BIOLOGICAL
MOLECULES WITHIN CELLS.
3)I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY PROVEN EVIDENCE THAT RF EXPOSURES
KILL CELLS,AT THE ALLOWABLE LEVELS OF EXPOSURE STATED IN
THE IEEE OR ICNIRP STANDARDS,AFTER EITHER EXPOSURE OF
ISOLATED CELLS IN THE LABORATORY,OR IN TISSUES IN ANIMALS
EXPOSED TO RF OVER THEIR LIFETIMES,
4)THE BIOINITATIVE DOCUMENT,THAT IS REGULARLY QUOTED AS A
SOURCE OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE DANGERS OF RF RADIATION,
IS DRAFTED BY A SMALL GROUP OF SELF-SELECTED INDIVIDUALS.
THESE INVIDUALS,NOT ALL OF WHOM ARE SCIENTISTS,DO NOT HAVE
THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR CONTENTION THAT RF
IS DANGEROUS,AND THAT CURRENT STANDARDS ARE TOO LOW. THE
BIOINITIATTVE REPORT IS A BIASED,INCOMPLETE AND A FAULTY
DOCUMENT.I HAVE PROVIDED YOU WITH A DOCUMENT
SUMMARIZING SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THE BIOINITIATVE
REPORT.
I APOLOGIZE FOR THE INCOMPLETENESS OF MY PRESENTATION.
I AM AVAILABLE TO THE COUNCIL TO PROVIDE A MORE DETAILED
BRIEFING ABOUT THE IEEE GUIDELINES,ABOUT THE PROCESS FOR
ESTABLISHING STANDARDS,AND ABOUT THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE
SUPPORTING THE CURRENT IEEE STANDARDS.
From: Barbara & Knobby Knobloch[SMTP:ABCREAD@ABCREAD.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:17:59 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: Wireless Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear City Council Members,
Our neighbor, who is a doctor, has advised us to contact you telling
you that there are harmful wireless effects from the wireless Smart
Meters. We have been informed that even if we opt out of the Smart
Meters, that we will still receive all of the harmful affects of
everyone around us that is using the wireless meters. we have heard
the Europe has decided against using wireless, because of all the
cancers they are causing. We hope you will look into the increased
possibilities of cancer before you decide upon the Wireless Smart
Meters. Please protect the people of San Luis Obispo from another
wireless devise that could increase our risks of cancer.
Would the population of bees be decreased by this devise? I have heard
that the bees are losing their way back to their bee hives. Last week
there was a swarm of bees, seemingly not knowing where they were going,
in the middle of our town.
Sincerely,
Ronald and Barbara Knobloch
From: donna shepherd[SMTP:MOLOKAI72@SBCGLOBAL.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03,,2011 1:19:18 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Auto forwarded by a Rule RED FILE
To Mayor Jan Marx and members of Council: MEETING AGENDA
pATE--q3 // ITEM #,ww~ rl4-r"s
My two cents worth on the "smart meters."
I am disabled and live in a senior apartment building on Ella street. I am also on life
support.
There are four eletric meters directly underneath my bedroom window. There isn't much
point in my opting out of a smart meter since my neighbors might not. We are all on
extreme fixed incomes.
I am concerned about possible health problems. What can be done?
Sincerely, hard copr, ems,
o COUNCIL a CDD DIR
Donna Shepherd a AAW� o FM�
1335 Ella St #15 o ATTORNU c P'ra
a CUMWRIO a POLICE CHU
San Luis Obispo Ca 93401 a PS a PAW&RECDIR
o TRMM a UrILDIR
a NprTDM a HRDIR
a smcrrvNm a COUNCIL
a Crryus
a M.FR8
council MCMORAnc)um
May 3, 2011 RED FILE
TO: Mayor and City Council - MEETING AGENDA
PATE s_I1 ITEM #sm�zr�is
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
FROM: Came Mattingly, Utilities Director
SUBJECT: Red File: Presentation by PG&E and EMF Safety Network on SmartMeters
In light of the presentations we will receive this evening regarding PG&E's SmartMeters it is
appropriate for Council to be aware of the installation of automatic meter reading (AMR) meters
in the City by the Utilities Department.
There are 35 AMR meters installed in the City. The installations .are sprinkled throughout the
city and include businesses and apartments.
We are studying this technology to improve staff safety by keeping personnel out of vaults and
confined spaces as well as improve efficiency and offset the impacts of reduced staffing.
The power of our radios is one quarter of the radio signal power of the electric meters noted on
the PG&E website(250 mW v. 1 watt).
The City has had various automatic meter reading systems deployed on a small scale (up to 80
units) since 2000 with varying degrees of success.
hard co small:
o COUNl�. a CDD DIR
o CRY MGR o FITDIA
D ASSTCM o FMCfll_<iF
O MMRM D FW D$
D CLERL'ORIG D POLICACIM
o PID D PAW&AFCDIA
D TRIMM o UM DM
D NAW TndES D EMM
D SLOCITYNM D CDUNM
D CaYM(Rt
D CLL
From: Wilmore, Patricia [PxWh@pge.com)
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 6:18 PM
To: Marx, Jan
Cc: Carter, Andrew; Smith, Kathy; Carpenter, Dan; Ashbaugh, John;
Lichtig, Katie
Subject: PG&E SmartMeter Announcement, May 2
Dear Mayor Marx and Members of the City Council,
Earlier today, PG&E announced that we will replace a small number of
electric SmartMeters' supplied by Landis + Gyr that have a rare defect.
You can view the press release issued today
here<http://www.pge.com/about/newsroom/newsreleases/20110502/pge_to_iss
ue_customer_refunds.shtml> and a new Currents article on this issue
here<http://www.pgecurrents.com/2011/05/02/pge-begins-issuing-refunds-
to-customers-after-rare-defect-found-in-small-number-of-electric-
smartmeters%e2%84%a2/>. The defect affects fewer than 1, 600 meters and
none are in San Luis Obispo City or County but I wanted to keep you
informed should you have any questions or concerns.
This defect was discovered by a PG&E employee who noticed a diagnostic
flag in a small group of meters. The defect affects just 0.08 percent
of the 2 million Landis+Gyr electric SmartMetersT that we have in the
field, or roughly 0.04 percent of the electric SmartMetersTM that we've
installed to date.
The flaw in this small group of meters occurs when they operate within
a narrow band of high temperatures. At these temperatures, the meters
may run fast when recording energy usage at hourly intervals. Most of
the hourly intervals remain accurate, and the billing implications are
relatively small. The average refund will be about $40 per customer,
• and we also will issue a $25 credit to each of these customers for any
inconvenience caused. In addition, we will replace the meters and offer
free home energy audits to these customers, all at no cost to our
customers.
We are continuing to thoroughly monitor the process as SmartMeter
installation moves forward.
Please contact me if you have questions and I look forward to seeing
you at tomorrow night's Council meeting.
Best Regards,
Patricia Wilmore
Local Area Manager RED FILE
Governmental Relations MEETING AGENDA
Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Office: (805) 595-6405, cell (805) 540-1426 DATES ITEM #yx�'
PneJ
bard eman
p CGUNCM o CDDDM
0 ary UGR o FIT DDR
O AMOA O MECMU
a ATfORNEP o PWM
o CIFRRIORtG c POLICECIUEF
o PM o pAW&HCDIR
O TRIBUNE a UTILMR
a SIACIT4NM o COUNCIL
o CffYMOR
o CLM
01/12/1999 01:31 805-461-0954 IKEDA PAGE 01
1
RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
DATE#�—/L ITEM #sRa MAS45 herds .- eman,
7W0alfAnoA) o cr"Um o Fmrtn R�
To: Mayor Jan Marx and Councilmembers of San Luis Obispo o AW CU r o F 0W
990 Palm, SLO (Fax 805-781-7109) a cLBMMO o POLICECHW
o PID o PAW&UXDIR
o TRIBUNE o UMDIR
From: Linda Ikeda ' nwnm QMDM
O SLOMYNm a couWn
Date: 5/3/11 o urrmaR
Re: SmartMeters—Agenda 5/3/11 °aum
Please enact an urgent ordinance banning the installation of wireless
Smartt Meters in the city of San Luis Obispo.
1 am one of the 3%of people (according to the Architectural and Transportation
Barriers Compliance Board, the federal agency that administers the Americans
with Disabilities Act.)severely sensitive to wireless and dirty.electricity, a
result of overexposure and a head injury August 2005.
People that study this, like Magda Havas from Canada, says that up to 50% may
be hyper sensitive (magdahavas.orgl'tag/multiple-sclerosisn. Many do not
make the connection between their symptoms and pulsed high frequencies in
the air (wireless) or on the wiring as produced by wireless SmartMeters. In
Europe, 30,000 doctors signed the Freiburger Appeal observing the
connection in their patients to pulsed high frequencies and the many health
problems that resolve or improve when removed from that environment.
The head injury I had, occurred when I was on the phone and DSL was
activated for high speed internet. Apparently the filters were not functioning
properly and I felt a strong heating come through the phone's receiver. From that
moment on, it felt like I had had a bad burn inside my head, from my ears
across through my sinuses to the other side of my head. Thereafter, cell phones
on standby 50 feet away caused piercing ear pain. A television turned on 40 feet.
away caused rapid heartbeat followed by such severe weakness I felt like I was
dying. My allergies were severely worse plus 3/4 of a page of other symptoms.
Before this Injury, I did not make the connection that my disability had anything
to do with high frequencies from my cordless phone or on my electricity, etc. I
often was so weak, it was hard to walk. After the injury, all I wanted to do is
find something non-pharmaceutical to relieve the pain in my head. 1 tried
various products. To my surprise, some of the products that reduced the pain
in, my head immediately caused the weakness to vanishl I did not expect
that and no one told me that that might happen.
I didn't know what else to do. I went to the doctor but he was clueless; went to my
chiropractor and he produced information about my condition. Finally, someone
arranged for my chiropractor and I to talk with George Carlo, previous head to
01/12/1999 01:33 805-461-0954 IKEDA PAGE 01
To: SLO City Council .
From: Linda Ikeda
Re: Smartmetem 5/3/11 Agenda item
one of the largest, if not THE largest study on cell phones and their biological
effects. He told us what to do and how the various products I tried worked
at the cellular level (I was once a cell biology tutor) — use them and stay away
from wireless, etc. When I did that, every health problem I ever had began to
disappear. Later, 1 was told that there was possible nerve damage and that that
takes a long time to repair. When the SmartMeters were installed in our
neighborhood, I had already healed a lot(no piercing ear pain, no severe
weakness, often unable to feel a cell phone, etc) but was still healing and
continue to need residence without wireless. 1 do not have a SmartilNeter.
When the Smartmeters came to my neighborhood, I and others at the same
time, began to have insomnia and other symptoms..One neighbor all of a sudden
had a flare up offibromyalgia. I had much increased pressure in my head where I
had had the injury described above. None of us had gotten SmartMeters yet_ We
didn't know that about a week before our troubles, SmartMeters had been
installed on the streets nearby.
Now, where do I go to get away from wireless?
These meters feel very strong and different than other wireless. It turns out
that these meters can transmit 1/4 mile to over 2 miles and pulses are
exceptionally strong compared to other wireless devices. Some meters are
stronger than others. They also produce high frequencies on the wiring called
dirty electricity.
Later I talked to a retired engineer about how strong the pulses felt and how they
go right through shielding materials and he told me about"power density.°
Cindy Sage, coeditor of the Bioinitiative report(a study of 30 years of research
on wireless) said the power density from SmartMeters could be 1000 times
stronger than a cell phone (http://www.easttmyexpress.com/gyrobase/are
smartmeters-dangerous-too/Content?oid=1939740&s). Dan Hirsch
(whistleblower.for the nuclear industry) using figures from the California Council
on Science and Technology report on health effects from SmartMeters
determined that they are 100 times stronger(emfsafetynetwork.org/?p=3946).
Other people who are sensitive attest to the fact that they are very strong
pulses, worse than anything they have telt before.
PG&E minimizes the pulse by using instruments that average the pulse. Others
have found strong pulses with their instruments.
(http://www.eastbayexpress.corn/gyrobasetare-smartmeters-dangerous-
too/Content?oid=1939140&s).
2
01/12/1999 01:33 605-461-0954 IKEDA PAGE 02
J
And 1000's of these exceedingly strong, quarter mile to two-mile signals
transmit as often as every couple of seconds to an average of every 45
seconds in a locale from each home.
1 want to leave Atascadero, only to be free from the SmartMaters and the
pressurelpain in my sinuses, ears and head, the insomnia, nausea and
fatigue that these meters have caused. For me, they have ruined our wonderful
citY•
When I go to many areas of your city, the SmartMeter discomfort goes
away. it returns in some parts of SLO and big time when I come back to
Atascadero.
Already, PG&E has hurt thousands of people with SmartMeters (over 2000
health complaints to the California Public Utilities Commission) and they
continue to rush deployment. This technology has met with huge public outcry; its
safety is clearly questionable. (See emfsafetynetwork.org for health and safety
complaints.) Experts warn of adverse public health and safety impacts. Studies
show that wireless and dirty electricity cause ill health and contribute to
healthy people becoming sensitive to wireless and other electromagnetic
fields produced by computers and other gadgets we enjoy.
(sagereports.com/smart-meter-if/?page_id=282)
And they want to put three Smartmeters on each home plus added wireless from
the Home Appliance Network with wireless transmitters on washers, computers
and other appliances. Even if you think this is all safe, the controversy in the
scientific arena is enough evidence to wait and NOT allow the installation
of a technology not proven safe by independently-funded researchl
Our communities need to stop SmartMeter deployment until they make it
safe.
Other contentions included violations of the FCC code in certain applications
(see sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?page_id=282), nonprofessionals with two
weeks training installing meters, (also an FCC violation) increasing the risk of
fires traced back to the meters.
We want to keep our original analog meters with no extra charge.
For these and numerous other reasons (high bills, privacy, damaged electronics,
etc.), please enact an urgent ordinance banning the installation of wireless
SmartMeters in San Luis Obispo.
Linda Ikeda
5000 EI Verano Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
805-461-0954
3
From: Roberta Soules[SMTP:RJSOULES@CHARTER.NET]
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 11:57:43 AM
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: smart meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
I am a resident of the city of San Luis Obispo. I want to be able to have a choice as to whether I
want a Smart Meter or not. Please vote to at the very least give homowners that choice.
Roberta Soules
From: susan colvin[SMTP:C21SUSANC@GMAIL.COM]
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 8:25:51 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Banning Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
Dear SLO City Council, DAT s ITEM #s9!a
I strongly urge you to enact an urgent ordinance banning
smart meters. There are many reasons,but my biggest
concern is the health issues that will effect our Happy
Town.
Also, there should be no charge for a customer to opt out
of a Smart Meter program.
There is a saying: "If it isn't broken, don't fix it." hard.eMr. ems;
° COUNCIL °CDDDI
R° C7GR °FMURSincerely. ° WM °MECM
W
•° A77UR?W °PWOM cuWJORG 0 POLICE CHW W
Susan Colvin ° a °'PAFM&RW
D
M
° nm °UMDMo NW7 ¢ °
=DM
° SIA CRY NEWS °COUNCIL
°Cn YMM
°cuutx
From: marcy israel [SMTP:MATHIASIUS@YAHOO.COMI
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 10:58:43 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Cc: bob.banner@gmail.com
Subject: Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear San Luis Obispo City Council Members.
I own a home in San Luis Obispo and pay taxes here. I am adamantly
opposed to smart meters. I implore you to take a stand against these
unnecessary and potentially dangerous meters. There is absolutely no
reason to have them except for the greed of PG and E. Please advocate
for your constituents. We do not want smart meters!
Sincerely,
Marcy A. Israel
From: Victoria Grostick[SMTP:VICTORIAGROSTICK@SBCGLOBAL.NET]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 11:17:26 AM
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear Council Members,
I have been sent an email about the council meeting on Tues.,the 3rd, regarding the
smart meters being installed by PG and.E.
I would very much like to have the option to choose whether we have one or not as I am
not in favor of the potential health risk these might cause.
Thank you for listening.
Sincerely,
Victoria Grostick
1730 Corralitos Ave.
San Luis Obispo,
CA 93401
544-7988
From: peter felS[SMTP:ARTGAWK@THEGRID.NET]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 10:04:15 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: PG&E "smartmeters. OPPOSED
Auto forwarded by a Rule
PG&E is an amoral company, quite clearly.
While i do not believe that the "smart meters" pose a significant EMF
exposure risk,
in light of the much larger amount of EMFs we are exposed to through
their regular service. . . .
I do strongly feel that it constitutes a serious avenue for invasion of
privacy.
It also would result in further local unemployment.
Sincerely, peter fels
From: Carole[SMTP:ONEGOODGAL@JUNO.COM]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 11:10:46 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Please copy and distribute this email to Mayor Marx and the San Luis Obispo City
Council members. It is very time sensitive. Thank you.
Honorable Mayor Marx and Honorable San Luis Obispo City Council members,
I'm writing you today to ask you to please consider enacting an ordinance prohibiting
installation of wireless smart meters in the City of San Luis Obispo.
The following information, although lengthy, is packed full of crucial knowledge. It will
be presented verbally by Judy Vick on May 3, 2011,but I ask that you take the time to
read it in advance of that meeting. The future health of you and your family could be at
stake. Please take this seriously. There are multiple studies showing this technology to
be dangerous in it's current stage of development.
There are serious consumer issues involved in moving toward wireless technology for our
utilities. Interestingly, this is an issue that is uniting concerned citizens from all political
persuasions, as you can see from the references provided below (in blue).
The issue of forced compliance concerns me. There should have been a customer opt-in
to the wireless smart meter program, when it was originally proposed as a primarily
wired program in 2006, for 1.7 billion ratepayer dollars. Or perhaps when PG&E
switched the smart meter program to wireless in 2009,when they came back to the CPUC
to request an additional half billion dollars of ratepayer money. But instead, PG&E
deployed mandatory installation of wireless smart meters for all customers; regardless of
the fact that wireless smart meters are not mandated by the federal government and are
not a requirement of a smart grid.
(Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company for Authority to Increase Revenue
Requirements to Recover the Costs to Upgrade its SmartMeter Program,.3/12/2009).
Author Orlean Koehle, a prominent Republican in northern California, researched the
utility companies claim that they are following federal law by mandating these
installations. When she consulted a lawyer, she found that was not the case, "Upon
reading the bill (2005 Energy Policy Act), it does not mandate utility companies to install
smart meters in homes; they are only to offer them and install them upon customer
request," Koehle said as she read from the lawyer's response. Koehle also emphasized
that the California Constitution gives us the right to protect our health, safety, privacy and
property. http://www.noozhawk.c-om/article/042811 smart meter forum/
A 2008 report by San Francisco Environment and the San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission, cautioned that the plan to equip homes with so-called smart meters should
be put off until the gadgets are proven to save money for ratepayers and be safe for the
environment, echoing the criticism of reports across the country on smart meters, which
said the meters savings don't outweigh the costs. The report recommended PG&E first
employ a pilot program of 300,000 to 500,000 test homes.
htty//www.sfexaminer.com/local/meters-may-not-be-smart-
move?category=l 6#ixzz 1 JS7ZXmTA
Ratepayers have now paid billions of dollars in excess of the proposed costs for the
wireless smart meter program. This is money ratepayers can ill afford in this economy.
And they are paying in more ways than one, with their health and well-being, property,
safety and security.
The number of California local governments that oppose the smart meter program are
steadily growing,40 and counting,including the San Luis Obispo County Board of
Supervisors and the cities of Morro Bay and Grover Beach. In addition to the City of San
Luis Obispo addressing this issue this week, the City of Arroyo Grande will be
considering an action in late May. The County Health Commissioners (9) also voted
unanimously to support the County Board of Supervisors resolution to the CPUC,
opposing mandatory installation and advocating for an opt-out option. Thirteen of the 40
California local governments that have formally opposed wireless smart meters have
passed ordinances,banning the meters. You have to stop and ask yourself, why is there
so much resistance across California(and in other states and countries) over a simple
utility meter?
(To see the list of the communities in California that are opposed, see this link below:)
htW:Hstonsmartmeters org/how-you-can-stoi)--smart-meters/ca-local-governments-on-
board/
First of all, smart meters don't save energy. People save energy. The results promised by
utility companies have never been demonstrated in any test or actual program done in the
country. When asked for data on consumer energy savings from communities with
wireless smart meters, PG&E has not produced it.
Consumer organizations such as Public Citizen, The California Public Utilities
Commission Division of Ratepayer Advocates, The Utility Reform Network (TURN) and
the Consumer Law Center have refuted PG&E's consumer benefit claims.
The California Small Business Association opposes smart meters due to their energy
pricing scheme, which will substantially increase costs to small businesses. Even the San
Francisco Sierra Club opposes wireless smart meters, and called for a ban on the meters
in the city.
Public Citizen launched a national campaign to expose the faulty assumption that smart
meters will save energy. Instead, Public Citizen's analysis of the program found that
smart meter installations have thus far prioritized utility budget efficiency, profiting
utility companies,not household budget efficiency. "Pouring through utility dockets,
utilities make it clear that the vast majority of projected savings from smart meters is
from laying off utility workers--and not from consumers' lowering their energy use and
bills. Utilities highlight savings from remote disconnection--mainly for nonpayment. This
raises serious consumer safety and health issues." For this,people are paying double and
triple what they used to pay for energy. And people and businesses who are unfortunate
enough to not be able to avoid using energy at peak times,pay more for energy than those
who do not.
Residents of Bakersfield filed a class action lawsuit for excessive billing from wireless
smart meters after they were installed.
http://www.citizen.org/documents/EnergyInvestmentFonimPres.i)dfhttp://Yubanet.com/ca
lifornia/DRA-and-CSBA-Request-Relief-from-New-Electric-Pricing-Scheme-That-W i ll-
Cause-Disruption-to-500-000-PG-E-Small-Business-Customers.yhp
Mark Toney, Executive Director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN), exposed the
fact that utility companies' critical peak pricing includes a 10 fold increase in cost for
energy use during heat waves. He noted that many people die every year from heat,more
than other natural disasters. How many more people will be at risk, not using energy
during heat waves, for fear of excessive energy bills?
http://www.tum.or article.phy?id=875htty://www_ .noozhawk.com/article/042811 smart
meter forum/
In addition to the program not delivering on promised benefits, electrical fires, appliance
damage and interference with existing household electrical systems have been reported
from smart meter installations.
Additionally, a report by the Government Accountability Office (the investigative arm of
the U.S. Congress) revealed that the wireless smart meter system will be easy for hackers
to remotely shut off power, and cause widespread outages as well as threaten national
security systems. The security weaknesses could also allow hackers to snoop on
customers and steal personal data.
A paper out of the University of Cambridge highlights privacy concerns from smart
meters as well as security risks caused by linking home-area wireless networks from
smart meters. http://stopsmartmeters.org{press-releases/ian-26th-2011-wellinaton-
whistleblower-interview/http://ncwatch.typei)ad.com/media/2011/01/smartmeter-
security-is-a- owing-concem.htmlhtty:Hnews.cnet.com/8301-27080 3-20007672-
245.html
But at the forefront of the heightened resistance to the wireless smart meter program, is
the fact that people are getting sick. There is regular testimony at the California Public
Utility Commission from people who report injuries from wireless smart meters and are
demanding an end to the smart meter program. For every person testifying at the CPUC,
there are many others writing the CPUC and their elected officials for help. You can read
personal account after personal account at: http://emfsafetvnetwork.org/?page id=2292
Testimonies of health effects from the wireless smart meters are echoed here in San Luis
Obispo County. North County residents (where the meters have already been installed)
have testified about health effects at the SLO County Board of Supervisors hearings and
at the County Health Commission meetings.
Many people who have never been activists, are getting involved on this issue to protect
themselves, their families and their communities. They are spending their personal time
attending city council meetings, county board meetings, walking neighborhoods, writing
letters to their elected officials, going on local radio and television to try to stop this
harmful program. Those in Northern California who are especially dedicated are
physically blocking contractors from installing the wireless meters and devising ways to
prohibit their analog meters from being removed from their property. Meanwhile, utility
companies continue to promote the benefits of the meters and continue installations at a
rapid pace.
There are significant and unnecessary health problems from wireless smart meters
identified by dozens of scientists. The microwave radiation(also referred to as
electromagnetic radiation, emf, and radio frequency radiation) emitted from the meters is
harmful to health, causes DNA breakages and a myriad of symptoms. Our bodies are bio-
electric, as measured by EKGs and EEGs. Interference from microwave radiation can
alter the electrical activity which regulates the function of our hearts,brains and other
organs. Heart rhythm disturbance, sleep disruption, headache, tinnitis or ringing in the
ears,unexplained rashes, are some of the common symptoms..
htti)://saaerei)orts.com/smart-meter-
rf/?vage id=282h"://emfsafetynetwork.org/?s=ccst+www.bioinitiativereyort.or
Additionally, 3-5 %of the population is considered electrically hyper-sensitive and 30-
35%of the population is moderately sensitive. In Sweden, electrohypersensitivity(EHS)
is an offically fully recognized functional impairment. Electromagnetic radiation also
interferes with sensitive medical.equipment and medical implant devices. 8-10% of the
population have medical implant devices, such as insulin pumps, cochlear implants and
heart pacemakers. httv://www.national-toxic-encephalopathy-foundation.oro/esen.pdf
The Seletun Scientific Statement (2011)recommends that global governments adopt new
exposure guidelines for electromagnetic radiation--pointing to biological hazards and
risks to the genetic code from unchecked proliferation of wireless technologies. The
recommendation is based on scientific studies reporting health impacts at much lower
exposure levels. Many researchers now believe the existing safety limits are inadequate
to protect public health because they do not consider prolonged exposure to lower
emission levels that are now widespread.
htty://www.smartmeterdangers.org/index.yhy/Position-statements/'76-seletun-scientific-
statement-press-release htttv:Hsaizereports.com/smart-meter-
rf/docs/letters/011e final to CCST.pdf
Other countries have recognized the problem of emf exposure from wireless technology
and are returning to wired systems. The European Environment Agency, an agency of
the European Union that advises 32 countries on public policy, is calling for lowering
public exposure to electromagnetic fields: "Waiting for high levels of proof before taking
action to prevent well known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs, as it
did with asbestos, leaded petrol and
smoking."http://glossary.en.eea.eurova.eu/terminologv/sitesearch?term=children+and+e
mf
The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) recently acknowledged health
effects from low level, "non-thermal (non-heating)" chronic emf exposure: CDPH
suggests further review of the literature on non-thermal effects,which is complicated and
controversial,but does not support a claim of no non-thermal health effects from radio
frequency electromagnetic fields. htty:Hemfsafetynetwork.org/?p=3856
Daniel Hirsch, Professor of Nuclear Policy at University of California explains that the
whole body cumulative radiation exposure from wireless smart meters is 100X more than
cell phone exposure.'He adds that the wireless smart meter program deployment "is a
large experiment on a very large
population."http://stol2smartmeters.orgJ2011/04/20/daniel-hirsch-on-ccsts-fuzzy-math/
The problem with the wireless smart meter individual household opt-out, is that it does
little in the real world to protect public health, security or privacy, unless most of us opt-
out. Wireless smart meters are mounted in close proximity to our every day lives,
attached to our homes and businesses, and places where we spend a lot of our time.
Wireless smart meters emit electromagnetic pulses that can travel for a mile or more, and
manufacturers of the meters advertise that the emf pulses travel through mountains.
These same emf pulses go through the walls of our homes and our bodies. Many people
report their utility meter is mounted on the exterior side of their bedroom wall, and often
in places easily accessed by children. If you choose to opt-out--but your neighbor does
not, you are still exposed. If you opt-out but you live in a condo, and share a wall that
mounts 15 smart meters for your condo neighbors,how can you protect yourself and your
family? If you opt-out,but live by a smart grid repeater station for your neighborhood,
you can do little to reduce your exposure. In addition, we are experiencing an
accumulation of electromagnetic radiation that our environment has never seen before,
from the rapid proliferation of cell towers, wifi, cell phones, electronic equipment, etc.
The CPUC chose to exempt the wireless smart meter program from an environmental
impact report, the type of review that is usually required of such a massive state-wide
program. So the burden of proof regarding harm has shifted to the consumer. But it
shouldn't be. The CPUC needs to take responsibility to protect consumers and our
environment now,by calling for independent testing and evaluation of the wireless smart
meter and the smart grid. In the meantime, there should be a moratorium on any further
installation of wireless smart meters, until utility companies can prove the wireless
meters are safe. And we should demand evidentiary hearings on wireless smart meters.
As a result of consumer pressure, the CPUC directed PG&E to propose an opt out of the
program. As it is proposed, the PG&E opt-out plan is a$270 up-front fee to opt out, a
$14 monthly surcharge and a yet-to-be determined exit fee, if you move. The opt-out
costs are prohibitive for many individuals and families, which may be the intention, to try
to stop the widespread and growing opposition to the wireless smart meter program.
Ratepayers should not be penalized for the failure of the smart meter program. Utility
companies should restore analog meters at no cost to customers. Consider that utility
companies have profited from customers who have paid twice and three times their
regular energy bills since their wireless smart meters were installed, and from laying off
meter readers.
Additionally, utility companies should be required to pay reparations to ratepayer-victims
who have suffered ill health, fires, explosions, damage to existing electronics and/or theft
of personal information due to forced smart meter installation.
For those who do not have a wireless smart meter, PG&E just announced a compromise,
filed with the California Public Utilities Commission, April 26, 2011. It is an agreement
to honor customers' requests that a smart meter not be installed, until the California
Public Utilities Commission has clearly defined the final opt-out plan, and has allowed
customers time to opt out. Customers can call PG&E at 1-866-743-0263 to request that a
smart meter not be installed. The CPUC could take 5 months or more to finalize an opt-
out program. After the opt-out program is in place, PG&E will contact customers to
determine whether they still want to opt-out, given the final opt-out plan.
Customers who still have an analog meter, should be able to keep it at no charge. There
should be no additional monthly fees to have an analog meter. PG&E can estimate usage
based on the prior year, or customers can self-read and report monthly by phone or email.
A meter reader can check twice a year so that any underage or overage can be adjusted.
Or, meter readers should keep their jobs and let them continue to read meters.
It took a long time to make the connection between cigarettes and lung cancer, with the
tobacco industry obstructing the truth. We should not make the same mistake again.
Please consider enacting an ordinance prohibiting installation of wireless smart meters in
the City of San Luis Obispo. It is the strongest message you can send to the CPUC,
joining 13 of 40 California local governments opposed to the mandatory installation of
wireless smart meters, who have done the utmost to protect their community. And for the
most part, PG&E has honored those local laws. To date, PG&E has not countered any of
these communities ordinances with legal action.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Sincerely,
Carole Good
onegoodgala,juno.com
From: judy Vick[SMTP:VENTUREMIND@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 10:24:38 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Dr. Carpenter, Harvard Medical School-trained physician, who headed up New York
State Dept. Public Health for 18 years
Auto forwarded by a Rule
BIG THANKS to Dr. Carpenter and to Maine's Smart Meter.Safety Coalition who
"recently caught up with Dr. David Carpenter, a Harvard Medical School-trained
physician who headed up the New York State Dept. of Public Health for 18 years
before becoming Dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Albany,
where he currently directs the Institute for Health and the
Environment" (www.smartmetersafety.com)
Dr. Carpenter states, "We have evidence...that exposure to radiofrequency
radiation...increases the risk of cancer, increases damage to the nervous
system, causes electrosensitivity, has adverse reproductive effects and a
variety of other effects on different organ systems. There is no
justification for the statement that Smart Meters have no adverse health
effects."
Dr. Carpenter further advises, "An informed person should demand that
they be allowed to keep their analog meter"
(For those of you already Smart Metered, demand to have the analog meter
restored, call your your utility and your state public utility commission)
i
council memoRAnOum
May 2, 2011
TO: Mayor and City Council
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
FROM: Carrie Mattingly,Utilities Director
SUBJECT: Red File:Presentation by PG&E and EMF Safety Network on SmartMeters
On March 8, 2011 the Board of Supervisors took action regarding the Installation of
SmartMeters in San Luis Obispo County.
Attached are copies of documents regarding the Board of Supervisor's request to the California
Public Utilities Commission to suspend the installation of SmartMeters in San Luis Obispo
County. The documents include the letter from the Board of Supervisor's, Resolution No. 2011-
62,Assembly Bill 37 and its status.
Lend coov. email:
° COUNCIL. °CDD DIR
° aTYMOR. °FITDM
° ASST CM °FMCHU
° ,ua o P01.aCW RED FILE
° PM °PAW&MCDa
° r umm °UTMDM MEETING AGENDA
° nvTnm O HRDIR
a Crry' o CMM at DATE 81/ ITEM #sa~ A401&05
°aeRx
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
1055 MONTEREY,Room D430 • SAN Luis OBISPO,CALgoRNIA.93408-1003 805.781.5450
FRANK R.MECTLM Supervisor District One
March 8,2011 BRUCE GIBSON,SupervisorDistrkt7ivo
ADAMMILL,Supervisor Dli'tria Three
Michael R. Peevey,President PA ULTEVMRA,Super visor DisottFour
California Public Utilities Commission JAMESR PATrERSON,SupervisorDWHctFtve
505 Van Ness Ave.
San Francisco,CA 94102
Re: Suspend SmartMeter Installation until Legislative Action on AB37(Huffman)
Dear President Peevey,
The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors adopted the attached resolution requesting the California•
Public Utilities Commission(CPUC)to direct Pacific Gas and Electric Company(PG&E)to suspend installation Df
wireless SmartMeters until such time as the California Legislature acts on pending legislation,AB 37(Huffman),
that would give consumers options to the installation of wireless SmartMeters.
During the past several weeks our Board has received numerous complaints and expressions of concern
regarding the installation of wireless SmartMeters in homes in San Luis Obispo County. Several citizens have
testified that they are experiencing serious health issues since the installation of SmartMeters in their homes.
Other issues raised by local residents regarding SmartMeters include accuracy, loss of privacy,security, risk of
fire and damage to in-home electrical appliances.
The complaints are too numerous and the issues potentially too significant and far reaching to ignore. It is the
opinion of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors that the CPUC, as the regulatory body,should take
immediate action to order PG&E to suspend installation of the wireless SmartMeters until such time as the
consumer is given a choice of having an alternative to the wireless SmartMeter.
We appreciate your immediateattention to this matter.
Sincerely,
/damrman
San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors
Cc-
Assemblymemberlared Huffman al,
Assemblymember Katcho Achadjian
Senator Sam Blakeslee
Pacific Gas& Electric Company
IN E BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Tuesday,March 8,2013
PRESENT: Supervisors: Bruce S.Gibson,Paul A.Teixeira,James R.Patterson and Chairperson Adam
Hill
ABSENT: Supervisor: Frank Mecham
RESOLUTION N0.2011-62
RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION(CPUC)TO DIRECT PACIFIC
GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY(PG&E)TO SUSPEND THE INSTALLATION OF SMARTMETERS IN SAN LUIS
OBISPO COUNTY UNTIL THE CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE ACTS ON LEGISLATION GIVING
CUSTOMERS OPTIONS TO THE INSTALLATION OF WIRELESS SMARTMETERS
The following resolution is hereby offered and read:
WHEREAS,the CPUC is the state agency with regulatory authority over the installation of SmartMeters(Public
Utilities Code sections 8360-8369);and
WHEREAS,numerous San Luis Obispo County residents have expressed to the Board of Supervisors concerns
regarding the installation of wireless SmartMeters in their homes;and
WHEREAS,several county residents have testified to experiencing adverse health effects after the installation
of such meters and are concerned that the science regarding the health Impacts of electro-magnetic frequency(EMF)
emitted by wireless SmartMeters is inconclusive;and
WHEREAS,residents have expressed concerns that wireless SmartMeters have caused electrical shorts and
fires in some SmartMeter Installations;and
WHEREAS,concerns have also been raised regarding the accuracy of the meters and lack of data privacy and
security with the installation and operation of SmartMeters;and
WHEREAS,the installation of hard wired smart meters could eliminate a number of these concerns;and
WHEREAS,Assemblymember Jared Huffman has authored legislation(AB37)which would require the CPUC to
Identify options for customers who decline the installation of wireless SmartMeters;and
WHEREAS,it is the responsibility of the San Luis County Board ofSupervisorsto ensure the health and safety of
our citizens.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE iT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors,County of San Luis Obispo,State of
California,does hereby request the California Public Utilities Commission to direct PG&Eto suspend the Installation of
SmartMeters in San Luis Obispo County until the California State Legislature acts on legislation giving customers
options to the installation of wireless Smart Meters.
Upon motion of Supervisor Patter.seconded by Supervisor Gibson•and on the following roil call vote,
to wit:
AYES: Supervisors Patterson,Gibson,Teixeira,Chairperson Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Mecham VIM—
Chairperson,
The foregoing resolution is hereby adopted. � VI r
Chairperson,Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:
i STATE OF CALIFORNIA ► te.
JULIE L RODEWALD I CouNTY OF!UW LUIS OBISPO) i
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors I I,JULIE L.RODEWALD,County Clerk of the above entitled County,
and Ea-Officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors thereof,do
By; I hereby certify the foregoing to be a full,true and correct copy of
Deputy Clerk I an order encored in the minutes of said Board of Supervisors,and i
inow remaining of record In my office.
APPROVED AS TO FORM Witness,my hand and seal of said Board of Supervisors this lath i
AND LEGAL EFFECT day of March,2011.
WARREN R.JENSEN ( JUUE L RODEWALD
County Counsel I County Clerkend
Ex-Offlclo�Cknrk of theBoardof Supervisors
BY: L9 .s+b
By:/s/Warren R.Jensen Deputy Carl, 1
County Counsel
Dated:February 24.2011
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Tuesday,March 8,2011
PRESENT: Supervisors: Bruce S.Gibson,Paul A.Teixeira,James R.Patterson and Chairperson Adam Hill
ABSENT: Supervisor: Frank Mecham
In the matter of RESOLUTION NO.2011-62:
This is the time set for a submittal of a letter and resolution requesting the California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) to direct Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to suspend installation of Smart Meters in San Luis
Obispo County until the California State Legislature acts upon proposed legislation,AB 37;All Districts.
Chairperson HBI:opens the floor to public comment.
Ms.Judy Vick,Ms.Patricia Wilmore-Pacific Gas and Electric Company(PG&E)Government Relations Local Area
Manager,Mr.Gary Richard Arnold,Mr.David Garth-San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce,Ms.Anne Harris,
Ms:Vicki Shelby District One Legislative Assistant(reads into the record a letter by Supervisor Mecham), Mr.
Bill Martony, Mr. Michael Her: - PG&E Electro Magnetic Fields (EMF) Program Manager (presents
documentation),Mr.Abram Perlsteln, Mr, Russ Levanway;Mr. Eric Greening, Ms.Linde Owen,Dr.C. Hite, Mr.
Mike.Gibson, Ms. Dawn Tomastlk, Ms. Gewynn Taylor, Mr. Tom Guarino - PG&E Central Coast Government
Relations Manager, Mr.Thomas Smith: PG&E Smart Meter Program Customer Outreach Specialist, Mr. Grant
Crowl, Ms. Beverley Abbey, Ms. Debbie Highfill, Mr: John Carsel, Mr. John Lucien, Ms. Martha Goldin, Ms.
Daniela Amon, Ms. Linda Ikeda, Ms. Betty Winholtz, Mr. Barbara Ahern, Mr. Bob Shanbrom and Ms. Penny
Borenstein-County Health Officer.speak.
Chairperson Hili:questions if PG&E is willing to commit to community workshops throughout the County,with Ms.
Wilmore agreeing;and enters into the record a letter received by 33rd District Assemblyman Khatchik H. 'Katcho'
Achadjian regarding a Smart Meter study.
Supervisor Patterson:outlines changes to the letter based on PG&E's commitment to carry out community
workshops.
Thereafter, on motion of Supervisor James R. Patterson,seconded by Supervisor Bruce S. Gibson, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Supervisors:James R.Patterson,Bruce S.Gibson,Paul A.Teixeira,Chairperson Adam Hill
NOES: None
ABSENT: supervisor.Frank Mecham
the Board amends the letter by deleting the last sentence in the third paragraph; approves the letter as
amended and RESOLUTION NO. 2011-62, a resolution requesting the California Public UtlBtles Commission
(CPUC)to direct the Pacific Gas and Electric Company(PG&E)to suspend the installation of Smart Meters in San
Luis Obispo County until the California State Legislature acts on legislation giving customers options to the
Installation of wireless Smart Meters,adopted.Furthermore,the Board directs the Clerk to send the letter and
resolution to the CPUC
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Filed 03/18/11 or
)ss.
County of San Luis Obispo )
1,JULIE L.RODEWALD,County Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, in and for the County
of San Luis Obispo,State of California,do hereby certify the foregoing to be a full,true and correct copy of an order
made by the Board of Supervisors,as the same appears spread upon their minute book.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of the said Board of Supervisors,affixed this 18th day of March,2011.
JULIE L.RODEWALD
(SEAL) County Clerk and Ex-Officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: �h
Deputy Clerk
3 A-7
y
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-2611-12 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 37
Introduced by Assembly Member Huffman
December 6,2010
An act to add Section 8370 to the.Public Utilities Code, relating to
electricity,and declaring the urgency thereof,to take effect immediately.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 37,as introduced,Huffinan.Smart grid deployment:smart meters.
(1) The federal Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 states
that it is the policy of the United States to maintain a reliable and secure
electricity structure that achieves certain objectives that characterize a
smart grid.Existing federal law requires each state regulatory authority,
with respect to each electric utility for which it has ratemaking authority,
and each nonregulated electric utility,to consider certain standards and
to determine whether or not it is appropriate to implement those
standards to carry out the purposes of the federal Public Utility
Regulatory Policies Act. The existing standards include time-based
metering and communications,consideration of smart grid investments,
and providing purchases with smart grid information,as specified.
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has
regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical
corporations and gas corporations,as defined.Existing law requires the
CPUC, by July 1, 2010, and in consultation with the State Energy
Resources Conservation and Development Commission,the Independent
System Operator, and other key stakeholders, to determine the
requirements for a smart grid deployment plan consistent with certain
policies set forth in state and federal law..Existing law requires that the
smart grid improve overall efficiency,reliability,and cost-effectiveness
99
AB 37 —2—
of
2—of electrical system operations, planning, and maintenance. Existing
law requires each electrical corporation, by July 1, 2011, to develop
and submit a smart grid deployment plan to the commission for approval.
This bill would require the CPUC, by January 1, 2012, to identify
alternative options for customers of electrical corporations that decline
the installation of wireless advanced metering infrastructure devices,
commonly referred to as smart meters, as part of an approved smart
grid deployment plan. The bill would also require the CPUC,when it
has identified those alternative options, to require each electrical
corporation to permit a customer to decline the installation of an
advanced metering infrastructure device and make the alternative options
available to that customer. The bill would also require the CPUC to
disclose certain information to customers about the technology of smart .
meters. The bill would require the CPUC to direct each electrical
corporation to suspend the deployment of advanced metering
infrastructure until the CPUC has complied with the above requirements.
(2) Under existing law,a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any
order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the CPUC
is a crime.
Because the bill would require action by the CPUC to implement
certain of its requirements,a violation of which would be a crime,these
provisions would impose a state-mandated local program by creating
a new crime.
(3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.
Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act
for a specified reason.
(4) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an
urgency statute.
Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. Section 8370 is added to the Public Utilities Code,
2 to read:
3 8370. (a) By January 1, 2012,the commission shall do all of
4 the following:
99
-3— AB 37
1 (1) Identify alternative options for customers of electrical
2 corporations that decline the installation of wireless advanced
3 metering infrastructure devices as part of a smart grid deployment
4 plan approved by the commission pursuant to this chapter. The
5 alternative options identified by the commission shall provide
6 reliability and efficiency equivalent to the approved devices.
7 (2) When the commission has identified alternative options in
8 accordance with paragraph (1), it shall require each electrical
9 corporation to permit a customer to decline the installation of an
10 advanced metering infrastructure device; and to make alternative
I1 options identified pursuant to paragraph (1) available to that
12 customer.
13 (3) Direct each electrical corporation to disclose to customers
14 information about the technology of advanced metering
15 infrastructure devices, including radio frequency, magnitude of
16 signal,and duration of signal.
17 (4) Assess the net effect of customers declining the installation
18 of advanced metering infrastructure devices on smart grid reliability
19 and efficiency.
20 (b) The commission shall direct each electrical corporation to
21 suspend the deployment of advanced metering infrastructure until
22 the commission has complied with the requirements of subdivision
23 (a).
24 SEC.2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
25 Section 6 of Article MB of the California Constitution because
26 the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
27 district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
28 infraction,eliminates a crime or infraction,or changes the penalty
29 for a crime or infraction,within the meaning of Section 17556 of
30 the Government Code,or changes the definition of a crime within
31 the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
32 Constitution.
33 SEC. 3. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the
34 immediate preservation of the public peace,health,or safety within
35 the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into
36 immediate effect.The facts constituting the necessity are:
99
AB 37 —4—
I In order to ensure that utility customers in California are able to
2 make informed decisions about the deployment of smart grid
3 technology,it is necessary for this act to take effect immediately.
0
99
AB 37 Assembly Bill - Status Page 1 of 1
CURRENT BILL STATUS
MEASURE A.B. No. 37
AUTHOR(S) Huffman.
TOPIC Smart grid deployment: smart meters..
HOUSE LOCATION ASM
TYPE OF BILL :
Active
Urgency
Non-Appropriations
2/3 Vote Required
State-Mandated Local Program
Fiscal
Non-Tax Levy
LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 04/04/2011
LAST HIST. ACTION In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at
the request of author.
COMM. LOCATION ASM UTILITIES AND COMMERCE
TITLE An act to add Section 8370 to the Public Utilities Code,
relating to electricity, and declaring the urgency
thereof, to take effect immediately.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/ab_37 bill_20110427 status.... 5/2/2011
RED FILE
From:judy Vick[SMTP:VENTUREMIND@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 12:07:48 PM MEETING AGENDA
To: Council, SloCity DATE] ITEM #-imr—MOMes
Subject: Daniel Hirsch Interview on Smart Meters pnyrgT�i�
Auto forwarded by a Rule
San Luis Obispo City Council,
Please see this recent interview with Daniel Hirsch regarding smart meters,
below.
Sincerely, hard`o ` email:
o COUNCIL 0 CDDDIR
0 CrNMOR 0 FITDIR
Judy Vick 13 O RC1'' °FMS
AITORM OPWDIR
EMF Safety Network ° a.»wmo °1UCE`�
0 P01 o PAW&RECDIR
San Luis Obispo County ° TRISM °U'DIR
d NEWTIMES 0 HRDIR
venturemindCa)hotmail.com n siocrrvlNIM oODpxca
o CM MGR
emfsafetynetwork.org a coax
Last night, Stop Smart Meters! caught up with Daniel Hirsch, a lecturer and expert in nuclear
policy at UCSC who has been widely quoted in themedia regarding recent events in Japan. Mr.
Hirsch had just finished his talk at Stevenson College, UCSC about the crisis at Fukushima and
what it means for the future of nuclear energy. The take home message from his talk is that
instead of worrying about the milk and the rain, what we must do is to put an end to Obama's
desire to build dozens of new nuclear reactors in the US-the so-called'nuclear renaissance'and
begin shutting down existing plants-starting with the ones,stupidly built on earthquake faults.
such as San Onofre and Diablo Canyon.
After the talk, which should be available online shortly, we asked him about'smart'meter
radiation. It appears that many of the distortions that industry has used to deflect concern about
such non-ionizing wireless radiation are the same techniques that have been used for many years
to downplay ionizing nuclear radiation.
Here is what he had to say about the so-called'independent'CCST report on the health effects of
smart meters- read whole article and watch video here:
htta://stobsmartmeters.orci/2011/04/20/da n iel-h irsch-on-ccsts-fuzzy-math/
Please distribute to your networks and contacts in the media and do with.this information what
you feel is appropriate.
Josh
Joshua Hart
Director, Stop Smart Meters!
httr)://stor)smartmL=ters.org
From: Dana Bordegaray(SMTP:DBORDEGARAY@ATT.NET]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 1:28:57 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: smart meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
No smart meters ;lease
From: Solstice222@aol.com[SMTPSOLSTICE222@AOL.COMj
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 20113:32:30 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: REGARDING SMART METERS
Auto forwarded by a Rule
April 20, 2011
Dear SLO City Council:
I have attended a number of City Council meetings regarding the "automatic"
installation of Smart Meters. None of which answered some very important
questions.
PG&E's smart meter opt out option is grossly unfair for ratepayers who have
already paid in excess of 2.2 billion dollars for the Smart Meter program--which
they never asked for.
PG&E's OPT OUT PLAN: $270.00 up-front opt-out fee + $14/month
surcharge + a yet-to-be determined "exit fee"if you move.
While PG&E is being forced to offer an opt-out provision of the Smart Meters
program, it has gamed that provision. The proposed costs of opting out are
prohibitive, which is PG&E's intention to stop the opposition to Smart Meters. A
REASONABLE CHOICE IS NOT BEING OFFERED.
Here is a proposition for another opt out plan:
No charge to keep existing analog meters. PG&E could estimate usage based on
the prior year, or customers could self-read, monthly. A meter reader could check
twice a year so that any underage or overage can be adjusted. For any customer
who requests it, PG&E should restore their analog meter at PG&E's
expense, ASAP.
Rate payers should not have to pay for their negligence. There needs to be a
choice.
Also, there should be an immediate moratorium on any further installation of
wireless Smart Meters until consumers know they have these opt out options.
And there needs to be evidentiary hearings on smart meters. We should not be
used to find out if these meters are dangerous to our health ...after the fact.
Sincerely,
Margaret Hennessy
1505 Cobblestone Way
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
solstice
The Green Directory
Bringing people together to make a difference...
PO Box 14610,San Luis Obispo,CA 93406
4251 S.Higuera St.Suite 800,San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
ph:805.473.5064 www.slosofsticc.com
From: patticake801@aol.com[SMTP:PATTICAKE801@AOL.COM]
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 20117:32:12 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Subject: Smart meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Please keep the smart meters out of our county...they are dangerous
and I know that our bills will be higher. I am barely making it financially
and cannot afford higher bills...it is also unfair for them to make us pay
to opt out of the smart meters. Please Please do not let them install
smart meters here. Thank you, Patricia Anderson
From: rosemary wilvert[SMTP:RWILVERT@SBCGLOBAL.NET1 RED FILE
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 9:24:38 PM
To: Council, Slocity — MEETING AGENDA
Subject: Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule DATE=, ITEM #1&*erA*z
Dear Mayor Marx and SLO City Council,
For the safety of San Luis Obispo residents, we urge the council to
enact an
urgent ordinance banning the installation of wireless smart meters.
Sincerely,
Gerd coyr. email:
Rosemary Wilvert o COUNCIL oCDD Dm
Cal Wilvert G C0 ASSTCM o PMECRIW
o ATTORNEY o PWDM
San Luis Obispo c P(:L��EARll3 aPAROq RECA CE�
o TRIDUNE o UTTLDIR
o NEW TAM o IIIc DTR
o STACTIYNM oODUNCA.
o CITY MOR
0 CLERK
From: Roberta Soules[SMTP:RJSOULES@CHARTER.NET]
Sent: Monday,April 18, 2011 6:03:54 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: PG & E Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Please pass the ordinance banning Smart Meters in San Luis Obispo.
1
From: catherine carwise[SMTP:CATHERINECARWISE@YAHOO.COM]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 7:46:12 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Ban installation of smart meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
I urge the council to enact an urgent ordinance banning the
installation of wireless smart meters.
Sincerely,
Catherine Carwise
14045 Mesa Road
Atascadero, CA
From: susan colvin[SMTP:C21 SUSANC@GMAIL.COM]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 20117:50:07 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Banning Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear SLO City Council,
I strongly urge the SLO City Council to enact an urgent ordinance banning the
installation of
wireless smart meters There are many reasons but, I'm very concerned about the health
issues that will effect our Happy Town.
Thank you for considering this important issue.
Sincerely,
Susan Colvin
From: ron@randmpainting.net[SMTP:RON@RANDMPAINTING.NET]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 8:02:44 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Smart meter
Auto forwarded by a Rule
--Dear Mayor Marx
Please stop the smart meter installations, they are very dangerous
for people especially little babys. Exposure to electosmog has been
documented to have major biological effectson living tissue, DNA
breaks, sleep disturbance, memory loss , headaches, chest pain, leaning
impairment, cancer. Please don't do it.
thank you
Ron
From: ANNE HARRIS[SMTP:ANNEHARRISSEASIDE@MSN.COM]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 9:03:37 AM
To: Council, SloCity; mayorjanmarx@slocity.org
Subject: "Smart"Meters: please keep analog meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear Mayor Marx:
I am writing to let you know of the injuries my "Smart"meter has done to me. I hope you and
the other members of the San Luis Obispo City Council will enact an urgent ordinance banning
the installation of wireless smart meters so that SLO citizens do not have to suffer the same
health problem I do (in Paso Robles).
A SmartMeter was installed on the living room wall of my small house in Paso in 2010. I did not
think much about it. But the beginning of this year I had a health scare that eventually led me to
the conclusion that the SmartMeter was the cause. It often takes many years before serious
problems with a scientific advance are fully known. Many health complaints have led the
California PUC to plan to allow opt-outs from the.SmartMeter program. I urge you to protect the
health of SLO residents by banning all SmartMeter installations now. I believe the health
complaints made up to this point are the tip of the iceberg.
Here is what happened to me. Up until early January 2011, I had never had an irregular pulse --
meaning I had never had skipped beats. But in early January, after working 4-5 hours while
sitting on my living room sofa, I took my pulse, and it skipped beats at irregular intervals, e.g., it
would skip a beat after the first 3 beats, then after 7-8 more beats, etc. I was very concerned
and assumed it was a new health condition. I started thinking about how to find a good
cardiologist. I ran errands and while out took my pulse --I was happily surprised to find it was
normal! I returned home, and when in my bedroom took it again. Again, it was normal. The
next day I got up and sat at my dining room table, at the far end of the living room.
Unfortunately, after an hour or two I took my pulse, and it skipped one beat in about one.
minute. At.some point, in thinking about what if anything was different, and why my heart
would skip beats only in my living room, I remembered the SmartMeter. It was installed on the.
outside wall of my living room so that when I sit on my sofa I am only 1-2 feet from the meter.
Since then I have taken my pulse many times. It is always normal when away from my house.
When in my house, it is always normal in my bedroom, but after being in the living room for
awhile, it eventually starts skipping beats. Irregular heart beats can be deadly. And I have read
other, different health complaints on various websites like the EMF Safety Network.
I will take advantage of the option of having my SmartMeter wired (not wireless), but what effect
will my neighbors' SmartMeters have on me?
SLO is considered one of the healthiest places to live in the US. I do not think that will continue
if wireless SmartMeters are allowed to be installed.
If the City Council does not allow wireless SmartMeters to be installed, I think you will save lives
and protect the health of all residents. Please vote to keep the analog meters that are already in
place.
Thank you, Anne Harris
From: Abe Perlstein[SMTP:AP3DGUY@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent:Monday,April 18, 2011 10:26:23 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Cc: Judy Vick
Subject: PG&E should ban smart meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear SLO City Council and Mayor Marx,
I urge you to ban the deployment of PG&E's wireless smart meters.
They are dangerous;increase users' monthly bills, and unnecessary.
The wired smart meter option is the way to go.
Abe.Perlstein
Los Osos, CA.
From: peter yelda[SMTP:PETERYELDA@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 10:28:37 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: smart meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
as a resident of this city for 40 years i urge you not to allow smart meters in the city of
slo......thank you.....peter yelda
From: Carole[SMTP:ONEGOODGAL@JUNO.COM]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 12:45:32 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject, Dangers of Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Honorable members of San Luis Obispo City Council:
I am writing to urge you to enact an urgent ordinance banning the installation of wireless
smart meters.
I have included(below) a vast amount of eye-opening information about the real and
i
potential future dangers of having smart meters in our lives. I ask that you please take the
time to read it. Smart Meters will affect you personally, as well as your family members
for generations to come. It pays to be informed.
A few excerpts include: Dr.David Carpenter,public health physician and former Dean of the School
of Public Health at the University at Albany,New York stated that the evidence for adverse effects of
radio frequency radiation is currently strong and grows stronger with each new study.
Elihu D Richter MD,MPH medical epidemiologist from Israel states that we are no longer talking
about mere precaution of uncertain risk,but about prevention of highly probable and known risks;
an unethical exercise. It is now fairly certain that there will be widespread adverse public health
impacts.
EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT AGENCY, an agency of the European Union that
advises 32 countries on public policy, is calling for LOWERING EXPOSURE TO EMF
(Electro Magnetic Fields): "Waiting for high levels of proof before taking action to
prevent well known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs,_as it did with
asbestos, leaded petrol and smokinc."
Top wireless radiation scientists in the world at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco: CELL
DAMAGE,DNA BREAKS and BREACHES IN THE BLOOD-BRAIN BARRIER(increased risks
of cancer and Alzheimer's)from low levels of pulsed RF signal radiation as emitted by wireless smart
meters.
TREND IN EUROPE TOWARD WIRED and AWAY FROM WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES:
German/French Government advise against wi-fi and French libraries removed wi-fi.Spain removed
some cell towers. Freiburger Appeal 2002 signed by 30.000 doctors observe correlation of disease
and wireless technolosies.
WHY SO MUCH RESISTANCE: You have to stop and ask yourself, why
is there so much resistance across California and in other states and
countries over a utility meter? What is sustaining this resistance at a time
when people are overwhelmed with everything else?
People are being injured, or afraid of being injured in a variety of ways.
You must believe the testimony of the injured persons at your hearings.
You also need to know that for every person attending, there are many
more that wish they could travel to attend your hearings to testify. Many
of these people have never been an activist of any kind, but are getting
involved to protect themselves and their families. They are now spending
their personal time attending city council meetings, county board
meetings, walking neighborhoods, and going on local radio to try to stop
this harmful program.
In addition to physical illness, people are paying double and triple what
they used to pay for energy since getting a smart meter. And people who
are unfortunate enough to have a work schedule that does not allow them
to avoid using energy at peak times, will pay more for energy than those
who do not.
OPT OUT INFO: There should have been a customer opt-in to the smart
meter program, when it was originally proposed as a primarily wired
program in 2006, for 1.7 billion ratepayer dollars. In 2009, PG&E
switched the program to wireless, when they came back to request an
additional half billion dollars of ratepayer money. That would have been
another good time to offer customers an opt-in to the program. But
instead, PG&E rushed ahead with mandatory installation of wireless
meters for all customers, when the program never was mandated to be
wireless. Ratepayers have now paid billions for this program, that they
can ill afford in many ways in this economy.
It is PG&E's turn to pay, and they should pay for an opt-out for customers
from the profits they have reaped from customers paying double and triple
their normal bill, since their smart meters were installed.
PG&E OPT-OUT PLAN: $270 up-front fee to opt out, a $14 monthly
surcharge and a yet-to-be determined "exit fee" if you move.
PG&E's smart meter opt-out option is prohibitively expensive for many
individuals and families who never would have opted into the program,
and desperately want out of the program.
CONSUMER GROUPS AND OTHERS: Smart Meters don't save
energy. People save energy. Public Citizen (Ralph Nader's consumer
organization) has a national campaign to expose the faulty assumption that
smart meters will save energy. Public Citizen found that smart meter
installations have thus far prioritized utility budget efficiency (profiting
utility companies) not household budget efficiency. "Pouring through
utility dockets, utilities make it clear that the vast majority of projected
savings from smart meters is from laying off utility workers -- and not
from consumers' lowering their energy use and bills. Utilities highlight
savings from remote disconnection -- mainly for nonpayment. This raises
serious consumer safety and health issues
(btti)://www.citizen.orgldocuments/EnergyInvestmentFonimPres.ndf)
The Government Accountability Office reported that the smart meter
system will be easy for hackers to hack-in to and shut off power remotely
with no forensic ability built in to identify where the hacker is originating
from. In addition, we are uncomfortable knowing that our personal lives
will be tracked by the amount of power we pull at any certain time.
FAULTY INSTALLATIONS: We are learning of electrical fires
associated with the meters from those contracted to install them. A
Wellington employee/whistleblower reported that contractors have very
little training and are rewarded for hasty work. He admitted contractors
left jobs where the meters were sparking in the Santa Cruz area. After
smart meters are installed, fires have been reported due to the electrical
load the wireless meter puts on household wiring systems. There have also
been reports of damage to appliances and electrical systems (lighting,
security systems) during and after installation of the meters.
The burden of proof should not be on the consumer. If the smart meter is
genuinely safe, why doesn't PG&E and the CPUC call for an independent
testing and evaluation of the smart meter? There should be a moratorium
on any further installation until PG&E can prove the meters are safe.
The proposed costs of opting out are prohibitive, which is PG&E's
intention, an attempt to stop the widespread and growing opposition to
smart meters. For any customer who requests it, PG&E should restore the
analog meter at PG&E's expense, as soon as possible. Additionally, PG&E
should be required to pay reparations to ratepayer-victims who suffered ill
health, fires, explosions, damage to existing electronics and/or theft of
personal information due to forced smart meter installation.
If we still have an analog meter,we should be able to keep it. There should
be no additional monthly fees to have an analog meter. PG&E can
estimate usage based on the prior year, or customers can self-read and
report monthly by phone or email. A meter reader can check twice a year
so that any underage or overage can be adjusted. Or, meter readers
should keep their jobs and let them continue to read meters.
There should be an immediate and permanent moratorium on further
installation of wireless smart meters, and a public service campaign to
inform consumers of opt-out options. Finally, no more delays in
evidentiary hearings on smart meters should be tolerated.
Please see additional information and references below..
Sincerely,
Carole Good
P. O. Box 810
Grover Beach, CA 93483
oneyodgal(aii uno.com
Thirty-five (35) CA local governments (Cities and Counties) formally oppose
wireless smart meters, 10 have passed ordinances (law).prohibiting.the meters.
San Francisco Chapter of the Sierra Club opposes wireless smart meters.
http://`stopsmartmeters.org
Public Citizen (Ralph Nader's consumer advocate organization) has a national
campaign exposing that smart meters don't save energy, they just profit PG&E's
bottom line.htti)://www.citizen.org/documents/EnergylnvestmentForumPres.t)df
Public Citizen,AARP, Consumers Union, National Consumer Law Center and the
National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates
www.ncic.org/images/r)df/energy utility telecom/additi
The Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), an independent consumer advocacy
division of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and the California
Small Business Association (CSBA), a non-profit small business advocacy.
http://ygbanet.com/califomi a/DRA-and-C S B A-Request-Relief-from-New-Electric-
Pricing-S cheme-That-W ill-Cause-Disruption-to-5 00-000-PG-E-Small-Business-
Customers.php
Indiana regulators rejected the meters: The cost outweighs potential benefits to
consumers.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10 39/b4196044842103.htrn
The Karolinska Institute, Stockholm(Gives the Nobel Prizes) warns against wireless
smartmeters, etc. : http://www.scribd.com/doe/48148346/Karolinska-Institute-Press-
Release
The Government Accountability Office (the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress)
warns of security risks from cyber attacks hackers being able to remotely shut off
power: httl):Hncwatch.tyr)epad.com/media/2011/01/smartmeter-security-is-a-growing_
concern.htm]
Dan Hirsch,Leader of Committee to Bridge the Gap,whisleblower for the nuclear
industry warns that continuous whole body exposure from a smart meter may be
between 160 and 800 times worse than that from cell phones (comparison: whole
body exposure from Smart Meter at three (3) feet and cell phone at ear).
Elihu D Richter MD, MPH medical epidemiologist from Israel states that we are no
longer talking about mere precaution of uncertain risk, but about prevention of
highly probable and known risks; an unethical exercise. It is now fairly certain that
there will be widespread adverse public health impacts.
EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT AGENCY, an agency of the European Union that
advises 32 countries on public policy, is calling for LOWERING EXPOSURE TO
EMF(Electro Magnetic Fields): "Waiting for high levels of proof before taking
action to prevent well known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs,
as it did with asbestos, leaded petrol and smoking."
http://glossary.en.eea.euroRa.eu/terminology/sitesearch?tern=children+and+emf
Dr. David Carpenter, public health physician and former Dean of the School of
Public Health at the University at-Albany, New York stated that the evidence for
adverse effects of radio frequency radiation is currently strong and grows stronger
with each new study.
Top wireless radiation scientists in the world at the Commonwealth Club in San
Francisco (11/18/10): CELL DAMAGE, DNA.BREAKS and BREACHES IN THE
BLOOD-BRAIN BARRIER (increased risks of cancer and Alzheimers) from low
levels of pulsed RF signal radiation as emitted by Wireless smart meters:
VIDEO- http://electromagnetichealth.orolelectromagnetic-health-blo cc-video/
TREND IN EUROPE TOWARD WIRED and AWAY FROM WIRELESS
TECHNOLOGIES: German/French Government advise against wi-fl and French
libraries removed wi-fi. Spain removed some cell towers. Freiburger Appeal 2002
signed by 30,000 doctors observe correlation of disease and wireless technologies.
Insurance Companies won't insure the health problems from wireless smart meters
and do not sacrifice insurance premiums without good reason. TV NEWS VIDEO
- (3 minutes): htti):Heori3emfblog.net/?0=382
Wireless smart meters constantly transmit pulsed digital microwave radiation (RF)
24/7, up to 22,500 pulses per day. PG&E minimizes the transmitting time stating its
only 45 seconds per day, however these pulses are between 2-20 millisecond bursts.
In addition this duty cycle does not include what the Smart Meters are further
intended for— wireless data transmission for new RF enabled appliances.
Cindy Sage, co-editor of The Bioinitiative Report (www.bioinitiativeret)ort.org) states
that "wireless smart meters are unique in that they transmit 24/7 without shut off
and without relief. Humans can recover from significant adversity and stress, but
24/7 pulsed transmissions from wireless smart meters dominates the sleep time for
human recovery, and the pulsed signal radiation from the wireless meters dominates
the natural bio-electronic communications originating in the brain."
httv:HsaRereDorts.com/smartTmeter-rf/?vage id=
1 I/
From: freespirit23@comcast.net[SMTP:FREESPIRIT23@COMCAST.NET]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 5:31:04 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Fwd: Electromagnetic radiation damage TO MAYOR JAN MARX
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Please take the time to read a very important information about EMF and
SMART METERS and what it will do to your life and your family , it is a very
important report and we should all be very aware of the REAL DANGERS of
EMF, thank you for your time , Claudy Assalit
Subject: Electromagnetic radiation damage
This is a great article on damage caused by EMR(electro-magnetic radiation) by someone
damaged by it.
Very apropos regarding the Smart Meters PG&E wants to install.
Helke Ferrie is a medical journalist with a regular column in Vitality Magazine in Toronto, Canada.
THE DAMAGING EFFECTS OF ELECTROPOLLUTION
Regulators Ignore Health Impact
as EMF Radiation Invades Canada
by Helke Ferrie
Vitality,Apri12011
"The good news is that many of these EMF diseases may be preventable by simple environmental
manipulation, if society chooses to pay attention. Unless public outrage intervenes, !am afraid
that our 'diseases of civilization'will get worse. Good science is not enough to force sensible
public policy. Only citizens can do that. "
Dr. Samuel Milham in Dirty Electricity,2010
"This device emits electromagnetic radiation, exposure to which may cause brain cancer. Users,,
especially pregnant women and children, should keep it away from the head and body."
Currently proposed legislation for cell phones: Bill LD 1014,sponsored by Legislator Andrea
Boland in Maine,USA.
Ignorance may or may not be bliss,but one thing is certain: it is very profitable.
According to Buddhism, all suffering derives from ignorance, and it rarely hurts until it is
too late; ignorance keys into the addictive potential in all of us and, thereby, allows
somebody to make a huge pile of money on enslavement.
The detrimental health effects of cell phones, WiFi,electromagnetic fields
(EMI's), and the microwave-based technology we use daily makes worrying about our
kids experimenting with drugs, sexual escapades, alcoholic binges, or a touch of crime
insignificant - in comparison to the WiFi-equipped school you send them to, the cell
phones you may have bought for them, the hours they spend in front of the TV (forget the
content—the TV itself is worse), and the microwave oven from which they often receive
their meals. Sex,booze, drugs, and crime are part of the dark side of life's education: one
often learns from those mess-ups to go on to make healthy choices. Now consider that
this "progressive" and seductive radiation technology has the power to obliterate life,
phase out our biological future, and kill the brain.
I am one of those suckers seriously injured by cell phones. Our solar-powered
cottage on Manitoulin is far from phone lines; so, for 25 years we used public phones.
Last summer, a cell phone tower was erected 1 mile from my study window. Being a
social animal, I thought this was fabulous! Over a period of two months I quickly
developed indescribable headaches,piercing pains in my right eye, and spontaneous
bleeding from my right ear. My ophthalmologist diagnosed two cataracts in my right
eye: the hallmark of microwave radiation injury ( age-related cataracts appear in both
eyes), as we know from research begun on WW II U.S. Navy personnel injured by radar
equipment. In a future Vitality issue I will discuss the successful treatment I am
undergoing and how I did not tum into a Luddite.
I am in stellar company: World Health Organization Director General, Gro
Harlem Brundtland (1998—2003) and convener of the World Commission on
Environment and Development in 1987, did not permit any cell phones at WHO's
Geneva headquarters because they caused her debilitating headaches. Of course, she had
the wrath of the industry descend upon her accordingly. She is currently suffering from
cancer.
In 2004, the WHO defined electrohypersensitivity (EHS) as: "... a phenomenon
where individuals experience adverse health effects while using or being in the vicinity of
devices emanating electric,magnetic, or electromagnetic fields .... a sometimes
debilitating problem [occuring] several orders of magnitude under the limits of
internationally accepted standards."
In fact, everybody is at risk. Epidemiologist Dr. Sam Milham first studied
childhood leukemia clusters in the 1970s that eventually proved beyond any doubt that
the risk for this disease is directly related to the presence of powerlines, and subsequently
also cell phone towers; those areas of the world that have little or no electricity have
almost no incidence of leukemia. In addition to leukemia, evidence now supports that cell
phones cause especially brain tumors, cancer of the eye, salivary glands, testicles, non-
Hodgkin's lymphoma, and Alzheimer's. This radiation also contributes to the
development of autism and ADHD. While several causes are known for all of these
conditions,research has confirmed that the use of cell and cordless phones and lap-top
computers, speed up their manifestation such that people in their 30's are now beginning
to be diagnosed with advanced Alzheimer's. The degranulation process of live brain cells
when exposed to cell phone radiation has been experimentally demonstrated. Cancer
incidence is also significantly higher within 400 meters of a cell phone tower or
transmitter site. Trent University researcher Magda Havas may now have discovered a
third type of diabetes caused exclusively by electromagnetic radiation.
The most vulnerable are children, pregnant women, human brains in general,
testicles, and ovaries. This was confirmed in 2007 by the World Health Organization and
the International Agency for Research on Cancer and in 2010 by a Swedish government
study, all showing that cell phone use increases the chances of brain cancer by 40%. Last
year, the European Journal of Oncology reported that serious heart and related problems
(e.g. arrhythmia,palpitations,heart flutter, racing heart beat, fainting,profuse sweating
etc) can occur to pulsed radiation as low as 0.5% of the existing Canadian and US federal
guidelines which permit 10 mill micro/Wm2. The truly science-based exposure
guidelines demonstrate that nobody should be exposed to more than 1 microW/m2.
When it comes to any type of death industry, the most reliable information comes
from the military. On the website www.safeschool.ca you can download a recently
declassified US Navy document from1971 which summarizes the more than 2,300
studies on the health effects from microwave radiation known way back then! Of course
they knew—microwave technology was already part of the military arsenal intended to
inflict bodily harm. It is the Military University in Germany that developed EMF
protection standards for civilian building codes. In addition to people,building materials
require protection from rapid corrosion caused by radiofrequencies and microwaves. In
2008, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities asked the federal government for an
emergency fund of S 123 billion over 5 years to avoid building collapse.
The financial problems caused by this irresponsible application of radiation-based
technology includes agriculture and cows. Plants avoid high EMF levels by not growing
as high as they normally would; when the EMF source is removed, they grow normally.
As reported by Dr. Milham, when the"dirty electricity" was neutralized by
Graham/Stetzer plugs in a U.S. school, "a dairy fanner a quarter of a mile away noticed
that his cows each gave an average of ten pounds more milk per day,beginning the day
the school received its filters. The cows were responding to dirty electricity being
removed from the ground currents." In 2008 the French court ordered a power company
to compensate cattle farmers for EMF damage.
A thoroughly depressing fact is that the main reason gorillas in Africa were
reduced in numbers by 90%over the past two decades is because their habitat was
destroyed by miners fora rare mineral called coltan. This mineral is apparently
indispensable to the production of cell phones. The international efforts to save the
gorillas is appearing to have some success,but nothing has happened so far, it seems to
rescue the miners themselves—they are primarily children even as young as 6 years.
Living creatures are electrical beings able to function only within specific
frequencies. Devra Davis observes: "The difference between being alive and being dead
is just one thing—the presence of electrical activity in the brain." Thoracic surgeon Dr.
William Rae, the co- founder of the American Academy for Environmental Medicine
with Linus Pauling and Dr. Thoren Randolph,became originally interested in
environmental influences on health when he himself became seriously EMF-sensitive in
the 1970's from operating room equipment. His research led him to recognize the
deleterious influence of pesticides and many other environmental toxins, all of which
cause multi-system damage. The immune system is the primary target which does its job
through electrically charged biological substances such as neurotransmitters,hormones,
and peptides which transmit faster than the speed of light. It has been known since the
1990's that environmental illness from biological toxins and electrohypersensitivity share
the process of a disastrous reduction in the nervous system enzyme cholinesterase. It's
sudden depletion cause depression and also suicidal behavior.
All these biological processes have their inherent timing, repair and defensive
responses, especially during pregnancy and brain development. Hence, the industry
"safety" standards, with which government regulators collaborate, are totally absurd.
Devra Davis explains: They are based on the imaginary SAM, the Standard
Anthropomorphic Man based on military recruits of 1989: six foot two tall, about 200 lbs,
and never exposed to a cell phone. The subsequently constructed safety standards date to
1962 when nobody knew the difference between heat-producing radiation and microwave
radiation, and cell phones did not exist.
The Safe School Committee in Collingwood (www.safeschool.ca) is fighting the
WiFi craze that has hit Canadian schools. Even though WiFi is slower than landline-
transmitted connections, and even though there is a documented 40%increase in cardiac
arrest in children under 13 years directly related to this type of radiation,the Toronto
School Board is hell-bent on WiFi for all schools—presumably until no brains are left to
zap. So eager are our guardians of education to implement what they call "Vision of
Hope" (abysmally black humor unintended), they even exceed the totally inappropriate
safety standards set by Health Canada—standards that date from a time when wireless
phones were Dick Tracey-type sci-fi watches.
Ken Dryden expressed outrage on March 12 (Globe & Mail) about the lack of
mandatory protection from head injuries in hockey, stating: "How could we be so
stupid!" Such outrage applies to WiFi in schools even more because even more children—
all of them in fact—will be affected. In a 2009 review of the usually irreversible harm
EMFs cause,neuroscientists O. Johansson of the Karalinska Institute in Sweden, wrote:
"Today no-one would consider having a radio-active wrist watch with glowing digits (as
you could in the 1950s), having your children's shoes fitted in a strong X-ray machine(as
you could in the 1940s), keeping radium in open trays on your desk (as scientists could in
the 1930s), or X-raying each other at your garden party(as physicians did in the 1920s).
In retrospect that was just plain madness. However, the persons doing so were not ...less
intelligent. ... knowledge was deficient, as was a competent risk analysis coupled to a
parallel analysis of public needs"
What is happening in other jurisdictions? In 2007, Germany initiate a policy of
reducing the use of CAT scans because of their demonstrated cancer-causing properties,
and because their use increased health care costs (directly and through additional cancer
incidence)by 80% in 40 years. It followed logically that last year Germany banned the
energy efficient CFLS light bulbs because their carcinogenic radiation exceeds European
exposure limits. (I tossed all ours and put old-fashioned incandescent bulbs back; I found
that the crushing fatigue I thought was aging mysteriously disappeared!) Many
jurisdictions in the US are now framing legislation to deal both with the bulb's
unacceptable levels of radiation and the difficulty of their disposal because of the high
mercury content threatening the ground water.
The European Union's September 2009 report on EMFs stressed the"serious and
irreversible damage to health and environments" from EMF radiation and called on all
member states to take precautionary action. Shortly afterwards the possibility of
outlawing the use of cell phones for children under 18 was discussed in the EU
parliament.
The UK, whose national Department of Health is as industry-fiiendlyand science-
challenged as our Health Canada, started to surrender to reality and on March 11 advised
its citizens that they should text, rather than put their cell phones to their ears..
Switzerland, Finnland, Luxumburg, and Austria supply their schools with the
totally radiation-safe fiber-optic technology for their internet and communication needs.
Israel has similar legislation in the works. Those countries also set the maximum level of
4
i
exposure between 5 to 10 microW/cm2. Recall: In Canada we are told 1,000
microW/cm2 is "safe". Guess on which part of the Earth human brains will survive!
Meanwhile, we are also being threatened with"smart meters"which tend to
increase electricity costs for people and expose them to massive amounts of radiation. As
of February of this year, California allows people to refuse their installation, because a
formal investigation showed that these US-made devices never passed all the mandatory
regulatory hurdles, are hazardous to health, and can cause fire.
Devra Davis in her superb book"Disconnect" explains how the most serous
practical challenge to this industry comes from the world's large insurance companies,
such as the Sterling Group of Lloyd's of London. Having nearly been nearly wiped out
when the asbestos-related claims became undeniable in the early 1990s, the cell-phone
industry was informed they would not be backed when radiation hits the fan, as it must.
The trigger for this decision was the UK's 2005 Stewart Commission whose chair, citing
worldwide research demonstrating harm to children's brains from cell phones, told the
mobile phone industry to "refrain from promoting the use of mobile phones by children".
In Canada,liability is certainly worth testing in court,because the 2007 Human Rights
Commission report on Environmental Illness specifically included harm from EMF
radiation as being real and requiring accommodation.
Hear Magda Havas, Devra Davis and many others at the Total Health Show
(April 8,9,10) and learn that, amazingly, it may be possible to be safe and have your toys.
Sources and Resources:
S. Milham MD, Dirty Electricity, iUniverse, 2010, any bookstore or
www.sammilham.com
D. L. Davis, Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, Dutton, 2010
M. Havas & C. Rees, Public Health SOS: The Shadow Side of the Wireless Revolution,
2009
L. Blake, Electromagnetic Fields: A Consumer's Guide to the Issues and How to Protect
Ourselves, iUniverse(updated 2007 edition)
Best source for relevant information www.magdahavas.com and
www.microwavenews.com
To fight cell phone towers being placed near schools, playgrounds,hospitals, etc.
research www.whyfry.org and google"cell phone towers+ opposition"
NOTE: The products sources listed-below I myself have tried and-found-helpful.
Planetary Association for Clean Energy Inc. Ottawa. Andrew M- ichrowski provides
excellent scientific sources and practical help: paceincnet(a,gmail.com
Environmental Working Group at www.ewg.org tests cell phones etc for hazards, safety,
alternatives, etc where regulatory information is lacking, outdated,or wrong. Check out
their recommendations on safer cell phones.
Dr. Stephen Sinatra, a cardiologist of Co-Q10 fame, has excellent information on
radiation on his excellent website www.heartmdinstitute.com
To take action against the WiFi plans for all of Toronto's schools go to
www.safeschool.ca and meet its organizers at the Total Health Show April 8, 9, 10 at-the
Metro Convention Center.
r
To have your home/apartment assessed and made safe, or to build an EMF-safe house,
contact www.breathing-easy.nef
For Graham/Stetzer filters www.stetzerelectric.com&www.DirtyElectricity.ca and
EMFSolutions 1-877-987-5185 or visit their booth at Total Health.
Full Source List for Vitality Website:
This list is in order of the information's appearance in the article itself.
1. The legislation proposed in Maryland could be used in its identical wording in Canada
and proposed to Health Canada via our MPs. See www.mainlegislature.org go to
"Summary of LD 1014".
2. On cell phone towers the most comprehensive information is in Dr. Sam Milham's
book"Dirty Electricity". For success in.having proposed cell towers moved to locations
away from children,hospitals etc. see Waterloo Chronicle February 15, 2011 article
entitled"Transmission interrupted?" and March 9, 2011 "WIND Mobile looking at other
tower sites".
3. The EarthCalm website has a good summary article on the research involving EMF
harm and possible protection entitled "EarthCalm develops unprecedented EMF
protection against phone and WiFi radiation".
4. Google the name Arthur Firstenberg and read his article in The Ecologist volume 34,
number 5,June 1, 2004, on the harm cell phone towers do to people and animals.
5. On the dangers to food quality done by using microwave ovens google "microwave
ovens + safety".
5. The Wikipedia entry on former WHO Director Gro Harlem Brundtland is pretty
informative and useful for the links it provides to her statements and interviews involving
harm, from cell phones.
6. Contact Andrew Michrowski of Planetary Association for Clean Energy at
paceincneta,,wnail.com for his powerpoint presentations and scientific papers. Most
useful is his summary of all the literature, world-wide, up to the end of 2010, entitled
"Electro-Magnetic Fields: High Level Microtechnology Concerns". It is the source of
many items in this article including the degranulation of brain cells, the damage to blood
cells, the corrosive effect of microwaves on building materials, etc.
7. On February 23, 2011, the Journal of the American Medical Association published an
article"Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure and Brain Glucose Metabolism"
which is exceedingly tame, until you get into the details which support the worst findings
published internationally.
8. The information on microwaves and EMFs affecting the heart is in the European
Journal for Oncology, Library Volume 5, October 2010. The lead author of Trent
University's Magda Havas. For medical professionals this article is a must and for people
with existing heart issues it is perhaps a life saver.
9. On building codes and EMF protection in architectural design, the Military University
in Germany etc., go to Robert Steller's website www.breathing-easy.net
10. How EMFs adversely affect animals and plants is discussed and sources ion both the
work of Andrew Michrowski (PACE) and in the book by Dr. Sam Milham. There are
also a website specific to EMFs involving the issue of damage to trees, other plants and
animals: www.popsci.com or con tact nukenetCa,energviustice.net
1
11. The unbelievable nonsense on which the Toronto School Board bases its decision to
WiFi all schools, go to www.safeschool.ca from where you can download all of this
material.
12. The declassified summary of all adverse health effects of microwave radiation known
by 1971 also go to www.safeschool.ca
13. The biological pathways shared by MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity) and EMF
sensitivity are discussed in detail in the material available by googling Dr. William Rae,
the American Academy for Environmental Medicine, and specifically from h ://tis-
hq.eh.doe.gov/chem-safety which is the web access to the U.S.Department of Energy.
The article there is by Lucinda Grant published in 1997 entitled"Microwaves imitate
pesticides".
14. EMFs and their harmful effects on the immune system of humans and animals is
comprehensively presented in a long articled by O. Johansson of the Karalinska Institute
in Sweden published in Pathophysiology in 2009. It can be downloaded from the website
of EarthCalm.
15. The various sources for which countries have outlawed or initiated regulatory
protection can be found on www.safeschool.ca,by googling Magda Havas, the
organization Care, and accessing the January 2011 journal called Environmental Science
and Technology, and www.communities.cana.com
16. On Germany curtailing the use of CAT scans see Globe &Mail,April 3, 1009.
17. The European Union's report from the European Environmental Agency of
September 15, 2009 can be downloaded by googling them.
18. The advisory given by the UK Department of Health to text instead of put the cell
phone to your head was published widely;my source was The Telegraph, March 11,
2011. Go to www.telegraph.co.uk/ioumalists/martin-beckford
19. The report showing that "smart meters" are not safe and were not put through the
mandated regulatory hoops was published on February 18, 2011 by Sage Associates of
Santa Barbara, CA, U.S.A/. and is entitled: "Addendum: Assessment of Radiofrequency
Microwave Radiation Emissions from Silver Spring OWS-NIC514 Model Wireless
Electric Meter". Go to www.stopsmartmeters.wordpress.com and/or
omahonevna epri.com to get a copy of the report and associated materials.
20. The May 2007 Canadian Human Rights Commission report(2 parts—one on the
medical condition, the other on Canada's legal obligations) on MCS/EMF sensitivity and
relevant case law etc. can be downloaded by goggling its author Margaret E. Sears or by
going to the Human Rights Commission website and searching for"Environmental
sensitivities Report 2007".
21. To find a research study on how the EarthCalm protective technology for your home
works, go to EarthCalm's website and download it. Title: "Quality of Life Research
Testing of EarthCalm Protective System."
Helke Ferrie is a medical science writer who lives in Alton.
She runs Kos Publishing Inc., a publisher dedicated to the
politics of medicine.
Visit www.kospublishin2.com.
or reach her at helkeferrie(a),gmail.com
p � I
From: Dawn Carol[SMTP:CAROLDAWN8@YAHOO.COM]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 10:31:56 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Fw: Smart Meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear Mayor Jan Marx, and council members,
There should have been a customer opt-in to the smart meter program,
when it was orginally proposed as a primarily wired program in 2006, for
1.7 billion ratepayer dollars. In 2009, PG&E switched the program to
wireless , when they came back to request an additional half billion dollars
of ratepayer money. That would have been another good time to offer
customers an opt-in to the program. But instead, PG&E rushed ahead
With mandatory installation of wireless meters for all customers, when the
program never was mandated to be wireless. Ratepayers have now paid
billions for this program, that they can ill afford in many ways in this
economy.
It is PG&E's turn to pay, and they should pay for an opt-out for customers
from the profits they have reaped from customers paying double and triple
their normal bill, since their smart meters were installed.
PG&E OPT-OUT PLAN: $270 up-front fee to opt out, a $14 monthly
surcharge and a yet-to-be determined "exit fee" if you move.
PG&E's smart meter opt-out option is prohibitively expensive for many
individuals and families who never would have opted into the program,
and desperately want out of the program.
You have to stop and ask yourself, why is there so much resistance across
California and in other states and countries over a utility meter? What is
sustaining this resistance at at time when people are overwhelmed with
everything else?
People are being injured, or afraid of being injured in a variety of ways.
You must believe the testimony of the injured persons at your hearings.
You also need to know that for every person there, there are many more
that wish they could travel to attend your hearings to testify. Many of
these people have never been an activist of any kind, but are getting
involved to protect themselves and their families. They are now spending
their personal time attending city council meetings, county board
i
meetings, walking neighborhoods, and going on local radio to try to stop
this harmful program.
In addition to physical illness, people are paying double and triple what
they used to pay for energy since getting a smart meter. And people who
are unfortunate enough to have a work schedule that does not allow them
to avoid using energy at peak times, will pay more for energy than those
who do not.
Smart meters don't save energy. People save energy. Public Citizen
(Ralph Nader's consumer organization) has a national campaign to expose
the faulty assumption that smart meters will save energy. Public Citizen
found that smart meter installations have thus far prioritized utility
budget efficiency (profiting utility companies) not household budget
efficiency. "Pouring through utility dockets, utilities make it clear that the
vast majority of projected savings from smart meters is from laying off
utility workers=and not from consumers' lowering their energy use and
bills. Utilities highlight savings from remote disconnection—mainly for
nonpayment. This raises serious consumer safety and health issues
htty://www.citizen.orgidocuments/EnergylnvestmentForumPres.pdf>
The Government Accountability Office reported that the smart meter
system will be easy for hackers to hack-in to and shut off power remotely
with no forensic ability built in to identify where the hacker is originating
from. In addition, we are uncomfortable knowing that our personal lives
will be tracked by the amount of power we pull at any certain time.
We are learning of electrical fires associated with the meters from those
contracted to install them. A Wellington employee/whistleblower reported
that contractors have very little training and are rewarded for hasty
work. He admitted contractors left jobs where the meters were sparking
in the Santa Cruz area. After smart meters are installed, fires have been
reported due to the electrical load the wireless meter puts on household
wiring systems. There have also been reports of damage to appliances and
electrical systems (lighting, security systems) during and after installation
of the meters.
The burden of proof should not be on the consumer. If the smart meter
is genuinely safe, why doesn't PG&E and the CPUC.call for an
independent testing and evaluation of the smart meter? T here should be a
moratorium on any further installation until PG&E can prove the meters
}
are safe.
The proposed costs of opting out are prohibitive, which is PG&E's
intention, an attempt to stop the widespread and growing opposition to
smart meters. For any customer who requests it, PG&E should. restore the
analog meter at PG&E's expense, as soon as possible. Additionally, PG&E
should be required to pay reparations to ratepayer-victims who suffered ill
health, fires, explosions, damage to existing electronics and/or theft of
personal information due to forced smart meter installation.
If we still have an analog meter, we should be able to keep it. There should
be no additional monthly fees to have an analog meter. PG&E can
estimate usage based on the prior year, or customers can self-read and
report monthly by phone or email. A meter reader can check twice a year
so that any underage or overage can be adjusted. Or, meter readers
should keep their jobs and let them continue to read meters.
There should be an immediate and permanent moratorium on further
installation of wireless smart meters, and a public service campaign to
inform consumers of opt-out options. Finally, no more delays in
evidentiary hearings on smart meters should be tolerated.
Please see additional information and references below.
Sincerely,
Carol Dawn,
1171 Toro St., SLO, Ca.93401
(805)546-8660
3 PG&E Smart Meters Explode at Santa Rosa Mall
According to the incident report from the Santa Rosa Fire Department on April 7, firefighters
found the electrical room at the Santa Rosa Mall "charged with smoke" and "upon investigation
found 3 PG&E meters that had blown off the electrical panel causing damage to the interior
wiring of the electrical panel. A fire was still smoldering.."
The cause of the fire is listed as equipment failure and arcing coming from the switchgear area,
transformer vault of the meters.
According to the Press Democrat, Santa Rosa Battalion Chief Jack Piccinini described the scene as
a "meltdown".
EMF Safety Network has been informed that the electrical room was filled with Smart Meters,
which have been reported to explode and catch fire in other areas, including Bakersfield, EI
Cerrito, Berkeley and other areas.
"Smart Meters are dangerous and PG&E and the CPUC should act now to stop the installation"
states Sandi Maurer, EMF Safety Network.
More info: see incident report 2011-0005703-000
htto://emfsafetynetw6rk.org/?page id=1280
Last week's article in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat:
htto://www.oressdemocrat.com/article/20110407/ARTICLES/110409523/1350.7 itle=Fire-forces-
evacuation-of-downtown-Santa-Rosa-Plaza&tc=a r
Sandi Maurer
EMF Safety Network
www.emfsafetynetwork.oro
From: Katie Franklin[SMTP:KATIELOVESEMILY@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 7:51:33 AM
To: Council, SloCity; Marx, Jan
Subject: enact an URGENT ordinance banning the installation of wireless smart meters
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear CPUC:
There should have been a customer opt-in to the smart meter program,
when it was orginally proposed as a primarily wired program in 2006, for .
1.7 billion ratepayer dollars. In 2009, PG&E switched the program
to wireless , when they came back to request an additional half billion
dollars of ratepayer money. That would have been another good time to
offer customers an opt-in to the program. But instead, PG&E rushed
ahead with mandatory installation of wireless meters for all customers,
when the program never was mandated to be wireless. Ratepayers have
now paid billions for this program, that they can ill afford.in many ways in
this economy.
It is PG&E's turn to pay, and they should pay for an opt-out for customers
from the profits they have reaped from customers paying double and triple
their normal bill, since their smart meters were installed.
PG&E OPT-OUT PLAN: $270 up-front fee to opt out, a $14 monthly
surcharge and a yet-to-be determined "exit fee" if you move.
PG&E's smart meter opt-out option is prohibitively expensive for many
individuals and families who never would have opted into the program,
and desperately want out of the program.
You have to stop and ask yourself, why is there so much "resistance across
California and in other states and countries over a utility meter? What is
sustaining this resistance at at time when people are overwhelmed with
everything else?
People are being injured, or afraid of being injured in a variety of ways.
You.must believe the testimony of the injured persons at your hearings.
You also need to know that for every person there, there are many more
that wish they could travel to attend your hearings to testify. Many of
these people have never been an activist of any kind, but are getting
involved to protect themselves and their families. They are now spending
their personal time attending city council meetings, county board
meetings, walking neighborhoods, and going on local radio to try to stop
this harmful program.
In addition to physical illness, people are paying double and triple what
they used to pay for energy since getting a smart meter. And people who
are unfortunate enough to have a work schedule that does not allow them
to avoid using energy at peak times,will pay more for energy than those
who do not.
Smart meters don't save energy. People save energy. Public Citizen
(Ralph Nader's consumer organization) has a national campaign to expose
the faulty assumption that smart meters will save energy. Public Citizen
found that smart meter installations have thus far prioritized utility
budget efficiency (profiting utility companies) not household budget
efficiency. "Pouring through utility dockets, utilities make it clear that the
vast majority of projected savings from smart meters is from laying off
utility workers—and not from consumers' lowering their energy use and
bills. Utilities highlight savings from remote disconnection--mainly for
nonpayment. This raises serious consumer safety and health issues
(http://www.citizen.org/documents/EnergylnvestmentForumPres.pdf>
The Government Accountability Office reported that the smart meter
system will be easy for hackers to hack-in to and shut off power remotely
with no forensic ability built in to identify where the hacker is originating
from. In addition, we are uncomfortable knowing that our personal lives
will be tracked by the amount of power we pull at any certain time.
We are learning of electrical fires associated with the meters from those
contracted to install them. A Wellington employee/whistleblower reported
I
that contractors have very little training-and are rewarded for hasty
work. He admitted contractors left jobs where the meters were sparking
in the Santa Cruz area. After smart meters are installed, fires have been
reported due to the electrical load the wireless meter puts on household
wiring systems. There have also been reports of damage to appliances and
electrical systems (lighting, security systems) during and after installation
of the meters.
The burden of proof should not be on the consumer. If the smart meter
is genuinely safe, why doesn't PG&E and the CPUC call for an
independent testing and evaluation of the smart meter? T here should be a
moratorium on any further installation until PG&E can prove the meters
are safe.
The proposed costs of opting out are prohibitive, which is PG&E's
intention, an attempt to stop the widespread and growing opposition to
smart meters. For any customer who requests it, PG&E should restore the
analog meter at PG&E's expense, as soon as possible. Additionally, PG&E
should be required to pay reparations to ratepayer-victims who suffered ill
health, fires, explosions, damage to existing electronics and/or theft of
personal information due to forced smart meter installation.
If we still have an analog meter, we should be able to keep it. There should
be no additional monthly fees to have an analog meter. PG&E can
estimate usage based on the prior year, or customers can self-read and
report monthly by phone or email. A meter reader can check twice a year
so that any underage or overage can be adjusted. Or, meter readers
should keep their jobs and let them continue to read meters.
There should be an immediate and permanent moratorium on further
installation of wireless smart meters, and a public service campaign to
inform consumers of opt-out options. Finally, no more delays in
evidentiary hearings on smart meters should be tolerated.
Please see additional information and references below.
Sincerely,
Katie Franklin
1613 7th St
Los Osos
From: Deborah[SMTP:DEBORAHT@SONIC:NET]
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 10:35:18 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: STOP-Smart Meters-Military Document-RF/EMF/MICROWAVE- INTENTIONAL
HARM-Military Document
Auto forwarded by a Rule
To All Council Members:
This is a military document that was obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.
This document is extremely disturbing. It discusses how Microwave/EMF and RF
technology is being used for weaponization against human beings by the military because
they know how harmful it is to human life and safety.
For our representatives to be ignorant to this is understandable,but for them to remain
ignorant is inexcusable.
Representatives must now consider the potential use of this technology that is being
authorized by Public Utility Commissions and the utility companies by installing smart
meters on our homes and businesses. The burden of proof on there safety is upon THEM
and all further deployment of smart meters must stop.
Peer documentation from those who thoroughly understand the detrimental
effects of biohazards.
hard cour. email:
o COUNCIL o CDD DIR
o AAWCM o CM MOR Fn RED FILE
o C o o PPOLIATIOMMYDCECIM — MEETING AGENDA
c PIS aPAM&RECDUL
a TRIBUNE c UTILDIR DATE 9 it ITEM #�1Pywr32�s
LMES
c NEWTo HRDIR o
o SLOCRYNEWS o COUNCIL.
o C17YMGR
c CLERK
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
UNITED STATES ARMY INTELLIGENCE AND SEQJRITY COMMAND
FREEDOM OF INFORM,MARYLAND.2 OFFICE
.FORT GEORGE G.MEADE,MARYLAND.20155-SM
G).REPLYTO
ATTENTION OR:
DEC 13 2006
Freedom of Information/
Privacy Office
Mr. Donald Friedman
Confidential Legal Correspondence
1125 Third Street
Napa,California 94559-3015
Dear Mr. Friedman:
References:
a. Your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request dated May 25, 2006,to the Department
of the.Army, Freedom of Information/Privacy Act Division (DA FOIA/PA DIV), for all
documents pertaining to the microwave auditory effect, microwave hearing effect,Frey effect,
artificial telepathy, and/or any device/weapon which uses and/or causes such effect; and any
coven or undisclosed use of hypnosis. On September 5, 2006, the DA FOIA/PA DIV referred a
copy of your request to this office. Your request was received on September 11, 2006.
b. Our letter of September 13, 2006, informing you of the search for records at another element
of our command and were unable to comply with the 20-day statutory time limit in processing
your request.
As noted in our letter, the search has been completed with another element of this command
and the record has been returned to this office for our review and direct response to you.
We have completed a mandatory declassification review in accordance with Executive Order
(EO) 12958, as amended. As a result of this review, it has been determined that the Army
information no longer warrants security classification protection and is releasable to you. A copy
of the record is enclosed for your use.
Fees for processing your request are waived.
0
-2-
If you have any questions concerning this action, please feel free to contact this office at(301)
677-2308. Refer to case#614F-06.
Sincerely,
Su an J. Butterlield-�-e•.�
Director
1 Freedom of Information/Privacy Office
/ Investigative Records Repository
Enclosure
a
Bioeffects of Selected Nonlethal
Weapons f( n 1)
This addendum to the Nonlethal Technologies--Worldwide (MGIC-1147-101-98)study
addresses in summary,some of the most often asked questions of nonlethal weapons
technology,the physiological responses observed in clinical settings of the biophysical
coupling and susceptibility of personnel to nonlethal effects weapons. These results
identify and validate some aspects of maturing nonlethal technologies that may likely be
encountered or used as nonlethal effectors in the future including:
• Laser and other light phenomena.
• Radiofrequency directed energy.
• Aural bioeffects.
The study of electromagnetic fields and their influence on biological systems is
increasing rapidly.Much of this work is taking place because of health concerns. For
example, increased concern has arisen regarding the effects of operator exposure to the
electromagnetic fields associated with short-wave diathermy devices,high power
microwave ovens, radar systems, magnetic resonance imaging units, etc. In addition,
much concern has arisen about extremely low frequency(60 Hz power frequency)
electric and magnetic fields that originate from high-voltage transmission lines, industrial
equipment, and residential appliances. Both occupational and residential long-term
exposure have been the focus of epidemiological studies. The studies have suggested
possible adverse effects on human health (e.g., cancer, reproduction, etc.). Laboratory
research is still being pursued to identify possible mechanisms of interaction. However,
other than thermal heating for microwave frequencies, there is no yet agreed-upon
mechanism of action. As a consequence,our knowledge base is developed entirely with
phenomenological observations.Because of this fact, it is not possible to predict how
norithenYtal biological effects may differ from one exposure modality to another. It is
especially difficult, because of the small data base for fast pulses,to predict biological
effects that might be associated with high-power pulses of extremely:short duration.
There is, however, a growing perception that microwave irradiation and exposure to low
frequency fields can be involved in a wide range of biological interactions. Some
investigators are even beginning to describe similarities between microwave irradiation
and drugs regarding their effects on biological systems. For example, some suggest that
power density and specific absorption rate of microwave irradiation may be thought of as
analogous to the concentration of the injection solution and the dosage of drug
1RECr' AL?Ilil}L7NQASSIFgt?'' .L
ON to cize,C(o
BYtY.SAINSCOM FOUPA
Auth Pau 4102 DOD 52W.IR
b
administration, respectively. Clearly, the effects of microwaves on brain tissue,
chemistry, and functions are complex and selective. Observations of body weight and
behavior revealed that rats, exposed under certain conditions to microwaves, eat and
drink less,have smaller body weight as a result of nonspecific stress mediated through
the central nervous system and have decreased motor activity. It has been found that
exposure of the animals to one modality of radiofrequency electromagnetic energy
substantially decreases aggressive behavior during exposure.However,the opposite
effects of microwaves, in increasing the mobility and aggression of animals,has also
been shown for a different exposure modality.Recent published data implicates
microwaves as a factor related to a deficit in spatial memory function. A similar type of
effect was observed with exposure to a"resonance tuned" extremely low frequency
magnetic field. Thus, the data base is replete with phenomenological observations of
biological systems "affected" by exposure to electromagnetic energy. (The fact that a
biological system responds to an external influence does not automatically nor easily
translate to the suggestion of adverse influence on health.)The objective of the present
study was to identify information from this developing understanding of electomagnetic
effects on animal systems that could be coupled with human biological susceptibilities.
Situations where the intersection of these two domains coexist provide possibilities for
use in nonlethal applications.
Incapacitating Effect: Microwave Heating
Body heating to mimic a fever is the nature of the RF incapacitation. The objective is to
provide heating in a very controlled way so that the body receives nearly uniform heating
and no organs are damaged. Core temperatures approximately 41° C are considered to be
adequate. At such temperature a considerably changed demeanor will take place with the
individual. Most people, under fever conditions,become much less aggressive; some
people may become more irritable. The subjective sensations produced by this buildup of
heat are far more unpleasant than those accompanying fever. In hyperthermia all the
effector processes are strained to the utmost,whereas in fever they are not. It is also
possible that microwave hyperthermia(even with only a 1°C increase in brain
temperature) may disrupt working memory,thus resulting in disorientation.
Biological Target Normal Functions/Disease State
The temperature of warm-blooded(homeothermic) animals like the human remains
practically unchanged although the surrounding temperature may vary considerably. The
normal human body temperature recorded from the mouth is usually given as 37°C,with
the rectal temperature one degree higher. Variation between individuals is typically
between 35.8° C and 37.8°C orally. Variations also occur in any one individual
throughout the day—a difference of 1.0° C or even 2.0° C occurring between the
maximum in the late afternoon or early evening,and the minimum between 3 and 5
o'clock in the morning. Strenuous muscular exercise causes a temporary rise in body
temperature that is proportional to the severity of the exercise; the level may go as high as
40.0° C.
2
Extreme heat stress,such that the body's capacity for heat loss is exceeded, causes a
pathological increase in the temperature of the body.The subjective sensations produced
by this buildup of heat are far more unpleasant than those accompanying fever.In
hyperthermia all the effector processes are strained to the utmost,whereas in fevers they
are not. The limiting temperature for survival, however,is the same in both cases--a body
temperature of 42° C. For brief periods, people have been known to survive temperatures
as high as 43 °C.
In prolonged hyperthermia,with temperatures over 40° C to 41'C, the brain suffers
severe damage that usually leads to death. Periods of hyperthermia are accompanied by
cerebral edema that damage neurons, and the victim exhibits disorientation,delirium, and
convulsions: This syndrome is popularly referred to as sunstroke, or heatstroke,
depending on the circumstances. When the hyperthermia is prolonged,brain damage
interferes with the central thermoregulatory mechanisms. In particular, sweat secretion
ceases,so that the condition is further exacerbated.
Mechanism to Produce the Desired Effects
This concept builds on about 40 years of experience with the heating effects of
microwaves. Numerous studies have been performed on animals to identify
characteristics of importance to the understanding of energy deposition in animals. As a
result of the physics, the relationship between the size of the animal and the wavelength
of the radiofrequency energy is most important. In fact,the human exposure guidelines to
radiofrequency radiation are designed around knowledge of the differential absorption as
a function of frequency and body size. The challenge is to minimize the time to effect
while causing no permanent injury to any organ or the total body and to optimize the
equipment function. The orientation of the incident energy with respect to the orientation
of the animal is also important.
In a study of the effect of RF radiation on body temperature in the Rhesus monkey, a
frequency(225 MHz) is purposely chosen that deposits energy deep within the body of
the animal. A dose rate of 10 W/kg caused the body temperature to increase to 42° C in a
short time(10-15 min). To avoid irreversible adverse effects, the exposure was
terminated when a temperature of 42° C was reached. A lower dose rate of 5 W/kg
caused the temperature to increase to'41.5° C in less than 2 hours. The reversible nature
of this response was demonstrated by the rapid drop in body temperature when RF
exposure was terminated before a critical temperature of 42° C was reached. It is
estimated for rats that the absorbed threshold convulsive dose lies between 22 and 35 J/g
for exposure durations from less than a second to 15 minutes. For 30-minute exposure,
the absorbed threshold dose for decrease in endurance is near 20 J/g, the threshold for
work stoppage approximately 9 J/g, and the threshold for work perturbation ranges from
5 to 7 J/g. All of the above measures, except convulsions, are types of nonlethal
incapacition.
A rough estimate of the power required to heat a human for this technology is on the
order of 10 W/kg given about 15 to 30 minutes of target activation. Actual power levels
depend on climatic factors,clothing, and other considerations that affect the heat loss
from the individual concerned. A method for expressing dose rate in terms of body
surface area(i.e.,watts per square meter)rather than body mass(i.e.,watts per kilogram)
would permit a more reliable prediction of thermal effects across species.However,there
are large uncertainties in the ability to extrapolate thermoregulatory effects in laboratory
animals to those inhuman beings.
This technology is an adaptation of technology which has been around for many years. It
is well known that microwaves can be used to heat objects. Not only is microwave
technology used to cook foods, but it is also used as a directed source of heating in many
industrial applications. It was even the subject of the "Pound Proposal' a few years ago in
which the idea was to provide residential heating to people, not living space. Because of
the apparently safe nature of body heating using microwave techniques,a variety of
innovative uses of EM energy for human applications are being explored.The nonlethal
application would embody a highly sophisticated microwave assembly that can be used to
project microwaves in order to provide a controlled heating of persons. This controlled
heating will raise the core temperature of the individuals to a predetermined level to
mimic a high fever with the intent of gaining a psychological/capability edge on the
enemy,while not inflicting deadly force.The concept of heating is straightforward; the
challenge is to identify and produce the correct mix of frequencies and power levels
needed to do the remote heating while not injuring specific organs in the individuals
illuminated by the beam.
A variety of factors contribute to the attractiveness of this nonlethal technology. First, it
is based on a well-known effect,heating. Every human is subject to the effects of heating;
therefore, it would have a predictability rating of 100%. The time to onset can probably
be engineered to between 15 and 30 minutes; however; timing is the subject of addil ional
research to maximize heating while minimizing adverse effects of localized heating. The
onset can be slow enough and/or of such frequency to be unrecognized by the person(s)
being irradiated. Safety to innocents could be enhanced by the application and additional
development of advanced sensor technologies. Incapacitation time could be extended to
almost any desired period consistent with safety. (Given suitable R&D, temperature or
other vital signs could be monitored remotely, and temperature could be maintained at a
minimum effective point).
Time to Onset
The time to onset is a function of the power level being used. Carefully monitored
uniform heating could probably take place in between 15 and 30 minutes. Time to onset
could be reduced but with increased risk of adverse effects. Minimum time is dependent
on the power level of the equipment and the efficiency of the aiming device.
Duration of Effect
Assuming that the heating is done carefully,reversal of elevated body temperature would
begin as soon as the source of heat is removed.
I
Tunability
This concept is tunable in that any rate of heating, up to the maximum capacity of the
source, may be obtained Thus it is suitable for use in a gradual force or"rheostatic"
approach. If the situation allows, and the source is sufficiently powerful, there is the
possibility to use this technology in a lethal mode as well. Prolonged body temperature
above 43° C is almost certain to result in permanent damage to the brain and death.
Distribution of Human Sensitivities to Desired Effects
No reason has been identified to suggest that anyone would be immune to this
technology. Individuals with compromised thermoregulatory mechanisms would be
susceptible with a lower incident energy density.This would include people with organic
damage to the hypothalamus, the part of the brain that integrates the autonomic
mechanisms which control heat loss as well as people with compromised somatic features
of heat loss (e.g.,respiration,water balance, etc.).
The technologies needed for the thermal technology concept are relatively well
developed because of the!mown biophysical mechanism, the universal susceptibility of
humans to the mechanism of heating, and because of a well developed technology base
for the production of radiofrequency radiation. Because the human body is
inhomogeneous, certain organs are,by virtue of their size and geometry, more easily
coupled with one radiofrequency wavelength than another. Therefore, to avoid permanent
damage to the suspect or to innocent bystanders, it may be necessary to vary the
frequency to avoid localized heating and consequent damage to any organ. Additionally,
it will be necessary to avoid the conditions thought to be associated with the induction of
cataracts.Thus,while the technology of microwave heating in general is mature,
adaptation as a nonlethal technology will require sophisticated biophysical calculations to
identify the proper regimen of microwave frequencies and intensities; it will also be
necessary to optimize existing hardware to meet the biophysical requirements.
Possible Influence on Subject(s)
If the technology functions approximately as envisioned, the targeted individual could be
incapacitated within 15 to 30 minutes. Because this technology is focused on a relatively
slow onset, it should only be used in situations where speed is not important. The very
uncomfortable nature of a high body temperature may be useful in negotiations or
possibly for controlling crowds. It would be equally useful on single persons or crowds.
Evidence also indicates a disruption of working memory, thus disorientation may occur
because of an inability to consolidate memory of the recent(minutes)past.
Technological Status of Generator/Aiming Device
Equipment needed to explore this concept in the laboratory is available today. Design and
construction of the RF/microwave generator will depend on the constraints posed by the
calculations, potential generation devices, and energy-directing structures. A variety of
options exist for both of these equipment needs. The use of advanced frequency and
modulation-agile RF generation and amplification circuitry will be required to assess
fully the frequency/power/time envelope of RF heating profiles required. Although much
equipment is commercially available, it is likely that custom hardware and software will
be necessary because available equipment has not been designed with the need for
frequency/intensity variability,which will probably be needed.for safety purposes. In
addition, the design of antennas and other energy-directing structures will almost
certainly involve unique configurations. Since this technology utilizes radiofrequency
energy, it can be defeated by the use of shielding provided by conductive barriers like
metal or metal screen.
Incapacitating Effect: Microwave Hearing
Microwave hearing is a phenomenon,described by human observers, as, the sensations of
buzzing, ticking,hissing, or knocking sounds that originate within or immediately behind
the head. There is no sound propagating through the air like normal sound. This
technology in its crudest form could be used to distract individuals; if refined, it could
also be used to communicate with hostages or hostage takers directly by Morse code or
other message systems,possibly even by voice communication.
Biological Target/Normal Functions/Disease State
This technology makes use of aphenomenon first described in the literature over 30 years
ago. Different types of sounds were heard depending on the particulars of the pulse
characteristics. Various experiments were performed on humans and laboratory animals
exploring the origin of this phenomenon. At this time, virtually all investigators who have
studied the phenomenon now accept thermoelastic expansion of the brain, the pressure
wave of which is received and processed by the cochlear microphonic system, to be the
mechanism of acoustic perception of short pulses of RF energy. One study(in 1975)
using human volunteers, identified the threshold energy of microwave-auditory responses
in humans as a function of pulse width for 2450 MHz radiofrequency energy. It is also
found that about 40 J/cm2 incident energy density per pulse was required.
Mechanism to Produce the Desired Effects
After the phenomenon was discovered,several mechanisms were suggested to explain the
hearing of pulsed RF fields. Thermoelastic expansion within the brain in response to RF
pulses was first studied and demonstrated in inert materials and was proposed as the
mechanism of hearing of pulsed RF fields. A pressure wave is generated in most solid
and liquid materials by a pulse of RF energy—a pressure wave that is several orders of
magnitude larger in amplitude than that resulting from radiation pressure or from
electrostrictive forces. The characteristics of the field-induced cochlear microphonic in
guinea pigs and cats, the relationship of pulse duration and threshold,physical
measurements in water and in tissue-simulating materials, as well as numerous theoretical
calculations—all point to thermoelastic expansion as the mechanism of the hearing
phenomenon.
l
Scientists have determined the threshold energy level for human observers exposed to
pulsed 2450-MHz fields(0.5-to 32 micron pulse widths). They found that, regardless of
the peak of the power density and the pulse width,the per-pulse threshold for a normal
subject is near 20 mJ/kg. The average elevation of brain temperature associated with a
just-perceptible pulse was estimated to be about 5x 10,6°C.
Time to Onset
The physical nature of this thermoelastic expansion dictates that the sounds are heard as
the individual pulses are absorbed. Thus, the effect is immediate(within milliseconds).
Humans have been exposed to RF energy that resulted in the production of sounds.
Duration of Effect
Microwave hearing lasts only as long as the exposure. There is no residual effect after
cessation of RF energy. _
Tunability
The phenomenon is tunable in that the characteristic sounds and intensities of those
sounds depend on the characteristics of the RF energy as delivered. Because the
frequency of the sound heard is dependent on the pulse characteristics of the RF energy,
it seems possible that this technology could be developed to the point where words could
be transmitted to be heard like the spoken word, except that it could only be heard within
a person's head. In one experiment,communication of the words from one to ten using
"speech modulated" microwave energy was successfully demonstrated. Microphones next
to the person experiencing the voice could not pick up the sound. Additional development
of this would open up a wide range of possibilities.
Distribution of Human Sensitivities to Desired Effects
Because the phenomenon acts directly on cochlear processes, the thermoelastic pressure
waves produce sounds of varying frequency. Many of the tests run to evaluate the
phenomenon produced sounds in the 5 kHz range and higher. Because humans are known
to experience a wide range of hearing loss due to cochlear damage, it is possible that
some people can hear RF induced sounds that others with high frequency hearing loss
cannot. Thus, there is a likely range of sensitivity, primarily based on the type of pulse
and the condition of the cochlea. Bilateral destruction of the cochlea has been
demonstrated to abolish all RF-induced auditory stimuli.
Recovery/Safety
Humans have been subjected to this phenomenon for many years. The energy deposition
required to produce this effect is so small that it is not considered hazardous
experimentation when investigating responses at the just-perceptible levels.
t
Possible Influence on Subject(s)
Application of the microwave hearing technology could facilitate a private message
transmission. It may be useful to provide a disruptive condition to a person not aware of
the technology. Not only might it be disruptive to the sense of hearing, it could be
psychologically devastating if one suddenly heard"voices within one's head."
Technological Status of Generator/Aiming Device
This technology requires no extrapolation to estimate its usefulness. Microwave energy
can be applied at a distance, and the appropriate technology can be adapted from existing
radar units. Aiming devices likewise are available but for special circumstances which
require extreme specificity, there may be a need for additional development. Extreme
directional specificity would be required to transmit a message to a single hostage
surrounded by his captors. Signals can be transmitted long distances(hundreds of meters)
using current technology. Longer distances and more sophisticated signal types will
require more bulky equipment, but it seems possible to transmit some type of signals at.
closer ranges using man-portable equipment.
Range
The effective range could be hundreds of meters.
Incapacitating Effect: Disruption of Neural Control
The nature of the incapacitation is a rhythmic-activity synchronization of brain neurons
that disrupts normal cortical control of the corticospinal and corticobulbar pathways: this
disrupts normal functioning of the spinal motor neurons which control muscle contraction
and body movements. Persons suffering from this condition lose voluntary control of
their body. This synchronization may be accompanied by a sudden loss of consciousness
and intense muscle spasms.
Biological Target/Normal Functions/Disease State
The normal function of the brain is to control all forms of behavior, voluntary control of
body, and the homeostatic parameters of the organism. In normal conditions, all the brain
structures,neuron populations,networks, and single units function with specific rhythmic
activity depending on the incoming sensory information, information from mnemonic
structures, and signals from visceral organs. Each single neuron provides specific
processing of information it receives and forms a specific pattern of impulse firing as
outgoing information. Synchronization of neuron activity is a natural mechanism of the
brain function that uses such controlling processes as motivation,attention and memory
(experience) in order to organize behavior. For example,motivational processes are
considered as activating ascending signals that synchronize the neuron activity of specific
brain strictures and neuron networks; this activation/synchronization in tum activates
specific forms of behavior such as sexual,aggressive; ingestive activities.
In normal functioning the degree of neuronal synchronization is highly controlled. From
experiments that record the neuronal activity in different brain areas simultaneously in
animals, it is known that correlation of spike activity between neurons (measured by the
correlation level of synchronization)changes depending on the stage of behavior, .
motivation, attention,or activation of the memory processes. However, under some
conditions,such as physical stress,heat shock, or strong emotional stress, the level of
synchronization may become higher,involving nonspecific large populations of brain
neurons and the synchronization may become uncontrollable.
Depending on at which frequency the synchronization rhythm occurs and how many
neurons are involved, it may produce different physical effects; muscle weakness,
involuntary muscle contractions, loss of consciousness, or intense (tonic) muscle spasms.
The higher level of synchronization takes place in persons affected with epilepsy when
they experience periodic seizures since they have a pathologic source(e.g., from injury to
the brain) of rhythmic synchronization.Because the neurophysiological mechanisms of
epileptiform synchronization are better documented,this incapacitating technology is
described in terms of epileptogenesis.
The neurophysiological mechanisms active in epileptogenesis involve changes in
membrane conductances and neurotransmitter alterations as they affect neuronal
interaction. In the process of epileptogenesis, either some neurons are discharging too
easily because of alterations in membrane conductances or there is a failure of inhibitory
neurotransmission. The actual discharges have been recognized to result from a neuronal
depolarization shift with electrical synchrony in cell populations related in part to
changes in membrane conductances. The ionic basis and biochemical substrate of this
activation have been areas of considerable study but still leave many questions
unanswered. What are the basic cellular properties,present in normal cells and tissue. that
could contribute to the generation of abnormal activity? What parts of the systems are
low threshold and function as trigger elements?
One of the current hypotheses is involved with microcircuitry, particularly local synaptic
interactions in neocortical and limbic system structures. In the hippocampus,the role of
the trigger element has been long attributed to the CA3 pyramidal cells—a hypothesis
based on the fact that spontaneous synchronous burst discharge can be established in
CA3 neurons Some studies describe an intrinsically bursting cell type in the neocortex
that plays a role similar to that of CA3 cells in the hippocampus and that of deep cells in
the pyriform cortex.The intrinsic nature of these cells appears to be an important
contributor to the establishment of synchronized bursting in these regions. Another
apparent requirement in such a population is fora certain degree of synaptic interaction
among neurons, such that discharge of even one cell enlists the activity of its neighbors.
Given the presence of these bursting cells and the occurrence of excitatory interactions
among them in normal tissue, it may actually be the morphologic substrate for
epileptiform discharges.
Another hyptothesis has focused particularly on the role of N-methyl D-aspartate
(NMDA) receptors. Various factors regulate the efficacy of NMDA receptors: their
1
voltage-dependent blockade by magnesium and modulation by glycine and polyamines.
For example, in the low magnesium model, spontaneous synchronous burst discharge in
hippocampal pyramidal cell populations is sensitive to NMDA antagonists..That finding
suggests that it is the opening of NMDA channels,by relieving the magnesium blockade,
that facilitates epileptiform activity.
Significant attention in the literature is also being given to gamma-amino butyric acid
(GABA) receptors for the potential role in control of excitability. Changes in GABA
inhibitory efficacy can lead to important effects on the excitability of the system.
GABAergic inhibitory post-synaptic potentials(IPSPs) have been shown to be quite
labile in response to repetitive activation of cortical cell populations,as may occur during
epileptiform discharge. Scientists have shown that even a small percentage change in
GABA inhibition can have profound effects on neocortical epileptogenesis.These
changes in GABAergic inhibition may be the key to an explanation of how repetitive
discharge patterns give rise to ictal discharge. Further, there appears to be a significant
increase in excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP)frequency prior to seizure initiation
an observation that is consistent with loss of IPSP efficacy prior to ictal onset.
The above hypotheses describe different mechanisms of epileptogenesis, but it is quite
possible that all of these mechanisms take place, and they reflect large variety of typos of
epileptic seizures.The common principle of the mechanisms proposed is the change of
membrane properties(i.e.,conductance,permeability etc.)of certain neurons which
results in depolarization and burst.discharging. Some factors(e.g., trauma)can affect
these specific neurons and initiate synchrony for neurons that control internal
communication and communication with various muscle systems not associated with
vital functions(i.e., heart beating,breathing). High strength pulsed electric fields could
also be such a factor.
Mechanism to Reproduce the Desired Effects
Application of electromagnetic pulses is also a conceptual nonlethal technology that uses
electromagnetic energy to induce neural synchrony and disruption of voluntary muscle
control.The effectiveness of this concept has not been demonstrated. However, from past
work in evahtating the potential for electromagnetic pulse generators to affect humans, it
is estimated that sufficiently strong internal fields can be generated within the brain to
trigger neurons. Estimates ate that 50 to 100 kV/m free fi6ld'of very sharp pulses(— i nS)
are required to produce a cell membranic potential'of approximately 2 V this would
probably be sufficient to trigger neurons or make them more susceptible to firing.
The electromagnetic pulse concept is one in which a very fast(nanosecond timeframe)
high voltage(approximately 100 kV/m or greater)electromagnetic pulse is repeated at
the alpha brain wave frequency(about 15 Hz). It is known that a similar frequency of
pulsing light can trigger sensitive individuals (those with some degree of light-sensitivity,
epilepsy) into a seizure and itis thought that by using a method that could actually trigger
nerve synapses directly with an electrical field,essentially 100%of individuals would be
susceptible to seizure induction. The photic-induced seizure phenomenon was borne out
demonstrably on December 16, 1997 on Japanese television when hundreds of viewers of
a popular cartoon show were treated, inadvertently,to photic seizure induction MM
3 1). The photic-induced seizure is indirect in that the eye must receive and transmit the
impulses which initially activate a portion of the brain associated with the optic nerve.
From that point the excitability spreads to other portions of the brain. With the
electromagnetic concept, excitation is directly on the brain,and all regions are excited'
concurrently. The onset of synchony and disruption of muscular control is anticipated to
be nearly instantaneous. Recovery times are expected to be consistent with,or more rapid
than,that which is observed in epileptic seizures.
Time to Onset
No experimental evidence is available.for this concept. However, light-induced seizures
latency onset in photosensitive epileptics varies from 0.1 to about 10 seconds. Because of
the fact that the electrical impulses triggered by light must spread to other parts of the
brain,photic-induced seizures are expected to have a generally slower onset than neural
synchrony induced by high-strength pulsed electric fields.
Duration of Effect
For epileptic individuals, the typical duration of a petit mal event or a psychomotor event
is I minute or 2,possibly longer,while the duration of a grand mal seizure is 1 to 5
minutes. In a non-epileptic individual who is induced by electromagnetic means, the
durations of the different events are expected to be roughly the same as the epileptic
individual's events after the external excitation is removed.
Tunability
There are many degrees of epileptic seizure in diseased persons,and it seems reasonable
that electromagnetic stimulation of neural synchrony might be tunable with regard to type
and degree of bodily influence, depending on the parameters associated with the chosen
stimulus. Because there are no actual data to build on, these statements must be
considered tentative. It is known that in the study of photic-induced seizures,parameters
can be varied so that the individual under study does not actually undergo a grand mal
seizure. This knowledge gives confidence that the proposed technology would be tunable.
Distribution of Human Sensitivities to Desired Effects
It is anticipated that 100%of the population would be susceptible. The mechanism is one
that could act on many individual neuronal cells concurrently and hence does not depend
on spreading regions of electrical activity as in the disease state.
Possible Influence.on Subjects(s)
If the technology functions approximately as envisioned,the targeted individual could be
incapacitated very quickly. Because there have been no reported studies using the
conditions specified,experimental work is required to characterize onset time.Different
types of technologies could be employed to influence wide areas or single individuals.
Because this technology is considered to be tunable, the influence on subjects could vary
from mild disruption of concentration to muscle spasms and loss of consciousness. The
subject(s)would have varying degrees of voluntary control depending on the chosen
degree of incapacitation.
Technological Status of Generator/Aiming Device
An electric field.strength of roughly 100 Kv/m over a time period of 1 nanosecond is
approximately the condition thought to be necessary to produce the desired effect when
provided to an overall repetition rate of 15 Hz. Such a field may be developed using a
radar-like,high-peak-power,pulsed source or an electromagnetic pulse generator
operated at 15 Hz.These technologies exist today sufficient to evaluate the disabling
concept.Power requirements are not high because the duty factor is so low. Aiming
devices are currently available,but a high degree of directionality at long distances wi Il
require development It may be necessary to provide bursts of these nanosecond pulses in
order to stimulate the desired effect. As the duty time increases so does the average
power requirement for power source. Because there were no open literature reports from
which to make inferences, there is some uncertainty about the power levels required.
Range
The effective range could be hundreds of meters.
Defeat Capabilities/Limitations
Shielding can be provided by conductive barriers like metal or metal screen. There art, a
number of drugs that are capable of inducing convulsive seizures and others, like
phenobarbital,diphenyllhydantoin,trimethadione, 2-4 dinitrophenol,and acetazolamide,
which are anticonvulsive. Anticonvulsive drugs are known to be helpful in reducing the
effect of seizures in epileptic patients, but their ability to reduce the effect of the proposed
technology is unknown(possibly no effect)but expected to be less than for photic-
induced seizures.
Incapacitating Effect; Acoustic Energy
The nature of the incapacitation consists of severe pressure sensations,nystagmus (a
spasmodic,involuntary motion of the eyes), and nausea caused by high intensities of
9140-155 dB). Nystagmus occurs when convection currents are produced (cupula
movement)in the lateral ear canal. This cupula movement causes the eyes to move
involuntarily; hence,the external world is.interpreted as moving. The subject "sees" his
surroundings turning round him and at the same time experiences a sensation of turning.
Persons exposed to these levels of sound experience nausea.
Biological Target/Normal Functions/Disease State
The two lateral semicircular canals, one located in each inner ear, alert a person to the
fact that his upright head is experiencing angular acceleration. Within the ampulla of the
canal are several so called hair cells..The cilia of these cells protrude into the lumen of
the ampulla where they are encased in a mass of jelly-like material (the cupula)which is
attached to the opposite wall of the canal. As the head accelerates,the cilia are bent by an
inertial force of the cupula and the viscous liquid in the canal lumen. The bending of the
cilia excites hair cells which in turn excite afferent neurons; these then alert the brain that
a change of position of the head has occurred. Similar events occur when the head stops
moving. The result of a strong hair cell stimulus to the brain is a rapid eye movement,
call nystagmus, a feeling of dizziness and disorientation, and a possibility of nausea and
vomiting.
Normal hearing is in the range between the frequencies of 20,000 to 16,000 Hz with the
optimal sensitivity for most people between the frequencies of 500 to 6000 Hz.
Mechanism to Produce the Desired Effects
Because the end organs for acoustic and vestibular perception are so closely related,
intense acoustic stimulation can result in vestibular effects. The hypothesis is that the
sound of normal intensity produces oscillations of the endolymph and perilymph,
compensated for by oscillations of the round window. High intensity sound produces
eddy currents,which are localized rotational fluid displacements. High intensity sound
can also produce nonlinear displacement of the stapes,causing a volume displacement.
the result of which can be a fluid void in the labyrinth. To fill the void, fluid may be
displaced along the endolymphatic duct and/or block capillary pathways, which, in turn,
could stimulate vestibular receptors. Stimulation of the vestibular receptors may lead to
nausea and vomiting if the sound pressure level is high enough. Conclude that both eddy
currents and volume displacement serve to stimulate vestibular receptors in humans,
when exposed to high levels of noise.
One study found nystagmum in guinea pigs exposed to high levels of infrasound via
stimulation of the vestibular receptors. However, the same lab was unable to produce
nystagmus in human subjects at 5-and 10-second exposures to a pure tone at 135 dB,
broadband engine noise, or a 100 Hz tone at 120 dB,pulsed three times/s or 2 minutes.
The same research was unable to elicit nystagmus at levels up to 155 dB, and also equally
unable to produce nystagmus using infrasound levels of 112-150 dB in guinea pigs,
monkeys, and humans. However, research with audible components in the sound
spectrum with guinea pigs and monkeys produced nystagmus. Other researchers report
other vestibular effects in addition to nystagmus at the following thresholds: 125 dB from
200-500 Hz, 140 dB at 1000 Hz,and 155 dB at 200 Hz. Decrements in vestibular
function occur consistently for broadband noise levels of 140 dB(with hearing
protection).
Human subjects listened to very high levels of low-frequency noise and infrasound in the
protected or unprotected modes. Two-minute duration as high as 140 to 155 dB produced
a range of effects from mild discomfort to severe pressure sensations, nausea,gagging,
and giddiness. Effects also included blurred vision and visual field distortions in some
exposure conditions. The nature and degree of all effects was dependent on both sound
level and frequency with the most severe effects occurring in the audible frequency range
(as opposed to infrasound),at levels above about 145 dB. The investigators found no
temporary threshold shift (TTS) among their subjects, and the use of hearing protectors
greatly alleviated the adverse effects.
Since the early days of jet-engine testing and maintenance,anecdotal evidence has
appeared linking exposure to intense noise,with such complaints as dizziness,vertigo,
nausea, and vomiting. As a result of siren noise at 140 dB, subjects consistently reported
a feeling of being pushed sideways, usually away from the exposed ear, and one subject
reported difficulty standing on one foot.
These effects were not as dramatic as from the jet-engine(broadband)noise at 140 dB.
This research concludes that the threshold of labyrinthine dysfunction is about 135 to 140
dB and that these effects occur during,but not after, exposure.
Time to Onset
No times to onset of nausea or nystagmus were identified in the literature but is presumed
to be relatively immediate based on effects to the labyrinth system occurring during, but
not after,exposure to sound pressure levels of 135 to 140 dB.
Duration of Effect
The incapacitation lasts only as long as the incapacitating sound is present.
Tunability
Based on the data presented above, it is unclear whether the degree of nausea or
nystagmus is tunable,but similar symptoms caused by other stimuli are variable in
degree.
Distribution of Human Sensitivities to Desired Effects
It is most probable that all individuals will be susceptible to this stimulus with the
exception of those with a disease or defect (i.e.,deaf mutes)of some part or parts of the
vestibular system. Data showed no consistent decrease in vestibulo-ocular reflects with
increased age.
Recovery/Safety
Normal subjects are likely to recover immediately and experience no or unmeasurable
changes in hearing unless well known frequency-intensity-time factors are exceeded.
This is based on studies which found no temporary threshold shift in hearing of subjects
tested at low frequency. Occupational safety personnel generally recognize that 115
s
dB(A)is to be avoided and that 70 dB(A) is assumed safe. Is believed that the noise
energy with predominating frequencies above 500 Hz have a greater potential for hearing
loss than noise energy at lower frequencies. Occupational standards for noise state that a
person may be exposed continuously for 8 hours to 90 dB(A)or 15 minutes to 115
dB(A).
Possible Influence on Subject(s)
Induction of nystagmus and nausea will have variable effects on individuals. Effects may
be sufficiently incapacitation to allow offensive advantage; the perception of sickness
may make a subject susceptible to persuasion. It would be difficult to target single
individuals at the present level of sound directing technology.This technology may be
better suited for groups of people.
Technological Status of Generator/Aiming Device
Sound generating technology is well developed but not highly portable. Aiming devices
are poorly developed.
Range
Under normal circumstances the sound pressure level decreases 6 dB(A)when the
distance from the source is doubled. For example if the sound is 100 dB(A) at 100 1?. at
200 ft the sound would be 94 dB(A). At very high sound levels,certain conditions may
lead to nonlinear effects in propagation and greatly increase range accuracy.
Defeat Capabilities/Limitations
Negative effects of audible sound are greatly decreased if hearing protection is worn.
.High frequency sound is more easily blocked than low frequency sound due to
wavelength effects.
Laser-Induced Biological Effects
Their are three basic damage mechanisms associated with exposure to laser radiation:
chemical, thermal,and mechanical or acoustic-mechanical.
The laser-induced, chemical alterations in irradiated tissue are referred to as
photochemical damage. The likelihood of laser radiation in the blue-light portion of the
electromagnetic spectrum (.380 to .550 microns)inducing photochemical reactions
progressively decreases with increasing wavelength. Photochemical effects are not
observed upon exposure to radiation with wavelengths exceeding .550 to .650 microns
because the kinetic energy associated with these photons is insufficient to initiate a
photochemical change.
On the other hand,thethermaleffect is a primary mechanism for laser-induced injury.
The extent of the injuries induced depends upon the wavelength and energy of the
incident radiation,duration of exposure, and the nature of the exposed tissue and its
absorption characteristics. Generally, this mechanism predominates in the visible and the
near-infrared(.760 to 1.4 microns)portions of the electromagnetic spectrum and for
almost all CW and pulsed exposures between 0.1 milliseconds and Ito 5 seconds.
The third injury mechanism associated with exposure to laser radiation is the mechanical
or acoustical-mechanical effect. The radiant energy is absorbed into the tissue and, as a
result of rapid thermal expansion following a short(1 nanosecond to 0.1 millisecond)
laser radiation pulse, a pressure wave is generated that may result in explosive tissue
injury.
Generally, all three mechanisms operate concurrently in an irradiated animal. Thermal
effects currently predominate for continuous wave(CW) lasers,while mechanical effects
are of increased significance for pulsed-mode lasers. With even higher power,one must
also consider nonlinear phenomena such as multiphoton absorption and electromagnetic
field effects.
The organs most susceptible to external laser radiation are the skin and eyes. The severity
of injury is affected by the nature of the target, the energy density delivered to the target,
the frequency and power of the laser,.atmospheric attenuation of the beam, and the use of
filtering or amplifying optics by the target, etc.
The primary effect on the skin is thermal damage(bums).The severity varies from slight
erythema or reddening to severe blistering or charring,depending on such factors as total
energy deposition, skin pigmentation, and the tissue's ability to dissipate heat.
The eye is particularly susceptible to intense pulse of laser radiation because of its unique
sensitivity to light. The focusing effect is similar to that of a magnifying lens, which
focuses the energy on a particular spot. Since the cornea and lens of the eye amplify the
intensity of the light incident upon the retina, the retina is extremely sensitive to visible
and near-infrared light, and damage to the retina may result in temporary or permanent
loss of visual acuity. Laser eye injuries vary according to incident power,spot size,beam
angle,temporal mode(CW or pulsed), and pulse repetition frequency: Reported effects
include comeal lesions,burns,cataracts, and retinal lesions.
Some high-power lasers can cause antipersonnel effects by the deposition of thermal
energy. These lasers must operate at a wavelength that is readily absorbed by the skin or
the comes. These generally include the far- and mid-IR regions(10 to 12 microns and 3
to 5 microns) as well as the ultraviolet region(<0.4 microns). However, ultraviolet
wavelengths generally do not propagate well in the atmosphere, so the primary threat
wavelengths to be considered are between 3 and 12 microns. Although relatively modest
amounts of far-IR laser power are required to produce superficial burns on the skin at
short.ranges, and efforts to design rheostatically lethal laser weapons are on going.
i
Nonlethal blinding laser weapons generally use collimated beams with very low beam
divergence, and the energy contained in the beam diminishes relatively slowly over great
distances. Imaging systems such as eyes and EO vision systems have focusing optics that
bring the incident plane wave of light to focus at the sensor plane. This results in a high
optical gain(greater than 100,000 for eyes),which makes the associated sensor
vulnerable to relatively low fluences of laser energy.
The effects of lasers on eyes are threefold:
• Dazzling or induced glare.
• Flashblinding or loss of night adaptation.
• Permanent or semipermanent blinding.
The severity of laser eye injuries varies according to the incident power, spot size, beam
angle, pupil diameter(ambient light conditions), temporal mode(CW or pulsed), and
PRF of the laser.Reported effects include corneal burs,cataracts(a permanent
cloudiness of the lens), and retinal burns and perforations. Low-cnergy laser weapons are
capable of causing the latter.
Exposure to relatively low laser energies can produce temporary changes in the ability to
see without producing permanent injury. Exposure to laser light can produce an effect
called glare or dazzle,which is similar to the temporary loss of vision experience when
viewing the headlights of an oncoming car. The visual effects last only as long as the
light is present in the field of view(FOV). At slightly higher energy exposures, the same
laser radiation can saturate or flashblind the photoreceptor cells,resulting in after images
that fade with time after exposure. Only visible radiation will induce veiling glare or after
images; near-IR radiation will not produce these effects even though the radiant energy
reaches the photoreceptor cells. Flashblindness and dazzle,while not permanent injuries.
can cause discomfort and temporary loss of vision. Some studies have shown that dazzle
and flashblindness can seriously.impactmission performance, especially in highly visual
tasks such as piloting an aircraft or aiming.
Blinding is the permanent or semipermanent loss of visual acuity. The effect can last
from several hours onward and generally is evidenced by a dark spot in the field of
vision. This spot is called a scotoma. The impact of the scotoma on visual acuity will
vary with the size and position of the injury. Human vision is greatly affected when the
laser damage is to the central vision area of the retina called the fovea.Nonfoveal laser
damage may be less severe or even go unnoticed because it affects only the peripheral
vision. The most serious retinal injuries occur when the incident light is so intense that a
perforation in the retina is formed,resulting in a hemorrhage into either the subretinal
layer or,in the most severe cases,the vitreous humor of the eye.Less severe exposures
result in lesions on the retina.
Footnote:
1-(U)This appendix is classified FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY in its entirety.
t
Information Cutoff Date:17 February 1998
ILS-T?ADED UNCL"SIFM
r OIN (0 n_ b(C
T` 'SAWSCCM FOYPA
A=!!P::Cc 4-102 DOD SZ i0.1R
SERE-T