fyi

[Allan Frey]

I came across the following press release.

Allan

Ad Hoc Association
Of Parties Concerned About the Federal Communications
Commission=92s Radio Frequency Health & Safety Rules
P.O. Box 7577, Olympia, Washington, 98507-7577
Phone 415-892-1863/Fax 415-892-3108

June 10,
1998
Contact: Libby Kelley
For Immediate
Release
(415) 892-1863

CITIZEN=92S CHALLENGE TO FCC WIRELESS
RULES IN FEDERAL COURT

A coalition of citizens and citizens associations has challenged FCC
radio-frequency radiation rules it says are endangering public health
and
violating constitutional guarantees of free speech, due process and
reserved
state powers. The Seattle-based Ad-Hoc Association of Parties Concerned
About
The FCC=92s Radio Frequency Health and Safety Rules joined with the
Communications Workers of America and its Washington State Local 7810 in
an 80
page brief filed May 22, 1998, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Second
Circuit. A third challenger, Cellular Phone Taskforce of Brooklyn, New
York,
also filed a lengthy brief on behalf of =93electrosensitive=94 persons
specially
vulnerable to microwave radiation. The Ad Hoc Association is
represented by
James R. Hobson of Donelan, Cleary, Wood and Maser in Washington D.C.

One of the individual appellants, Holly Fournier, is a Charlotte,
Vermont town
council member. Because the FCC=92s rules must be followed by local
governments,
Ms. Fournier says she is =93being compelled to budget for, support and
otherwise
carry out the FCC=92s regulatory program=94 for rapid placement of radio
antennas
associated with the booming business of personal wireless services such
as
cellular and micro-cellular (=93PCS=94) telephony. The federal program, =
she
declares, is =93contrary to my views=94 and a source of =93great anxiety =
to me
as a
local government official sworn to act in the best interest of my
community=94.

The legal remedies being sought include asking the court to: 1)=20
Overturn
the
FCC=92s preemption authority as it interferes with state perogatives in
matters
of public health, safety and welfare. 2) Eliminate the regulatory
standard
which raises the Maximum Permissible Exposure (=93MPE=94) levels for
workers. 3)
Order the FCC to prepare an environmental assessment according to the
National
Environmental Protection Act (=93NEPA=94). 4) Require public access to
information on carrier compliance with RF emission standards. 5)=20
Remand the
standards to the FCC and the health and safety agencies to be
re-determined
and
account for scientific findings which show adverse health effects to
biological
systems when exposed to non-ionizing radiation.