Laserfiche WebLink
facilities based on environmental effects of RF emissions so long as those facilities <br /> complied with relevant FCC regulations. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(iv). That same <br /> year, Congress eliminated funding for Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) <br /> activities related to RF radiation.4 <br /> SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT <br /> The Federal Communications Commission has failed to protect the public <br /> from radiofrequency emissions. The Commission's legal obligations flow from <br /> two statutes —the National Environmental Policy Act and the Telecommunications <br /> Act. NEPA requires the Commission to analyze the environmental impacts — <br /> including those of radiofrequency radiation — of its authorization of wireless <br /> service providers. The Telecommunications Act goes further and imposes an <br /> affirmative duty on the FCC to protect the public from environmental effects of <br /> radiofrequency radiation. The FCC's December 4, 2019,5 order misinterprets the <br /> 4 Sen. Report 104-140, Department of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban <br /> Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Bill, 1996, (Sept. 13, <br /> 1995)(to accompany H.R. 2099)(hereafter "Senate Report 104-140"), at 91 . <br /> FCC, In the Matter of Proposed Changes in the Commission'S Rules Regarding <br /> Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Reassessment of'Fed. <br /> C0111171C111s Commit'n Radiofrequency Exposure Limits & Policies Targeted Changes <br /> to the C0171171iSSiOn'S Rules Regarding Human Exposure to Radiofrequencv <br /> Electromagnetic Fields, Docket Nos. ET 03-137, 13-84, 19-226, FCC Rcd <br /> 2019 WL 6681944 (Dec. 4, 2019)(hereafter "2019 Order" or "Order") <br /> 6 <br />