PETER A . DEFAZIO PLEASE RESPOND TO: 4 TH DISTii ICT, OPU!GON D 2134 RAvau" N House 0FFIC1! 6u1Lo1Na WASHINGTON, DC 20515·3704 TRANSPORTATION AND (202) 226-8418 INFRASTRUCTURE CHAIRMAN D 405 EAST 8TH AVENUE, #2030 EUGENE, OR 97401 (6411 486-6732 1·800-944-9603 ~ongregg ~tatrg of tbt mtntttb D 126 CENTUL AVENUE, #350 Coos BAY, OR 97420 l!}ou~t of it\tprt~tntatibt~ (6411 269-2809 D 812 SE JACKSON S'"EET, #9 Roseeu" a, OR 974 70 May 29, 2n~ e1vea & tnspeeted (641J440-3523 defazlo.house.gov Chairman Ajit Pai D Federal Communications Commission JUN 03 2019 445 I 21h Street SW Washington, DC 20554 FCC Maitroom 346 Dear Chairman Pai: Thank you for your prompt response to the letter I sent you on April 15, 2019, regarding the federal government's research into the potential health effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation and its relation to the Federal Communications Commission' s (FCC) current guidelines for what it considers to be safe RF exposure levels for humans. However, your response did not provide answers to the specific questions I posed in my letter. While I appreciate the information you provided regarding the FCC's reliance on recommendations from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, and others, your letter did not provide details of how these organizations reach their conclusions nor the research or studies they have relied upon. Moreover, the fact remains that, despite its ongoing rulemaking initiated in 2013 - six years ago - the FCC still has not completed a formal reassessment or update of its RF safety guidelines since 1996. Unfortunately, I find this response to be yet another example of the FCC and other federal agencies assuring Congress and the public about the safety of 5G technology and RF radiation without providing clear evidence or research to back up these assertions. Your agency's continued equivocation gives the appearance that the FCC is dismissing Americans' concerns, which only serves to fuel public distrust in the federal government and increases public concern about possible health effects from 5G technology. If the FCC and related agencies were willing to be more transparent and provide specific details about the research they rely upon, the public would feel more confident about the process for determining RF safety which you have outlined. Additionally, as you may know, a recent New York Times article' suggests that Russian-backed media entities are engaged in propaganda efforts to further stoke Americans' fears of potential health effects from 5G technology. If the FCC and the federal government wish to counter this narrative, it is imperative that you take prompt action to clearly demonstrate to the public that this technology has no adverse effects on public health. Moreover, the FCC's responsibility to be transparent about this research is underscored by the fact that it adopted onerous clarifying rules2 in 20 I 8 which usurp local control over SG small cell installations, essentially forcing states and municipalities to adopt this new technology no matter their 1 New York Times, "Your 5G Phone Won't Hurt You. But Russia Wants You to Think Otherwise," 12 May 2019, https://www .nvtimes.com/20191051I2/science/5g-phone-safetv-health-russia.htm I. 2 Federal Communications Comm ission, "Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by. Removing Barriers to In frastructure Investment," FCC 18-1I l , 2 August 2018, https://docs.fcc.gov/publi c/attachments/FCC-18- 1 I I A 1.pdf; and FCC 18-133, 26 September 2018, https://docs. fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-1 8-I 33A l.pdf. THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS ~·· citizens' concerns. As a result, states and municipalities are forced to depend on the federal government for information about the safety of 5G technology. I strongly urge the FCC and the administration to be open and transparent about its research on this issue, the processes it uses to determine and update its RF safety guidelines, and to take immediate efforts to inform the American public about these items. Anything less would be to neglect the federal government's responsibility to provide answers to the public regarding the safety of the technology that surrounds them. Once again, I request that the FCC provide answers to the following: 1. What scientific literature or research has the FCC, EPA, FDA, and related agencies used to determine that 5G technology will not cause any adverse health effects in humans? Please cite specific studies and research conducted. 2. What gaps exist in our current understanding of possible health effects from 5G technology, as well as the possible health effects of RF radiation writ large? 3. What efforts has the federal government taken to educate the public, as well as state and local governments, about its research on RF radiation and safety guidelines as it relates to 5G technology? Additionally, what efforts has the federal government taken, if any, to counteract Russian propaganda on this issue? The FCC and the federal government cannot continue to ignore Americans' concerns. If the scientific evidence on this issue is clear-cut, there should be no hesitation to provide the details. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your reply. Sincerely, p~~· Member of Congress -- - ---- --- - ----------- -- -