My guess is that no one questioned this project because, at the time, no one realized the potential health impacts. Either that, or no one received or read the letter they received.
The FCC's RF exposure guidelines recommend a maximum permissible exposure level of the general public (or exposure in "uncontrolled" environments) of about 580 microwatts per square centimeter (µW/cm2), as averaged over any thirty-minute period. The chance of these antenna emitting that much radiation is unlikely.
The Center for Public Integrity found that FCC officials are bribed by the industry with such perks as expensive trips to Las Vegas.(24) FCC standards are based on the obsolete theory that the only risk from RF/microwave exposure is excessive heating of tissues (thermal effects). Yet there are so many documented and dangerous non-thermal effects that even the EPA has said it is time to consider non¬thermal effects in updated standards. The FCC admits that its standards are based upon recommendations of organizations loaded with industry and military lobbyists - most of whom would obviously prefer NO restrictions whatever on the use of RF/microwave radiation.(25) The FCC's exposure limits are so high that no matter how much Fedgov and industry adds to our radiation burden, it will always be "within standards."
24. "Study of the health of people living in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations: I. influences of distance and sex," R. Santini et al, Institut National des Sciences Appliquées"laboratoire de biochimie-pharmacologie, 2002.
25. "Cancer Risks from Microwaves Confirmed," Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, Institute of Science in Society press release, 5-24-07.
The document at http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/luib/3003909.pdf states:
Public issue of this proposal (the 4 additional Clearwire antennas) was issue on January 13, 2006. DPD received no comment letters…
Long-term Impacts - Environmental Health
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has pre-empted state and local governments
from regulating personal wireless service facilities on the basis of environmental effects of radio frequency emissions. As such, no mitigation measures are warranted pursuant to the SEPA
Overview Policy (SMC 25.05.665).
The applicant has submitted a “Statement of Federal Communication Commission Compliance
for Personal Wireless Service Facility” and an accompanying “Affidavit of Qualification and
Certification” for this proposed facility giving the calculations of radiofrequency power density at roof and ground levels expected from this proposal and attesting to the qualifications of the Professional Engineer who made this assessment. This complies with the Seattle Municipal Code Section 25.10.300 that contains Electromagnetic Radiation standards with which the proposal must conform. The City’s experience with review of this type of installation is that the EMR emissions constitute a small fraction of that permitted under both Federal standards and the standards of SMC 25.10.300 and therefore pose no threat to public health.
This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other
information on file with the responsible department and by the responsible official on behalf of
the lead agency. This constitutes the Threshold Determination and form. The intent of this
declaration is to satisfy the requirement of the State Environmental Policy Act (RCW 43.21.C),
including the requirement to inform the public of agency decisions pursuant to SEPA.
[X] Determination of Non-Significance. This proposal has been determined not to have a
significant adverse impact upon the environment. An EIS is not required under
The document at http://www.seattle.gov/dclu/codes/dr/DR2004-8.pdf states:
C. Third Party Review. In order to verify that technical information provided by the applicant is accurate, the Director may require a third-party review, as follows. The third-party reviewer must be a Radiofrequency Engineer, paid for by the applicant and selected by the Director:
1. In single family zones, all minor communication utility applications will be required to undergo third-party review.
2. In multifamily and neighborhood commercial zones, minor communication utility applications may be required to undergo third party review, at the discretion of Director. In determining whether a third-party review is required, the Director will consider the Department’s previous experience in the review of similar applications, and the potential availability of alternate, less intrusive locations.
City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development
Diane M. Sugimura, Director
700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000, PO Box 34019, Seattle, WA 98124-4019