New Hampshire House Bill 1644-FN

Please note the following suggested edits to 1644-FN:

Suggested edits are [bolded and within square brackets].

On Jan 14,2022 I sent this info to the following

  1. Denise Ricciardi
  2. Kent Chamberlin>

On Jan 16,2022 I sent this info to the following

  1. Patrick Abrami
  2. Gary Woods

New Hampshire House Bill 1644-FN


AN ACT relative to the placement of telecommunication antennas and establishing a registry for residents who are experiencing biological symptoms from wireless radiation exposure.

SPONSORS: Rep. Abrami, Rock. 19; Rep. Woods, Merr. 23; Sen. Ricciardi, Dist 9

COMMITTEE: Science, Technology and Energy


This bill requires telecommunication antennas be placed at least 1,640 feet from residentially zoned areas, parks, playgrounds, hospitals, nursing homes, day care centers, and schools. This bill also creates a registry for anyone experiencing symptoms of radiation exposure.



In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Twenty Two

AN ACT relative to the placement of telecommunication antennas and establishing a registry for residents who are experiencing biological symptoms from wireless radiation exposure.


Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 Legislative Findings and Purpose.

I. The New Hampshire Commission to study the environmental and health effects of [4G/5G Wireless microwave radiation transmissions] concluded on November 1, 2020, after reviewing thousands of peer reviewed studies and listening to months of testimony from experts, that there is a significant public health risk associated with the [total dose] of radio frequency [microwave] radiation exposures which is growing every day with the proliferation of cell tower [infrastructure antennas].

II. The Federal Communication Commission has used a specific absorption rate [(SAR)] limit [since August 1996] to manage the risks associated with wireless [microwave radiation exposures and] emissions, [but this SAR limit only applies to frequencies up to 6,000 MHz, which means there is no FCC microwave radiation MPE regulation upon which the State of New Hampshire can rely in 2022 — UNTIL the FCC completes its court-mandated environmental review for the proposed addition of 800,000 to 1,200,000 additional cell towers projected to be constructed to build the proposed densified 4G/5G Wireless infrastructure grid hyped under the Wireless Industry FCC propaganda slogan of “Winning the Race to 5G” (see]

Please, understand these relevant facts . . .


On Page 3, the FCC Attempted the following:

Para 3. . . . based on our existing limits, we revise our implementing rules to reflect modern technology and today’s uses. We streamline our criteria for determining when a licensee is exempt from our RF exposure evaluation criteria, replacing our prior regime of service-based exemptions with a set of formulas for situations in which the risk of excessive RF exposure is minimal. For those licensees who do not qualify for an exemption, we provide more flexibility for licensees to establish compliance with our RF exposure limits. And we specify methods that RF equipment operators can use to mitigate the risk of excess exposure, both to members of the public and trained workers (such as training, supervision, and signage).

Para 4. . . . we notice further targeted proposals on the application of our RF emission exposure limits for future uses of wireless technologies. Specifically, we propose to formalize an additional limit for localized RF exposure and the associated methodology for compliance for portable devices operating at high frequencies (gigahertz (GHz) frequencies) on top of our already existing limits that apply at these frequencies, and propose to extend this to terahertz (THz) frequencies as well4 We also propose to allow wireless power transfer (WPT) equipment under Parts 15 and 18 of the Commission’s rules and propose specific exposure limits for such operations.

Page 3, Footnote 4:

4 “The standards for localized specific absorption rate (SAR) that are normally applied for testing compliance of consumer devices operating below 6 GHz were derived from the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) whole body limits that extend up to 100 GHz. The Commission currently employs a similar derivation to apply localized limits where appropriate for testing consumer devices operating above 6 GHz, and we propose in this item to formalize that approach.”

Wire America: Regarding the text cited from FCC 19-126, above, whatever the FCC attempted in FCC 19-126, was ruled on Aug 13, 2021 by the US Court of Appeals DC Circuit to be arbitrary and capricious and was remanded back to the FCC for further consideration — SO THIS ATTEMPT FAILED. The FCC falsely states things in reverse-order in footnote 4. The regulations were actually established in the opposite order: the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) whole body limits were derived from SAR. If there is no relevant SAR, then there is no MPE. Read this NCPR Report No. 86 → . . . These facts are very germane to New Hampshire House Bill 1644-FN.

This is further explained in a Jan 13, 2022 Youtube video from 55:05 to 58:35.

[Scientifically-established facts prove] that wireless [microwave] radiation is bioactive and can cause [adverse biological and] health effects. There is clear evidence of biological effects from radio frequency [microwave] radiation exposure, such as that from wireless devices and infrastructure [antennas]. The World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer categorized wireless emissions — [electromagnetic fields from any source] — as a class 2B carcinogen in 2011 after reviewing the science worldwide. In 2018, the United States National Institute of Health’s, National Toxicology Program completed the largest study of its kind focused on the question of whether [wirelessl cellular microwave] radiation is capable of inducing adverse health effects [at power output levels lower than that which would heat tissue], which is especially important because our current FCC [microwave radiation regulations] only protect against thermal [effects from microwave radiation] exposures. This [$30 million scientific, peer-reviewed study] found clear evidence of carcinogenicity and DNA damage in animals from [power output levels lower than that which would heat tissue]. [The type of cellular telecommunications service that was tested is typical of second generation (2G) and third generation (3G) wireless telecommunications service; frequencies initially used for 3G wireless microwave radiation (and being repurposed for 5G service) are still currently in use for wireless telecommunications service].

III. On August 13, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled, in a case brought by the Environmental Health Trustm Children’s Health Defense [et al. versus the Federal Communication Commission (FCC), challenging the legality of the FCC’s Dec 2019 Order 19-126, an order] that attempted to state that the radio frequency microwave radiation regulations that were selected by the FCC in August] 1996 were adequate to protect the public. [The US Court of Appeals DC Circuit ruled that FCC Order 19-126 was arbitrary, capricious and therefore unlawful due to] its failure to respond to record evidence, and [its] violation of the Federal Administrative Procedures Act.

Specifically, the DC Circuit judges ruled:

“that failure undermines the Commission’s conclusions regarding the adequacy of its testing procedures, particularly as they relate to children, and its conclusions regarding the implications of long term exposure to [radio frequency] radiation, exposure to [radio frequency] pulsation or modulation, and the implications of technological developments that have occurred since 1996, all of which depend on the premise that exposure to [radio frequency] at levels below its current limits causes no negative health effects. Accordingly, we find those conclusions arbitrary and capricious as well. Finally, we find the commission’s order arbitrary and capricious in its complete failure to respond to comments concerning environmental harm caused by [radio frequency] radiation.”

IV. The legal history of New Hampshire is similar to other states in that there is no question that New Hampshire local and state governments are responsible for protecting the health and safety of our residents, particularly in the case of our most vulnerable children and the matter of schools and particularly in the case of the elderly and the matter of hospitals and nursing homes. The examples of New Hampshire taking action to protect the health and safety of its residents are too numerous to list herein.

V. In light of all these facts, we conclude that [wireless radio frequency microwave radiation is] bioactive and is currently being [insufficiently regulated]; therefore, [the state of New Hampshire should regulate the maximum power output of microwave radiation from wireless infrastructure antennas that reaches any areas that are accessible to human beings and other living organisms more strictly moving forward], consistent with the 11,000+ pages of peer-reviewed, scientific evidence that Environmental Health Trust and Children’s Health Defense and others plaintiffs placed in the FCC’s public record: Vol-1, Vol-2, Vol-3, Vol-4, Vol-5, Vol-6, Vol-7 Vol-8, Vol-9, Vol-10, Vol-11, Vol-12, Vol-13, Vol-14, Vol-15, Vol-16, Vol-17, Vol-18, Vol-19, Vol-20, Vol-21, Vol-22, Vol-23, Vol-24, Vol-25, Vol-26 and Vol-27.

Based on the commission’s work, we do not believe that the current Federal Communication Commission’s [regulations] for radio frequency [microwave radiation] exposure are adequate to protect public health, especially when it comes to [the total dose of microwave radiation (the total exposure over time), the adverse biological effects caused by the peaks of microwave radiation resulting from the many, varied pulsation and modulation schemes in today’s 2G/3G/4G/5G/Wi-Fi specifications, or the adverse biological effects on sensitive populations, including but not limited to children, the elderly, people with Electromagnetic Sensitivity (EMS) or the immuno-compromised of all ages].

VI. Unfortunately, the Federal Communication Commission and Food and Drug Administration have not engaged in adequate risk management when it comes to managing [the total dose of wireless microwave radiation exposures], like has been done with other agents that expose the public to possible harm such as medications, medical procedures, and food. As a result, New Hampshire residents are exposed to unacceptable levels of risk given the widespread [use of wireless devices and the insufficiently-regulated placement, construction and operations of, wireless infrastructure antennas]. [This bill seeks to take some first steps towards establishing confidence with New Hampshire residents, by ensuring that they are adequately protected from wireless microwave radiation exposures from wireless infrastructure antennas].

VII. To be clear, the [New Hampshire Commission] favors broadband to be delivered via wires (coaxial and fiber optic wires), choices that maximize symmetric upload/downloads speeds, capacity, security, sustainability, energy-efficiency, privacy, and safety vs wireless broadband, which is inferior in each of these operational parameters.]
When considering plans for, use of and deployment of new state or federal broadband funds, the New Hampshire Commission is in favor of New Hampshire making the best possible choices to deliver broadband to its citizens: Fiber Optics (or Coaxial) to the Premises (FTTP).]

VIII. [In New Hampshire], we are not willing to take chances with the health and safety of our workers, families, children and elderly. Because the health and safety of New Hampshire residents is of the utmost importance, this bill is establishing a common distance that all new cell tower transmitters, whether large or small [or part of a modification on an existing cell tower] must be located from any person – a distance of 1,640 feet from residentially zoned areas, parks, playgrounds, hospitals, nursing homes, day care centers, and schools.

Wire-America: So, this grandfather’s in every cell tower constructed prior to January 1, 2023, as is? Are there no plans to move or change the operating parameters (Vertical offset, Horizontal, Offset, Maximum allowed Effective Radiated Power) of cell towers that are non-compliant with this law?

Given the large body of scientific evidence documenting the adverse biological effects from [wireless microwave radiation exposures] and given the vast range of biological sensitivities [to microwave radiation exposures] within any population, this mandated distance will significantly reduce the risk of adverse biological effects and thus the probability of health effects within this distance of 1,640 feet.

Wire-America: Of course, this is way over-simplified. I can easily envision cell towers with antennas that are less than 200 feet from the ground that choose to transmit with additional power in order to easily overcome the horizontal offset parameter of 500 meters (1640 feet) and still create hazardous conditions. Without regulating all three parameters, Vertical, Horizonal and Power, you are achieving little with this New Hampshire House Bill 1644-FN. There is not enough time for this incrementalism. We need an effective solution right now, not a watered-down, easier-to-sell solution.

IX. Public health and safety is the primary responsibility of local and state government.

2 New Paragraph; Placement of Telecommunication Antennas. Amend RSA 374:34-a by inserting after paragraph VIII the following new paragraph:

IX. The placement of telecommunication antennas on any existing structure, existing pole, new pole, or tower constructed after the enactment of this paragraph shall be placed at least 1,640 feet from residentially zoned areas, parks, playgrounds, hospitals, nursing homes, day care centers, and schools.”

3 New Subdivision; Radiation Exposure Registry. Amend RSA 126-A by inserting after section 97 the following new subdivision:

Radiation Exposure Registry

126-A:98 Radiation Exposure Registry.

I. The department of health and human services shall establish an online registry that allows residents who are experiencing biological symptoms from wireless radiation exposure to list their relevant information, including:

(a) The resident’s name, address, email, phone number;

(b) The address and location of the wireless transmitter in question;

(c) The type of cell transmitter or other wireless source in question if known;

(d) When symptoms began;

(e) The range of biological symptoms experienced;

(f) The frequency of biological symptoms and severity; and

(g) If there is a change in these symptoms with a change in proximity to the transmitter and length of time exposed.

II. The registry, and all relevant information, shall be posted online in its entirety, easily accessible to the public on the department’s website with a link to the registry easily accessible to the public on the home page of the website. The published information shall not include the name, address, email, or phone number of the person reporting. The department shall include a conspicuous notice to the public regarding how their information shall be used.

III. The department, in consultation with the department of energy, shall establish fees to ensure the cost of establishing, maintaining, and advertising the online registry established in this section shall be borne by the operators of wireless antennas in the state.

4 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2023.