History of Legal Challenges to

FCC Ignoring 24 Years of Science and Federal Regulations for Fast 5G Rollout,

Risking Our Lives and Health

documents collected for this case -- includes the 11,0000 pages of medical evidence

Most recent activity is at the top of list. Start at the bottom for chronological order.

August 13, 2021 Win

Significant win.

Short explanation of the meaning of this court win by one of the involved lawyers. Start at 3:50

The Court also found the FCC’s reliance on FDA statements to be “unreasoned” because the FDA did not substantiate its statements on RF limits. The Court stated the FCC should have determined “how and why it (the FDA) reached its conclusions” as the FCC had a responsibility “to regulate radio communications and devices that emit RF radiation and interfere with radio communications and to do so in the public interest, including in regard to public health.”

November 12, 2020 Petitioners' Final Joint Reply Brief (EHT, et. al. Rebuttal)

1. The FCC’s Brief uses impermissible post-hoc rationalization and wrongly cites to extra-record documents, some of which did not even exist at the time of the Order.

2. The FCC’s arguments for extraordinary deference mischaracterize the nature of the case and the relief Petitioners seek. The Inquiry had the same purpose and design as informal rulemaking. Petitioners did not ask the Court to order a new rulemaking; they request vacatur, remand for reasoned decision-making, and an order requiring that the Commission resolve the issues set out in the Inquiry, assess all the material evidence, and properly balance all interests in accordance with the policies underlying the Communications Act.

3. The FCC refused to meaningfully assess the vast amount of reliable peer-reviewed scientific and medical evidence generated after 1996 indicating current and potential health risks from currently-authorized exposures, and gave inappropriate weight to unreliable and conflicted views and opinions by industry- supported sources. It irresponsibly refused to confront the evidence showing that many individuals have already become seriously ill from exposures that cannot be escaped.

August 4, 2020

Amicus brief filed by Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) on loss of public role for NEPA review

NRDC supports the petitioners’ request to vacate the FCC’s unlawful December 4, 2019 order. NRDC explains how the FCC’s arbitrary and capricious action harms communities by eliminating meaningful environmental review and public participation in the siting of wireless infrastructure. Eighteen local elected officials from across the US signed on this brief.

July 29, 2020

The two nonprofits file consolidated main petition asking for science-based safety standards

Spring, 2020

Consolidation directive from court to the two nonprofits challenging the FCC

The courts consolidated the two petitions against the FCC and ordered the case to be heard in the US Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia.

February 2, 2020

Second nonprofit files challenge to FCC brush-off of 25 years of scientific research as an invalid review

Children's Health Defense et al v. FCC: CHD was the lead petitioner also challenging the FCC’s December refusal to update their 24-year-old guidelines, and to promulgate scientific, human evidence-based radio frequency emissions (“RF”) rules that adequately protect public health and safety from wireless technology radiation. CHD filed in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

January 31, 2020

First nonprofit files challenge to FCC brush-off of 25 years of scientific research as an invalid review

The Environmental Health Trust et al v. FCC: In response to the December FCC Order, the EHT filed suit on January, 31st, 2020, as the lead petitioner in a case that faults the FCC for failing to have ever updated cellular phone and wireless RF radiation limits and cellular phone testing methods since they were first set in 1996. These failures, the petitioners contend, ignore “peer-reviewed scientific studies showing that radiation from cell phones and cell phone towers and transmitters is associated with severe health effects in humans, including cancer, DNA damage, damage to the reproductive organs, and brain damage (including memory problems).” This case challenges the FCC for their non-protective, inadequate, and outdated wireless regulations. EHT filed in the US Court of Appeals for DC

December 4, 2019

FCC 2019 Order upholds original order with outdated safety standards after cursory review of science

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a new order essentially maintaining that despite having only conducted a cursory review that failed to take into account the accumulating scientific evidence of 25 years, would stand by its public health and safety standards related to human exposure to Radio Frequency (RF) radiation. That action basically gave a green light to the rollout of 5G technology and a dense network of small cell towers on residential streets across the country.

August 9, 2019

Court decides for Cherokee Nation against fast 5G/small cell deployment, FCC must review science first

DC Circuit Court of Appeals vacated FCC’s order requiring expedited deployment of 5G and small cell antennas, the 800,000-unit so-called "Small Cell" technology. The FCC was “arbitrary and capricious” in violating the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and the National Historical Protection Act (NHPA) by adding ultra-high frequency millimeter radiation without required review. It is not lawful for any such facilities to be constructed without NEPA review at this time. The prior rule requiring NEPA review was reinstated, so any actions taken on the basis of the vacated rule have to be reconsidered. Since the Court vacated the FCC’s rule, the decision applies nationwide.$file/18-1129-1801375.pdf

Late 2018

A tribe of the Cherokee Indian Nation challenges the FCC rush to deploy 5G/small cells without review

Three groups of petitioners challenge the FCC Order as violating the NHPA, NEPA, and the Administrative Procedures Act on several grounds: that its elimination of historic preservation and environmental review of small cell construction was arbitrary and capricious, an unjustified policy reversal, and contrary to the NHPA and NEPA; that the changes to Tribes’ role in reviewing new construction was arbitrary and capricious; that the Commission arbitrarily and capriciously failed to engage in meaningful consultations with Tribes in promulgating the Order; and that the Order itself required NEPA review.

(needs citation for original petition)

March 30, 2018

FCC removes NEPA and NHPA review of 5G/small cell microwave antennas to speed up installation

As part of an effort to expedite the rollout of 5G service, the Commission has removed some regulatory requirements for the construction of wireless facilities. The Order exempted most small cell construction from two kinds of previously required review: historic-preservation review under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Together, these reviews assess the effects of new construction on, among other things, sites of religious and cultural importance to federally recognized Indian Tribes; and the local environmental effect of the 5G installations including public participation in the environmental review process. The Order also effectively reduced Tribes’ role in reviewing proposed construction of macrocell towers and other wireless facilities that remain subject to cultural and environmental review. See:

Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment (Second Report & Order) (Order), FCC 18-30, 2018 WL 1559856 (F.C.C.) (Mar. 30, 2018).