Law360 (July 6, 2021, 6:33 PM EDT) -- A coalition of 68 wellness organizations is lending support to a lawsuit in the D.C. Circuit challenging a
Federal Communications Commission rule
meant to facilitate the installation of wireless internet equipment in residential areas.
The groups, led by Safe Technology Minnesota and Wired Broadband Inc., told the D.C. Circuit in a June 30 brief that recent revisions to the FCC rule that were aimed at
encouraging fixed wireless providers to install smaller wireless antennas closer to consumers actually endangers residents who don't want to come into contact with the airwaves signals.
The organizations represent citizens who "are all concerned about the devastating health risks and health impact, as well as severe impact on the environment, arising from the proliferation of wireless technology that has accompanied the advent of not only 5G wireless systems but also the changes adopted by the FCC," according to the brief.
The coalition lent support to a lawsuit filed in February by Children's Health Defense — a D.C.-based organization chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and known for promoting vaccine skepticism and campaigning against the fluoridation of drinking water. Kennedy's group
alleges that the FCC botched its rulemaking procedures and overstepped its authority when it revised its over-the-air reception devices, or OTARD, rules in January.
The FCC's OTARD rules in dispute have been around since 1996, and they generally limit prohibitions that would keep people from installing communications antennas. The rule update extended the OTARD protections to wireless internet service providers, not just consumers, allowing them to more freely install carrier-grade base station antennas and provide wireless service to other users in the area. The rule changes were expected to let companies like wireless internet provider Starry serve more than one million new homes in the next year.
However, CDH argued that the rule runs roughshod over state and local zoning laws by requiring no applications, permits or notices to nearby properties. The organization claimed the FCC's "radical preemptive approach" would further expose children and adults to wireless radiation, and allow non-consensual radiation "that can also constitute 'child endangerment' that has criminal and civil penalties."
Safe Technology Minnesota, one of the two groups leading the amicus brief, wrote that it was originally founded to campaign against the "dangers of electromagnetic radiation pollution" from "smart" water meters installed by a St. Paul, Minnesota, utility. It has since moved on to combat the spread of cell towers and small cell nodes. The other brief leader, Wired Broadband Inc., campaigns for fiber as a "safer, faster and more secure" alternative to wireless internet in New York City and throughout the U.S., according to the brief.
These groups wrote that, when amending the OTARD rules, the FCC failed to provide "any meaningful response to the hundreds of comments filed by parties who advised the Commission that they themselves — or members of their families or friends — are suffering health effects as a result of RF emissions." They fear that the updated OTARD rules will bring them into even closer contact with the emissions.
The amicus organizations echoed CDH's call to vacate the OTARD rule updates and send them back to the FCC for further evaluation in light of the alleged health effects.
The FCC doesn't comment on pending litigation.
The petitioners are represented by W. Scott McCollough of McCollough Law Firm PC and CHD in-house counsel Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
The FCC is represented in-house by William J. Scher and Jacob M. Lewis.
The supporting groups are represented by Stephen Díaz Gavin of Rimôn PC
The case is Children's Health Defense et al. v. FCC et al., case number
21-1075,
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
--Additional reporting by Khorri Atkinson. Editing by Emily Kokoll.
https://www.law360.com/articles/1400593/dc-circ-urged-to-overturn-fcc-s-expanded-antenna-rules 
