WS Of RADIO FREQUENCY SMART METERS RNUARY 2011 219' ff :Mu an if' ?zsis* I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS? We?would?like?to?thank?the?many?people?who?provided?input?and?feedback?towards?the? completion?of?this?report.??Without?the?insightful?feedback?that?these?individuals?generously? provided,?this?report?could?not?have?been?completed.??We?would?like?to?give?special?thanks?to? the?California?Smart?Grid?Center,?College?of?Engineering?and?Computer?Science?at?the?California? State?University,?Sacramento?and?to?the?University?of?California's?Center?for?Information? Technology?Research?in?the?Interest?of?Society?(CITRIS).? ? This?report?was?conducted?with?the?oversight?of?a?CCST?Smart?Meter?Project?Team,?whose? members?include:?Rollin?Richmond?(Chair),?Emir?Macari,?Patrick?Mantey,?Paul?Wright,?Ryan? McCarthy,?Jane?Long,?David?Winickoff,?and?Larry?Papay.?We?also?thank?J.D.?Stack?for?his? technical?contributions?and?Lora?Lee?Martin?for?the?overall?coordination?of?this?report?response.? We?express?gratitude?to?CCST's?members?and?colleagues?for?their?many?contributions?to?the? report.? ? COPYRIGHT? Copyright?2010?by?the?California?Council?on?Science?and?Technology.?Library?of?Congress? Cataloging?Number?in?Publications?Data?Main?Entry?Under?Title:? Health?Impacts?of?Radio?Frequency?From?Smart?Meters? January?2011? ISBN-13:?978-1-930117-42-6? ? CCST?is?a?non-profit?organization?established?in?1988?at?the?request?of?the?California?State? Government?and?sponsored?by?the?major?public?and?private?postsecondary?institutions?of? California?and?affiliate?federal?laboratories?in?conjunction?with?leading?private-sector?firms.? CCST's?mission?is?to?improve?science?and?technology?policy?and?application?in?California?by? proposing?programs,?conducting?analyses,?and?recommending?public?policies?and?initiatives? that?will?maintain?California's?technological?leadership?and?a?vigorous?economy.? ? Note:?The?California?Council?on?Science?and?Technology?(CCST)?has?made?every?reasonable? effort?to?assure?the?accuracy?of?the?information?in?this?publication.?However,?the?contents?of? this?publication?are?subject?to?changes,?omissions,?and?errors,?and?CCST?does?not?accept? responsibility?for?any?inaccuracies?that?may?occur.? ? For?questions?or?comments?on?this?publication?contact:? California?Council?on?Science?and?Technology? 1130?K?Street,?Suite?280? Sacramento,?California?95814? (916)?492-0996? ccst@ccst.us? ? 1 Table?of?Contents?? ? Letter?from?CCST ............................................................................................................................ 3? Key?report?findings ......................................................................................................................... 4? Other?considerations...................................................................................................................... 4? Legislative?request.......................................................................................................................... 6? Approach ........................................................................................................................................ 6? Two?types?of?radio?frequency?effects:?Thermal?and?Non-thermal................................................. 7? Findings .......................................................................................................................................... 7? What?are?smart?meters? ................................................................................................................ 9? Why?are?smart?meters?being?installed?throughout?California?.................................................... 11? What?health?concerns?are?associated?with?smart?meters?.......................................................... 13? FCC?guidelines?address?known?thermal?effects?only,?not?non-thermal?effects............................ 15? Power?density?(and?exposure?level)?declines?rapidly?with?distance............................................. 18? Comparison?of?electromagnetic?frequencies?from?smart?meters?and?other?devices .................. 19? What?is?duty?cycle?and?how?does?it?affect?human?health? .......................................................... 22? What?about?exposure?levels?from?a?bank?of?meters?and?from?just?behind?? the?wall?of?a?single?meter? ........................................................................................................... 23? Is?the?FCC?standard?sufficient?to?protect?public?health? .............................................................. 23? Are?additional?technology-specific?standards?needed? ............................................................... 23? Public?information?and?education................................................................................................ 24? Alternatives?to?wireless? .............................................................................................................. 24? Key?factors?to?consider?when?evaluating?exposure?to?radiofrequency?from?smart?meters?....... 25? Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 26? ? Appendix?A?-?Letters?requesting?CCST?assistance ........................................................................ 27? o Assembly?Member?Huffman's?Letter ............................................................................... 27? o Assembly?Member?Monning's?Letter ............................................................................... 29? o City?of?Mill?Valley?Letter ................................................................................................... 30? Appendix?B?-?Project?Process ....................................................................................................... 32? Appendix?C?-?Project?Team .......................................................................................................... 34? Appendix?D?-?Written?Submission?Authors.................................................................................. 37? Appendix?E?-?Materials?Consulted ............................................................................................... 38? Appendix?F?-?Glossary .................................................................................................................. 45? Appendix?G?-?CCST?2010?Board?Members ................................................................................... 47? Appendix?H?-?CCST?2010?Council?Members ................................................................................. 48? Appendix?I?-?Report?Credits ......................................................................................................... 49? ? 2 Letter?from?CCST? ? With?rapidly?emerging?and?evolving?technologies,?lawmakers?at?times?find?themselves?pressed? to?make?policy?decisions?on?complex?technologies.??Smart?meters?are?one?such?technology.? ? Smart?meters?are?being?deployed?in?many?places?in?the?world?in?an?effort?to?create?a?new? generation?of?utility?service?based?on?the?concepts?of?a?smart?grid,?one?that?is?agile,?efficient? and?cost?effective.? ? The?electricity?crisis?of?2000?and?2001?helped?force?the?issue?here?in?California,?lending? significant?urgency?to?the?need?for?better?management?of?power?generation?and?distribution.?? In?2006,?the?California?Public?Utilities?Commission?authorized?the?Pacific?Gas?and?Electric? Company?to?implement?a?relatively?new?technology,?smart?meters,?to?gather?much?more? precise?information?about?power?usage?throughout?the?state.??The?process?of?installing?the? meters?throughout?the?state?is?still?underway.? ? As?with?any?new?technology,?there?are?unknowns?involved.??Smart?meters?generally?work?by? transmitting?information?wirelessly.??Some?people?have?expressed?concerns?about?the?health? effects?of?wireless?signals,?particularly?as?they?become?virtually?ubiquitous.??These?concerns? have?recently?been?brought?to?the?attention?of?state?legislators,?with?some?local?municipalities? opting?to?ban?further?installation?of?the?meters?in?their?communities.? ? We?are?pleased?that?Assembly?Members?Huffman?and?Monning?have?turned?to?CCST?for?input? on?this?issue.??It?is?CCST's?charge?to?offer?independent?expert?advice?to?the?state?government? and?to?recommend?solutions?to?science?and?technology-related?policy?issues.??In?this?case,?we? have?assembled?a?succinct?but?comprehensive?overview?of?what?is?known?about?human? exposure?to?wireless?signals?and?the?efficacy?of?the?FCC?safety?standards?for?these?signals.??To? do?so,?we?assembled?a?project?team?that?consulted?with?over?two?dozen?experts?and?sifted? through?over?a?hundred?articles?and?reports,?providing?a?thorough,?unbiased?overview?in?a? relatively?rapid?manner.? ? In?situations?where?public?sentiment?urges?policy?makers?to?make?policy?decisions?with? potentially?long-term?consequences,?access?to?the?best?information?possible?is?critical.??This?is? the?role?that?CCST?was?created?to?fulfill.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Rollin?Richmond? Project?Team?Chair,?CCST? ? Susan?Hackwood? ? Executive?Director,?CCST? ? 3 ? 1. 2. 3. 4. ? Health?Impacts?of?Radio?Frequency?from?Smart?Meters? Response?to?Assembly?Members?Huffman?and?Monning? ? California?Council?on?Science?and?Technology? January?2011? KEY?REPORT?FINDINGS? Wireless?smart?meters,?when?installed?and?properly?maintained,?result?in?much?smaller? levels?of?radio?frequency?(RF)?exposure?than?many?existing?common?household? electronic?devices,?particularly?cell?phones?and?microwave?ovens.? The?current?FCC?standard?provides?an?adequate?factor?of?safety?against?known?thermally? induced?health?impacts?of?existing?common?household?electronic?devices?and?smart? meters.?? To?date,?scientific?studies?have?not?identified?or?confirmed?negative?health?effects?from? potential?non-thermal?impacts?of?RF?emissions?such?as?those?produced?by?existing? common?household?electronic?devices?and?smart?meters.? Not?enough?is?currently?known?about?potential?non-thermal?impacts?of?radio?frequency? emissions?to?identify?or?recommend?additional?standards?for?such?impacts? OTHER?CONSIDERATIONS? Smart?electricity?meters?are?a?key?enabling?technology?for?a?"smart?grid"?that?is?expected?to? become?increasingly?clean,?efficient,?reliable,?and?safe?at?a?potentially?lower?cost?to?the? consumer.??The?CCST?Smart?Meter?Project?Team?offers?the?following?for?further? consideration?by?policy?makers,?regulators?and?the?utilities.??We?appreciate?that?each?of? these?considerations?would?likely?require?a?cost/benefit?analysis.??However,?we?feel?they? should?be?considered?as?the?overall?cumulative?exposure?to?RF?emissions?in?our? environment?continues?to?expand.?? 1. As?wireless?technologies?of?all?types?increase?in?usage,?it?will?be?important?to:?(a)? continue?to?quantitatively?assess?the?levels?of?RF?emissions?from?common?household? devices?and?smart?meters?to?which?the?public?may?be?exposed;?and?(b)?continue?to? investigate?potential?thermal?and?non-thermal?impacts?of?such?RF?emissions?on?human? health.? 2. Consumers?should?be?provided?with?clearly?understood?information?about?the? radiofrequency?emissions?of?all?devices?that?emit?RF?including?smart?meters.??Such? information?should?include?intensity?of?output,?duration?and?frequency?of?output,?and,? in?the?cases?of?the?smart?meter,?pattern?of?sending?and?receiving?transmissions?to?and? from?all?sources.? 3. The?California?Public?Utilities?Commission?should?consider?doing?an?independent?review? of?the?deployment?of?smart?meters?to?determine?if?they?are?installed?and?operating? consistent?with?the?information?provided?to?the?consumer.? 4. Consideration?could?be?given?to?alternative?smart?meter?configurations?(such?as?wired)? in?those?cases?where?wireless?meters?continue?to?be?concern?to?consumers.?? ? 4 5000? 5000? 4500? 4000? 3500? 3000? 2500? 2000? 1500? 1000? 500? 0? 50? 200? 40? 40? 4? 4? 0.2? 1? 1? 0.005? 1000? Maximum? Minimum? ? ? Figure?1.?Comparison?of?Radio-Frequency?Levels?from?Various?Sources?in??W?/cm ? 2 ? Note:?Exposure?levels?in?uW/cm2?obtained?from?Table?2?and?converted?from?mW/cm2.?Smart? meter?figures?represent?100%?duty?cycle?(i.e.,?always?on)?as?hypothetical?maximum?use?case.? ? 5 Legislative?Request?? ? On?July?30,?2010,?California?Assembly?Member?Jared?Huffman?wrote?to?the?California?Council?on? Science?and?Technology?(CCST)?to?request?that?the?Council?perform?an?"independent,?science- based?study...[that]?would?help?policy?makers?and?the?general?public?resolve?the?debate?over? whether?smart?meters?present?a?significant?risk?of?adverse?health?effects."??California?Assembly? Member?Bill?Monning?signed?onto?the?request?with?his?own?letter?to?CCST?on?September?15,? 2010.??The?City?of?Mill?Valley?also?sent?a?letter?on?September?20th?supporting?Assembly?Member? Huffman's?request?for?the?study.? ? Approach? ? Reflecting?the?requests?of?the?Assembly?Members,?CCST?agreed?to?compile?and?assess?the? evidence?available?to?address:? ? 1.?Whether?Federal?Communications?Commission?(FCC)?standards?for?smart?meters?are? sufficiently?protective?of?public?health,?taking?into?account?current?exposure?levels?to? radiofrequency?and?electromagnetic?fields.? ? 2.?Whether?additional?technology-specific?standards?are?needed?for?smart?meters?and? other?devices?that?are?commonly?found?in?and?around?homes,?to?ensure?adequate? protection?from?adverse?health?effects.? ? CCST?convened?a?Smart?Meter?Project?Team?composed?of?CCST?Council?and?Board?members? supplemented?with?additional?experts?in?relevant?fields?(see?Appendix?A?for?Project?Team? members).??The?Project?Team?identified?and?reviewed?over?100?publications?and?postings?about? smart?meters?and?other?devices?in?the?same?range?of?emissions,?including?research?related?to? cell?phone?RF?emissions,?and?contacted?over?two?dozen?experts?in?radio?and?electromagnetic? emissions?and?related?fields?to?seek?their?opinion?on?the?two?identified?issues.??? ? It?is?important?to?note?that?CCST?has?not?undertaken?primary?research?of?its?own?to?address? these?issues.?This?response?is?limited?to?soliciting?input?from?technical?experts?and?to?reviewing? and?evaluating?available?information?from?past?and?current?research?about?health?impacts?of?RF? emitted?from?electric?appliances?generally,?and?smart?meters?specifically.?A?subset?of?those? contacted?provided?written?input?on?the?issues?to?CCST.?This?report?has?been?extensively? reviewed?by?the?Project?Team,?experts?in?related?fields,?and?has?been?subject?to?the?CCST?peer? review?process?(see?Appendix?B).??It?has?also?been?made?available?to?the?public?for?comment.?? ? 6 Two?Types?of?Radio?Frequency?Effects:??Thermal?and?Non-thermal? ? Household?electronic?devices,?such?as?cellular?and?cordless?telephones,?microwave?ovens,? wireless?routers,?and?wireless?smart?meters?produce?RF?emissions.?Exposure?to?RF?emissions? may?lead?to?thermal?and?non-thermal?effects.??Thermal?effects?on?humans?have?been? extensively?studied?and?appear?to?be?well?understood.?The?Federal?Communications? Commission?(FCC)?has?established?guidelines?to?protect?public?health?from?known?hazards? associated?with?the?thermal?impacts?of?RF:?tissue?heating?from?absorbing?energy?associated? with?radiofrequency?emissions.??Non-thermal?effects,?however,?including?cumulative?or? prolonged?exposure?to?lower?levels?of?RF?emissions,?are?not?well?understood.??Some?studies? have?suggested?non-thermal?effects?may?include?fatigue,?headache,?irritability,?or?even?cancer.? But?these?findings?have?not?been?scientifically?established,?and?the?mechanisms?that?might?lead? to?non-thermal?effects?remain?uncertain.??Additional?research?and?monitoring?is?needed?to? better?identify?and?understand?potential?non-thermal?effects.? ? Findings? ? Given?the?body?of?existing,?generally?accepted?scientific?knowledge?regarding?smart?meters?and? similar?electronic?devices,?CCST?finds?that:? ? 1. The?FCC?standard?provides?an?adequate?factor?of?safety?against?known?thermally? induced?health?impacts?of?smart?meters?and?other?electronic?devices?in?the?same? range?of?RF?emissions.?? ? The?potential?for?behavioral?disruption?from?increased?body?tissue?temperatures?is?the? only?biological?health?impact?that?has?been?consistently?demonstrated?and?scientifically? proven?to?result?from?absorbing?RF?within?the?band?of?the?electromagnetic?spectrum? (EMF)?that?smart?meters?use.??The?Federal?Communications?Commission?(FCC)?has?set?a? limit?on?the?Standard?Absorption?Rate?(SAR)?from?electronic?devices,?which?is?well?below? the?level?that?has?been?demonstrated?to?affect?behavior?in?laboratory?animals.?Smart? meters,?including?those?being?installed?by?Pacific?Gas?and?Electric?Company?(PG&E)?in? the?Assembly?Members'?districts,?if?installed?according?to?the?manufacturers? instructions?and?consistent?with?the?FCC?certification,?emit?RF?that?is?a?very?small? fraction?of?the?exposure?level?established?as?safe?by?the?FCC?guidelines.?? ?? The?FCC?guidelines?provide?a?significant?factor?of?safety?against?thermal?impacts?that? occur?at?the?power?levels?and?within?the?RF?band?used?by?smart?meters.?Given?current? scientific?knowledge,?the?FCC?guideline?provides?a?more?than?adequate?margin?of?safety? against?the?known?thermal?effects.? ? ? ? ? 7 ? ? 2. At?this?time?there?is?no?clear?evidence?that?additional?standards?are?needed?to?protect? the?public?from?smart?meters?or?other?common?household?electronic?devices.?? No?clear?causal?relationship?between?RF?emissions?and?non-thermal?human?health? impacts?has?been?scientifically?established,?nor?have?the?mechanisms?that?might?lead?to? such?a?biological?impact?been?clearly?identified.?Additional?research?is?needed?to?better? understand?and?verify?these?potential?mechanisms.?? Given?the?existing?significant?scientific?uncertainty?around?non-thermal?effects,?there?is? currently?no?generally?accepted?definitive,?evidence-based?indication?that?additional? standards?are?needed.??Because?of?the?lack?of?generally?accepted?evidence,?there?is?also? not?an?existing?basis?from?which?to?understand?what?types?of?standards?could?be?helpful? or?appropriate.??Without?a?clearer?understanding?of?the?biological?mechanisms?involved? identifying?additional?standards?or?evaluating?the?relative?costs?and?benefits?of?those? standards?cannot?be?determined?at?this?time.? ? CCST?notes?that?in?some?of?the?studies?reviewed,?contributors?have?raised?emerging? questions?from?some?in?the?medical?and?biological?fields?about?the?potential?for? biological?impacts?other?than?the?thermal?impact?that?the?FCC?guidelines?address.?A? report?of?the?National?Academies?identifies?research?needs?and?gaps?and?recommended? areas?of?research?to?be?undertaken?to?further?understanding?of?long-term?exposure?to? RF?emissions?from?communication?devices,?particularly?from?non-thermal?mechanisms? that?are?not?currently?addressed?by?the?FCC?guidelines.1?In?our?increasingly?wireless? society,?smart?meters?account?for?a?very?small?portion?of?RF?emissions?to?which?we?are? exposed.??Concerns?about?human?health?impacts?of?RF?emissions?from?smart?meters? should?be?considered?in?this?broader?context.? "Scientifically?established",?"generally?accepted?scientific?knowledge"?and?other?such?references? throughout?this?document?are?referencing?information?obtained?through?the?scientific?method.?A? scientific?method?consists?of?the?collection?of?data?through?observation?and?experimentation,?and?the? formulation?and?testing?of?hypotheses.??These?steps?must?be?repeatable?in?order?to?predict?future?results.?? Scientific?inquiry?is?generally?intended?to?be?as?objective?as?possible,?to?reduce?biased?interpretations?of? results.?Another?basic?expectation?is?to?document,?archive?and?share?all?data?and?methodology?so?they?are? available?for?careful?scrutiny?by?other?scientists,?giving?them?the?opportunity?to?verify?results?by? attempting?to?reproduce?them.?This?practice,?called?full?disclosure,?also?allows?statistical?measures?of? the?reliability?of?these?data?to?be?established.? ? ? ? Health?concerns?surrounding?RF?from?smart?meters?are?similar?to?those?from?many?other? devices?that?we?use?in?our?daily?lives,?including?cordless?and?cellular?telephones,?microwave? ovens,?wireless?routers,?hair?dryers,?and?wireless-enabled?laptop?computers.??As?detailed?in?the? report,?a?comparison?of?electromagnetic?frequencies?from?smart?meters?and?other?devices? shows?that?the?exposure?level?is?very?low.?? ? 1 ?National?Research?Council?(2008)?Identification?of?Research?Needs?Relating?to?Potential?Biological?or?Adverse? Health?Effects?of?Wireless?Communication,?The?National?Academies?Press,?Washington,?D.C.??? ? 8 ? What?are?Smart?Meters?? ? Smart?meters?measure?attributes?of?electricity,?natural?gas,?or?water?as?delivered?to?consumers? and?transmit?that?information?(e.g.,?usage)?digitally?to?utility?companies.??Some?smart?meters? are?also?designed?to?transmit?real-time?information?to?the?consumer.??These?smart?meters? replace?traditional,?analog?meters?and?meter?readers?with?an?automated?process?that?is? expected?to?reduce?operating?costs?for?utilities,?and?potentially,?costs?for?customers?(see?Figure? 2).?? ? ? ? ? a.?Analog?Meter? ???? ????????b.?Digital?Meter? Figure?2.?a)?An?analog,?conventional?meter?and?a?(b)?digital?smart?meter?(Source:?PG&E)? ?????????? ? ? Each?of?California's?major?electricity?utilities?has?begun?deploying?smart?meter?infrastructure.??? ? There?are?many?kinds?of?smart?meters?manufactured?by?a?variety?of?companies.?The?meter,? including?sensors?and?the?housing?or?casing,?may?be?manufactured?by?one?company?while?the? communications?device?(installed?within?the?meter)?is?manufactured?by?another.??Depending? upon?the?internal?communications?device?employed,?meters?are?configured?to?operate?in?a? wired?or?in?wireless?environment.?The?smart?meters?used?by?PG&E?are?made?by?General?Electric? and?Landis?+?Gyr?and?use?a?wireless?communications?technology?from?Silver?Spring?Networks.?? Each?of?these?PG&E?meters?has?two?transmitters?to?provide?two?different?communications?of? data?from?these?meters.2??The?first?provides?for?the?"automatic?meter?reading"?(AMR)?function? of?the?meter?(and?for?more?detailed?and?real?time?monitoring?of?the?characteristics?of?the? electrical?energy?delivered?to?the?consumer)?and?sends?this?data?to?an?access?point,?where?it?is? collected?along?with?data?from?many?other?customers?and?transmitted?to?PG&E?using?a?wireless? area?network?(WAN)?(similar?to?the?way?cell?phone?communication?works).??? ?Tell,?R.?(2008)?"Supplemental?Report?on?An?Analysis?of?Radiofrequency?Fields?Associated?with?Operation?of?the? PG&E?Smart?Meter?Program?Upgrade?System,"?Prepared?for?Pacific?Gas?&?Electric?Company,?Richard?Tell? Associates,?Inc.,?October?27.?? ? 2 9 ? ? Figure?3.?Simplified?depiction?of?Smart?Meter?system?network.??Arrows?show?the?use?of?radiofrequency?(RF)? signals?for?automated?meter?reading,?communications?among?electric?power?meters,?relays,?access?points,?the? company's?enterprise?management?systems.?The?future?home?access?network?will?operate?within?the?house.? ? Smart?meters?have?evolved?from?automatic?meter?reading?(AMR;?i.e.,?replacing?meter?readers)? to?a?real?time?monitoring?of?power?as?delivered?to?the?consumer?by?the?utility?company.?CCST? obtained?from?PG&E?the?Richard?Tell?Associates?report,?which?describes?the?operation?of?the? smart?meter?from?the?2008?perspective?of?AMR,?not?a?fully?deployed?real?time?smart?grid.? The?Richard?Tell?Associates?reports?describe?the?use?of?the?smart?meter?radios?being?deployed? by?PG&E?as?licensed?by?the?FCC?for?a?maximum?power?output?of?1?W?(watt)?and?within?the?902- 928?MHz?(mega-hertz)?frequency?band.?In?its?initial?deployment,?PG&E?reports?that?it?will? configure?the?radios?to?transmit?data?from?the?meter?to?the?access?point?once?every?four?hours,? for?about?50?milliseconds?at?a?time.3?Accounting?for?this,?the?current?duty?cycles?of?the?smart? meter?transmitter?(that?is,?the?percent?of?time?that?the?meter?operates)?would?then?typically?be? 1?percent,?or?in?some?cases?where?the?meter?is?frequently?used?as?a?relay,?as?much?as?2-4? percent.??This?means?that?the?typical?smart?meter?in?this?initial?(AMR)?use?would?not?transmit? any?RF?signal?at?least?96-98?percent?of?the?time.??? ? It?is?important?to?note?that?any?one?smart?meter?is?part?of?a?broader?"mesh"?network?and?may? act?as?a?relay?among?other?smart?meters?and?utility?access?points.??In?addition,?when?the?smart? grid?is?fully?functional?the?smart?meters?would?be?expected?to?be?transmitting?much?more?than? once?every?four?hours,?providing?data?in?near?real-time,?which?will?result?in?a?much?higher?duty? ?Tell,?R.?(2008)?"Supplemental?Report?on?An?Analysis?of?Radiofrequency?Fields?Associated?with?Operation?of?the? PG&E?Smart?Meter?Program?Upgrade?System,"?Prepared?for?Pacific?Gas?&?Electric?Company,?Richard?Tell? Associates,?Inc.,?October?27.? http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/shared/edusafety/systemworks/rfsafety/rf_fields_supplemental_report _2008.pdf)? ? 10 3 cycle.??For?purposes?of?this?report?we?include?a?hypothetical?scenario?where?the?smart?meter?is? continually?transmitting.??Even?in?this?100%?duty?cycle?situation?the?power?output?would?be?well? below?the?FCC?limits.?? ? Smart?meters?are?designed?to?transmit?data?to?a?utility?access?point?that?is?usually?25?feet?above? ground,?on?utility?or?light?poles.??These?access?points?are?designed?to?transmit?data?from?up?to? 5,000?smart?meters?to?the?utility?company.??Access?points?have?a?similar?AMR?transmitter?as? smart?meters,?as?well?as?an?additional?AirCard,?which?communicates?with?utilities?and?is?similar? to?wireless?cards?used?in?laptop?computers.??AirCards?typically?operate?at?0.25-1?W,?in?the?800- 900?MHz?or?1.9?GHz?range.??? ? In?some?cases,?data?is?moved?through?the?mesh?network,?relaying?the?data?through?other? meters?to?the?utility?access?point.??This?may?occur?when?the?topography?or?built?environment? interferes?with?the?transmission?of?data?from?a?smart?meter?to?the?access?point.??In?these?cases,? the?relaying?of?data?may?occur?between?one?smart?meter?and?another?before?the?signal?is?sent? to?the?utility?access?point?(e.g.,?hops?along?a?set?of?meters).??Additionally,?some?non-meter?data? relays?will?also?exist?in?the?system?to?connect?some?smart?meters?to?utility?access?points.?? ? Many?smart?meters,?including?those?from?PG&E,?also?have?a?second?transmitter?that,?at?some? future?point?in?time,?will?allow?customers?to?enable?a?home?access?network?(HAN).??The?HAN?will? allow?increased?consumer?monitoring?of?electricity?use?and?communication?among?appliances? and?the?future?smart?grid.??This?functionality?is?important?to?achieve?the?full?potential?of?the? smart?grid.??This?second?internal?transmitter,?for?delivery?of?smart?meter?data?to?the?consumer,? reportedly?will?operate?at?a?rated?power?of?0.223W,?at?frequency?of?about?2.4?GHz?(again,? similar?to?that?of?cell?phones?and?wireless?phones).??The?actual?duty?cycle?of?this?transmitter?will? depend?on?the?design?and?operation?of?the?home?area?network.?? ? Why?are?Smart?Meters?Being?Installed?Throughout?California?? ? It?is?anticipated,?when?fully?operational,?that?smart?electricity?meters?are?a?key?enabling? technology?for?a?"smart?grid"?that?is?expected?to?become?increasingly?clean,?efficient,?reliable,? and?safe?(see?Figure?3)?at?a?potential?lower?cost?to?the?consumer.?(Digital?meters?are?also?being? used?for?reading?of?natural?gas?and?water?consumption).?Smart?electrical?meters?allow?direct? two-way?communication?between?utilities?and?customers,?which?is?expected?to?help?end?users? adjust?their?demand?to?price?changes?that?reflect?the?condition?of?the?electricity?grid.?These?end? user?adjustments?can?help?to?protect?the?overall?reliability?of?the?electricity?grid,?cut?costs?for? utility?customers,?and?improve?the?operation?and?efficiency?of?the?electricity?grid.?The?smart? grid?will?enable?grid?operators?to?better?balance?electricity?supply?and?demand?in?real-time,? which?becomes?increasingly?important?as?more?intermittent?wind?and?solar?generation? resources?are?added?to?the?grid.?? ? Figure?4?depicts?the?potential?operation?of?a?smart?grid.? ? ? 11 Figure?4.?Illustration?of?components?of?the?PG&E?Smart?Meter?Program?Upgrade?showing?the?use?of? radiofrequency?(RF)?signals?for?communications?among?electric?power?meters,?relays,?access?points?and,? 4 ultimately,?the?company's?enterprise?management?systems.?(Source?Silver?Spring?Network )? ? ? ? Smart?meters?will?also?allow?utilities?to?communicate?grid?conditions?to?customers?through? price?signals,?so?that?consumers,?via?their?HAN,?can?delay?non-time?sensitive?demands?(such?as? clothes?drying)?to?a?time?when?electricity?is?cheapest?or?has?the?most?benefit?to?the?reliability?of? the?system.??In?some?cases?wireless?signals?interior?to?the?structure?will?also?be?able?to? automatically?adjust?the?heating?and?ventilation?systems?and?to?adjust?heat?or?air?conditioning? units.?This?adaptation?to?price?or?reliability?signals?could?reduce?overall?electricity?costs?for? customers,?improve?the?utilization?of?renewable?and?non-renewable?power?plants,?and?cut? costs?associated?with?adding?intermittent?wind?and?solar?resources?to?the?grid.? ? While?such?long-term?value?of?smart?meters?will?take?years?to?fully?realize,?they?are?sufficiently? promising?that?the?federal?government?has?required?utilities?to?take?steps?to?implement?smart? ?See?http://www.silverspringnet.com/products/index.html?for?component?descriptions.?Network? infrastructure?includes?the?Silver?Spring?Access?Points?(APs)?and?Relays?that?forward?data?from?endpoints?across? the?utility's?backhaul?or?WAN?infrastructure?into?the?back?office.? The?UtilityIQ?application?suite?incorporates?both?utility?applications?such?as?Advanced?Metering?and?Outage? Detection?as?well?as?administrative?programs?for?managing?and?upgrading?the?network.?GridScape?provides? management?for?DA?communications?networks.? The?CustomerIQ?web?portal?enables?utilities?to?directly?communicate?usage,?pricing,?and?recommendations?to? consumers.?Silver?Spring?works?with?each?utility?to?customize?the?information?portrayed?and?to?import?utility- specific?information?such?as?rate?schedules.?? ? ? 12 4 grid?networks,?including?the?use?of?smart?meters.5??After?review?and?authorization?from?the? California?Public?Utilities?Commission,6?utilities?in?California?have?begun?to?install?smart?meters? throughout?the?state.??Some?California?utilities?(such?as?Sacramento?Municipal?Utility?District)? have?received?significant?federal?funding?for?smart?meter?deployment?from?the?American? Recovery?and?Reinvestment?Act?(federal?stimulus?package).?Many?countries?around?the?world? are?actively?deploying?smart?meters?as?well.?Digital?smart?meters?are?generally?considered?to?be? the?fundamental?technology?required?to?enable?widespread?integration?of?information? technology?(IT)?into?the?power?grid?(i.e.,?the?smart?grid).?The?following?table?(table?1)? summarizes?some?potential?societal?benefits?expected?to?result?from?the?smart?grid.? ? Table?1:?Smart?Grid?Benefits?? Consumers? ? 1.?Cost?Savings?Resulting?from?Energy?Efficiency? 2.?Increased?Consumer?Choice?and?Convenience? 3.?More?Transparent,?Real-Time?Information?and? Control?for?Consumers? Environment? ? 1.?Widespread?Deployment?of?Renewable?Energy? (Solar,?Wind,?Biofuels)?and?Electric?Vehicles? (EVs)? 2.?Reduced?Need?to?Build?More?Fossil?Fueled?Power? plants? 3.?Reduced?Carbon?Footprint?and?Other?Pollutants? (via?Renewables,?Energy?Efficiency,?Electric? Vehicles)? Economy? ? 1.?Creates?New?Market?for?Goods?and?Services?(i.e.,? New?Companies,?New?Jobs)? 2.?Up-skilling?Workforce?to?be?Prepared?for?New? Jobs? 3.?Reduced?Dependence?on?Foreign?Oil,?Keeps? Dollars?at?Home? Utilities? ? 1.?Reduced?Cost?Due?to?Increased?Efficiencies?in? Delivering?Electricity?and?Reduction?in? Manpower?to?Read?Meters.? 2.?Improved?Reliability?and?More?Timely?Outage? Response? 3.?Increased?Customer?Satisfaction?Due?to?Cost? Savings?and?Self-Control??? Source:??California?Smart?Grid?Center? ? What?Health?Concerns?are?Associated?with?Smart?Meters?? ? Human?health?impacts?from?exposure?to?electromagnetic?frequency?(EMF)?emissions?vary? depending?on?the?frequency?and?power?of?the?fields.??Smart?meters?operate?at?low?power?and? in?the?RF?portion?of?the?electromagnetic?spectrum.??At?these?levels,?RF?emissions?from?smart? ?The?federal?Energy?Independence?and?Security?Act?of?2007?directs?states?to?encourage?utilities?to?initiate?smart? grid?programs,?allows?recovery?of?smart?grid?investments?through?utility?rates,?and?reimburses?20%?of?qualifying? smart?grid?investments.??The?American?Recovery?and?Reinvestment?Act?of?2009?provided?$4.5?billion?to?develop? smart?grid?infrastructure?in?the?U.S.?For?more?information,?see:??Congressional?Research?Service?(2007)?"Energy? Independence?and?Security?Act?of?2007:?A?Summary?of?Major?Provisions,"?CRS?Report?for?Congress,?Order?Code? RL34l294,?December?21.??(http://energy.senate.gov/public/_files/RL342941.pdf)? 6 ?California?Public?Utilities?Commission?decision?on?Application?07-12-009?(March?12,?2009).?Decision?on?Pacific?Gas? and?Electric?Company's?Proposed?Upgrade?to?the?Smartmeter?Program.? ? 13 5 meters?are?unlikely?to?produce?thermal?effects;?however?it?is?not?scientifically?confirmed? whether?or?what?the?non-thermal?effects?on?living?organisms,?and?potentially,?human?health? might?be.??These?same?concerns?over?potential?impacts?should?apply?to?all?other?electronic? devices?that?operate?with?similar?frequency?and?power?levels,?including?cell?phones,?computers,? cordless?phones,?televisions,?and?wireless?routers.??Any?difference?in?health?impacts?from?these? devices?is?likely?to?be?a?result?of?differences?in?usage?patterns?among?them.??? ? Thermal Effects? Electromagnetic?waves?carry?energy,?and?EMF?absorbed?by?the?body?can?increase?the? temperature?of?human?tissue.??The?scientific?consensus?is?that?body?temperatures?must? increase?at?least?1oC?to?lead?to?potential?biological?impacts?from?the?heat.??The?only?scientifically? verified?effect?that?has?been?shown?to?occur?in?the?power?and?frequency?range?that?smart? meters?are?designed?to?occupy?is?a?disruption?in?animal?feeding?behavior?at?energy?exposure? levels?of?4?W/kg?and?with?an?accompanying?increase?in?body?temperature?of?1oC?or?more.7??The? exposure?levels?from?smart?meters?even?at?close?range?are?far?below?this?threshold.??The?FCC? has?set?limits?on?power?densities?from?electronic?devices?that?are?well?below?the?level?where? demonstrated?biological?impacts?occur,?and?the?limits?are?tens?or?hundreds?of?times?higher?than? likely?exposure?from?smart?meters.8?? ? Non-thermal Effects There?are?emerging?questions?in?the?medical?and?biological?fields?about?potential?harmful? effects?caused?by?non-thermal?mechanisms?of?absorbed?RF?emissions.??Complaints?of?health? impacts?from?"electromagnetic?stress"?have?been?reported,?with?symptoms?including?fatigue,? headache,?and?irritability.??Some?studies?have?suggested?that?RF?absorption?from?mobile? phones?may?disrupt?communication?between?human?cells,?which?may?lead?to?other?negatives? impacts?on?human?biology.9,10?While?concerns?of?brain?cancer?associated?with?mobile?phone? usage?persist,?there?is?currently?no?definitive?evidence?linking?cell?phone?usage?with?increased? incidence?of?cancer.11??But?due?to?the?recent?nature?of?the?technology,?impacts?of?long-term? exposure?are?not?known.??Ongoing?scientific?study?is?being?conducted?to?understand?non- thermal?effects?from?long-term?exposure?to?mobile?phones?and?smart?meters,?etc.,?especially? ?D'Andrea,?J.A.,?Adair,?E.R.,?and?J.O.?de?Lorge?(2003)?Behavioral?and?cognitive?effects?of?microwave?exposure,? Bioelectromagnetics?Suppl?6,?S39-62?(2003).? 8 ?Tell,?R.?(2008)?"Supplemental?Report?on?An?Analysis?of?Radiofrequency?Fields?Associated?with?Operation?of?the? PG&E?Smart?Meter?Program?Upgrade?System,"?Prepared?for?Pacific?Gas?&?Electric?Company,?Richard?Tell? Associates,?Inc.,?October?27.? (http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/shared/edusafety/systemworks/rfsafety/rf_fields_supplemental_report _2008.pdf)? 9 ?Markova,?E.,?Malmgren,?L.,?and?I.Y.?Belyaev?(2009)?Microwaves?from?mobile?phones?inhibit?53PB1?focus? formation?in?human?stem?cells?stronger?than?in?differentiated?cells:?Possible?mechanistic?link?to?cancer?risk.? ?Environmental?Health?Perspectives,?doi:10.1289/ehp.0900781.? 10 ?Nittby,?H.,?Grafstrom,?G.,?Eberhardt,?J.L.,?Malmgren,?L.,?Brun,?A.,?Persson?B.R.R.,?and?L.G.?Salford?(2008)? Radiofrequency?and?Extremely?Low-Frequency?Electromagnetic?Field?Effects?on?the?Blood-Brain?Barrier? Electromagnetic?Biology?and?Medicine,?27:?103-126,?2008.? 11 ?Ahlbom,?A.,?Feychting,?M.,?Green,?A.,?Kheifets,?L.,?Savitz,?D.?A.,?and?A.?J.?Swerdlow?(2009)?Epidemiologic?evidence? on?mobile?phones?and?tumor?risk:?a?review.?Epidemiology?20,?639-52?(2009).? ? 14 7 the?cumulative?impact?from?all?RF?emitting?devices?including?that?of?a?network?of?smart?meters? operating?throughout?a?community.12?? ? There?currently?is?no?conclusive?scientific?evidence?pointing?to?a?non-thermal?cause-and-effect? between?human?exposure?to?RF?emissions?and?negative?health?impacts.?For?this?reason,? regulators?and?policy?makers?may?be?prudent?to?call?for?more?research?while?continuing?to?base? acceptable?human?RF?exposure?limits?on?currently?proven?scientific?and?engineering?findings?on? known?thermal?effects,?rather?than?on?general?concerns?or?speculation?about?possible?unknown? and?as?yet?unproven?non-thermal?effects.??Such?questions?will?likely?take?considerable?time?to? resolve.?The?data?that?are?available?strongly?suggest?that?if?there?are?non-thermal?effects?of?RF? absorption?on?human?health,?such?effects?are?not?so?profound?as?to?be?easily?discernable.? ? FCC?Guidelines?Address?Known?Thermal?Effects?Only,?not?Non-thermal?Effects? ? In?1985,?the?FCC?first?established?guidelines?to?limit?human?exposure?and?protect?against? thermal?effects?of?absorbed?RF?emissions.??The?guidelines?were?based?on?those?from?the? American?National?Standards?Institute?(ANSI)?that?were?issued?in?1982.13??In?1996,?the?FCC? modified?its?guidelines,14?based?on?a?rulemaking?process?that?began?in?1993?in?response?to?a? 1992?revision?of?the?ANSI?guidelines15,?16?and?findings?by?the?National?Council?on?Radiation? Protection?and?Measurements?(NCRP).17??The?1996?guidelines?are?still?in?place?today.? ? In?its?rulemaking?process?to?set?SAR?and?MPE?limits,?the?FCC?relied?on?many?federal?health?and? safety?agencies,?including?the?U.S.?Environmental?Protection?Agency?and?the?Food?and?Drug? Administration.??While?the?FCC?guidelines?appear?to?provide?a?large?factor?of?safety?against? known?thermal?effects?of?exposure?to?radiofrequency,?they?do?not?necessarily?protect?against? potential?non-thermal?effects,?nor?do?they?claim?to.18?Without?additional?understanding?of? these?effects,?there?is?inadequate?basis?to?develop?additional?guidelines?at?this?time.? ? ?National?Research?Council?(2008)?Identification?of?Research?Needs?Relating?to?Potential?Biological?or?Adverse? Health?Effects?of?Wireless?Communication,?The?National?Academies?Press,?Washington,?D.C.?? (http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12036.html)? 13 ?American?National?Standards?Institute?(1982)?"American?National?Standard?Radio?Frequency?Radiation?Hazard? Warning?Symbol,"?ANSI?C95.2-1982,?Institute?of?Electrical?and?Electronics?Engineers,?Inc.? 14 ?FCC?(1997)?"Evaluating?Compliance?with?FCC?Guidelines?for?Human?Exposure?to?Radiofrequency?Electromagnetic? Fields,"?OET?Bulletin?65?(Edition?97-01),?Federal?Communications?Commission,?August.? (http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet65/oet65.pdf)? 15 ?American?National?Standards?Institute?(1992)?"Safety?Levels?with?Respect?to?Human?Exposure?to?Radio? Frequency?Electromagnetic?Fields,?3?kHz?to?300?GHz,"?ANSI/IEEE?C95.1-1992?(previously?issued?as?IEEE?C95.1-1991),? Institute?of?Electrical?and?Electronics?Engineers,?Inc.?? 16 ?American?National?Standards?Institute?(1992)?"Recommended?Practice?for?the?Measurement?of?Potentially? Hazardous?Electromagnetic?Fields?-?RF?and?Microwave,"?ANSI/IEEE?C95.3-1992,?Institute?of?Electrical?and? Electronics?Engineers,?Inc.? 17 ?NCRP?(1986)?"Biological?Effects?and?Exposure?Criteria?for?Radiofrequency?Electromagnetic?Fields,"?NCRP?Report? No.?86?(1986),?National?Council?on?Radiation?Protection?Measurements.? 18 ?The?U.S.?EPA?confirmed?this?in?a?letter?to?The?Electromagnetic?Radiation?Policy?Institute,?dated?March?8,?2002.?? (http://www.emrpolicy.org/litigation/case_law/docs/noi_epa_response.pdf)? ? 15 12 The?FCC?guidelines?measure?exposure?to?RF?emissions?in?two?ways.??Specific?absorption?rate? (SAR)?measures?the?rate?of?energy?absorption?and?is?measured?in?units?of?watts-per-kilogram?of? body?weight?(W/kg).??It?accounts?for?the?thermal?effects?on?human?health?associated?with? heating?body?tissue?and?is?used?as?a?limiting?measurement?for?wireless?devices,?such?as?mobile? phones,?that?are?used?in?close?proximity?to?human?tissue.19??The?FCC?limits,?as?well?as?the? underlying?ANSI?and?NCRP?limits,?are?based?on?a?SAR?threshold?of?4?W/kg.??At?the?time?of?the? FCC?rulemaking,?and?still?today,?behavioral?disruption?in?laboratory?animals?(including?non- human?primates)?at?this?absorption?rate?is?the?only?adverse?health?impact?that?has?been?clearly? linked?to?RF?at?levels?similar?to?those?emitted?by?smart?meters.?This?finding?is?supported?in? scientific?literature20,?21?and?by?the?World?Health?Organization?and?many?health?agencies?in? Europe.22,?23?The?FCC?limit?of?1.6?W/kg?provides?a?significant?factor?of?safety?against?this? threshold.??? ? Limits?on?SAR?provide?the?basis?for?another?measurement?of?exposure,?maximum?permissible? exposure?(MPE).??MPE?limits?average?exposure?over?a?given?time?period?(usually?30?minutes?for? general?exposure)?from?a?device?and?is?often?used?for?exposure?to?stationary?devices?and?where? human?exposure?is?likely?to?occur?at?a?distance?of?more?than?20?cm.??It?is?measured?in?micro? (106)?watts-per-square-centimeter?(?W/cm2),?and?accounts?for?the?fact?that?the?human?body? absorbs?energy?more?efficiently?at?some?radiofrequencies?than?others.??The?human?body? absorbs?energy?most?efficiently?in?the?range?of?30-300?MHz,?and?the?corresponding?MPE?limits? for?RF?emissions?in?this?range?are?consequently?the?most?stringent.??In?the?frequency?bands? where?smart?meters?operate,?including?PG&E's,?namely?the?902-928?MHz?band?and?2.4?GHz? range,?the?human?body?absorbs?energy?less?efficiently,?and?the?MPE?limits?are?less?restrictive.??? ? The?FCC?limits?on?MPE?are?summarized?in?Figure?5.24,?25?At?902?MHz,?appropriate?for?operation? of?the?AMR?transmitter?of?the?smart?meter,?the?FCC?limit?is?601??W/cm2.??At?higher?frequencies,? ?FCC?(2001)?"Additional?Information?for?Evaluating?Compliance?of?Mobile?and?Portable?Devices?with?FCC?Limits?for? Human?Exposure?to?Radiofrequency?Emissions,"?Supplement?C?(Edition?01-01)?to?OET?Bulletin?65?(Edition?97-01),? Federal?Communications?Commission,?June.? (http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet65/oet65c.pdf)? 20 ?D'Andrea,?J.A.,?Adair,?E.R.,?and?J.O.?de?Lorge?(2003)?Behavioral?and?cognitive?effects?of?microwave?exposure,? Bioelectromagnetics?Suppl?6,?S39-62?(2003).? 21 ?Sheppard,?A.R,?Swicord,?M.?L.,?and?Q.?Balzano?(2008)?Quantitative?evaluations?of?mechanisms?of?radiofrequency? interactions?with?biological?molecules?and?processes,?Health?Phys?95,?365-96?(2008).? 22 ?The?World?Health?Organization?has?reviewed?international?guidelines?for?limiting?radiofrequency?exposure?and? scientific?studies?related?to?human?health?impacts?and?concludes?that?exposure?below?guideline?limits?don't?appear? to?have?health?consequences.??(http://www.who.int/peh-emf/standards/en/)? 23 ?Committee?on?Man?and?Radiation?(COMAR)?(2009)?"Technical?Information?Statement:?Expert?reviews?on? potential?health?effects?of?radiofrequency?electromagnetic?fields?and?comments?on?The?Bioinitiative?Report,"? Health?Physics?97(4):348-356?(2009).? 24 ?FCC?(1997)?"Evaluating?Compliance?with?FCC?Guidelines?for?Human?Exposure?to?Radiofrequency?Electromagnetic? Fields,"?OET?Bulletin?65?(Edition?97-01),?Federal?Communications?Commission,?August.? (http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet65/oet65.pdf)? 25 ?FCC?(1999)?"Questions?and?Answers?about?Biological?Effects?and?Potential?Hazards?of?Radiofrequency? Electromagnetic?Fields,"?OET?Bulletin?56?(Fourth?Edition),?Federal?Communications?Commission,?August.? (http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet56/oet56e4.pdf)? ? 16 19 the?human?body?absorbs?even?less?energy,?and?the?threshold?for?the?2.4?GHz?transmitter?for? home?area?network?communications?is?consequently?higher,?1000??W/cm2.??? ? PG&E?commissioned?a?2008?study?by?Richard?Tell?Associates,?"Supplemental?Report?on?An? Analysis?of?Radiofrequency?Fields?Associated?with?Operation?of?the?PG&E?Smart?Meter?Program? Upgrade?System."?In?this?study?of?PG&E's?proposed?smart?meter?network?it?is?noted?that?the? FCC?limits?on?MPE?include?a?factor?of?safety,?and?the?perceived?hazardous?exposure?level?is?50? times?higher?than?the?FCC?limits.26??The?study?estimates?that?the?highest?exposure?from?smart? meters,?if?an?individual?were?standing?directly?in?front?of?and?next?to?the?meter,?would?be?8.8? ?W/cm2?transmitting?at?2?to?4%?of?the?time.?The?study?notes?that?this?is?almost?70?times?less? than?the?FCC?limit?and?3,500?times?less?than?the?demonstrated?hazard?level.??In?all?likelihood,? individuals?will?be?much?farther?away?from?smart?meters?and?likely?behind?them,?(within?a? structure)?where?power?density?will?be?much?lower.??The?highest?exposure?from?the?entire? smart?meter?system?would?occur?immediately?adjacent?to?an?access?point.??It?is?very?unlikely? that?an?individual?would?be?immediately?adjacent?to?an?access?point,?as?they?are?normally? located?25?feet?above?the?ground?on?a?telephone?or?electrical?pole?or?other?structure.??The?peak? power?density?from?an?access?point?is?estimated?to?be?24.4??W/cm2,?or?about?25?times?less? than?the?FCC?limit.??From?the?ground,?exposure?to?power?density?from?access?points?is? estimated?to?be?15,000?times?less?than?the?FCC?limit?in?great?part?due?to?the?distance?from?the? device.??? ? The?PG&E?commissioned?report?by?Richard?Tell?Associates?is?based?only?on?an?AMR?duty?cycle? of?transmitting?data?once?every?four?hours?which?results?in?this?very?low?estimated?peak?power.? However,?we?are?not?aware?of?the?justification?for?using?averaging?over?a?four-hour?period.??We? do?know?the?FCC27?allows?averaging?of?exposure?over?a?designated?period?(30?minutes). To? truly?be?a?smart?grid?the?data?will?be?transmitted?at?a?much?more?frequent?rate?than?this.??In? this?report?we?look?at?the?worst-case?scenario,?a?meter?that?is?stuck?in?the?"on"?position,? constantly?relaying,?at?a?100%?duty?cycle.??Even?in?this?100%?scenario?the?RF?emissions?would?be? measurably?below?the?FCC?limits?for?thermal?effects. ? ?Tell,?R.?(2008)?"Supplemental?Report?on?An?Analysis?of?Radiofrequency?Fields?Associated?with?Operation?of?the? PG&E?Smart?Meter?Program?Upgrade?System,"?Prepared?for?Pacific?Gas?&?Electric?Company,?Richard?Tell? Associates,?Inc.,?October?27.? (http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/shared/edusafety/systemworks/rfsafety/rf_fields_supplemental_report _2008.pdf)? 27 ?http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet56/oet56e4.pdf?? ? 17 26 Max.?permissible?exposure?(MPE)?(?W/cm2)? 1200? 1000? 800? 600? 400? 200? 0? 0? 500? 1000? 1500? 2000? 2500? Frequency?(MHz)? ? 100%?if?always?on? FCC?Limit? If?on?50%?? Max?exposure?from?smart?meter?AMR? transmixer?at?5%?duty?cycle? Max?exposure?from?smart?meter?HAN? transmixer?at?5%,?50%?and?100%?duty?cycle? ? Figure?5.??FCC?maximum?permissible?exposure?limits?on?power?density?rise?with?frequency?because?the?human? body?can?safely?absorb?more?energy?at?higher?frequencies.??The?estimated?maximum?exposure?from?a?1-Watt? 2 AMR?transmitter?at?5%?duty?cycle?(i.e.,?72?minutes/day)?and?one-foot?distance?is?18??W/cm ,?or?3%?of?the?FCC? limit.?Even?if?a?meter?malfunctioned?and?was?stuck?in?the?always-on?transmit?mode?(i.e.,?100%?duty?cycle),? exposure?levels?would?be?60%?of?the?FCC?limit?for?an?AMR?transmitter.??For?a?250mW?HAN?transmitter?at?a?5%? duty?cycle,?the?level?would?be?.45%?of?the?FCC?limit?and?9%?of?the?FCC?limit?if?the?transmitter?were?on?100%.? Exposure?figures?derived?from?November?2010?Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?field?measurement?study? 28 entitled?"Radio?Frequency?Exposure?Levels?from?Smart?Meters". ? ? Power?Density?(and?Exposure?Level)?Declines?Rapidly?with?Distance? ? The?power?density?from?smart?meters,?or?other?devices?that?emit?RF,?falls?off?dramatically?with? distance.??Figure?6?illustrates?this?affect?for?an?example?smart?meter.??While?the?estimated? maximum?exposure?level?at?1?foot?from?the?meter?with?a?duty?cycle?of?50%?is?180??W/cm2?(far? below?the?FCC?guidelines),?at?a?distance?of?about?10?feet,?the?power-density?exposure? approaches?zero.?? ?EPRI?(2010)?"Radio?Frequency?Exposure?Levels?from?Smart?Meters,"?Electric?Power?Research?Institute,?November? 2010.??? ? 18 28 180? 160? 140? 120? ?W/cm2?? 100? 80? 60? 40? 20? 0? 1? 180? 20? 1.8? 0.2? 0.018? 3? 10? Distance?in?Feet? 30? 100? ? 29 Figure?6.??Power?density?from?a?sample?smart?meter?versus?distance; ?1-Watt?emitter?at?50%?duty?cycle.??Typical? smart?meter?AMR?transmitter?power?density?declines?rapidly?with?distance.?The?rapid?drop?of?power?density? with?distance?(inverse-square?law)?is?similar?for?various?duty?cycles?and?different?sets?of?source?data.? ? ? Comparison?of?Electromagnetic?Frequencies?from?Smart?Meters?and?Other?Devices? ? Health?concerns?surrounding?RF?from?smart?meters?are?similar?to?those?from?many?other? devices?that?we?use?in?our?daily?lives,?including?cordless?and?mobile?telephones,?microwave? ovens,?wireless?routers,?hair?dryers,?and?wireless-enabled?laptop?computers.??? ? In?addition?to?slight?differences?in?frequency?and?power?levels,?which?affect?human?absorption? of?RF?from?these?devices,?the?primary?difference?among?them?is?how?they?are?used.??Cell? phones,?for?example,?are?often?used?for?many?minutes?at?a?time,?several?times?over?the?course? of?a?day,?and?held?directly?next?to?one's?head.??? ? For?perspective,?microwave?ovens?operate?at?a?similar?frequency?as?the?HAN?transmitter?of? smart?meters?(2.45?GHz),?and?the?U.S.?Food?and?Drug?Administration?has?set?limits?on?leakage? levels?that?are?five?times?higher?(5,000??W?/cm2)?than?the?FCC?limit?for?smart?meters?and?other? devices?operating?at?2.4?GHz.30?Wireless?routers?and?Wi-Fi?equipment?produce?radiofrequency? ?EPRI?(2010)?"Radio?Frequency?Exposure?Levels?from?Smart?Meters,"?Electric?Power?Research?Institute,?November? 2010.? 30 ?FDA,?"Summary?of?the?Electronic?Product?Radiation?Control?Provisions?of?the?Federal?Food,?Drug,?and?Cosmetic? Act,"?U.S.?Food?and?Drug?Administration.?(http://www.fda.gov/Radiation- EmittingProducts/ElectronicProductRadiationControlProgram/LawsandRegulations/ucm118156.htm)? ? 19 29 fields?of?about?0.2?-?1.0??W?/cm2.31,?32,33?People?in?metropolitan?areas?are?exposed?to? radiofrequency?from?radio?and?television?antennas,?as?well,?although?for?most?of?the? population,?exposure?is?quite?low,?around?0.005??W?/cm2.34?? ? 5000 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 50 1000 200 40 40 4 4 0.2 1 1 0.005 Maximum Minimum ? ? 2 Figure?7.?Comparison?of?Radio-Frequency?Levels?from?Various?Sources?in??W?/cm ? Note:?Exposure?levels?in?uW/cm2?obtained?from?Table?2?and?converted?from?mW/cm2.?Smart? meter?figures?represent?100%?duty?cycle?(i.e.,?always?on)?as?hypothetical?maximum?use?case.?? ? ?"Radio-Frequency?Exposure?Levels?from?Smart?Meters",?white?paper?by?Rob?Kavet?and?Gabor?Mezei?of?the? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI).?November?2010.? 32 ?Foster,?K.R.?(2007)?Radiofrequency?exposure?from?wireless?LANS?utilizing?WI-FFI?technology.?Health? Physics,?Vol.?92,?No.?3,?March,?pp.?280-282.? 33 ?Schmidt,?G.?et?al.?(2007)?Exposure?of?the?general?public?due?to?wireless?LAN?applications?in?public? Places,?Radiation?Protection?Dosimetry,?Vol.?123,?No.?1,?Epub?June?11,?pp.?48-52.? 34 ?EPA?(1986)?The?Radiofrequency?Radiation?Environment:?Environmental?Exposure?Levels?and?RF?Radiation? Emitting?Sources,?EPA?520/1-85-014,?U.S.?Environmental?Protection?Agency,?July.? ? 20 31 Table?2:?Radio-Frequency?Levels?from?Various?Sources? ? Source? Mobile?phone? Mobile?phone?base? station? Microwave?oven? Local?area?networks? Radio/TV?broadcast? Frequency? 900?MHz,?1800?MHz? 900?MHz,?1800?MHz? 2450?MHz? 2.4--5?GHz? Wide?spectrum? Exposure?Level? 2 (mW/cm )? 1--5? 0.000005--0.002? ~50.05-0.2? 0.0002--0.001? 0.000005--0.0002?? 0.001?(highest?1%?of? population)?? 0.000005?(50%?of? population)? 0.0001?(250?mW,?1%? duty?cycle)?? 0.002?(1?W,?5%?duty? cycle)?? 0.000009?(250?mW,? 1%?duty?cycle)?? 0.0002?(1?W,?5%? duty?cycle)? Distance? At?ear? 10s?to?a?few? thousand?feet? 2?inches2?feet? 3?feet? Far?from?source?(in? most?cases)? 3?feet? ? Time? During?call? Constant? During?use? Constant?when? nearby? Constant? Spatial? Characteristic? Highly?localized? Relatively?uniform? Localized,?non- uniform? Localized,?non- uniform? Relatively?uniform? Smart?meter? 900?MHz,?2400?MHz? ? ? ???????????????10?feet? When?in?proximity? during?transmission? Localized,?non- uniform? ? Source:??Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI),?Radio?Frequency?Exposure?Levels?from?Smart?Meters?(November?2010)? ? 21 What?is?Duty?Cycle?and?How?Does?it?Affect?Human?Health?? ? Duty?cycle?refers?to?the?fraction?of?time?a?device?is?transmitting.??For?instance,?a?duty?cycle?of?1%?means?the?device? transmits?RF?energy?1%?of?a?given?time?period.??One?percent?of?the?time?in?a?day?is?equivalent?to?14.4?minutes?per? day.??The?duty?cycle,?or?signal?duration?is?an?often-overlooked?factor?when?comparing?exposures?from?different? kinds?of?devices?(e.g.,?mobile?phones,?Wi-Fi?routers,?smart?meters,?microwave?ovens,?FM?radio/TV?broadcast? signals).? ? Duty?cycles?of?various?devices?vary?considerably.??The?duty?cycle?of?AM/FM?radio/TV?broadcasts,?are?100%;?in?other? words,?they?are?transmitting?continuously.???Mobile?phones?usage?varies?widely?from?user?to?user,?of?course.?? However,?the?national?average?use?is?about?450?minutes?per?month.??This?usage?equates?to?a?1%?duty?cycle?for?the? "average"?user.??? ? From?information?that?CCST?was?able?to?obtain?we?understand?that?the?smart?meter?transmitter?being?used?by? PG&E?operates?with?a?maximum?power?output?of?1?W?(watt)?and?within?the?902-928?MHz?(mega-hertz)?frequency? band.??Each?smart?meter?is?part?of?a?broader?"mesh"?network?and?may?act?as?a?relay?between?other?smart?meters? and?utility?access?points.??The?transmitter?at?each?smart?meter?will?be?idle?some?of?the?time,?with?the?percent?of? time?idle?(not?transmitting)?depending?on?the?amount?and?schedule?of?data?transmissions?made?from?each?meter,? the?relaying?of?data?from?other?meters?that?an?individual?meter?does,?and?the?networking?protocol?(algorithm)?that? manages?control?and?use?of?the?communications?paths?in?the?mesh?network.? ? Theoretically?the?transmit?time?could?increase?substantially?beyond?today's?actual?operation?level?if?new? applications?and?functionality?are?added?to?the?meter's?communication?module?in?the?future.?For?a?hypothetical? "worst?case"?illustration?(i.e.,?if?the?meter?malfunctioned?and?was?stuck?in?the?transmit?mode),?an?absolute?upper? end?duty?cycle?would?be?100%,?where?the?transmitter?is?always?on.?The?table?below?compares?the?effect?of? different?duty?cycles?against?the?FCC?guidelines?for?human?exposure?limits.?? ? Typical?Smart?Meter?Operation? With?Repeater?Activity? ? 5%?Duty?Cycle? 72?minutes/day? 3%?of?FCC?limit? Scaled?Hypothetical?Maximum?Use?Case? (i.e.,?always?on)?? ? 100%?Duty?Cycle? 24?hours/day? 60%?of?FCC?limit? Source?data?on?operating?duty?cycles?(i.e.,?first?column)?from?Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?actual?field?testing?of?smart?meters,?as? reported?in?Radio?Frequency?Exposure?Levels?from?Smart?Meters,?November?2010.?Second?column?hypothetical?maximum?case?derived?through? extrapolation?of?first?column?data.?Both?exposure?levels?at?1?foot?distance.? ? In?summary,?the?duty?cycles?of?smart?meters?in?typical?meter-read?operation?and?added?maximum-case?repeater? operation?result?in?exposures?that?are?3%?of?the?FCC?exposure?guidelines.??Even?in?a?hypothetical?always-on? scenario?the?maximum?exposure?would?be?about?60%?of?the?FCC?limit,?which?provides?a?wide?safety?margin?from? known?thermal?effects?of?RF?emissions.? ? ? 22 What?About?Exposure?Levels?from?a?Bank?of?Meters?and?from?Just?Behind?the?Wall?of?a?Single? Meter?? ? In?a?November?2010?study?Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)35?field?tested?exposure?levels? from?a?bank?of?10?meters?of?250?mW?power?level?at?one?foot?distance?in?order?to?simulate?a? bank?of?smart?meters?located?at?a?multifamily?building,?such?as?an?apartment?house.??The? exposure?level?was?equivalent?to?8%?of?the?FCC?standard.??? ? In?the?same?study?EPRI?measured?exposure?of?one?meter?from?eight?inches?behind?the?meter? panel?box?in?order?to?simulate?proximity?on?the?opposite?site?of?the?meter?wall.??At?5%?duty? cycle?it?yielded?an?exposure?of?only?0.03%?of?the?FCC?standard.??Even?at?100%?duty?cycle?(i.e.,? always?transmitting),?exposure?at?eight?inches?behind?the?meter?was?0.6%?of?the?FCC?limit.? ? Is?the?FCC?Standard?Sufficient?to?Protect?Public?Health?? ? The?FCC?guidelines?do?provide?a?significant?factor?of?safety?against?thermal?impacts?the?only? currently?understood?human?health?impact?that?occurs?at?the?power?level?and?within?the? frequency?band?that?smart?meters?use.??In?addition?to?the?factor?of?safety?built?into?the? guidelines,?at?worst,?human?exposure?to?RF?from?smart?meter?infrastructure?operating?at?even? 50%?duty?cycle?will?be?significantly?lower?than?the?guidelines.??While?additional?study?is?needed? to?understand?potential?non-thermal?effects?of?exposure?to?RF?and?effects?of?cumulative?and? prolonged?exposure?to?several?devices?emitting?RF,?given?current?scientific?knowledge?the?FCC? guideline?provides?an?adequate?margin?of?safety?against?known?thermal?effects.? ? Are?Additional?Technology-specific?Standards?Needed?? ? The?FCC?guidelines?protect?against?thermal?effects?of?RF?exposure.?Many?non-thermal?effects? have?been?suggested,?and?additional?research?is?needed?to?better?understand?and?scientifically? validate?them.??? ? Given?the?scientific?uncertainty?around?non-thermal?effects?of?all?RF?emitting?equipment,?at?this? time?there?is?no?clear?indication?of?what,?if?any,?additional?standards?might?be?needed.?Neither? is?there?a?basis?from?which?to?understand?what?types?of?standards?could?be?helpful?or? appropriate.??Without?a?clear?understanding?of?the?biological?mechanisms?at?play,?the?costs?and? benefits?of?additional?standards?for?RF?emitting?devices?including?smart?meters,?cannot?be? determined?at?this?time.??? ? 35 EPRI?(2010)?"A?perspective?on?radio-frequency?exposure?associated?with?residential?automatic?meter?reading? technology,"?Electric?Power?Research?Institute,?February. ? 23 Public?Information?and?Education? ? It?is?important?that?consumers?have?clear?and?easily?understood?information?about?smart?meter? emissions?as?well?as?readily?available?access?to?clear,?factual?information?and?education?on? known?effects?of?RF?emissions?at?various?field?strengths?and?distances?from?an?array?of?devices? commonly?found?in?our?world.??? ? Equipped?with?this?information,?people?can?make?knowledgeable?judgments?about?how?to? prudently?minimize?possible?risks?to?themselves?and?their?families?by?utilizing?standards- compliant?devices?at?known?safe?distances.??Also,?people?will?be?better?able?to?gauge?relative? field?strengths?of?various?RF?sources?in?our?everyday?environment?(e.g.,?mobile?phones,?electric? blankets,?clock?radios,?TV?and?radio,?computers,?smart?meters,?power?lines,?microwave?ovens,? etc.).?An?ongoing?regularly?updated?source?of?unbiased?information?on?the?state?of?scientific? research,?both?proven?and?as-yet-unproven?causal?effects?being?studied,?if?presented?by?an? independent?entity,?would?provide?consumers?a?credible?and?transparent?source?from?which?to? obtain?facts?about?RF?in?our?environment.? ? CCST?is?not?currently?aware?of?a?single?website?with?up-to-date?consumer?information?which?we? are?able?to?endorse?as?impartial.? ? Alternatives?to?Wireless?? ? Assembly?Member?Huffman?has?inquired?about?potential?alternatives?to?wireless? communication?with?smart?meters.??There?are?currently?several?other?methods?of?transmitting? data?from?some?smart?meters?to?the?utility?company.?These?methods?include?transmitting?over? a?power?line?or?wired?through?phone?lines,?fiber-optic?or?coaxial?cable.??Each?method?has? tradeoffs?among?cost?and?performance?(e.g.,?how?much?data?can?be?carried,?how?far,?how?fast).? The?ability?to?have?a?transmission?protocol?alternative?to?wireless?depends?upon?the?type?and? configuration?of?the?meter?used.?Some?existing?smart?meters?can?be?hard-wired,?while?others? would?have?to?be?modified?or?replaced.??The?communications?board?plugs?into?a?digital?meter.?? The?current?PG&E?meters?use?a?SilverSpring?communications?board?that?only?supports?wireless? protocol.??SilverSpring?or?another?vendor?could?provide?an?alternative?communications?means?if? such?were?warranted?and?cost?effective.??The?related?costs?of?an?alternative?approach?would? need?to?be?factored?into?the?decision?making?process?related?to?different?options.? ? If?future?research?were?to?establish?a?causal?relationship?between?RF?emissions?and?negative? human?health?impacts,?industries?and?governments?worldwide?may?be?faced?with?difficult? choices?about?practical?alternatives?to?avoid?and?mitigate?such?effects.??This?would?greatly? affect?the?widespread?use?of?mobile?phones,?cordless?phones,?Wi-Fi?devices,?smart?meters,? walkie-talkies,?microwave?ovens,?and?many?other?everyday?appliances?and?devices?emitting?RF.? If?such?a?hypothetical?scenario?were?to?occur,?smart?meters?could?conceivably?be?adapted?to? non-wireless?transmission?of?data.??However,?retrofitting?millions?of?smart?meters?with?hard- wired?technology?could?be?difficult?and?costly.??Perhaps?more?importantly,?retrofitting?smart? ? 24 meters?would?not?address?the?significantly?greater?challenge?presented?by?the?billions?of?mobile? phones?in?use?globally.?? ? Key?Factors?to?Consider?When?Evaluating?Exposure?to?Radiofrequency?from?Smart?Meters? ? 1.??Signal?Frequency? Compare?to?devices?in?the?? 900?MHz?band?and?2.4?GHz?band? Frequency?similar?to?mobile? phones,?Wi-Fi,?laptop?computers,? walkie-talkies,?baby?monitors,? microwave?ovens? Meter?signal?strength?very?small? compared?to?other?devices?listed? above? Example:? 2 1?ft.??-?8.8?uW/cm ? 2 3?ft.??-?1.0?uW/cm ? 2 10?ft.?-?0.1?uW/cm ? -?Often?overlooked?factor?when? comparing?devices.? -?Short?duration?combined?with? weak?signal?strength?yields?tiny? exposures? -?FCC?"margin-of-safety"?limits?50? times?lower?than?hazardous? exposure?level? -?Typical?meter?operates?at?70? times?less?than?FCC?limit?and? 3,500?times?less?than?the? demonstrated?hazard?level? Continuing?research?needed? 2.??Signal?Strength?? (or?Power?Density)? 3.??Distance?from?Signal? Microwatts/square?centimeter? 2 (uW/cm )? Signal?strength?drops?rapidly? (doubling?distance?cuts?power? density?by?four)? -?Extremely?short?amount?of?time? (2.0-5.0%,?max.)?? -?No?RF?signal?95-98%?of?the?time? (over?23?hours/day)? -?Scientific?consensus?on?proven? effects?from?heat?at?high?RF?levels? 4.??Signal?Duration? 5.??Thermal?Effects? 6.??Non-thermal?Effects? -?Inconclusive?research?to?date? -?No?established?cause-and-effect? pointing?to?negative?health? impacts? ? ? 25 Conclusion? ? The?CCST?Project?Team,?after?carefully?reviewing?the?available?literature?on?the?current?state?of? science?on?health?impacts?of?radiofrequency?from?smart?meters?and?input?from?a?wide?array?of? subject?matter?experts,?concludes?that:?? ? 1. The?FCC?standard?provides?a?currently?accepted?factor?of?safety?against?known? thermally?induced?health?impacts?of?smart?meters?and?other?electronic?devices?in?the? same?range?of?RF?emissions.??Exposure?levels?from?smart?meters?are?well?below?the? thresholds?for?such?effects.? ? 2. There?is?no?evidence?that?additional?standards?are?needed?to?protect?the?public?from? smart?meters.?? ? The?topic?of?potential?health?impacts?from?RF?exposure?in?general,?including?the?small?RF? exposure?levels?of?smart?meters,?continues?to?be?of?concern.??This?report?has?been?developed?to? provide?readers?and?consumers?with?factual,?relevant?information?about?the:? ? o Scientific?basis?underpinning?current?RF?limits? o Need?for?further?research?into?RF?effects? o Relative?nature?of?RF?emissions?from?a?wide?array?of?devices?commonly?used?throughout? world?(e.g.,?cellular?and?cordless?phones,?Wi-Fi?devices,?laptop?computers,?baby? monitors,?microwave?ovens).? ? CCST?encourages?the?ongoing?development?of?unbiased?sources?of?readily?available?and?clear? facts?for?public?information?and?education.??A?web-based?repository?of?written?reports,? frequently?asked?questions?and?answers,?graphics,?and?video?demonstrations?would?provide? consumers?with?factual,?relevant?information?with?which?to?better?understand?RF?effects?in?our? environment.? ? 26 Appendix A Letters Requesting CCST sure cAP|rot Po eox mem sAcRAMEnro cA etmeruuos isis) ate zoos FAX isis; :na-awe sen: civic CENTER oR|vE, sulTE sm cA 94903 4415> usasau 4415; usrziza July 30, 2010 @egi?lz1fure #Is 412 . W2 nf IARED HUFFMAN olsmicr Karl Pistcr, Chair Susan 1-lackwood, Executive Director California Council on Science and Technology 1 130 Street, Suite 280 Sacramento, CA 95814-3 965 Dear Chair Pisterand Ms. I-lackwood: COMMITTEES CHAIR WATER PARKS AND w|toL|FE NATURAL RESOURCES oTlLiT|Es AND COMMERCE SUBCOMMITTEE No a on RESOURCES I am writing to request a study by the Califomia Council on Science and Technology in response to the many concerns and questions that have been raised by constituents in my Assembly District including the Marin County Board of Supervisors, City of Sebastopol, City of Fairfax, and Marin Association of Realtors relating to potential negative health effects nom SmartMeters, the electronic monitoring devices that Pacilic Gas and Electric Company is installing statewide to continuously measure the electricity output from each household and business. SmartMeters are currently being installed throughout the state under the authority ofthe California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) pursuant to a series of decisions that span from 2006 through 2009. The authority for to deploy SmartMeters in its territory is embodied in two decisions: (the initial deployment) and (the upgrade). On the question of health effects of radiation from the devises, and CPUC maintain that electromagnetic fields emitted from these SmartMeters and the radio frequency power associated with the wireless radios fall within the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) regulations, pointing out that SmartMeters emit fewer radio frequencies than the amount allowable for cellular telephones, microwave ovens, and wireless lnternet Services. Critics claim, among other things, that FCC standards are not sufficiently protective ofpublic health and do not take into account the cumulative effect ofradiation exposure from a growing number ofsources and devices, including continuous exposure from some sources. For example, they cite a letter from the Radiation Protection Division ofthe Environmental Protection Agency (attached), they argue, standards were thermally based and do not apply to chronic, nonthermal exposure situations, and that the current exposure guidelines are based on the effects resulting from whole-body heating, not exposure ofand effect on critical organs including the brain and the eyes." Therefore, they argue the "safety" standards were not designed to protect the public from health problems under the circumstances which the meters are being used. Pnmea an maya/sa Paper Letter to Karl Pisterand Susan Hackwood July 30, 2010 Page 2 An independent. science-based study by the California Council on Science and Technology would help policy makers andthe general public resolve the debate over whether SmartMeters present a significant risk of adverse health effects, Toward that end. request that the Council specitically determine whether FCC standards t`or SmartMeters are sufticiently protective of public health taking into account cun'ent exposure levels to radiofrequency and electromagnetic liclds, and further to assess whether additional technology specific standards are needed for SmartMeters and other devises that are commonly found in and around homes. to ensure adequate protection from adverse health effects. Thank you tor your serious consideration of this important and time~sensitive request, Please do not hesitate to contact me ifl can be of assistance going forward Sincerely. x/ JARED HUFFMAN (mm District CHAIR HEALTH ARTS ENTERTAINMENT SPORTS, 552m TOURISM INTERNET MEDIA ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETV TOXIC MATERIALS JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE JUDICIAFIV Qlegizlulute LABOR AND EMPLOVMENT wEIssrrE: assemuty ca gov/manning WILLIAM W. MONNING oismicf sur, gif; ., September 15,2010 Karl Pister, Chair Califomia Council on Science and Technology 1130 Suite 280 Sacramento, CA 95814-3965 Dear Chair Pister: STATE CAPITUL RO. BOX 942849 SACRAMENTO, CA 94249-0027 (9161 FAX 49161 3192127 DISTRICT OFFICES 101 OCEAN STREET SUITE sts-H SANTA CRUZ. CA 95060 Islip 425-|503 FAX tsatl 425-2570 99 PACIFIC STREET. SUITE MONTEHEV CA 93940 testi sas-zaaz (aan s49-2935 SANTA CLARA couurv DIRECT LINE most Taz-os-sv This letter is to lbmtally request that I be included in the response Iiom the Califomia Council on Science and Technology (CCST) regarding the health safety evaluation ofthe new electronic metering devices, otheiwise known as Smart Meters, currently being installed by Pacific Gas and Electric (`ompany which will be available by October 15. 2010. Numerous and questions have been mised by customers throughout the state, as well Us local government entitics such as the County of Santa Cruz, the City ot`Capitola, City ofSanta (`ruz. City ot`Scotts Valley, and the City ofWatsonville, relating to potential health effects ofthe radio from Sman Meters. As you know, the tederal Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 required each state to initiate a smart grid system. ln response to this federal mandate, the State ot`Calitomia enacted Senate Bill 17, Chapter 327, Statutes of2009, granting the Califomia Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) smart grid oversight authority. While the CPUC has authorized to install their current Sman Meter system, CPUC has not addressed the question ofwhether the RF emissions from Smart Meter devices have potential health impacts. While Inaintains that Smart Meteis comply with the Fedenil Communications Commission (FCC) salety standards. there is still public concem that the FCC standards do not sufficiently protect the pub|ie`s health and do not take into account the cumulative el`I`ect ofradiation exposure from growing number of sources and devices emitting RF. The scientitic evaluation by the Califomia Council on Science and Technology will help to both elected officials and the public about the safety of Smart Meters and I appreciate the Council taking the time to assess this very imponant issue. l`l\ank you for your time and assistance on this issue, Sincerely, Assembl icmber, District rog Pfmiga an Hacyefea Paper 29 he-' 6 _,fa .. 4- ng. 1|;f 57% 1 wi., Stephanie Moulton-Peters Shawn Marshall Mayor Councilnieiriwr Ken Wachlel Andrew Berman Vice-Mag/or Garry Lion James C. McCann Cuimimambaf my Manage,- September 20, 2010 Karl Pister, Chair Susan Hackwood, Executive Director Califomia Council on Science and Technology 1130 Street, Suite 280 Sacramento, CA 95814-3965 Dear Chair Pistel and Ms, Hackwood: On behalf of the Mill Valley City Council, am writing to support Jared Huffinan's request for a study by the Califomia Council on Science and Technology (CCST) to specifically detennine whether Federal Communications Commission (FCC) standards for Pacific Gas and Electric SmartMeters are sufficiently protective ofpublic health. This request is in response to the many concems and questions that have been raised by Mill Valley residents relating to potential negative health effects from SmartMeters. Mill Valley residents have expressed their concems that these devices, which are regulated by the Califomia Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), emit levels of radiation that may be harmful to public health, especially with consideration to the long-term and cumulative impacts of the devices. The CPUC maintains that SmartMeters emit radiation Well below the FCC-established safety standards, and have therefore not ordered to halt the installation ofthe advanced metering devices. Critics argue that the safety standards detemiined by the FCC are not sufficient and specifically not designed to protect the public from health problems under the circumstances which the meters will be used. The FCC standards, they claim, do not take into consideration long-term and cumulative exposures to these devices. The City of Mill Valley City Council therefore join Huffman in requesting the CCST undertake a study to specifically detemiine whether FCC standards for SmanMeters are sufficiently protective of public health, taking into account current exposure levels to radioirequency and electromagnetic iields, and further to assess whether additional technology City of Mill Valley. 26 Corte Madera Avenue. Mill Valley. California 94941 I 415-388-4033 specific standards are needed for SmartMeters and other devices that are commonly found in and around homes, to ensure adequate protection from adverse health effects. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Stephanie Moulton>>Peters, Mayor City ofMill Valley Cc: Mill Valley City Council Jared Huffinan Joshua Townsend, Public Affairs Manager Mania Zafar, CPUC Business and Community Outreach Division Manager 2 Appendix?B?-?Project?Process? ? CCST?Smart?Meter?Project?Approach? Assembly?Member?Huffman?(Marin)?(July?30,?2010?letter)?and?Assembly?Member? Monning?(Santa?Cruz)?(September?17,?2010?letter)?requested?CCST's?assistance?in? determining?if?there?are?health?safety?issues?regarding?the?new?SMART?meters?being? installed?by?the?utilities.?In?addition,?the?City?of?Mill?Valley?sent?a?letter?to?CCST? (September,?2010)?in?support?of?Mr.?Huffman's?request.?(Appendix?A?-?letters)? ? The?CCST?Executive?Committee?appointed?a?Smart?Meter?Project?Team?that?oversaw?the? development?of?a?response?on?the?issue?(Appendix?C):? o Rollin?Richmond?(Chair),?President?Humboldt?State?University,?CSU? o Jane?Long,?Associate?Director?at?Large,?Global?Security?Directorate?Fellow,?Center? for?Global?Security?Research?Lawrence?Livermore?National?Laboratory? o Emir? Macari,? Dean? of? Engineering? and? Computer? Science,? California? State? University,?Sacramento?and?Director?of?the?California?Smart?Grid?Center? o Patrick?Mantey,?Director,?CITRIS?@?Santa?Cruz? o Ryan?McCarthy,?2009?CCST?Science?and?Technology?Policy?Fellow? o Larry?Papay,?CEO,?PQR,?LLC,?mgmt?consulting?firm? o David? Winickoff,? Assistant? Professor? of? Bioethics? and? Society,? Department? of? Environmental?Science,?Policy?and?Management,?UC?Berkeley? o Paul? Wright,? Director,? UC? Center? for? Information? Technology? Research? in? the? Interest?of?Society?(CITRIS)? ? In?addition?to?those?on?the?project?team,?CCST?approached?over?two?dozen?technical? experts?to?contribute?their?opinion?to?inform?CCST's?response.?The?experts?were?referred? from?a?variety?of?sources?and?were?vetted?by?the?Smart?Meter?Project?Team.??Efforts? were?made?to?include?both?biological?and?physical?scientists?and?engineers?to?help? provide?broad?context?and?perspective?to?the?response.?Many?of?the?experts?approached? indicated?they?did?not?time?to?provide?a?written?response?however?they?provided? references?to?additional?experts?and/or?literature?for?review.??A?few?experts?identified? were?not?asked?to?contribute?due?to?affiliations?that?were?felt?to?be?a?conflict?of?interest.?? Experts?were?asked?to?provide?written?comment?on?two?issues,?to?provide?referral?to? other?experts,?and?to?suggest?literature?that?should?be?reviewed.??Appendix?D?provides?a? list?of?those?experts?who?provided?written?comment.? ? Smart?Meter?Project?Team?members?and?the?experts?providing?written?technical?input? completed?a?conflict?of?interest?disclosure?form?to?reveal?any?activities?that?could?create? the?potential?perception?of?a?conflict.? ? In?addition?to?written?and?oral?input?from?technical?experts,?CCST?identified?relevant? reports?and?other?sources?of?information?to?inform?the?final?report.??This?material?can?be? found?listed?in?Appendix?E?and?on?a?CCST?website:?http://ccst.us/projects/smart/.? ? ? 32 Peer?Review:??After?the?draft?report?was?vetted?in?great?detail?by?the?Smart?Meter?Project? Team,?it?was?forwarded?to?the?CCST?Board?and?Council?for?peer?review.??? ? Public?Comment:??The?report?is?being?posted?to?the?CCST?website?that?will?allow?the? general?public?to?comment.?? ? 33 Appendix?C?-?Project?Team? ? The?California?Council?on?Science?and?Technology?adheres?to?the?highest?standards?to? provide?independent,?objective,?and?respected?work.?Board?and?Council?Members?review? all?work?that?bears?CCST's?name.??In?addition,?CCST?seeks?peer?review?from?external? technical?experts.?The?request?for?rigorous?peer?review?results?in?a?protocol?that?ensures? the?specific?issue?being?addressed?is?done?so?in?a?targeted?way?with?results?that?are?clear? and?sound.? ? In?all,?this?report?reflects?the?input?and?expertise?of?nearly?30?people?in?addition?to?the? project?team.?Reviewers?include?experts?from?academia,?industry,?national?laboratories,? and?non-profit?organizations.? ? We?wish?to?extend?our?sincere?appreciation?to?the?project?team?members?who?have? helped?produce?this?report.?Their?expertise?and?diligence?has?been?invaluable,?both?in? rigorously?honing?the?accuracy?and?focus?of?the?work?and?in?ensuring?that?the? perspectives?of?their?respective?areas?of?expertise?and?institutions?were?taken?into? account.?Without?the?insightful?feedback?that?these?experts?generously?provided,?this? report?could?not?have?been?completed.? ? Rollin?Richmond,?Smart?Meter?Project?Chair,?CCST?Board?Member? President?Humboldt?State?University,?CSU? Prior?to?Richmond's?appointment?at?Humboldt?State?University?in?2002,?he?had?a? distinguished?career?as?a?faculty?member,?researcher?in?evolutionary?biology?and? academic?administrator.?Richmond?received?a?Ph.D.?in?genetics?from?the? Rockefeller?University?and?a?bachelor's?degree?in?zoology?from?San?Diego?State? University.?Dr.?Richmond's?career?has?included:?Chairperson?of?biology?at?Indiana? University,?founding?Dean?of?the?College?of?Arts?and?Sciences?at?the?University?of? South?Florida,?Provost?at?the?State?University?of?New?York?at?Stony?Brook,?and? Provost?and?Professor?of?Zoology?and?Genetics?at?Iowa?State?University.???He?was? named?the?sixth?President?of?Humboldt?State?University?in?July?of?2002.?Dr.? Richmond?is?a?fellow?of?the?American?Association?for?the?Advancement?of?Science? and?a?member?of?Phi?Beta?Kappa.??His?research?interests?are?in?evolutionary? genetics.? ? Jane?Long,?CCST's?California's?Energy?Future?Project?Co-Chair?and?CCST?Sr.?Fellow? Associate?Director?at?Large,?Global?Security?Directorate?Fellow,?Center?for?Global?Security? Research?Lawrence?Livermore?National?Laboratory? Dr.?Long?is?the?Principal?Associate?Director?at?Large?for?Lawrence?Livermore? National?Laboratory?working?on?energy?and?climate.?She?is?also?a?Fellow?in?the? LLNL?Center?for?Global?Strategic?Research.?Her?current?interests?are?in?reinvention? of?the?energy?system?in?light?of?climate?change,?national?security?issues,?economic? stress,?and?ecological?breakdown.?She?holds?a?bachelor's?degree?in?engineering? from?Brown?University?and?Masters?and?Ph.D.?from?UC?Berkeley.?? ? 34 ? Patrick?Mantey? Director,?UC?Center?for?Information?Technology?Research?in?the?Interest?of?Society?(CITRIS)? @?Santa?Cruz,?University?of?California,?Santa?Cruz? Mantey?holds?the?Jack?Baskin?Chair?in?Computer?Engineering?and?was?the? founding?Dean?of?the?Jack?Baskin?School?of?Engineering.?He?is?now?the?director?of? CITRIS?at?UC?Santa?Cruz?and?of?ITI,?the?Information?Technologies?Institute?in?the? Baskin?School?of?Engineering.?In?1984,?he?joined?the?UCSC?faculty?to?start?the? engineering?programs,?coming?from?IBM?where?he?was?a?senior?manager?at?IBM? Almaden?Research.?His?research?interests?include?system?architecture,?design,? and?performance,?simulation?and?modeling?of?complex?systems,?computer? networks?and?multimedia,?real-time?data?acquisition,?and?control?systems.? Mantey?is?a?Fellow?of?the?Institute?of?Electrical?and?Electronics?Engineers.??His? current?projects?at?CITRIS?include?the?Residential?Load?Monitoring?Project?and? work?on?power?distribution?system?monitoring?and?reliability.???Mantey?received? his?B.S.?(magna?cum?laude)?from?the?University?of?Notre?Dame,?his?M.S.?from?the? University?of?Wisconsin-Madison,?and?his?Ph.D.?from?Stanford?University,?all?in? electrical?engineering.?He?is?a?Fellow?of?the?Institute?of?Electrical?and?Electronics? Engineers?(IEEE).? ? Emir?Jos??Macari? Dean?of?Engineering?and?Computer?Science,?California?State?University,?Sacramento?and? Director?of?the?California?Smart?Grid?Center? Prior?to?his?appointment?as?dean?at?CSU?Sacramento,?Macari?was?dean?of?the? College?of?Science,?Mathematics?and?Technology?at?the?University?of?Texas?at? Brownsville.?Prior?to?that,?he?served?as?the?program?director?for?the?Centers?of? Research?Excellence?in?Science?and?Technology?at?the?National?Science? Foundation.?He?spent?five?years?as?the?Chair?and?Bingham?C.?Stewart? Distinguished?Professor?in?the?Department?of?Civil?and?Environmental?Engineering? at?Louisiana?State?University.?At?the?Georgia?Institute?of?Technology?he?taught? both?engineering?and?public?policy?and?at?the?University?of?Puerto?Rico?he?was?a? professor?and?director?of?Civil?Infrastructure?Research?Center.?He?has?also?worked? as?a?civil?engineer?in?private?industry?and?has?been?a?fellow?at?NASA.??Macari?holds? both?a?doctorate?and?a?master's?degree?in?civil?engineering?geomechanics?from? the?University?of?Colorado.?He?has?a?bachelor's?degree?in?civil?engineering? geomechanics?from?Virginia?Tech?University.?? ? Larry?Papay?CCST?Board?Member? CEO,?PQR,?LLC,?mgmt?consulting?firm? Papay?is?currently?CEO?and?Principal?of?PQR,?LLC,?a?management?consulting?firm? specializing?in?managerial,?financial,?and?technical?strategies?for?a?variety?of? clients?in?electric?power?and?other?energy?areas.?His?previous?positions?include? Sector?Vice?President?for?the?Integrated?Solutions?Sector,?SAIC;?Senior?Vice? President?and?General?Manager?of?Bechtel?Technology?&?Consulting;?and?Senior? ? 35 ? David?E?Winickoff? Associate?Professor?of?Bioethics?and?Society,?Department?of?Environmental?Science,?Policy? and?Management,?UC?Berkeley? David?Winickoff?(JD,?MA)?is?Associate?Professor?of?Bioethics?and?Society?at?UC? Berkeley,?where?he?co-directs?the?UC?Berkeley?Science,?Technology?and?Society? Center.?Trained?at?Yale,?Harvard?Law?School,?and?Cambridge?University,?he?has? published?over?30?articles?in?leading?bioethics,?biomedical,?legal?and?science? studies?journals?such?as?The?New?England?Journal?of?Medicine,?the?Yale?Journal?of? International?Law,?and?Science,?Technology?&?Human?Values.?His?academic?and? policy?work?spans?topics?of?biotechnology,?intellectual?property,?geo-engineering,? risk-based?regulation,?and?human?subjects?research.?? ? Paul?Wright? Director,?UC?Center?for?Information?Technology?Research?in?the?Interest?of?Society?(CITRIS)? As?Director?of?CITRIS?Wright?oversees?projects?on?large?societal?problems?such?as? energy?and?the?environment;?IT?for?healthcare;?and?intelligent?infrastructures? such?as:?public?safety,?water?management?and?sustainability.?Wright?is?a?professor? in?the?mechanical?engineering?department,?and?holds?the?A.?Martin?Berlin?Chair.? He?is?also?a?co-director?of?the?Berkeley?Manufacturing?Institute?(BMI)?and?co- director?of?the?Berkeley?Wireless?Research?Center?(BWRC).?Born?in?London,?he? obtained?his?degrees?from?the?University?of?Birmingham,?England?and?came?to? the?United?States?in?1979?following?appointments?at?the?University?of?Auckland,? New?Zealand?and?Cambridge?University?England.?He?is?also?a?member?of?the? National?Academy?of?Engineering.? ? Ryan?McCarthy? Science?and?Technology?Policy?Fellow,?California?Council?on?Science?and?Technology? McCarthy?recently?completed?the?CCST?Science?and?Technology?Policy?Fellowship? in?the?office?of?California?Assembly?Member?Wilmer?Amina?Carter,?where?he? advised?on?issues?associated?with?energy,?utilities,?and?the?environment,?among? others.??McCarthy?holds?a?master?and?doctorate?degree?in?civil?and?environmental? engineering?from?UC?Davis,?and?a?bachelor's?degree?in?structural?engineering?from? UC?San?Diego.??His?expertise?lies?in?transportation?and?energy?systems?analysis,? specifically?regarding?the?electricity?grid?in?California?and?impacts?of?electric? vehicles?on?energy?use?and?emissions?in?the?state.? Vice?President?at?Southern?California?Edison.??Papay?received?a?B.S.?in?Physics? from?Fordham?University,?a?M.S.?in?Nuclear?Engineering?from?MIT,?and?a?Sc.D.?in? Nuclear?Engineering?from?MIT.?He?is?a?member?of?the?National?Academy?of? Engineering?and?served?on?its?Board?of?Councilors?from?2004-2010.?He?served?as? CCST?Council?Chair?from?2005?through?2008,?after?which?he?was?appointed?to?the? Board.? ? 36 Appendix?D?-?Written?Submission?Authors? ? Written?Input?Received?from:? Physical?Sciences/Engineers? Kenneth?Foster,?Professor,?Department?of?Bioengineering,?University?of?Pennsylvania? Rob?Kavet,?Physiologist/Engineer,?Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?? ? Biologists/medical? De-Kun?Li,?MD,?Ph.D.,?Senior?Reproductive?and?Perinatal?Epidemiologist,?Division?of? Research,?Kaiser?Foundation?Research?Institute,?Kaiser?Permanente? Asher?Sheppard,?Ph.D.,?Asher?Sheppard?Consulting,?trained?in?physics,?environmental? medicine,?and?neuroscience? Magda?Havas,?B.Sc.,?Ph.D.,?Environmental?&?Resource?Studies,?Trent?University,? Peterborough,?Canada? Cindy?Sage,?MA,?Department?of?Oncology,?University?Hospital,?Orebro,?Sweden?and?Co- Editor,?BioInitiative?Report? Ray?Neutra,?MD,?Ph.D.,?Epidemiologist,?retired?Chief?of?the?Division?of?Environmental?and? Occupational?Disease?Control,?California?Department?of?Public?Health?(CDPH)? ? ? 37 Appendix?E?-?Additional?Materials?Consulted? ? All?sources?can?be?accessed?through?the?CCST?website?at?http://www.ccst.us?? ? American?Academy?of?Pediatrics? o The?Sensitivity?of?Children?to?Electromagnetic?Fields??American?Academy?of? Pediatrics?(August?3,?2005)? Australian?Radiation?Protection?and?Nuclear?Safety?Agency?(ARPANSA)? o www.arpansa.gov.au?Australian?Radiation?Protection?and?Nuclear?Safety?Agency? (ARPANSA)? o Radiation?Protection?-?Committee?on?Electromagnetic?Energy?Public?Health?Issues? (Fact?Sheet)??? Australian?Radiation?Protection?and?Nuclear?Safety?Agency?(ARPANSA)?(May? 2010)? o Radiation?Protection?-?Mobile?Telephones?and?Health?Effects??? Australian?Radiation?Protection?and?Nuclear?Safety?Agency?(ARPANSA)?(June?25,? 2010)? Documents?From?the?California?Department?of?Public?Health?(CDPH)? o Mixed?Signals?About?Cellphones'?Health?Risks?Hang?Up?Research??? The?Chronicle?(September?26,?2010)? o Summary?of?the?Literature:?What?do?we?Know?About?Cell?Phones?and?Health?? (July?20,?2010)? o Brain?Tumor?Risk?in?Relation?to?Mobile?Telephone?Use:?Results?of?the? INTERPHONE?International?Case?-?Control?Study??? Oxford?University?Press?(March?8,?2010)? o Mobile?Phones?and?Health?? U.K.?Department?of?Health? o Late?Lessons?from?Early?Warnings:?Towards?Realism?and?Precaution?with?EMF?? David?Gee,?European?Environment?Agency,?(January?30,?2009)? o Statement?of?Finnish?Radiation?and?Nuclear?Safety?Authority?(STUK)?Concerning? Mobile?Phones?and?Health??? Radiation?and?Nuclear?Safety?Authority?-?STUK?(January?7,?2009)? o Fact?Sheet:?Children?and?Safe?Cell?Phone?Use?? Toronto?Public?Health?(July?2008)? o Children?and?Mobile?phones:?The?Health?of?the?Following?Generations?in?Danger? Russian?National?Committee?on?Non-Ionizing?Radiation?Protection?(April?14,?2008)? o AFSSE?Statement?on?Mobile?Phones?and?Health??? French?Environmental?Health?and?Safety?Agency?-?AFSSE?(April?16,?2003)? Committee?on?Man?and?Radiation?(COMAR)? o IEEE?Engineering?in?Medicine?and?Biology?Society?Committee?on?Man?and? Radiation?(COMAR)? o COMAR?Technical?Information?Statement?the?IEEE?Exposure?Limits?for? Radiofrequency?and?Microwave?Energy??? ? 38 IEEE?Engineering?in?Medicine?and?Biology?Magazine?(April?2005)? Commonwealth?Club?of?California? o Commonwealth?Club?of?California?-?The?Health?Effects?of?Electromagnetic?Fields? (Video)??(November?18,?2010)? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)? o emf.epri.com?EMF/RF?Program?at?EPRI? o Radio-Frequency?Exposure?Levels?from?SmartMeters??? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(November?2010)?-?accessed?via?the?Internet? December?2010? o Perspective?on?Radio-Frequency?Exposure?Associated?With?Residential?Automatic? Meter?Reading?Technology??? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?(February?22,?2010)? o Testing?and?Performance?Assessment?for?Field?Applications?of?Advanced?Meters? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?(December?4,?2009)? o Overview?of?Personal?Radio?Frequency?Communication?Technologies??? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?(September?9,?2008)? o Characterizing?and?Quantifying?the?Societal?Benefits?Attributable?to?Smart? Metering?Investments??? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?(July?2008)? o Metering?Technology??? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(June?20,?2008)? o The?BioInitiative?Working?Group?Report??? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?(November?23,?2007)? o An?Overview?of?Common?Sources?of?Environmental?Levels?of?Radio?Frequency? Fields??? Electric?Power?Research?Institute?(EPRI)?(September?2002)? Environmental?Protection?Agency? o United?States?Environmental?Protection?Agency's?Response?to?Janet?Newton? ?(March?8,?2002)? o United?States?Environmental?Protection?Agency's?Response?to?Jo-Anne?Basile? ?(September?16,?2002)? Epidemiology? o Prenatal?and?Postnatal?Exposure?to?Cell?Phone?Use?and?Behavioral?Problems?in? Children??? Epidemiology?July?2008?-?Volume?19?-?Issue?4?-?pp?523-529? European?Journal?of?Oncology?-?Ramazzini?Institute? o Non-Thermal?Effects?and?Mechanisms?of?Interaction?between?Electromagnetic? Fields?and?Living?Matter??? (2010)? Federal?Communications?Commission? o Radio?Frequency?Safety?FAQ's? ? 39 o o o o o RF?Safety?Page? Federal?Communications?Commission?Response?to?Cindy?Sage?? (August?6,?2010)? FCC?Certifications? o FCC?Certification?for?the?Silver?Spring?Networks?Devices?-?September?28,? 2009? o FCC?Certification?for?the?Silver?Spring?Networks?Devices?-?September?28,? 2009? o FCC?Certification?for?the?Silver?Spring?Networks?Devices?-?September?4,? 2007? o FCC?Certification?for?the?Silver?Spring?Networks?Devices?-?July?6,?2007? Questions?and?Answers?about?Biological?Effects?and?Potential?Hazards?of? Radiofrequency?Electromagnetic?Fields??? Federal?Communications?Commission?Office?of?Engineering?&?Technology?(August? 1999)? Evaluating?Compliance?with?FCC?Guidelines?for?Human?Exposure?to? Radiofrequency?Electromagnetic?Fields?? Federal?Communications?Commission?Office?of?Engineering?&?Technology?(August? 1997)? Food?and?Drug?Administration? o No?Evidence?Linking?Cell?Phone?Use?to?Risk?of?Brain?Tumors?? U.S.?Food?and?Drug?Administration?(May?2010)? Health?Protection?Agency? o Wi-Fi??? Health?Protection?Agency?(Last?reviewed:?October?26,?2009)? o Cordless?Telephones?-?Digital?Enhanced?Cordless?Telecommunications?(DECT)?and? other?Cordless?Phones?? Health?Protection?Agency?(Last?reviewed:?September?4,?2008)? International?Commission?on?Non-Ionizing?Radiation?Protection?(ICNIRP)? o www.icnirp.de?International?Commission?on?Non-Ionizing?Radiation?Protection? (ICNIRP)? o International?Commission?on?Non-Ionizing?Radiation?Protection?(ICNIRP)?on?the? Interphone?Publication?? International?Commission?on?Non-Ionizing?Radiation?Protection?(May?18,?2010)? o ICNIRP?Statement?on?the?"Guidelines?for?Limiting?Exposure?to?Time-Varying? Electric,?Magnetic,?and?Electromagnetic?Fields?(up?to?300?GHz)"?? International?Commission?on?Non-Ionizing?Radiation?Protection?(September?2009)? o Epidemiologic?Evidence?on?Mobile?Phones?and?Tumor?Risk?? International?Commission?on?Non-Ionizing?Radiation?Protection?(September?2009)? o Exposure?to?High?Frequency?Electromagnetic?Fields,?Biological?Effects?and?Health? Consequences?(100?kHz?-?300?GHz)?? International?Commission?on?Non-Ionizing?Radiation?Protection?(2009)? ? 40 National?Academies?Press? o Identification?of?Research?Needs?Relating?to?Potential?Biological?or?Adverse?Health? Effects?of?Wireless?Communication?? National?Academies?Press?(2008)? o An?Assessment?of?Potential?Health?Effects?from?Exposure?to?PAVE?PAWS?Low- Level?Phased-Array?Radiofrequency?Energy??(9.9MB?PDF)? National?Academies?Press?(2005)? National?Cancer?Institute? o Cell?Phones?and?Cancer?Risk?(Fact?Sheet)?? National?Cancer?Institute? o Cell?Phones?and?Brain?Cancer:?What?We?Know?(and?Don't?Know)?? National?Cancer?Institute?(September?23,?2008)? National?Institute?of?Environmental?Health?Sciences? o Electric?and?Magnetic?Fields?? National?Institute?of?Environmental?Health?Sciences? PG&E? o Understanding?Radio?Frequency?(RF)?? PG&E? o Supplemental?Report?on?An?Analysis?of?Radiofrequency?Fields?Associated?with? Operation?of?PG&E?SmartMeter?Program?Upgrade?System?? Richard?A.?Tell,?Richard?Tell?Associates,?Inc.?(October?27,?2008)? o Smart?Grid:?Utility?Challenges?in?the?21st?Century?(7.4MB?PDF)? Andrew?Tang,?Smart?Energy?Web,?Pacific?Gas?and?Electric?Company?(September? 18,?2009)? o Summary?Discussion?of?RF?Fields?and?the?PG&E?SmartMeter?System?? Richard?A.?Tell,?Richard?Tell?Associates,?Inc.?(2005?Report?and?2008?Supplemental? Report)? o Analysis?of?RF?Fields?Associated?with?Operation?of?PG&E?Automatic?Meter? Reading?Systems?? Richard?A.?Tell,?Richard?Tell?Associates,?Inc.?and?J.?Michael?Silva,?P.E.?Enertech? Consultants?(April?5,?2005)? Provided?by?Raymond?Neutra? o www.ehib.org/emf?The?California?Electric?and?Magnetic?Fields?(EMF)?Program? o Should?the?World?Health?Organization?(WHO)?Apply?the?Precautionary?Principal?to? Low?and?High?Frequency?Electromagnetic?Fields??? Raymond?Richard?Neutra? Society?for?Risk?Analysis? o Risk?Governance?for?Mobile?Phones,?Power?Lines?and?Other?EMF?Technologies??? Society?for?Risk?Analysis?(2010)? Swedish?State?Radiation?Protection?Authority?(SSI)? o The?Nordic?Radiation?Safety?Authorities?See?no?Need?to?Reduce?Public?Exposure? ? 41 Generated?by?Mobile?Bas?Stations?and?Wireless?Networks?? Swedish?State?Radiation?Protection?Authority?(SSI)?(2009)? University?of?Ottawa? o Wireless?Communication?and?Health?-?Electromagnetic?Energy?and? Radiofrequency?Radiation?FAQ's?? University?of?Ottawa,?RFcom? World?Health?Organization? o Database?of?Worldwide?EMF?Standards? o WHO?-?Electromagnetic?Fields? o Electromagnetic?Fields?and?Public?Health?-?Base?Stations?and?Wireless?Networks? (Fact?Sheet?N?304)?? World?Health?Organization?(May?2006)? o Electromagnetic?Fields?and?Public?Health?-?Electromagnetic?Hypersensitivity?(Fact? Sheet?N?296)?? World?Health?Organization?(December?2005)? o Electromagnetic?Fields?and?Public?Health?-?Mobile?phones?(Fact?Sheet?N?193)? ?World?Health?Organization?(May?2010)? Unsolicited?Submissions? Documents?Provided?by?Alexander?Blink,?Executive?Director?of?the?DE-Toxics? Institute,?Fairfax?CA? o Points?and?Sources?Submitted?for?Consideration?by?Alexander?Blink?2? o Points?and?Sources?Submitted?for?Consideration?by?Alexander?Blink?1? o Public?Health?Implications?of?Wireless?Technologies,?Cindy?Sage? o Memory?and?Behavior,?By?Henry?Lai,?Bioelectromagnetics?Research? Laboratory,?University?of?Washington? Sage?Consulting? o Assessment?of?Radiofrequency?Microwave?Radiation?Emissions?from? Smart?Meters? Sage?Associates?(January?2011)? o Cindy?Sage?Letter?to?Julius?Knapp?(FCC)? (September?22,?2010)? o Response?Letter?to?Cindy?Sage?from?Julius?Knapp?(FCC)? (August?6,?2010)? o Cindy?Sage?Letter?to?Edwin?D.?Mantiply?(FCC)? (March?15,?2010)? o Bioinitiative?Report:?A?Rational?for?a?Biologically-based?Public?Exposure? Standard?for?Electromagnetic?Fields?(ELF?and?RF)?(3.1MB?PDF)? o Bioinitiative?Report:?What?is?the?BioInitiative?Report??? o Bioinitiative?Report:?Myocardial?Function?Improved?by?Electromagnetic? Field?Induction?of?Stress?Protein?hsp70??(1.1MB?PDF)? o Bioinitiative?Report:?The?Interphone?Brain?Tumor?Study??(1.6MB?PDF)? Cindy?Sage,?Editorial?Perspective? o Bioinitiative?Report:?Steps?to?the?Clinic?with?ELF?EMF??(1.0MB?PDF)? ? 42 o Mobile?Phone?Base?Stations?-?Effects?on?Wellbeing?and?Health?? Pathophysiology?(August?2009)? o Increased?Blood-Brain?Barrier?Permeability?in?Mammalian?Brain?7?Days? after?Exposure?to?the?Radiation?from?a?GSM-900?Mobile?Phone?? Pathophysiology?(August?2009)? o Public?Health?Implications?of?Wireless?Technologies? Pathophysiology?(August?2009)? o Genotoxic?Effects?of?Radiofrequency?Electromagnetic?Fields? Pathophysiology?(August?2009)? o Epidemiological?Evidence?for?an?Association?Between?Use?of?Wireless? Phones?and?Tumor?Diseases? Pathophysiology?(August?2009)? o Public?Health?Risks?from?Wireless?Technologies:?The?Critical?Need?for? Biologically-based?Public?Exposure?Standards?for?Electromagnetic?Fields? (2.9MB?PDF)?? BioInitiative?Briefing?for?President-Elect?Obama?Transition?Team? o The?BioInitiative?Report:?A?Rationale?for?A?Biologically-based?Public? Exposure?Standard?for?Electromagnetic?Fields?(ELF?and?RF)?(3.6MB?PDF)? Cindy?Sage?PowerPoint?Presentation?(November?2007)? Wilner?&?Associates? o SmartMeters?and?Existing?Electromagnetic?Pollution?? Wilner?&?Associates?(January?2011)?-?This?report?was?not?commissioned? by?CCST?? o Application?for?Modification?Before?the?California?Public?Utilities? Commission?(3.5MB?PDF)? Other?Documents? o Health?Canada?Safety?Code?6?and?City?of?Toronto's?Proposed?Prudent?Avoidance? Policy??? (2010)? o Transmitting?Smart?Meters?Pose?A?Serious?Threat?To?Public?Health??? (2010)? o RF?Safety?and?WiMax?FAQ's:?Addressing?Concerns?About?Perceived?Health?Effects? ?(April?2008)? Relevant?Websites? o EMF?-?Portal? o o o o o emfacts.com? emfsafetynetwork.org? lbagroup.com? NIOSH?Program?Portfolio??Centers?for?Disease?Control?and?Prevention?(CDC)? Radio?Frequency?RF?Safety?and?Antenna?FAQs? ? 43 Smart Grid Information Clearinghouse QSGICQ stogsmartmetersorg Appendix?F?-?Glossary? ? Access?point?-?A?term?typically?used?to?describe?an?electronic?device?that?provides?for? wireless?connectivity?via?a?WAN?to?the?Internet?or?a?particular?computer?facility.? ? Duty?cycle?-?A?measure?of?the?percentage?or?fraction?of?time?that?an?RF?device?is?in? operation.?A?duty?cycle?of?100%?corresponds?to?continuous?operation?(e.g.,?24? hours/day).?A?duty?cycle?of?1%?corresponds?to?a?transmitter?operating?on?average?1%?of? the?time?(e.g.,?14.4?minutes/day).? ? Electromagnetic?field?(EMF)?-?A?composition?of?both?an?electric?field?and?a?magnetic?field? that?are?related?in?a?fixed?way?that?can?convey?electromagnetic?energy.?Antennas? produce?electromagnetic?fields?when?they?are?used?to?transmit?signals.? ? Federal?Communications?Commission?(FCC)?-?The?Federal?Communications?Commission? (FCC)?is?an?independent?agency?of?the?US?Federal?Government?and?is?directly?responsible? to?Congress.?The?FCC?was?established?by?the?Communications?Act?of?1934?and?is?charged? with?regulating?interstate?and?international?communications?by?radio,?television,?wire,? satellite,?and?cable.?The?FCC?also?allocates?bands?of?frequencies?for?non-government? communications?services?(the?NTIA?allocates?government?frequencies).?The?guidelines?for? human?exposure?to?radio?frequency?electromagnetic?fields?as?set?by?the?FCC?are? contained?in?the?Office?of?Engineering?and?Technology?(OET)?Bulletin?65,?Edition?97-01? (August?1997).?Additional?information?is?contained?in?OET?Bulletin?65?Supplement?A? (radio?and?television?broadcast?stations),?Supplement?B?(amateur?radio?stations),?and? Supplement?C?(mobile?and?portable?devices).? ? Gigahertz?(GHz)?-?One?billion?Hertz,?or?one?billion?cycles?per?second,?a?measure?of? frequency.? ? Hertz?-?The?unit?for?expressing?frequency,?one?Hertz?(Hz)?equals?one?cycle?per?second.? ? Megahertz?(MHz)?-?One?million?Hertz,?or?one?million?cycles?per?second,?a?unit?for? expressing?frequency.? ? Mesh?network?-?A?network?providing?a?means?for?routing?data,?voice?and?instructions? between?nodes.?A?mesh?network?allows?for?continuous?connections?and?reconfiguration? around?broken?or?blocked?data?paths?by?"hopping"?from?node?to?node?until?the? destination?is?reached.? ? Milliwatt?per?square?centimeter?(mW/cm2)?-?A?measure?of?the?power?density?flowing? through?an?area?of?space,?one?thousandth?(10-3)?of?a?watt?passing?through?a?square? centimeter.?? ? ? 45 Microwatt?per?square?centimeter?(uW/cm2)?-?A?measure?of?the?power?density?flowing? through?an?area?of?space,?one?millionth?(10-6)?of?a?watt?passing?through?a?square? centimeter.?? ? Radiofrequency?(RF)?-?The?RF?spectrum?is?formally?defined?in?terms?of?frequency?as? extending?from?0?to?3000?GHz,?the?frequency?range?of?interest?is?3?kHz?to?300?GHz.? ? Repeater?unit?-?A?device?that?can?simultaneously?receive?a?radio?signal?and?retransmit? the?signal.?Repeater?units?are?used?to?extend?the?range?of?low?power?transmitters?in?a? geographical?area.? ? Router?-?An?electronic?computer?device?that?is?used?to?route?and?forward?information,? typically?between?various?computers?within?a?local?area?network?or?between?different? local?area?networks.? ? Smart?meter?-?A?digital?device?for?measuring?consumption,?such?as?for?electricity?and? natural?gas,?and?sending?the?measurement?to?a?utility?company.??Automated?meter? reading?(AMR)?meters?send?information?one-way?only.??Automated?meter?infrastructure? (AMI)?meters?are?capable?of?two-way?communications.?? ? Specific?absorption?rate?(SAR)?-?The?incremental?energy?absorbed?by?a?mass?of?a?given? density.?SAR?is?expressed?in?units?of?watts?per?kilogram?(or?milliwatts?per?gram,?mW/g).? ? Transmitter?-?An?electronic?device?that?produces?RF?energy?that?can?be?transmitted?by?an? antenna.?The?transmitted?energy?is?typically?referred?to?a?radio?signal?or?RF?field.?? ? Wide?area?network?(WAN)?-?A?computer?network?that?covers?a?broad?area?such?as?a? whole?community,?town,?or?city.?Commonly,?WANs?are?implemented?via?a?wireless? connection?using?radio?signals.?High-speed?Internet?connections?can?be?provided?to? customers?by?wireless?WANs.? ? Wi-Fi?-?An?name?given?to?the?wireless?technology?used?in?home?networks,?mobile? phones,?and?other?wireless?electronic?devices?that?employ?the?IEEE?802.11?technologies? (a?standard?that?defines?specific?characteristics?of?wireless?local?area?networks). ? 46 Appendix?G?-?CCST?2011?BOARD?MEMBERS? ? Karl?S.?Pister,?Board Chair;?Chancellor?Emeritus,?UC?Santa?Cruz;?and?Dean?and?Roy?W.? Carlson?Professor?of?Engineering?Emeritus,?UC?Berkeley? Bruce?M.?Alberts,?Professor,?Department?of?Biochemistry?&?Biophysics,?UC?San?Francisco? Ann?Arvin,?Vice?Provost?and?Dean?of?Research,?Lucile?Salter?Packard?Professor?of? Pediatrics?and?Professor?of?Microbiology?and?Immunology,?Stanford?University? Warren?J.?Baker,?Emeritus,?President,?California?Polytechnic?State?University,?San?Luis? Obispo? Peter?Cowhey,?Council?Vice-Chair?and?Dean,?School?of?International?Relations?and?Pacific? Studies,?UC?San?Diego? Bruce?B.?Darling,?Executive?Vice?President,?University?of?California? Susan?Hackwood,?Executive?Director,?California?Council?on?Science?and?Technology? Randolph?Hall,?Vice?Provost?for?Research?Advancement,?University?of?Southern?California? Charles?E.?Harper,?Executive?Chairman,?Sierra?Monolithics,?Inc.? Miriam?E.?John,?Council?Chair?and?Emeritus?Vice?President,?Sandia?National?Laboratories,? California? Mory?Gharib,?Vice?Provost,?California?Institute?of?Technology? Bruce?Margon,?Vice?Chancellor?of?Research,?University?of?California,?Santa?Cruz? Tina?Nova,?President,?CEO,?and?Director,?Genoptix,?Inc.? Lawrence?T.?Papay,?CEO?and?Principal,?PQR,?LLC? Patrick?Perry,?Vice?Chancellor?of?Technology,?Research?and?Information?Systems,? California?Community?Colleges? Rollin?Richmond,?President,?Humboldt?State?University? Sam?Traina,?Vice?Chancellor?of?Research,?University?of?California,?Merced? ? ? 47 Appendix?H?-?CCST?2011?COUNCIL?MEMBERS? ? Miriam?E.?John,?Council Chair?and?Emeritus?Vice?President,?Sandia?National?Laboratories,? California? Peter?Cowhey,?Council Vice Chair?and?Dean,?School?of?International?Relations?and?Pacific?Studies,? UC?San?Diego? Wanda?Austin,?President?and?CEO,?The?Aerospace?Corporation? Julian?Betts,?Professor?of?Economics,?UC?San?Diego? George?Blumenthal,?Chancellor,?UC?Santa?Cruz? Susan?Bryant,?Former?Vice?Chancellor?for?Research,?UC?Irvine? Charles?Elachi,?Director,?Jet?Propulsion?Laboratory? David?Gollaher,?President?and?CEO,?California?Healthcare?Institute? Corey?Goodman,?Former?President,?Biotherapeutics?and?Bioinnovation?Center,?Pfizer? M.R.C.?Greenwood,?President,?The?University?of?Hawai'i?System? Susan?Hackwood,?Executive?Director,?California?Council?on?Science?and?Technology? Bryan?Hannegan,?Vice?President?of?Environment?and?Renewables,?Electric?Power?Research? Institute? Sung-Mo?"Steve"?Kang,?Chancellor,?University?of?California,?Merced? Charles?Kennedy,?Vice?President?for?Health?Information?Technology,?WellPoint,?Inc. Jude?Laspa,?Deputy?Chief?Operating?Officer,?Bechtel?Group,?Inc.? William?Madia,?Former?Senior?Executive?Vice?President?of?Laboratory?Operations,?Battelle? David?W.?Martin,?Jr.,?M.D.,?Chairman?&?CEO,?AvidBiotics?Corporation? Fariborz?Maseeh,?Founder?and?Managing?Principal,?Picoco?LLC George?H.?Miller,?Director,?Lawrence?Livermore?National?Laboratory? Michael?Nacht,?Dean,?Goldman?School?of?Public?Policy,?UC?Berkeley? Stephen?D.?Rockwood,?Executive?Vice?President,?Science?Applications?International?Corporation? Jeffrey?Rudolph,?President?and?CEO,?California?Science?Center? Shankar?Sastry,?Dean,?College?of?Engineering,?University?of?California,?Berkeley? Soroosh?Sorooshian,?Distinguished?Professor?and?Director,?Center?for?Hydrometeorology?&? Remote?Sensing?(CHRS),?UC?Irvine? James?L.?Sweeney,?Director,?Precourt?Institute?for?Energy?Efficiency,?and?Professor?of? Management?Science?and?Engineering,?Stanford?University? S.?Pete?Worden,?Director,?NASA?Ames?Research?Center? Julie?Meier?Wright,?President?and?CEO,?San?Diego?Economic?Development?Corporation? Kathy?Yelick,?Director,?National?Energy?Research?Scientific?Computing?Center?(NERSC),?Lawrence? Berkeley?National?Laboratory? ? 48 Appendix?I?-?Report?Credits? ? CCST?Smart?Meters?Project?Team:? Rollin?Richmond?(Chair),?President?Humboldt?State?University,?CSU? Jane?Long,?Associate?Director?at?Large,?Global?Security?Directorate?Fellow,?Center?for? Global?Security?Research?Lawrence?Livermore?National?Laboratory? Emir?Macari,?Dean?of?Engineering?and?Computer?Science,?California?State?University,? Sacramento?and?Director?of?the?California?Smart?Grid?Center? Patrick?Mantey,?Director,?CITRIS?@?Santa?Cruz? Ryan?McCarthy,?2009?CCST?Science?and?Technology?Policy?Fellow? Larry?Papay,?CEO,?PQR,?LLC,?mgmt?consulting?firm? David?Winickoff,?Assistant?Professor?of?Bioethics?and?Society,?Department?of? Environmental?Science,?Policy?and?Management,?UC?Berkeley? Paul?Wright,?Director,?UC?Center?for?Information?Technology?Research?in?the?Interest?of? Society?(CITRIS)? ? With?Additional?Assistance?From:? JD?Stack,?Administrator,?California?Smart?Grid?Center,?College?of?Engineering?and? Computer?Science,?California?State?University,?Sacramento? ? CCST?Executive?Director:? Susan?Hackwood? ? Project?Manager:? Lora?Lee?Martin,?Director,?S&T?Policy?Fellows? ? CCST?Staff:? Donna?King,?Executive?Assistant?and?Accountant? Sandra?Vargas-De?La?Torre,?Program?Coordinator,?Layout?and?Design? ? 49