San Francisco to Start Cellphone Radiation Labeling Rules; Industry Groups Oppose
Despite opposition from the cellphone industry, San Francisco could soon start requiring cellphone retailers to post notices at point of sale, showing the level of radiation each phone could generate. The city’s Board of Supervisors voted 10-1 Tuesday to give preliminary approval to a “Cell Phone Right-to-Know” ordinance. Final approval is expected next week.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Manufacturers currently disclose cellphone radiation levels to the federal government and the same information should also be made easily accessible to the consumer, said Mayor Gavin Newsom in a statement. Recent studies indicated long-term exposure to cellphone radiation may be responsible for increased rates of brain and salivary cancer as well as other serious health problems, said Newsom, who introduced the legislation in January. But he acknowledged more research needs to be conducted. Meanwhile, “I am not suggesting by any means that people should be fearful of using a cellphone,” said the tech savvy mayor, who had 1,349,266 followers on Twitter. Cellphone radiation is regulated by both the Food and Drug Administration and the FCC, with a legal limit of 1.6 Watts per kilogram of SAR (specific absorption rate).
CTIA and the wireless industry are disappointed with the city’s decision to advance for a final vote, said John Walls, the group’s vice president. Rather than inform, the ordinance will potentially mislead consumers with point of sale requirements suggesting that some phones are “safer” than others based on radiofrequency (RF) emissions, he said. All phones sold legally in the U.S. must comply with the FCC safety standards for RF emissions and according to the FCC, all such compliant phones are safe phones as measured by these standards, he said. The scientific evidence doesn’t support point of sale requirements that would suggest some compliant phones are “safer” than other compliant phones based on RF emissions, he said.
In the wake of legislative defeats of this type of legislation across the country, TechAmerica finds the passage of this legislation in San Francisco unfortunate, said Kim Allman, senior vice president for state government affairs. While consumers should have the most accurate information possible, the “overwhelming science” at this point says that laws like what San Francisco passed are unnecessary and confusing, she said. The California Senate recently defeated a requirement for radiation warning labels on wireless devices including cellphones (CD June 7 p10). The group had said it helped defeat similar legislation in Maine. Many states were watching California to see what would happen there, the group said.
Requiring health-related warning labels on mobile devices, despite the lack of evidence of any harm, and ignoring the fact that government restrictions are already in place is “opportunistic folly,” said Bartlett Cleland, director for the Center for Technology Freedom. The American Cancer Society, World Health Organization, FDA, FCC, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection all agree: A survey of the recent scientific literature shows there’s no clear evidence of any link between mobile devices and health problems, he said.