Ore. Health Official Says RF Safety Report 'Wasn't Perfect'
The Oregon Health Authority “accepts some criticisms” about a 2020 report that found insufficient evidence that cellphone exposure can cause cancer, said Center for Health Protection Administrator Andre Ourso at an Oregon Senate Education Committee virtual hearing Monday. Ourso generally defended the agency’s work after RF safety advocates urged state lawmakers to retract the report.
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.
At a virtual meeting Tuesday, the Oregon Public Utility Commission advanced two USF proceedings.
The Oregon legislature required the OHA report in 2019, which recommended no action other than saying more research is needed (see 2101040028). The review “wasn’t perfect,” but OHA has no “agenda or bias,” stressed Ourso. “We did have to get creative with finding some human resources to conduct the review without any funding and being preoccupied with other urgent public health matters at the time.” Industry, academics or federal agencies could look into wireless radiation effects more, said Ourso. “State public health agencies really are not equipped to do this type of primary research, nor do we really regulate this type of technology.”
“We have a lot of material to look at based on what we heard,” said Chair Michael Dembrow (D). The senator wants to consider next steps “carefully and ... deliberately.” The legislature gave OHA only $10,000 to do the report, which is “really not the level that would be required to do a highly serious review of the literature,” said Dembrow. “That is something for us to think about for the future if this effort were to continue.”
Unless lawmakers retract OHA's report, it “will be used across the country as an example of a report that looked at children and wireless, and gave it the all-clear,” warned Environmental Health Trust Executive Director Theodora Scarato. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit remanded 2019 RF safety rules to the FCC in response to a suit brought by Scarato’s group earlier this year (see 2108160059). OHA’s report includes bad information and reviews too few studies, she said.
RF safety advocate David Morrison asked why OHA didn’t take public input or consult the same experts who convinced the Senate to unanimously support review in 2019. OHA didn’t measure RF exposure in classrooms. Morrison claimed the final report omitted statements from a first draft about many reports showing an array of negative health effects. The state denied a Freedom of Information Act request for the first draft, he said.
Dembrow disagreed OHA gave “a green light to wireless.” It didn’t find enough to “recommend that we take policy action on this problem,” he said: Future research might “show that we do need to take action.”
Oregon USF
Oregon commissioners gave parties six more months to agree on permanent rules for cost-based state USF distribution in docket AR-649. They voted 3-0 for a staff recommendation in docket AR-650 to temporarily extend current payment levels through the first half of 2022. Commissioners also voted unanimously to issue an NPRM on keeping its state Lifeline subsidy at $10.
Staff is willing to extend current state USF payment levels if parties commit to resolving the permanent rulemaking, PUC Senior Telecom Analyst Nicola Peterson told commissioners. Lumen and the Oregon Telecommunications Association are committed, their representatives said at the meeting.
Chair Megan Decker supported the six-month extension but asked staff to give commissioners a status report after about three months. Commissioner Letha Tawney said the "sense of urgency that the temporary rules create is an opportunity for the stakeholders to craft a cost-based approach" that will consider federal dollars coming for broadband. Tawney will be concerned if stakeholders continue to “run down the clock,” she said. Commissioner Mark Thompson urged parties to “engage” because things now are in an “awkward” place.
The PUC will seek comment on making permanent its temporary increase of the Oregon Telephone Assistance Program subsidy. The commission increased it $3 a month on July 28 for Sept. 1-Jan. 31 to offset reduction in federal support for voice-only services. Staff recommended in docket AR-646 making the increase permanent even though the FCC paused phasedown of Lifeline voice-only support earlier this month until Dec. 1, 2022 (see 2111080042 and 2111050058). Keeping the subsidy at $10 will support broadband affordability in addition to maintaining landline support, said Jon Cray, PUC residential service protection fund program manager.