T-Mobile Experts: Cell Tower Won't Cause a Health Concern

T-Mobile is looking to put in cell phone antennas at Green Knoll Volunteer Fire Company on North Bridge Street—and, for some residents, the biggest concern is how the tower could affect their health.

Representatives from T-Mobile came before the Bridgewater Township Zoning Board of Adjustment Tuesday to present an application to attach six cellular power antennas to a flagpole that would be at the fire house, in addition to having new radio equipment in a container at the base of the flagpole. Since the antenna and equipment would be in a residential zone, T-Mobile must seek a use variance in order to place the antenna panels on the flagpole, in addition to variances for height, lot coverage and fence height.

But for residents and board members at the meeting, the biggest question was how any radiation emitted from the antennas could affect them and their children.

Cell phones use radio frequency waves to transmit calls, data and text messages. According to the American Cancer Society, concerns have been raised over time that since the waves are a form of radiation, they could cause cancer–but studies of the issue don't show evidence that's the case.

Daniel Collins, a health and safety expert with Pinnacle Telecom Group, said radiation from the proposed antenna would only be a small fraction of the limit set by the Federal Communications Commission [FCC]. Pinnacle provides professional and technical services to telecommunication companies such as T-Mobile.

As per FCC regulations, the firm used a standard engineering formula for determining cellular tower frequency waves.

"It's built to be conservative," Collins said. "It overstates reality. It results in a radio frequency calculated level that's higher than the actual level that would occur because of the conservative assumptions."

The assumptions, he said, are built around a scenario in which the tower would work at maximum cell channel capacity and at maximum power-per-channel capacity all the time. They also envision a worst-case scenario for waves bouncing from the ground.

Zoning board member Don Sweeney asked whether Pinnacle Telecom Group returns to sites to test radio equipment emissions after installation, to determine whether the predicted calculations are correct.

Collins said the firm does such tests on a request-only basis, since the FCC does not require them after installation.

"You don't tend to see a before-and-after effect from a cell site like this where the antennas are more than 100 feet in the air," Collins said.

Sweeney also asked whether the company had seen tested results that were larger than the predicted radio frequency emissions.

For the most part, Collins said, that was not an issue. While Pinnacle has seen a few incidents of higher emissions, many of the cases involve outside sources, such as a passing taxi driver talking to a dispatcher over a radio and causing a higher rating, he said.

Board member Filipe Pedroso asked whether the cell tower emits any type of harmful radiation, like gamma or X-ray radiation.

"Radiation only causes harm if you are seriously out of compliance," Collins said. "In other words, if the radio frequency waves are using percentages, like 5,000 percent of the FCC standard, that is where the trouble could start. And we are at 0.06 percent."

"The best analogy for a layperson is, the cell phone antennas serve the same purpose as the cordless phone base unit in your house," he added. "This facility is the unit on your wall. Now, it's just 120 feet in the air."

Board member Pushpavati Amin asked whether the 0.06 measurement was for all the antennas collectively, or each individual one. Collins said it is the limit for all six together.

Andrew Leven of Holmes Court expressed concern that the calculation Collins had provided would not actually give an accurate idea of the frequency rates.

"So you don't really know, standing here today, what the actual measurement is going to be on the site, and you don't really know what it's going to be if the mobile tower is installed," he said.

While Pinnacle has not measured the actual site, Collins said, the firm has measured several thousand communities throughout the country, and can characterize them as meeting various profiles. He said the firm can estimate the radio frequency from the tower and the potential exposure, with an about 1 percent error margin.

Simone Gaunt of North Bridge Street wanted to know if the number of phones being used would change the radiation output, and asked whether the safety studies considered the duration of exposure to the waves. She said she was also concerned about the waves having any long-term health effects.

In addition, Gaunt asked whether being on the second story of a house would increase exposure to the waves, noting her children's bedrooms face the intended tower site.

"Your tests have been done at six and a half feet off the ground, so how would that impact homes that are multiple stories?" Gaunt asked. "I'm 120 feet from the site; I measured it. I have a two-story home, and my bedroom and my children's bedrooms face that side of the street where the antenna would be. What kind of an impact would that have?"

Collins said none of those factors should be cause for concern.

"You could be exposed at 100 percent of the standard for the rest of your life, and it would not affect health," he said.

The walls of a house absorb most of the radio waves emitted by the tower, meaning that the waves would not reach the inside of the house itself, Collins added.

Turning the conversation away from possible radiation effects on humans, Board Member Evans Humenick, noting the board's recent approval of a veterinary clinic on Route 206, asked whether the tower would affect animals.

The tower, Collins said, should have no effect on them.

Aside from these concerns, Humenick asked whether the tower would interfere with Green Knoll Fire Company’s day-to-day operations.

Since the T-Mobile tower will operate in a different radio band than the fire company's emergency radios, Collins said, the tower would be independent and not interfere.

Grace Kochanik, of Hoffman Road, said her concerns centered around a defunct copper mine on a mountain near the site, and whether any children would be able to climb the flagpole and get to the actual antenna mechanism.

"There are multiple teenagers and young kids growing around this area," she said. "What if they climb it?”

The frequency does not bounce off the mountain, and the radio frequency level decreases as people get farther away from the tower, Collins said. In addition, no studies of which he was aware showed the copper in the ground increasing the radio frequency levels.

To get onto the tower, Collins said, a child would first have to jump a fence surrounding the tower, then climb to where the antenna was, take the cover off the flagpole to see the antennas, and take off another cover on the antenna to get to the mechanisms. Falling would be more of a danger than overexposure to the equipment, he said.

"I'm not even sure how you would get up them, even a standard monopole. I'm not sure how you would get to them," he said. "You would have to be one centimeter away from the radiating element in the antenna to have a problem. This has never happened in my experience."

Jennifer Carillo-Perez—of Trenk, DiPasquale, Webster, Della Fera & Sodono, P.C., which represented T-Mobile for the application–said the fixture would have several safety features, including an alarm, which T-Mobile's civil engineer would present at a future meeting.

Because of a hearing prior to T-Mobile’s that lasted until 9 p.m., Carillo-Perez was unable to call up any other witnesses—which included a radio frequency engineer and a planner—and the board opted to carry the application to the Aug. 31 meeting.