Resolution 3650 - Laserfiche WebLink

i Findings: The City relied upon reports prepared by technical experts in the field of electromagnetic radiation. In addition, the City based its decision on the standards and guidelines recommended by ANSI and the FCC, which specifically address the issue of potential health impacts. Dr. Cobb's testimony together with the letter of appeal which contains studies and articles suggest a link between exposure to EMF and adverse health impacts on people. However, much of the information is conjecture and therefore, does not provide a factual basis which should require further assessment of the environmental impacts of the proposal by US West. Don Justefson's testimony concludes that one must carefully consider what frequencies are considered in assessing health effects from EMF. The only studies that have shown a statistically significant link between exposure to EMF and adverse health effects have involved Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) fields, such as those associated with power lines. Ultra High Frequency (UHF) fields, such as those used by cellular technology, also have been studied. The conclusions reached by these studies have been that there are no potential adverse health impacts from UHF fields produced by cellular. Although the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has renewed efforts to study and adopt regulations for ELF fields, it has not undertaken a similar effort regarding UHF fields. Conclusion: There is a lack of factual information which provides evidence or reasonable cause to conclude that the proposal will have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Based upon all of the information presented by the Appellant, the Appellant did not demonstrate any defect in the Responsible Official's determination under SEPA. C. ISSUE - MDNS FAILED TO INCLUDE A WORST-CASE ANALYSIS The third issue raised in the appeal is the Appellant's contention that the MDNS was defective because it did not contain a worst-case analysis, based on the assumption that there was insufficient information provided for the Responsible Official to render a decision. Findings: WAC 197-11-080 requires that the lead agency shall prepare in its environmental documents a "worst-case analysis and likelihood of occurrence, to the extent this information can reasonably be developed" (emphasis added) . Such analysis is to be provided in the event that there is insufficient information available to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposal . 5