{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-4536","number":"4536","name":"Jill Boan","organization":"","posted":"2026-10-26T04:00Z","received":"2026-10-16T04:00Z","body":"October 16, 2026\n\nTo: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services\n\nSubject: Request for Independent Review of 5G Tower Siting and RF Safety Standards\n\nDear HHS Officials,\n\nMy name is Jill Boan, and I am a homeowner in rural Nevada County, California. I strongly oppose a proposed 5G cell tower planned within approximately 100 yards of our home and even closer to some of our neighbors.\n\nOur community has raised serious questions about long-term health effects, environmental impacts, and the wisdom of placing this infrastructure so close to homes. We have attended hearing after hearing, yet we feel that our concerns are not being heard or meaningfully addressed.\n\nPart of the problem is federal law. Under Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, local governments generally cannot deny wireless facilities based on the environmental effects of radiofrequency (RF) emissions if the facilities comply with FCC regulations. This leaves county officials with limited authority to address the very health concerns that matter most to residents.\n\nMeanwhile, the FCC’s core RF exposure guidelines date back to 1996, before today’s widespread 5G deployment and extensive use of wireless devices. In 2021, a federal appeals court ordered the FCC to better explain its decision to retain those guidelines, including how it considered evidence involving children, long-term exposure, non-cancer effects, and the environment.\n\nI am not claiming that every possible health effect has been established. I am asking for an independent, up-to-date scientific evaluation that residents can trust.\n\nI urge HHS to:\n\n1. Review current research on long-term and cumulative RF exposure, including exposure from 5G towers near homes.\n2. Determine whether existing limits adequately protect children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable people, including those reporting sensitivity to RF exposure.\n3. Assess potential environmental impacts, including effects on wildlife.\n4. Recommend updated health-protective exposure standards and evidence-based setbacks from homes, schools, and childcare facilities where warranted by the science.\n5. Advise Congress and federal regulators on changes that would give local communities a meaningful voice in tower siting decisions.\n\nWe are not opposed to reliable cellular service. We are opposed to being told that we must accept a tower so close to our homes while our health concerns are effectively excluded from local decisions.\n\nPlease ensure that federal health agencies play a leading role in reviewing RF safety and that rural families like ours are heard. Public health deserves independent scientific scrutiny, transparency, and accountability.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJill Boan\nNevada County, California","attachments":[],"attachment_inventory":true,"withheld":false,"source":"https://www.regulations.gov/comment/HHS-OASH-2026-0397-4536","tags":["cancer-tumors","child-development","health-experiences","exposure-places","policy-standards","research-evidence"],"source_hash":"8ec320fd685b48e6ce8dc63d6b8654f7e3f9579413136296c6bb0d2495af2952","slug":"cancer-tumors-comment-4536","classification":{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-4536","body_sha256":"21804084d8c3b0494e090e27595e84961b429773d67fdb51f6004997ac07d7c7","status":"ai_reviewed","primary_topic":"infrastructure","topics":[{"id":"infrastructure","evidence":"pose a proposed 5G cell tower planned within approximately 100 yards of our home and even closer to some of our neighbors.\n\nOur commu"},{"id":"section-704","evidence":".\n\nPart of the problem is federal law. Under Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, local governments generally cannot deny wireless facilities bas"},{"id":"standards","evidence":" including effects on wildlife.\n4. Recommend updated health-protective exposure standards and evidence-based setbacks from homes, schools, and childcare f"},{"id":"research","evidence":"ect has been established. I am asking for an independent, up-to-date scientific evaluation that residents can trust.\n\nI urge HHS to:\n\n1. Review current res"},{"id":"environment","evidence":"s potential environmental impacts, including effects on wildlife.\n4. Recommend updated health-protective exposure standards and e"}],"summary":"Raises concerns about a proposed tower near a rural home, requests independent evaluation, protective setbacks and updated limits, and questions Section 704 restrictions on local health objections.","reviewed_at":"2026-10-26T22:22:05Z","review_method":"Full comment-text review with exact source evidence; attachments not reviewed","review_source_sha256":"8643b22712974fd4834498a5c9c6816f34cf4ac3853047e44f8f221c672a9d88","source_url":"https://rfsafe.net/hhs-comments/data/catalog.json","scope":"Original comment body; attachments excluded"},"forum_topics":["infrastructure","section-704","standards","research","environment"],"primary_topic":"infrastructure","forum_title":"Raises concerns about a proposed tower near a rural home, requests independent evaluation, protective set…"}