{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5930","body_sha256":"e72bf23d05b823423dca713985c1dd27ba73122ad2aa8db9255e98988bdeb9fd","status":"ai_reviewed","primary_topic":"research","topics":[{"id":"research","evidence":"eve it is essential that the FCC undertake a thorough, independent review of its exposure limits, with particular attention to long-term e"},{"id":"children","evidence":" particular attention to long-term exposure, children’s developing nervous systems, and potential environmental effects.\n\nWe should not have to wai"},{"id":"section-704","evidence":"rprised us most was learning that, under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, health concerns cannot be used as grounds to reject a proposed "},{"id":"infrastructure","evidence":"fied in asking questions about the safety of placing a cell tower so close to where their children are growing up.\n\nGiven the evol"},{"id":"standards","evidence":"tions Commission’s (FCC) radiofrequency (RF) exposure limits adequately protect human health and the environment.\n\nThis issue"},{"id":"environment","evidence":"’s developing nervous systems, and potential environmental effects.\n\nWe should not have to wait for conclusive evidence of harm bef"}],"summary":"A neuroscientist and parent requests independent review of RF limits, focusing on children's development, long-term exposure and environmental effects, and questions health-based siting restrictions.","reviewed_at":"2026-10-28T16:50:58Z","review_method":"Full comment-text review with exact source evidence; attachments not reviewed","review_source_sha256":"f2312a48a3e277267de8992a7686efd52e253e4c8751fd6e057a7f20e882324f","source_url":"https://rfsafe.net/hhs-comments/data/catalog.json","scope":"Original comment body; attachments excluded"}