{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5183","body_sha256":"5a517b86c77ed10135b0b883e3e979fab247a683bf2e12d2d2049470562fd757","status":"ai_reviewed","primary_topic":"standards","topics":[{"id":"standards","evidence":"ight. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) guidelines must be modernized, as the foundational exposure limits rely on data compiled long "},{"id":"infrastructure","evidence":"icant concern that the integration of 5G and small-cell infrastructure onto existing tracer wires inadvertently elevates ambient radiat"},{"id":"optical","evidence":"ries involves the recent rapid deployment of fiber-optic installations. Documentation presented during these intakes indicates that sta"},{"id":"electricity","evidence":" Specific technical areas of concern include improper grounding techniques and the utilization of copper tracer wires. There is significant"},{"id":"access","evidence":" discrimination when patients request simple environmental accommodations, such as asking staff to leave wireless devices outside the exam"},{"id":"research","evidence":" energy levels. Stricter federal guidelines, independent biological studies, and the establishment of verified low-EMF zones are entirely ap"},{"id":"other","evidence":"oviding an outpouring of criticism regarding outdoor LED lighting creating vision difficulty and a blinding effect. \n \nA distinct "}],"summary":"Describes reports from legal and advocacy intake about wireless exposure, lighting, fiber-installation interference and clinical accommodation barriers, and recommends updated standards, independent research and low-EMF spaces.","reviewed_at":"2026-10-27T19:20:49Z","review_method":"Full comment-text review with exact source evidence; attachments not reviewed","review_source_sha256":"51ba785871ebcf5750e868eb66bcb8b6ab7902215d2d526e59b758287fc59ed5","source_url":"https://rfsafe.net/hhs-comments/data/catalog.json","scope":"Original comment body; attachments excluded"}