BILL ANALYSIS ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1212| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ THIRD READING Bill No: SB 1212 Author: Leno (D) Amended: 5/28/10 Vote: 21 SENATE ENV. QUALITY COMMITTEE : 4-2, 4/19/10 AYES: Simitian, Corbett, Hancock, Pavley NOES: Runner, Strickland NO VOTE RECORDED: Lowenthal SUBJECT : Cell phones: specific absorption rate disclosure SOURCE : Environmental Working Group DIGEST : This bill requires specific language relating to the specific absorption rate (SAR), to be included at the point of sale on the Internet Web site of a phone service provider or manufacturer, on the exterior packaging, and in the instruction manuals of cellular telephone devices that are sold in the State of California. Senate Floor Amendments of 5/28/10 (1) require the SAR specified disclosure statement requirement to apply only to phone service providers' and manufacturers' Internet Web sites, and not to a physical retail location; (2) revise related legislative intent; and (3) make technical and clarifying changes. ANALYSIS : Existing federal law requires the Federal CONTINUED SB 1212 Page 2 Communication Commission (FCC) to regulate the cellular phone industry, radio and other media related fields. This bill enacts the Cellular Telephone Devices Law that: 1.Defines "cellular phone device," "hands-free device," and "Specific Absorption Rate." 2.Requires the SAR specified disclosure statement to be prominently displayed by the seller immediately adjacent to the displayed purchase price. This provision applies only to phone service providers' and manufacturers' Internet Web sites and not to a physical retail location. The SAR statement shall be clearly printed as follows: "This device emits radiofrequency energy. The federal specific absorption rate (SAR: a measure of radiofrequency energy) limit is ___. This device emits a maximum of ___." 3.Requires the manufacturer to list the maximum SAR for hands-free devices, used with cell phones as reported to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). 4.Requires the following phrase be printed on the exterior of the package of all cell phone devices sold in California: "This device emits radiofrequency energy. The federal specific absorption rate (SAR: a measure of radiofrequency energy) limit is ___. This device emits a maximum of ___." 5.Requires that the maximum SAR value, as reported to the FCC by the manufacturer, for each mode of use of the cell phone be printed in the instruction manual provided with the phone as follows: "This device emits radiofrequency energy. The federal specific absorption rate (SAR: a measure of radiofrequency energy) limit is ___. When used in mode ___ this device emits a maximum of ___ per 1 gram of SB 1212 Page 3 tissue when held at the head and a maximum of ___ per 1 gram of tissue when attached to the body." Background Cellular phones and radiofrequency . When you receive a call on your wireless telephone, the message travels through the telephone network until it reaches a base station close to your wireless phone. Then the base station sends out radio waves that are detected by a receiver in your telephone, where the signals are changed back into the sound of a voice. The human body absorbs some of those radio frequency waves. The level of radiation emitted from a cell phone and absorbed by the human brain and body is called the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR). The SAR values range in cell phones from 0.2 to 1.6 W/kg (watts of energy absorbed per kilogram of body weight). The FCC wireless regulations . Since 1996, the FCC has required that all wireless communications devices sold in the United States meet minimum guidelines for safe human exposure to radio frequency (RF) energy. The FCC relies on the expertise of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other federal health, safety and environmental agencies to help determine safe levels for human exposure to RF energy. In adopting its guidelines for RF exposure, the FCC considered opinions from these agencies as well as limits recommended by two non-profit, expert organizations, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. The FCC's guidelines specify exposure limits for hand-held wireless devices in terms of the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR). The SAR is a measure of the rate that RF energy is absorbed by the body. For exposure to RF energy from wireless devices, the allowable FCC SAR limit is 1.6 watts per kilogram (W/kg), as averaged over one gram of tissue. The FCC approves all wireless devices sold in the US. If the FCC determines that exposure from an approved wireless device exceeds its guidelines, it can withdraw its approval. In addition, if the FDA determines that RF SB 1212 Page 4 exposure from a device is hazardous, it can require the manufacturer of the device to notify users of the health hazard and to repair, replace, or recall the device. Several U.S. government agencies and international organizations work cooperatively to monitor the health effects of RF exposure. According to the FDA, to date the weight of scientific evidence has not linked exposure to radio frequency energy from mobile devices with any health problems. Finally, the World Health Organization has established an International Electromagnetic Fields Project to provide information on health risks, establish research needs, and support efforts to harmonize RF exposure standards. Recent reports by some health and safety interest groups have suggested that wireless device use can be linked to cancer and other illnesses. These questions have become more pressing as more and younger people are using the devices, and for longer periods of time. According to the FCC, no scientific evidence currently establishes a definite link between wireless device use and cancer or other illnesses, but almost all parties debating the risks of using wireless devices agree that more and longer-term studies are needed. After listening to several expert witnesses, a U.S. Senate committee recently came to this same conclusion. The FCC holds that even though no scientific evidence currently establishes a definite link between wireless device use and cancer or other illnesses, some parties recommend taking the precautions to reduce RF exposure and the FCC posts those precautions on its website. Cell Phone Radio Frequency Studies . The body of scientific evidence to date does not show an association between radio frequency from cell phones and health outcomes. However, recently published peer-reviewed studies suggest that long-term heavy use of cell phones may lead to an increased incidence of brain and salivary glad tumors as well as other health impacts. The positions of the FDA, the FCC, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Cancer Institute SB 1212 Page 5 are that the weight of the current scientific evidence has not conclusively linked cell phones with health problems. However, additional data is needed. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 6/1/10) Environmental Working Group (source) Breast Cancer Fund California Nurses Association Consumer Federation of California OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/1/10) AT&T CalChamber California Grocers Association California Manufacturers and Technology Association Connect, Consumer Electronics Association Consumer Electronics Retailers Coalition Cricket CVS Pharmacy Motorola Qualcomm Sprint T Mobile Tech Net TechAmerica Verizon Wireless ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the proponents, more than four million people around the globe use cellular phones. But, worldwide, government agencies, public health experts, and university researchers have raised concerns about possible effects of cell phone radiation on human health. While the scientific evidence is not conclusive and more research is needed, several major studies now link cell phone use to cancer and other adverse health effects. Questions around potential health effects and the adequacy of current U.S. standards are significant enough to warrant basic precautionary measures that allow consumers to make SB 1212 Page 6 informed purchasing decisions. This bill does not require any kind of warning label on cell phones; rather it would simply require retailers to disclose cell phone radiation levels at the point-of-sale, and require manufacturers to print this information on the box and in the user guide. It also contains similar requirements for headsets that emit radiation. Proponents state that, the U.S. government standards are outdated and provide only a slim margin of safety. The FCC standard was set 14 years ago and was based on potential acute rather than long-term health effects. It allows 20 times more radiation to penetrate any individual body part compared to the whole body exposure and has not been updated since adopted. The latest research shows that the brain of a 5-8 year old child absorbs twice the amount of radiation compared to an adult brain, but this was not accounted for by the FCC when the standard was set. Proponents contend that while data gaps clearly remain and more research needs to be conducted on the safety of cell phone radiation, the questions are potential health effects and the adequacy of current standards are significant enough to warrant some type of precautionary action. At a minimum, consumers should be provided with cell phone radiation values at the point of sale so that they can make informed purchasing choices. ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to the opponents, this bill is "misguided, unnecessary and constitutes a de facto unwarranted warning label that would burden California retailers with additional regulations and significant costs and will lead to substantial consumer confusion." Opponents state that this bill is unnecessary as federal standards already ensure wireless consumer safety, incorporating a fifty-fold safety factor designed to provide for safe exposure levels for all segments of the population. Opponents also state that this bill ignores the reality that the weight of scientific evidence has concluded that the current FCC standards adequately protect cell phone SB 1212 Page 7 consumers from potential adverse effects from radio frequency emissions. Finally, opponents state that this bill is federally preempted. Any attempt by state governments to regulate radiofrequenty emissions from wireless devices on the basis of alleged safety concerns is preempted by federal law; states simply have no authority to act in this area since the federal government completely occupies the field of regulating standards of radiofrequency emissions. TSM:nl 6/1/10 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END ****