I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its dec…

FCC public comment #26110077215 · ET Docket 13-84 · 2026-09-21

#1I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its dec…by Heather Tiekeu » 2026-09-21
AI summary & topic connections
  • Cancer & tumors: The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer.
  • Children, schools & development: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Towers, antennas & siting: This issue matters to me personally because: Our family feels the impact of 5G.
  • Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Wildlife & environment: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.
  • Exposure limits & testing: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Court remand & agency accountability: Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines.
  • Research, evidence & monitoring: Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices.

AI-reviewed source analysis of the original text, not verified medical findings. Attachments are not reviewed.

Original comment · unedited text

26110077215

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110077215

I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: Our family feels the impact of 5G. My husband has an ICD device installed to protect his heart and he can specifically feel the difference when using 5G vs none 5G in our apartment. This impact his health. If he can feel this radiation and signal differently it makes me certain there are effects on others in the home too. We live in Manhattan in a 15 floor apartment building. When studies have been performed, have they been done in high population density environments that have wireless radiation coming at people from above, below and sideways apartments stacked on top and next to each other? I expect our nation's government representatives to make the research and testing of wireless signals a high priority as these signals go inside the body of its people and the government is supposed to protect the people.

Share this public comment

Share guide: link to the comment page, quote the commenter's own words, and point people to the official docket to file their own comment.

Discuss this comment

Replies are reviewed before they appear. This is a community discussion, not an official FCC filing.

Replies