14 September 2015 The Chief Executive Officer Gladstone Regional Council PO Box 29 Gladstone QLD 4680 Dear Rian, Response to Submissions – DA/115/2015 - Material Change of Use for a ‘Telecommunications Facility’ located within at 141 Siding Road, Beecher QLD 4680 (Provisional Lot 1 on RP613234) I refer to the abovementioned development application for a Material Change of Use - Telecommunications Facility located within 141 Siding Road, Beecher QLD 4680 (Lot 1 on RP613234). During the recent Public Notification period, eleven (11) properly made submission were received, with two (2) in support. Further to the submissions received by Council, nbn advises that its’ Community Information Session on 4 August 2015 was attended by approximately 30 residents, with 14 whom expressed strong support for the proposals at Beecher and Burua (refer to Appendix 1 – Feedback Forms). Some of the residents’ written comments include:

• “Please hurry, fast reliable internet is becoming a necessity in today’s age." • "This will be wonderful, just wish it could be earlier" • "I hope you start soon!" • "Get it going ASAP."

A response to the matters raised within the submission is outlined below. Should you have any queries regarding the subject application please do not hesitate to contact Kloe Robinson on (07) 3173 8611 or kloe.robinson@aurecongroup.com Yours faithfully

Lisa Shields Project Leader Appendices Appendix 1 – Feedback Forms Appendix 2 – Health and Safety Fact Sheets

T +61 7 3173 8000 F +61 7 3173 8001 E brisbane@aurecongroup.com W aurecongroup.com

Aurecon Australia Pty Ltd ABN 54 005 139 873 32 Turbot Street (Locked Bag 331 Brisbane QLD 4001) Brisbane Queensland 4000 Australia

Response to Public Submissions, Telecommunications Proposal for 141 Siding Road, Beecher (DA/115/2015)

Prepared for: Gladstone Regional Council

Visual Impact It is noted that several submissions raise concerns regarding the potential visual impact of the proposed facility on the surrounding area. Before lodging this Development Application, nbn C/- Aurecon thoroughly investigated a number of sites for the most appropriate and technically feasible location to service Beecher. From these initial investigations a candidate was selected that best fulfilled the radio frequency, planning, property and engineering discipline requirements, as well as taking into account anticipated community and local council concerns. The Beecher locality is comprised predominantly of rural residential land uses. Larger rural allotments are located to the west of the locality, and as such, it is considered that the rural allotments within Beecher provides an appropriate location for a facility, given the physical separation provided to dwellings in the area. The proposed location was chosen as it was considered to be the best location given:

• The proposed facility would be sited on the periphery of the Beecher community and as a result is separated from nearby residential land uses (closest dwelling is located approximately 200 m to the north east of the proposed facility)

• Existing mature vegetation on the subject site, in conjunction with the undulating topography, will minimise the visual impact of the facility when viewed from the surrounding area;

• The location is accessible and does not require extensive vegetation removal.

While nbn acknowledge that, by virtue of its size, the proposed facility will be taller than the surrounding tree canopy, the size of the tower is a technical requirement for coverage and transmission reasons. However, without the use of the natural ground elevation at this proposed location, a much larger tower would be required to provide coverage to the Beecher community. The location currently enables the height of the proposed facility to be restricted to 35 m (as opposed to 50 m at other Candidates) whilst still achieving coverage to all the targeted localities throughout Beecher and obtaining line of sight to other planned sites in the nbn™ wireless network. nbn have endeavoured to minimise the site’s visual impact by locating it as far as possible from areas of residential development, and designing the tower to retain the smallest possible profile.

Overall, the site selected for the proposed facility is considered to demonstrate an appropriate balance between providing an essential service; while minimising potential visual impacts through considerate site selection and design. Alternative Sites It is noted that a few submissions ask for alternative sites to be investigated. Aurecon can advise that several alternative locations were investigated prior to selecting the site in question, and are contained within Section 3.0 of the Planning Report. The alternative locations included:

• Candidate B: 29 Jefferis Road, Beecher (Lot 100 SP235925) nbn considered a 35 monopole in this location; however dwellings to the west would likely receive a poor quality service given the due to the obstruction of a hill. This hill in conjunction with the low ground elevation would mean a much higher and bulkier lattice structure would be required, which is not considered a good visual outcome. Therefore, this candidate was discounted.

• Candidate C: Co-location of existing Telstra Facility, 68 Wyndham Road, Beecher (Lot 6 SP153042)

nbn investigated co-locating equipment and antennas on the existing 35 m high Telstra monopole. The maximum height available for nbn to co-locate on this facility would approximately 28 m. Although this candidate would provide an appropriate ‘low impact’ solution, given the 115 m difference in ground elevation between the Telstra facility and the proposed nbn™ facility, nbn would not be able to provide a good/reliable service to the whole Beecher community at the installation height of 28 m. As such, a replacement of the existing facility with a much larger lattice tower would be required in order for the nbn™ facility to achieve good/reliable service to the Beecher community, whilst also accommodating Telstra’s existing and future (reserved) equipment. Furthermore, due to the large number of dwellings that need to be serviced in Beecher and Burua, it is likely that a second facility would still be required in the area to ensure a good/reliable service is provided to both communities. This was considered to be more visually intrusive and prominent to the surrounding area. One submissions suggests that there are more suitable sites within the general area including Beecher State Forest or existing telecommunication sites in the area. Firstly, nbn advises Council that co-locations typically present the fastest, easiest and cheapest solution to service provision, and wherever possible, nbn seeks to co-locate on existing facilities as its first recourse. nbn did investigate the Telstra facility at 68 Wyndham Road, Beecher, however for the above-mentioned reasons, is not technically feasible to provide a good/reliable service to the Beecher community without requiring a large lattice tower structure. Furthermore, nbn endeavours to locate facilities away from environmentally sensitive locations – such as National Parks and State Forests, which are often protected at a National or State level. Therefore there is a low degree of confidence that relocating the proposed facility within the Beecher State Forest would be regarded by Council as a better planning outcome. Additionally, a facility in Beecher State Forest would likely have limited access to power, and would require significant vegetation removal to introduce a clear corridor for power and access. The wholesale vegetation clearance that would be required within the State Forest would also not have planning merit. A telecommunications facility located within the Beecher State Forest would also require consent from the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM). The Department also requires applicants to demonstrate that there no alternatives exist outside a national park before they will consent to allow telecommunications providers access to a national park. We would not pass these basic criteria at Beecher. Alternative Technologies nbn notes one submission raises the question of providing alternative technologies to Beecher. nbn is upgrading the current telecommunications network in the most cost-efficient way using best-fit technology and taking into account existing infrastructure, in keeping with the Government’s Multi-Technology-Mix model. This will vary from place to place and will include technologies such as Fibre to the Node, Fibre to the Premises, Fixed Wireless, HFC and Satellite. Due to Australia’s size and particular geographic challenges the cost of providing fixed line services to all Australian premises is prohibitive. The rural residential surrounds of Gladstone and Calliope such as Beecher are typical of the regional communities receiving fixed wireless across the country and across the Gladstone LGA - sparsely-developed large lot and rural lifestyle blocks. The cost of running fibre to every village in Australia is, and has always been considered cost-prohibitive. That is why more than 2,000 fixed wireless facilities have been proposed across Australia to deliver high quality broadband to smaller and sparsely developed communities - because it is a cost efficient and time efficient way to deliver high-quality services to our smaller communities.

Environmental Impact A number of concerns were raised regarding the environmental impact of the proposal. As stated in the Planning Report, the proposed facility requires minor clearing of ‘Category B’ Regulated Vegetation on the Regulated Vegetation Management Map within the 10 m x 9 m compound area (approximately 40 m2). All other vegetation on site will be retained. Aurecon, on behalf of nbn, has been careful to take the best possible advantage of the existing vegetation for screening purposes, while not proposing a facility that will impact significantly on the vegetation. Lightning Strikes While it is acknowledged that the proposed facility is a tall structure and is susceptible to lightning strikes, lightning protection systems are included in the design of the facility. The facility will be grounded to the relevant Australian Standards – that is, the facility will be ‘earthed’. All nbn facilities are designed and engineered to be safe. Many nbn facilities are erected in landscapes where other tall structures, such light poles, and power stanchions are also located. These tall structures compete as lightning triggers; therefore, attracting lightning to themselves, as well. Increased Bushfire Risk The proposed location is identified within a mapped medium bushfire hazard buffer area under the Planning Scheme. It is also noted that the proposed development for a Telecommunications Facility is not considered a habitable use and will not result in an additional increase in the number of people living, working or congregating in the bushfire hazard area. Therefore, the facility will not increase bushfire risk to people or property in the surrounding area. nbn acknowledges the risk of fire damage and takes responsibility for repair or replacement of the facility should it be damaged. All measures will be undertaken to ensure the facility can function effectively during and immediately after a bushfire event where practical. Impacts on Property Values One submission raises the point that the nbn™ fixed wireless facilities have an effect on property values for homeowners in area due to both visual impact and potential health concerns. While property value is not a town planning matter and a decision by Council should not be made on this basis, it is acknowledged that this issue is of concern to some local residents. It should be noted that property valuation is an extremely complex issue, with fluctuations in price being subject to a vast number of factors. Many of these are subjective, and may be as diverse as aspect, views, condition of the property, local amenity and access to services, such as high quality communications.

Since the mid 1990s, thousands of telecommunications facilities have been installed throughout Australian metropolitan and regional areas. During this period, property values have continued to increase, showing no clear signs of deterioration as a result of the location of communications facilities. International studies have shown that there is no evidence to show that mobile phone installations have negative impacts on property values. nbn highlights that the nbn™ network facilities do not place any impediments on the development and / or use of land.

Nonetheless, nbn has taken care to minimise the impact of the proposed infrastructure at Beecher to ensure it does not have an unreasonable intrusion on the amenity of the immediate neighbours, by choosing a location that maximises separation while allowing for the smallest, neatest structure to provide service.

Health and Safety nbn acknowledges that some members of the public are genuinely concerned about possible health effects from the radiofrequency electromagnetic energy (EME) from radio communications networks, and we are committed to addressing these concerns responsibly.

• Radio Communications in the Environment All radio communications facilities emit electromagnetic energy (EME) as radio frequency signals or “radio waves” - electromagnetic waves that have the capacity to transmit sound, music, speech, pictures and other data invisibly through the air. People have been living with radio frequency energy in the environment for generations, literally since the invention of “the wireless” in the 1880s. Today, communities depend on radio communications for many day-to-day communications. Radio communications facilities commonly found in urban areas include television, AM and FM radio broadcast towers, paging network antennas, mobile network facilities, and many 2-way radio systems supporting emergency services, council services, hospitals, roadside assistance, taxi-services, sports clubs, transit authorities, utility providers, and large commercial operations such as shopping centres and property development sites. For instance, there are dozens of licenced radio communications facilities located across the Gladstone LGA. These are illustrated on the map below taken from Australian Communications & Media Authority’s Register of Radio Communications Licenses (Beecher is shown in purple)

The nbn™ fixed wireless communications facilities contribute very little radio frequency energy to the environment, because the antennas themselves are extremely low powered.

• Are radio communications facilities regulated to protect public health? Licensed radio frequency transmitters, including the nbn™ fixed wireless communications facilities and commercial radio and TV broadcast towers, are regulated to protect all people in all environments, 24-hours a day.

The national safety regulations operate by placing a limit on the strength of the signal (or radio frequency EME) that our antennas can transmit. They do not impose any general public distance-based restrictions. That is why radio communications facilities are permissible in any environment. Australia has adopted the safety regulations recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO). These regulations have a significant safety margin, or precautionary approach built into them. The WHO provides the following advice:

From all the evidence accumulated so far, no adverse short or long term health effects have been shown to occur from the RF signals produced by base stations...Considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF [radio frequency] signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects.”11

The current standard, recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO), was introduced to Australia in 2003, and in June 2014, an independent, expert Review Panel reconfirmed the adequacy of the standard following a detailed assessment of recent scientific literature. The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA ) advises that its Review Panel considered more than 1300 separate pieces of scientific literature as well as the results of 72 major panel reviews. ARPANSA states:

Based on the assessment of the scientific evidence from January 2000 till August 2012, the Expert Panel find that the underlying basis of the ARPANSA RF exposure Standard remains sound and that the exposure limits in the Standard continue to provide a high degree of protection against the known health effects of RF electromagnetic fields.22

ARPANSA also constantly evaluates emerging science, publishing a Literature Survey which is updated monthly, and is available on their website – www.arpansa.gov.au.

• How do the NBN fixed wireless network facilities measure up against the safety limit? nbn strives to deliver superfast broadband services and keep the community safe at all times. We do this by strictly complying with relevant public health and safety standards established by independent authorities. This includes the national public health and safety standards for radio frequency EME. Typically nbn™ fixed wireless communications facilities operate at radio signal strengths that are thousands of times below the safety limit. To put the signal strength into perspective, the general public exposure to radio signals from our fixed wireless network facilities is less than or equivalent to the exposure people experience in their home from domestic wireless routers. Alternatively, it’s about one tenth the power of a taxi’s two-way radio. The national safety watchdog, Australian Radiation Protection & Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) advises that: "NBN base stations use electromagnetic radiation to provide high speed broadband services to the community. The base stations use similar technology to 4G mobile phones and produce very low exposures to EMR (or EME) in the surrounding area, even very close to the installation. There are no established health effects from these very low levels of RF EMR.” [National Broadband Network Fixed Wireless Base Stations and Health].

• What is the maximum signal strength of the proposed fixed wireless network facility at Beecher?

nbn undertakes an environmental compliance report for each proposed radio network facility, as required by the federal regulator, the Australian Communications Media Authority (ACMA). This report demonstrates the maximum signal strength that the facility is capable of transmitting.

1 WHO Fact Sheet: Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health – Base Stations and Wireless Technology 2 Review of the Radiofrequency Health Effects Research – Scientific Literature 2000 – 2012, Technical Report Series No. 164

The environmental compliance report submitted to Council demonstrates that the maximum radio signal strength at ground level (1.5m), at any distance from the proposed fixed wireless network facility at Beecher would be 0.3% of the safety limit for 24-hour general public exposure to radiofrequency signals. In other words, the maximum signal strength at any location would be more than 333 times below the safety limit recommended by the World Health Organisation. In addition to the assessment required by the Federal Department of Health, nbn undertook an analysis of the maximum signal strength at several surrounding properties. This shows that the maximum signal strengths at these locations would be:

• Residential Dwelling 1 - 0.00095% or more than 105,263 times below the safety standard • Residential Dwelling 2 - 0.00085% or more than 117,647 times below the safety standard • Residential Dwelling 3 - 0.0011% or more than 90,909 times below the safety standard • Residential Dwelling 4 - 0.0055% or more than 18,181 times below the safety standard

nbn does not just get its toe over the line when it comes to meeting safety standards, but operates its network safely and responsibly at power levels that are significantly below scientifically mandated safety standards for radiofrequency transmissions. Additional Health and EME Factsheets have been attached as Appendix 2.

Appendix 1 – Feedback Forms

Appendix 2 – Health and Safety Fact Sheets

VERSION 01 / FEBRUARY 2015

COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS, RADIO TRANSMITTERS AND SAFETYInformation for communities and their parliamentary representatives

Radio transmitters—Are they safe?

Some people may have concerns about possible health effects from exposure to electromagnetic energy (EME) coming from radiocommunications transmitters on towers and elsewhere. This factsheet outlines the steps the Australian Government takes to keep Australians safe.

Exposure to radiofrequency (RF) EME has been the subject of detailed research by experts. Exposure limits are set well below the level at which adverse health effects are known to occur and include a wide safety margin to protect the public.

What is EME?

RF EME is the energy in radio waves, and is used for wireless communication. It has been in use for over 100 years. It is used to send and receive signals between communications equipment such as broadcast towers, radios and televisions, mobile phone towers and phones, radar facilities, and electrical and electronic equipment. It is also part of our natural environment.

How is EME regulated?

Two Australian Government agencies, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) and the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), are responsible for regulating RF EME exposure.

ARPANSA is an independent Australian Government agency charged with protecting Australians from exposure to EME. ARPANSA is responsible for advising what safe levels of EME exposure are. ARPANSA has developed a public health standard which sets limits for human exposure to RF EME. The limits are set well below the level at which adverse health effects are known to occur and include a wide safety margin to protect the public. The exposure standards take into account the many sources of RF EME present in the modern environment.

The ACMA licenses the operation of radiocommunications transmitters. Licences require transmitters to comply with the exposure limits set out in the ARPANSA standard.

communications.gov.au

How much EME comes from radio transmitters?

All transmitters must operate below ARPANSA’s public exposure standard. Typically transmitters operate at a tiny percentage of the ARPANSA standard.

Is the scientific information on EME up to date?

ARPANSA maintains continual oversight of emerging research into the potential health effects of EME exposure in order to provide accurate and up-to-date advice to the Government. ARPANSA works with the World Health Organisation in researching the health effects of human exposure to EME. Should scientific evidence indicate that the current ARPANSA standard does not adequately protect the health of Australians, the Government would take immediate action to rectify the situation.

NBN wireless towers

Currently, as part of the rollout of the National Broadband Network (NBN), a number of new fixed wireless towers are being built across Australia. These are subject to the same strict EME safety limits set by ARPANSA. As such, exposure to EME should not be a concern.

People can, however, also be concerned about the appearance of towers and their visual impact in their communities. This can also be the case with other facilities, for example mobile phone base stations. Approvals for the installation of free standing telecommunications towers are subject to state, territory and local government planning laws. NBN Co is required to follow the processes for community and local government consultations set out in these laws. People with concerns about proposed NBN towers should raise their concerns during the consultation process for each tower.

Where can I find out more information?

Further information is available from the following expert bodies:

Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency www.arpansa.gov.au/Science/rf

Australian Communications and Media Authority www.acma.gov.au/Citizen/Consumer-info/Rights-and-safeguards/EME-hub

World Health Organisation www.who.int/topics/electromagnetic_fields

International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) www.icnirp.org

You can also find out more about transmitters in your community, including EME reports and community consultation information, from the Radio Frequency National Site Archive www.rfnsa.com.au

communications.gov.auVERSION 01 / FEBRUARY 2015

EME emissions are well below the

limits set by the ARPANSA Standard

Electromagnetic fields and public health

Base stations and wireless technologies

Fact sheet N°304

May 2006

Mobile telephony is now commonplace around the world. This wireless technology relies upon an extensive network of fixed antennas, or base stations, relaying information with radiofrequency (RF) signals. Over 1.4 million base stations exist worldwide and the number is increasing significantly with the introduction of third generation technology.

Other wireless networks that allow high-speed internet access and services, such as wireless local area networks (WLANs), are also increasingly common in homes, offices, and many public areas (airports, schools, residential and urban areas). As the number of base stations and local wireless networks increases, so does the RF exposure of the population. Recent surveys have shown that the RF exposures from base stations range from 0.002% to 2% of the levels of international exposure guidelines, depending on a variety of factors such as the proximity to the antenna and the surrounding environment. This is lower or comparable to RF exposures from radio or television broadcast transmitters.

There has been concern about possible health consequences from exposure to the RF fields produced by wireless technologies. This fact sheet reviews the scientific evidence on the health effects from continuous low-level human exposure to base stations and other local wireless networks.

Health concerns

A common concern about base station and local wireless network antennas relates to the possible long-term health effects that whole-body exposure to the RF signals may have. To date, the only health effect from RF fields identified in scientific reviews has been related to an increase in body temperature (> 1 °C) from exposure at very high field intensity found only in certain industrial facilities, such as RF heaters. The levels of RF exposure from base stations and wireless networks are so low that the temperature increases are insignificant and do not affect human health.

The strength of RF fields is greatest at its source, and diminishes quickly with distance. Access near base station antennas is restricted where RF signals may exceed international exposure limits. Recent surveys have indicated that RF

exposures from base stations and wireless technologies in publicly accessible areas (including schools and hospitals) are normally thousands of times below international standards.

In fact, due to their lower frequency, at similar RF exposure levels, the body absorbs up to five times more of the signal from FM radio and television than from base stations. This is because the frequencies used in FM radio (around 100 MHz) and in TV broadcasting (around 300 to 400 MHz) are lower than those employed in mobile telephony (900 MHz and 1800 MHz) and because a person's height makes the body an efficient receiving antenna. Further, radio and television broadcast stations have been in operation for the past 50 or more years without any adverse health consequence being established.

While most radio technologies have used analog signals, modern wireless telecommunications are using digital transmissions. Detailed reviews conducted so far have not revealed any hazard specific to different RF modulations.

Cancer: Media or anecdotal reports of cancer clusters around mobile phone base stations have heightened public concern. It should be noted that geographically, cancers are unevenly distributed among any population. Given the widespread presence of base stations in the environment, it is expected that possible cancer clusters will occur near base stations merely by chance. Moreover, the reported cancers in these clusters are often a collection of different types of cancer with no common characteristics and hence unlikely to have a common cause.

Scientific evidence on the distribution of cancer in the population can be obtained through carefully planned and executed epidemiological studies. Over the past 15 years, studies examining a potential relationship between RF transmitters and cancer have been published. These studies have not provided evidence that RF exposure from the transmitters increases the risk of cancer. Likewise, long-term animal studies have not established an increased risk of cancer from exposure to RF fields, even at levels that are much higher than produced by base stations and wireless networks.

Other effects: Few studies have investigated general health effects in individuals exposed to RF fields from base stations. This is because of the difficulty in distinguishing possible health effects from the very low signals emitted by base stations from other higher strength RF signals in the environment. Most studies have focused on the RF exposures of mobile phone users. Human and animal studies examining brain wave patterns, cognition and behaviour after exposure to RF fields,

such as those generated by mobile phones, have not identified adverse effects. RF exposures used in these studies were about 1000 times higher than those associated with general public exposure from base stations or wireless networks. No consistent evidence of altered sleep or cardiovascular function has been reported.

Some individuals have reported that they experience non-specific symptoms upon exposure to RF fields emitted from base stations and other EMF devices. As recognized in a recent WHO fact sheet "Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity", EMF has not been shown to cause such symptoms. Nonetheless, it is important to recognize the plight of people suffering from these symptoms.

From all evidence accumulated so far, no adverse short- or long-term health effects have been shown to occur from the RF signals produced by base stations. Since wireless networks produce generally lower RF signals than base stations, no adverse health effects are expected from exposure to them.

Protection standards

International exposure guidelines have been developed to provide protection against established effects from RF fields by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP, 1998) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE, 2005).

National authorities should adopt international standards to protect their citizens against adverse levels of RF fields. They should restrict access to areas where exposure limits may be exceeded.

Public perception of risk

Some people perceive risks from RF exposure as likely and even possibly severe. Several reasons for public fear include media announcements of new and unconfirmed scientific studies, leading to a feeling of uncertainty and a perception that there may be unknown or undiscovered hazards. Other factors are aesthetic concerns and a feeling of a lack of control or input to the process of determining the location of new base stations. Experience shows that education programmes as well as effective communications and involvement of the public and other stakeholders at appropriate stages of the decision process before installing RF sources can enhance public confidence and acceptability.

Conclusions

Considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects.

WHO Initiatives

WHO, through the International EMF Project, has established a programme to monitor the EMF scientific literature, to evaluate the health effects from exposure to EMF in the range from 0 to 300 GHz, to provide advice about possible EMF hazards and to identify suitable mitigation measures. Following extensive international reviews, the International EMF Project has promoted research to fill gaps in knowledge. In response national governments and research institutes have funded over $250 million on EMF research over the past 10 years.

While no health effects are expected from exposure to RF fields from base stations and wireless networks, research is still being promoted by WHO to determine whether there are any health consequences from the higher RF exposures from mobile phones.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a WHO specialized agency, is expected to conduct a review of cancer risk from RF fields in 2006-2007 and the International EMF Project will then undertake an overall health risk assessment for RF fields in 2007-2008.

Further Reading

ICNIRP (1998) www.icnirp.org/documents/emfgdl.pdf

IEEE (2006) IEEE C95.1-2005 "IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz"

For more information contact:

WHO Media centre

Telephone: +41 22 791 2222

E-mail: mediainquiries@who.int

Fact Sheet

ARPANSA Fact Sheet – National Broadband Network Fixed Wireless Base Stations and Health 619 Lower Plenty Road, Email: info@arpansa.gov.au | Web: www.arpansa.gov.au Yallambie VIC 3085 March 2015 Telephone: +61 3 9433 2211 | Fax: + 61 3 9432 1835 © Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency 2015

National Broadband Network Fixed Wireless Base Stations and HealthBased on current research there are no established health effects from the low level exposure to the RF EME from NBN base station antennas.

IntroductionThe National Broadband Network (NBN) makes use of fixed wireless communications links to provide high-speed broadband in areas beyond the reach of the fibre network. Typically, this is where residential blocks are large and widely spaced.

The fixed wireless links use low level radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic energy (EME) to communicate between NBN base stations and small rooftop installations on residences and business premises.

Are NBN base stations regulated in Australia?The RF EME emissions from mobile phone base stations and other communications installations are regulated by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). The ACMA’s regulatory arrangements require NBN base stations to comply with the exposure limits in the ARPANSA RF Standard. The ARPANSA Standard is designed to protect people of all ages and health status against all known adverse health effects from exposure to RF EME. The ARPANSA Standard is based on scientific research that shows the levels at which harmful effects occur and it sets limits, based on international guidelines, well below these harmful levels.

How much RF EME are people exposed to from NBN base stations?The maximum levels of exposure of RF EME from NBN base stations may be calculated from details of the equipment installed. These calculations are made available in the ARPANSA EME reports provided by

the telecommunications companies on the Radio Frequency National Site Archive website, www.rfnsa.com.au. The NBN sites may be located by searching by postcode or town.

For typical 30-40 m high NBN base stations, the highest EME exposure levels at ground level in the surrounding area are typically thousands of times below the limits of the ARPANSA RF Standard.

Where NBN base station antennas are mounted on the same structure as mobile phone base station antennas, the ARPANSA EME reports provide the overall exposures from the different technologies combined.

Do NBN base stations cause any health effects?Health authorities around the world, including ARPANSA and the World Health Organization, have examined the scientific evidence regarding possible health effects from the RF EME emitted by NBN base stations. Current research indicates that there are no established health effects from the low exposure to the RF EME from NBN base station antennas.

ConclusionNo adverse health effects are expected from continuous exposure to the low RF EME emitted by the antennas on NBN fixed wireless base stations.

ARPANSA will continue to review the research into potential health effects of RF EME emissions from NBN base stations and other sources in order to provide accurate and up-to-date advice.

Useful LinksARPANSA fact sheet on RF EME www.arpansa.gov.au/RadiationProtection/basics/rf.cfmThe ARPANSA RF Standard www.arpansa.gov.au/Publications/codes/rps3.cfm

WHO fact sheet on base stations www.who.int/peh-emf/publications/facts/fs304/en/NBN Co Limited www.nbnco.com.au

www.emfexplained.info

Radio Communicationsin the CommunityExplained Series – Wireless Technology and Health Issue Date – July 2008

What communications systemsuse radio frequency technology?Radio frequency technology is used by

> TV and AM / FM broadcasts> Mobile phones and their base stations> Wireless broadband> Radio paging services> Cordless phones> Baby monitors> Emergency services communications(police, fire, ambulance)

> Government communications> Air traffic control> Rural and country communications.

IntroductionRadio communications are a part of everydaylife in today's society. All radio communicationssystems utilise EMF in the radiofrequency(RF) part of the electromagnetic spectrum.Typical background EMF levels from radiocommunications systems are very low andwell below safety guidelines.

www.emfexplained.info

Radio Communicationsin the CommunityExplained Series – Wireless Technology and Health Issue Date – July 2008

How strong are the environmentalor background EMF levels in thecommunity?In a typical community, broadcast television and radiosignals are similar in strength to signals from mobilephone networks and other two-way communicationssystems. These signals are overall very low and wellbelow the established safety guidelines.

The World Health Organisation has reviewed thebackground EMF levels from wireless systemsand says,

“Recent surveys have shown that theRF exposures from base stations rangefrom 0.002% to 2% of the levels ofinternational exposure guidelines,depending on a variety of factors suchas the proximity to the antenna and thesurrounding environment. This is loweror comparable to RF exposures fromradio or television broadcasttransmitters"

Specifically on EMF levels in public areas theWHO says,

"Recent surveys have indicated thatRF exposures from base stations andwireless technologies in publiclyaccessible areas (including schools andhospitals) are normally thousands oftimes below international standards."

What research has been done onradio communications and EMFsafety?There has been a lot of research conductedworldwide to investigate possible health effects ofradio communications and wireless technology.

In relation to radio frequency exposures and wirelesstechnology and health, the general conclusion fromthe World Health Organisation (WHO) is

"Despite extensive research, to datethere is no evidence to conclude thatexposure to low level electromagneticfields is harmful to human health”

The WHO also says,

"radio and television broadcast stationshave been in operation for the past 50 ormore years without any adverse healthconsequence being established”.

How do the transmitterpowers compare?

Spectrum plot showing typical radio communications signals in a community

This picture is a plot from a spectrum analyser (specialised radio measurementequipment) showing the various radio communications signals measured in a typicalcommunity. The plot is taken at one location to illustrate typical radio communicationsignals present, and to make a comparison of signal level.

The type of radio service is indicated on the plot along the horizontal axis and signallevel in dBm (level relative to 1 milli-watt) on the left hand axis. The units are not reallyimportant here except to show relative levels. The picture also shows how many radioservices are used in a typical community.

Radio Systems* Typical Transmitter Power (Watts)

TV & Radio broadcast 5,000 – 100,000Air traffic control radars 5000 – 20,000Radio paging services 50 – 100Emergency communications 50 – 100Government radio systems 50 – 100Mobile phone base station 2 – 50Wireless Broadband base station 2 – 50

Radio Devices Typical Transmitter Power (Watts)

Walkie Talkies 0.1 – 5Mobile phones 0.002 – 0.2Wi-Fi Modem 0.1Cordless phones 0.01 – 0.2Baby monitors 0.01 – 0.1Car remote control 0.001 – 0.1

* typical power into antenna