EMF Legislation and Litigation.
Children's Electromagnetic Field Risk Reduction Act

Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Children's Electromagnetic Field Risk Reduction Act of 1993. This legislation takes prudent steps to protect our children's health until such time as the Federal Government and scientists determine that electromagnetic fields [EMF 's] created by transmission lines are not a threat to our children's health.

In fact, many expert researchers fear a dangerous correlation between exposure to EMF 's and childhood cancer does exist. The Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, conducted a study by M. Feychting and A. Ahlbom that confirms findings made earlier by other scientists, including Dr. David Savitz who testified on the health effects of transmission lines before my Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources in 1987. In addition, studies controlled by S.J. London et al., 1991; A. Myers et al., 1990; M.P. Coleman, 1989; L. Tomenius, 1986; J.P Fulton et al., 1980; and Wertheimer and Leeper, 1979, among others, have reported statistically significant associations between EMF exposure and the risk of some cancers.

In response to the studies, local communities, and States have begun to make policy changes affecting the proximity of transmission lines to schools. In California, the Department of Education plans to soon announce regulations restricting the location of transmission line easements adjacent to property for new schools. Approximately 600 schools under construction in California today will be built in compliance with the regulations. The new regulations are expected to require that new schools be located 100 feet from the edge of the easement to the school property line for 50-133 KV lines; 150 feet from the edge of the easement to the school property line for 220-230 KV lines; and 350 feet from the edge of the easement to the school property line for 500-550 KV lines.

The Congressional Research Service estimates that transmission lines built in compliance with the California regulation would generate EMF levels ranging approximately from a low of .1 milligauss to a high of 2.5 milligauss. However, there is no correlation between kilovolts used in California's regulation, and milligauss--the standard cited in this legislation. Volts measure electric potential, and gauss measure magnetic field strength. Because the Karolinska Institute study and other studies address the biological effects of EMF milligauss levels on children, this legislation uses milligauss as the standard as well.

The Children's Electromagnetic Field Risk Reduction Act establishes a national policy to prohibit the construction and operation of new schools, and child care facilities, on property where the EMF exceeds an average two milligauss per day. The bill responds to a growing body of scientific studies showing a possible dose-response relationship between human exposure to

electromagnetic fields from electric transmission lines and development of cancer, particularly childhood cancer. Most recently, the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm found that children exposed to 1 milligauss over long periods have twice the normal risk of developing leukemia, those exposed to 2 milligauss had three times the normal risk, and those exposed to 3 milligauss had 4 times the normal risk.

At the local level, two California communities--Irvine and Fremont--have implemented regulations concerning electromagnetic fields. In Irvine, residential construction may not occur on properties where the EMF exceeds four milligauss. In Fremont, property owners are required to disclose to potential buyers the proximity of transmission lines to the real estate.

In New York, officials also have expressed concern about the proximity of transmission lines to schools. Attorney General Robert Abrams recently asked utilities to undertake a comprehensive survey of the location and strength of power lines near schools.

Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government has not kept pace with efforts undertaken by States and local communities. The Federal investment in research on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields has been minimal--approximately $11 million in fiscal year 1992. Last year, the Congress approved a provision in the Energy Policy Act authorizing a 5-year $65 million EMF research program jointly financed by the Federal Government and private sector. Given budget restrictions, prospects for appropriating this money are not good.

Mr. Speaker, given the rising body of evidence suggesting a link between EMF exposure above 2 milligauss and cancer in children, why take the risk of building new schools and childcare facilities in areas where children risk dangerous exposure? This legislation will prevent communities and governments from wasting scarce resources to construct facilities that might have to be closed or destroyed if studies continue to support the link between EMF exposure and cancer. This legislation also could effectively reduce legal fees for lawsuits involving claims of EMF -induced health damage from power lines near schools and childcare facilities. Legal costs, along with the reduction in property values adjacent to transmission lines, and efforts presently undertaken by utilities to retrofit lines to reduce EMF exposure roughly exceed $1 billion a year, according to an article in Science by J. Keith Florig of Resources for the Future. More importantly, Mr. Speaker, this legislation could help save children's lives if the link proves to be true.

Until the evidence proves that electromagnetic fields pose no threat to human health, we should begin to take prudent steps to reduce EMF exposure to children. The Children's Electromagnetic Field Risk Reduction Act takes a first step. I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.