ICES · of his foresight in visualizing the need for IEEE Std C95.7-2005 and his perseverance in...

IICCEESS

International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety

Approved Minutes

TC-95 Parent Committee Meeting

Doubletree Hotel Airport San Antonio, TX

Sunday, 11 December, 2005 0900 – 1200 h

1. Call to Order – Petersen

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Petersen at 0900 h. Each of the attendees introduced him/herself and the attendance sheets were circulated. [See Attachment 1 for list of attendees].

2. Approval of Agenda – Petersen Since Bill Ash was unable to attend the meeting and give the IEEE myProject™ presentation, and since several attendees had to leave the meeting early, Chairman Petersen replaced item 5 of the agenda with item 12 (Reports from the Subcommittees). Following a motion by Varanelli that was seconded by D’Andrea, the modified agenda was approved. [See Attachment 2 for modified agenda].

3. Approval of June 26, 2005 Minutes – Petersen

Chairman Petersen asked for a motion to approve the Minutes of the June 2005 ICES meeting. Art Varanelli moved and Bob Curtis seconded the motion. The minutes were approved unanimously.

4. Executive Secretary’s Report – Adair

Following the ICES meetings in Dublin, 2005, two teleconferences were held for members of the ExCom. These were arranged through Raytheon teleconference facilities. Topics of concern included a) details of the reorganization of ICES; b) new members of ICES; c) C95.1 appeal to the SASB; d) matters related to the C95.6 short course; e) progress in standards-setting; f) potential meetings outside the US; and g) attempts to interact with ICNIRP members. Of greatest importance was the SASB approval of two new TC-95 standards, C95.1 2005 and C95.7 2005 plus 2 reaffirmations. Also the TC-34 amendment to 1528 was approved with PARs approved for 3 others. This was a banner year for ICES.

Approved ICES TC95 Minutes –11 December 2005 Meeting

5. Reports from the Subcommittees – Petersen a) SC-1 – Howard Bassen, Chair

In absence of the SC-1 Chairman, Petersen presented the report [See Attachment 3.] This subcommittee has been working diligently on a Draft Recommended Practice on measurements and computations over the frequency range of 0 to 100 kHz. The draft has been updated, incorporates IEEE 1460-1996, and will be designated as C95.3.1. A number of meetings and teleconferences have been held and drafts of several sections have been completed. This material will be submitted to Ron Petersen in mid-January 2006 and a meeting of the committee will be held in the Washington DC area near the end of January. There are some new issues to discuss, such as the definition of the appropriate ‘metrics’ for assessing compliance with C95.6-2002. Joe Bowman (NIOSH) has raised a number of issues regarding the appropriate metrics that may have to be resolved by SC-3. The current PAR expires at the end of 2008 and the committee is working hard to complete the document in good time. Pat Reilly serves as liaison to this committee and has been very helpful.

b) SC-2 – Ric Tell, Chair

The new IEEE Recommended Practice on RF Safety Programs, drafted by members of TC-95 SC-2, was approved by the IEEE SASB on 22 September, 2005. It should be published by IEEE on or before March, 2006. This subcommittee met Thursday, 8 December with 17 members present. The current total membership listed for SC-2, including observers, is 96 individuals. The Chair intends to cleanse the membership by eliminating inactive members. The current objective of this SC is to generate a short course with respect to the recommended practice or develop a written document in place of a short course. The latter may be the best approach. A written document (guidance), examples, etc. would have to go through the usual IEEE process. Petersen thinks the document should be a guide and a draft should be started and labeled C95.7.1. It would be desirable if it was modeled after the short course given at Wilmington, Delaware (with Don Zipse running the show) and Petersen, Varanelli, Osepchuk, Adair, etc. as presenters. Ric Tell believes that two short courses should be implemented, one addressing C95.1 and the other C95.7. Ric intends to work along with members of SC-4 as well as his own SC on this project. As a surprise, an IEEE Standards Medallion was awarded to Ric Tell in recognition of his foresight in visualizing the need for IEEE Std C95.7-2005 and his perseverance in ushering this project through from inception to approval. [See Attachment 4].

c) SC-3 – Ian Brooker, Secretary ICES SC-3 met on Friday with Adair and Bodemann serving as Co-Chairs, since Phil Chadwick and Thanh Dovan were unable to attend the meetings. Jim Daly had retired and stepped down as SC-3 secretary before the Dublin meeting and Ian Brooker accepted the temporary position of Secretary. SC-3 currently has 80 members and 9 were lost during the past year. Ian will continue to cleanse the working groups of this SC. Future revisions of C95.6 underwent considerable discussion at this meeting and thoughtful presentations by Bill


Bailey, Ralf Bodemann, and Sheila Johnston were most helpful. The possibility of an RF safety program for C95.6 was discussed at length by all present.

d) SC-4 – John D’Andrea (and C-K Chou)

SC-4 met on December 10, 2005 during which time progress during the past 6 months was reviewed. Specifically, • The new C95.1-2005 “Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human

Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz” has been approved by the IEEE Standards Association Standards Board on October 3, 2005. It is scheduled for publication on or before April 3, 2006.

• An appeal of the new standard was filed by an SC-4 member based in part on the claim that the IEEE Code of Ethics may have been violated in that certain studies that have not been confirmed should have been included in the normative part of the standard along with precautionary language relating to the existence of such studies. The appeal may be heard in part at the March 2006 SASB meeting. SASB Appeals Panels address only procedural issues. Code of Ethics issues will have to be appealed to the IEEE.

• New SC-4 leadership positions are filled. Drs. Marvin Ziskin of Temple University and Art Thansandote of Health Canada have agreed to serve as co-chairs of SC4. Dr. Joe Morrissey of Motorola will chair the Literature Surveillance Working Group.

• For the next revision, the Literature Surveillance WG will filter out standard unrelated papers, which will not be passed on to the Literature Review WG. Details of selection criteria will be decided by the WG.

• Dr. John Osepchuk moved that an article summarizing the new standard be written by SC-4 members and submitted for publication in the IEEE Spectrum. This was approved in the meeting. A task group was formed and timelines have been set.

• The final count of SC-4 members is 126. The updated membership list and unfinished action items related to the next revision will be passed on to the new Co-Chairs.

• A task group was formed to improve the SC-4 website. Following this presentation, IEEE Standards Medallions were awarded to both C-K Chou and John D’Andrea in recognition of their tireless and dedicated leadership while co-chairing ICES Subcommittee 4 during the exciting, and oftentimes frustrating, development of IEEE Std C95.1-2005. [See Attachment 5.]

e) SC-5 – Drew Koban and Robert Needy, Co-Chairs.

SC-5 did not meet because the Co-Chairs were not available. Petersen announced that criticism of C95.4 has again been received by an individual who


also provided the same criticism during balloting. He ahs been invited to join SC-5 and participate in the next revision.

6. Chairman’s Report – Petersen

The IEEE SASB requires an Annual Report from the Chairman of ICES and the report this year is huge! [See Attachment 6 for summary.] It is divided into two major sections where there are differences in scope; these sections are TC-95 and TC-34. The scope of TC-34 is the development of product performance standards for specific products that emit electromagnetic energy, such as hand held phones. The scope of TC-95 is the development of standards for the safe use of electromagnetic energy in the range of 0 Hz to 300 GHz relative to the potential hazards of exposure of humans, volatile materials, and explosive devices to such energy. The ICES AdCom is the overseer of standards developed by the TCs. Another function of the AdCom is fundraising and this program will be initiated in January 2006. The semi-annual ICES meetings, including the parent committee and several subcommittees, were held last June in Dublin Ireland. Next June we will try to meet in Cancun, Mexico prior to the annual BEMS meetings. Four short courses based on the C95.6 standard (safety levels, electric and magnetic fields – 0 to 3 kHz) were held so far. The first was held in conjunction with the Canadian Electrical Association meeting in March 2004, the others were held in Washington DC in June 2004, San Antonio in December 2004, and Dublin Ireland in June 2005. A total of more than 100 people attended these short courses and they were very well received. As of this fall, all TC-95 standards have been approved or reaffirmed. Under TC-34, only 2 standards have been approved, but PARs for 3 new standards have also been approved. Under TC-95, a PAR for a new project (PC95.3.1 – measurements and computations of exposure, 0 to 100 kHz) was approved in December 2003.

Chairman Petersen concluded his report with several critical issues: a) ICES made an unsuccessful attempt to have the C95.3 standard approved for use

as a dual logo IEEE/IEC standard. A major pushback by some EU participating countries was related to a misunderstanding of the MOU between the IEEE and the IEC. Of seven such standards, only one was accepted; this activity is not working too well.

b) ICES (SCC-39) and it’s Administrative Committee (AdCom) are concerned with management, oversight, fundraising, etc. The organization of the AdCom membership is of top priority and will manage the fundraising effort.

c) Shortly after the SASB approved the new C95.1 - 2005 standard, an appeal was filed by a member of TC-95 SC-4. This appeal is similar to other appeals filed by the same individual and leans on the IEEE Code of Ethics. The SASB deals only with procedural issues will not deal with Code of Ethics issues. The appeal is expected to be heard by the SASB Appeals Panel during the March meetings. Petersen is confident that we are on solid ground regarding process.

d) The IEEE filed the amicus curiae brief urging the Supreme Court to hear one of the cellphone lawsuits. The Supreme Court refused and sent the brief back for resolution in State Court. The IEEE is taking a strong stand on in support of the


open process and science-based underpinning of IEEE standards, as is the FCC. The situation seems very positive.

D’Andrea posed a question about environmental standards that may potentially be part of the ICES structure. He wonders if C95.1 can be used as such standards wherein there can be separate kinds of effects.

Murphy questioned whether ELF and RF can exist in the same standard, i.e., a single standard to cover the frequency range of 0 to 300 GHz. We now have two separate standards, C95.1 and C95.6, which should be combined. Working groups from SC-3 and SC-4 should be able to collaborate to bridge the gap and make a smooth transition.

C.-K. Chou reported that he would send the new C95.1 standard to ICNIRP in hopes that they would try to harmonize with us. One potential problem is that ICNIRP seems to be overly sensitive to association with any group that could even be perceived to be associated with industry.

Petersen announced that Howard Bassen was also awarded the Standards Medallion in recognition of his perseverance and leadership skills while chairing SCC-34/SC-2 during the development and approval of its first standard, IEEE Std. 1528-2003. [See Attachment 7.]

Ric Tell noted that with respect to TC-95/SC-4, ANSI was being reinstated as a reviewer of our standards. Petersen said that the IEEE SA is an ANSI accredited standards body and new IEEE standards are recognized as American National Standards. Finally, Petersen reported that new P&Ps have been drafted but have not yet been submitted to the SASB Audit Committee.

7. Vice Chairman’s Report on EU Activities - Bodemann

Directive 2004/40/EC was initiated on April 29, 2004 and the directive involves EU EMF workers only. [See Attachment 8.] The ICNIRP limits for occupational exposure were adopted into the directive including the basic restrictions and reference values. The employer now has to assess the EMF exposure at workplaces. If action values are exceeded, there must be proof that limit values are met or else take measures to reduce exposure. Worker information training is required. Health surveillance occurs when limit values are exceeded. Obligations to member states include progress reports to the Commission until April 29, 2009 and transposition to national law until April 29, 2008. The EC standardization mandate M/351 was transferred to CENELEC from May 17, 2004. The purpose of the mandate is to provide standards to enable employers to perform EMF exposure assessment. The work program includes whether or not a detailed risk assessment is required, the methodology of a detailed risk assessment should be known, and measurement and calculation methods are necessary to support the above. Regular progress reports to the Commission are required. Employers should seek advice from ICNIRP, WHO, and other EU services. Coordination with other international standardization bodies (IEC, ICES) would be useful.


A draft CENELEC standard pr EN 14410 is underway. The title is: “Determination of workers exposure to electromagnetic fields and assessment of risk”. The Scope is: “To assess EMF workplace exposure to show compliance with directive 2004/40/EC.” A white list of EMF emitters should be provided. When the workplace contains only products listed in Table 1, compliance is assumed. Otherwise, use the workplace standard, if there is one; prove that action values are met by measurement or calculation; and prove that exposure limits are met i.e., measures for exposure reduction. A flowchart assessment procedure is available in Attachment 8 to these minutes, together with Table 1 (white list) and Table 2 (a non-exhaustive list of equipment that needs further assessment). In addition, 5 informative annexes are included, some of which are confusing. The current status: the draft is under balloting by national standardization committees until December 16, 2005. Balloting results and comments will be discussed at a working group meeting in January. In the meantime, an EC working party was founded in mid 2005. The scope is to create a non-binding guideline to advice employers on the proper implementation of the EU directive 2004/40/EC. Representatives of industry are involved with this effort. The first meeting of the EC working party was held on September 1 and several topics were discussed: reference the provisions of the directive; make it possible to identify hazards, assess exposures and risks, and define specific measures for safeguarding the safety and health of workers; enable the employer to give specific information to workers, adopt safety measures, and define suitable methods. These will help the employer to implement the Directive 2004/40/EC.

Ric Tell suggested that Sakari Lang look into this. The EC Working Party may provide complications.

Ralf said that ICES could send the IEEE std. C95.7-2005 to them for their information. Bob Curtis strongly agreed.

Ian Brooker suggested that we send them everything related to health surveillance so that they can interact with us.

Ralf said that he will try to see if this will work out.

Ian said that this effort is highly conservative and there is no need to worry about it. About 98% of workplaces don’t have a problem.

8. Treasurers Report – Art Varanelli Art stated that the current balance is $54,990.16. He has no idea where this money came from. He has no recent balance sheet from IEEE but figures that the current balance should be about $25,000 to $30,000. Bill Ash will be asked to look into this matter.

9. Membership Chairman’s Report – Tom McManus Tom was unable to attend this meeting but he submitted the names of those who have been elected to ICES during the past year [see Attachment 9]. These include: Max Amman Ian Brooker


Leon duToit Jeff Holley Nam Kim David Nelson Quan Hoong Ng Paolo Ravazzani Dum Sik Yoo ICES is growing steadily. Members from countries outside the US will be ~40%. There are a number of inactive members, including members who have retired and can no longer be reached. Therefore some cleansing will be undertaken. Tom McManus has resigned as Membership Chairman of ICES. Sheila Johnston has been asked to accept the Membership Chairmanship.

10. International Liaison Chairman’s Report – Michael Murphy

a) Recent Meetings [see Attachment 10]: Molecular and cellular mechanisms of biological effects of EMF,

UNESCO/WHO seminar, 2 – 5 March, 2005, Yerevan Armenia Electro Med 2005, Fourth International Symposium on Nonthermal

Medical/Biological Treatments using EMF and Ionized Gases, 15 – 18 May, Portland OR. Will meet with BEMS next year.

WHO Workshop on Base Stations and Wireless Networks: Exposure and Health, 15-16 June 2005, Geneva, Switzerland.

Dublin meetings: BioEM 2005 and ICES Meetings, 19 - 26 June, 2005 Coherence and Electromagnetic Fields in Biological Systems, 1 – 4 July

2005, Prague, Czech Republic. Applying Precautionary Measures to EMF Public Health Policy, 11 – 13

July 2005, Ottawa, Canada (scientific uncertainty) Progress in Electromagnetics Research Symposium – PIERS 2005, 22-26

August 2005, Hangzhou, China (RF safety issues. December 7 meeting at Motorola on cell phones.)

Bioeffects of EMF: WHO 4th International EMF Seminar in China, 12-16 September 2005, Kuenming, China

ICNIRP Dosimetry Workshop, 19-21 September 2005, Nuremberg, Germany

28th URSI General Assembly: Commission K, 23-29 October 2005, New Delhi, India

Application of Proteomics and Transcriptonics in EMF Research, 30 October-1 November 2005, Helsinki, Finland (dePomerai’s draft is in press)

BEMS School at Erice on in vitro studies, 3-8 October 2005 Australasian Radiation Protection Society Conference. WHO Workshop –

RF Fields: Health Effects and Policy Options for Protection, 14-18 November 2005, Melbourne


WHO Workshop on Dosimetry of RF Fields, 5 – 7 December 2005, Moscow, Russia

b) Upcoming EMF Meetings: 24th Meeting of the Society for physical Regulation in Biology and

Medicine (SPERBUM), 11-13 January 2006, Cancun, Mexico BEMS Winter Workshop and Board Meeting,– Phoenix, AZ 3 – 4

February 2006. Exploring the boundaries of EMF Intervention Techniques, i.e., Tasers.

Emerging EMF-technologies, Potential Sensitive Groups and Health, 20-21 April 2006, Graz, Austria

International Conference on Electromagnetic Fields, Health and Environment, 27-29 April 2006, Madeira Island, Portugal

BEMS Annual Meeting, 11-15 June 2006, Cancun, Mexico International Conference of the IEEE EMBS, August 31-September 3,

2006, New York City, USA Bioelectrochemistry Gordon Research Conference, 3-8 September 2006,

Aussois, France 4th International Workshop on Biological Effects of Electromagnetic

Fields, 16-20 October 2006, Crete, Greece c) Liaison Activities:

ICNIRP meeting in San Antonio, April 2005 – Michael Murphy WHO Annual International Advisory Committee, Geneva, 13-14 June

2005, Ralf Bodemann Joint Reception for ICES and BEMS, Dublin, June 2005, Ralf Bodemann BioEM2005, Status of IEEE C95.1 Safety Standard Revision, C.K. Chou BioEM2005, The International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety

(ICES): Safety Standards for Electromagnetic Energy, M. R. Murphy

Union of Radio Science International (URSI), IEEE ICES Safety Standards for Exposure to Electromagnetic Energy, New Delhi, India, 27 October 2005, Michael Murphy

d) Invited Presentations: 1. Progress in RF SCIENCE – Sheila Johnston, Ph.D

Sheila reported on 26 RF conferences she attended from 1 July through15 December [see Attachment 11]. Research projects in the EU, UK, USA, Japan, and Australia are currently funded by a total of ~100 Million euros. During the period of 3 – 5 October 2005, a series of meetings were held in Trondheim and concerned Statistics in RF Research. Five papers are listed on the Internet. These were written by Brazalle (Statistics in the preparation phase), Schüz (Statistics in the planning phase of experimental and epidemiological studies), Wiart (COST 281 mission: Statistics and exposure assessment in bio-electromagnetism), Scherb (Statistical analysis, interpretations, and conclusions), and Petrowicz


(Nonconformities in current publications and future perspectives). An Epidemiology COST 281 Task Force was held in London on 20 January 2001 and hosted by Sheila Johnston. This was a preliminary meeting chaired by Gunnhild Oftedal from Trondheim. A meeting was held in Stuttgart on 21 – 23 November 2005 and was sponsored by FGF/COST 281. The topic was “Subtle Thermal Effects of RF fields in vitro and in vivo.” Several unusual findings were reported including the following: local temperature increases up to 42 °C (44 °C for fat and skin) are tolerated by humans; special mechanisms, such as blood flow, protect the brain from excess heating; a local SAR up to 100 W/kg and higher can be compensated by perfusion, with cardiac performance being a limiting factor; and thermal sensors in beetles and snakes are much more sensitive than human thermosensors. Jan Gimsa reported that non-spherical cells from polar regions show anisotropic properties such that local RF energy absorption increases by one order of magnitude. Ken Foster reported that biophysical theory suggests that RF energy would be thermalized and dissipated immediately in the surrounding fluid. RF exposure in organic synthesis is a combination of thermal effects arising from heating rate, super heating or “hot spots”, and selective absorption of radiation by polar substances. Such phenomena are not usually accessible by classical heating (de la Hoz, et al, 2005). Several conclusions were drawn from this meeting including the following: the Pennes bio-heat equation (1948) predicted heat dissipation in the body from exposure to RF fields; non-thermal effects are still a controversial (unproven) topic (Foster, de la Hoz 2005); dosimetrically and theoretically, micro or macromolecular hot spots have been shown to be unlikely; and modeling of small temperature changes in the head, body, and individual organs are required to improve the evaluation of RF exposure on human health. A meeting of ARPANSA and the WHO was held in Melbourne on 17-18 November 2005. Several reports were provided including the following: Telstra is mapping RF calculations that have been confirmed by measurements with a 3dB scientific uncertainty; Attempts to simplify measurements and calculations of SAR; Sleep studies are mostly negative except for a small EEG effect of heat; Cognitive studies in children are ongoing and ICES member Quan Hoong Ng is participating in this project; No big RF research health worries are on the horizon; WHO has provided a pilot study (http://www.who.int/peh-emf/project/en/) concerning RF information for children; Michael Repacholi will retire in June 2006 and E. van Deventer will be the acting head in Geneva; and finally, Standards and precautionary frameworks will be out in December.

2. WHO Workshop on Dosimetry of Radiofrequency Fields – Patrick Mason, PhD This meeting was held in Moscow, Russia on 5 – 7 December, 2005. [See Attachment 12.] The venue for the meeting was the State Research Center, Institute of Biophysics, Moscow. The Purpose of the meeting was to provide an overview of the fundamentals of radio frequency dosimetry for

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/project/en/


researchers and standards developers. In addition, it was to facilitate discussion on the need for high quality dosimetry in radio frequency studies and the usefulness of the SAR concept. Twelve invited participants, including Patrick Mason and C-K. Chou, were present. In addition, 40 – 50 Russian scientists from many institutes, universities, centres, etc. participated. On Monday, 5 December, 6 presentations were given: Scope and purpose of the workshop (Repacholi); Basic electromagnetic theory as related to RF dosimetry (Chou/Swicord); Macroscopic electrical properties of tissue (Payman); Factors affecting absorption of RF fields (Chou); Mechanisms of absorption of RF fields in tissues (Mason); and The Russian approach to RF dosimetry (Rubtsova/Merculov). A panel discussion followed on the question “Is SAR a good dose concept?” It was clear that SAR, not power density should be used for dosimetry. On Tuesday, 6 December, 5 presentations were given: Numerical dosimetry and experimental setups (Leveque); Demonstration of SEMCAD software (Futter); Methods for assessing base stations and mobile phones for compliance with international mobile phone standards (Romann); and the Russian-French animal study dosimetry (Leveque). The presentations were followed by a laboratory demonstration led by Drs. Leveque, Veyret, and Romann. The Russian-French animal study employs rats held in restrainers so that the temperature in the head could be measured. The facilities are illustrated in photographs to be found in Attachment 9. Racks of cages were shown, together with calcium blocks as food for the rats. A picture of part of a laboratory was also included. The RF antenna (2450 MHz) was suspended from a rod near the ceiling. Ferrite anechoic foam lined the walls and looked like waffle material. There were also concrete walls that were flat. One researcher, Dr. Svoboda, and two students were knowledgeable and endorse SAR over power density. On Wednesday, 7 December, 4 presentations were given: Dosimetry concepts in RF standards (Repacholi); Concepts and methodology of RF standards for mobile phones (Grigoriev); Compliance with standards (Chou); and Distance learning course on dosimetry (Veyret). It is hoped that the French study will be more professional than the Russian study.

3. Triennial Review: STANAG 2345 – B. Jon Klauenberg, PhD

NATO is interested in standards because NATO has expanded. This provides new challenges to standardization and new opportunities for collaborative research and information exchange. Harmonization and alignment of standards for safety is necessary to ensure inter-operability, interchange-ability, and commonality. Safety standards within NATO and worldwide should be based upon the same scientific data. The NATO standardization policy encourages nations to develop, agree and implement common concepts, doctrines, procedures, criteria, and designs to achieve and maintain the most effective levels of compatibility, inter-operability, interchange-ability, and commonality in the fields of operations, material,


and administration. Guiding principles of NATO standardization include voluntary effort, essential implementation of operational plans, achievement of maximum operational standardization, essential commonality of terminology, and information exchange to non NATO by consensus of all NATO nations. [See Attachment 13.]

NATO began to provide support for non-ionizing research and standardization in 1970. In that year AC/243/Panel III formed RSG2, “Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation,” which was the basis for the first Edition of the NATO STANAG. NATO held research study groups, AGARD lecture series, and advanced research workshops through 1985. Edition 1 of the STANAG 2345, “Control and Recording of Personnel Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation,” was promulgated in 1979 after a 6-year effort. A second edition, prepared from 1981 to 1989 was never promulgated. In June 1992, a proposal for a NATO ARW was approved and in 1993 was held in Rome, Italy and entitled “Developing a New Standardization Agreement (STANAG) for Radiofrequency Radiation.” Drafting group meetings began in 1994 and the Edition 2 draft was circulated for ratification. After a 5 year effort, STANAG 2345 Edition 2 was promulgated in October 1997. Highlights of Edition 2 included a single tier, frequency dependence, 3 kHz – 300 GHz, a minimal safety standard, protective clothing provisions, contact current guidance, and was thoroughly reviewed by an International Group of Experts. Edition 3 of the STANAG was begun in 1998, ratified in 2001, and promulgated in February 2003 – a 4.5 year effort. Updated sections of Edition 3 included a revised overexposure proforma, actions to be taken in case of a suspected or actual overexposure, and a new section entitled “The Role of the Physician” was added. The revision was facilitated through the efforts of technical and medical expert members of the NATO RADHAZ Working Group and the Research and Technology Organization (RTO) AC/323/Human Factors and Medicine (HFM) 26/Task Group (TG) 002 “Health Effects of Non-Ionizing Radiation in the Military Setting.” STANAG 2345 impacts the military: It directly impacts system design and siting considerations and directly impacts coordination of multi-national operations. The GENMED WG purview maintains independence from design and operations, maintains credibility, avoids conflict of interest of perception of conflict, and is a personnel safety liaison to the engineering and design community. It is now essential that the STANAG be reaffirmed every year. In September 2005, a new edition was started. There is concern with operations and missions, especially aboard ship. There may also be a shift in the risk, perhaps to higher levels. It is also possible that the next STANAG will be for the military only. The goal is to complete the next edition in one year, perhaps by June of 2006.

11. Report on ICES Fundraising – Petersen No report.


12. New Business – Petersen Ian Brooker announced a Call for Papers to be submitted to the EMC Society, which will met in Portland Oregon in 2006. Check the web for dates and other material related to the meeting. The IEEE C95.1 2005 standard would be of great interest to members of this society, as would the TC-34 technical committees dealing with product safety.

13. Future Meetings – Petersen Cancun will be chosen if the hotels damaged by Hurricane Wilma are restored. If not, the ExCom will have to find another venue for the ICES June meetings.

14. Adjournment – Petersen There being no further business, the Chairman called for a motion to adjourn. John D’Andrea moved and Don Umdenstock seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously at 11:55am

Approved ICES TC95 Minutes –11 December 2005 Meeting ATTACHMENT 1

List of Attendees

IEEE ICES TC-95 Meeting Doubletree Hotel San Antonio, TX 11 December 2005

0900 h – Noon

LAST NAME

FIRST NAME

AFFILIATION COUNTRY EMAIL STATUS

1. Adair Eleanor Independent Consultant

US mailto:[email protected] M

2. Baron David AIHA Representative

US [email protected] M

3. Blick Dennis Independent Consultant


4. Bodemann Ralf Siemens AG DE [email protected] M

5. Brooker Ian Tyco Safety Products,

IE [email protected] M

6. Cassata Jim Navy - Bureau of Med & Surgery

US [email protected] O

7. Chou C.K. Motorola, Inc. US [email protected] M

8. Cohen Jules Jules Cohen P.E. US [email protected] M

9. Curtis Robert OSHA - USDOL US [email protected] M

10. D'Andrea John Naval Health Research Ctr.


11. DeFrank John USACHPPM US [email protected] M

12. Douglas-Miller Ruth Kansas State University


13. Johnston Sheila Independent Consultant

UK [email protected] M

14. Klauenberg B. Jon USAF US [email protected] M

15. Lang Sakari Nokia Research Ctr. FI [email protected] M

16. Mason Patrick USAF/AFRL/HEDR US [email protected] M

Approved ICES TC95 Minutes –11 December 2005 Meeting ATTACHMENT 1

LAST NAME

FIRST NAME

AFFILIATION COUNTRY EMAIL STATUS

17. Murphy Michael Directed Energy Bioeffects


18. Osepchuk John Full Spectrum Consulting


19. Packer Malcolm Harris RF Communications


20. Petersen Ronald R C Petersen Associates


21. Tell Richard Richard Tell Assoc. Inc.


22. Testagrossa Paul Lucent Technologies


23. Umdenstock Don Tyco Safety Products


24. Varanelli Arthur Raytheon Company US [email protected] M

25. Ziriax John Naval Health Research Center


IICCEESS

International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety

Modified Agenda

TC95 Main Committee Meeting Doubletree Hotel

San Antonio, TX December 11, 2005 9:00 AM – Noon

1. Call to Order: Petersen 2. Approval of Agenda: Petersen 3. Approval of June 26, 2005 Minutes: Petersen 4. Executive Secretary’s Report: Adair 5. Report from the Subcommittees Petersen 5. IEEE Standards Activities Report: Ash

Presentation – IEEE myProjectTM 6. Chairman’s Report: Petersen 7. Vice Chairman’s Report Bodemann

Update on European Workers; Directive 8. Treasurer’s Report: Varanelli 9. Membership Chairman’s Report: McManus

10. International Liaison Chairman’s Report: Murphy a) Dr. B. Jon Klauenberg, AFRL/HEDR

"Update on NATO Triennial Review of STANAG 2345 on RF Personnel Exposure Safety Standards and Impact of the European Union Directive on Worker Safety: Possible Degradation of Operations and Interoperability"

b) Dr. Patrick Mason, AFRL/HEDR, and Dr. Dr. Roza Sypniewski, General Dynamics "Support for the WHO/French/Russian Immunology Study"

c) Lt Col Noel Montgomery, AFRL/HEDR "Report from a Collaborating Center of the WHO EMF Project"

d) Report on ICES and Fundraising: Adair/Osepchuk Petersen e) Reports from the Subcommittees: Petersen

12. New Business: Petersen 13. Plans for Future Meetings: Petersen 14. Adjournment: Petersen

ATTACHMENT 2

TCTC--95/SC95/SC--1 Report1 Report

Measurements and Measurements and computational techniquescomputational techniques

Howard BassenHoward Bassen

ChairChairDecember 2005December 2005

ATTACHMENT 3

Progress on C95.3Progress on C95.3--xx,,

C95.3C95.3--x, Draft Recommended Practice for x, Draft Recommended Practice for Measurements and Computation of Electric, Measurements and Computation of Electric, Magnetic and Electromagnetic Fields With Respect Magnetic and Electromagnetic Fields With Respect to Human Exposure to Such Fields, 0 to Human Exposure to Such Fields, 0 -- 100 kHz.100 kHz.

This standard will update IEEE Std 1460This standard will update IEEE Std 1460--1996 1996 –– ““IEEE IEEE Guide for the Measurement of QuasiGuide for the Measurement of Quasi--Static Magnetic and Static Magnetic and Electric FieldsElectric Fields”” –– which was developed by SCwhich was developed by SC--1, published 1, published in 1996, and reaffirmed in 2002in 1996, and reaffirmed in 2002

IEEE Std C95.3IEEE Std C95.3--x together with IEEE Std C95.3x together with IEEE Std C95.3--2002 will 2002 will provide measurement/computation techniques over the provide measurement/computation techniques over the frequency range covered by the scope of ICES TCfrequency range covered by the scope of ICES TC--95, i.e., 95, i.e., 0 to 300 GHz0 to 300 GHz

Progress on C95.3Progress on C95.3--xx,,

Two telephone conference meetings were Two telephone conference meetings were held in Sept. and Nov. 2005. most held in Sept. and Nov. 2005. most members participatedmembers participatedDrafts of all sections are complete Drafts of all sections are complete ––editing for continuity and style will be editing for continuity and style will be performed in January 2006 and performed in January 2006 and distributed to the subcommittee members distributed to the subcommittee members for comment and updating.for comment and updating.A meeting in Washington DC will be held A meeting in Washington DC will be held in January 2006,in January 2006,

Definitions of PossibleDefinitions of PossibleEMF Metrics for C95.6EMF Metrics for C95.6

Joseph Bowman, PhD, (NIOSH) and Joseph Bowman, PhD, (NIOSH) and Wolfgang Kainz, PhD (FDA) of SCWolfgang Kainz, PhD (FDA) of SC--1 1 studied the need for more wellstudied the need for more well--defined defined exposure metrics for measuring exposure metrics for measuring compliance with the Maximum compliance with the Maximum Permissible Exposures (MPE)Permissible Exposures (MPE)..


After some discussion with members of After some discussion with members of SCSC--1 and SC1 and SC--3, members of SC3, members of SC--1 1 developed detailed descriptions of three developed detailed descriptions of three metrics that could be used to measure E metrics that could be used to measure E and H fields at a single moment. These and H fields at a single moment. These metrics are: metrics are:

Peak vector magnitudePeak vector magnitude

Root mean square (RMS) vector magnitude Root mean square (RMS) vector magnitude (also known as the resultant)(also known as the resultant)

Maximum RMS componentMaximum RMS component


These metrics were evaluated by the These metrics were evaluated by the entire subcommittee. They were sent to entire subcommittee. They were sent to Dr. Pat Reilly of SCDr. Pat Reilly of SC--3 to evaluate the 3 to evaluate the relevance of these metrics. Relevance to relevance of these metrics. Relevance to the basic restrictions of IEEE Std C95.6the basic restrictions of IEEE Std C95.6--2002 was considered, and re2002 was considered, and re--evaluation evaluation of the best metric is underway in SC1.of the best metric is underway in SC1.

IIEEEEEE SSttaannddaarrddss MMeeddaalllliioonn:: RRiicc TTeellll

Richard A Tell has been awarded the Standards Medallion in recognition of his foresight in visualizing the need for IEEE Std C95.7-2005 and his perseverance in ushering this project through from inception to approval

ATTACHMENT 4

IIEEEEEE SSttaannddaarrddss MMeeddaalllliioonn:: CC--KK CChhoouu aanndd JJoohhnn DD’’AAnnddrreeaa

C-K Chou has been awarded the Standards Medallion in recognition of his dedicated leadership while co-chairing ICES TC-95/SC-4 during the development of IEEE Std C95.1-2005 John D’Andrea has been awarded the Standards Medallion in recognition of his dedicated leadership while co-chairing ICES TC-95/SC-4 during the development of IEEE Std C95.1-2005

ATTACHMENT 5

ICESICESInternational Committee on Electromagnetic SafetyInternational Committee on Electromagnetic Safety

Annual ReportAnnual Report(SCC(SCC--39)39)

11 December 200511 December 2005

Ron PetersenRon Petersen

ATTACHMENT 6

Highlights Highlights –– 20042004--20052005

Reorganization:SCCSCC--28 is now TC28 is now TC--95, SCC95, SCC--34 is now TC34 is now TC--34 34 –– both both are technical committees of a new SCC (39) are technical committees of a new SCC (39) designated the International Committee on designated the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES)Electromagnetic Safety (ICES)

TCTC--34 Scope:34 Scope:Development of product performance standards for Development of product performance standards for specific products that emit EM energyspecific products that emit EM energy

TCTC--95 Scope:95 Scope:Development of standards for the safe use of Development of standards for the safe use of electromagnetic energy in the range of 0electromagnetic energy in the range of 0 Hz to 300 GHz Hz to 300 GHz relative to the potential hazards of exposure of man, relative to the potential hazards of exposure of man, volatile materials, and explosive devices to such energyvolatile materials, and explosive devices to such energy

IEEE SASB

Management, Oversight,

Fundraising, etc.

TC-95 TC-34 TC-XX

Liaison with National Groups: NCRP, ACGIH, US Fed. Agencies, Canada, China, Ireland…….

Liaison with International Groups:ICNIRP, WHO, IEC, NATO…...

ExposureStandards

ProductStandards

EnvironmentalStandards?

SC-1 SC-2 SC-5SC-4SC-3 SC-1 SC-2 SC-3

SC-1: MeasurementsSC-2: Warning Signs/Hazard CommSC-3: Safety Levels; 0-3 kHzSC-4: Safety Levels; 3 kHz - 300 GHzSC-5: EEDs

SC-1: Marine RadarSC-2: Wireless PhonesSC-3: RF-Protective Clothing

ICES(SCC-39)AdCom


TCTC--3434Develops standards/practices/guides that apply to products, Develops standards/practices/guides that apply to products, e.g., emission limitse.g., emission limits

•• timetime--invariantinvariant•• specific to productsspecific to products•• simple (product performance standards)simple (product performance standards)

TCTC--9595Develops standards/practices/guides that apply to people, Develops standards/practices/guides that apply to people, e.g., exposure limitse.g., exposure limits

•• timetime--dependentdependent•• specific to exposure populations, e.g., occupational versus specific to exposure populations, e.g., occupational versus

general publicgeneral public•• complexcomplex


International organizations with International organizations with similar scope:similar scope:

TCTC--3434 IEC TC106IEC TC106•• The scope of TC106 is narrower than that of The scope of TC106 is narrower than that of

TCTC--34 (TC106 is limited to standards for 34 (TC106 is limited to standards for exposure assessment)exposure assessment)

TCTC--9595 International Commission on NonInternational Commission on Non--Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)

•• ICNIRP develops exposure guidelines across ICNIRP develops exposure guidelines across the NIR portion of the spectrumthe NIR portion of the spectrum


Meetings:Meetings:

TCTC--34 and TC34 and TC--9595•• 2424––26 June 2005, Dublin Castle, Ireland26 June 2005, Dublin Castle, Ireland

(Hosted by the Department of (Hosted by the Department of Communications, Natural and Marine Communications, Natural and Marine Resources)Resources)

•• June 2006, Cancun, MexicoJune 2006, Cancun, Mexico


Meetings:Meetings:

TCTC--9595•• 88––11 December 2005, San Antonio, TX11 December 2005, San Antonio, TX

TCTC--34, SC34, SC--22•• 77--10 November 2005, Ottawa (910 November 2005, Ottawa (9--10 November 10 November

in conjunction with IEC TC106 PT62209)in conjunction with IEC TC106 PT62209)

•• 66--7 April 2006 7 April 2006 -- Stockholm, SwedenStockholm, Sweden

•• 99--10 June, 2006, Cancun, Mexico10 June, 2006, Cancun, Mexico


ShortcoursesShortcoursesC95.6 (Safety levels 0C95.6 (Safety levels 0--3 kHz)3 kHz)•• CEA CEA –– March 04March 04

•• Wash DC Wash DC –– June 04June 04

•• San Antonio San Antonio –– December 04December 04

•• Dublin Dublin –– JuneJune 0505


Standards:Standards:TCTC--95:95:

•• C95.1C95.1--2005 (RF safety levels 2005 (RF safety levels –– 3 kHz to 300 GHz) 3 kHz to 300 GHz) •• C95.2C95.2--1999 (RF Warning signs and symbols)1999 (RF Warning signs and symbols)**

•• C95.3C95.3--2002 (Measurements 2002 (Measurements –– 100 kHz to 300 GHz)100 kHz to 300 GHz)•• C95.4C95.4--2002 (Safe distances from antennas during 2002 (Safe distances from antennas during

blasting operations)blasting operations)•• C95.6C95.6--2002 (Safety levels, E&M fields 2002 (Safety levels, E&M fields –– 0 to 3 kHz)0 to 3 kHz)•• C95.7C95.7--2005 (Elements of an RF safety program)2005 (Elements of an RF safety program)•• 14601460--1996 (Measurement of quasi1996 (Measurement of quasi--static E&M fields)static E&M fields)****

**Reaffirmed 2005Reaffirmed 2005****Reaffirmed 2002Reaffirmed 2002


Standards:Standards:

TCTC--34:34:

•• 15281528--2003 (Certification of mobile telephones) 2003 (Certification of mobile telephones)

•• 1528a1528a--2005 (Amendment 1 to include CAD files of 2005 (Amendment 1 to include CAD files of head model) head model)


PARsPARs

TCTC--34:34:•• P1528bP1528b--(Amendment 2(Amendment 2--Extends the scope to 6 GHz)Extends the scope to 6 GHz)**

•• P1528.1P1528.1--(General requirements for using the FDTD (General requirements for using the FDTD method for SAR calculations method for SAR calculations –– certification of certification of mobile telephones)*mobile telephones)*

•• P1528.2P1528.2--(Specific requirements for FDTD modeling of (Specific requirements for FDTD modeling of vehicle mounted antenna configurations)vehicle mounted antenna configurations)**

**Approved September 2005Approved September 2005


PARsPARs

TCTC--95:95:

•• PC95.3.1PC95.3.1--(Measurement of E&M fields; 0(Measurement of E&M fields; 0--100 kHz)100 kHz)**

**New Project New Project -- Approved December 2003Approved December 2003


Liaisons:Liaisons:

FormalFormalTCTC--34:34:•• Category Category ““DD”” Liaison with IEC TCLiaison with IEC TC--106 PT62209 106 PT62209

(Certification of body(Certification of body--worn wireless transceivers)worn wireless transceivers)

InformalInformalTCTC--34 & 95:34 & 95:•• ARIB, CENELECARIB, CENELEC……•• ICNIRP, NCRP, WHO EMF ProjectICNIRP, NCRP, WHO EMF Project……


Issues:Issues:•• Unsuccessful attempt to have C95.3 approved Unsuccessful attempt to have C95.3 approved

for use as a dual logo IEEE/IEC standardfor use as a dual logo IEEE/IEC standard

Major pushback by some EU participating Major pushback by some EU participating countries related to misunderstanding of MOU countries related to misunderstanding of MOU between IEEE and IECbetween IEEE and IEC

•• Organization of ICES Organization of ICES AdComAdCom membershipmembership

Develop fundraising programDevelop fundraising program

•• C95.1C95.1--2005 Appeal 2005 Appeal

•• Amicus BriefAmicus Brief

IIEEEEEE SSttaannddaarrddss MMeeddaalllliioonn:: HHoowwaarrdd BBaasssseenn

Howard I Bassen has been awarded the Standards Medallion in recognition of his perseverance and leadership skills while chairing SCC34/SC2 during the development and approval of its first standard, IEEE Std 1528-2003

ATTACHMENT 7

IEEEIEEE

InternationalInternationalCommittee on Committee on

Electromagnetic Electromagnetic SafetySafetyEU EU activitiesactivities

followingfollowing EMF EMF workplaceworkplace directivedirective 2004/40/EC2004/40/EC

ATTACHMENT 8

RegardingRegarding thethe „„rumoursrumours““ issueissue

TheThe followingfollowing slideslide was was presentedpresented byby

Mike Mike RepacholiRepacholi

at at thethe WHO WHO workshopworkshop on on

„„GuidingGuiding publicpublic healthhealth policypolicy in in areasareas of of scientificscientific uncertaintyuncertainty““

heldheld in Ottawa/in Ottawa/CanadaCanada

on on JulyJuly 1111--13, 2005 13, 2005

EU EMF EU EMF WorkersWorkers DirectiveDirective at a at a glanceglance(Dir. 2004/40/EC (Dir. 2004/40/EC fromfrom April 29, 2004) April 29, 2004)

Adoption of ICNIRP limits Adoption of ICNIRP limits occocc. . exposureexposure::ExposureExposure limitlimit valuesvalues: : basicbasic restricitionsrestricitions ((excexc. 0 Hz). 0 Hz)

Action Action valuesvalues: : referencereference valuesvalues

EmployerEmployer has to has to assessassess EMF EMF exposureexposure at at workplacesworkplaces..

Action Action valuesvalues exceededexceeded: : proveprove thatthat limitlimit valuesvaluesareare metmet oror taketake measuresmeasures to to reducereduce exposureexposure..

WorkerWorker informationinformation trainingtraining

HealthHealth surveillancesurveillance ((whenwhen limitlimit valuesvalues exceededexceeded))

Obligation to Obligation to membermember statesstates::Progress Progress reportreport to Commission to Commission untiluntil April 29, 2009April 29, 2009

TranspositionTransposition to national to national lawlaw untiluntil April 29, 2008April 29, 2008

EC EC standardizationstandardization mandatemandate M/351M/351to CENELEC to CENELEC fromfrom May 17, 2004 May 17, 2004

PurposePurpose: : provideprovide standardsstandards to to enableenable employersemployers to to performperform EMF EMF exposureexposure assessmentassessment

WorkWork programmeprogramme::TheThe assessmentassessment as to as to whetherwhether a a detaileddetailed riskrisk assessmentassessmentin in requiredrequired

TheThe methodologymethodology of a of a detaileddetailed riskrisk assessmentassessment

MeasurementMeasurement and and calculationcalculation methodsmethods to to supportsupport thetheaboveabove

RegularRegular progressprogress reportsreports to Commission to Commission requiredrequired

SeekSeek adviceadvice byby ICNIRP, WHO and ICNIRP, WHO and otherother EU EU servicesservices

CoCo--ordinationordination withwith otherother international international standardizationstandardization bodies(IECbodies(IEC, ICES(?)), ICES(?))

DraftDraft CENELEC CENELEC standardstandard prpr EN 14410EN 14410

Title: Title: Determination of workers exposure to

electromagnetic fields and assessment of risk.

ScopeScope: : assessassess EMF EMF workplaceworkplace exposureexposure to to showshowcompliancecompliance withwith directivedirective 2004/40/EC2004/40/EC

ProvideProvide a a whitewhite list of EMF list of EMF emittersemitters ((tabletable 1). 1). WhenWhen workplaceworkplace containscontains onlyonly productsproducts listedlisted in in tabletable 1, 1, compliancecompliance isis assumedassumed. Else:. Else:

UseUse workplaceworkplace standardstandard, , ifif therethere isis oneone

ProveProve thatthat actionaction valuesvalues areare metmet ((measurementmeasurement, , calculationcalculation))

ProveProve thatthat exposureexposure limits limits areare metmet ((measuresmeasures forforexposureexposure reductionreduction))

prpr EN 14410: EN 14410: FlowchartFlowchart assessmentassessmentprocedureprocedure

prpr EN 14410: Table 1 (EN 14410: Table 1 (whitewhite list)list)

CE CE markedmarked equipmentequipment withwith EMF EMF productproduct standardstandard,, lightingequipment, computer and ITE equipment incl. wirelesscommunication, office equipment, mobile phones and cordlessphones, non-wireless communication equipment and networks, electric handheld and transportable tools, portable heatingtools, battery chargers, electric operated garden appliances, audio and video equipment, battery powered equipment notincluding RF transmitters, all non-electrical equipment, the low-voltage electrical network (<1000Vac) and components*, power transformers connected to LV networks (<1000V phaseto phase)*, electrical motors and pumps*, instrumentation, measurement and control equipment, household applicances, battery driven transmitters, all medical equipment not using RF sources

*with a rating of up to 200kVA, or up to 1000kVA if they are morethan 0.6m away.

prpr EN 14410: Table 2 (EN 14410: Table 2 (nonnon--exhausiveexhausive list of list of equipmentequipment thatthat needsneeds furtherfurther assessmentassessment))

Industrial Industrial electrolysiselectrolysis, , electricalelectrical weldingwelding and and meltingmelting, , inductioninductionheatingheating, , dielectricdielectric heatingheating, , dielectricdielectric weldingwelding, , industrialindustrialmagnetizersmagnetizers//demagnetizersdemagnetizers, , microwavemicrowave and RF and RF lightinglighting, RF , RF plasmaplasma devicesdevices, , diathermydiathermy, , electricelectric crackcrack detectordetector systemsystem, high , high powerpower radarradar (> 100 mW RMS, > 20 W (> 100 mW RMS, > 20 W peakpeak), ), powerpower generationgenerationand and distributiondistribution*, *, electricalelectrical motorsmotors and and pumpspumps*, *, electricallyelectricallydrivendriven transporttransport –– trainstrains and and tramstrams, MRI , MRI equipmentequipment, , industrialindustrialmicrowavemicrowave heatingheating and and dryingdrying, , basebase stationsstations ((forfor mobile mobile communicationcommunication))

*with a rating above 200kVA, if they are closer than 0.6m and all rated above 1000kVA

prpr EN 14410: informative EN 14410: informative annexesannexes

Annex A: Annex A: CECE--markedmarked equipmentequipmentlist of list of productsproducts wherewhere productproduct standardsstandards rere assessmentassessment of EMF of EMF emissionsemissions existexist

Annex B: Annex B: DocumentingDocumenting thethe riskrisk assessmentassessmentForm Form thatthat mightmight bebe usedused forfor documentationdocumentation of EMF of EMF riskriskassessmentassessment

Annex C: Treatment Annex C: Treatment forfor employeesemployees at at particularparticular riskriskQuotationQuotation of DG EMPL of DG EMPL replyreply to CENELEC to CENELEC inquiryinquiry

Annex D: Total Annex D: Total ExposureExposure Quotient (TEQ) Quotient (TEQ) EQ: EQ: TheThe proportionproportion of of thethe limitlimit valuevalue exhaustedexhausted byby availableavailableallowedallowed sourcesourceTEQ: TEQ: TheThe resultresult of of thethe summationsummation of of thethe EQsEQs fromfrom thetheequipmentequipment causingcausing exposureexposure at at thethe workplaceworkplace

Annex E: Annex E: ZoningZoningDetermineDetermine zoneszones wherewhere limits limits forfor generalgeneral publicpublic and and occupationaloccupational exposureexposure areare metmet

prpr EN 14410: StatusEN 14410: Status

DraftDraft underunder ballotingballoting byby national national standardizationstandardization committeescommittees untiluntil DecDec, 16, 16

BallotingBalloting resultsresults and and commentscomments will will bebediscusseddiscussed on WG on WG meetingmeeting in in JanuaryJanuary

EC EC workingworking party: party: nonnon--bindingbinding guidelineguidelineforfor implementationimplementation of 2004/40/ECof 2004/40/ECEC EC workingworking party party foundedfounded in in midmid 20052005

ScopeScope: : createcreate a a nonnon--bnidingbniding guidelineguideline to to adviceadvice employersemployers on on proper proper implementationimplementation of EU of EU directivedirective 2004/40/EC2004/40/EC

RepresentativesRepresentatives of of industryindustry associationsassociations

1st 1st meetingmeeting on Sep, 1:on Sep, 1:IssueIssue tendertender forfor PR PR agenciesagencies to to provideprovide draftdraft

MakeMake referencereference to to provisionsprovisions of of directivedirective

make it possible to identify hazards, assess exposures and risksand define specific measures for safeguarding the safety and health of workers exposed to risks arising from EMF

enable the employer to give specific information to workers

facilitate the task of the employer in implementing Directive 2004/40/EC

enable the employer to adopt safety measures and define suitable methods

Members Added in 2005

Name Affiliation Country Max Amman Dublin Institute of Technology IE Ian Brooker Sensormatic IE Leon du Toit Directorate Rad Control, Dept of Health ZA Jeff Holley Florida Power and Light US Nam Kim Chungbuk National University KR David Nelson Michigan Technical University US Kwan-Hoong Ng University of Malaya, Dept of Radiation MY Paolo Ravazzani Italian Nat Res Council IT Dun Sik Yoo Elect & Telecom Res Inst KR

ATTACHMENT 9

ICES - International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety

Michael R. Murphy, PhDAir Force Research Laboratory

ICESInternational Liaison Report

San Antonio, TX11 December 2005

ATTACHMENT 10


Outline• Recent International EMF Meetings

• Upcoming EMF Meetings

• Liaisons • ICNIRP, WHO, BEMS/EBEA, URSI

• Invited Presentations:– Sheila Johnson, Patrick Mason,

B. Jon Klauenberg, Art Varanelli


• Molecular and Cellular Mechanisms of BiologicalEffects of EMF, UNESCO/WHO Seminar, 2-5 March,2005, Yerevan, Armenia

2005 EMF Meetings


• ElectroMed 2005, Fourth International Symposium on Nonthermal Medical/Biological Treatments UsingEMF and Ionized Gases, 15-18 May 2005, Portland, Oregon

• WHO Workshop on Base Stations andWireless Networks: Exposure and Health,15-16 June 2005, Geneva, Switzerland

2005 EMF Meetings


• AF Workshop at BioEM2005: Molecular Biology for EMF BioeffectsAssessment, 19 June, Dublin, Ireland

• BioEM2005, 19-24 June, Dublin

• ICES Meetings, 24-26 June 2005, Dublin

2005 EMF Meetings


2005 EMF Meetings• Coherence & Electromagnetic Fields in Biological Systems,1–4 July 2005, Prague, Czech Republic

• Applying Precautionary Measures to EMF Public Health Policy, 11-13 July 2005, Ottawa, Canada

• Progress in Electromagnetics Research Symposium – PIERS 2005, 22-26 Aug 2005, Hangzhou, China


• Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields: WHO 4th International EMF Seminar in China,12-16 Sept 2005, Kuenming, China

• ICNIRP Dosimetry Workshop, 19-21 Sept 2005, Nuremberg, Germany

• 28th URSI General Assembly: Commission K 23-29 Oct 2005, New Delhi, India

2005 EMF Meetings


2005 EMF Meetings

• Application of Proteomics & Transcriptomics in EMF Research, 30 Oct – 1 Nov 2005, Helsinki, Finland

• Bioelectromagnetics School at Erice, 3-8 Oct 2005

• Australasian Radiation Protection Society Conference. WHO Workshop – RF Fields:Health Effects & Policy Options for Protection, 14-18 Nov 2005, Melbourne

• WHO Workshop on Dosimetry of RF Fields5-7 Dec 2005, Moscow, Russia


• 24th Meeting of the Society for Physical Regulation in Biology and Medicine, 11-13 Jan 2006,Cancun, Mexico, www.SPRBM.org

• BEMS Workshop and Board Meeting, 3-4 Feb 2006,Phoenix, AZ http://www.bioelectromagnetics.org/

- “Exploring the Boundaries of EMF Intervention Techniques”

• Emerging EMF-technologies, PotentialSensitive Groups and Health, 20-21 April 2006,Graz, Austriahttp://www.kht.tugraz.at/conference2006.html

Upcoming EMF Meetings

http://www.sprbm.org/

http://www.bioelectromagnetics.org/

http://www.kht.tugraz.at/conference2006.html


• International Conference on ElectromagneticFields, Health and Environment, 27-29 April 2006,Madeira Island, Portugal www.apdee.org/ehe06/

• BEMS Annual Meeting, 11-15 June, Cancun, Mexicohttp://www.bioelectromagnetics.org/

• International Conference of the IEEE EMBS, Aug 31-Sept 3, 2006, New York City, USA.http://embc2006.njit.edu/announcement.php


http://www.apdee.org/ehe06/

http://www.bioelectromagnetics.org/

http://embc2006.njit.edu/announcement.php


Bioelectrochemistry Gordon Research Conference, 3 – 8 Sept 2006, Aussois, France ([email protected])

• 4th International Workshop on BiologicalEffects of Electromagnetic Fields 16-20 October 2005, Crete, Greecehttp://imm.demokritos.gr/bioeffects/


http://imm.demokritos.gr/bioeffects/


Liaison: ICNIRP

ICNIRP Meeting April 2005

San Antonio, River Walk

IEEE Spy

Liaison

• Future plans: Hold ICES summer meetings in nearby location &

times as BEMS, with independent arrangements


• WHO Annual International Advisory Committee– Geneva 13-14 June 2005, Ralf Bodeman

• BioEM2005 – June 2005- Represented ICES at Irish Government JointReception for ICES and BEMS, Ralf Bodeman

– “Status of IEEE C95.1 RF Safety StandardRevision,” C.K. Chou

- “The International Committee on ElectromagneticSafety (ICES): Safety Standards forElectromagnetic Energy,” M. R. Murphy

Liaison: BEMS/EBEA


• Union of Radio Science International (URSI)– “IEEE ICES Safety Standards for Exposure

to Electromagnetic Energy,”New Delhi 27 Oct 2005, M. R. Murphy

Liaison: URSI


Invited Presentations

Sheila JohnsonEuropean RF Conference Updates

Sheila Johnston

Patrick MasonMoscow Dosimetry Workshop

B. Jon KlauenbergNATO EMF Standardization Update

Art VaranelliMythbusters

Sheila JOHNSTON PhD, Neuroscience Consultant,

http://[email protected]

Progress in RF SCIENCE :Trondheim, RF & STATS, (COST281/FGF)Melbourne, ARPS & WHO/OZ RF review,Stuttgart, RF SUBTLE THERMAL EFFECTSGREEN = COST281/FGF host conference

BLUE= WHO host conference

ATTACHMENT 11

26 RF Conf: July-Dec 2005, 12/26 listed.

1. 1–4 July, Prague, Coher & EMF in Biol Sys, 2. 11-13 July, Ottawa, Applying Precautionary

Measures to EMF, Public Health Policy COST3. 27-31 July Michaelson, Hood River, E Adair4. 22-26 Aug, PIERS Hangzhou EM theory & appl

5. 12-16 Sept. Kunming, 4th EMF Biol Effects6. 14-17 Sept. Nuremberg, 14th Med Phys7-9. 3- 5 Oct. Trondheim, 9th MCM COST 281. &

1.“TETRA Biol Eff” 2.“Abdominal RF-Exp & Foetus” 3.“ Proper Stat Methods in EMF Res”

10. 3-9 Oct, Erice school ''EMF & Genotoxicity''11. 16-19 Oct Denver, RRS 52nd 12. 23–29 Oct New Delhi. URSI XXVIII GA

13. 30 Oct-1 Nov Helsinki,Omics EMF Res COST14. 4-5 Nov Belgium European Cancer Prev Org. 15. 7-8 Nov Seoul, Gov’ts Telecoms & Health, 16. 13-16 Nov Melbourne, ARPS 30th

17. 17-18 Nov Melb, OZ/WHO RF Health Policy18. 14–17 Nov UK NPL dosimetry19. 21-23 Nov Stutt FGF/COST Subtle Therm Eff20. 21-24 Nov Mt Verita, “RF Res needs21. 27 Nov Paris, Dosimetry for Epid, 22. 29 Nov London Spiked, what are we scared 23. 5-7 Dec Moscow, RF Dosimetry MMF24. 8-11 Dec San Antonio, IEEE ICES Fall Meet25. 12-13 Dec London MTHR - £7M; + £10M 26. 15 Dec Paris 12th Fr Tel, Sum RF Res 2005

• UK £7M + new £10 M pink = website• Germany BfS ?17M euro TOTAL=100M?• Germany FGF ? 2M euro /yr• France new? 3M euro, Fr Tel• Swiss Govt 7 M; Swiss ETHZ; IT’IS,• Greece, Hungary, Italy, Austria -Seibersdorf,• Fin Hermo ? +10 M euro /4 yr• Swed, Nor, Den,? Cohort study 7M?• Denmark Gov’t prog ?• Japan ARIB -2008, Korea, China, Russia• USA $ 21M Bioassay, Health Can in vitro,• McLaughlin Centre, Epid, WHO Collaborator.• Australia RF Centre Excell, Telstra,5M?

Trondheim Statistics in RF ResearchWiart “COST281 ST Mission: Statistics in

Bio-electromagnetism"Brazzale "Statistics in the preparation phase

Schüz "Statistics in the planning phase of experimental & epidemiological studies"

Wiart "Statistics and Exposure Assessment in Bio EM"

Scherb "Statistical anal, interpretations, conclusions"

Petrowicz " Nonconformities in current publications & future perspectives"

Epidemiology COST281 Task Force

Chair: Gunnhild Oftedal (Trondheim)First Meeting: London UK, Jan 20thS Johnston: Host, venue MOA10 members: (invited)Epidemiology: Agenda Under DiscussionCriteria, Guidelines & Enterpretation ?

''Subtle Thermal Effects of RF-fields in vitro and in vivo'' FGF/COST281, Stuttgart

Local temp rises 42°C (44°C for fat & skin) are tolerated.Brain - special mechanisms protect brain from excess heat. Local SAR-up to 100 W/kg & higher compensated by

perfusion: cardiac performance a limiting factor for perfusion. No known human thermosensor -as sensitive as beetles,’

snake’s thermosensors- 100th –1000th °C temp change. W. Hanke -a hypo- human receptor based on a complex

interaction of existing mechanisms.P. Christen - twofold HS thermosensor- DnaK

chaperone sys: 1. necessary for normal cell growth 25-40 °C. 2. resistance of cells to temp above 40 °C.

J Frolich –nonuniformity SAR < 30% is not achieved in vitro cell suspensions setups. TEMs best for cell suspensions.Waveguide best for exposure of cell monolayers.

''Subtle Thermal” Effects CtdJan Gimsa - non spherical cells polar regions show

anisotropic properties - local RF energy absorption increase by one order of magnitude.

Foster biophysical theory suggests that RF energy would be thermalized and dissipated immediately in the surrounding fluid.

RF exposure in organic synthesis (chemistry) is a combo of thermal effects, arising from heating rate, superheating or ‘‘hot spots’’ & selective absorption of radiation by polar substances.

Such phenomena are not usually accessible (reproducible) by classical heating „(de la Hoz et al 2005).

''Subtle Thermal” Effects Ctd

Vanderstraeten theorized SAR at nanoscale, vicinity nucleic acid molecules, 10X above its value in tissues as a whole.

A-C Cefalas hypothesized RF coupling w biological matter via subtle-thermal effects- inter’n - quantum mechanically.

A Copty –expt-microwaves had a 3-10 x + effect on fluorescence of EGFP than conventional convective heating.

A Bitz -pilot dosimetry proj -SAR, & adjustments according blood perfusion. No est. sci uncertainty of measurement.

G Oftedal - lit on increase in skin temp during mobile phone calls –due to heat insulation by the phone box not RF.

G Scmid- worst case RF induced temperature elevations in the brain from mobiles < 0.32 °C - steady state after approximately 30-40 min of exp. With usual exposure not possible to estab “signif” RF induced temperature hotspots in the well perfused tissues (e.g. brain).

''Subtle Thermal” Effects Ctd-END

A Lerchl expt- RF metabolic effects? + bdy wgt small mammals. -not extrapolated to humans -further study.

J Buschmann extrapolate toxicol procedures to RF testing. The changes RF signals in society -difficult to test -

difficult to come to health hazard conclusions on.1948 the bio heat equation (Pennes) - predict heat

dissipation in the body from RF exposure. Non-thermal effects are still a controversial (unproven)

topic (Foster, de la Hoz 2005). Dosimetrically and theoretically micro or macromolecular

hot spots have been shown to be unlikely.Modeling of small temp changes in head, body, organs

required to improve eval RF on human health. END

ARPS/WHO MR-RS• Telstra mapping RF calculations confirmed by

measurement- 3dB sci uncertainty –3G• attempts to simplify measure/Cal of SAR• Sleep studies, mostly negative, small EEG eff due to

heat? no biol/health signif? • Cogn child studies ongoing• Sum by BV & CR -no big RF res health worries on

the horizon. Epid AA ? Cohort? Germany out.• WHO RF information for children pilot (weblink)• MR retire in June; EvD acting head in Geneva• Standards & Precaut Frameworks out in Dec

World Health Organization (WHO) Workshop on Dosimetry of Radio Frequency Fields

Moscow, Russia5-7 Dec 05

Patrick Mason, PhDRadio Frequency Radiation Branch

Air Force Research Laboratory

ATTACHMENT 12

2

WHO Workshop

Venue: State Research Center, Institute of Biophysics, Moscow

Purpose: • To provide an overview of the fundamentals of radio

frequency dosimetry for researchers and standards developers

• To facilitate discussion on the need for high quality dosimetry in radio frequency studies and the usefulness of the SAR concept

3

WHO Invited Participants

Chou, C.K. Motorola LabsFutter, Peter IT’IS FoundationLeveque, Philippe IRCOM UMR CNRSMason, Patrick AFRLPeyman, Azedah Microwave Consultants LtdPioli, Claudio ENEA CR CasacciaRepacholi, Michael WHORomann, Albert IT’IS FoundationRowley, John GSM FoundationSypniewski, Roza AFRL-GDVan Deventer, Emilie WHOVeyret, Bernard Laboratory PIOM CNRS/EPHE

4

WHO Invited Participants

40-50 Russian Scientists representing:• Central Physical and Technical Institute, Ministry of Defense• Centre for Bioradioinformation System• Centre for Electromagnetic Safety• Centre of State Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision of

Administration of the President of Russia• Institute of Military Medicine, Ministry of Defense• Institute of Physics, Russian Scientific Academy• Moscow Physical Engineering Institute• Samara Radio Scientific State Institute• Scientific Research Institute for Occupational Medicine, Russian

Academy of Medical Science• SRC Institute of Biophysics• State Technological University

5

Agenda

Monday:• Scope and Purpose of Workshop

Dr. Repacholi• Basic Electromagnetic Theory as it Relates to RF Dosimetry

Drs. Swicord/Chou• Macroscopic Electrical Properties of Tissue

Dr. Peyman• Factors Affecting Absorption of RF Fields

Dr. Chou• Mechanisms of Absorption of RF Fields in Tissues

Dr. Mason• The Russian Approach to RF Dosimetry

Drs. Nina Rubtsova/Anton Merkulov• Panel Discussion: Is SAR a Good Dose Concept?

6

Agenda

Tuesday:• Numerical Dosimetry and Experimental Setups

Dr. Philippe Leveque• Demonstration of SEMCAD Software

Dr. Peter Futter• Methods for Assessing Base Stations and Mobile Phones for

Compliance with International Mobile Phone StandardsDr. Albert Romann

• Russian-French Animal Study DosimetryDr. Leveque

• Laboratory DemonstrationDrs. Leveque, Veyret, and Romann

7

Agenda

Wednesday:• Dosimetry Concepts in RF Standards

Dr. Repacholi• Concepts and Methodology of RF Standards for Mobile Phones

Dr. Yuri Grigoriev• Compliance with Standards

Dr. Chou• Distance Learning Course on Dosimetry

Dr. Veyret

8

Facilities

9

Facilities

1

B. Jon Klauenberg, Ph.D.Custodian NATO STANAG 2345

Senior Research PhysiologistHEDR

Air Force Research Laboratory

Triennial Review: STANAG 2345

ATTACHMENT 13

2

• The expansion of NATO

• New challenges to standardization

• New opportunities for collaborative research and information exchange.

• Harmonization and alignment of standards for safety

• Necessary to insure Interoperability, interchangeability, commonality

• Safety standards within NATO and worldwide

• Should be based upon the same scientific data.

Why NATO is Interested in Standards

3

Encourage nations to develop, agree and implement common concepts doctrines, procedures, criteria, and designs to achieve and maintain the most effective levels of compatibility, inter-operability, interchange-ability, and commonality in the fields of operations, material, and administration.

NATO Standardization Policy

4

Guiding Principles Of NATO Standardization

1. Voluntary

2. Essential for Effective Implementation of Operational Plans

3. Desirable When it has Impact on National or NATO Economies

4. Achieve Maximum Operational Standardization, at Least for Interoperability

5. Commonality of Terminology is Essential

6. Information Exchange to Non NATO is by Consensus by All NATO Nations

5

• 1970: AC/243/Panel III forms RSG2 – “Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation”

• 1973: Coordinate with General Medical Working Party – Personnel Safety Standards

• 1974: RSG2 Transferred to Panel VIII: – Defense Applications: Human & BioMed Sciences

• 1975: NATO AGARD Lecture Series No.78: Radiation Hazards Netherlands, Norway, and Germany

• 1981: NATO Research Study Group 2 (Panel VIII AC/243 Defence Research Group)– “A Workshop on the Protection of Personnel Against Radiofrequency Radiation”

Farnborough, UK• 1981:NATO Advanced Studies Institute: Advances in Biological Effects & Dosimetry

of Low Energy Level Electromagnetic Fields. Erice, Sicily

• 1984: NATO Research Study Group 2 (Panel VIII AC/243 Defence Research Group)– “A Workshop on Radiofrequency Radiation Bioeffects” Wachtberg-Werthoven, DEU

• 1984: NATO Advanced Research Workshop– “Interaction Between Electromagnetic Fields and Cells: Erice, Sicily.

• 1985 AGARD Lecture Series No. 138: – “The Impact of Proposed RFR Standards on Military Operations” Rome, Italy; Lisbon,

Portugal; Paris, France.

History of NATO Support for Non-Ionizing Research - Standardization

6

• May 1973: 2nd Preliminary Draft " Control of Microwave Hazards”– Frequency Independent – 30MHz - 300GHz – 10mW/cm2 (three tiered, protective clothing)

• Sep 1974: 1st RSG 2, NATO Panel VIII AC/243– 3rd Preliminary Draft "Control of Microwave Hazards”

• Sep 1975: RSG 2, NATO Panel VIII AC/243– Proposed additional STANAG for High Frequency 1 MHz -30 MHz

• Sep 1976: 2nd draft STANAG 2345” Radio Frequency Radiation”⎯ 10KHz-300GHz⎯ Prohibited protective clothing

• Sep 1977: 3rd draft– Deleted protective clothing prohibition

• 16 Feb 1979: STANAG 2345 “Control and Recording of Personnel Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation.” Promulgated

• 6 year effort

STANAG 2345 Edition 1: Chronology

7

• Dec 1981: USA recommends update to include shock and burn• Nov 1989: STANAG 2345 (2nd Edition, Draft 1) Control and Recording of

Personnel Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation– Ratification request issued

• NEVER PROMULGATED

• Jun 1992: Proposal for NATO Advanced Research Workshop (ARW) approved

• May 1993: NATO ARW: Rome, ITA, “ Developing a New Standardization Agreement (STANAG) for Radiofrequency Radiation”– Review of Standards– Scientific basis for new Standards– Public health policy concerns

STANAG 2345 Edition 2 Chronology

8

• Apr 1994: Las Vegas, USA: 1st Drafting Working Group Meeting

• Oct 1994: London, GBR: Final Drafting Working Group Meeting: (Montague House)

• Jan 1995: Publication of Proceedings: Radiofrequency Radiation Standards

• Feb 1995: NATO HQ: 44th General Medical Working Party

– USA Appointed Custodian of STANAG-2345, vice BEL

– USA directed to convene meeting of National Technical Representatives

• May 1995: Technical Representative Working Group meeting

– Brooks AFB, San Antonio, Texas, USA

– Final preliminary draft prepared

– Consensus letter signed by Technical Representatives

• Sep 1995: NATO HQ: Report to RADHAZ WG

– Commended by Chair for improved communication between General Medical and Radio and Radar Radiation Hazards Working Parties


9

• Feb 1996: London, GBR: Drafting group conference with GBR RADHAZ, Lacomb House

• Mar 1996: Edition 2, Draft 1 Circulated for ratification

• Apr 1996: 45th MED votes unanimous recommendation to ratify

• 13 Oct 1997: STANAG 2345 Edition 2 promulgated

– 5 year effort


11

HIGHLIGHTS: STANAG-2345 (Edition 2)

• Single tier: Controlled Environment (aware, informed worker)

• Frequency Dependent

• 3kHz to 300GHz

• Minimal Safety Standard

• Protective Clothing Provisions

• Contact Current Guidance

• Thoroughly Reviewed by International Group of Experts

• Similar to Other New Standards

12

AUSTRALIA/WHOMichael H. Repacholi, Ph.D.

CANADAB.L. AnsteyPaul CampagnaTapio MurtoCOL J.-M. Rouleau

FRANCEJean Claude Debouzy, MD, PhD Rene Malabiau, PhD, Doc Eng

GERMANYJürgen H. Bernhardt, PhDGünter BrücknerKlaus W. Hofmann, Ph.D.

ITALYGianni F. Mariutti, Ph.D.LT Roberto Venturoni

NETHERLANDSCOL (Dr) Theo W.H. Herweijer

SUPREME HEADQUARTERSALLIED POWERS EUROPELTC (Dr) Jörg Frerichs

UNITED KINGDOMNigel CoxCamelia Gabriel, Ph.DRobert C. GardnerColin Lewis CDR Ian JarvisBrian J. Maddock, PhD SRG CPT Brian J.W. PingreeAlistair J. Race

UNITED STATESEleanor R. Adair, Ph.D. Robert Adair, Ph.D.MAJ John BrewerC.K. Chou, PhD John A. D'Andrea, Ph.DJohn de Lorge, Ph.D.Linda Erdreich, PhD Om P. Gandhi, Ph.D.Ricardo S. GonzálezArthur W. Guy, Ph.D. B. Jon Klauenberg, Ph.D.John A. Leonowich Ph.D.James H. MerrittMichael Murphy, Ph.D.John M. Osepchuk, Ph.D. Ronald C. PetersenBrad J. RobertsRichard A. TellGalen Thompson Charles L. Wakefield CDR Robert Yacovissi

* Contribution or participation indrafting process does not imply agreement with final edition or signify national endorsement

Participants Contributors: STANAG 2345 Edition 2

13

• Revision meeting 16-17 September 1998, San Antonio

– GBR, USA, NOR, LAT (NLD email comments)

– Incorporate induced contact current guidance

• Oct 1998: NATO ARW on Dosimetry and Standards: Ljubljana, Martuljek, Slovenia

• Change Proposal/Study Draft of Amendments to STANAG 2345 MED (Edition 2) Feb 1999

• POL suggests elimination of the four digit implied accuracy

• Drafts 1,2,3, via e-mail

• 10—11 May 2000, TG-002 meeting: Bergen, NOR

• 24-25 Oct 2000, TG-002 meeting: Chania, Crete, GRE

• 22-24 May 2001,TG-002 meeting: London, GBR

• 9/11 canceled 10-12 Dec 2001 meeting

• Ratification draft: 50th General Medical Working Group, June 2001

• Promulgated 13 February 2003.

• 4.5 year effort


14

RTO-TG-002:Health Effects of Non-Ionizing Radiation in the Military Setting

• 22-24 May 2001 meeting London, UK • Nations attending included GRE, DEU, NLD, NOR, GBR, USA, BEL: • Reviewed comments from FRA on STANAG 2345 Evaluation And

Control Of Personnel Exposure To Radio Frequency Fields - 3 Khz To 300 Ghz (Edition 3 Draft 3).

• Site visit MOD Radiation Hazards teams of the Directorate of Engineering and Interoperability (DEI). Blandford, UK

• Fall 2001 meeting in San Antonio canceled due to 9/11 security concerns• Lecture Series (Fall 2002 proposed): How New Civilian Radio Frequency

Exposure Guidelines Will Impact NATO Operations (never acted on)• TG-002 defunct

NATO Research Technology Organization

15


16

Overexposure format proforma was extensively revised.

“Actions to be Taken in Case of a Suspected or Actual Overexposure” was expanded significantly

A new section entitled “The Role of the Physician” was added.

The revision was facilitated through the efforts of technical and medical expert members of the NATO RADHAZ Working Group and the Research and Technology Organization (RTO) AC/323/Human Factors and Medicine (HFM) 26/Task Group (TG) 002 “Health Effects of Non-Ionizing Radiation in the Military Setting.” (BE, FR, GE, GR, NL, NO, U.K., and U.S.).

Edition 3 Ratified 13 Feb 2003.Promulgated by BE, CA, DA, GR, LU, NL, NO, PL, TU, UK

Updated Sections

17

Standardization Agreement (STANAG) 2345 Evaluation And Control Of Personnel Exposure To Radio Frequency Fields - 3 KHz To 300 GHz (EDITION 3):

• New medical reporting proforma• New “Actions to be taken in case of a suspected or

actual overexposure above PEL”• New “The Role of the Physician”

• STANAG 2345 included in list of essential NATO STANAGs at 49th MED (2000)

HIGHLIGHTS: STANAG-2345 (Edition 3)

18

• Directly impacts systems design and siting considerations

• Directly impacts coordination of multi-national operations

• GENMED WG purview

• Maintains independence from design and operations

• Maintain Credibility

• Avoid Conflict of Interest or Perception of Conflict

• Personnel Safety Liaison to Engineer & Design Community

STANAG 2345 Impacts on Military

19

Standards Setters Hard at Play

Photo courtesy of Klaus Hofmann, 25 Oct 1994, Blackfriar’s, London

ICES · of his foresight in visualizing the need for IEEE Std C95.7-2005 and his perseverance in...

Documents

Transcript of ICES · of his foresight in visualizing the need for IEEE Std C95.7-2005 and his perseverance in...