WRITTEN QUESTION E-3246/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 November 2002)

Subject: The erection of mobile telephone masts

Concern has been expressed by a number of my London constituents over plans to erect a mobile telephone mast at the junction of Mead Way and Pickhurst Lane, Beckenham, which is a residential area. The Bromley Local Authority representing the residents of the Borough opposed the development of an 8-metre streetworks monopole mast with associated antenna, equipment cabinet and development ancillary to the construction, but an appeal by the mobile telephone operator One 2 One against the Bromley Local Authority's decision was upheld by the U.K. Planning Inspectorate. Strong concerns on the part of a number of local residents were expressed over the possible health effects of the proposed development. These concerns centred on the proximity of the proposed development to houses, the proximity of a nearby school and the fact that children walking to it would pass the site and be exposed to electromagnetic high field strength. Similar concerns have been expressed in other parts of the United Kingdom and in other parts of the European Union.

The Planning Inspector noted that although some countries have introduced legislation specifying that telecommunications masts should be located at least 500 metres away from schools and residential areas, U.K. Government Guidance in Planning Policy Guidance Note 8: Telecommunications (PPG8) states that if a proposed mobile 'phone base station meets the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines for public exposure it should not be necessary for a local planning authority to consider further the health aspects and concerns about them. The Inspector also notes that the Guidance Note further advises that local planning authorities should not impose a ban or moratorium on new telecommunications development or insist on minimum distances between new telecommunications development and existing development.

Can the Commission indicate whether or not whether there is any European Union legislation governing the erection of such masts and, if so, whether the U.K. guidelines are consistent with such legislation? What discretion is afforded to Member States over the erection procedures, and are any of the countries which insist on masts being located at least 500 metres away from schools and residential areas European Union Member States?

Finally, what information does the Commission have regarding the potential dangers of mobile telephone masts located in residential areas?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(19 December 2002)

Regarding the potential existence of any European regulation governing the erection of mobile telephone masts, the positioning of mobile telephone masts is a matter falling under the responsibility for local, regional and State authorities.

Union legislation governing radio products, including mobile telephone masts(1), obliges manufacturers to ensure that the products are safe when used for their intended purpose but national or local authorities may impose additional restrictions on the use of radio products, for instance, by prescribing minimum distances from the public, so as to ensure that telephone masts are appropriately installed.

Regarding the potential dangers of mobile telephone masts, the Community has further provided guidance on the safety levels to be respected by establishing a set of maximum exposure limits(2). The Scientific Committee on Toxicology-Ecotoxicology and the Environment confirmed on 30 November 2001 that: the additional information which has become available on carcinogenic and other non-thermal effects of radio frequency and microwave radiation frequencies in the last years does not justify a revision of exposure limits set by the Commission.

The European Commission will continue to monitor the scientific evidence on this issue.

(1) Directive 1999/5/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity, OJ L 91, 7.4.1999.

(2) Council Recommendation 1999/519/EEC.