About MA Pure Tone Air Pollution Laws

In 2006 our lives were forever changed by a noise that turned on the day the Wi-Fi and Broadband high-speed and digital wireless electric meters  were installed in our town, my parents town and every location we have lived, vacation and visit.  This has been a living nightmare and continues to be one because our lives as we knew has been taken from us due to the noise is in our home 24/7 non stop.  This is approaching 8 years of this assault and battery upon us.  Other residents have filed noise complaints, but the State Agencies because of their carelessness and lack of interest in taking action are forced to deal with this issue, anyway.  They thought they could close our case or simply wear us down. Typical MO, in which they avoid expending time and resources; while relying on the judgment of the utilities, makes for a very hostile and toxic environment for citizens to face.  We should not have to; the State and Government we have entrust our health and wellbeing to; they have failed us, miserably.  We are still here and we are still fighting.  This they did not expect that we would become more determined and wiser the longer they ignored our desperate pleas for help.  NUISANCE AND TRESPASSING IS ILLEGAL IN ALL STATES.  This is where the FCC can not protect the wireless industry!

There is no place to seek refuge, no place to sit quietly, no place to sleep in peace.  It is maddening!  Every attempt we have made to get help we have been stonewalled by the State of Massachusetts who are aligned with the utilities.  The noise is radiating on the lines and causing harmonic distortion in our home.  We have supported our complaints with power quality evidence, 1/3 octave band pure tone results, forensic audio evidence, but the State continues to not take action appropriately.   Pure tones are illegal in Massachusetts.  Non the less, this we are hearing constantly is trespassing and causing a nuisance.  The FCC made sure, even though it is not a health agency is acting illegal as one, by taking our human rights away in the Telecommunication Act of 1996, stating we cannot sue the government if you get sick from Radio Frequency radiation.   The radiation limits in the United States are one of the highest in the World.  The government does not have our backs, they are on the side of the wireless industry where profits are more important than the health of humans and animals.   Victims across the country are being impacted by this noise.  We hope this blog will be a source of information and comfort, knowing, you are not alone; there are thousands of others who .   We will continue to fight Corporate America to right this injustice they are inflicting on us all.  Remember, even if your neighbor is not aware of the noise; they too, are absorbing the effects of this noise and radiation, as well.

“Calling noise a nuisance is like calling smog an inconvenience. Noise must be considered a hazard to the health of people everywhere.” former U.S. Surgeon General William Stewart, 1969

Below is the MassDEP NOISE REGULATIONS

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)
Noise Control Regulation
310 CMR 7.10

310 CMR 7.10  Noise

(1) No person owning, leasing, or controlling a source of sound shall willfully, negligently, or through failure to provide necessary equipment, service, or maintenance or to take necessary precautions cause, suffer, allow, or permit unnecessary emissions from said source of sound that may cause noise.

(2) 310 CMR 7.10(1) shall pertain to, but shall not be limited to, prolonged unattended sounding of burglar alarms, construction and demolition equipment which characteristically emit sound but which may be fitted and accommodated with equipment such as enclosures to suppress sound or may be operated in a manner so as to suppress sound, suppressible and preventable industrial and commercial sources of sound, and other man-made sounds that cause noise.

(3) 310 CMR 7.10(1) shall not apply to sounds emitted during and associated with:

  1. parades, public gatherings, or sporting events, for which permits have been issued provided that said parades, public gatherings, or sporting events in one city or town do not cause noise in another city or town;
  2. emergency police, fire, and ambulance vehicles;
  3. police, fire, and civil and national defense activities;
  4. domestic equipment such as lawn mowers and power saws between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 9:00 P.M.

(4) 310 CMR 7.10(1) is subject to the enforcement provisions specified in 310 CMR 7.52.
The DEP has established a Noise Level Policy for implementing this regulation. The policy specifies that the ambient sound level, measured at the property line of the facility or at the nearest inhabited buildings, shall not be increased by more than 10 decibels weighted for the “A” scale [dB(A)] due to the sound from the facility during its operating hours.

The ambient sound level is the sound from all sources other than the particular sound of interest; also known as the background sound level. The ambient sound measurement (A-weighted sound level) is taken where the offending sound cannot be heard, or with the sound source shut-off. The ambient sound level is rarely found to be constant over time, and is usually quite variable. The ambient sound level is considered to be the level that is exceeded 90% of the time that the noise measurements are taken. The ambient sound level may also be established by other means with the consent of the DEP.

The dB(A) unit of sound measurement is altered (or weighted) to reflect human sound sensitivity. For instance, for those frequencies of sound which humans hear very well, the actual reading is enhanced, or increased, in the weighting process. The “weighted” reading therefore emphasizes the frequencies best heard by humans, and likewise de-emphasizes those sound frequencies which are less well heard.

The guideline further states that the facility shall not produce a pure-tone condition at the property line (or at the nearest inhabited buildings). A pure-tone exists if the sound pressure level, at any given octave band center frequency, exceeds the levels of the two adjacent octave bands by three (3) or more decibels.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) adopted this Noise Control Regulation, 310 CMR 7.10, under the authority of M.G.L. Chapter 111, Section 142B and 142D. The Noise Control Regulation is used to limit the sound impact of new stationary sources and to respond to complaints of certain excessive sound. The DEP Noise Control Regulation can be enforced by local officials under the authority of 310 CMR7.52

310 CMR 7.52  Enforcement Provisions

“Any police department, fire department, board of health officials, or building inspector or his designee acting within his jurisdictional area is hereby authorized by the DEP to enforce, as provided in M.G.L. c. 111, S 142B, any regulation in which specific reference to 310 CMR 7.52 is cited.”
Noise is defined in the Regulations as “…sound of sufficient intensity and/or duration as to cause or contribute to a condition of air pollution.”

Community Sound Level Criteria

 
A source of sound will be considered to be in compliance with the DEP noise regulation 310 CMR 7.10(1) if the source does not:

  1. Increase the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A) above ambient, or
  2. Produce a pure tone condition.
 End Radio Frequency Radiation Pollution!  Our expert evidence proves the 217Hz is a pure tone in exceedence of the Massachusetts laws.  The 217Hz is also in violation of the FCC Part 15. 

Noise and tones  (http://www.silvent.com/us/competences/sound-and-noise-levels/)

Noise can consist of a single pure tone, but is usually composed of many tones of varying strength. The disturbing effect of a sound depends not only on the strength of the tones; frequency also has an effect—high tones are more disturbing than low tones. Pure tones are more disturbing than a composite sound. 

CONTACT US AT:  globalrfrdefenseteam@verizon.net to contribute to our investigation and legal fund.

Published on Feb 8, 2015

Sandra Chianfoni – Environmental EMR Research/investigator and Advocate, has investigated the noise pollution known as “The HUM”, which is exposing the public worldwide to this health hazard. Have YOU heard the HUM?

Responses

  1. NOISE CONTROL ACT OF 1972
    HISTORY: Public Law 92-574, Oct. 27, 1972; 86 Stat. 1234; 42 USC 4901 et seq.; Amended by PL 94-301, May 31, 1976; PL 95-609, Nov. 8, 1978; PL 100-418, Aug. 23, 1988
    SEC. 1 [42 U.S.C. 4901 nt], Short Title.
    This Act may be cited as the “Noise Control Act of 1972.”
    SEC. 2 [42 U.S.C. 4901]Findings and Policy.
    (a) The Congress finds–
    (1)
    that inadequately controlled noise presents a growing danger to the health and welfare of the Nation’s population, particularly in urban areas;
    (2)
    that the major sources of noise include transportation vehicles and equipment, machinery, appliances, and other products in commerce; and
    (3)
    that, while primary responsibility for control of noise rests with State and local governments, Federal action is essential to deal with major noise sources in commerce control of which require national uniformity of treatment.
    (b)
    The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States to promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare. To that end, it is the purpose of this Act to establish a means for effective coordination of Federal research and activities in noise control, to authorize the establishment of Federal noise emission standards for products distributed in commerce, and to provide information to the public respecting the noise emission and noise reduction characteristics of such products.

    http://www.epa.gov/air/noise/noise_control_act_of_1972.pdf

  2. Military document

    BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON NOISE
    Noise Measurements and Terminology

    Introduction.
    Sound is caused by vibrations that generate waves of minute air pressure fluctuations in the air. The number of pressure fluctuations per second is reported as cycles per second or Hertz (Hz). Different frequencies of vibration produce different tonal qualities for the resulting sound. Air pressure fluctuations that occur from 20 to 20,000 times per second can be
    detected as audible sound. Frequencies below 20 Hz are called infrasound frequencies. Frequencies above 20,000 Hz are called ultrasound frequencies. Although not audible, some infrasound frequencies can be felt as vibrations.

    Human hearing varies in sensitivity for different acoustic frequencies. In addition, relative sensitivity to different acoustic frequencies also varies with the intensity of the sound. Peak sensitivity to pure tones typically occurs at frequencies between 2,000 Hz and 6,000 Hz. Relative sensitivity remains fairly high between about 250 Hz and 2,000 Hz. Relative sensitivity
    drops off above 7,000 Hz and below 200 Hz. Normal speech typically spans a frequency range From about 125 Hz to about 6,000 Hz, but is dominated by sounds in the range of 500 to 3,000 Hz. The frequency range for adult males tends to be lower than that for adult females, while the frequency range for children’s speech tends to be higher than that for adult females.

    Figure 1 illustrates the relative sensitivity of human hearing to pure tones at various magnitudes. Hearing sensitivity is plotted as relative sensitivity to tones at “equal loudness” levels of 20, 40, 60, and 80 phons. The numerical value of an equal loudness curve in phons is equal to the loudness of a 1,000 Hz tone at the specified decibel level (for example, 60 phon is the loudness of a 1,000 Hz tone at 60 dB). Also shown for comparison are the two most commonly used decibel weighting systems (A-weighted and C-weighted). Decibel weighting systems are discussed in more detail below. Measurements and descriptions of sounds are usually based on various combinations of the following factors:

    1. The vibration frequency characteristics of the sound, measured as sound wave cycles per second (Hertz); this determines the “pitch” of a sound;

    2. The total sound energy being radiated by a source, usually reported as a sound power level;

    3. The actual air pressure changes experienced at a particular location, usually measured as a sound pressure level; the frequency characteristics and sound pressure level combine to determine the “loudness” of a sound at a particular location;

    4. The duration of a sound; and

    5. The changes in frequency characteristics or pressure levels through time.

    full paper at: http://www.garrison.hawaii.army.mil/sbcteis/feis/Appendices/Appendix%20H1.pdf

  3. A MUST READ BOOK JUST WRITTEN BY KATIE SINGER

    “An Electronic Silent Spring-Facing the Dangers and Creating Safe Limits

    Forward by Frank Clegg, former President of Microsoft Canada, founding CEO of Canadians for Safe Technology–

    “This book shows how radiation emitted by electronic devices can cause biological harm. It describes how to reduce our emissions and exposure. These issues matter to anyone who uses technology. Therefore, everyone should read this book”
    Katie was kind and generous in allowing me space to talk about the “Pure Tone” noise as she recognizes this noise pollution as part of the radiation issues caused by the Automated metering infrastructure and so inappropriately named by industry as the “Smart Grid”

    http://www.amazon.com/Katie-Singer/e/B001K8KUCE

    • The Katie Singer’s book is a must read for those who are concerned with the obvious environmental impacts caused by EM emissions. ALL life on the planet is being exposed to this class 2B carcinogen.

      Next time you make a subscription payment for cellular phone service, ask yourself’s whether planetary extinction is a good investment…

  4. J. Electromagnetic Analysis & Applications, 2010, 2, 607-617 doi:10.4236/jemaa.2010.211080 Published Online November 2010

    (http://www.scirp.org/journal/jemaa)
    Copyright © 2010 SciRes. JEMAA
    Inspections of Mobile Phone Microwaves Effects on Proteins Secondary Structure by Means of Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy
    Emanuele Calabrò1*, Salvatore Magazù1
    1 Department of Physics, University of Messina, Messina, Italy. Email: e.calabro@yahoo.com

    Received September 10th, 2010; revised October 15th, 2010; accepted October 18th, 2010.

    As cellular telephone technology has advanced, the radiofrequency patterns used become more and more complex with lower frequencies, nearer to biological ones and so they may interfere with the sophisticated electro- magnetic circuits of human body, for example in the brain. Most governments and cell-phone companies have claimed that the only possible biological effect of RF transmission is localized body heating. RF-MW radiations produce a response in many types of neurones in the avian central nervous system [2], and can affect central cholinergic activity in the rat [3]. Mobile phone MWs have effects on blood-brain bar- rier permeability [4,5] and can produce oxidative damage in brains tissues [6].

  5. The exposure to the noise from the smart grid network produces the same symptoms and negative effects as the wind turbines. The list of professionals below have spoken out voicing their concerns for the victims health due to low frequency noise and vibration. We deserve the same concern. They took an oath to protect the public and little do they know this public health hazard does not exclude them. In this matter,They are the public as well! I urge you to contact these experts and demand they get involved.

    Below is the list of health practitioners, researchers and acousticians who have investigated or voiced concerns for the health of wind turbine neighbors – apologies to those we forgot to mention, and please advise us of errors and omissions at dmette@epaw.org
    In alphabetical order:
    1. Professor Mariana Alves Pereira, Biomechanical Engineer (Portugal, 2007) 2. Dr Ian Arra, Public Health Physician (Canada, 2013) 3. Mr Stephen Ambrose, Noise Engineer (USA, 2011) 4. Associate Professor Jeffrey Aramini, Epidemiologist (Canada, 2010) 5. Dr Huub Bakker, Engineer, (New Zealand, 2010) 6. Dr Linda Benier, Ear Nose & Throat specialist (Canada, 2011) 7. Dr Owen Black, Ear Nose & Throat specialist (USA, 2009) 8. Mr Wade Bray, Noise Engineer (USA, 2011) 9. Professor Arline Bronzaft, Psychologist & Researcher (US, 2010) 10. Dr Nuno Castelo Branco, Pathologist (Portugal, 2007) 11. Dr Micheal Cooke, General Practitioner (Ireland, 2012) 12. Mr Steven Cooper, Acoustician (Australia, 2011) 13. Dr Herb Coussos, Medical Practitioner (US, 2010) 14. Dr R Crunkhorne, Ear Nose & Throat specialist (UK, 2013) 15. Mrs Jane Davis, Nurse (UK, 2010) 16. Professor Phillip Dickinson, Acoustician (New Zealand, 2009) 17. Associate Professor Con Doolan, Mechanical Engineer (Australia, 2012) 18. Mr Chuck Ebbing, Noise Engineer (USA. 2013) 19. Dr Alun Evans, Epidemiologist (Ireland, 2011) 20. Dr Amir Farboud, Ear Nose & Throat Specialist (UK, 2013) 21. Dr. Robert A. Frosch, Senior Research Fellow, Harvard University; ex Administrator of NASA; member of the National Academy of Engineering, the AAES, the UK’s RAE, etc. (2013) 22. Professor Jerome Haller, Neurology and Paediatrics (US, 2008) 23. Professor Colin Hansen, Mechanical Engineer, International Expert in Low Frequency Noise & Vibration (Australia, 2010) 24. Dr Chris Hanning, Sleep Physician (UK, 2010) 25. Professor John Harrison, Physicist (Canada, 2010) 26. Dr Amanda Harry, Rural Medical Practitioner (UK, 2003) 27. Professor Henry Horn, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (US, 2008) 28. Mr Richard Horonjeff, Acoustician (USA, 2010) 29. Mr Les Huson, Acoustician (Australia, 2011) 30. Dr Jan van Ingen Schenau, MD, Retired Physician (Netherlands, 2013) 31. Dr David Iser, Rural Medical Practitioner (Australia, 2004) 32. Associate Professor Rick James, Noise Engineer (USA, 2009)
    33. Dr Roy Jeffrey, Rural Medical Practitioner (Canada, 2010) 34. Dr Mauri Johansson, Occupational Physician (Denmark, 2012) 35. Mr George Kamperman, Noise Engineer (USA, 2009) 36. Professor Ralph Katz, Epidemiologist (US, 2008) 37. Dr Noel Kerin, Occupational Physician (Canada, 2010) 38. Professor Nicholas Kouwen, PhD., P.Eng., University of Waterloo, ON (Canada, 2013) 39. Ms Carmen Krogh, Pharmacist, Researcher (Canada, 2009) 40. Dr Eckhard Kuck, Oral Surgeon (Germany, 2012) 41. Dr Nicole Lachat, Biologist (Switzerland, 2011) 42. Dr Sarah Laurie, Former Rural Medical Practitioner (Australia, 2010) 43. Dr David Lawrence, Rural Medical Practitioner (USA, 2012) 44. Professor Joel Lehrer, Earn Noise & Throat specialist (US, 2008) 45. Dr Lu Lombardi, Medical Practitioner, Ontario (Canada, 2010) 46. Dr Hazel Lynn, Medical Officer of Health, Grey/Bruce County, ON (Canada, 2012) 47. Dr Robert McMurtry, Former Dean of Medical & Dental School, University of Western Ontario (Canada, 2010) 48. Peter Mitchell, Engineer, Founder and Chairman of the Waubra Foundation (Australia, 2010) 49. Dr Andja Mitric Andjic, Rural Medical Practitioner (Australia, 2011) 50. Dr Sarah Myhill, Rural Medical Practitioner, Wales (UK, 2012) 51. Dr Michael Nissenbaum, Medical Practitioner (US, 2010) 52. Mr Bill Palmer, Engineer (Canada, 2010) 53. George Papadopoulos, Pharmacist (Australia, 2011) 54. Dr Helen Parker, Psychologist (US, 2011) 55. Dr Robyn Phipps, Researcher (NZ, 2007) 56. Dr Eja Pedersen, Medical Sociologist (Sweden, 2006) 57. Dr Nina Pierpont, PhD, MD, Specialist Paediatrician, Fellow American Academy of Paediatrics (US, 2009) 58. Professor Carl Phillips, Epidemiologist (USA, 2010) 59. Mr Jerry Punch, Audiologist (USA, 2013) 60. Mr Rob Rand, Noise Engineer (USA, 2011) 61. Mr Bruce Rapley, Scientist (NZ, 2013) 62. Dr Sandy Reider, Medical Practitioner (USA, 2013) 63. Linda J Rogers, Primary Health Care Nurse Practitioner (Canada, 2013) 64. Professor Alec Salt, Neurophysiologist (USA, 2010) 65. Dr Paul Schomer, Noise Engineer (USA, 2012) 66. Mrs Norma Schmidt, Retired Nurse (Canada, 2010) 67. Dr Daniel Shepherd, Psychologist, Psychoacoustician (New Zealand, 2010) 68. Dr Wayne Spring, Sleep Physician (Australia, 2011) 69. Mr Mike Stigwood, Acoustician (UK) 70. Dr Malcolm Swinbanks, Acoustician, (UK, 2010) 71. Dr Scott Taylor, Rural Medical Practitioner (Australia, 2011) 72. Dr Henning Theorell, Medical Practitioner (Sweden, 2012) 73. Dr Bob Thorne, Psychoacoustician (Australia, NZ) 74. Mr Peter Trask, Psychologist (Australia, 2012) 75. Dr A Trinidade, Ear Nose & Throat specialist (UK, 2013) 76. Dr Alan Watts, Rural Medical Practitioner (Australia, 2011) 77. Dr Colleen Watts, Scientist, former Board Member of the EPA in New South Wales (Australia, 2011) 78. Associate Professor Libby Wheatley, Medical Sociologist (USA, 2012)

    • Engineering ethics is the field of applied ethics and system of moral principles that apply to the practice of engineering. The field examines and sets the obligations by engineers to society, to their clients, and to the profession. As a scholarly discipline, it is closely related to subjects such as the philosophy of science, the philosophy of engineering, and the ethics of technology.

  6. Have been hearing this hum since October 2011. BC Canada. It recently started changing tone intermittently. Generally a low hum and will change pitch back and forth during the day also sometimes louder and sometimes softer.

  7. 7/06/11 I urge individuals who want to grasp our issues to read everything we have posted and view our youtube videos as well. Assess if your situation is the same as ours; if it is then please take the time to write about your history or story so that others can compare their own situations and gain some viable information that will help other victims. We are not going to get this mitigated unless there are large number of folks protesting in the form of formal complaints to your representatives, State and Federal regulatory agencies.

    The issue here is microwave wireless technology that is not compatible with our environment or the power grid. It is not about aliens, or any other pheonomenon that historically has been catagorized as an anomoly. Why? because the noise was not heard until the wireless high speed internet infrastructure was turned on. We do not have cell towers in our town and the noise is here! It is my belief they are aware of it and it is a costly fix. It is everywhere. I know this because my sense of hearing is in tune specifically with the signals that are causing this ubiquitous noise. You can’t blame this on a factory, turnpike, well pump, something going on in your home, tinnitus. We have physical evidence that disproves many of the silly theories that will leave you going in circles, which is a way of keeping us distracted from the truth.

    Our directive is to help other victims become more clear as to what is happening to them. What is asked of you is to share your story and give input and feedback, so that we can validate the scope and impact of this problem and to show the inormity of the seriousness and how this is negatively impacting us all. Of course when I speak it is always with our domesticated and wildlife friends in mind.

    We are not an organization, nor are we selling anything. The Global Defense Team is a way to identify with our issues and assist in your interest to resolve the pollution in your home and community. You will never do this on your own. We need each other to resolve this. Please don’t look to the next person to do it for you. This is not just my story or problem to solve we share the burden and only because our advocates such as our elected officials and civil servants refuse to do their jobs; protecting its citizens.

  8. […] Problems include both low frequency Hum and high frequency related to recent WiFi installations. https://sandaura.wordpress.com/about/ “Victims across the country are being impacted by this noise.  We hope this blog will be a […]


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: