Radio frequency
Abstract
This guidance note provides guidance on the management of the effects of radio frequency transmitters. The fields produced by radio frequency transmitters are not radiation and are not considered to be a contaminant and there is no demonstrated adverse effect from the radio frequency transmissions of transmitters if exposures are within the limits set by the New Zealand standard NZS2772.1:1999. Levels of exposure greater than the limits set by the standard, and other effects (such as the visual impact of transmission facilities) may need to be managed through Resource Management Act provisions and processes.
This note provides guidance on:
Other guidance notes that complement the content of this note are those relating to The Plan Development Process, Consultation and Conditions on Resource Consents.
Guidance note
Introduction
While radio frequency transmitters have been present in New Zealand for many decades their diversity and overall number has grown rapidly in the last 10-15 years.
Some communities have raised issues about the effects of radio frequency transmitters and in particular their health and safety effects. There is now a significant amount of information, case law, guidelines and standards available to assist those faced with radio frequency transmitter concerns. A large part of this Best Practice guidance note is based on the Ministry of Health/Ministry for the Environment publication "National Guidelines for Managing the Effects of radio frequency Transmitters" (the National Guidelines) published in 2000.
What are radio frequency transmitters?
The term radio frequency transmitter can cover a great diversity of equipment ranging from garage door openers and baby monitors through to telecommunications facilities and powerful radar installations. Controlling all radio frequency transmitters through district plan provisions is either not necessary (given low risk or control through other regulations) or is impracticable.
If the effects of radio frequency transmitters and their fields are determined to be an issue by local authorities the types of radio frequency transmitter which may be managed through district plan provisions could include AM and FM radio, TV, mobile radio base sites and telecommunication transmitters.
Different types of radio frequency transmitters operate at different frequencies and power levels. Some transmit continuously and some relatively infrequently.
Many types of transmitter, including FM radio, TV, microwave communication systems and cell sites, operate best with a direct line of sight between the transmitter and receiver. To achieve a good level of service, the need for line of sight will influence the number, location and height of transmitters.
It is possible in some instances for transmitters to use directional antenna, thus directing the signal only into the area it is required.
Exposures from radio frequency transmission facilities
Exposure to radio frequency fields will be dependent on a number of factors, the main ones being distance, transmitter power, transmission duration, directionality of antenna, height of the antenna above the ground and the degree to which local terrain screens the transmitter from the receiving environment.
A detailed discussion and explanation of exposures from radio frequency transmission facilities is provided in the National Guidelines (pages 11 to 15).
Health effects
Potential health effects of radio frequency fields have been extensively researched by organisations such as the International Council for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICINIRP).
Health effects tend to be classified as thermal or non-thermal. Thermal effects are those effects which heat the human body. Thermal effects may occur when people come into close proximity with high power and / or frequency transmitters. At extremely high exposures, thermal effects can cause skin burns and eye damage. The exposure levels associated with most transmitters in New Zealand are extremely low when compared to those at which thermal effects occur.
Non-thermal effects relate to potential effects from low-level exposures (below the level at which heating occurs). Much research has already been carried out to find out if there are health effects caused by low-level (non-thermal) exposures.
Taken together, the studies do not establish a relationship between exposure to radio frequency fields and cancer, adverse reproductive outcomes, sleep disturbances or psychological factors in children, chromosomal changes, haematological effects, eye effects, cardiovascular changes, headaches or asthma. In the setting of standards, the possibility of non-thermal effects has been evaluated, but has not been found to be sufficiently persuasive or convincing to form the basis for limiting exposures.
The Environment Court has concluded that there are no adverse health effects arising from radio frequency fields that comply with the New Zealand Standard (copies of which can be ordered from the Standards New Zealand Shop).
The Court has also rejected arguments relating to psychological effects, stating that fear needs to be reasonably based on real risk. See Shirley Primary School v Christchurch City Council, C136/98 (December 1998).
Ongoing studies relating to health effects include the World Health Organisation international electromagnetic fields project (note that this study covers electromagnetic fields, of which radio frequency fields are only a small part).
Are radio frequency fields a contaminant?
The Ministry for the Environment considers that radio frequency fields are not a contaminant as defined in Section 2 of the RMA, and therefore do not need to be addressed in regional plans. More information on the reasoning is contained in the National Guidelines.
Standards
The relevant New Zealand Standard is NZS2772.1:1999. This standard was adopted after a comprehensive investigation, including an international review of other standards and guidelines. NZS2772.1:1999 replaced the previous standard NZS 6609 Part 1. Copies of the standard can be ordered from Standards New Zealand (note that copies have to be purchased, and that pdf file copies are cheaper than the booklet format).
NZS2772:1999 sets limits for public exposure which are 50 times lower than the level at which health effects may start to occur.
Comparison of the New Zealand standard with typical exposures
Exposures in public areas for most radio frequency transmitter types are considerably less than the New Zealand Standard - often less than 5% of the maximum specified under the standard. In the case of cell sites, which have generated most public concern, typical exposures are less than 3% of the New Zealand standard.
Case law has confirmed that the New Zealand Standard appropriately manages the health effects of radio frequency transmitters.
Other effects
Other effects may be generally classified into:
Effects on visual amenity
As shown by the number of Environment Court cases that relate to amenity effects (see for example: Telecom New Zealand Limited v Christchurch City Council W165/96) radio frequency transmitters can, potentially, have effects on visual amenity. These effects will vary according to the type, height and design of the transmitter, its location, and the characteristics of the surrounding environment (for example transmitters in a scenic reserve are likely to have more visual amenity impact than those located in industrial areas).
New towers or very large antennae can have very real visual effects when situated on prominent sites such as a headland In contrast, small "panel" or "box" antennae may have minimal visual effects when situated on, or attached to existing structures (i.e. co-located).
Noise
A few incidents have been cited where residents raised concerns about the noise generated from the air cooling fans associated with larger-scale radio frequency transmitter equipment cabinets. Often these issues can be dealt with through compliance with the general noise provisions for the zone in which the transmitter is located.
Cultural values
The potential exists for earthworks associated with transmitter towers or buildings to destroy archaeological sites. In other cases care may need to be taken to ensure that transmitters are not sited inappropriately on heritage buildings or features of cultural or spiritual significance. Consideration should also be given as to whether proposed transmitter sites are located on or close to Maori ancestral land, or wahi tapu. See for example Tainui Hapu and Tainui Awhiro Ngunguru Te Po, Ngunguru Te Ao Management Committee v Waikato District Council A075/96.
Effects from mode of access and site clearence
Access is required to radio frequency transmitters for maintenance purposes. A variety of effect may be generated, the type being dependent on the proposed means of access - for instance whether it will be by foot, vehicle or helicopter. Obvious effects may be visual (a new road for example), noise, or vehicle movements (though these are typically very small as most transmitters do not require a person on site for their operation and are reliable enough to require little maintenance).
Most radio frequency transmitters occupy only a small surface area, but there may be effects arising from earthworks for foundations, or the need for vegetation clearance.
District plan provisions - health effects
Health effects do not vary from one part of the country to another so there is merit in adopting the same or similar district plan provisions throughout the country (amended as appropriate to fit in with the format of each individual district plan). The National Guidelines prepared by the Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry of Health offer a good practice model, based on comprehensive investigation and review. They address, amongst other things, section 32 RMA requirements.
Councils can be confident in referring to the New Zealand Standard NZS2772.1:1999 as being an accepted standard in RMA terms.
- It is strongly recommended that Councils adopt NZS2772.1:1999 as the limit for radio frequency exposures.
The National Guidelines offer suggestions for the wording of District Plan provisions relating to issues, objectives, policies, methods and rules.
- The National Guidelines suggest the use of a district plan rule similar to the following:
"An activity which emits a radio frequency field is a permitted activity provided the following conditions are met:
1. Exposures comply with NZS2772.1:1999 radio frequency Fields Part 1: Maximum exposure levels 3kHz-300GHz ("the New Zealand Standard").
2. Prior to commencing any radio frequency emissions the following are sent to and received by the [xxxx Department of the Council]:
a) written notice of the location of the facility or proposed facility and
b) a report prepared by a radio engineer/technician or physical scientist containing a prediction of whether the New Zealand Standard will be complied with.3. If the report provided to the Council under condition 2(b) predicts that emissions will exceed 25% of the exposure limit set for the general public in the New Zealand Standard, then, within 3 months of radio frequency emissions commencing, a report from the National Radiation Laboratory (or XXX, being an appropriately qualified person/organisation specifically identified in this rule) certifying compliance with the New Zealand Standard, based on measurements at the site will be provided to the XXX department of the Council".
Features of this rule are:
Under the National Guidelines it is recommended that where a facility did not meet the requirements of NZS2772.1:1999, the activity should be treated as a non-complying activity in terms of the rules in the plan.
Methods outside the district plan
Industry best practice
The New Zealand Standard includes encouragement of industry best practice and "least-cost" approach to minimising radio frequency exposure. The Standard states that, independent of compliance with the exposure limits, radio frequency exposure which is unnecessary or incidental to the achievement of service objectives or process requirements should be minimised, provided that this can be readily achieved at modest expense.
The Standard also states that service providers should demonstrate that installations are planned and operated in accordance with appropriate industry best practice.
There is a role, outside the district plan regulatory framework, for territorial authorities and radio transmitter operators to work together to achieve voluntary avoidance or reduction of exposures where they can do so for low or no cost, and in accordance with the New Zealand Standard. The National Guidelines suggest the following measures could be included in a voluntary agreement:
It is also suggested that local authorities could assist operators to adopt a best-practice approach by:
- Making them aware of sites which communities are likely to be concerned about; and
- Asking whether or not the operator has taken steps to minimise exposures and publicising these if they have.
Community education and research
Lack of community understanding of radio frequency technology has become a major issue. The National Guidelines suggest that territorial authorities have a role in providing information to communities. The National Guidelines themselves assist, and the Ministry of Health has produced a pamphlet on radio frequency fields (PDF 23KB), which could be distributed to communities within which radio frequency transmitters are to be located.
The National Radiation Laboratory, (NRL) is a specialist business unit within the New Zealand Ministry of Health. The NRL provides independent expert advice on radio frequency matters. The NRL website also contains some useful information sheets on radio frequency emissions.
The NRL was commissioned by Vodafone to measure ambient levels of radio frequency exposure in areas around 5% of their cell sites. Forty sites were measured before 31 March 2004, and a further 50 in the following twelve months. The results are presented on the NRL website.
Results show that the maximum ambient levels of all radio frequency sources (in locations close to cell sites which are reasonably accessible to the public) are less than 1% of the maximum level for public exposures recommended in New Zealand Standard NZS 2772.1:1999. Most levels are around 0.2% of the maximum level for public exposures recommended in New Zealand Standard. Potential exists for higher exposure levels in close proximity to other types of radio frequency transmitters, such as radar installations or television transmitters.
Telecommunication companies also have personnel and information readily available regarding mobile phone sites and radio frequency. For example, Telecom has a Communications Manager who is available to discuss mobile phone sites and the resulting radiofrequency effects. Telecom also has an information pack which is readily available to the public which contains information that assists in explaining the radio frequency effects of mobile phone sites and other general information.
District plan provisions - visual amenity and other effects
All district plans contain building/structure bulk and location and/or height requirements, in order to manage visual, amenity and other effects. Many district plans will also manage the visual and amenity effects of radio frequency transmitters through design rules, often within those parts of the plan dealing with infrastructure, public utilities and designated sites.
Visual and landscape/amenity effects all vary according to local circumstances and the policy approach of the particular district plan.
- Plans should contain specific provisions which make transmitter antennae below a certain size a "permitted" activity in recognition of the limited visual effect small transmitters have. The Tauranga District Plan generally follows this principle: Tauranga District Plan: Transportation Activity and Other Network Utility Rules (PDF 587KB) (see pages 2-3).
However many small transmitters in close proximity may generate a noticeable adverse visual effect. District Plan provisions should provide for potential situations where adverse visual effects may arise from the clustering of antennae. Using expert input, limitations could be placed on the number of transmitters that may be appropriate on any one structure or building, or imposing a separation requirement to reduce adverse visual effects brought about by "clustering".
In dealing with amenity effects, care must be taken in drafting the district plan provisions to ensure that there are no inappropriate issues raised relating to health effects. This can be achieved by utilising the "restricted discretionary activity" consent status for antennae and towers whose dimensions are adjudged as being of a scale that they would generate adverse visual effects. District plan provisions would make it clear that Council's discretion will be limited to visual/landscape and amenity concerns only.
Other effects will also be managed by the district plan according to local circumstances. For instance, noise from transmitter cooling equipment is generally subject to district plan noise controls applicable to the particular zone in which the transmitter is located. Generally most transmitters will not generate noise to a level which would exceed normal noise standards for the zone.
Designations
Some radio frequency transmitting equipment operators have requiring authority status under the Resource Management Act, and operate their equipment on land covered by a designation.
Under section 171 of the RMA, when considering a requirement for a designation, and any submissions received, a territorial authority must, subject to Part II, consider the effects on the environment of allowing the requirement. The territorial authority may recommend to the requiring authority that it confirm, modify or withdraw the requirement, or recommend conditions.
This approach promotes consistency in the standards required to be complied with from all radio frequency equipment operators, and helps maintain public confidence over the safety of new facilities.
Outline plan of works
Under section 176A of the RMA an outline plan of works for a designated site must show a number of things, including any matters to avoid, remedy, or mitigate any adverse effects on the environment (clause (3)(f)). The council may request the requiring authority to make changes to the outline plan.
- In relation to radio frequency exposures, it would be consistent for the outline plan, or recommendations on the outline plan, to contain a management approach which conforms to that suggested in this guidance note for resource consents.
Resource consents
Several councils have adopted the district plan provisions suggested in the National Guidelines. Examples are provided in the Best Practice examples of this guidance note.
Many district plans require resource consents for radio frequency transmitters, and reserve discretion to consider matters including radio frequency field exposures. Some councils specify an exposure limit, and others refer to the older New Zealand Standard NZS6609 Part 1.
- Councils should update provisions in their district plans to align with the National Guidelines as they come up for review, or earlier as a plan change.
Other district plans that do not refer to a specific standard or limit incorporate the National Guideline suggestions through resource consent processes.
Councils need to consider the cumulative emissions of multiple antennas belonging to multiple operators at one site though it is unlikely that antennas at nearby sites will have any significant impact on exposure levels. When emissions predictions are provided by an operator, the operator should be required to warrant that the predictions have been undertaken on a cumulative basis, taking into account any other antennas present at the site.
Monitoring
Section 35 of the RMA requires councils to gather information and keep records in order to carry out their functions under the Act. Section 35 includes requirements relating to monitoring the state of the environment, and the efficiency and effectiveness of plan provisions. Monitoring of radio frequency exposures may be included as part of the state of the environment reporting, and should be part of the district plan monitoring where there are specific provisions in the plan for managing the effects of radio frequency transmitters.
Resource consent conditions may require a report be provided subsequent to the construction and commencement of transmission from a radio frequency transmitter, confirming that the requirements of the New Zealand Standard are met.
Resource consent conditions which are consistent with the National Guidelines would require checks where radio frequency field exposures are predicted to exceed 25% of the New Zealand Standard. For most radio frequency transmitters (including cell sites) checks would not be required as predicted exposures are likely to be considerably less than 25% of the New Zealand Standard. See Best Practice Examples - Resource Consents.
In relation to compliance, the Guidelines indicate that while it is reasonable to monitor some sites after they are operational to ensure that exposures comply with the New Zealand Standard (and the ICNIRP guidelines) it is unnecessary and unreasonable to monitor every site on a regular basis. To do so would be costly, and difficult to justify on the basis of environmental effects or the results from monitoring that has already occurred for some sites.
The National Guidelines suggest that there would be an advantage in territorial authorities knowing where all the radio frequency transmitters are in their district. This would assist in compliance monitoring as well as more general monitoring duties under section 35 of the RMA.
While councils may keep records themselves it may also be possible for individual councils to agree to share information with the Ministry of Economic Development Radio Spectrum Management Division.
The Radio Spectrum Management Division keeps records of license holders and the location of transmitters as part of its role in the allocation and management of broadcasting and communications licenses.
Telecommunication companies can be reluctant to give access to all details concerning the location and property management details of transmitters as some of those details may be confidential (for instance they may include leasing agreements with landowners). The Resource Management Act (Section 42 for example) and Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 do provide possible mechanisms through which councils can protect information which is sensitive.
Councils are encouraged to work with the radio transmitter operators to identify locations where there may be a concern about existing or possible future radio frequency fields. Locations could be identified with the assistance of community consultation and spot measurements could be taken by an appropriate authority (such as the National Radiation Laboratory or qualified Ministry of Economic Development Radio Spectrum Management staff). Locations may be monitored over time if that is determined to be appropriate.
It is not necessary to carry out continuous monitoring, or monitoring in circumstances other than those described above though monitoring may be required should any existing facility be expanded or upgraded.
Best practice examples
Amenity
A number of Councils impose conditions requiring unobtrusive colours be used on proposed radio frequency transmitter structures so as to minimise their prominence in the surrounding environment.
The following examples illustrate best practice in particular aspects of plan preparation, as described in the guidance note.
Hamilton City Council Proposed District Plan [Reveal/Hide]
The Hamilton City Council Proposed District Plan has adopted provisions which are generally consistent with the approach recommended in the National Guidelines.
Hamilton Proposed District Plan rules do not entirely follow the approach recommended in the National Guidelines as rules are structured such that a proposal which complies with the New Zealand Standard for radio frequency exposures could still become a discretionary activity based on visual amenity issues (e.g. height of mast, diameter of dish). The discretionary activity category allows any potential effects to be considered and may result in inappropriate issues relating to health effects being raised when these have already been dealt with through compliance with the New Zealand Standard. The National Guidelines recommend that the restricted discretionary activity category is used for proposals which fail to comply with rules relating to visual amenity.
The Hamilton City Proposed District Plan is available online.
Palmerston North City District Plan [Reveal/Hide]
The approach adopted in the Palmerston North City District Plan is similar to that recommended in the national guidelines. The Plan makes those activities which produce radio frequency field exposure levels which comply with NZS2772.1:1999 a permitted activity. Activities which produce exposure levels which do not comply with NZS2772.1:1999 are a non-complying activity. Activities which comply with NZS2772.1:1999 for radio frequency exposure, but which do not comply with amenity controls (height and dimensions etc) are a restricted discretionary activity.
Another notable feature of the Palmerston North Plan is that the rules relating to radio frequency exposures refer to "activities emitting radio frequency fields…" rather than "network utilities…". This is because the definition of the term "network utility operator" in section 166 of the RMA does not appear to take into account operators who use radio frequency emitting equipment for recreation, or who do not necessarily constitute a "network" as defined by legislation. The use of the term "activities emitting radio frequency fields…" is consistent with the national guidelines.
The permitted activity rule in the Palmerston North District Plan does differ from the approach recommended in the national guideline, in that it does not include the requirement for a report predicting whether the New Zealand Standard will be complied with. Nor does it require the further monitoring report certifying compliance with the New Zealand Standard for activities predicted to produce emissions that will exceed 25% of the exposure limit in NZS2772.1:1999. This is primarily to reduce compliance costs for operators.
The Palmerston North City District Plan (PDF 73KB) can be viewed online. The provisions relating to radio frequency emissions are in Section 23 of the Plan (Utilities).
Resource consents - North Shore City Council [Reveal/Hide]
A good example of a decision on a resource consent concerning radio frequency transmitters was issued by the North Shore City Council. This example is broadly consistent with the approach recommended in the national guidelines. Note that condition 3 of the consent is somewhat different from condition 4 in the example under the Resource Consents in this guidance note.
Condition 4 of this guidance note is more specifically targeted at dealing with any future modifications to the transmitting equipment and places the onus on the consent holder to demonstrate compliance. It also requires the applicant to inform the Council of any changes to the equipment, enabling the Council to keep its records up to date.
This compares with condition 3 below, which only requires the consent holder to demonstrate compliance if requested to by Council. Condition 3 below also requires that the scale and intensity of the actual or potential effects of the activity has not altered from that originally set out by the applicant. Provided that the district plan has a permitted activity standard for radio frequency emissions, it is considered that this test is onerous: if the level of emissions continues to be less than the permitted activity standard then it should not matter whether the scale and intensity of the actual or potential effects of the activity has altered from that originally set out by the applicant.
That the discretionary activity land use consent application by XXXX to establish, operate and maintain a cellular telephone cell site where one dish antenna (0.3m diameter), two panel antennas (2.2m in length) and an equipment cabinet are mounted on the roof of YYYY The consent is granted pursuant to Sections 104 and 105 of the Resource Management Act 1991 for the following reasons:
1. Provided that the activity is carried out in accordance with the radio frequency radiation exposures applied for and in compliance with the conditions of the consent, there will be no adverse effect on the health and safety of persons within the surrounding environment.
2. The adverse visual effects from the activity will be de minimus.
3. The proposal satisfies the specific provisions and assessment criteria of the District Plan over which North Shore City Council has discretion in assessing the application.
4. The proposal is not contrary to the objectives and policies of the District Plan.
Consent is granted subject to the following conditions:
1. The development and operation shall proceed in general accordance with the plans and description of the activity submitted as part of this application ... The installation shall at all times comply with the NZS2772.1:1999 radio frequency Fields Part 1: Maximum exposure levels 3kHz - 300 GHz.
2. Prior to commencing any radio frequency emissions, the consent holder shall confirm to Council in writing whether or not the predicted radio frequency exposure exceeds 25% of NZS2772.1:1999 in areas accessible to the public. If the predicted exposure exceeds 25% of the limit set for the public in NZS2772.1:1999 at any point to which the public may reasonably gain access, then within 3 months of radio frequency emissions commencing, a report from an appropriately qualified and experienced person or authority, certifying compliance with NZS2772.1:1999 based on measurement at the site, will be provided to the Council.
3. Upon written request from Council, the consent holder shall provide written confirmation that the conditions are being complied with, and that the scale and intensity of the actual or potential effects of the activity has not altered from that originally set out by the applicant.
RMA provisions
Case law
Leading case law on the effects of radio frequency transmitters are:
It was acknowledged in Shirley that this decision may be referred to by communities elsewhere in New Zealand.
In respect of cultural values, see
In that decision, the Environment Court allowed the appeal and refused an application for a television translator, because the proposed site was located on ancestral Maori land and a wahi tapu area.
Related guidance notes
The following guidance note is related:
Work in progress
There is regular international and national work being carried out on the health effects of radio frequency fields. At the international level an excellent website is Mobile Phone (Cell Phone) Base Stations and Human Health.
Locally, the Ministry of Health National Radiation Laboratory website is regularly updated.
Potential National Environment Standard
As a result of changes to the Resource Management Act 2005 (s43-44), greater national discretion and involvement in local decision making through National Enviromental Standards ( NESs ) has been introduced. In light of this pending change to the Act, the Ministries for the Environment and Economic Development invited the telecommunications industry to assist with scoping a potential telecommunications NES.
The objective is to provide for consistent and certain regulatory planning provisions that apply on a national basis, to assist in network and equipment design and to reduce compliance costs and timeframes. The proposal only addresses exposure to radiofrequency emissions from radio transmitters whether inside or outside of a road and the construction and operation of infrastructure in legal roads only.
The NES is still in the scoping stage and should it be adopted this guidance note will need to be updated to reflect the changes resulting from the NES in relation to radiofrequency.
Relevant publications
Safety of Cellphones (PDF 16KB)
Published by National Radiation Laboratory - December 2000
This information sheet provides information on the possible health effects for cellphone users.
Cellsites (PDF 35KB)
Published by National Radiation Laboratory - March 2001
Covers: the operation of cellular phone networks & cellsites; the nature of radio signals; the status of health effects research; exposure standards; findings of recent reviews; and NZ initiatives.
National Guidelines for Managing the Effects of Radiofrequency Transmitters
Published by Ministry for the Environment - December 2000
These guidelines are based on scientific findings from the past 50 years of research and recent Environment Court case law.
NZS 2772.1:1999 - Radiofrequency fields - Maximum exposure levels - 3 kHz to 300 GHz
Published by Standards New Zealand - August 1999
Specifies limits of exposure of the human body to radiofrequency radiation intended to avoid biological effects hazardous to the body in the frequency range 3 kHz to 300 GHz.
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICINIRP) Guidelines can be purchased from the ICINIRP website.
Current challenges in practice
Radio frequency field emission thresholds
A few councils impose emission thresholds which are more restrictive than the New Zealand Standard, either through bylaw-type controls or district plans or, most commonly, resource consents. As outlined in this Guidance Note, the New Zealand Standard has been accepted by the Environment Court as already being an appropriately conservative standard.
Misunderstanding or non-adoption of the National Guidelines
The National Guidelines have not yet been adopted by many councils. The National Guidelines encourage a regulatory approach which is based on the New Zealand Standard - but they do not state that there should be an emissions threshold at 25% of the New Zealand Standard. The National Guidelines represent and promote best practice. They should be read carefully and seriously considered for adoption in future district plan reviews or changes.
Communication
Issues can arise through communication difficulties between telecommunication companies and councils, and between these two parties and the community. Consistency of approaches to district plan provisions and the administration of those provisions will help. It is best to recognise the potential for community issues arising at the earliest possible stage and to educate and involve the community from the start. This may be important even if there is no need for formal public involvement through resource consent processes. Non-regulatory methods will rely on telecommunication companies and councils establishing trust and good communication processes.
Reverse sensitivity
Some councils have raised a possible future reverse sensitivity issue in relation to cell sites. Redevelopment on a neighbouring site may have an impact on transmitter 's compliance with exposure standards. This issue could arise, for instance, with a radio frequency transmitter placed on the wall of, or roof of, a building adjacent to a site which could be redeveloped close to that transmitter. A suitable review condition may need to be imposed if such circumstances have potential to arise.
Reverse sensitivity should also be considered as a potential issue as part of any proposal that would rezone land in proximity to powerful radio frequency transmitters (thereby removing the buffer which allowed the transmitter to comply with exposure standards). Options may need to be considered in regard to the practicality of relocating the transmitter, the establishment of a buffer zone around the transmitter site, or whether there is a technical solution which would allow the transmitter power to a limit that would comply with the New Zealand Standard.
Amenity concerns
Many councils are of the view that, provided adequate information is provided in respect of radio frequency field emissions, and that the New Zealand Standard is complied with, the major issues arising from radio frequency transmitter proposals are amenity concerns. However, it remains an issue that health concerns could be raised under an application which is required under the amenity standards of the plan only. Suggestions are made in this Guidance Note and the National Guidelines as to how this concern can be addressed (through the use of restricted discretionary activities which limit the scope of effects being considered for example).
Acknowledgements and editorial comments
This guidance note is administered by the Ministry for the Environment as part of its Best Practice programme. The guidance note was prepared by Peter Reaburn, Cato Bolam Consultants, and reviewed by Richard Hills, Ministry for the Environment, and Matthew Grainger, Hill Young Cooper Ltd. Particular acknowledgement is given to the authors of the Ministry of Health/Ministry for the Environment publication "National Guidelines for Managing the Effects of radio frequency Transmitters".
The guidance note was updated in March 2006 by Vicki Barker and Matthew McCallum-Clark of Incite.
