If you would like to learn about the U.S. Navy's electronic war games to be held in the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State, you may find it informative to read the Navy's Environmental Assessment (EA) report:
Pacific Northwest EW Range Environmental Assessment (EA). United
States Department of the Navy. Final EA, September 2014. Unclassified.
URL: http://bit.ly/1yBz8dh.
The report, however, seems rather sketchy as critical information is likely classified.
The safety of these war games has been challenged by Dr. Martin Pall
as the Navy is only concerned about protecting people and wildlife from heating or thermal risks. The report actually admits that there would be a thermal risk
should any persons or wildlife remain stationary within the test area. The report does not address the non-thermal risks of exposure to high-intensity radar.
Allegedly,
the purpose of these war games is to test the Navy's ability to block
military communications. According to the EA report, the primary radio frequency emissions involved in the games are in the 4-8 GHz range with a peak transmit power of 100 kW (kilowatts). According to Wikipedia, this radar C band is typically used for satellite transponders.
Following are some excerpts from the Navy's report.
2.1.1.2 Installation
and Operation of a Fixed Emitter at Naval Station Everett Annex Pacific Beach, Washington
(pp. 2-1 – 2-2)
To
facilitate EW training, construction of a permanent tower south of Building 104
(Figure 2.1-1) is required to
support a fixed emitter (MRES) at NS Everett Annex Pacific Beach (similar to
that shown in Figure
3.1-3). The 40-foot (ft.) tower and fixed emitter would have a total height of
about 66 ft. above ground
level on a Navy-operated, controlled, and owned site, to which the general
public does not have access. The
MRES is capable of generating an electromagnetic wave at frequencies ranging
from 2 to 18 gigahertz
(GHz). It can emit up to 64 simultaneous signals and can transmit in pulses or
a continuous wave. The
MRES site is fenced for security purposes to restrict public access, and the
emitter’s height is designed to
further reduce any potential safety issues or hazards. Additionally, warning
signs specific to the
tower-mounted emitter would be posted for Building 104, which already has a
secured, fenced area with warning signs that exclude unauthorized personnel and
the public. Furthermore, during training evolutions,
the Navy would ensure that all necessary safety precautions and standard
operating procedures
would be followed to further minimize the risk to the public. All Navy
personnel and trainees would be
required to follow the specific safety precautions identified in Office of the
Chief of Naval Operations Instruction (OPNAVINST)
5100.23 Series and any applicable site-specific range regulations.
3.1.1.2 Electromagnetic
Radiation Hazards
<snip>
There are
no conclusive direct hazards to human tissue as a result of electromagnetic
radiation. Links to DNA fragmentation, leukemia, and cancer due to intermittent exposure to extremely
high levels of electromagnetic radiation are speculative; study data are
inconsistent and insufficient at this time (Focke et al. 2009).
Strong
electromagnetic radiation can cause fire if a wave were to create a spark near
explosives or ordnance.
Strong waves can also induce an electric current capable of overloading or
destroying electrical
equipment while less strong radiation waves can interfere with electromagnetic
signals, such as radio, television, and telephone.
3.1.1.2.1 Navy’s
Electromagnetic Devices and Electromagnetic Radiation Outputs
Fixed
Emitter. The MRES, more commonly referred to as
the “fixed emitter” being proposed and analyzed
for use at NS Everett Annex Pacific Beach (tower-mounted, similar to that shown
in Figure 3.1-1) is
capable of generating an electromagnetic wave at frequencies ranging from 2 to
18 GHz. It can emit up to 64 simultaneous signals and
can transmit in pulses or a continuous wave.
Vehicle-mounted
Mobile Emitters. There are two types
of vehicle-mounted mobile emitters that are being proposed and analyzed for use
on the MEWTS, more commonly referred to as “mobile emitters.” Traveling Wave Tube Amplifier
(TWTA) mobile emitters are capable of generating an electromagnetic wave at
frequencies ranging from 4 to 8 GHz; the Magnetron mobile emitters are capable
of generating an electromagnetic wave at frequencies ranging from 6.7 to 7.4
GHz.
These
emitters can produce the electromagnetic hazards mentioned in the previous
section. As discussed below, the threat to the public’s safety is largely a function
of the locations of the emitters relative to people, the power and frequency
output of the emitters, the amount of time an individual is exposed to the
electromagnetic energy, and the Navy’s management practices related to operation
of the emitters.
For each EW
emitter, a “controlled environment” and “action level environment” (as
described below in Section
3.1.1.3) are determined based on the power and frequency output of the emitter.
Because emitters
focus energy in a relatively narrow beam, controlled and action level environments
would be triangular,
as opposed to complete circles. Within controlled and action level
environments, personnel and the
public would be limited to the time they could be exposed without receiving
harmful levels of electromagnetic
energy (this is done by calculating the distances from the emitter and time
limits at those
distances). For example, the mobile emitters (MEWTS) have controlled and action
level environments
in which personnel and the public must not be allowed to loiter, while outside
a controlled
or action level environment, personnel and the public would receive no harmful
levels of electromagnetic
radiation.
<snip>
Table 3.1-1
displays the minimum calculated separation distances within controlled and
action level environments
for the main beams of each electromagnetic radiation wave being proposed for
use, at its highest
frequency, and at the longest averaging time (the “permissive exposure time”)
for each type of proposed
emitter. The values were derived in accordance with OPNAVINST 5100.23G, IEEE
standards, and two2 separate
Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) safety reviews conducted for the
MRES and MEWTS.
It should be noted that these values are “worst case” scenario, thus providing
the greatest amount of
protection to the general public. In actual operations, these values will
typically be lower, as the
emitters will not be transmitting at their highest frequency, and permissive
exposure times would vary as
well. Additionally, safety precautions, as described in Section 3.1.1.5 below,
would further limit the general
public’s (as well as forest creatures) potential exposure and enhance the
overall safety of the
operation.
Table 3.1-1: Radiation Hazard Minimum Safe Separation Distances
Per the E3 Safety Reviews (see p. 3.1-4 for this table; my summary is in brackets)
[At the Naval Station Everett Annex Pac Beach, the
minimum separation distances listed in the table range from 29.3 feet to 713.7
feet for the action level environment and from 9.3 feet to 276.4 feet for the
controlled environment.]
[At the Olympic, Okanogan and Roosevelt MOAs (military
operation areas), the minimum separation distances listed in the table range
from 29.3 feet to 101.1 feet for the action level environment and from 9.3 feet
to 32.0 feet for the controlled environment.]
Two types
of mobile emitters will be used under Alternative 1. The first operates between
6 and 8 GHz with an
approximate peak transmit power of 100 kW. The second operates between 4 and 8
GHz with an
approximate peak transmit power of 3 kW. At these operational settings, it is not
expected that wildlife,
notably birds, would be impacted by the radiated energy. (3.2-26)
Under
Alternative 2, the Navy would have a total of six mobile emitters. There would
be three for the activities
in the Olympic MOAs as described in Alternative 1 and three for activities in
the Okanogan and Roosevelt
MOAs. On average, the fixed and mobile emitters would provide service for 19
events a day, totaling
about 72 hours of operation per day (Table 2.1-2). In order to power the mobile
emitters, 10 kW generators
will be used, which are housed within the mobile emitter unit. Emitters would
be energized in
accordance with the training scenario. The emitter may be energized for short
periods of time throughout
the training activity or continuously throughout the entire time the aircraft
is airborne, depending
upon the training scenario. Should an individual/individuals or animals remain
in the area while a
training event is occurring, the mobile emitter crews will cease the training
(de-energize the emitter and stow for travel), and if need be, relocate to
another pre-selected training site. (3.2-28)
---
The following study conducted in India is timely although the radar frequency bands differ from those that the U.S. Navy will employ in the war games discussed above.
Singh
S, Mani KV, Kapoor N. Effect of occupational EMF exposure from radar at
two different frequency bands on plasma melatonin and serotonin levels.
Int J Radiat Biol. 2015 Jan 7:1-39. [Epub ahead of print].
Abstract
Objective:
The purpose of the present study was to delineate the effect of chronic
electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure from radar on plasma melatonin and
serotonin levels in occupationally exposed military personnel.
Subjects
and Methods: 166 male military personnel participated in the study out
of which only 155 joined for blood draw. They were divided into three
sets viz control group (n=68), exposure group I (n=40) exposed to
8-12 GHz and exposure group II (n=58) working with radar at 12.5-18 GHz
frequency. All the three groups were further split into two groups
according to their years of service (up to 10 years and > 10 years)
in order to investigate the effect of years of exposure from radar.
Melatonin and serotonin levels were estimated by enzyme immunoassay in
fasting blood samples collected during 0600-0700h. EMF measurements were
recorded at different locations using Satimo EME Guard 'Personal
Exposure Meter' and Narda 'Broad Band Field Meter'.
Results: The
group I exposed population registered a minor though not significant
decrease in plasma melatonin concentration while the other group II
exposed population registered statistically significant decline in
melatonin concentration when compared with controls. Highly significant
increase in plasma serotonin levels was found in exposure group II when
compared to control whereas marginal non-significant rise was also
registered in exposure group I in comparison to control. Exposure in
terms of length of service up to 10 years did not produce any
significant effect in the indoleamine levels in both the exposure groups
when they were compared with their respective control groups. Whereas,
length of service greater than 10 years was observed to decrease and
increase respectively the melatonin and serotonin concentration
significantly in exposure group II but not in exposure group I. However,
correlation test did not yield any significant association between
years of service and melatonin or serotonin levels respectively in both
the exposure sets I and II. No significant association was observed
between melatonin and serotonin levels as well.
Conclusion: The
study shows the EMF ability to influence plasma melatonin and serotonin
concentration in radar workers, significantly in 12.5-18GHz range with
service period greater than 10 years.
Excerpts
The
EMF levels measured in power density (W/m2) were monitored with EME
Guard personal exposure meter (frequency range 27MHz to 40GHz with upper
and lower detection limit of 200V/m and 5V/m respectively) and Broad
Band Field Meter (frequency range 100KHz to 60GHz). Measurements were
undertaken inside the radar cabins and outside the radar at different
distances of occupational exposures of the personnel. The power density
of microwave radiation level inside the radar cabin and outside at
various locations around the radar vehicle, where a worker of Group I
worked during the course of normal duty ranged from 0.24 – 0.77W/m2.
Subjects of Group II were exposed to microwave power density level of
0.1 – 15.6W/m2 inside and outside the radar vehicle.
Despite
the measured EMF levels found to be well within the acceptable limits
of occupational exposure of 50W/m2 for controlled environments (1.5 to
150GHz) (ICNIRP guidelines, 1998, 2002; Canada Safety Code 6, 2009;
NRPB, 2004), changes in pineal indoleamine concentrations with radar
exposure in terms of both frequency band and years of service have been
observed. The significantly depressed antioxidant level of melatonin in
exposure group II signifies the potential of EMF exposure combination at
Ku frequency band and mean exposure period of 11.5 years in terms of
length of service in inducing stress. At the same time, the slight fall
registered in group I may be due to comparatively lower cumulative
exposure both in terms of frequency band and length of service (mean 8.3
years) to which the group might have acclimatized as apparent by the
non-significant difference when compared with the reference group.
Correlation analysis however, did not yield any significant association
between years of service and melatonin or serotonin levels in both the
exposure sets I and II ...
In light of the observed alterations
in melatonin and serotonin found in both the frequency bands of radar
and service category though, significant only in the higher frequency
band and in greater than 10 years of service duration, our study do
imply the EMF potential to alter the plasma indoleamine levels in radar
workers. The results need further corroboration; hence, the results
should be interpreted with caution. Given the significance of these
pineal secretions for organisms, further studies with better EMF
characterization and standardization are crucial. In this regard, future
studies should target occupational groups with cohort or
cross-sectional studies with more time point measurements in order to
find the pattern of melatonin and serotonin response with EMF
experience. Upcoming studies should also address the effect of EMF on
all the components of melatonin biosynthesis in order to concretize the
findings in addition to taking into account possible confounders. For
the time being, precautionary approach should be adopted and unnecessary
exposures should be checked, along with suitable protective measures
where such exposures are unavoidable and considerably high.
