House hearing draws sharp divide over bill to let towns decline 5G towers

House Bill 501, sponsored by Representative Diane Kelly, would amend RSA 12‑K to make clear that municipalities may adopt rules to decline siting personal wireless service facilities, including small wireless equipment installed on utility poles. The bill follows the recommendations of a 5G study commission that reported in 2020 and suggested the state should examine environmental and public health effects of evolving wireless technologies and improve measurement and tracking of ambient microwave radiation.

Representative Kelly told the committee the commission found limits in state agency monitoring, cited concerns that the insurance industry treats microwave radiation as an uninsurable pollutant, and argued that local governments should have clearer authority to accept or decline wireless facility siting pending better state regulation or further study. Multiple residents — including Josie Kumendala of Dover and Brittany DiBernardo — testified in favor of HB 501, telling the committee they had encountered small wireless facilities in utility rights‑of‑way that their cities did not track and that RSA 12‑K effectively forecloses local review of those pole‑mounted devices.

Industry and business groups strongly opposed the bill. Jeremy Crandall of CTIA (the wireless industry trade association) said HB 501 would delete large parts of existing state law governing wireless permitting, replace them with vague language, and likely run afoul of federal law and FCC precedent that prohibit state or local rules that have the effect of prohibiting wireless service. CTIA said the bill would undercut the predictability required for network investment and warned it could prevent necessary densification of networks. Rick Fabrizio of the Business & Industry Association also urged opposition and noted the economic and public‑safety importance of advanced wireless connectivity.

Technical witnesses clarified how 5G deployments vary by frequency and topology. Several technical witnesses including Andrew Thatcher (testifying for CTIA) and electrical‑engineering‑trained local witnesses described differences between sub‑6 GHz deployments (most common and biologically similar to earlier decades of wireless use) and millimeter‑wave deployments (high‑frequency bands used primarily in dense urban environments). Witnesses noted that millimeter‑wave antennas are small and highly directional and that prevailing scientific assessments — from federal agencies and international bodies cited by industry witnesses — find no established mechanism for nonthermal biological effects at current exposure levels.

Supporters argued that local discretion is needed because the 5G commission identified gaps in state measurement and oversight and because residents increasingly encounter small wireless devices on poles without local input. Opponents said public‑safety, economic and legal risks of disrupting deployment outweigh those concerns and pointed to federal law and FCC guidance as grounds to preserve the existing statutory approach.

The committee did not take a vote. The hearing drew the largest public turnout of the day, with sustained testimony from residents, technical witnesses and industry representatives; the committee will consider the bill further in executive session.