New disease to keep track of: Hutchison's 3G tower headache

["Bjorn Cedervall" <bcradsafers@HOTMAIL.COM>]

Someone sent me the article below (with the headtitle as it is). Maybe I 

should pass it on to some professor in the Nobel Prize committee.



My personal reflection only,



Bjorn Cedervall    bcradsafers@hotmail.com

(Assoc. Prof. Karolinska Institutet)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Hutchison's 3G tower headache

---------------------------------

Oct 08

Katrina Nicholas





Hutchison could be forced to dismantle scores of the high-tech mobile phone 

towers that power its '3' video-phone network after the High Court rejected 

its application to appeal a court ruling that ordered the removal of a tower 

in south Sydney.



Hutchison contractors broke into Oatley Park to remove the 22-metre high 

offending tower at about 5.30am on Saturday after being asked by the phone 

group to take down the tower early to avoid negative publicity.



Hurstville City Council mayor Vince Badalati said he was not worried about 

the smashed padlock but was glad Hutchison had begun removing the structure 

quickly. He said a number of other councils may be able to take similar 

action against the telco, which launched its third-generation mobile service 

in Australia in April.



Mr Badalati said Hutchison had erected its '3' tower at Oatley Park, despite 

Hurstville Council twice rejecting the telco's requests to do so.



Hutchison eventually relied on a maintenance provision in the 

Telecommunications Act to erect the tower. Usually, building such towers 

requires a permit from the Australian Communications Authority, which first 

holds a public inquiry.



However, carriers generally get around this process by relying on an 

exemption in the act that allows a carrier to "maintain" an existing 

facility. In the case of Oatley Park, Hutchison had declared that a council 

lighting pole was an existing facility and had replaced it with a '3' 

telecommunications tower.



In July, the NSW Court of Appeal ruled that Hutchison was wrong to rely on 

that provision.



Although Hutchison maintains the Oatley Park tower was a one-off and that 

its 500 or so other '3' towers around Sydney will not be affected, people 

close to the appeal say this is not the case.



One source said an affidavit sworn by a Hutchison project manager indicated 

that many more '3' sites could be affected if the High Court refused to 

allow the company's appeal. Deacons partner Peter Rigg, who acted for 

Hurstville Council, also said a number of other sites could be affected.



Other councils understood to be considering legal action of a similar nature 

include Sydney's Sutherland Shire Council and Adelaide's City of Mitcham. 

The City of Mitcham's action, which concerns five '3' towers, is expected to 

be heard in the South Australian Supreme Court

soon.



Hutchison said in a statement that it was disappointed by the High Court's 

decision but intended to comply with orders to remove the facility (at 

present an equipment shed still remains) within 10 days. A spokesman also 

said the company's contractors would not have done anything Hurstville 

Council was not first made aware of.



_________________________________________________________________

Instant message with integrated webcam using MSN Messenger 6.0. Try it now 

FREE!  http://msnmessenger-download.com



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/