Why Public Law 90‑602 still matters
1) The consumer shock that changed federal law
In 1967, routine testing found that certain large‑screen GE color televisions were emitting X‑rays at far above acceptable levels because a high‑voltage regulator tube leaked radiation, especially downward through cabinet vents. GE moved to modify about 90,000 sets; Public Health Service officials warned that the riskiest geometry was sitting very close to—or underneath—an elevated set. The episode quickly broadened beyond a single model and made national headlines.
2) Not the first time: X‑ray shoe‑fitters for kids
A generation earlier, U.S. shoe stores commonly used shoe‑fitting fluoroscopes—live X‑ray boxes for sizing children’s shoes. As risks became clear, Pennsylvania banned them in 1957, and by 1960 the devices had largely disappeared across the U.S. under pressure from insurers and regulators. The arc is familiar: what starts as a convenience becomes a cautionary tale once exposure and risk are better understood. Oak Ridge Associated Universities+1
3) Congress responds: what Public Law 90‑602 actually says
The Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968 (Public Law 90‑602) amended the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to create a standing federal program for electronic product radiation, defined to include ionizing and non‑ionizing radiation (e.g., RF, microwaves) emitted by electronic products. Three provisions do most of the work:
-
§ 360ii – Program of control. The Secretary of HHS “shall establish and carry out” an electronic product radiation control program to protect public health—this explicitly includes planning, conducting, coordinating, and supporting research.
-
§ 360kk – Performance standards. The Secretary “shall… prescribe performance standards”—and may update them “from time to time”—when necessary to protect public health and safety.
-
§ 360jj – Studies by the Secretary. The Secretary shall conduct studies and report results to Congress.
By definition, “electronic product radiation” includes ionizing and non‑ionizing electromagnetic radiation from electronic products—so RF and microwave emissions are within scope. At the same time, Congress added a non‑interference clause: these authorities must be coordinated so as not to supersede other agencies’ lawful functions (e.g., the FCC).
4) The first big test of the law: a TV X‑ray limit
On December 25, 1969, the federal government issued a binding TV standard: newly manufactured sets (after January 15, 1970) could not exceed 0.5 milliroentgen per hour at 5 cm from any point on the cabinet when tested under worst‑case conditions. This closed the very gap that the 1967 scare exposed and illustrates how federal performance standards translate into real‑world protection.
5) The law covers RF, too
Because the statute expressly covers non‑ionizing emissions, Subchapter J of FDA’s radiological health regulations includes standards not only for X‑ray systems but also for microwave ovens—for example, 1 mW/cm² at 5 cm before sale and 5 mW/cm² in service, plus dual door‑interlocks. In other words, Congress expected HHS to manage both ionizing and non‑ionizing hazards from electronic products.
6) Are today’s RF rules adequate?
In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found that the FCC’s 2019 decision to retain 1996 RF exposure limits lacked a reasoned explanation on several fronts (e.g., long‑term exposure, modulation/pulsation, evolving device ecosystems) and remanded the issue. Among the consolidated petitioners was Children’s Health Defense, long chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The takeaway wasn’t that the limits were invalidated, but that regulators must grapple with the record. Federal Communications Commission+1
Meanwhile, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) reported “clear evidence” that high‑level RFR exposures comparable to 2G/3G signals caused malignant heart schwannomas in male rats (with some evidence for other tumors). Whatever one’s policy conclusions, these findings are a key part of the modern evidentiary landscape regulators must consider.
7) Where the statute points HHS today
The verbs in Public Law 90‑602 are not optional. HHS shall run an electronic‑radiation control program (§ 360ii), shall conduct studies and report (§ 360jj), and shall prescribe performance standards when necessary (§ 360kk). Those duties apply to RF as much as to X‑rays, with coordination to avoid overlap with other agencies.
A note on NTP’s status
You mentioned that NTP “shut down” in January 2025. I cannot verify that. As of today (October 7, 2025), official HHS/NIH pages show NTP still active (program pages, meeting notices). If key product‑hazard research were curtailed, that would plainly conflict with the statute’s “shall… plan, conduct, coordinate, and support research” directive, but the public record indicates continuing activity. National Toxicology Program
About Secretary Kennedy
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is the current HHS Secretary. He was previously associated with litigation that led the D.C. Circuit to remand the FCC’s 2019 RF decision, as noted above. Under Public Law 90‑602, the authority and duty to conduct research and promulgate performance standards (as needed for public health) rest with the HHS Secretary and FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health—again, in coordination with sister agencies such as the FCC. HHS.gov
Important legal nuance: Whether a particular official is in violation of Public Law 90‑602 is a legal conclusion that depends on specific facts (e.g., whether HHS has failed to “establish and carry out” the required program or to conduct studies/report). What we can say from the text is that Congress used “shall”—these functions are not optional—and the scope explicitly includes non‑ionizing radiation from electronic products.
8) A practical roadmap aligned with 90‑602
If the goal is to honor both the letter and spirit of Public Law 90‑602 in today’s RF‑saturated world:
-
Update performance standards where warranted. Use § 360kk to set or modernize standards for relevant classes of RF‑emitting consumer electronics, in coordination with the FCC to avoid conflicts—just as FDA already does for microwaves.
-
Fill research gaps under § 360ii. Commission targeted studies on chronic, real‑world exposure (pulsed signals, simultaneous multi‑band use, body‑proximate wearables), responsive to the D.C. Circuit’s remand issues. Justia Law
-
Keep the lights on at NTP and CDRH. Maintain transparent, timely program communications, meetings, and congressional reporting (§ 360jj).
-
Enforce and educate. Keep manufacturer reporting (21 CFR Part 1002), defect notifications (§ 360ll), and consumer guidance current—especially on placement and safe use.
9) The through‑line: “From time to time” means now
The 1967 TV scare produced a clear public‑health fix—a federal performance standard. The same statute empowers HHS to research and standardize in response to today’s electronic‑product emissions, including RF. That mandate hasn’t expired; if anything, the device ecosystem is far denser than the era of floor‑standing TVs and shoe fluoroscopes. The law gives the tools. The public expects them to be used.
References (selection)
-
1967 color‑TV X‑rays & recall: TIME; Desert Sun; CQ Almanac.
-
Shoe‑fitting fluoroscopes: ORAU; The Henry Ford. Oak Ridge Associated Universities+1
-
Statute & definitions: 21 U.S.C. §§ 360hh, 360ii, 360jj, 360kk.
-
TV performance standard (0.5 mR/h at 5 cm): Federal Register, Dec 25, 1969.
-
Microwave oven limits & interlocks: 21 CFR § 1030.10; FDA explainer.
-
EHT v. FCC (2021 remand): FCC summary; D.C. Circuit opinion; CHD consolidation. Federal Communications Commission+1
-
NTP RFR findings (“clear evidence”): NIH news release.
-
NTP status pages (active 2025): NTP; NIH Almanac. National Toxicology Program
-
Current HHS Secretary page: HHS leadership. HHS.gov
What you’re getting in the downloadable file
-
A single‑page HTML article with an RF SAFE header bar and a theme toggle (light/dark).
-
Clean typography, responsive layout, and an inline References section with live links.
-
Ready to drop into a CMS, or host as a static page.
Download the HTML
A quick fact‑check on two specific claims you raised
-
“NTP shut down in January 2025.” I can’t substantiate this. Official HHS/NIH pages show ongoing NTP activity in 2025 (program pages and meeting notices). If you have a specific memo/order, I can incorporate it, but the public record indicates the program continues. National Toxicology Program
-
“Secretary Kennedy sued the FCC and won.” More precisely, Children’s Health Defense (long chaired by Kennedy) was among petitioners in litigation consolidated with Environmental Health Trust v. FCC. In August 2021, the D.C. Circuit found the FCC’s 2019 decision arbitrary and capricious in part and remanded it to the agency for further explanation—not a final merits ruling on health effects, but a demand for a reasoned response to the record. Federal Communications Commission+1