Residents sued the Environmental Protection Agency

residents

tower body radiation affected residents

Dong Run Feng Jing Wu et al, Department of residents, their claims, residential construction in 2000 residents to stay around next year, but in 2002, the developer Beijing Tianhong Real Estate Development Co., Ltd was re-submit an application to the municipal environmental protection bureau of environmental protection examination and approval procedures. And the surrounding area are built in the 1968 Radio Transmitter, the continuous generation of electromagnetic radiation, the body a greater impact on the residents.
residents that, according to To this end, residents sued in 2004 to revoke the district's environmental approval.
first instance

cell electromagnetic radiation intensity is not exceeded

response, EPA believes that the regulations for environmental impact assessment did not make specific provisions of the Ordinance The enforcement authority should be planning department rather than the environmental protection department, while in 1968 the beginning of construction of towers, did not have a negative impact on the surrounding environment.
's Court of First Instance found, according to procedures. As a result, EPA Tianhong received within 60 days after the company made application for approval procedures, not inappropriate.
in the case during the trial, the court also based on the residents, the EPA, the developer of the nomination, selection of the three experts to appear and answer questions related technologies,polo ralph lauren homme, and ultimately finds that the district itself, the electromagnetic radiation intensity is not exceeded.
Final

not affect the scope of the review tower

satisfied with the result because of the first instance, Wu and others appeal.
Recently, a letter in the Court of Final Appeal adopted the first instance experts say that under the Ordinance, the new construction project environmental impact assessment should be carried out to prevent its impact on the surrounding environment, and the surrounding environment, such as the existence of towers whether the impact of new projects, not in the context of the review. Accordingly, Ms. Wu, who dismissed the appeal request.