The petition filed with the court is here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B14R6QNkmaXuZWZVaDhYb09kVGM/view

The tentative ruling by the court:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B14R6QNkmaXuWXVVLVNEUDY0RGM/view

The court documents are available online (case number: 2016 80002358) at
https://services.saccourt.ca.gov/PublicCaseAccess/Civil/SearchByCaseNumber

Check his website for updates.

———————————————————–

From Dr. Joel Moskowitz, Safer EMR 

http://www.saferemr.com/2017/03/cell-phone-safety-guidance-from.html

March 2, 2017, Updated 6:10 PM

–
This page will be updated periodically with further developments and links to media coverage.

–
Last May we sued the California Department of Public Health for a cell phone safety guidance document under the California Public Records Act. The document was originally prepared in 2010 and has been updated several times but never released to the public.

Late this afternoon, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) emailed a cell phone guidance document, entitled “Cell Phones and Health,” to Melody Gutierrez, a reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle who attended our court hearing.

This “fact sheet” summarizes research on cell phone radiation health risks and provides safety tips on how to reduce cell phone radiation exposure. The document highlights a potentially greater risk to “pregnant women, children, and teens.” The safety recommendations are similar to those issued by the Connecticut Department of Public Health in May, 2015.

We are grateful to see CDPH’s cell phone guidance document after a long battle for it.

The CDPH document is marked “released pursuant to Moskowitz v. CDPH, Sac. Super. Ct. No. 34-2016-8000-2358” and “Draft and Not for Public Release.”

Apparently, CDPH does not intend to appeal the merits of the court’s ruling that the document must be disclosed. However, the manner of release is troubling. CDPH has not waited for the court to finalize its ruling and determine whether CDPH may indicate that the document does not (as it argued at the hearing) represent its current, official position.  Rather, the agency has “jumped the gun” and stamped new lettering in huge dark letters across the face of the document so as to make it virtually illegible. Further, that lettering states that the document is “draft and not for public release” when the judge’s tentative ruling stated exactly the opposite —   that the document was not a draft, and must be publicly released.

CDPH has essentially created a new document rather than produced the document as-is, in violation of the Public Records Act. To the extent that CDPH wanted merely to indicate that the document does not represent its official position in early 2017, the fact that the document is dated “April 2014” should make that plain.

An account of our attempts to obtain the document and the lawsuit filed by the UC Berkeley Environmental Law Clinic and the First Amendment Project on my behalf appears below. The judge’s tentative ruling on our lawsuit is available (see link below).

Why has the California Department of Public Health suppressed a cell phone radiation safety document since 2010?

In 2010, health professionals in the Environmental Health Investigations Branch of CDPH prepared a cell phone guidance document that summarized the science regarding the health risks from cell phone radiation and provided precautionary recommendations to the public for limiting personal exposure.

Why was this document never officially released to the public?

I learned about the existence of the document in late 2013. In January, 2014, I submitted a formal request for the document to the CDPH under the California Public Records Act (CPRA).

Dr. Richard Kreutzer, the Division Chief for Environmental and Occupational Disease Control in CDPH, contacted me three days later. He informed me that the document was recently revised and was under review by the State. He asked me to withdraw my request since the final approved version should be available within three weeks. When I asked how long the document had been under review, he responded that the review was “freshly re-started this year,” and that the current draft is similar to a previous version “that stalled three years ago” while under review by the State. I opted not to withdraw my request.

For the rest of his article and updates:
http://www.saferemr.com/2017/03/cell-phone-safety-guidance-from.html