sufficient buffer to protect residences, businesses, schools from interference. You have seen this map before concerning the intense interference within a mile and a half which is the inner circle and I believe five miles is the outer circle. This is the area of radiation which will be impacted to some considerably degree by the super tower. You have already heard tonight and I won t repeat it all what Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Selstad, etc. have said concerning the negative impacts on property values. We note that the Telecommunications Land Use Plan specifically sets forth that residents have a righto expectha the value of their property won t be degraded. And it specifically notes that towers do so degrade property values. We think that the promise to protect property values is significant in terms of your consideration of whether this militates in favor or againsthe public health safety and welfare. The threat from interference problems to the School of Mines to businesses, to future industry and residents show in summary that the super tower is not in the best interest of the health and safety and welfare of the citizens of Jefferson County. The final graphic really shows what the ultimate reality of this proposal would be which is irradiated residential properties and compromised commercial situations which will cause businesses to leave or to not come in the first place. That concludes my remarks Commissioners, if you have any questions I would be glad to answer them. Thank you. HISL P: My name is Alfred Hislop. H-I-S-L- -P my address is 64 Lookout Mountain Circle. I would like to show you the effecthat the Lake Cedar Group proposal would have on our community and the radiation levels. 67
Last summer as part of a melatonin study done by Colorado State University, I made measurements of the existing radiation levels in the Lookout Mountain area over quite a wide area. This represents hundreds of hours of detailed measurements. In essence what this graph shows is that radiation levels over a good portion of this area are less than one microwatt-watt per centimeter squared and the varying colorshow increased radiation levels. In general any kind of high radiation levels are levels above one microwatt-watt are within a radius of about two miles of the antennas. Using the antenna patterns and powers for this proposal that were furnished by Lake Cedar Group and using 2O FCC recommended formulas, I made calculations of what the levels would be in the areas if this proposal were to be implemented. This next one shows side by side the comparison of the before and after type radiation limits and you can definitely see that the areas of high radiation have increased significantly probably by a factor of five where there are nearby populations, and particularly hard hit are some of the ridges by the Mount Vernon Canyon and in Geneseeo And here you could see this is a composite of the antenna pattern which is overlaid on an elevation plot and you can see where the Ralston School is slightly above the center of the radiation of the antennas. The antenna pattern actually tilts down a little bit and as a result it winds up having about seven and half microwatt-watts per centimeter square. And you can see the point where it says to there is about where the Mount Vernon Country Club sits on the edge of the Canyon. When we look at our calculations we used FCC recommended formulas and we submitted our calculations to Jefferson County s 68
Consultant, Mr. Hart for verification and Mr. Hart has issued a report which is probably a part of public record for this case where he says that the calculations have been verified. Now, you have seen Lake Cedar Group last month show you that their claim is tha the levels will go down, this will be good for our neighborhood. Yet, when you look at our calculations, you see that, that is not the case. And the question is you know...who do you believe? And I guess you have just seen these before so we will just go through them real quick. There are three different homes and there is Ralston Elementary School, every single one has an increase radiation at this level. We did find a place actually that had a decrease in radiation or would have a decrease in radiation and that is directly under the Channel 6 tower which would be removed. All other areas that we could find had increases. So, if we look at the statements that have been made by the Lake Cedar Group, they have claimed that the levels would go down. Mr. Rosascof the Planning Commission said he was voting for this tower because the radiation levels would go down. Mr. James Martese of Channel 6 -IV has claimed in letters to our questioning citizens that the RF levels at Ralston Elementary School quote "will ultimately experience a decrease in radiation from the current levels if the new tower is built". That is a direct quote from a letter that Mr. Martese wrote. So who do you believe? Do you believe me? I guess the buck stops right here with the calculations has made or do you believe Lake Cedar Groups paid consultants? So, let s just take a look at the record. Here you see a map that was presented with the original RF report by Hammett & Edison. And this map and report was submitted in 69
August of 98 and in that report Hammett & Edison, Lake Cedar Group claimed that the maximu measured levels on Lookout Mountain were 66% of what s called the maximum permissible exposure by the FCC. Well it came as a surprise to us because I had been out there and measured 250% and the County was notified the FCC was notified, the FCC asked Lake Cedar Group for clarification and in September Lake Cedar Group submitted to the FCC a second report again claiming that the maximum levels that they had measured were 66% on Lookout Mountain. Well, the FCC came out to measure and where we claimed there was 250%, the FCC found 250%. Everywhere we went and made a claim that the broadcasters were over the limit, the FCC confirmed that, that was true. Now when the Planning Commission found that this report was in such error they asked Lake Cedar Group, Mr. Weller well why are your measurements so far off? Mr. Weller submitted an affidavit to Jefferson County in whic he attributed the erroneous readings to an undetectable error in his measuring equipment. Well, I happen to own the exact same, make and model of measuring equipment that Mr. Weller had and I know that, that measuring equipment has built-in test equipment which is designed to show the operator if a malfunction has occurred. Now, while searching through the FCC files I found a statement submitted to the FCC by Mr. Weller and it was dated October 28, 97 which was one week after Mr. Weller made his measurements on the mountain and he claimed his meter was broken And the statement by Mr. Weller is remarkable in three respects. In one, the first respect he admits that he measured at the Channel 6 tower levels which exceeded the FCC public 60
exposure limits. Yet in his reports of August and September of 98 which were based on those measurements he said that the maximum levels that he measure were 57% percent at the Channel 6 tower. Number two, the statement shows that Mr. Weller s equipment was operating properly in the week of October st through 28th, 97 and the FCC and I also measured those same excessive levels at the Channel 6 tower. The third point is that, even though the FCC had been notified of those excessive levels, the FCC failed to take any action for more than one year until those excessive levels became public knowledge. Well, in October of 98 the FCC required five, FM stations to turn down their power, and they also required some fencing be put up over some hot spots that could not be eliminated by turning down their power. These hot spots were quite high and it s rumored that Cristo was hired to design this fence. The FCC returned in December on December th of 98 and found that Lookout Mountain still wasn t in compliance and they required three FM stations to turn down there power even more before they declared the mountain to be in compliance. Now I would like to show you a one and a half minute video tape of the FCC at this point. Mr. Wizard at work. VIDEO EXHIBIT "A" HISLOP: Jefferson County has relied pretty heavily on the FCC to resolve these problems with excessive levels and you were concerned that there might still be hot spots around that one doesn t know about. Could we go back to the fence? The spot were the photographer stood and took this picture actually happens to be a very high field area. There s still spots in this area where I measure more that 0% of the maximum permissible exposure. 61
Now, Jefferson County was notified of these spots by CARE in early February and Jefferson County so far has chosen to not to measure these spots and to rely instead on upon the FCC s claim that Lookout Mountain is in compliance so there is, I think some reliance there that may not be justified. It turns out that these hot spots in the road where the photographer was standing were originally at a 0% of the maximum exposure. The FCC required a power reduction of equivalent of % by two FM stations that point, which would by calculation leave those areas at 1% of the allowable level. I still measure over one hundred percent at that point. When the FCC came out and measured they miraculously measured 70% at that point. In January, four months ago, more than four months ago, I wrote a letter to the FCC asking how they could reconcile a 50% reduction in measured power, by turning down the power by %o I have not received an answer I have requested repeatedly that I get an answer and Dr. Cleveland of the FCC has told me he s too busy to answer my letter but he will do it when he gets some time. So, this kind of brings us to the question of the infallibility of the FCC and I would like to read you a very short chunk from an article in the Denver Post on May th of this year. The Federal Communications Commission employee mistakenly sent a dirty joke by e-mail to 6,000 reporters and government officials instead of a daily report of actions taken by the agency. The FCC issued an apologetic e-mail Friday immediately after sending out the raunchy joke entitled "nuns in heaven", so it s pretty obvious that the FCC can make some mistakes and the question is how much does Jefferson County want to rely on the FCC? I believe that the FCC is very 62
motivated to get digital television implemented and it may not be in the best interest of these citizens to have the FCC running roughshod. This next graph here is a view shed analysis which was presented by Lake Cedar Group last month, and the black dots all to the south here are places that the Lake Cedar Group claimed, all these areas were claimed that you couldn t see the tower from these areas. And Mark Wilson of Virtual Topics emphasized that it was not just the building that couldn t be seen but the tower that couldn t be seen from these areas. Unfortunately the map is patently false and it has a significant effect here because in general if you can t see the tower the radiation will be 2O low. The radiation in general requires line of sighto have high intensity. The black dots there include Cabrini Shrine, Mount Vernon Country Club, Ralston Elementary School, one of the most highly irradiated areas right around Mounts Field Street, Lininiger Mountain, Genesee Village if you drive anywhere in the Lookout Mountain area you see these towers. It would require an almost 800 foot tall obstruction very near the tower in order to block off the view of this tower to the south, to the west. It s surprising to me what has been presented here to you And again I ask who do you believe? Do you really believe your eyes or do you believe the so called experts from Lake Cedar Group that didn t even take the time to visit Lookout Mountain to see if their presentation was even remotely accurate The next topic is Interference Impacts. Interference really effects the quality of life, interference has been a great burden to Lookout Mountain residents and it can significantly effect health issues as well as just the everyday, day to day life of the residents When I measured homes of residents 63
that were complaining about interference again you have heard over and over again that the interference seems to have an onset of about a half microwattwatt per centimeter squared. And here we re told by Lake Cedar Group everything is fine as long as it is less than the standard and quite often you hear 0 microwatt watts per centimeter squared for the standard, in actuality that s the minimum at higher frequencies the radiation is allowed to go up to a much higher levels. So, why should we expect interference to increase so high? What s the reason, why are we so concerned and here again you have seen this one. But this is really critical, if you look at the replacement here is Channel 6 peak radiated power, 0,000 watts they re going to replace this analog "IV with a digital TV signal and it s going to have a peak effective power of 5 million watts, 50 times higher. Now, you do this for several stations and you can expect to have quite a bit more interference. Last month the...or earlier this month you heard another hearing concern from a citizen who thought his wheelchair had malfunctioned possibly due to interference and I have looked at the manual for the wheelchair and I have looked at the interference levels at his home and it is highly unlikely that the malfunction of his wheelchair was caused by interference but the manual for the wheelchair did give me some great insight into what the potential is. So, on the graph there the manual for the wheelchair says that the wheelchair has immunity to interference for signals they can achieve up to about volts per meter immunity and volts per meter is the equivalent of 6 microwatt watts per centimeter square, An FM station a typical FM station or lower frequency -IV station is allowed to 0 microwatts per centimeter square. 64
It s almostwice as much as what the immunity level that wheelchair is. If you go up to Channel 35, they are actually allowed at their frequency 400 microwatts per centimeter square, average power. But the peaks of a digital "iv power can be 5 times what its average power is so now you are looking at time peaks of 0,000 s per centimeter square and this is actually a spatial average over a human body surface area and it turns out that the, there are also spatial peaks, you measure over a certain height and you find out that the spatial peaks are typically about 1.6 times the spatial average. So, a signal what they spatial average at 400 micro watts per centimeter square could actually have temporal and spatial peaks as high as 3,0 microwatts per centimeter squared and still fall within the federal and county safety standards. Now if you compare that power density with the community that s achievable for that wheelchair you start to see something, it s over 30 times higher then that wheelchair is designed to withstand. You have somebody with a wheelchair go over to Buffalo Bill s grave there and take off across the parking lot it wouldn t be too surprising to find something like that and you could say well, no the signalevels are still well within the standard and indeed they are but the potential for that kind of interference is there. This goes as well for pacemakers, other health related equipment. Now, due to the potential healt hazards, interference hazards and CARE really recommends that these antennas be placed in another place that s not populated. These places exist, admittedly Lookout Mountain is a great area for the broadcasters to transmit from it has great coverage~ It very well may be the best poin that maximizes their coverage. But the question is do the 65
broadcasters really need to have the absolute best place to go? Could they pick up another spot, that is remote, unpopulated, doesn t have quite the coverage What portion of their listenership are they going to lose. Now we know that approximately 69% of the households in the metro area are already on cable television. So, when Lake Cedar Group says, " Well we are going to lose 2,000 of our audience in Boulder" what does that mean? If you take that and you multiply that by the remainders that don t have cable that number shrinks way down. Ecostar says that the satellite systems are coming on strong. Just recently legislation passed the house granting satellite -IV companies the ability to broadcast local television stations and it is assumed it will also pass the Senate shortly, in which case you will have people like Ecostar transmitting they claim in the 50 largest markets at local signals. Again, there is so many alternate types of technology, alternate sites it just is not necessary at all to cause this kind of trauma to this community. So, we believe that viable alternative sites exist in unpopulated areas and they can be found and we urge you to deny the proposal that will greatly increase the radiation and interference in our residential community. I am glad to answer any questions. SHEEHAN: If l understand correctly there is a proposal by our 2O applicant to have a monitoring, independent monitoring process what s your appraisal of that aspect of their application? HISLOP: Well, I think it s a good idea. I was a little bit disturbed that the citizens were eliminated from participating in the original monitoring that was to be done. Ostensibly it was because they were afraid that 66
somebody might let slip the date of the measurements. I don t think that would be the case for the citizens here. Basically I have spent probably more time than anybody else scrounging around Lookout Mountain looking for hot spots finding them, reporting them, having them confirmed. The FCC followed me around to find out where the existing hot spots were that they were requiring the stations to turn down. So it seems like your greatest resource in this case is the citizens who have spent so many hours trying to find hot spots which is really what you are trying to do. The, it s obvious that the consultants have spen their time trying not to find the hot spots and again when you have a monitoring program like this and you say okay we are going to spend a few hours monitoring or trying to find out the hot spots that s not as comprehensive as what has been done by the citzens on their own, so I am a little bit concerned about being excluded from that original monitoring procedure. Thank you. HOLLOWAY: LARSEN: CLERK: Thank you. I don t believe I have been sworn ino Do you solemnly swear the testimonyou are about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? LARSEN: I do. Good evening, you are certainly persevering. My name is Les Larsen. I live at 82 Sand Lily in Golden. I am a resident of Genesee. I am here as a professional Consultant. My background is telecommunications consulting. I am certified by the Institute of Management Consultants. I have been a consultant for about years having worked with more than 0 organizations, including many Fortune Five Hundred telephone, 67