Canyon Area Residents for the Environment Deb Carney Attorney for C.A.R.E Cabrini Blvd August 12, 2004

A Rare Second Chance To protect the Community of Golden, the Colorado School of Mines and the 9000 residents of CARE from a significant zoning mistake

LCG Misrepresentations Late Filings (Jefferson County Exhibit B) -Handed to CARE at time of rebuttal hearing July 22, 2003 –No time for review or comment By staff By public –Documents contain misrepresentations

Musselman Report Did Not Say what LCG Represented –LCG Spokesmen misrepresented content of Musselman report (Tab I) Misrepresented that RF going down overall Misrepresented that RF going down out in 800 out of 1000 points

Damage from Misrepresentation Applicants, like LCG, seldom sanctioned Dr. Frankle –Testified about health dangers from proposal –Moved from his Stonebridge Home because proposal approved –Many others

LCG Represents RF going down Rockford: “To start off, the Commissioner’s have asked a number of times, Mr. Tuthill asked, what happens to RF over all? The answer is RF overall goes down. The studies we have submitted prove that. (referring to Musselman Report Jeffco Ex.B Tab I) RF goes down over most of the Lookout Mountain area not just west of the new tower as CARE has told you.” Sheehan: “By what Percentage overall, do you know? “ July 22,2003 Lake Cedar Group Rebuttal R Track 1

Independent RF Expert Disputes LCG assertion RF going down “Now I disagree with LCG’s results whether the RF radiation has increased or decreased at some of these far out places. First …and I looked at eight places and I also confirmed most of Mr. Hislop’s approach, which is quite different from mine, and I agree with his mathematics. Dr. Musselman gave me a report yesterday at 2:30 and I had a 3:30 meeting here, so I haven’t had a chance to look at his “1000 points” so I don’t know what that’s about. At this point, we have no calculations.” (Still don’t today!) Jim Hart, July 22, 2003 R Tract 10

“RF Levels Go Down at More than 800 of those 1,000 sites…” Sheehan: “By what Percentage overall, do you know?” Rockford: “Well as I am going about to say in my testimony here, We have submitted a study on 1,000 sites on the Lookout Mountain area. The RF levels go down at more than 800 of those 1,000 sites, so somewhat better than 80% and again we have submitted that study.” (Referring to Jeffco Ex.B Tab I) July 22,2003 Lake Cedar Group Rebuttal R Track 1

Rockford on Musselman Report “Our research which underlies our assertion about RF levels was conducted by Dr. Randall Musselman, Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at the United States Air Force Academy. We have submitted the resume of Dr. Musselman. He is a licensed professional engineer in the area of RF. He is certified by the State of Colorado to put his professional seal on this kind of study. Meaning that he is staking his professional reputation, his integrity on the accuracy of hismeasurements and his conclusions.” Referring to Jeffco Ex. B Tab I, J July 22,2003 Lake Cedar Group Rebuttal. Track 1 Rockford 2

Marv Rockford Claims Musselman Study Proves RF Goes Down Overall “We have also submitted, as I just said, an updated study done by Dr. Musselman on more than 1,000 sites in the Lookout Mountain area. (Jeffco Ex.B Tab I) The study proves conclusively that overall RF goes down if the new tower is built. This is the most exhaustive study ever conducted on the RF levels on Lookout Mountain. It proves again conclusively that RF levels go down overall.” Marv Rockford July 22,2003 Lake Cedar Group Rebuttal R Track 1 Rockford 2

CLAIM THAT RF AT MINES DOES NOT INCREASE “And you have heard about concern about RF interference at the Colorado School of Mines, –not from the school which again has chosen not to take a position on our application but from a couple of researchers. They should be reassured. RF at the school remains virtually the same. Right now RF at Mines is 0.21%. Under our proposal it would decline ever so slightly to 0.20% of your standard.” –July 22,2003 Lake Cedar Group Rebuttal R Rockford Track 2

Claims that RF Does Not Increase at Schools “We have submitted another professionally certified study by Dr. Musselman documenting the RF levels at the elementary schools, the high schools and the Colorado School of Mines.” (Referring to Jeffco Ex. B Tab J) July 22,2003 Lake Cedar Group Rebuttal R Track 2

“RF Goes Down Over All of Jefferson County” per Niehaus “Finally the opposition states that RF will go up throughout Jefferson County. Well the calculations that we have been dealing with and have been submitted to the County were made of more than 1,000 sites throughout Jefferson County, not 18 as in the Hislop study. And these calculations were made by qualified professional engineers who seal these calculations. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. However Dr. Musselman is certified to render a finding that is backed by that professional shield. And he’s a person who is professionally at risk. His findings are considered opinion. The reality is RF goes down over all Jefferson County, using your own standards, not by manipulating the standards to a contrived conclusion. “ Fred Niehaus July 22, 2003 LCG Rebuttal R Track 8

Commissioner Sheehan Believes RF Goes Down “[I think] couple of the residents are greatly concerned about the health effects of RF radiation, and this proposal lowers the overall RF radiation on Lookout Mountain by 80%, and as well… my understanding it’s by 80% of the federal standard and then the as well as below the federal standard by 85% [and with the increase in monitoring and enforcement it doesn’t currently exist.]” Commissioner Rick Sheehan explaining reason for decision at conclusion of July 22, 2003 hearing R Track 12

Rocky Mt. News July 23 Commissioner Rick Sheehan, chairman of the three-member Board of Count y Commissioners, said he was impressed by the proposal. ``Some of the residents are greatly concerned about health effects of RF radiation and this proposal lowers the overall radiation on Lookout Mountain,'' he said. Although Sheehan initially said the plan would lower radiation on the mountain by 80 percent, he later corrected that statement, saying, ``This proposal lowers overall RF at 80 percent of sites tested and is below the federal standard by 85 percent.''

Jim Hart, RF Engineer for Jeffco – RF Increases to North, South East and over hills “Um, generally, I agree with Mr. Hislop. All these places that were south, to the north, and to the east increased differentially. … So my conclusion is there will be a slight increase in the electromagnetic fields at locations that are north, south, and east, which are directly in line of site with the antennas. There will also be some increase of those that are diffracted over the hills there.” July 22, 2003 R 12112

Significance of Misrepresentation that Radiation Going Down But for LCG, RF would go down Negated testimony of public on health and interference Also misrepresented that the law allows LCG nonconforming towers/antennas/buildings to remain forever.

RF Keeps Increasing

LCG Lookout Mt. Effective Radiated Power (ERP) 9 Million Watt Increase LCG ERP on Lookout Proposal = 9,732,000 watts Present = 732,000 watts

LCG Claim that Squaw Mt. Would Not Work “As for Squaw Mountain, it fails as an alternative site for several critical reasons. (Jeffco Ex. B Tabs A, B, C, D, E, F, G, K) The first is outlined in the legal brief we have submitted.” Jeffco Ex.B Tab B Campbell Brief Rockford July 22,2003 Lake Cedar Group Rebuttal R Rockford Track 5

Myth-More Towers Created if LCG Antennas Moved off Lookout “Your Telecommunications Land Use Plan and the County Code demand consideration of existing alternative telecommunication sites as a part of this process.” (TRUE) “It seems to us that the point of that requirement is to prevent tower proliferation not to create it.” …(ERRONEOUS LEGAL INTERPRETATION) “Moving our digital antennas to any other site will not accomplish consolidation, it creates more towers. “(FALSE-) Rockford July 22, 2003 LCG Rebuttal R Track 6

Concern about More Towers Hart: “…that requires a booster -- there’s no question about that, but I’m sure there are quite a few other shadowed spots that will require some boosters. “ Holloway: “They are towers?” Hart: “yeah, but they are short towers.” Holloway: “But they’re towers.” Hart: “they don’t have to be very high. Sure they’re towers.” Sheehan: “how high do they have to be?” Hart: “Maybe you are looking at 30 or 40 or 50 feet at the most. They’re just covering small areas and you might think of it like a cell tower.” Jeffco Independent RF Engineer July 22, Record Track 9 Hart & Holloway

LCG Tower Fall Experts Not Given Facts Ch 4 payments to resident for ice fall damage Ch9 clocking 126 MPH winds at its tower in 60’s Previous 2 tower falls Foothills winds much faster than Denver winds

Debris Fall Zone Fact vs Opinion FACT From History Height of tower (330 ft.) times 4.2 Actual Debris found 1400 ft away 736 ft downhill LCG 04 Experts-Ex A Height of tower (730 ft) times 1 Expected=80% of height=590 ft. (also 150 ft.from guy anchor)

Debris found 1,400 feet from 330 ft. Tower fall Site Resident recalls seeing big pieces of debris in 1950’s after towers blew over during construction at present Channel 4 tower 12/6/ foot KOA tower 3/11/ foot KOA tower Found next to high tension powerline tower

Broadcast Tower Falls Over on Lookout

Fred Niehaus LCG Spokesman “Now this application, and all of the presentations made to you, are about credibility and facts, and it is about integrity.” July 22,2003 Lake Cedar Group Rebuttal R Track 7

Conclusion Misrepresentations Negate Zoning Witnesses will discuss Jeffco Ex A and B (over 150 pages of documents) and referral comments on these exhibits If any question on which exhibit witness is speaking to, I will explain