Subject:  Lookout Mountain revisited (Lomond).
Date:     Thu, 23 Nov 2000 084148 -0600
From:     Roy Beavers 
To:       guru 
--------------------------------------------------

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------582C4FB7DFE353581139AAD9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Hi everybody:

I invite the following website to your attention.  It was called to my
attention by Carole Lomond, the editor of _City, Mountain Views_, a 
Golden, CO. based periodical about the scenic country side (where
many of our readers live) in and around Lookout Mountain in Colorado.

We have so many new readers, perhaps I should briefly update them on the
history and importance of the Lookout Mountain case.....

It is possibly the most important "EMF case" in progress.  It concerns 
a mountain (near Denver, Colorado) which has become the focus of attention
due to its use as the principle "tower site" for the broadcasters into
the Denver market.  That means "broadcasters" of ALL types -- TV, radio,
telecom, military and civilian, etc.....  As you will read in Carole's 
website, more than 1000 transmitters of various types are located there.  

The broadcasters are seeking to add more!!  The local residents have 
become acutely aware of the health hazards.  Some local investigation has 
shown an association with an abnormal rate of cancer.....!!  Other 
"suspect" conditions are also reported.....

The case is not yet "in the courts."  It is still being "tied-up" in the
bureaucracy -- the FCC (Federal Communication Commission) mainly.  Those
guys -- in case any of you have forgotten -- interpret their 
responsibility to monitor and protect-against **"interference" between
electronic signals only!!**  They take NO RESPONSIBILITY whatsoever with 
regard to human life...!!!

Subsequently, we have learned on this list that they don't actually
"monitor" all RF/MW transmitters either.  At the bottom line, they appear
to have enough responsibility to justify a huge RICH $$$$$$ bureaucracy,
but with very little actual RESPONSIBILITY for anything....!!!!!!  (Guru
well remembers -- that is Washington's FAVORITE game.)

Recently, Eric Johnson wrote in a message to this list that (paraphrased):
the folks at Lookout Mountain were trying to have ALL the "stuff" moved
from their mountain to a new site near where Eric lives near Boulder, CO.

Not quite true, says Carole Lomond.....  Whatever the facts are -- (1)
guru thinks it a matter of considerable significance to learn that the 
"tower operators" are trying to "sneak away" from the Lookout Mountain 
situation!!  (Until Eric spoke up -- that was not known "out here" where 
the interest level in the Lookout Mountain situation is high.  Even the
Lookout Mountain people had not told me....)

(2)  Let's hope that these two communities -- both apparently being
exploited by an industry/FCC cabal -- find a way to work TOGETHER in
this matter, rather than in conflict with each other.....  

Somebody, somewhere, somehow ... needs to put the "mark" of **guilt** 
squarely where it belongs ... on the foreheads of the FCC (the federal 
government) and the telecom industry -- both determined to 
surreptitiously continue what they have been doing:  placing this 
RF/MW risk on a "guinea pig" public (as Allen Frey wrote) **without
informing the public what the true facts are!!!!!.......**

http://www.CityMtnViews.com/antennaupdate.html

Cheerio.......

Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
roy@emfguru.com

It is better to light a single candle
  than to curse the darkness.....

WEBSITE:  http://emfguru.com

People are more important than profit$$
--------------582C4FB7DFE353581139AAD9
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1;
 name="antennaupdate.html"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline;
 filename="antennaupdate.html"



	
		
		
		Antenna Tower Update
		
		
		
	

	
		
		
			
			
			

ANTENNA = TOWER UPDATE

= Pinnnacle Towers Inc = purchased a 40-acre tower site at the summit of Eldorado Mountain for $9 = million in December, 1999. The site is 200 feet from the Boulder County l= ine and seven miles south of the City of Boulder. Agriculture-One Special= Use zoning was approved by JeffCo in 1981. Pinnacle is an international = radio frequency, antenna tower company based in Florida.

Construction of on= e or two towers and the size of the transmitter-service building will be = determined by response of Denver broadcasters. Pinnacle held a JeffCo req= uired "community feedback" meeting at the county government bui= lding on November 14. Of the 65 people who attended, estimated representa= tion was:
8 county employees
12 antenna industry employees
15 Boulder County citizens
20 Coal Creek Canyon citizens
10 citizens from other tower areas

Eldorado's one tower

Attorney Joseph Be= nkert of Littleton represented Pinnacle to answer questions raised by cit= izens who live near the tower site. "The site will accommodate both = analog and digital television and FM radio transmitters. The maximum heig= ht will be 450 feet, but the need for one or two towers will be determine= d by broadcast stations who commit. Other limitations will be to avoid th= e Boulder Quiet Zone and maintain EMR emission limits."

Benkert responded = respectfully to all citizen concerns, especially the visual impact. "= ;Towers are visible. We can construct the transmitter building to blend i= nto the rock outcroppings, but towers, wherever they are located, are vis= ible."

The site is adjace= nt to Boulder and JeffCo open space land to the east and south. The neare= st residential area, Plainview, is one mile south and 1500 feet below the= tower site. "Unlike Lookout Mountain, there are no homes at the tow= er site and none at the same altitude as the antennas," Benkert said= =2E

View of open space from Eldorado


= An issue not mentione= d is accountability. One professional tower company could be more efficie= ntly monitored than the proliferation of 30+ towers, used for more than 1= 000 transmission devices, on 21 different parcels, owned by 14 different = companies on Lookout Mountain.

View of foothills population from Lookout Mountain

A study conducted = by professional scientists and engineers for Canyon Area Residents for th= e Environment (CARE) included residential population near the sites as a = factor. Lake Cedar Group (Denver TV stations) did not consider residentia= l population in its evaluation. CARE recommends several "alternative= " sites to densely populated Mt. Vernon Canyon. The CARE study is av= ailable on www.c-a-r-e.org.=


 
= Half of Mt. Vernon Ca= nyon’s population of 9,000 are exposed to high levels of electromagn= etic radiation 24-hours daily. Existing tower sites and altitudes in the = foothills west of Denver are:
  Lookout Mountain 7,200
  Mt. Morrison 7,881
  Double Header 8,100
  Eldorado Mountain 8,300
  Squaw Mtn (private) 10,890
  Squaw Mtn (Natl Forest) 11,488

More than 30 towers and 1000 devices top Lookout Mountain

Broadcasters pressure JeffCo to permit adding DTV on Lookout

CBS (Westinghouse)= -owned KCNC-TV channel 4 wants to mount a digital transmitter that would = send radiation directly into a home 150-feet west. The "stub tower&q= uot; is now used for microwave transmitters adjacent to the station’= s 825-foot tower on Cedar Lake Road.

Entravision Holdin= gs’ KCEC-TV channel 50 wants to add a million-watt DTV transmitter t= o their rental space on Tribune’s KWGN-TV tower within 200 feet and = at the same altitude as Buffalo Bill’s Grave on Lookout Mountain Roa= d. CARE filed a petition with the FCC requesting denial of licensing KCEC= digital channel 51 on Lookout Mountain.

The tower site was= first a real estate home office, adjacent to a railed "funicular&qu= ot; to market residential lots, in 1912. The Lariat Trail, Buffalo Bill&#= 146;s Grave and the Pahaska Lodge are listed on the National Register of = Historic Places and receive over 500,000 visitors annually. On September = 3, 1999, President Clinton declared Buffalo Bill’s Grave and Museum = "an American Treasure that documents and illuminates the history and= culture of the United States" and should be protected and preserved= =2E

Gannett’s KUS= A-TV channel 9 has apparently withdrawn a request to install a digital tr= ansmitter on a radar tower that was never permitted by Jefferson County. = The weather radar device is said to use 1.5 billion watts!

These antenna appl= ications (and zoning violation enforcement listed below) have been superv= ised by JeffCo Zoning Administrator Mary Bunn who permitted FOX-31 to add= digital and KRMA-TV channel 6 to add microwave digital relay device with= out public hearings.

KRMA-TV Channel 6 slips an "exchange" thru JeffCo

CARE discovered a = new microwave device on the KRMA-TV tower in June, 2000. The station clai= med to "replace" a mesh dish (of undisclosed size, age and powe= r) with "same type antenna."

The "exchange= " does not comply with JeffCo zoning resolutions. The new, solid whi= te, 6-foot wide microwave device has an Effective Isotropic Radiated Powe= r of 338.8 watts and exceeds the 18-inch limit permitted by JeffCo for op= erating below 200-feet above ground. JeffCo planner Tim Carl approved the= "exchange" on August 2, 1999 (two weeks after supertower denia= l).

The new dish is fo= r a different use. It relays digital signals from the KRMA’s studio = in Denver to Lookout and back to a DTV antenna on the Republic Plaza roof= top in Denver. Analog and digital television are different technologies. = The digital spectrum can be split into multiple channels for a variety of= uses, including wireless "interactive."

KRMA engineers admitted in p= leadings filed with the FCC in 1990 that the Channel 6 tower is already &= quot;stressed" from too much weight which increases the risk of &quo= t;tower fall" on five family homes. The non-conforming tower (on a r= esidential zoned lot) does not comply with set-back requirements on Color= ow Road, which is used by residents, hikers, cyclists, runners and visito= rs to historic Boettcher Mansion (National Register of Historic Places) a= nd Lookout Mountain Nature Center on 110 acres of JeffCo Open Space.

JeffCo sued Bear C= reek Development in 1999 for installing an analog television transmitter = in "exchange" for cable TV "relay" microwave devices = on Mt. Morrison. The tower operates with a "special use" permit= on Agriculture-zoned land, surrounded by public park land.

JeffCo cites FM Stations for exceeding limits on Lookout Mountain

Radio stations exc= eeding radio frequency electromagnetic emission limits were cited by Jeff= erson County with a demand of compliance by November 15, 2000. Clear Chan= nel’s KISS and KALC, Tribune’s KOSI and KKHK, and Public Radio&= #146;s KCFR and KUVO are said to be operating below licensed power levels= to comply with public exposure limits.

Colorado Public Ra= dio expanded media power by purchasing KVOD-AM for $4.2 million in August= while the KCFR-FM and KUVO-FM transmitters continued to threaten public = safety. The CPR transmitters operate on the KRMA-TV channel 6 (PBS affili= ate) tower a few hundred feet from popular public facilities. Leo Cirbo, = FCC director of the Lakewood, Colorado office, claims there is an active = "investigation" of the KRMA-TV, KCFR-FM and KUVO-FM tower.

CPR attempted to c= omply in August by changing the spacing of the FM antennas, but groundlev= el radiation became more severe at the county-owned Boettcher Mansion (ev= ent center) and the Lookout Mountain Nature Center.

500,000 annual visitors view Channels 2 and 50 from historic Buffalo B= ill's Grave. Both stations want to increase electromagnetic radiation by = adding HDTV.

Value of the publi= c buildings and property, visited by an estimated 100,000 annually, are e= stimated at more than $10 million. CPR claims the historic metal mesh fen= ce surrounding the 115-acre "nature preserve" is causing the pr= oblem. The mansion’s listing with the National Register of Historic = Places includes the metal fence erected in 1917.


= Alleged "collusion" of FCC and Denver Broadcasters

EMR emission repor= ts filed with the Federal Communications Commission in 1986, 1997, 1998, = 1999 and 2000 verify the violations of the 1991 ANSI Standard. The statio= ns have not been cited by the FCC which has renewed all licenses and appr= oved new licenses.

FCC Enforcement Bu= reau rules do not allow licensing any station when public radiation limit= s are exceeded in the proposed tower area. CARE’s Antenna Tower Comm= ittee recently discovered that the FCC knew of exceeding radiation limits= when it provided DTV licenses and "construction permits" for f= ive digital television transmitters on December 2, 1998, the day of the f= irst JeffCo public hearing for Lake Cedar Group’s proposed "Sup= ertower" addition to already saturated Lookout Mountain.

Beginning in March= , 1998, CARE has filed several petitions requesting that the FCC deny lic= ensing any additional antennas without a comprehensive environmental impa= ct statement in compliance with the following federal laws:
   1) FCC electromagnetic radiation limits
   2) National Environmental Protection Act
   3) National Historic Preservation Act

CARE recently lear= ned that the FCC informed the broadcasters that it planned to conduct an = audit of transmission devices on Lookout in August, 1998. KCNC-TV removed= an unlicensed auxiliary transmitter operating on a "stub tower"= ; before the FCC arrived. The station was not cited by the county or FCC = for violating local and federal laws.

FCC collaboration = with broadcasters is similar to the FDA colluding with pharmaceuticals, t= he EPA colluding with industrial water polluters, or OSHA colluding with = employers. Federal regulatory agencies are reported by the media, except = for the FCC responsible for broadcasters and other wireless providers. Th= e media uses the First Amendment right to report on issues of choice. The= re is no national oversight of the FCC.

Radio frequency in= terference in the Greater Golden area has increased since News Corp’= s FOX-31 added a digital TV transmitter to its Lookout tower in 1999. On = October 17, 2000, CARE’s most recent filing was requesting enforceme= nt of FCC public policy for preventing severe interference.

National courts bombarded with antenna tower litigation<= /p>

The Advisory Counc= il on Historic Preservation, formed in 1966 as part of the National Histo= ric Preservation Act, has apparently influenced denial of some wireless a= nd digital TV antenna installations. Part of the Advisory Council’s = responsibility is to protect properties listed with the National Registry= of Historic Places from negative impact by federally financed or mandate= d installations. ACHP has requested comprehensive Environment Impact Stat= ements for several proposed tower sites. The FCC has threatened to file l= itigation against ACHP to support antenna clients.

National Tribal Hi= storic Preservation Officers have determined that some proposed tower sit= es would cause a negative impact on historic Tribal properties. ACHP is a= ttempting to support Native American claims by requesting EIS evaluations= =2E

National League of= Cities and National Association of Counties have filed a petition with t= he FCC to enforce federal laws that require EIS of proposed tower sites. = See more at
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/MassMedia/PublicNotices/da000764.doc<= /a> and
http://ww= w.fcc.gov/Bureaus.MassMedia/Filings/

The U.S. Supreme C= ourt has been asked to overturn the Telecommunications Act preemption cla= use. Local attorney Deb Carney has volunteered many hours assisting New Y= ork attorney Whitney Seymour representing grassroot citizens to overturn = the Telecom Act’s preemption clause. "The Tenth Amendment precl= udes Congress from treating state and local legislative bodies as puppets= on a federal string," Seymour wrote in a brief filed September 7.

According to Micro= wave News (Sep/Oct 2000), the brief also requests overturning the FCC= 6;s radio frequency/microwave (RF/MW) exposure limits. "Noting the l= ack of any funding for RF/MW research at the EPA, they argue that the fed= eral government has not fulfilled its responsibility to ensure that such = limits are based on adequate research."

Seymour, a former = U.S. District Attorney for New York, represents Citizens for the Appropri= ate Placement of Telecommunications Facilities.

To download docume= ntation about the above, see the CARE website: www.c-a-r-e.org
F
or background inf= ormation about the local Antenna Tower Struggle ,see: www.CityMtnViews.com/antenna_towe= r.html.

EPA considers public access to environmental pollution monitoring

A poll conducted i= n April, 2000 by Princeton Survey Research Associates found that nine of = ten Americans want government to fund research of environmental causes of= disease and were dismayed when they discovered no federally funded, syst= ematic monitoring and evaluation exists.

The U. S. Environm= ental Protection Agency recently announced plans to develop Environmental= Monitoring for Public Access and Community Tracking (EMPACT) program. Th= e goal is to assist communities in providing sustainable public access to= environmental monitoring data and information that are communicated in r= eal-time (or timely), useful, and accurate in the largest U.S. metro area= s. Deadline for public comment is February 21, 2001.

Environmental moni= toring consists of the systematic measurement, evaluation, and communicat= ion of physical, chemical, and/or biological information intended to give= insight into environmental conditions. EMPACT seeks to assist the Americ= an public in day-to-day decision-making about their health and the enviro= nment.

The 1996 TelCom Ac= t unleashed 110,000 more antennas to be installed nationwide. The EPA doe= s not monitor radio frequency electromagnetic radiation emissions and is = not considering it with EMPACT planning.

Microwave News rep= orts that the only EPA budgetary expense for EMR monitoring has been to a= ssign one staff member, Norbert Hankin, to work on radio frequency/microw= ave (RF/MW) radiation half time. Senator Joseph Lieberman asked the Gener= al Accounting Office to investigate the status of mobile phone safety res= earch in October, 1999. Before accepting the candidacy for U. S. Vice Pre= sident, Lieberman wrote the EPA (May, 2000) seeking details of the agency= ’s RF/MW activities. The reply was "EPA has no current or pendi= ng research studies on RF radiation health effects."

Five years ago, a = Senate panel cut $350,000 from EPA’s budget with instruction that &q= uot;EPA should not engage in EMF (electromagnetic frequencies from electr= ic power lines) activities." While the panel appeared to be targetin= g EMF, the agency stopped all radio frequency/microwave (RF/MW) radiation= programs. American news media (controlled by the primary RF/MW polluters= and primary advertisers) selectively reports research about electrical p= ower lines that emit a tiny fraction of high-power broadcast transmitters= =2E

To learn more abou= t EMPACT, see es.e= pa.gov/ncerqa/rfa/empact01.html
F
or a more compreh= ensive analysis, click Antenna Tower Strug= gle.
Tor more information and documents, see c-a-r-e.org.

© 2000 Updated: 11/21/00
Contact CARE Committee
O= ne resident lives only 150 feet from a short microwave tower where KCNC C= hannel 4 wants to install a high-power HDTV transmitter.
=
K= RMA-KCFR-KUVO tower of expanded use, 2000
= KRMA-KCFR-KUVO tower on Colorow Road adjacent to historic Boettcher Mansi= on and Lookout Mountain Nature Center.
= View of KWGN tower from Buffalo Bill's Grave and Museum
return to top of page
--------------582C4FB7DFE353581139AAD9-- Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com