the response on page 5, but nonetheless, they have colored the equipment brown tenacity of killing people. totally not the case. -- brown to match the color of the utility pole. totally not the case. can i show you a picture? this is across the street from my house. qc the actual wireless box that is so low to the ground that anyone can touch it. you can see the extension on that they added, this bright red piece of what. this pile of wires was left there after the contractors came back to work on the day that they did not do their work. on a side note, per what the board gave me, your permit is

hereby suspended until the board of appeals decides on this matter. they did not have a permit and they were fined, and a couple weeks ago on april 17, the contractor had a cigarette out of his mouth as he was standing on the utility pole. when i called the department of works, i was told that they had an emergency permit. and asked what the emergency was. i called ed never got a response because i don't believe there was an emergency. that equipment has never been turned on. i don't understand what kind of emergency it could have been. people like me are suffering, and the permits are supposed to be suspended. that is one issue.

the color of the texture don't match. let me show you a picture of what they say they will look like on the web site. none of these wireless unit look anything like this. on the picture on the left, you can see that there doesn't seem to be intent of on top of the expansion pool. that equipment boxes really far off the ground. if you look at the distance between the actual length and the extension pole on the left and look at what it looks like on my street, it is really different. the other thing i noticed was that there seems to be a discrepancy in the end of model number. the model number listed in the letter that the department of health review, they wrote a letter saying that the technology was saved. i noticed a discrepancy in the

model number. the difference between the two and that the model numbers is that the designation was inadvertently omitted in one document. let me show you the difference in these model numbers. i feel like if it was an omission, i feel like that is reason enough for the sperm that to be revoked. the letters at the numbers associated with the antenna have everything to do with the frequency of the technology being radiated. it means that the radiation levels are changing. the department of public works and their response actually provided a totally different model number. it does not match with either of those two. [chime] i stand in front of you asking the board of appeals to please remove this equipment, revoke

their permit. they are not in compliance from many different reasons. the tsignificant and the model numbers being there as well. >> do you know what wm stands for? reflective of any type of particular technology? >> i think it is. i contacted the manufacturer directly. high said, does this exist? they said no. i read those letters to the company. they said it does not. what >> what does wm signify? >> there are all these ways that

they break it down. frequents rangcy range, words associated with technology. i do gather the 14, 65, on the letter, it has dto do with gain. they do seem to be different. i got confirmation that the model number, and even if it was a typo, doesn't exist. the antenna that they put up does exist. president garcia: you have a hubble science degree? >> biology and environmental science. >> you're not the first well- educated person to come before us, but here is what confuses me. do you think the fcc, and i mean

this respectfully, i don't want to sound at all disrespectful. how do you think the fcc and the department of public works, and i want ask you if you think that of them, but you think they are misleading you as to what the rf's are? >> no, i don't think i am being misled, but i know from my own scientific research, the standard in the scientific community, all of the studies come out and say that it is not so black and white, there needs to be more research. it is unresolved. as fact, rf waves heat up tissues. that's fact. i know what happens to tissues when they heat up. they cause cancer. if i stay in my home, i am a

renter. it would take me three years to save money to move. i want to live there for a long time. i feel like my kids will get cancer. it is my belief, but i believe it is your responsibility to look at this technology. five of you have to follow the federal agency, but look at the fda. it is a funny parallel. it's a case of not in my back yard. the levels will be decreased by building material. the only thing between that is a piece of glass. >president garcia: have you gotten rf readings? >> they have asked me if i would be interested in having those levels taken, i have answered yes.

i would not have them come into my home. h the equipment isn't on, it's not up and running. president garcia: i've been led to understand the rf's, one of those antennas -- listen to me. i'm saying a microwave oven and your cell phone emit more rf's than that box does. 9 those are choices. i don't choose to use the microwave. president garcia: i am not asking you to keep making arguments -- >> i don't know that this is the right body for this decision to be made -- president garcia: stop. you agreed that it might be

true, that is all i wanted to ask you. >> may i say one more thing, please? president garcia: when you have rebuttal, of course you may. >> thank you, president garcia and commissioners. i'm the government relations and utility counsel for crowncastle which purchased nex-g. that entity will stay intact. as outlined in our comments, we met all of the permit requirements for wireless stocks - -bo-- for the wireleess ss box.

in the past, we have come before this board and you have upheld those. we are asking that you will pull this permit as well. the requirement here is a schematic of the location in the drawing that was submitted as part of the application. we happen to have of photo of the location has constructed. because of the suspension, we will be double checking the paint and color. if they want us to modify any type of the colors or textures, we will do that.

there is a wooden pole extension, because it is new would reverse is old wooden. if you have ever had to replace a beam, the new werer -- that ie nature of wood. the site is at the appropriate height, and it also meets the standards. the nice thing about this antenna is that -- it was used. i was double-checking the recommendations for approval. there are typos, but i went back to double and triple checked that the radio frequency report was with specifications and consistent in the application. the report for this site at this

location shows it has the correct model number. a lot of people have been talking to the manufacturer about it. people will often shorthand the model number. all the assessments were done. regarding rf verification, we have absolutely offered to do this at both of the appellants office -- houses. we hire someone. if there is another way to do these reports, we will happily comply. edison is a highly respected engineering firm in the region. we do this because we don't want people to be afraid of things

there is no need to be afraid of. people do often have microwaves ,w, wi fi, routers, showing the residents that a baby monitors are another one. we have given the city the report showing the compliance with the fcc. we asked to uphold the permit based on those reasons as well as our compliance with the process and the permit under which it was granted. if you have other questions, i will happily answer them. president garcia: if there were a box where the camera is right now, what kind of radio frequency would it be a meeting relative to the things you mentioned? >> i am not an engineer, so i can't go into the details of the engineering, but in working with a lot of engineers on this, the

further you get away is an inverse square rule. it drops off very dramatically. it is not only the handset, .wrt the hands that has the power up. heat in the microwave is the power of the microwaves in a close container. because of the shielding, it doesn't teach anything outside of the microwave. this is a low-and our location. this information cited the lowest level of exposure that means even if you are right next to the antenna thinking about your cordless phone or your wifi router, it would not have an impact vs. others where you have to have a standoff distance.

if there is an end to know where you can be in proximity to it, this is like one of those. hougpresident garcia: has it evr been done where the company would report what it would be 10 feet away, and you provide data like that for individuals? >> in the reports that we give to the city, it shows what that is projected out. and we go directly there. we give them the report and take measurements standing directly under the antenna, a certain distance is in the first

interior wall. and there is questions, often, about levels. i have done this at elementary schools and with the president, with small children and elderly relatives. one gentleman was really concerned that when we measured his laptop, it showed a decent amount of rf because of the wireless card. the engineer was there to explain, it is still so far below what the fcc level is for public exposure. they are above us, but they are not afraid they are going to hurt us, but if we touched them, they will, potentially, the very hot. rf operates in that thermal way, the closer you are, the more

potential for thermal heating. in proximity, there's no heat given off at that level. president garcia: given that this facility is not operating, would you predict that they would be a measurable at all? >> no. i have measured others, and they have not registered at all even belowground. thank you. >> a quick question. sorry. i agree with the appellant, it does not look appealing compared to the ones on the web site. why does it have to look like this? >> because it is a utility pole attachment. when you attach to a utility

pole, you use a certain type of configuration to meet the coverage objective. they are very low powered as well, but a different frequency. it covers in a different way. when you attach to street lights, which is the allowance and francisco, you have to fabricate the antenna in a different way. when we see transformers -- >> she showed us this equipment attached to label. >> of the picture was a street light that was fabricated securely with an antenna to be part of one unit as a new pole into the public right-of-way

rather than attaching to an existing pool. -- pole. it's not allowed in san francisco. anything else? president garcia: thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. in our brief, we stated that there were some sort of argument stating as it relates to the notification of these facilities, it was applied prior to the adoption. it would require me to process the spermine.

there was a notification requirements required in that case. this location did not fall under planning's requirement to streets with excellent views. planning was not involved in the review of this. the equipment was forwarded to the health department for review. we understand where the confusion is. the department received a letter from the department of public health of august 25, 2010 where on the remarks line, they stated kmw. in the body of the letter, that notation was changed to kms. it appears that the was a typo.

from our understanding of this, it is still referring to the same piece of equipment. this appears to be further exasperated in january of 2011. he again, the good department of health made the same error where one letter of the description was incorrect from their header. but our understanding was it continues to remain the same piece of equipment. the appellant commented upon the coloration of these facilities as it relates to the typical requirement of the pole.

historically, it has been a challenge for the wireless companies to try to match. it is either dark brown or gray based upon colorations. the department will provide additional directions. during the application, this is on the overhead that shows you the approximately view of that facility which appears to match what is installed. while we empathize, and the

requirement was passed by the government that the wireless facilities have their right to place it in the public right of way and it of what he's the city to process the variety of permits. >> are there two antennas? >> that is correct. two facing two directions in one housing. as you can see on top. >> they look sleeker, they seem to be closer together than what has actually been built. >> or one of the issues is how the bracket amounts are set up through the installation process. it would be best to explain why it would be, necessarily,

tighter. we have tried to match the shade of the utility bullhead. excuse me. there were comments related to the notification on the poles. in our brief, the notification was for utility workers that will be on the pole in close proximity to the antenna. this is part of the requirement for possible exposure to people working in very close proximity to these facilities so that they know what the issues are. please be advised also that upon

renewal, and given that there is article 25, that is new, a next year will be required to comply with the new regulations pending a court decision. in those cases, moving forward, if this facility -- there will be notification moving forward upon renewals. i am here to answer any questions you may have. president garcia: some point was made having to do with the fact that most streets marked a good are in wealthier areas. i know that is something that planning does. >> it is a planning definition for streets with good views and

above. it could be a situation where the views were identified -- it creates an increase in property values. president garcia: forgive me, you might have done it. i was looking for something. did you address the height of the base of this equipment issue? >> this facility and has multiple pieces of equipment. one of them is a pg &e meter. president garcia: that is pretty discriminatory against people like shaquille o'neal and other tall people.

>> any public comment? you are one of the appellants, right? you can speak under rebuttal, but you cannot speak under public comment. we will move into a bottle. you have three minutes. -- rebuttal. you have three minutes. >> i am not afraid of this technology. i do not fear anything about this. i did want to say a couple of things. i do not know if this is the kind of forum to have this decision made. what i what so bad is to have been denied their permit and take this back to the appropriate forum for discussion. maybe that is the planning department. many other cities buried this equipment underground. why aren't we doing that in san francisco? it is not like we do not want the technology. we all want our computers to

move faster. but it is how it is being placed in the city. they have a right to put this equipment and a public way, but san francisco has a right to oversee the whereabouts. i found a case in new york were this particular village, at the same thing was happening to them. a visually similar to box and antennas. the people were so distraught by it. they agreed to provide a slimmed down version. i have seen the pictures and it is so much different. why aren't we doing that? when i presented my request, i felt the board made it clear that it was not your place to consider esthetics. i found a course case where the judge did determine that local governments are allowed to consider esthetics. it is not the health concern. i am not afraid of this

technology. but i think about san francisco as a whole and our standard of living. it is not this. if this was happening outside your home, maybe things would be different. people are just starting to see these boxes. but there are a lot of them in the city. pick it back to a department that will make better decisions about how this -- kicked back to a department that will make better decisions about how this technology is used. i just wanted to consider those things, thank you. i will make one more comment. when the -- when i asked the department of public works to provide me with that letter that the department of health had a typo. the letter was dated in august. that was the only letter that they provided me. in the department of public works response, there wa