HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING NOTICE

DATE: Monday, May 15, 2017 TIME: 3:30 PM PLACE: Terrebonne Parish Council Meeting Room 2nd Floor, Government Tower 8026 Main Street, Houma, LA 70360

A • G • E • N • D • A

1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Announcements: 4. Approve Minutes of April 17, 2017 and May 08, 2017 5. New Business: a. Structure Variance: Rear yard setback variance from required 25’ to 10’ to allow for new residential construction to be attached to the existing structure located at 226 Exeter Run; Angela Rains, applicant; (Bayou Cane Fire District/Council District 6). b. Special Exception: Approval for placement of a 190’ tall communication tower at 1310 Savanne Road; New Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC d/b/a AT&T Mobility, applicant; (Bayou Cane Fire District/Council District 6). 7. Next Meeting Date: June 19, 2017 8. Board of Adjustment Member Comment 9. Public Comment 10. Adjourn Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 1 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Official Proceedings of April 17,2017

Government Tower 2nd Floor, Terrebonne Parish Council Meeting Room

1. The Chairman, Trudy Hebert, called the April 17, 2017 meeting of the Houma Board of Adjustment to order at 3:40 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Mr. Joe Harris.

2. Upon Roll Call, those members present were Mr. Joe Harris, Mr. Pete Konos, Mr. Willie Newton, Mrs. Katie Sims and Mrs. Trudy Hebert. Also present was Mr. Christopher Pulaski, TPCG Planning Director and Mr. Julius Hebert, TPCG attorney. Absent was Mr. David Tauzin, due to an out of town business commitment.

3. Announcements: Chairman recognized Councilwoman Christa Duplantis Prather and Councilman Darren Guidry who were in attendance.

4. Approval of Minutes: Motion was made by Mr. Joe Harris, seconded by Mr. Willie Newton, that the minutes of March 20, 2017 be APPROVED; THERE BEING NO OPPOSITION, THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

5. OLD BUSINESS: a. Structure Variance: Height variance request for placement of a 250’ cellular communication tower at 1310 Savanne Road; AT&T applicant.

Chair recognized Mr. Jon “Chip” Leyens, 201 St. Charles Avenue, New Orleans, LA, who stated that they are only requesting a height variance for a communication tower at 1310 Savanne Road. He also stated that this is his third hearing on this issue. He stated that AT&T may be willing to reduce the height variance request to 190’ vs. 250’ if that would help to move this approval forward.

Chair recognized Mr. Jake Dickenson, Key Point Communications, 713 Navajo Drive, Abita Springs, La. 70320, who stated that he is an AT&T consultant on this project and is here to answer any questions.

Chair recognized Mr. Lloyd Olsen, 3792 Highway 311, Houma, who stated that he is the owner of this property. He presented pictures of other towers in the area which are similar to the proposed tower. (See Attachments 1: a-e)

Chair recognized Mr. Christopher Pulaski. Mr. Pulaski introduced two experts from the audience, Mr. Leo Holzenthal, Professional Engineer with M.S. Benbow and Associates; and Mr. Steve Villavaso, AICP, Certified Planner of Villavaso and Associates out of New Orleans. Mr. Pulaski stated that these experts are available to answer any questions.

Mr. Pulaski stated that the applicant is requesting approval to allow for the construction of a 250 foot monopole wireless telecommunication tower in a C-3 zoned district. While the request has been considered a height variance, further analysis of the zoning ordinance has concluded that the request constitutes an exception since the supplementary height section of the zoning ordinance excludes telecommunication towers.

At the February meeting, staff recommendation was for approval. Due to public comment and concern, the Board of Adjustment continued the item to allow for additional public comment. Subsequently, Administration and Staff evaluated the situation and had requested at the March meeting that the item be continued to allow for additional evaluation and withdrew the previous recommendation. As part of the evaluation, the Parish has retained the services of both a Professional Engineer and a AICP Certified Planner with considerable experience in proposed cell towers and their placement. Each expert consultant has conducted a site visit of the proposed site and several of the surrounding alternative sites as identified by the applicant and subsequent alternative sites that have been identified by Parish Staff. Attached to this Staff Report is a copy of the report from each of the experts along with a copy of their qualifications. The report prepared by the engineer, Mr. Leo Holzenthal, Jr., dated April 12, 2017 includes an analysis and findings of proposed alternative sites including the existing nearby 260’ tower owned and operated by American Tower originally described as Candidate C by the applicant which the applicant states that it cannot structurally support additional antennas that AT&T requires. Also attached to this Staff Report is an email from a representative of American Tower to Mr. Holzenthal dated April 09, 2017 that states that there is enough structural capacity for another carrier which would be confirmed in the co-location structural analysis.

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 2 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

The Parish has also provided three additional site alternatives for the applicant to consider as Candidate Sites G, H and I. G and H are both on Parish-owned property that are within ¾ to 1.5 miles from the subject property site, and would be in keeping with the public infrastructure aspects of the sites. Candidate Site H is of particular interest as the Parish’s expert engineer stated that the site may be close enough to be viable. The site is zoned OL (Open Land) which would require a rezone which the Parish Staff would support. The Parish’s findings and comments to all of the site alternatives are included as part of Mr. Holzenthal’s report. Staff agrees with Mr. Holzenthal in that Candidates C and H appear to be the most attractive alternatives.

Also attached to this Staff Report is a copy of the report prepared by our AICP Certified Planner, Mr. Steve Villavaso, dated April 13, 2017. Page 1 addresses the supplementary regulations while Pages 2 and 3 of the report include an analysis of the conditions of approval that Section 24-178(3) of the Parish Zoning Ordinance states must exist before the Board can approve. This report will be read into the meeting record. (See attachments: 2) M.S. Benbow and Associates, April 12, 2017); and 3) Villavaso & Associates, April 13, 2017).

Parish Staff concurs with Mr. Villavaso’s findings. While the tower is a permitted use in C-3 zoning, the additional foot requirement for each additional foot above the 35’ height max (215’) has not been met.

RECOMMENDATION: In lieu of the findings pertaining to the alternative sites, Staff recommends that the Board DENY the request so that the applicant may reapply for one of the alternative locations.

Mr. Pulaski clarified that the alternative locations are Candidate Sites A-F as identified by the applicant and Candidate Sites G, H, and I identified by the Parish.

He further stated that if the applicant requests to modify the application to reflect a lower height of 190’ as indicated in their April 12, 2017 email, Staff would recommend that the Board DENY the request for a 250’ tower and that the applicant submit a new application to the Board for an exception for the 190’ tall tower.

It was further stated that with the exception of legal, non-conforming towers that pre-date zoning, any new construction tower application shall be subject, at a minimum, to the setbacks identified in the Supplementary Section 28-73 of the Parish Zoning Ordinance or provide for setback waiver and other requirements including applicable indemnification agreements.

It was mentioned that the tower behind CVS at Hollywood Road and Park Avenue, as well as other existing towers, including Candidate C, pre-date zoning so there were no such zoning requirements at the time those were erected.

Chair recognized Mr. Olsen, again, who questioned the recommendations.

Chair recognized Mr. Leyens, again, who stated the construction schedule issues.

Chair recognized Mr. Dickinson, again, who attempted to answer questions regarding capacity issues.

Chair recognized Mr. Burt Theriot, 142 Houmas Drive, who stated that he lives in the area. He voiced that there is a need for Wi-Fi in the area.

Chair recognized Mr. Leo Holzenthal, M.S. Benbow & Associates, 2450 Severn Avenue, Metairie, LA., who explained his contact with American Tower and his company’s participation in this issue.

Chair recognized Mr. Steve Villavaso, 6304 Beauregard Avenue, New Orleans, LA., who stated that his firm was asked to analyze from a Zoning, Planning and Land use perspective and their recommendation is that this is a Special Exception and that AT&T’s request does not meet 5 out of the 8 criteria required.

After a lengthy discussion, a motion to DENY and allow AT&T to re-apply was made by Joe Harris, seconded by Willie Newton.

ROLL CALL VOTE: YEAS: Newton, Konos, Harris NAYS: None ABSTAINED: Sims NOT VOTING: Hebert ABSENT: Tauzin

Chair declared the MOTION ADOPTED and the request DENIED and to allow applicant to re-apply. Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 3 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

6. NEW BUSINESS: a. Structure Variance: Rear yard setback from required 25’ to 10’ for new residential construction at 422 Levron Street; Charity Boudreaux, applicant.

Chair recognized Mrs. Charity Boudreaux, 422 Levron Street, Houma, who stated that she is requesting the rear yard variance in order to be able to rebuild her house through the flood mitigation grant.

Chair recognized Mr. Christopher Pulaski who stated that the applicant is requesting a rear yard setback variance from the required 25’ to 10’ for new residential construction in an R-1 zoned district. The applicant is participating in the Parish’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, and a structural analysis of the existing home has deemed it unable to be elevated. Therefore, the owner’s only alternative is to rebuild at the same location, elevating the new home. The property pre-dates zoning so the required setbacks present a hardship in order to reconstruct a home at a similar square footage given the smaller size of the lot at 80’x 60’.

Staff feels that the exception will not alter the essential character of the district in which it is located and that the exception will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming properties in the same district as many of the existing homes also have similar legal, con-conforming setbacks. The subject property itself was considered to be legal, non-conforming and would not require such a variance had this not been a voluntary removal and reconstruction.

A site visit was performed and all property owners adjacent to and within a 250’ radius of the subject property have been notified. Staff received no calls of the request.

Staff recommends APPROVAL of the request.

MOTION to APPROVE was made by Mr. Willie Newton, seconded by Mr. Joe Harris

ROLL CALL VOTE: YEAS: Newton, Konos, Sims, Harris NAYS: None ABSTAINED: None NOT VOTING: Hebert ABSENT: Tauzin

Chair declared the MOTION ADOPTED and request APPROVED. b. Structure Variance: Rear yard setback from required 25’ to 19’ for new residential construction located at 1308 Compton Place; Burt Theriot, applicant.

Chair recognized Mr. Burt Theriot, 142 Houmas Drive, Houma, who stated that he is requesting this variance because of the irregular shape of the lot.

Chair recognized Mr. Christopher Pulaski who stated that the applicant is requesting a rear yard setback variance from the required 25’ to 19’ for new residential construction in an R-1 zoned district.

Applicant is requesting a rear yard setback to maintain the functional design and architectural integrity of the development. The unique shape of the lot as well as the 25’ front setback required by the subdivision covenants’, along with the minimum size of the proposed home create a hardship. Staff feels that the exception will not alter the essential character of the district in which it is located as the encroachment is limited to two corners of the property in the same district. The exception will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare of the district.

A site visit was performed and all property owners adjacent to and within a 250’ radius of the subject property have been notified. Staff received one call for more information and support of the request.

Staff recommends APPROVAL of the request.

MOTION to APPROVE was made by Mr. Pete Konos, seconded by Mr. Joe Harris.

ROLL CALL VOTE: YEAS: Newton, Konos, Sims, Harris NAYS: None ABSTAINED: None Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 4 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

NOT VOTING: Hebert ABSENT: Tauzin

Chair declared the MOTION ADOPTED and request APPROVED. b. Structure Variance: Rear yard setback from required 25’ to 5’ for residential addition located at 1026 Wood Street; Merlin Lirette, applicant.

Chair recognized Mr. Melvin Lirette, 803 Liberty St., Houma, who stated that his intentions are to move the house on Wood Street forward and construct the additions and modifications to the rear and to make this his primary residence. He needs the rear yard setback variance in order to accomplish this.

Chair recognized Mrs. Christa Duplantis Prather, 101 Saxony Drive, Houma, who stated that she has attended the meeting because she received an email from a constituent in her district in regards to him not having received a notice of the meeting. The constituent has NO OBJECTION to the request, he merely wondered why he did not receive a notice like other neighbors did.

Chair recognized Mr. Christopher Pulaski who stated that the applicant is requesting a rear yard setback to allow for an addition to the home to provide garage and storage. Typically, a detached accessory structure would not require such a variance; however, the applicant has chosen to attach the garage to the home via a covered walkway which categorizes it as an addition. Although the property is 140’ deep, the existing home is set back approximately 54’ from the front property line. Part of the applicant’s plan is to renovate the main structure and bring the front up to the 20’ setback and to increase the overall setback of the rear yard to the main portion of the house. This means that only the garage/storage structure will be encroaching into the rear yard setback so there seems to be some compromise as to the final footprint of the structure. Staff feels that the exception will not alter the essential character of the district in which it is located as several homes in the immediate and surrounding areas have similar encroachments. The exception will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property in the same district. The exception will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare the district.

A site visit was performed and all property owners adjacent to and within a 250' radius of the subject property have been notified. Staff received one call regarding the public notice requirements and indicated that they have yet to receive their notice letter. A subsequent review of the tracking number indicates that the letter is “in transit” although it lists the expected delivery date as April 14, 2017.

Staff recommends APPROVAL of the request.

A MOTION to APPROVE was made by Mr. Pete Konos, seconded by Mr. Joe Harris.

ROLL CALL VOTE: YEAS: Newton, Konos, Sims, Harris NAYS: None ABSTAINED: None NOT VOTING: Hebert ABSENT: Tauzin

Chair declared the MOTION ADOPTED and request APPROVED.

7. Next Meeting Date: May 15, 2017

8. Board of Adjustment Member Comment: NONE 9. Public Comment: NONE 10. There being no further business, Mr. Pete Konos made the MOTION to ADJOURN, seconded by Mr. Joe Harris. There being NO OPPOSITION, MOTION CARRIED; Chairman declared MOTION ADOPTED and the meeting ADJOURNED.

Mr. Willie Newton, Secretary

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 5 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Attachment 1 -a

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 6 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Attachment 1-b

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 7 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Attachment 1-c

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 8 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Attachment 1-d

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 9 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Attachment 1-e

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 10 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

April 12, 2017 Corporate Office • 2450 Severn Avenue • Suite 400 Metairie, LA 70001 • 504.832.2000 msbenbow.com ML Juiius P. Hebert, Jr Hebert & Marceaux, LLC 4752 Hwy. 311, Ste. 114 Houma, LA 70360

Reference: Proposed AT&T Wireless Mobility Cell Tower at 1310 Savanne Road MSB&A Project No. TE- 17-01315 .

Dear Mr. Hebert, I am writing this letter in response to your request for a first evaluation of the subject project. Please reference my comments to the memo from Chris Pulaski dated yesterday and attached. l. The proposed tower site designated as Candidate D is proposed to be a 250 ft. self­ supporting monopole type structure near the corner of Savanne Rd and Hwy 311. In addition to Mr. Pulaski's comments, I would like to note that AT&T has subsequently offered to reduce the tower height to 210 ft. then subsequent to that, AT&T offered to reduce the tower height to 190 ft. I suggest that the Parish should have AT&T provide construction drawings and other due diligence for the 190 ft tower structure if this alternate is to be considered. The question should also be asked of AT&T: "What is the least height (elevation) required for this installation to perform its intended function?"

2. In my evaluation of the candidate sites that have been presented by AT&T, Candidate C appears to be a very promising opportunity for AT&T. This is an existing lattice structure tower that has one cellular tenant installed at this time. Candidate C is owned and leased by American Tower Corporation (ATC). ATC references this tower as being Asset No. 412663 and Asset Name Ellendale, LA. This is a 250 ft. tall self- supporting structure built in 2003. The single existing tenant is Verizon Wireless and their antennas are installed at approximately 190 ft. AGL (centerline). I made an inquiry to ATC regarding this tower. Their response is that the tower has enough structural capacity to accommodate another tenant. Please find attached correspondence and background information on this candidate site. I recognize that AT&T characterized the Candidate C site as follows: Candidate C - Existing 260 ft. "seif-suppor(' tower. The construction tower was built in 2003 making it 14 years old. A structural analysis of the existing tower indicated that it would not support the additional antennas that AT&T requires.

170175, TE-l?-91315, Hebe1i & Marceau, J Hebe1i M AT&T Wireless Mobility Cell Tower.at 1310 Savanne Rd______State Registrations • Louisiana EF.0000868 • Louisiana Contractor License 28140 • Arkansas COA 2187 • Arizona 16734 Florida COA 28684 • Mississippi COA 1186 • North Dakota PE 1344' Ohio COA 03631 PE • Oklahoma PE 6016 • Texas F-2988 Attachment 2 Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 11 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

-

However,ft. AT&T did not submit evidence of the structural analysis with their application. At the time the previous statement was madeviable. AT&T was proposing their equipment installation to be at elevation 250 Now that they have lowered that requirement to 190 ft. AGL, I am more optimistic that the existingIn my opinion, Candidate Candidate C site C is provides an excellent opportunity for AT&T to co-locate on the existing structure, which would satisfy the spirit of the TPCG code of ordinance that prefers co-location on existing structures before the installation of new permit structures. Candidate C is in reasonable proximity to the proposed location. (1100' away) It has space available between 210 and 250 ft. elevation, and other locations below 180'. It should provide very similar coverage profile to the proposed site. I recommend that this candidate location be thoroughly investigated before eliminating it as a possibility.

3. Candidate G site is approximately a mile and a half from the proposed site location. It is significantly set back from Hwy 311. This site is owned by the Parish Government and could be made available to AT&T. I am not able to judge the functional viability of this site to AT&T because of its distance away from the proposed site. I would consider this location a weak option for AT&T.

4. Candidate H Site is also owned by the Parish Government and is approximately three quarters of a mile from the proposed site. From a RF technical standpoint, this site may be close enough to the proposed site to be a viable location. Other experts would have to determine whether this location is feasible from a site development perspective.

5. Candidate I site is privately owned land.. No comment at this time on this site because we have not determined the extents of the private owner's property boundaries.

I hope that this report provides you with valuable information and I am available anytime to discuss it.

Attachments

Attachment 2 170175, TE-17 01315, Hebert & Marceau, J Hebe1t -AT&T Wireless Mobility Cell Tower at 1310 Savanne Rd Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 12 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 13 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Report/Analysis regarding BZA Application Villavaso & Associates Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government April 13, 2017 Telecommunications Tower located at: 1310 Savanne Road

Introduction This report addresses the Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government Urban Services District Board of Adjustment application submitted on February 6, 2017 to construct a 250-foot monopole wireless telecommunications Tower at 1310 Savanne Road, Houma, Louisiana, 70360. This report includes an analysis of the Terrebonne Parish Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, specifically the sections of the ordinance that address supplementary height regulations and the special exception standards of the Board of Adjustment.

Height Exception Analysis

The applicant is requesting an exception to the maximum height allowed in base zoning district (35 feet in C-3) as noted in Sec. 28-73. - Supplementary height regulations. Sec. 28-73. - Supplementary height regulations. The following regulations shall apply in all districts as established in Article III of this chapter: (a) Height exceptions. The height limits for the various districts shall not apply to church spires, belfries, cupolas, penthouses or domes not used for human habitation nor to chimneys, ventilators, skylights, water tanks, parapet walls, cornices or necessary mechanical appurtenances usually carried above.the roof level, provided that such features are limited to the height necessary for their proper functioning. Commercial radio and television antennae or towers, in those districts where permitted, shall not be subject to the height limits provided for in such district, but shall be subject to the approval of the board of adjustment in order that such board may set such reasonable terms and conditions as may be necessary for the protection of adjacent property and uses. (b) Excess height. In any district any main structure may be erected or altered to a height in excess of that specified for the district in which the structure is located,' provided that each required front, side and rear yard is increased one (1) foot for each foot of such excess height, and provided further, that where no front yard is required, the part of the structure exceeding the height specified for the district shall be set back from the vertical planes of all street lines one (I) foot for each two (2) feet of such excess height. (c) Compensating bulk and open space. To permit variety in the shape and bulk of structures in any district, part of a main structure may be erected or altered to a height in excess of that specified for the district in which the structure is located without increasing the yards or creating the setback as required above, provided a volume of space at least equal to the volume of space occupied by the structure exceeding the height limit is provided and kept open below the height limit; it is intended that such open space below the height limit shall compensate for the excessive bulk above the height limit, and to this end, both the excess bulk and the compensating open space shall be provided on the same building site.

While standard (a) gives the Board of Adjustment the power to approve height exceptions, the intent of the ordinance is for all of the height standards to be applied for main structures, as noted. This means that the applicant must also meet the conditions of standard (b) which include additional front, side, and rear yard requirements based on the excess height requested. Additionally, standard (c) does not override the standard (b) since the entire main structure is in excess of the height limit.

Page 1 Attachment 3

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 14 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Report/Analysis regarding BZA Application Villavaso & Associates Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government April 13, 2017 Telecommunications Tower located at: 1310 Savanne Road

Special Exception Analysis

A Special Exception is a process by which the Board of Adjustment may grant an exception [specifically identified in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance] upon which the board is authorized to pass. Special exceptions shall be subject to such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the board. AdditionaIly, per the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, the Board of Zoning Adjustment can only grant a special exception if all of the following eight conditions exist.

The eight conditions are noted below (condition A through condition H) along with comments and analysis of each condition.

A. That the exception will not authorize the operation of a use other than those uses specifically enumerated for the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought; We agree that the exception will not authorize a use other than those specifically allowed in the district. The site is zoned C-3, and wireless towers are a permitted use in the district.

B. That the full development is designed and intended to serve the district in which the development is sought to be operated and maintained; Generally, we agree that proposed tower will serve the district in which the tower will be located.

C. That the exception is essential to maintain the functional design and architectural integrity of the development; We disagree that the exception is essential to maintain the functional design and architectural integrity of the development. Additionally, there are many towers in Terrebonne Parish of lower height that provide adequate service.

D. That the exception will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property in the same district; Yes, the proposed tower will substantially injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property within the district. The site, while zoned commercial, is surrounded by single-family residential districts. Additionally, the fall zone for the proposed tower includes several of these properties. The adjacent residential neighborhoods have voiced concerns about lighting and sign line issues.

Page 2 Attachment 3

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 15 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Report/Analysis regarding BZA Application Villavaso & Associates Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government April 13, 2017 Telecommunications Tower located at: 1310 Savanne Road

E. That the exception will not alter the essential character of the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought; Yes, the exception, if granted, will alter the character of the neighborhood by setting a precedent of multiple, large communication towers located directly adjacent and in close proximity to current and future single-family residential developments. Furthermore, these types of developments could have a detrimental impact on the value, harmony and character of the adjacent and nearby residential developments.

F. That the exception will not weaken the general purposes of this chapter or the regulations herein established for the specific district; We agree that the exception will not weaken the general purposes of this chapter or the regulations herein established for this specific district.

G. That the exception will be in harmony with the spirit and purposes of this chapter The stated purpose of the height exception for commercial towers is the "the board may set such reasonable terms and conditions as may be necessary for the protection of adjacent property and uses." Additionally, this section contains standards that require larger yards for additional height. The current development proposal does not meet these standards, and therefore, the exception is not in harmony and spirit with the purposes of this chapter.

H. That the exception will not adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare or the master plan. The surrounding residential neighborhoods have voiced serious concerns on the proposed development and the site does not allow for the mitigation of these concerns based on the current design and height. Based on the current design and the proposed location the exception would adversely affect the health, safety, and welfare of the community.

Page 3 Attachment 3

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 16 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

Report/Analysis regarding BZA Application Villavaso & Associates Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government April 13, 2017 Telecommunications Tower located at: 1310 Savanne Road

Recommendation

In summary and in conclusion, we believe that the development plan associated with requested exception, pursuant to Sec. 28-73. Supplement height regulations, of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to permit the construction of a 250-foot commercial tower, 215 feet in height over the maximum height allowed in C-3, does not meet the standard (b) which requires additional front, rear, and side yard dimensions due to the additional, excessive height. Additionally, the requested exception fails to meet five (5) of the eight (8) criteria of the Standards for Special Exceptions in Sec 28-178.(f).(3).Board of Adjustment-Powers of Board­ Special Exceptions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, in that: _ The exception is not essential to maintain the functional design and architectural integrity of the development (C) _ That the exception will substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property in the same district (D) _ That the exception will not alter the essential character of the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought (E) _ That the exception will be in harmony with the spirit and purposes of this chapter (G) _That the exception will not adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare or the master Plan (H) Therefore, we recommend DENIAL of the requested special exception.

Page 4 Attachment 3

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government 17 HOUMA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT –April 17, 2017

226 Exeter Run Narrative of request:

We are requesting a rear yard setback variance from required 25’ to 10’ to allow us to adjoin an existing structure to our new home construction.

Attaching the two structures is necessary for the overall effectiveness and usefulness of the home. “According to the contractor, he has constructed a number of houses with attachments like this in this area” .

This variance is needed to maintain the functional design and architectural integrity of the home and property.

At the time that the existing structure was built, we had not anticipated the building of the new construction and the possible issues pertaining to attaching the two.

The joining of the structures does comply with all of the requirements and regulations listed in the application of this variance. 226 EXETER RUN

May 5, 2017 DISCLAIMER: Terrebonne Parish makes no warranty as to the reliability or accuracy of the base maps, their associated data tables or the original data collection process and is not responsible for the inaccuracies that could have occurred due to errors in the original data input or subsequent update process. User assumes all responsibility for verifying accuracy of data for any intended use. 1 inch = 521 feet 0 280 560 840 1,120 Feet

226 EXETER RUN

Picture depicting the adjoining of structures

Side view depicting adjoining

TERREBONNE PARISH CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT URBAN SERVICES DISTRICT

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

P.O. BOX 2768 HOUMA, LA 70361

NO APPLICATION ACCEPTED UNLESS COMPLETE

Complete the following:

Special Exception Structure Variance Administrative Appeal

2. Applicant’s Name:

3. Applicant’s Address:

4. Applicant’s Phone:

5. Physical Address Of request:

6. Interest in Ownership: 7. Date of Application:

8. Explanation of Request:

POLICY

Special Exception

Special Exception shall be subject to such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the Board. No exception shall be authorized unless the Board shall find that all of the following conditions exist:

a) That the exception will not authorize of a use other than those uses specifically enumerated for the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought; b) That the full development is designed and intended to serve the district in which the development is sought to be operated and maintained; c) That the exception is essential to maintain the functional design and architectural integrity of the development; d) That the exception will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriated use of adjacent conforming property in the same district; e) That the exception will not alter the essential character of the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought; f) That the exception will not weaken the general purposes of this ordinance or the regulations herein established for the specific district; g) That the exception will be in harmony with the spirit and purposes of this ordinance; h) That the exception will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare, or the Master Plan. Variance

Where by reasons of exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a specified piece of property at the time of enactment of this ordinance, or by reason of exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary orexceptional characteristics of such piece of property, to authorize, upon an appeal relating to such property, a variance from such strict application so as to relieve such difficulties or hardship, provided, such relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. Variances shall be subject to such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the Board. No variance shall be authorized unless the Board shall find that all conditions exist:

a) That the exception will not authorize of a use other than those uses specifically enumerated for the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought; b) That the full development is designed and intended to serve the district in which the development is sought to be operated and maintained; c) That the exception is essential to maintain the functional design and architectural integrity of the development; d) That the exception will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property in the same district; e) That the exception will not alter the essential character of the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought; f) That the exception will not weaken the general purposes of this ordinance or the regulations herein established for the specific district: g) That the exception will be in harmony with the spirit and purposes of this ordinance; h) That the exception will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare, or the Master Plan.

Application Fee: $ 20.00 per application + cost of certified mailings. Make checks payable toTPCG.

Signature ofApplicant or Agent

The undersigned is owner(s) ofthe entire land area included in the proposal and in signing indicates concurrence with the application. (Please see attached lease agreement for landowner approval of this application.)

Signature of Owner

Date

9. Adjacent Property Owners:

Please provide a list of property owners located within 250 feet radius of the subject property along with this application. These property owners shall be notified in the followingmanner: Notification shall be sent by Parish Staff by certified mail to the applicant and to the adjacent property owners and by first class mail to all remaining property owners within a two hundred fifty-foot (250') radius. The notice shall advise the purpose, date, time and place of the hearing. The cost of any postal fees associated with the notification process shall be borne by the applicant. The current cost for each mail is $ 6.59. 201 ST. CHARLES AVENUE SUITE 3600 NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70170 PHONE: 504.566.5200 FAX: 504.636.4000

www.bakerdonelson.com

JON F. LEYENS, JR. Direct Dial: 504.566.8628 Direct Fax: 504.585.6928 E-Mail Address: [email protected]

May 1, 2017

VIA E-MAIL

Terrebonne Parish Board of Adjustment ATTN: Christopher Pulaski, PLA Directors, Planning & Zoning Department Government Tower 8026 Main Street, Suite 401 Houma, Louisiana 70360 [email protected]

RE: New Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC d/b/a AT&T Mobility request for approval for 190' wireless telecommunications tower at 1310 Savanne Road in Houma (Zoning District C-3) Our File No. 2900059-003126

Dear Mr. Pulaski:

I am writing on behalf of New Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC d/b/a AT&T Mobility ("AT&T" or "Applicant"), the applicant under the above-referenced approval request to the Terrebonne Parish Board of Adjustment (the “Board”). AT&T previously filed an application to construct a 250 foot tower at this location on February 6, 2017 (the “Initial Application”). At its April 17, 2017 meeting, the Board voted to deny the Initial Application, but the Board’s ruling specifically did not address the merits of AT&T’s offer to construct a 190 foot tower at the subject location. Accordingly, AT&T is filing this subsequent application to locate a tower of lower height in the same location in the City of Houma, Louisiana, in order to help improve the cellular service and data coverage around this area. The coverage and capacity demands in the area are illustrated on the Radio Frequency (Coverage) Maps attached hereto as Exhibit B. Additionally, as discussed below, there are no suitable structures in the area on which to co- locate. Accordingly, the best option to address the coverage and capacity issues in this area is to build a new cell tower at the subject location.

AT&T is seeking to construct a wireless telecommunications tower on property located at 1310 Savanne Road, which is located in Zoning District C-3 (Neighborhood Commercial District). The proposed tower will be a 190' monopole tower, which represents a 25% reduction in height from AT&T's prior application to the Board of Adjustments. Because the height of the proposed tower is being reduced below 200 feet, FAA regulations do not require lighting of the tower at this particular location. The addition of a tower located at the proposed site will help to ensure access to reliable wireless telecommunications services in the City in a manner consistent with public safety and welfare.

4819-7610-7079 v3

A L A B A M A • F L O R I D A • G E O R G I A • LOUISIANA • MISSISSIPPI • TENNESSEE • T E X A S • WASHINGTON, D.C. Terrebonne Parish Board of Adjustment Mr. Christopher Pulaski May 1, 2017 Page 2

The wireless telecommunications facility and antennae will be located, fenced, or otherwise secured in a manner that prevents unauthorized access. The antennae to be installed on the tower will be, and will remain, in compliance with current Federal Communications Commission standards, including radio frequency emissions.

At the Board’s April 17th hearing regarding the Initial Application, Terrebonne Parish referenced an engineer's report prepared by Mr. Leo Holzenthal, Jr. (the "Holzenthal Report"), which analyzed alternate sites to locate the proposed tower. Based upon the Holzenthal Report, the Parish recommended three site alternatives to AT&T: Candidates G, H, and I. The map of the site alternatives included in the Holzenthal Report is attached hereto as Exhibit C. However, candidates G, H, and I are located in zoning district OL. Telecommunications towers are not a permitted use in zoning district OL, and a re- zone would be required for AT&T to construct a telecommunications tower located at any of these three sites. Telecommunications towers are, however, a permitted use for the proposed site in zoning district C-3, and the additional requirement of a re-zone does not apply to the proposed site.

AT&T has selected the subject location on Savanne Road in reliance on the Terrebonne Parish Zoning Ordinance designation of a telecommunications tower as a permitted use on this location. As depicted on Exhibit D attached hereto, the subject location is one of the few properties in the immediate area that have been designated by Terrebonne Parish through its zoning code as appropriate for the location of a telecommunications tower. The majority of the land in the immediate area is zoned for residential or open land use; neither of those zoning classifications allow telecommunications towers under any circumstances. Accordingly, it would be an undue burden to require AT&T to seek rezoning any of the alternative sites referenced in the Holzenthal Report to a commercial classification so that AT&T could then apply for telecommunications tower approval on one of the alternative sites referenced in the Holzethal Report, after AT&T already has expended considerable resources in pursuing approval on a location where the proposed use is already a permitted use, per the Terrebonne Parish Zoning Ordinance.

Furthermore, prior to submitting both the Initial Application and this application, AT&T previously had performed an evaluation of the viability of alternative site locations for the proposed tower, as shown by the Elimination Map, attached hereto as Exhibit D, the Zoning Map of Existing Towers, attached hereto as Exhibit E, and the Site Candidate Map, attached hereto as Exhibit F. The Elimination Map includes an explanation as to why the other potential sites were deemed unacceptable by AT&T. As referenced above, the reasons include, without limitation, inappropriate zoning. In addition, selecting an alternative site at this time would require AT&T to start over on site acquisition, due diligence, and other regulatory matters. For example, AT&T would need to secure a National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") permit for an alternative site. The NEPA approval process can take approximately four to six months, which would unreasonably delay the construction of the proposed tower.

The Holzenthal Report also recommended that AT&T co-locate its equipment on an existing American Tower Company (“ATC”) site. The Holzenthal Report includes a letter from ATC stating that the ATC tower could accommodate additional equipment. AT&T already had thoroughly investigated

4819-7610-7079 v3 Terrebonne Parish Board of Adjustment Mr. Christopher Pulaski May 1, 2017 Page 3

this location more than two years before filing the subject application, and the structural analysis obtained by AT&T (dated September 11, 2014, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit G) concludes that the ATC tower was not structurally sufficient to accommodate AT&T’s equipment. The cost that would be required to reinforce and/or reconstruct the structural elements of the tower and to accommodate the long-term location of AT&T’s equipment are not justifiable.

Additionally, AT&T was recently awarded the contract to build the nationwide "FirstNet" first responders' communication network. The proposed tower at the Savanne Road location is intended to be included in the FirstNet system and would include antennae and other equipment dedicated to the FirstNet system. Co-location at the existing ATC site would not accommodate inclusion of the FirstNet antennae and equipment.

The proposed 190 foot telecommunications tower is a permitted use for the proposed site, will be designed to accommodate the FirstNet antennae and equipment, and has been designed in order to comply with all applicable requirements of the Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances. Pursuant to Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances § 6-175, the tower will be setback more than its height (190 feet) from any residential structure. Pursuant to Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances § 28-73(a), height limits for districts in which commercial towers are permitted do not apply to such towers, so the 35 foot height limit normally applicable to structures in the C-3 district does not apply to the subject tower. Because the tower already is exempted (by the explicit language of § 28-73(a)) from the height limits that normally apply to zoning district C-3, the provisions of § 28-73(b) regarding the setback for structures in excess of the height limit do not apply. Instead, the zoning code specifically states in § 28- 73(a) that the height of the tower is subject to approval of the Board. Thus, AT&T has filed the Initial Application and this application to seek the Board’s approval for the height of the tower.

Per Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances, an application to the Board of Adjustments for a telecommunications tower in a zoning district where telecommunications towers are a permitted use is an application for height approval, and not a variance application or a special exception application. The Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances § 28-178(f)(4) states that a variance application may be sought when strict application of the zoning ordinance would render a peculiar and exceptional or undue hardship due to the "exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of a specified piece of property" or "exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary or exceptional characteristics of such piece of property." Accordingly, height approval for a telecommunications tower in a zoning district where such use is permitted would not qualify as a variance, per the zoning ordinance.

The Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances, section 28-48(c)(1)(d) specifies that the special exception uses for zoning district C-3 are "Armories—military (reserve or national guard), college fraternity and sorority houses, liquor sales not to be consumed on the premises, [and] self-storage warehouse containing rented storage spaces with individual unit area not exceeding seven hundred fifty (750) square feet." Telecommunications tower height is not listed as a special exception use for zoning district C-3.

4819-7610-7079 v3 Terrebonne Parish Board of Adjustment Mr. Christopher Pulaski May 1, 2017 Page 4

However, at the April 17th Board hearing, the Parish introduced a report prepared by Steve Villavaso (the "Villavaso Report"), which addressed the proposed tower's compliance with the conditions required for Board of Adjustments approval, pursuant to the conditions for variance or special exception described in Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances § 58-178(f).

As discussed above, the Terrebonne Parish zoning code specifically states that the Board simply needs to approve the height of the subject tower. The zoning code does not list this type of application as one that would require special exception or variance approval. In an abundance of caution, however, we have set forth reasons below why the subject tower does, in fact, meet the criteria for a special exception.

a) The exception will not authorize a use other than those uses specifically enumerated for the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought

The exception will not authorize a use other than those specifically enumerated for the district where the proposed tower will be constructed. The proposed site is in zoning district C-3, and wireless telecommunications towers are a permitted use in all commercial districts. The height of the proposed tower is designed to satisfy the coverage and capacity needs in this specific location.

b) The full development is designed and intended to serve the district in which the development is sought to be operated and maintained

The proposed wireless telecommunications tower and the identified site for the proposed tower is designed to meet an identified need for increased telecommunications coverage and capacity in the area. The coverage and capacity requirements are identified by telecommunications coverage and radio frequency maps, as well as customer feedback. The proposed tower is designed to meet these specific coverage and capacity needs in the district in which the proposed wireless telecommunications tower will be operated and maintained.

c) The exception is essential to maintain the functional design and architectural integrity of the development

Yes. There is an identified coverage gap in the area, and for the structure to comply with engineering and coverage requirements, and satisfy the capacity and consumption needs in this area, a wireless telecommunications tower in this location must be at least 190 feet tall and will include a lightning rod above the tower height. This tower height represents a 25% height reduction from AT&T's previous application.

d) The exception will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriated use of adjacent conforming property in the same district

No, the proposed wireless telecommunications tower will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property. The proposed tower is located in zoning district C-3

4819-7610-7079 v3 Terrebonne Parish Board of Adjustment Mr. Christopher Pulaski May 1, 2017 Page 5

(Neighborhood Commercial District). A wireless telecommunications tower is a permitted use in all commercial districts. The proposed tower will be unmanned (visited on average of one per month for routine maintenance purposes) and will not emit noise or glare. The proposed wireless telecommunications tower will not have an impact on the supply of light and air to adjacent property. The placement of the tower likely will have little or no impact on traffic congestion in the public street. Additionally, as set forth in the article attached hereto as Exhibit I, telecommunications towers do not adversely affect adjacent property values. In fact, due to increasing demands for wireless service, the addition of additional coverage and capacity should have a positive effect on property values in the area.

e) The exception will not alter the essential character of the district in which is located the property for which the exception is sought

No, the proposed wireless telecommunications tower, as constructed on this site, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The site of the proposed wireless telecommunications tower is zoned C-3 Neighborhood Commercial District. The proposed wireless telecommunications tower will not alter the commercial character and nature of the locality, as telecommunications towers are a permitted use in zoning district C-3, with only the height of the tower subject to approval by the Board of Adjustments.

f) The exception will not weaken the general purposes of this ordinance or the regulations herein established for the specific district

No, the proposed wireless telecommunications tower will not weaken the general purposes of the Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances or the regulations established for the specific district. The site of the proposed wireless telecommunications tower is zoned C-3 Neighborhood Commercial District. A wireless telecommunications tower is a permitted use in zoning district C-3, with the height subject to approval by the Board of Adjustments.

g) The exception will be in harmony with the spirit and purposes of this ordinance

Yes, the proposed wireless telecommunications tower is in harmony with the spirit and purposes of the Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances. The site of the proposed wireless telecommunications tower is zoned C-3 Neighborhood Commercial District. A wireless telecommunications tower is a permitted use in this zoning district, with only the height of the tower subject to approval by the Board of Adjustments. Telecommunications towers are not permitted in the adjacent residential and open land districts; accordingly, AT&T is in compliance with the requirements of the Terrebonne Parish Code of Ordinances by putting the proposed tower in zoning district C-3. The placement of the tower at the proposed site allows AT&T to serve the residents in the adjacent residential districts without violating the spirit and purpose of the Neighborhood Commercial District.

4819-7610-7079 v3 Terrebonne Parish Board of Adjustment Mr. Christopher Pulaski May 1, 2017 Page 6

h) The exception will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare, or the Master Plan

No, the proposed wireless telecommunications tower will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. Wireless telecommunications towers are a permitted use in the C-3 Neighborhood Commercial District zoning district. The tower has been specifically located so as to comply with applicable setback requirements. As shown on the Tower Radius Map, attached hereto as Exhibit G, there are no residences located within the tower radius. Almost half of houses in the country are now “wireless- only” and more than 460,000 calls to 911 are made per day in the United States using cell phones. An increase in cell coverage and capacity in the area will have a positive effect on the health and safety of the adjacent residential areas, as well as a positive effect on property values in the area.

Accordingly, the Applicant anticipates there will be no detrimental effect on the existing residential structures or other improvements in the area. The Applicant has located the proposed tower such that, to the extent reasonably possible, the view of the tower is shielded from residential neighbors by other structures and trees. However, the tower itself has to exceed the height of the surrounding structures in order to be functional, and must be tall enough to meet the coverage and capacity needs in the area. Recognized studies have not found adverse health consequences or adverse effects on property values arising from wireless telecommunications towers. Additionally, the proposed tower will be constructed to code and in compliance with all other legal requirements, and thus will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety.

Additionally, the tower is intended to be included in the FirstNet system and would include antennae and other equipment dedicated to the FirstNet system. This equipment will facilitate the communication of first responders, which will have a positive effect on the health and safety of the existing residential structures and other improvements in the area.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Jon F. Leyens, Jr.

4819-7610-7079 v3 Terrebonne Parish Board of Adjustment Mr. Christopher Pulaski May 1, 2017 Page 7

Attachments:

Exhibit B – RF Map Exhibit C – Holzenthal Report Site Candidate Map Exhibit D – Elimination Map Exhibit E – Zoning Map of Existing Towers Exhibit F – Site Candidate Map Exhibit G – Structural Analysis Report (Tower Engineering Professionals) Exhibit H – Tower Radius Map Exhibit I – Probate & Property Magazine article ("Cell Phone Towers Do Not Affect Property Values") Exhibit J – Lease Agreement Exhibit K – Construction Drawings

4819-7610-7079 v3 AT&T Louisiana Market Justification Documents for Zoning

Proposed Site: Little Bayou Terrebonne, LA.

Prepared By: AT&T Louisiana RF Design Team Date: 2/17/2017

© AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved. AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Intellectual Property. Location of Proposed Site: Little Bayou

© AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved. AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Intellectual Property. 2 RF Coverage Before Site Addition

Coverage Levels: In Building In Vehicle Outdoor

© AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved. AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Intellectual Property. 3 RF Coverage After Site Addition

Coverage Levels: In Building In Vehicle Outdoor

© AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved. AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Intellectual Property. 4

AT&T – Little Bayou

Search Candidate Information

Candidate A – Located between Highway 311 and the bayou. It is directly on some a hill or embankment and has potential setback issues. The parcel is approximately 90’ in width and the site would potentially require bulk-heading along one side. Moving the candidate north on the property is not an option based on conversations with the property owner.

Candidate B – The property owner, Bayou Cane Fire Department, does not think they have the legal right to lease the land to a tower company because of deed restrictions limiting the use of the land that were put into place when the land was donated to the fire department.

Candidate C – Existing 260 foot “self-support” tower. The constructed tower was built in 2003 making it 14 years old. A structural analysis of the existing tower indicated that it would not support the additional antennas that AT&T requires.

Candidate D – APPROVED CANDIDATE

Candidate E - northeast intersection of Hwy 311 and Savanne Rd which is currently agricultural land. Landowner did not express interest in leasing for telecom tower.

Candidate F – Parish-controlled land used as a soccer field. Zoning may not be appropriate (it is zoned Residential) and site acquisition personnel did not receive a response to inquiries to the Parish regarding use of the property. Date: September 11, 2014

Christine Covinsky Tower Engineering Professionals KGI Wireless 326 Tryon Road Building Three, Suite 370 Raleigh, NC 27603 805 Las Cimas Parkway (919) 661-6351 Austin, TX 78746 [email protected] (512) 334-3253

Subject: Structural Analysis Report

Carrier Designation: AT&T Mobility Co-Locate Carrier Site Number: 159573-A Carrier Site Name: Little Bayou FA Location Code: 10154362

KGI Designation: KGI Site Number: 135956 KGI Site Name: Ellendale Rutledge FCC Number: 1234077

Engineering Firm Designation: TEP Project Number: 55653_21300

Site Data: 3956 Highway 311, Houma , Terrebonne Parish, LA 70360 Latitude 29° 36’ 55.95”, Longitude -90° 47' 33.50” 250 Foot - Self Supporting Tower

Dear Ms. Covinsky,

Tower Engineering Professionals is pleased to submit this “Structural Analysis Report” to determine the structural integrity of the above mentioned tower.

The purpose of the analysis is to determine structural acceptability of the structure stress level. Based on our analysis we have determined the stress level for the structure, under the following load case, to be:

LC1: Existing + Proposed Equipment Insufficient Capacity Note: See Table 1 for the existing and proposed loading

Structure Controlling Component Capacity

117.6% Diagonal (T12): 20' to 40'

The analysis has been performed in accordance with the ANSI/TIA-222-G-2-2009 Structural Standard for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas – Addendum 2 and the 2013 Louisiana State Uniform Construction Code based upon an ultimate 3-second gust wind speed of 150 mph converted to a nominal 3-second gust wind speed of 116 mph per Section 1609.3.1 as required for use in the TIA-222-G Standard per Exception #5 of Section 1609.1.1. Exposure Category C and Risk Category II were used in this analysis.

All modifications and equipment proposed in this report shall be installed in accordance with the appurtenances listed in Table 1 and the attached drawings for the determined available structural capacity to be effective.

We at Tower Engineering Professionals appreciate the opportunity of providing our continuing professional services to you and KGI Wireless. If you have any questions or need further assistance on this or any other projects please give us a call.

Analysis prepared by: George H. Taylor-Maule, E.I.

Respectfully submitted by:

Graham M. Andres, P.E. September 11, 2014 250-ft Self Supporting Tower Structural Analysis 135956 - Ellendale Rutledge TEP Project Number 55653_21300, Revision 0 Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1) INTRODUCTION

2) ANALYSIS CRITERIA Table 1 - Existing and Proposed Antenna and Cable Information Table 2 - Design Antenna and Cable Information

3) ANALYSIS PROCEDURE Table 3 - Documents Provided 3.1) Analysis Method 3.2) Assumptions

4) ANALYSIS RESULTS Table 4 - Section Capacity (Summary) Table 5 - Tower Component Stresses vs. Capacity Table 6 - Foundation Reaction Comparison Table 7 - Dish Twist/Sway Results for 60 mph Service Wind Speed 4.1) Recommendations

5) APPENDIX A tnxTower Output

6) APPENDIX B Coax Configuration

tnxTower Report - version 6.1.4.1 September 11, 2014 250-ft Self Supporting Tower Structural Analysis 135956 - Ellendale Rutledge TEP Project Number 55653_21300, Revision 0 Page 3

1) INTRODUCTION

This tower is a 250-ft self supporting tower designed by Cellxion in September of 2002. The tower was originally designed for a fastest mile wind speed of 105 mph with no ice, 90.9 mph with 0.50 inch radial ice thickness, and 50 mph per the ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F-1996 for the appurtenances listed in Table 2. TEP did not visit the site. All information provided to TEP was assumed to be accurate and complete.

2) ANALYSIS CRITERIA

The analysis has been performed in accordance with the ANSI/TIA-222-G-2-2009 Structural Standard for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas - Addendum 2 and the 2013 Louisiana State Uniform Construction Code based upon an ultimate 3-second gust wind speed of 150 mph converted to a nominal 3-second gust wind speed of 116 mph with no ice per section 1609.3.1 as required for use in the TIA-222-G Standard per Exception #5 of Section 1609.1.1, 30 mph with 0.25 inch ice thickness, and 60 mph under service loads. Risk Category II was used in this analysis with the following design criteria:

1) Type of Analysis: Feasibility Structural Analysis

2) Classification of Structure: Class II Definition: Structures used for services that due to height, use or location represent a significant hazard to human life and/or damage to property in the event of failure and/or used for services that may be provided by other means.

3) Exposure Category: Exposure C Definition: Open terrain with scattered obstructions having heights generally less than 30-ft. This category includes flat, open country, grasslands and shorelines in hurricane prone regions.

4) Topographic Category: Category 1 Definition: No abrupt changes in general topography, e.g. flat or rolling terrain, no wind speed-up consideration shall be required.

5) Earthquake Category: Not Considered Commentary: Earthquake effects may be ignored per this standard for site locations where Ss does not exceed 1.0. (Site Location Ss = 0.089).

tnxTower Report - version 6.1.4.1 September 11, 2014 250-ft Self Supporting Tower Structural Analysis 135956 - Ellendale Rutledge TEP Project Number 55653_21300, Revision 0 Page 4

Table 1 - Existing and Proposed Antenna and Cable Information Existing/ Elevation Mount Qty Coax1 Owner/ Qty Antenna Model Coax Size Proposed (ft) Type Coax Location Tenant

3 Amphenol BXA-80063-8CF 3 Andrew LNX-6515DS-VTM Commscope 3 (3) 12’ HBX-6517DS-VTM Existing 200 Sector 20 1 5/8 AB Face Verizon Commscope 2 3 Mounts E15Z09LP94 TMA Commscope 6 CBC721-DF Diplexers Dish Existing 145 1 Andrew HP6-59 MW Dish 1 1/2”Ø AB Face Verizon Mount Dish Existing 135 1 Andrew P2-57W MW Dish 1 EW52 AB Face Verizon Mount 6 Andrew SBNHH-1D65C 3 Andrew SBNH-1D6565C (3) 12’ 1 3/8”Ø RET Proposed 100 Sector 1 3/8”Ø Fiber BC Face AT&T 18 Ericsson RRUs Mounts3 6 DC Power 3 Raycap DC6-48-60-18-8F Dish Existing 95 1 Andrew HP6-59 MW Dish 1 1/2”Ø AB Face Verizon Mount Notes: 1) See “Appendix B – Coax Configuration” for the assumed coax configuration. 2) TEP assumed (3) sector mounts with an EPA of 33.11 ft2 and a weight of 1540 lbs without ice. 3) TEP assumed (3) sector mounts with an EPA of 19.83 ft2 and a weight of 923 lbs without ice.

Table 2 - Design Antenna and Cable Information Mounting Center Line Number of Qty Coax Coax Antenna Model Mount Type Level (ft) Elevation (ft) Antennas Coax Size Location 250 250 12 Allgon 7220A2 (3) Rotatable T-Boom 12 1-5/8 Unknown 240 240 12 Allgon 7220A2 (3) Rotatable T-Boom 12 1-5/8 Unknown 230 230 12 Allgon 7220A2 (3) Rotatable T-Boom 12 1-5/8 Unknown 220 220 12 Allgon 7220A2 (3) Rotatable T-Boom 12 1-5/8 Unknown 210 210 12 Allgon 7220A2 (3) Rotatable T-Boom 12 1-5/8 Unknown

3) ANALYSIS PROCEDURE

Table 3 - Documents Provided Document Remarks Reference Source

Tower and Cellxion, dated September 18, 2002 - KGI Foundation Drawings File Name: TRZ01588 Previous Structural Tower Engineering, Inc., dated June 27, 2013 - KGI Analysis TEI Job No. 13-120-1002:11 Construction Tower Engineering, Inc., dated August 21, 2013 - KGI Drawings TEI Job No. 2113-120-1002:111 Correspondence from KGI in reference to the existing and Correspondence - KGI proposed tower loading

tnxTower Report - version 6.1.4.1 September 11, 2014 250-ft Self Supporting Tower Structural Analysis 135956 - Ellendale Rutledge TEP Project Number 55653_21300, Revision 0 Page 5

3.1) Analysis Method

tnxTower (version 6.1.4.1), a commercially available analysis software package, was used to create a three-dimensional model of the tower and calculate member stresses for various loading cases. Selected output from the analysis is included in Appendix A.

3.2) Assumptions

1) The tower and foundation were built in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. 2) The tower and foundation have been maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specification. 3) The configuration of antennas, transmission cables, mounts and other appurtenances are as specified in Table 1 and “Appendix B – Coax Configuration.” 4) All tower components are in sufficient condition to carry their full design capacity. 5) Serviceability with respect to antenna twist, tilt, roll, or lateral translation, is not checked and is left to the carrier or tower owner to ensure conformance. See Table 7. 6) All antenna mounts and mounting hardware are structurally sufficient to carry the full design capacity requirements of appurtenance wind area and weight as provided by the original manufacturer specifications. It is the carrier’s responsibility to ensure compliance to the structural limitations of the existing and/or proposed antenna mounts. TEP did not perform a site visit to verify the size, condition or capacity of the antenna mounts and did not analyze antennas supporting mounts as part of this structural analysis report. 7) This report is not a construction document.

This analysis may be affected if any assumptions are not valid or have been made in error. Tower Engineering Professionals, Inc. should be notified to determine the effect on the structural integrity of the tower.

4) ANALYSIS RESULTS

Table 4 - Section Capacity (Summary) Section Component Critical % Elevation (ft) Size P (lb) øPallow (lb) Pass / Fail No. Type Element Capacity T1 250 - 240 Leg 1 3/4 3 -1792.700 58740.500 3.1 Pass T2 240 - 220 Leg 2 27 -14918.300 72063.203 20.7 Pass T3 220 - 200 Leg 2 1/2 60 -30996.801 143344.000 21.6 Pass T4 200 - 180 Leg 3 96 -66972.398 198962.000 33.7 Pass T5 180 - 160 Leg 3 1/4 123 -104266.000 250285.000 41.7 Pass T6 160 - 140 Leg 3 1/2 149 -142986.000 306709.000 46.6 Pass T7 140 - 120 Leg 3 1/2 176 -186191.000 306707.000 60.7 Pass T8 120 - 100 Leg 4 203 -228388.000 353707.000 64.6 Pass T9 100 - 80 Leg 4 1/4 224 -284356.000 421283.000 67.5 Pass T10 80 - 60 Leg 4 1/2 245 -341110.000 493989.000 69.1 Pass T11 60 - 40 Leg 4 1/2 266 -397759.000 493992.000 80.5 Pass T12 40 - 20 Leg 4 3/4 287 -454437.000 571718.000 79.5 Pass T13 20 - 0 Leg 5 308 -511060.000 654371.000 78.1 Pass T1 250 - 240 Diagonal L2x2x3/16 12 -532.083 15296.300 3.5 Pass 7.1 (b) T2 240 - 220 Diagonal L2x2x3/16 33 -1651.700 14674.900 11.3 Pass 21.2 (b) T3 220 - 200 Diagonal L2x2x3/16 69 -1950.080 12244.300 15.9 Pass 22.8 (b) T4 200 - 180 Diagonal L2x2x3/16 99 -4674.870 8546.370 54.7 Pass 61.9 (b) tnxTower Report - version 6.1.4.1 September 11, 2014 250-ft Self Supporting Tower Structural Analysis 135956 - Ellendale Rutledge TEP Project Number 55653_21300, Revision 0 Page 6

Section Component Critical % Elevation (ft) Size P (lb) øPallow (lb) Pass / Fail No. Type Element Capacity T5 180 - 160 Diagonal L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 127 -5497.560 12441.600 44.2 Pass 56.6 (b) T6 160 - 140 Diagonal L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 154 -7239.940 9457.820 76.5 Pass T7 140 - 120 Diagonal L3x3x3/16 181 -8509.920 12792.800 66.5 Pass 79.0 (b) T8 120 - 100 Diagonal L3x3x1/4 208 -9989.040 12297.300 81.2 Pass T9 100 - 80 Diagonal L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 229 -14192.100 16336.100 86.9 Pass T10 80 - 60 Diagonal L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 250 -15211.200 13645.700 111.5 Fail T11 60 - 40 Diagonal L4x4x1/4 271 -16447.100 17367.900 94.7 Pass 96.2 (b) T12 40 - 20 Diagonal L4x4x1/4 292 -17485.600 14870.900 117.6 Fail T13 20 - 0 Diagonal L4x4x3/8 313 -18725.699 18631.600 100.5 Pass4 T1 250 - 240 Top Girt L2x2x3/16 6 -38.630 10262.000 0.4 Pass T3 220 - 200 Top Girt L2x2x3/16 61 -16.292 10347.400 0.2 Pass 0.2 (b) Summary Leg (T11) 80.5 Pass Diagonal 117.6 Fail (T12) Top Girt (T1) 0.4 Pass Bolt Checks 101.4 Pass4 RATING = 117.6 Fail

Table 5 - Tower Component Stresses vs. Capacity Notes Component Elevation (ft) % Capacity Pass / Fail

- Anchor Rods - 60.7 Pass

Table 6 - Foundation Reaction Comparison Notes Component Design Reaction Analysis Reaction % Capacity Pass / Fail

5 Overturning Moment (kip-ft) 11,235.1 10,443.6 93.0 Pass 5 Shear per leg (kips) 64.0 55.5 86.7 Pass 5 Uplift per leg (kips) 634.2 441.2 69.6 Pass 5 Download per leg (kips) 712.7 519.9 72.9 Pass Notes: 4) A structure rating of 105% or less is within engineering tolerances and considered acceptable. 5) Capacities calculated are based on comparisons to design reactions and do not represent an actual analysis of the foundation. Design reactions include a 1.35 factor as allowed by ANSI/TIA-222-G-2-2009 Section 15.5.1.

Structure Rating (max from all components) = 117.6%

Table 7 - Dish Twist/Sway Results for 60 mph Service Wind Speed Elevation Beam Deflection Dish Model (ft) Deflection (in) Tilt (deg) Twist (deg) 145 Andrew HP6-59 MW Dish 1.549 0.089 0.015 135 Andrew P2-57W MW Dish 1.356 0.082 0.014 95 Andrew HP6-59 MW Dish 0.729 0.056 0.009 tnxTower Report - version 6.1.4.1 September 11, 2014 250-ft Self Supporting Tower Structural Analysis 135956 - Ellendale Rutledge TEP Project Number 55653_21300, Revision 0 Page 7

4.1) Recommendations

1) If the load differs from that described in Table 1 of this report, “Appendix B – Coax Configuration” or the provisions of this analysis are found to be invalid, another structural analysis should be performed. 2) The tower does not have sufficient capacity to carry the existing and proposed loads. Modifications will be required to bring the tower into compliance with the ANSI/TIA-222-G standard for the existing and proposed loading. The following components require modifications: a) Tower diagonals from 20’ to 40’ and 60’ to 80’ b) Possible foundation modifications Further engineering and detailing is required to design the necessary modifications. 3) A Professional Engineer licensed in the state of Louisiana shall issue design drawings for the above modifications. This analysis report is not a construction document. 4) TEP did not have sufficient information to perform a foundation analysis. If a foundation analysis is required, provide TEP with a geotechnical report for this site in order to determine the substructure capacity. If this information is not available, TEP recommends a geotechnical investigation be performed at the site. 5) Prior to acceptance of changed configuration a rigorous structural analysis shall be performed in order to determine the overall stability and the adequacy of the structural members, foundations and connections.

tnxTower Report - version 6.1.4.1 September 11, 2014 250-ft Self Supporting Tower Structural Analysis 135956 - Ellendale Rutledge TEP Project Number 55653_21300, Revision 0 Page 8

APPENDIX A

TNXTOWER OUTPUT

tnxTower Report - version 6.1.4.1 250.0 ft 4.5 A T1 523.6

SR 1 3/4 1 SR 240.0 ft

3 @ 3.33333 @ 3 12"1/2"BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-XLNX-6515DS-VTMHBX-6517DS-VTME15Z09P94(2)2.4"Sector5"4.5"HP6-59P2-57W(6)DC6-48-60-18-8FSBNH-1D6565C Dia. CBC721-DF-2XRRUSSBNHH-1D65C xx 24"4'7-ft72" Mountx LRodMount 8" Beacon MountPipe11 Side [SM Pipe LightPipew/ 602-3]406-3] w/ w/Mount MountMount w/ Pipe Mount PipePipe 25020015014513510095 Pipe DESIGNED APPURTENANCE LOADING TYPE ELEVATION TYPE ELEVATION 12" x 24" Beacon 250 5" Dia. x 8" Side Light 150 T2 N.A. 1080.9 SR 2 SR 1/2" x 4' LRod 250 5" Dia. x 8" Side Light 150 BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-X w/ Mount 200 5" Dia. x 8" Side Light 150 220.0 ft Pipe 4.5" x 72" Mount Pipe 145 LNX-6515DS-VTM w/ Mount Pipe 200 10 @ 4 @ 10 HP6-59 145 LNX-6515DS-VTM w/ Mount Pipe 200 4.5" x 4' Mount Pipe 135

L2x2x3/16 LNX-6515DS-VTM w/ Mount Pipe 200 P2-57W 135 T3 1527.5 HBX-6517DS-VTM w/ Mount Pipe 200 (6) RRUS 11 100 SR 2 1/2 2 SR L2x2x3/16 HBX-6517DS-VTM w/ Mount Pipe 200 (6) RRUS 11 100 200.0 ft HBX-6517DS-VTM w/ Mount Pipe 200 DC6-48-60-18-8F 100 E15Z09P94 200 DC6-48-60-18-8F 100 E15Z09P94 200 DC6-48-60-18-8F 100 6.30208 E15Z09P94 200 Sector Mount [SM 406-3] 100 T4 1957.3 SR 3 SR (2) CBC721-DF-2X 200 (2) SBNHH-1D65C w/ Mount Pipe 100 (2) CBC721-DF-2X 200 (2) SBNHH-1D65C w/ Mount Pipe 100 180.0 ft (2) CBC721-DF-2X 200 (2) SBNHH-1D65C w/ Mount Pipe 100 2.4" x 7-ft Pipe 200 SBNH-1D6565C w/ Mount Pipe 100 2.4" x 7-ft Pipe 200 SBNH-1D6565C w/ Mount Pipe 100 8.09896 2.4" x 7-ft Pipe 200 SBNH-1D6565C w/ Mount Pipe 100 T5 2454.7 Sector Mount [SM 602-3] 200 (6) RRUS 11 100 SR 3 1/4 3 SR BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-X w/ Mount 200 4.5" x 72" Mount Pipe 95 Pipe 160.0 ft HP6-59 95 BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-X w/ Mount 200

16 @ 5 @ 16 Pipe 9.90104 L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 1/2x2 L2 T6

2843.8 SYMBOL LIST MARK SIZE MARK SIZE 140.0 ft A L2x2x3/16

SR 3 1/2 3 SR MATERIAL STRENGTH 11.6979

T7 GRADE Fy Fu GRADE Fy Fu 3173.8 A572-50 50 ksi 65 ksi A36 36 ksi 58 ksi L3x3x3/16 A36

A572-50 120.0 ft TOWER DESIGN NOTES 13.5 1. Tower is located in Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana. 2. Tower designed for Exposure C to the TIA-222-G Standard. T8 3969.0 SR 4 SR 3. Tower designed for a 116 mph basic wind in accordance with the TIA-222-G Standard. L3x3x1/4 4. Tower is also designed for a 30 mph basic wind with 0.25 in ice. Ice is considered to 100.0 ft increase in thickness with height.

N.A. 5. Deflections are based upon a 60 mph wind. 6. Tower Structure Class II.

15.3021 7. Topographic Category 1 with Crest Height of 0.000 ft

T9 8. TOWER RATING: 117.6% 4713.9 SR 4 1/4 4 SR ALL REACTIONS 80.0 ft ARE FACTORED 17.099

L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 1/2x3 L3 MAX. CORNER REACTIONS AT BASE:

T10 DOWN: 519880 lb 5238.6 SHEAR: 55517 lb

60.0 ft UPLIFT: -441226 lb SR 4 1/2 4 SR SHEAR: 48507 lb 18.901 18 @ 6.66667 @ 18 T11

5734.1 AXIAL 98847 lb 40.0 ft SHEAR MOMENT L4x4x1/4 4859 lb 581955 lb-ft 20.6979 T12 6309.0

SR 4 3/4 4 SR TORQUE 1646 lb-ft 30 mph WIND - 0.250 in ICE 20.0 ft AXIAL

22.5 70978 lb T13 8276.8 SR 5 SR SHEAR MOMENT L4x4x3/8 93919 lb 10443595 lb-ft 0.0 ft TORQUE 39568 lb-ft REACTIONS - 116 mph WIND 47802.9 24.3021 Section Legs LegGrade Diagonals # Panels @ (ft) Panels@ # Top Girts Top DiagonalGrade Weight (lb) Weight Face Width (ft) Width Face

Tower Engineering Professionals Job: 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 326 Tryon Road Project: TEP# 55653_21300 Raleigh, NC 27603 Client: KGI Wireless Drawn by: aqueen App'd: Code: Date: Scale: Tower Engineering Professionals Phone: (919) 661-6351 TIA-222-G 09/10/14 NTS Path: Dwg No. FAX: (919) 661-6350 \\tep-vm-file01\Towers\55653\21300_Ellendale Rutledge\36423_Structural Analysis\Rev 0\2. tnx\Ellendale Rutledge.eri E-1 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 1 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 2 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Tower Input Data Wind 180

The main tower is a 3x free standing tower with an overall height of 250.000 ft above the ground line. The base of the tower is set at an elevation of 0.000 ft above the ground line. The face width of the tower is 4.500 ft at the top and 24.302 ft at the base. Leg A

This tower is designed using the TIA-222-G standard. Wind 90 F a A c The following design criteria apply: e e c B a Tower is located in Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana. F X

Basic wind speed of 116 mph. Leg C Z Leg B Structure Class II. Exposure Category C. Face C Topographic Category 1. Crest Height 0.000 ft. Nominal ice thickness of 0.250 in. Wind Normal Ice thickness is considered to increase with height. Ice density of 56 pcf. Triangular Tower A wind speed of 30 mph is used in combination with ice. Deflections calculated using a wind speed of 60 mph. A non-linear (P-delta) analysis was used. Pressures are calculated at each section. Stress ratio used in tower member design is 1. Local bending stresses due to climbing loads, feed line supports, and appurtenance mounts are not considered.

Tower Section Geometry

Options Tower Tower Assembly Description Section Number Section Section Elevation Database Width of Length Consider Moments - Legs Distribute Leg Loads As Uniform Treat Feedline Bundles As Cylinder Sections Consider Moments - Horizontals Assume Legs Pinned Use ASCE 10 X-Brace Ly Rules ft ft ft Consider Moments - Diagonals √ Assume Rigid Index Plate Calculate Redundant Bracing Forces T1 250.000-240.000 4.500 1 10.000 Use Moment Magnification √ Use Clear Spans For Wind Area Ignore Redundant Members in FEA T2 240.000-220.000 4.500 1 20.000 √ Use Code Stress Ratios √ Use Clear Spans For KL/r √ SR Leg Bolts Resist Compression T3 220.000-200.000 4.500 1 20.000 √ Use Code Safety Factors - Guys Retension Guys To Initial Tension All Leg Panels Have Same Allowable T4 200.000-180.000 6.302 1 20.000 Escalate Ice √ Bypass Mast Stability Checks Offset Girt At Foundation T5 180.000-160.000 8.099 1 20.000 Always Use Max Kz √ Use Azimuth Dish Coefficients √ Consider Feedline Torque T6 160.000-140.000 9.901 1 20.000 Use Special Wind Profile √ Project Wind Area of Appurt. √ Include Angle Block Shear Check T7 140.000-120.000 11.698 1 20.000 √ Include Bolts In Member Capacity Autocalc Torque Arm Areas Poles T8 120.000-100.000 13.500 1 20.000 Leg Bolts Are At Top Of Section SR Members Have Cut Ends Include Shear-Torsion Interaction T9 100.000-80.000 15.302 1 20.000 √ Secondary Horizontal Braces Leg √ Sort Capacity Reports By Component Always Use Sub-Critical Flow T10 80.000-60.000 17.099 1 20.000 Use Diamond Inner Bracing (4 Sided) Triangulate Diamond Inner Bracing Use Top Mounted Sockets T11 60.000-40.000 18.901 1 20.000 Add IBC .6D+W Combination Use TIA-222-G Tension Splice Capacity T12 40.000-20.000 20.698 1 20.000 Exemption T13 20.000-0.000 22.500 1 20.000

Tower Section Geometry (cont’d)

Tower Tower Diagonal Bracing Has Has Top Girt Bottom Girt Section Elevation Spacing Type K Brace Horizontals Offset Offset End ft ft Panels in in T1 250.000-240.000 3.333 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 T2 240.000-220.000 4.000 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 3 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 4 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Tower Tower Diagonal Bracing Has Has Top Girt Bottom Girt Tower Top Girt Top Girt Top Girt Bottom Girt Bottom Girt Bottom Girt Section Elevation Spacing Type K Brace Horizontals Offset Offset Elevation Type Size Grade Type Size Grade End ft ft ft Panels in in 220.000-200.000 (36 ksi) (36 ksi) T3 220.000-200.000 4.000 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 T4 200.000-180.000 5.000 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 T5 180.000-160.000 5.000 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 T6 160.000-140.000 5.000 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 T7 140.000-120.000 5.000 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 T8 120.000-100.000 6.667 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 Tower Section Geometry (cont’d) T9 100.000-80.000 6.667 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 T10 80.000-60.000 6.667 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 Tower Gusset Gusset Gusset Grade Adjust. Factor Adjust. Weight Mult. Double Angle Double Angle T11 60.000-40.000 6.667 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 Elevation Area Thickness A Factor Stitch Bolt Stitch Bolt T12 40.000-20.000 6.667 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 f (per face) A Spacing Spacing T13 20.000-0.000 6.667 X Brace No No 0.000 0.000 r Diagonals Horizontals ft ft2 in in in T1 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 250.000-240.0 (50 ksi) Tower Section Geometry (cont’d) 00 T2 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 Tower Leg Leg Leg Diagonal Diagonal Diagonal 240.000-220.0 (50 ksi) Elevation Type Size Grade Type Size Grade 00 ft T3 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 220.000-200.0 (50 ksi) T1 Solid Round 1 3/4 A572-50 Equal Angle L2x2x3/16 A36 00 250.000-240.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) T4 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 T2 Solid Round 2 A572-50 Equal Angle L2x2x3/16 A36 200.000-180.0 (50 ksi) 240.000-220.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) 00 T3 Solid Round 2 1/2 A572-50 Equal Angle L2x2x3/16 A36 T5 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 220.000-200.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) 180.000-160.0 (50 ksi) T4 Solid Round 3 A572-50 Equal Angle L2x2x3/16 A36 00 200.000-180.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) T6 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 T5 Solid Round 3 1/4 A572-50 Equal Angle L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 A36 160.000-140.0 (50 ksi) 180.000-160.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) 00 T6 Solid Round 3 1/2 A572-50 Equal Angle L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 A36 T7 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 160.000-140.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) 140.000-120.0 (50 ksi) T7 Solid Round 3 1/2 A572-50 Equal Angle L3x3x3/16 A36 00 140.000-120.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) T8 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 T8 Solid Round 4 A572-50 Equal Angle L3x3x1/4 A36 120.000-100.0 (50 ksi) 120.000-100.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) 00 T9 Solid Round 4 1/4 A572-50 Equal Angle L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 A36 T9 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 100.000-80.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) 100.000-80.00 (50 ksi) T10 Solid Round 4 1/2 A572-50 Equal Angle L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 A36 0 80.000-60.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) T10 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 T11 Solid Round 4 1/2 A572-50 Equal Angle L4x4x1/4 A36 80.000-60.000 (50 ksi) 60.000-40.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) T11 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 T12 Solid Round 4 3/4 A572-50 Equal Angle L4x4x1/4 A36 60.000-40.000 (50 ksi) 40.000-20.000 (50 ksi) (36 ksi) T12 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 T13 20.000-0.000 Solid Round 5 A572-50 Equal Angle L4x4x3/8 A36 40.000-20.000 (50 ksi) (50 ksi) (36 ksi) T13 0.000 0.500 A572-50 1 1 1 36.000 36.000 20.000-0.000 (50 ksi)

Tower Section Geometry (cont’d) Tower Section Geometry (cont’d)

Tower Top Girt Top Girt Top Girt Bottom Girt Bottom Girt Bottom Girt K Factors1 Elevation Type Size Grade Type Size Grade ft T1 Equal Angle L2x2x3/16 A36 Flat Bar A36 250.000-240.000 (36 ksi) (36 ksi) T3 Equal Angle L2x2x3/16 A36 Flat Bar A36 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 5 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 6 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Tower Calc Calc Legs X K Single Girts Horiz. Sec. Inner Tower Leg Diagonal Top Girt Bottom Girt Mid Girt Long Horizontal Short Horizontal Elevation K K Brace Brace Diags Horiz. Brace Elevation Single Solid Diags Diags ft Angles Rounds X X X X X X X Net Width U Net Width U Net Width U Net U Net U Net U Net U ft Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Deduct Deduct Deduct Width Width Width Width T1 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 in in in Deduct Deduct Deduct Deduct 250.000-240.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 in in in in 00 T3 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 T2 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 220.000-200.0 240.000-220.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 00 T4 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 T3 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 200.000-180.0 220.000-200.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 00 T5 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 T4 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 180.000-160.0 200.000-180.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 00 T6 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 T5 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 160.000-140.0 180.000-160.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 00 T7 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 T6 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 140.000-120.0 160.000-140.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 00 T8 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 T7 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 120.000-100.0 140.000-120.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 00 00 T9 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 T8 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 100.000-80.00 120.000-100.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 00 T10 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 T9 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 80.000-60.000 100.000-80.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T11 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0 60.000-40.000 T10 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T12 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 80.000-60.000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 40.000-20.000 T11 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T13 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 60.000-40.000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20.000-0.000 T12 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 40.000-20.000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T13 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20.000-0.000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Note: K factors are applied to member segment lengths. K-braces without inner supporting members will have the K factor in the out-of-plane direction applied to the overall length. Tower Section Geometry (cont’d)

Tower Leg Leg Diagonal Top Girt Bottom Girt Mid Girt Long Horizontal Short Horizontal Elevation Connection ft Type Tower Section Geometry (cont’d) Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. in in in in in in in Tower Leg Diagonal Top Girt Bottom Girt Mid Girt Long Horizontal Short Horizontal T1 Flange 1.000 4 0.625 1 0.625 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 Elevation 250.000-240.0 A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N ft 00 Net Width U Net Width U Net Width U Net U Net U Net U Net U T2 Flange 1.000 4 0.625 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 Deduct Deduct Deduct Width Width Width Width 240.000-220.0 A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N in in in Deduct Deduct Deduct Deduct 00 in in in in T3 Flange 1.375 6 0.625 1 0.625 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 T1 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 220.000-200.0 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N 250.000-240.0 00 1 00 T4 Flange 1.375 6 0.625 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 T2 0.000 1 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 0.000 0.75 200.000-180.0 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N 240.000-220.0 00 1 00 T5 Flange 1.375 6 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 180.000-160.0 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N 00 1 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 7 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 8 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Tower Leg Leg Diagonal Top Girt Bottom Girt Mid Girt Long Horizontal Short Horizontal Description Face Allow Component Placement Face Lateral # # Clear Width or Perimeter Weight Elevation Connection or Shield Type Offset Offset Per Spacing Diameter ft Type Leg ft in (Frac FW) Row in in in plf Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. Bolt Size No. EW52 B No Ar (CaAa) 135.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.04 1 1 0.500 2.250 0.590 in in in in in in in ***** T6 Flange 1.375 6 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 3/8'' RET C No Ar (CaAa) 100.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.02 1 1 0.500 0.375 0.090 160.000-140.0 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N 3/8'' Fiber C No Ar (CaAa) 100.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.01 1 1 0.375 0.375 0.180 00 1 Cable T7 Flange 1.375 6 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.8'' Power C No Ar (CaAa) 100.000 - 0.000 0.000 0 6 3 0.500 0.800 0.190 140.000-120.0 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N **** 00 1 5/8'' dia. coax A No Ar (CaAa) 150.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.5 2 2 0.625 0.625 0.150 T8 Flange 1.375 6 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 5/8'' dia. coax A No Ar (CaAa) 250.000 - 150.000 0.000 0.5 1 1 0.625 0.625 0.150 120.000-100.0 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N 00 1 T9 Flange 1.375 6 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 100.000-80.00 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N 0 1 T10 Flange 1.375 6 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 Feed Line/Linear Appurtenances Section Areas 80.000-60.000 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N 1 Tower Tower Face AR AF CAAA CAAA Weight T11 Flange 1.500 6 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 Section Elevation In Face Out Face 60.000-40.000 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N ft ft2 ft2 ft2 ft2 lb 1 T1 250.000-240.000 A 0.000 0.000 4.143 0.000 46.390 T12 Flange 1.500 6 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 B 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 40.000-20.000 A325N > A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1 T2 240.000-220.000 A 0.000 0.000 8.286 0.000 92.780 T13 Flange 0.000 0 0.875 1 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 0.625 0 B 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 20.000-0.000 A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N A325N C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T3 220.000-200.000 A 0.000 0.000 8.286 0.000 92.780 B 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T4 200.000-180.000 A 0.000 0.000 8.286 0.000 92.780 B 0.000 0.000 90.867 0.000 405.380 Feed Line/Linear Appurtenances - Entered As Round Or Flat C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T5 180.000-160.000 A 0.000 0.000 8.286 0.000 92.780 Description Face Allow Component Placement Face Lateral # # Clear Width or Perimeter Weight B 0.000 0.000 90.867 0.000 405.380 or Shield Type Offset Offset Per Spacing Diameter C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Leg ft in (Frac FW) Row in in in plf T6 160.000-140.000 A 0.000 0.000 8.911 0.000 94.280 Ladder Rail - A No Af (CaAa) 250.000 - 0.000 0.000 0 2 2 12.000 0.750 1.490 B 0.000 0.000 91.117 0.000 406.130 PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 1.750 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Ladder Rung - A No Ar (CaAa) 250.000 - 0.000 0.000 0 1 1 0.643 0.643 1.289 T7 140.000-120.000 A 0.000 0.000 9.536 0.000 95.780 3/4 SR B 0.000 0.000 95.242 0.000 417.230 (12''width, C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 14''step) T8 120.000-100.000 A 0.000 0.000 9.536 0.000 95.780 Safety Line A No Ar (CaAa) 250.000 - 0.000 0.000 0 1 1 0.375 0.375 0.220 B 0.000 0.000 96.367 0.000 420.180 3/8 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Rail L 1 3/4x1 B No Af (CaAa) 200.000 - 0.000 0.000 0 2 2 26.000 1.750 1.490 T9 100.000-80.000 A 0.000 0.000 9.536 0.000 95.780 3/4x1/8 1.750 B 0.000 0.000 97.117 0.000 422.430 Rung L 1 B No Af (CaAa) 200.000 - 0.000 0.000 0 1 1 1.083 0.000 0.889 C 0.000 0.000 24.286 0.000 95.280 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 T10 80.000-60.000 A 0.000 0.000 9.536 0.000 95.780 (26'' Wide, 42'' B 0.000 0.000 97.367 0.000 423.180 Step) C 0.000 0.000 24.286 0.000 95.280 Rail L 1 3/4x1 C No Af (CaAa) 100.000 - 0.000 0.000 0 2 2 12.000 1.750 1.490 T11 60.000-40.000 A 0.000 0.000 9.536 0.000 95.780 3/4x1/8 1.750 B 0.000 0.000 97.367 0.000 423.180 Rung L 1 C No Af (CaAa) 100.000 - 0.000 0.000 0 1 1 0.456 0.456 0.374 C 0.000 0.000 24.286 0.000 95.280 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 T12 40.000-20.000 A 0.000 0.000 9.536 0.000 95.780 (12.5'' Width, B 0.000 0.000 97.367 0.000 423.180 48'' Step) C 0.000 0.000 24.286 0.000 95.280 **** T13 20.000-0.000 A 0.000 0.000 9.536 0.000 95.780 LDF7-50A B No Ar (CaAa) 200.000 - 0.000 0.000 -0.01 20 8 0.500 1.980 0.820 B 0.000 0.000 97.367 0.000 423.180 (1-5/8 FOAM) C 0.000 0.000 24.286 0.000 95.280 1/2'' dia. coax B No Ar (CaAa) 95.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.03 2 2 0.500 0.500 0.150 1/2'' dia. coax B No Ar (CaAa) 145.000 - 95.000 0.000 0.03 1 1 0.500 0.500 0.150 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 9 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 10 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Section Elevation CPX CPZ CPX CPZ Feed Line/Linear Appurtenances Section Areas - With Ice Ice Ice ft in in in in Tower Tower Face Ice AR AF CAAA CAAA Weight T10 80.000-60.000 5.310 -1.996 3.958 -1.058 Section Elevation or Thickness In Face Out Face T11 60.000-40.000 5.473 -2.055 4.157 -1.117 ft Leg in ft2 ft2 ft2 ft2 lb T12 40.000-20.000 5.772 -2.165 4.446 -1.205 T1 250.000-240.000 A 0.611 0.000 0.000 10.253 0.000 102.337 T13 20.000-0.000 6.053 -2.269 4.779 -1.321 B 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T2 240.000-220.000 A 0.607 0.000 0.000 20.429 0.000 203.660 B 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T3 220.000-200.000 A 0.602 0.000 0.000 20.319 0.000 202.218 B 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Shielding Factor Ka C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T4 200.000-180.000 A 0.596 0.000 0.000 20.199 0.000 200.657 Tower Feed Line Description Feed Line K K B 0.000 0.000 74.022 0.000 1128.829 a a Section Record No. Segment Elev. No Ice Ice C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T5 180.000-160.000 A 0.589 0.000 0.000 20.067 0.000 198.951 T1 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 240.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 B 0.000 0.000 73.900 0.000 1124.438 250.00 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T1 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 240.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T6 160.000-140.000 A 0.582 0.000 0.000 22.539 0.000 206.067 (12"width, 14"step) 250.00 B 0.000 0.000 74.596 0.000 1124.160 T1 3 Safety Line 3/8 240.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 250.00 T7 140.000-120.000 A 0.573 0.000 0.000 24.969 0.000 212.799 T1 19 5/8" dia. coax 240.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 B 0.000 0.000 82.001 0.000 1170.650 250.00 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 T2 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 220.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T8 120.000-100.000 A 0.564 0.000 0.000 24.752 0.000 210.214 240.00 B 0.000 0.000 83.448 0.000 1176.042 T2 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 220.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 (12"width, 14"step) 240.00 T9 100.000-80.000 A 0.553 0.000 0.000 24.497 0.000 207.195 T2 3 Safety Line 3/8 220.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 B 0.000 0.000 86.481 0.000 1177.765 240.00 C 0.000 0.000 39.565 0.000 298.171 T2 19 5/8" dia. coax 220.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T10 80.000-60.000 A 0.539 0.000 0.000 24.183 0.000 203.544 240.00 B 0.000 0.000 87.189 0.000 1170.386 T3 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 200.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 C 0.000 0.000 39.195 0.000 292.710 220.00 T11 60.000-40.000 A 0.521 0.000 0.000 23.776 0.000 198.871 T3 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 200.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 B 0.000 0.000 86.665 0.000 1156.346 (12"width, 14"step) 220.00 C 0.000 0.000 38.714 0.000 285.701 T3 3 Safety Line 3/8 200.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T12 40.000-20.000 A 0.495 0.000 0.000 23.184 0.000 192.222 220.00 B 0.000 0.000 85.904 0.000 1136.094 T3 19 5/8" dia. coax 200.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 C 0.000 0.000 38.014 0.000 275.685 220.00 T13 20.000-0.000 A 0.444 0.000 0.000 22.009 0.000 179.549 T4 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 180.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 B 0.000 0.000 84.393 0.000 1096.531 200.00 C 0.000 0.000 36.624 0.000 256.446 T4 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 180.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 (12"width, 14"step) 200.00 T4 3 Safety Line 3/8 180.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 200.00 T4 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 180.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 200.00 Feed Line Center of Pressure T4 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 180.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 Wide, 42" Step) 200.00 T4 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 180.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 Section Elevation CPX CPZ CPX CPZ Ice Ice 200.00 ft in in in in T4 19 5/8" dia. coax 180.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 200.00 T1 250.000-240.000 -0.796 -0.774 -1.420 -1.320 T5 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 160.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T2 240.000-220.000 -0.858 -0.835 -1.532 -1.423 180.00 T3 220.000-200.000 -0.888 -0.866 -1.646 -1.532 T5 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 160.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T4 200.000-180.000 3.403 -2.720 2.428 -2.944 (12"width, 14"step) 180.00 T5 180.000-160.000 3.846 -3.091 2.779 -3.395 T5 3 Safety Line 3/8 160.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T6 160.000-140.000 4.344 -3.610 3.152 -3.794 180.00 T7 140.000-120.000 4.802 -3.964 3.679 -4.045 T5 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 160.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T8 120.000-100.000 5.582 -4.575 4.345 -4.701 180.00 T9 100.000-80.000 4.935 -1.857 3.679 -0.983 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 11 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 12 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Tower Feed Line Description Feed Line Ka Ka Tower Feed Line Description Feed Line Ka Ka Section Record No. Segment Elev. No Ice Ice Section Record No. Segment Elev. No Ice Ice T5 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 160.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 (12"width, 14"step) Wide, 42" Step) 180.00 T9 3 Safety Line 3/8 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 T5 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 160.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T9 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 180.00 T9 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 T5 19 5/8" dia. coax 160.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 Wide, 42" Step) 180.00 T9 6 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 T6 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 140.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T9 7 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 160.00 (12.5" Width, 48" Step) T6 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 140.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T9 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 (12"width, 14"step) 160.00 T9 10 1/2" dia. coax 80.00 - 95.00 0.6000 0.6000 T6 3 Safety Line 3/8 140.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T9 11 1/2" dia. coax 95.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 160.00 T9 12 EW52 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 T6 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 140.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T9 14 3/8" RET 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 160.00 T9 15 3/8" Fiber Cable 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 T6 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 140.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T9 16 0.8" Power 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 Wide, 42" Step) 160.00 T9 18 5/8" dia. coax 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 T6 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 140.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T10 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 160.00 T10 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 T6 11 1/2" dia. coax 140.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 (12"width, 14"step) 145.00 T10 3 Safety Line 3/8 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 T6 18 5/8" dia. coax 140.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T10 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 150.00 T10 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 T6 19 5/8" dia. coax 150.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 Wide, 42" Step) 160.00 T10 6 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 T7 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T10 7 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 140.00 (12.5" Width, 48" Step) T7 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T10 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 (12"width, 14"step) 140.00 T10 10 1/2" dia. coax 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 T7 3 Safety Line 3/8 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T10 12 EW52 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 140.00 T10 14 3/8" RET 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 T7 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T10 15 3/8" Fiber Cable 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 140.00 T10 16 0.8" Power 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 T7 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T10 18 5/8" dia. coax 60.00 - 80.00 0.6000 0.6000 Wide, 42" Step) 140.00 T11 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 T7 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T11 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 140.00 (12"width, 14"step) T7 11 1/2" dia. coax 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T11 3 Safety Line 3/8 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 140.00 T11 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 T7 12 EW52 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T11 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 135.00 Wide, 42" Step) T7 18 5/8" dia. coax 120.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T11 6 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 140.00 T11 7 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 (12.5" Width, 48" Step) 120.00 T11 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T11 10 1/2" dia. coax 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 (12"width, 14"step) 120.00 T11 12 EW52 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 3 Safety Line 3/8 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T11 14 3/8" RET 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 120.00 T11 15 3/8" Fiber Cable 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T11 16 0.8" Power 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 120.00 T11 18 5/8" dia. coax 40.00 - 60.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T12 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 Wide, 42" Step) 120.00 T12 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 (12"width, 14"step) 120.00 T12 3 Safety Line 3/8 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 11 1/2" dia. coax 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T12 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 120.00 T12 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 12 EW52 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 Wide, 42" Step) 120.00 T12 6 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 T8 18 5/8" dia. coax 100.00 - 0.6000 0.6000 T12 7 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 120.00 (12.5" Width, 48" Step) T9 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 T12 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 T9 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 80.00 - 100.00 0.6000 0.6000 T12 10 1/2" dia. coax 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 13 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 14 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Tower Feed Line Description Feed Line Ka Ka Description Face Offset Offsets: Azimuth Placement CAAA CAAA Weight Section Record No. Segment Elev. No Ice Ice or Type Horz Adjustment Front Side T12 12 EW52 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 Leg Lateral T12 14 3/8" RET 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 Vert T12 15 3/8" Fiber Cable 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 ft ° ft ft2 ft2 lb T12 16 0.8" Power 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 ft T12 18 5/8" dia. coax 20.00 - 40.00 0.6000 0.6000 ft T13 1 Ladder Rail - PL 1 3/4 x 1/4 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 0.000 T13 2 Ladder Rung - 3/4 SR 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 HBX-6517DS-VTM w/ C From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 5.503 5.019 40.096 (12"width, 14"step) Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 6.073 6.221 86.570 T13 3 Safety Line 3/8 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 0.000 T13 4 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 E15Z09P94 A From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 0.516 0.364 11.900 T13 5 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 (26" 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.616 0.452 16.334 Wide, 42" Step) 0.000 T13 6 Rail L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 E15Z09P94 B From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 0.516 0.364 11.900 T13 7 Rung L 1 3/4x1 3/4x1/8 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.616 0.452 16.334 (12.5" Width, 48" Step) 0.000 T13 9 LDF7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 E15Z09P94 C From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 0.516 0.364 11.900 T13 10 1/2" dia. coax 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.616 0.452 16.334 T13 12 EW52 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 0.000 T13 14 3/8" RET 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 (2) CBC721-DF-2X A From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 0.449 0.277 11.500 T13 15 3/8" Fiber Cable 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.542 0.355 15.236 T13 16 0.8" Power 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 0.000 T13 18 5/8" dia. coax 0.00 - 20.00 0.6000 0.6000 (2) CBC721-DF-2X B From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 0.449 0.277 11.500 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.542 0.355 15.236 0.000 (2) CBC721-DF-2X C From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 0.449 0.277 11.500 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.542 0.355 15.236 0.000 2.4'' x 7-ft Pipe A From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 1.663 1.663 25.600 0.000 1/2'' Ice 2.391 2.391 38.184 Discrete Tower Loads 0.000 2.4'' x 7-ft Pipe B From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 1.663 1.663 25.600 0.000 1/2'' Ice 2.391 2.391 38.184 Description Face Offset Offsets: Azimuth Placement C A C A Weight A A A A 0.000 or Type Horz Adjustment Front Side 2.4'' x 7-ft Pipe C From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 1.663 1.663 25.600 Leg Lateral 0.000 1/2'' Ice 2.391 2.391 38.184 Vert 0.000 ft ° ft ft2 ft2 lb Sector Mount [SM 602-3] C None 0.000 200.000 No Ice 33.110 33.110 1540.500 ft 1/2'' Ice 44.900 44.900 2158.770 ft ****** BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-X w/ A From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 10.907 8.177 56.455 4.5'' x 72'' Mount Pipe B From Leg 0.500 0.000 145.000 No Ice 2.250 2.250 65.000 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 11.615 9.667 135.728 0.000 1/2'' Ice 2.619 2.619 84.096 0.000 0.000 BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-X w/ B From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 10.907 8.177 56.455 ****** Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 11.615 9.667 135.728 4.5'' x 4' Mount Pipe B From Leg 0.500 0.000 135.000 No Ice 1.322 1.322 44.000 0.000 0.000 1/2'' Ice 1.577 1.577 56.987 BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-X w/ C From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 10.907 8.177 56.455 0.000 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 11.615 9.667 135.728 ****** 0.000 (2) SBNHH-1D65C w/ A From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 11.588 9.793 98.990 LNX-6515DS-VTM w/ A From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 11.211 9.359 75.350 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 12.306 11.311 188.134 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 11.828 10.679 158.695 0.000 0.000 (2) SBNHH-1D65C w/ B From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 11.588 9.793 98.990 LNX-6515DS-VTM w/ B From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 11.211 9.359 75.350 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 12.306 11.311 188.134 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 11.828 10.679 158.695 0.000 0.000 (2) SBNHH-1D65C w/ C From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 11.588 9.793 98.990 LNX-6515DS-VTM w/ C From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 11.211 9.359 75.350 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 12.306 11.311 188.134 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 11.828 10.679 158.695 0.000 0.000 SBNH-1D6565C w/ Mount A From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 11.695 9.854 99.254 HBX-6517DS-VTM w/ A From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 5.503 5.019 40.096 Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 12.421 11.383 189.044 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 6.073 6.221 86.570 0.000 0.000 SBNH-1D6565C w/ Mount B From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 11.695 9.854 99.254 HBX-6517DS-VTM w/ B From Leg 3.000 0.000 200.000 No Ice 5.503 5.019 40.096 Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 12.421 11.383 189.044 Mount Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 6.073 6.221 86.570 0.000 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 15 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 16 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Description Face Offset Offsets: Azimuth Placement CAAA CAAA Weight Description Face Dish Offset Offsets: Azimuth 3 dB Elevation Outside Aperture Weight or Type Horz Adjustment Front Side or Type Type Horz Adjustment Beam Diameter Area Leg Lateral Leg Lateral Width Vert Vert ft ° ft ft2 ft2 lb ft ° ° ft ft ft2 lb ft HP6-59 B Paraboloid From 1.000 0.000 145.000 6.000 No Ice 28.270 143.000 ft w/Shroud (HP) Leg 0.000 1/2'' Ice 29.070 290.000 SBNH-1D6565C w/ Mount C From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 11.695 9.854 99.254 0.000 Pipe 0.000 1/2'' Ice 12.421 11.383 189.044 ***** 0.000 P2-57W B Paraboloid From 1.000 0.000 135.000 2.000 No Ice 3.140 25.000 (6) RRUS 11 A From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 3.249 1.373 47.620 w/Shroud (HP) Leg 0.000 1/2'' Ice 3.410 43.940 0.000 1/2'' Ice 3.491 1.551 68.420 0.000 0.000 ***** (6) RRUS 11 B From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 3.249 1.373 47.620 HP6-59 B Paraboloid From 1.000 0.000 95.000 6.000 No Ice 28.270 143.000 0.000 1/2'' Ice 3.491 1.551 68.420 w/Shroud (HP) Leg 0.000 1/2'' Ice 29.070 290.000 0.000 0.000 (6) RRUS 11 C From Leg 3.000 30.000 100.000 No Ice 3.249 1.373 47.620 0.000 1/2'' Ice 3.491 1.551 68.420 0.000 DC6-48-60-18-8F A From Leg 1.500 0.000 100.000 No Ice 1.266 1.266 20.000 0.000 1/2'' Ice 1.456 1.456 35.116 Load Combinations 0.000 DC6-48-60-18-8F B From Leg 1.500 0.000 100.000 No Ice 1.266 1.266 20.000 Comb. Description 0.000 1/2'' Ice 1.456 1.456 35.116 No. 0.000 1 Dead Only DC6-48-60-18-8F C From Leg 1.500 0.000 100.000 No Ice 1.266 1.266 20.000 2 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg - No Ice 0.000 1/2'' Ice 1.456 1.456 35.116 3 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg - No Ice 0.000 4 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 30 deg - No Ice Sector Mount [SM 406-3] A None 0.000 100.000 No Ice 19.830 19.830 923.049 5 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 30 deg - No Ice 1/2'' Ice 29.410 29.410 1325.880 6 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 60 deg - No Ice ***** 7 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 60 deg - No Ice 4.5'' x 72'' Mount Pipe B From Leg 0.500 0.000 95.000 No Ice 2.250 2.250 65.000 8 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - No Ice 0.000 1/2'' Ice 2.619 2.619 84.096 9 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - No Ice 0.000 10 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 120 deg - No Ice **** 11 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 120 deg - No Ice 5'' Dia. x 8'' Side Light A From Leg 0.500 0.000 150.000 No Ice 0.222 0.222 10.000 12 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 150 deg - No Ice 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.300 0.300 13.156 13 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 150 deg - No Ice 0.000 14 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg - No Ice 5'' Dia. x 8'' Side Light B From Leg 0.500 0.000 150.000 No Ice 0.222 0.222 10.000 15 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg - No Ice 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.300 0.300 13.156 16 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 210 deg - No Ice 0.000 17 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 210 deg - No Ice 5'' Dia. x 8'' Side Light C From Leg 0.500 0.000 150.000 No Ice 0.222 0.222 10.000 18 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 240 deg - No Ice 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.300 0.300 13.156 19 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 240 deg - No Ice 0.000 20 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 270 deg - No Ice 12'' x 24'' Beacon A From Leg 0.000 0.000 250.000 No Ice 1.600 1.600 30.000 21 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 270 deg - No Ice 0.000 1/2'' Ice 1.806 1.806 49.573 22 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 300 deg - No Ice 1.000 23 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 300 deg - No Ice 1/2'' x 4' LRod C From Leg 0.000 0.000 250.000 No Ice 0.200 0.200 2.673 24 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 330 deg - No Ice 0.000 1/2'' Ice 0.613 0.613 5.173 25 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 330 deg - No Ice 2.000 26 1.2 Dead+1.0 Ice 27 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 0 deg+1.0 Ice 28 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 30 deg+1.0 Ice 29 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 60 deg+1.0 Ice 30 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 90 deg+1.0 Ice 31 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 120 deg+1.0 Ice 32 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 150 deg+1.0 Ice Dishes 33 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 180 deg+1.0 Ice 34 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 210 deg+1.0 Ice

35 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 240 deg+1.0 Ice Description Face Dish Offset Offsets: Azimuth 3 dB Elevation Outside Aperture Weight 36 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 270 deg+1.0 Ice or Type Type Horz Adjustment Beam Diameter Area 37 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 300 deg+1.0 Ice Leg Lateral Width 38 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 330 deg+1.0 Ice Vert 2 39 Dead+Wind 0 deg - Service ft ° ° ft ft ft lb 40 Dead+Wind 30 deg - Service Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 17 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 18 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Comb. Description Section Elevation Horz. Gov. Tilt Twist No. No. Deflection Load 41 Dead+Wind 60 deg - Service ft in Comb. ° ° 42 Dead+Wind 90 deg - Service T3 220 - 200 19.977 10 0.775 0.097 43 Dead+Wind 120 deg - Service T4 200 - 180 16.814 10 0.717 0.101 44 Dead+Wind 150 deg - Service T5 180 - 160 13.808 10 0.657 0.101 45 Dead+Wind 180 deg - Service T6 160 - 140 11.088 10 0.584 0.097 46 Dead+Wind 210 deg - Service T7 140 - 120 8.640 10 0.509 0.087 47 Dead+Wind 240 deg - Service T8 120 - 100 6.506 10 0.423 0.069 48 Dead+Wind 270 deg - Service T9 100 - 80 4.744 10 0.349 0.057 49 Dead+Wind 300 deg - Service T10 80 - 60 3.234 10 0.278 0.044 50 Dead+Wind 330 deg - Service T11 60 - 40 1.985 10 0.210 0.031 T12 40 - 20 1.031 10 0.136 0.019 T13 20 - 0 0.342 10 0.066 0.008

Maximum Tower Deflections - Service Wind

Section Elevation Horz. Gov. Tilt Twist No. Deflection Load Critical Deflections and Radius of Curvature - Design Wind ft in Comb. ° ° T1 250 - 240 4.208 43 0.137 0.016 Elevation Appurtenance Gov. Deflection Tilt Twist Radius of T2 240 - 220 3.921 43 0.137 0.016 Load Curvature T3 220 - 200 3.355 43 0.130 0.016 ft Comb. in ° ° ft T4 200 - 180 2.825 43 0.120 0.017 250.000 12'' x 24'' Beacon 10 25.066 0.816 0.094 853898 T5 180 - 160 2.320 43 0.110 0.017 200.000 BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-X w/ 10 16.814 0.717 0.101 52378 T6 160 - 140 1.863 43 0.098 0.016 Mount Pipe T7 140 - 120 1.451 43 0.086 0.015 150.000 5'' Dia. x 8'' Side Light 10 9.830 0.547 0.093 17472 T8 120 - 100 1.092 43 0.071 0.012 145.000 HP6-59 10 9.226 0.528 0.090 16620 T9 100 - 80 0.796 43 0.059 0.010 135.000 P2-57W 10 8.073 0.488 0.083 14347 T10 80 - 60 0.542 43 0.047 0.007 100.000 (2) SBNHH-1D65C w/ Mount Pipe 10 4.744 0.349 0.057 22234 T11 60 - 40 0.333 43 0.035 0.005 95.000 HP6-59 10 4.345 0.331 0.054 22044 T12 40 - 20 0.173 43 0.023 0.003 T13 20 - 0 0.057 43 0.011 0.001

Bolt Design Data Critical Deflections and Radius of Curvature - Service Wind Section Elevation Component Bolt Bolt Size Number Maximum Allowable Ratio Allowable Criteria No. Type Grade Of Load per Load Load Ratio Elevation Appurtenance Gov. Deflection Tilt Twist Radius of ft in Bolts Bolt lb Load Curvature Allowable lb ft Comb. in ° ° ft T1 250 Leg A325N 1.000 4 309.846 53014.398 0.006 1 Bolt Tension 250.000 12'' x 24'' Beacon 43 4.208 0.137 0.016 Inf Diagonal A325N 0.625 1 528.446 7495.310 0.071 1 Member Block 200.000 BXA-80063-8CF-EDIN-X w/ 43 2.825 0.120 0.017 307481 Shear Mount Pipe Top Girt A325N 0.625 1 24.651 7495.310 0.003 1 Member Block 150.000 5'' Dia. x 8'' Side Light 43 1.651 0.092 0.016 103585 Shear 145.000 HP6-59 43 1.549 0.089 0.015 98725 T2 240 Leg A325N 1.000 4 2993.270 53014.398 0.056 1 Bolt Tension 135.000 P2-57W 43 1.356 0.082 0.014 85310 Diagonal A325N 0.625 1 1592.500 7495.310 0.212 1 Member Block 100.000 (2) SBNHH-1D65C w/ Mount Pipe 43 0.796 0.059 0.010 132150 Shear 95.000 HP6-59 43 0.729 0.056 0.009 130839 T3 220 Leg A325N > 1.375 6 4157.840 100230.000 0.041 1 Bolt Tension 1 Diagonal A325N 0.625 1 1708.860 7495.310 0.228 1 Member Block Shear Top Girt A325N 0.625 1 15.285 7495.310 0.002 1 Member Block Maximum Tower Deflections - Design Wind Shear T4 200 Leg A325N > 1.375 6 9266.600 100230.000 0.092 1 Bolt Tension 1 Section Elevation Horz. Gov. Tilt Twist Diagonal A325N 0.625 1 4642.940 7495.310 0.619 1 Member Block No. Deflection Load Shear ft in Comb. ° ° T5 180 Leg A325N > 1.375 6 14752.100 100230.000 0.147 1 Bolt Tension T1 250 - 240 25.066 10 0.816 0.094 1 T2 240 - 220 23.354 10 0.814 0.095 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 19 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 20 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Section Elevation Component Bolt Bolt Size Number Maximum Allowable Ratio Allowable Criteria Section Elevation Size L Lu Kl/r A Pu φPn Ratio No. Type Grade Of Load per Load Load Ratio No. Pu ft in Bolts Bolt lb ft ft ft in2 lb Allowable lb φPn lb K=1.00 Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 5463.270 9653.910 0.566 1 Member Block T8 120 - 100 4 20.027 6.676 80.1 12.566 -228388.000 353707.000 0.646 1 Shear K=1.00 T6 160 Leg A325N > 1.375 6 20342.199 100230.000 0.203 1 Bolt Tension T9 100 - 80 4 1/4 20.027 6.676 75.4 14.186 -284356.000 421283.000 0.675 1 1 K=1.00 Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 7285.710 9653.910 0.755 1 Member Block T10 80 - 60 4 1/2 20.027 6.676 71.2 15.904 -341110.000 493989.000 0.691 1 Shear K=1.00 T7 140 Leg A325N > 1.375 6 26627.500 100230.000 0.266 1 Bolt Tension T11 60 - 40 4 1/2 20.027 6.676 71.2 15.904 -397759.000 493992.000 0.805 1 1 K=1.00 Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 8430.090 10673.400 0.790 1 Member Block T12 40 - 20 4 3/4 20.027 6.676 67.5 17.721 -454437.000 571718.000 0.795 1 Shear K=1.00 T8 120 Leg A325N > 1.375 6 32693.400 100230.000 0.326 1 Bolt Tension T13 20 - 0 5 20.027 6.676 64.1 19.635 -511060.000 654371.000 0.781 1 1 K=1.00 Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 9793.650 14231.300 0.688 1 Member Block Shear

T9 100 Leg A325N > 1.375 6 40496.000 100230.000 0.404 1 Bolt Tension 1 1 P u / φPn controls Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 14033.800 16950.000 0.828 1 Member Block Shear T10 80 Leg A325N > 1.375 6 48709.801 100230.000 0.486 1 Bolt Tension 1 Diagonal Design Data (Compression) Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 15064.300 16950.000 0.889 1 Member Block Shear Section Elevation Size L L Kl/r A P Ratio T11 60 Leg A325N > 1.500 6 56769.898 119282.000 0.476 1 Bolt Tension u u φPn No. P 1 u ft ft ft in2 lb lb Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 16299.700 16950.000 0.962 1 Member Block φPn Shear T1 250 - 240 L2x2x3/16 5.600 2.574 88.8 0.715 -532.083 15296.300 0.035 1 T12 40 Leg A325N > 1.500 6 64708.801 119282.000 0.542 1 Bolt Tension K=1.13 1 T2 240 - 220 L2x2x3/16 6.021 2.763 93.1 0.715 -1651.700 14674.900 0.113 1 Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 17193.500 16950.000 1.014 1 Member Block K=1.11 Shear T3 220 - 200 L2x2x3/16 7.314 3.505 110.1 0.715 -1950.080 12244.300 0.159 1 T13 20 Diagonal A325N 0.875 1 18725.699 24353.500 0.769 1 Bolt Shear K=1.03 T4 200 - 180 L2x2x3/16 9.329 4.514 137.5 0.715 -4674.870 8546.370 0.547 1 K=1.00 T5 180 - 160 L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 10.892 5.254 127.4 0.902 -5497.560 12441.600 0.442 1 K=1.00 T6 160 - 140 L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 12.516 6.055 146.8 0.902 -7239.940 9457.820 0.765 1 K=1.00 Compression Checks T7 140 - 120 L3x3x3/16 14.186 6.891 138.7 1.090 -8509.920 12792.800 0.665 1 K=1.00 1 T8 120 - 100 L3x3x1/4 16.417 8.024 162.6 1.440 -9989.040 12297.300 0.812 K=1.00 Leg Design Data (Compression) T9 100 - 80 L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 18.075 8.841 152.9 1.690 -14192.100 16336.100 0.869 1 K=1.00

T10 80 - 60 L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 19.760 9.674 167.3 1.690 -15211.200 13645.700 1.115 1 Section Elevation Size L Lu Kl/r A Pu φPn Ratio K=1.00 No. Pu 2 4.9-3 (1.11 CR) - 250 ft ft ft in lb lb 1 φPn T11 60 - 40 L4x4x1/4 21.461 10.524 158.9 1.940 -16447.100 17367.900 0.947 T1 250 - 240 1 3/4 10.000 3.333 91.4 2.405 -1792.700 58740.500 0.031 1 K=1.00 K=1.00 T12 40 - 20 L4x4x1/4 23.180 11.373 171.7 1.940 -17485.600 14870.900 1.176 1 T2 240 - 220 2 20.000 4.000 96.0 3.142 -14918.300 72063.203 0.207 1 K=1.00 K=1.00 4.9-3 (1.18 CR) - 292 T3 220 - 200 2 1/2 20.027 4.005 76.9 4.909 -30996.801 143344.000 0.216 1 T13 20 - 0 L4x4x3/8 24.911 12.229 186.2 2.860 -18725.699 18631.600 1.005 1 K=1.00 K=1.00 T4 200 - 180 3 20.027 5.007 80.1 7.069 -66972.398 198962.000 0.337 1 4.9-3 (1.01 CR) - 313 K=1.00 1 T5 180 - 160 3 1/4 20.027 5.007 73.9 8.296 -104266.000 250285.000 0.417 K=1.00 1 T6 160 - 140 3 1/2 20.027 5.007 68.7 9.621 -142986.000 306709.000 0.466 1 P u / φPn controls K=1.00 T7 140 - 120 3 1/2 20.027 5.007 68.7 9.621 -186191.000 306707.000 0.607 1 Job Page Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 21 of 23 tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 22 of 23

Project Date Project Date Tower Engineering Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals Professionals 326 Tryon Road 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Top Girt Design Data (Compression) Section Elevation Size L Lu Kl/r A Pu φPn Ratio No. Pu ft ft ft in2 lb lb φPn Section Elevation Size L Lu Kl/r A Pu φPn Ratio T11 60 - 40 L4x4x1/4 21.461 10.524 102.6 1.268 16299.700 55136.301 0.296 1 No. Pu T12 40 - 20 L4x4x1/4 23.180 11.373 110.8 1.268 17193.500 55136.301 0.312 1 ft ft ft in2 lb lb φPn 4.9-3 (1.17 CR) - 291 T1 250 - 240 L2x2x3/16 4.500 4.083 124.4 0.715 -38.630 10262.000 0.004 1 T13 20 - 0 L4x4x3/8 24.911 12.229 120.9 1.864 18376.301 81073.102 0.227 1 K=1.00 1 T3 220 - 200 L2x2x3/16 4.500 4.063 123.7 0.715 -16.589 10347.400 0.002 K=1.00 1 P u / φPn controls

1 P u / φPn controls Top Girt Design Data (Tension)

Tension Checks Section Elevation Size L Lu Kl/r A Pu φPn Ratio No. Pu ft ft ft in2 lb lb φPn T1 250 - 240 L2x2x3/16 4.500 4.083 84.7 0.431 24.651 18739.000 0.001 1 1 Leg Design Data (Tension) T3 220 - 200 L2x2x3/16 4.500 4.063 84.3 0.431 15.285 18739.000 0.001

Section Elevation Size L Lu Kl/r A Pu φPn Ratio 1 P φP No. Pu u / n controls ft ft ft in2 lb lb φPn T1 250 - 240 1 3/4 10.000 3.333 91.4 2.405 1239.380 108238.000 0.011 1 T2 240 - 220 2 20.000 4.000 96.0 3.142 11973.100 141372.000 0.085 1 T3 220 - 200 2 1/2 20.027 4.005 76.9 4.909 24947.000 220893.000 0.113 1 Section Capacity Table T4 200 - 180 3 20.027 5.007 80.1 7.069 55599.602 318086.000 0.175 1 1 T5 180 - 160 3 1/4 20.027 5.007 73.9 8.296 88512.398 373310.000 0.237 Elevation Component Size Critical P øPallow % Pass 1 Section T6 160 - 140 3 1/2 20.027 5.007 68.7 9.621 122053.000 432951.000 0.282 No. ft Type Element lb lb Capacity Fail T7 140 - 120 3 1/2 20.027 5.007 68.7 9.621 159765.000 432951.000 0.369 1 1 T1 250 - 240 Leg 1 3/4 3 -1792.700 58740.500 3.1 Pass T8 120 - 100 4 20.027 6.676 80.1 12.566 196161.000 565487.000 0.347 T2 240 - 220 Leg 2 27 -14918.300 72063.203 20.7 Pass T9 100 - 80 4 1/4 20.027 6.676 75.4 14.186 242976.000 638381.000 0.381 1 T3 220 - 200 Leg 2 1/2 60 -30996.801 143344.000 21.6 Pass T10 80 - 60 4 1/2 20.027 6.676 71.2 15.904 292259.000 715694.000 0.408 1 1 T4 200 - 180 Leg 3 96 -66972.398 198962.000 33.7 Pass T11 60 - 40 4 1/2 20.027 6.676 71.2 15.904 340619.000 715694.000 0.476 T5 180 - 160 Leg 3 1/4 123 -104266.000 250285.000 41.7 Pass T12 40 - 20 4 3/4 20.027 6.676 67.5 17.721 388253.000 797425.000 0.487 1 T6 160 - 140 Leg 3 1/2 149 -142986.000 306709.000 46.6 Pass T13 20 - 0 5 20.027 6.676 64.1 19.635 434301.000 883573.000 0.492 1 T7 140 - 120 Leg 3 1/2 176 -186191.000 306707.000 60.7 Pass

T8 120 - 100 Leg 4 203 -228388.000 353707.000 64.6 Pass T9 100 - 80 Leg 4 1/4 224 -284356.000 421283.000 67.5 Pass 1 P u / φPn controls T10 80 - 60 Leg 4 1/2 245 -341110.000 493989.000 69.1 Pass T11 60 - 40 Leg 4 1/2 266 -397759.000 493992.000 80.5 Pass T12 40 - 20 Leg 4 3/4 287 -454437.000 571718.000 79.5 Pass T13 20 - 0 Leg 5 308 -511060.000 654371.000 78.1 Pass T1 250 - 240 Diagonal L2x2x3/16 12 -532.083 15296.300 3.5 Pass Diagonal Design Data (Tension) 7.1 (b) T2 240 - 220 Diagonal L2x2x3/16 33 -1651.700 14674.900 11.3 Pass Section Elevation Size L Lu Kl/r A Pu φPn Ratio 21.2 (b) No. Pu T3 220 - 200 Diagonal L2x2x3/16 69 -1950.080 12244.300 15.9 Pass ft ft ft in2 lb lb φPn 22.8 (b) T1 250 - 240 L2x2x3/16 5.600 2.574 52.7 0.431 528.446 18739.000 0.028 1 T4 200 - 180 Diagonal L2x2x3/16 99 -4674.870 8546.370 54.7 Pass T2 240 - 220 L2x2x3/16 6.021 2.763 56.4 0.431 1592.500 18739.000 0.085 1 61.9 (b) T3 220 - 200 L2x2x3/16 7.314 3.505 70.8 0.431 1708.860 18739.000 0.091 1 T5 180 - 160 Diagonal L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 127 -5497.560 12441.600 44.2 Pass T4 200 - 180 L2x2x3/16 9.329 4.514 90.4 0.431 4642.940 18739.000 0.248 1 56.6 (b) T5 180 - 160 L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 10.892 5.254 83.6 0.536 5463.270 23310.600 0.234 1 T6 160 - 140 Diagonal L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 154 -7239.940 9457.820 76.5 Pass T6 160 - 140 L2 1/2x2 1/2x3/16 12.516 6.055 96.0 0.536 7285.710 23310.600 0.313 1 T7 140 - 120 Diagonal L3x3x3/16 181 -8509.920 12792.800 66.5 Pass T7 140 - 120 L3x3x3/16 14.186 6.891 90.2 0.677 8430.090 29444.100 0.286 1 79.0 (b) T8 120 - 100 L3x3x1/4 16.417 8.024 105.7 0.892 9793.650 38823.801 0.252 1 T8 120 - 100 Diagonal L3x3x1/4 208 -9989.040 12297.300 81.2 Pass T9 100 - 80 L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 18.075 8.841 99.2 1.080 14033.800 46980.000 0.299 1 T9 100 - 80 Diagonal L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 229 -14192.100 16336.100 86.9 Pass T10 80 - 60 L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 19.760 9.674 108.3 1.080 15064.300 46980.000 0.321 1 T10 80 - 60 Diagonal L3 1/2x3 1/2x1/4 250 -15211.200 13645.700 111.5 Fail 4.9-3 (1.10 CR) - 249 T11 60 - 40 Diagonal L4x4x1/4 271 -16447.100 17367.900 94.7 Pass Job Page tnxTower 135956_Ellendale Rutledge 23 of 23

Project Date Tower Engineering TEP# 55653_21300 11:54:29 09/10/14 Professionals 326 Tryon Road Raleigh, NC 27603 Client Designed by Phone: (919) 661-6351 KGI Wireless FAX: (919) 661-6350 aqueen

Section Elevation Component Size Critical P øPallow % Pass No. ft Type Element lb lb Capacity Fail 96.2 (b) T12 40 - 20 Diagonal L4x4x1/4 292 -17485.600 14870.900 117.6 Fail T13 20 - 0 Diagonal L4x4x3/8 313 -18725.699 18631.600 100.5 Pass T1 250 - 240 Top Girt L2x2x3/16 6 -38.630 10262.000 0.4 Pass T3 220 - 200 Top Girt L2x2x3/16 61 -16.292 10347.400 0.2 Pass 0.2 (b) Summary Leg (T11) 80.5 Pass Diagonal 117.6 Fail (T12) Top Girt 0.4 Pass (T1) Bolt Checks 101.4 Pass RATING = 117.6 Fail

Program Version 6.1.4.1 - 12/17/2013 File://tep-vm-file01/Towers/55653/21300_Ellendale Rutledge/36423_Structural Analysis/Rev 0/2. tnx/Ellendale Rutledge.eri September 11, 2014 250-ft Self Supporting Tower Structural Analysis 135956 - Ellendale Rutledge TEP Project Number 55653_21300, Revision 0 Page 9

APPENDIX B

COAX CONFIGURATION

tnxTower Report - version 6.1.4.1