Amid Fight on Revised Siting Rules, Pai Hasn't Appointed BDAC Ad Hoc Committee

The FCC got pushback against CTIA and Wireless Infrastructure Association proposals seeking more changes to wireless infrastructure rules designed to accelerate siting of towers and other gear. Big and small cities and their lobbying groups weighed in, along with industry allies of what CTIA and WIA seek. Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee state and local government members at September's BDAC meeting asked for an ad hoc committee on collocation issues (see 1909190024). But Chairman Ajit Pai took no action. Filings were posted mostly Wednesday in docket 19-250.

A senior industry official said discussions are ongoing with local and state officials. “Things get overheated,” the official said: “If we can lower the temperature a little, that would be good.” The FCC didn’t comment.

“We are seeing this level of pushback because the petitions ask for significant changes to the FCC’s rules that go well beyond the minor modifications Section 6409(a) was intended to allow,” NATOA General Counsel Nancy Werner told us. “The petitions would require municipalities to approve wireless deployments in locations that have never been reviewed or approved for wireless facilities,” she said: “Municipalities are responding to the very real risks posed by these proposals, which elevate speed of deployment much too far above public safety and community interests.”

“Local governments have an important role to play in wireless infrastructure siting, despite ongoing efforts to chip away at that role,” said Angelina Panettieri, National League of Cities principal associate-technology and communications. “The petitioners' requests go far beyond the intent of the original statute, and present real safety and property management concerns to local governments.” BDAC should be involved, she said. “If the petitioners are interested in addressing their concerns through a voluntary process, rather than regulation, then conducting that work in public, through the existing BDAC structure, with a working group that is fairly balanced between public and private interests, seems like a logical solution,” she said.

WIA President Jonathan Adelstein told us industry is willing to talk. “We have reached out to localities and would like to work with them to iron out any differences,” Adelstein said. “We really are interested in what they have to say” on the proposals, he said. Some comments express concerns that don’t involve Section 6409, where FCC authority has "been upheld in numerous courts,” he said. Wildfires illustrate (see 1910300013) the importance of getting infrastructure sited since “people are relying on their wireless,” Adelstein said. California's the toughest place in the U.S. to deploy new or upgraded facilities, he said. “Repeatedly we get denied,” he said: “This is not a game. Lives are at stake.”

The FCC sought comment in September on a WIA petitions for rulemaking and for declaratory ruling asking the Commission to adopt new rules or clarify existing rules on Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act of 2012 (see 1909130062). It sought feedback on a similar petition by CTIA, also requesting clarifications of rules implementing Communications Act Section 224.

The proposals “are contrary to the statutes the rules implement, would significantly intrude on local land use processes and pose serious public safety risks,” commented NATOA, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and National Association of Counties. The changes sought are major, they said. The FCC would allow “applicants to deploy facilities in locations never reviewed or approved for wireless facilities” and “issue electrical, structural and building permits on the sixty-first day after an applicant believes they made a ‘good faith attempt’ to submit the application,” they said.

New York supports wireless infrastructure deployment -- done safely. The FCC in implementing 6409(a) didn't prohibit "localities to ‘enforce and condition approval on compliance with generally applicable building, structural, electrical, and safety codes and with other laws codifying objective standards reasonably related to health and safety,’” the city said: “Petitioners’ proposed ‘clarifications’ and ‘narrow rule changes’ have the consequence of inhibiting the application of these important local public safety laws, such as the Fire Code, with potentially disastrous effects.”

Petitioners don't substantiate allegations, and omit some "critical context in mischaracterizing local permitting and land use,” said the National League of Cities and localities across the U.S. “No record based solely on responses to these Petitions will provide adequate support to justify Petitioners’ demands.” Among the cities signing were New York, Los Angeles and Boston.

Industry groups and companies seek FCC action. “These petitions have been developed from WIA’s advocacy that has occurred for well over a year on ways that the Commission can update its rules and provide further clarity to not only industry members, but also State and local governments,” WIA said. Current practice is leading to widespread discrepancies in how collocations are treated, it said: “Collocations that involve minor (less than thirty feet) compound expansions are treated as substantial increases, but new structures that involve ground excavation up to thirty feet outside of the site boundary are not.”

“Additional actions that expedite the review process and reduce the cost for deployment will enable investment dollars to go further, providing more robust services and densified networks to respond to the public’s accelerating demand,” CTIA said: “Additional Commission action is needed to advance its priority to remove barriers to 5G deployment.”

“Some jurisdictions continue to ignore the mandates of Section 6409, or wield the Commission’s rules in a manner that delays rather than speeds deployment,” the Competitive Carriers Association said.

AT&T said siting's a hurdle. “5G services will require much denser networks of cell sites than before,” AT&T commented. “Localities are misinterpreting many aspects of the Commission’s rules implementing Section 6409(a).” Verizon and T-Mobile also urged FCC action (see here and here).

The petitions “present this Commission with an opportunity to continue its important work by providing regulatory certainty and fostering an environment of clarity and collaboration for our nation’s wireless networks and supporting infrastructure,” tower company Crown Castle said.