How will the U.S. economy meet the mobile data
demand multiplier effects of tablets, smartphones, and the Internet-of-things?
The answer to that question depends, in no small part, on adopting policies to reduce
regulatory barriers to investment in new infrastructure needed to carry
exponentially growing data traffic.
In its Wireless Competition Reports, the FCC has identified local government permit processing as the significant regulatory constraint faced by wireless infrastructure providers that need to add or modify cell sites. Right now the FCC has prime opportunity to better ensure the future competitive standing of the U.S. economy and to promote welfare of American wireless consumers by reducing that constraint.
In its Wireless Competition Reports, the FCC has identified local government permit processing as the significant regulatory constraint faced by wireless infrastructure providers that need to add or modify cell sites. Right now the FCC has prime opportunity to better ensure the future competitive standing of the U.S. economy and to promote welfare of American wireless consumers by reducing that constraint.
The FCC is taking public comments today on its rulemaking
proposal to promote market investment in wireless broadband
infrastructure. The Commission seeks to reduce the cost and delay to wireless
infrastructure providers that results from both federal and local regulatory
approval processes. Reducing those burdens and establishing clearer and more
expeditious permitting processes would encourage more rapid and less expensive
deployment of infrastructure technologies that support wireless broadband
services. This would mean better service quality options for wireless services
and, potentially, reduced prices.
Wireless infrastructure providers shoulder
unnecessary environmental regulatory burdens in deploying distributed antenna
systems (DAS), small cells, and temporary towers. Wisely, the FCC is seeking to
reduce some of those burdens.
With regard to DAS or other small-scale wireless technologies
that have little or no discernable environmental impact, the FCC should
expedite its environmental review process. And temporary cell towers that
involve little to no excavation or light and that are of limited height and
duration deserve to be free from FCC pre-construction environmental notice
requirements.
Section 706 of the Communications Act charges the
FCC to “remove barriers to infrastructure investment.” Unnecessary
environmental regulations regarding small-scale wireless technologies and
temporary towers are precisely the kinds of barriers Congress tasked the
Commission to remove. Here the Commission should grant the relief it has
proposed – and do so on an accelerated basis.
Wireless infrastructure providers seeking to
collocate antennas on existing cell sites or to construct new towers or base
stations have also been mired in costly and lengthy processes at the local
level. But the FCC is taking positive steps to address such problems. The
Commission is now proposing to clarify the standards by which local governments
process and approve collocation and siting applications.
Section 6409(a)(1), enacted as part of the Spectrum
Act, provides that a local government “may not deny, and shall approve,” a
modification to an existing tower or base station that “does not substantially
change” its physical dimensions. Collocating an additional antenna on an
existing site typically results in little or no change. So the FCC should adopt
a shorter clock for a local government to decide on whether to accept or reject
an application. In particular, the Commission should reduce the 90-day period
that the Wireless Bureau currently presumes to be a reasonable time to consider
collocation applications. A 60- or 45-day window is time enough, given the
nature of the applications. And even then a local government that claims it is
unable to review a particular collocation application would have opportunity to
rebut that presumption with case-specific evidence before a court of law.
There is evidence that local governments have
delayed decision-making on collocation and new siting applications by claiming
that applications are “incomplete.” In some instances, local governments have
instead put off any decision by issuing repeated requests for extra information
from wireless infrastructure providers. Current FCC rules toll the time period
in which local governments must act on collocation or new siting applications
if, within 30 days of the application’s filing, the local government provides notice
that specific information is needed to complete the application. The Commission
should shore up the current rules to prohibit administrative abuse of the
applications process.
Among other things, the FCC should consider limiting
the tolling of the timeframe for local government action on applications to one
request for specific, additional information. Suppose a wireless infrastructure
provider offers information in response to a local government request but the
local government again maintains the application is incomplete. The local
government could simply deny the application, within the specified time period,
on that basis. A court of law could then consider whether the application is
complete or the local government acted arbitrarily. The FCC could provide that
a judicial finding of arbitrary denial of a collocation or new siting
application involving application completion results in such an application
being deemed granted by operation of law.
A “deemed granted” remedy would finally put teeth to
the FCC's rules for timely decisionmaking on collocation and new site
applications. Indeed, the Commission should also spell out that failure of
local governments to act on collocation or new siting applications within specified
timeframes should result in applications being deemed granted by operation of
law. Such finality would effectively counteract any incentives for local
governments to put off having to decide whether to accept or reject
applications.
In addition to addressing local government obstinacy,
a “deemed granted” remedy could also avoid lengthy and equally expensive
lawsuits. Litigation over individual wireless tower siting applications ranges
from several months to a handful of years to resolve. In the meantime,
financial resources that could be going into infrastructure instead go to
lawyers, consultants, and others involved in the litigation. And a lack of new
wireless infrastructure leaves consumers without upgraded wireless broadband
services.
By clarifying and tightening its procedural rules
regarding collocation and new siting applications, the FCC can tackle costly
administrative delay problems. At the same time, it can leave to local
governments the authority to decide whether or not such applications satisfy
substantive standards.
Building and upgrading thousands of more wireless
sites will be critical to supporting the demands of wireless broadband consumers
in the very near future. With its proposed rulemaking, the FCC now has an
excellent opportunity to reduce burdens resulting from unnecessary
environmental regulations. And the Commission is in prime position to reduce
administrative delays and legal costs stemming from collocation and new cell
siting permitting processes.
The FCC should follow through on its wireless
infrastructure rulemaking proposal, and do so fast.