Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Pages 22-27

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 23...
... ACRP LRD 43 23 and 60 days for collocation applications. Airport stake holders expressed opposition to the initial 2008 CTIA – The Wireless Association petition requesting that the FCC restrict state and local reviewing periods, ability to impose barriers to entry, and procedural requirements.
From page 24...
... 24 ACRP LRD 43 portation argued the presence of another carrier is a valid concern for localities because an additional antenna site would have a negative effect on airports by increasing potential air navigation obstructions.204 In disagreeing with the rule's negative effect on aviation, the FCC cited the FAA's comment that any FCC "action on this Petition does not alter or amend the FAA's regulatory requirements and process" to require notice of structures that may affect aeronautical operations and facilities.205 The airports also argued that carrier competition should not drive decisions to allow more antennas or frequencies to operate on or near airports. The FCC did not accommodate or acknowledge the comment in its ruling.
From page 25...
... ACRP LRD 43 25 cants for mobile systems must complete an environmental assess ment prior to equipment authorization.223 For non-construction authorization deployments, the FCC deems new antenna or modification applications categorically excluded from environmental processing unless one of seven exceptions applies.224 Exceptions include a planned antenna loca tion in a wilderness area, a wildlife preserve, or a flood plain; impacts on endangered species, historical preservation, or Indian religious sites; or significant change in surface features.225 A deployment in a floodplain can avoid the necessity for an environmental assessment if the facility and all equipment is "constructed at least one foot above the base flood elevation."226 In 2018, the FCC issued an exception to NHPA and NEPA reviews for small wireless facilities deployed under geographic area licenses. The exception was made as part of the FCC's effort to promote and speed up the deployment of 4G and 5G small cells to densify the cellular network to meet increasing coverage demands.
From page 26...
... 26 ACRP LRD 43 tion begins or the date of the construction permit application.238 The FAA cited a need to increase their review period, especially in cases where public comments are submitted.239 Entities do not need to file notice with the FAA when adding frequencies to an existing structure that has a current no hazard determination. The 45-day notice requirement is waived by the FAA where an "emergency involving essential public services, public health, or public safety" exists and requires immediate construction or alteration of a structure.
From page 27...
... ACRP LRD 43 27 restrictions that impair the use of certain antennas.251 After Congress enacted this provision in the Telecommunication Act of 1996, the FCC has issued a series of orders refining the rules scope and application to promote competition in multitenant environments.252 The FCC even issued a notice of proposed rulemaking in 2019, seeking to use OTARD to promote deployment of 5G technology.253 OTARD applies where an antenna that is one meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement is deployed within property that the user has exclusive use and control over through an owner ship or leasehold interest, and the antenna is used to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals.254 Prohibitions cannot "unreasonably delay or prevent installation, maintenance, or use of the antenna; or preclude the reception of an acceptable signal via the antenna."255 Safety and historic preservation exceptions must include "narrowly tailored restrictions, impose as little burden as possible, and apply in a nondiscriminatory manner."256 The Competitive Network Order makes clear that the FCC was concerned that premise owners would not adopt best practices to foster a competitive market for their tenants.257 The agency goes so far as to warn that it will consider directly regulating property owners to issue nondiscriminatory access rules if the premise owners inhibit a competitive market.258 Further, the FCC sought additional public comment regarding the competitiveness of the market, questioning whether state and local government owned buildings should be exempted from a nondiscriminatory access rule. The agency's question specifically identified municipal airports as a state or local government owned building of concern.259 251 47 C.F.R.

Key Terms

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.