The FCC again turned down a challenge by 2 environmental groups t...

Comr. Copps, in a separate statement, cautioned that just because those groups weren’t found to have standing in these cases, that didn’t mean an environmental group always would lack standing under such scenarios. Friends of the Earth (FOE) and Forest Conservation Council sought full FCC review of the bureau decision, which concluded that the groups lacked standing to file the petitions. FOE and the Forest Council had argued that the Commission hadn’t resolved the issues they raised in 29 applications to register antenna structures at the FCC. They asked the FCC to reject the applications because the environmental assessments attached to them didn’t support a finding of “no significant impact” under FCC rules and the National Environmental Policy Act. But the bureau’s Commercial Wireless Div. concluded the groups hadn’t made a showing that the proposed structures would cause them an injury. The Commission order released Mon. said the groups had failed to present arguments in their challenge that would lead it to overturn the division’s order. “We agree with the division that, given the lack of specificity in the petitions and the failure to show a nexus to any injury, the petitions were appropriately dismissed,” the FCC said. It said the groups also had failed to show “associational standing,” which required associations to submit affidavits from local residents or competitors to establish standing. The order said they had failed to provide letters from local residents near the areas where the proposed towers would be built. Copps, who also approved the item, stressed in his separate statement that the order didn’t conclude that the FOE and Forest Conservation Council petitions had “substantive flaws.” He said it held that the groups hadn’t made the showings needed to demonstrate they were interested parties and didn’t have “alleged injury with enough specificity… This does not mean that an environmental group will always lack standing in these cases. A petitioner will be deemed to have standing so long as a sufficient showing of both injury and causation is made.” He outlined possible scenarios in which standing could be found, including a bird watcher who lived or visited the area of a proposed tower and who could assert harm if birds were killed. Such a petitioner also would have to show evidence of, for example, a direct link between the individual tower structures and bird kills. “This could be done if the petitioner demonstrates that bird kills resulted when similar existing towers were built in other areas similar to the proposed site,” Copps wrote.