Wireless Industry Says Environmental Reviews Not Needed In Wetland Areas
The wireless industry urged the FCC to confirm that tower building projects in wetland areas covered by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits shouldn’t require environmental assessments (EA) filed at the FCC. They said the FCC had recognized the Corps as the expert agency on environmental impacts in wetland areas; there was no need to submit an EA to the Commission if another federal agency had evaluated relevant environmental impacts. Industry comments came in response to a petition for declaratory ruling filed by Stokes Environmental Services last year (Doc. 05-44).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
PCIA said the compliance requirements under Commission rules were “unclear and confusing for projects impacting wetlands [so it’s] likely that at least some applicants undergo unnecessary and duplicative environmental reviews by both the FCC and the Corps.” The group urged the 2 agencies to coordinate rules and informal guidance to eliminate “duplicative” and “unnecessary” compliance procedures. “PCIA and the wireless industry strongly support the streamlining of compliance obligations under the Commission’s environmental regulations,” PCIA said.
A “secondary problem” is that “while some NWPs [nationwide permits] may be interpreted to apply to the construction of communications towers, no existing NWP expressly does so,” PCIA said. The FCC should work with the Corps to develop “an appropriate nationwide permit that would expressly and efficiently cover communications sites and tower projects.”
Verizon Wireless said the FCC should “expeditiously clarify that EAs are not required for antenna-siting projects where the only potential impact to the human environment is to surface features and where the project is authorized under a permit issued by the Army Corps of Engineers.” FCC rules didn’t require EAs to be filed in such circumstances, adding that “requiring EAs to be filed would be bad public policy,” Verizon said.
Sprint said the ruling requested by Stokes was “unnecessary” because the Commission had decided that an EA and separate FCC approval weren’t required in the limited circumstances presented. Instead, Sprint said, the Commission should “promptly confirm that an EA need not be submitted to the Commission if another federal agency has assumed responsibility for evaluating relevant environmental impacts.” Sprint said the Commission had addressed a similar issue in Weigel Broadcasting Co., which hinged on an objection to construction of a TV tower in a flood plain because the applicant didn’t submit an EA to the Commission. But citing Rule 1.1311(e), the Commission dismissed that objection because the Army Corps had issued a permit.
“The public interest is not well served if Commission licensees are required to seek duplicative determinations,” Sprint said: “Requiring licensees to incur the costs and delays associated with processing unnecessary environmental assessments, when approval from the Army Corps have already been secured, undermines carrier efforts to build out and deploy quality services to their customers. Service quality is negatively affected by regulatory delays in constructing new facilities, especially when such delays are not tied to the public’s interest in environmental protection.”
Cingular said the Corps had been delegated by the Dept. of the Army to issue permits to fill wetlands and empowered by Congress to issue individual, regional and nationwide permits. “The Corps has adopted extensive regulations detailing the requirements for securing a permit to fill wetlands. The permitting process involves a full [NEPA] review of the environmental impact of the project,” Cingular said: “There is no need for this Commission to duplicate that process.” The company said the Commission should “simply advise Stokes that no EA is required for projects that have received a Corps permit.”