The denial of a T-Mobile pole attachment request did not violate...
The denial of a T-Mobile pole attachment request did not violate the Communications Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled in Virginia on Thursday, upholding a district court decision that the Fairfax County, Va., board of…
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.
supervisors had acted within their authority (http://xrl.us/bmwqan). In 2009, T-Mobile had filed two applications with the board seeking to increase the height of an existing utility transmission pole by ten feet, so it could attach a wireless facility containing three five-foot tall panel antennas. Years earlier, AT&T and Verizon Wireless had received permission to place panel antennas lower down on the pole. The board rejected T-Mobile’s plans and the telco sued, arguing the board’s decision violated the Act’s provisions barring local governing bodies from unreasonably discriminating among similar service providers, and from prohibiting wireless services. “T-Mobile has failed to carry its heavy burden in this case,” Judge Barbara Keenan wrote. “T-Mobile failed to show that it lacks reasonable alternatives to provide service in the area at issue, and failed to show that further attempts to gain the Board’s approval would be futile.” The board’s decision was reasonable, and “based on the traditional zoning principle of aesthetic impact,” the court wrote. Judge Andre Davis dissented in part, writing that a reasonable fact-finder could conclude that T-Mobile had an “effective absence of coverage” in the vicinity of the intersection in question, and “no reasonable alternative sites” would fill the gap.