3rd Circuit Affirms Violation for Denying Sprint, T-Mobile Wireless Tower Siting Application
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said a zoning board in Paramus, New Jersey, violated federal law in denying a wireless tower siting application jointly submitted by Sprint and T-Mobile, agreeing with the federal district court in the District…
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.
of New Jersey. The "effective prohibition" of wireless service violated the Communications Act, the 3rd Circuit panel said in an April 20 opinion in case number 14-2954. A "significant gap in wireless coverage existed within the area presented, the monopole proposed would adequately fill that gap, and [the carriers] had adequately considered alternative sites before arriving at the ones proposed." A distributed antenna system would be insufficient because it would be susceptible to outages, less flexible and cover a smaller gap, the court said. The wireless carriers don't bear the burden of proving that every potential alternative is unavailable, it said. The zoning board's denial of Sprint and T-Mobile's zoning variance violated the act's “effective prohibition” language, and wasn't based on “substantial evidence” required by the act and Municipal Land Use Law, so the 3rd Circuit affirmed the District Court. T-Mobile had urged the 3rd Circuit to affirm, in all respects, the lower court's judgment, Wiley Rein said Wednesday.