Carr Says Local, State Governments Have No Reason to Oppose Proposed Infrastructure Change
Local and state governments haven't raised objections on a pending order streamlining parts of the wireless infrastructure rules, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said in an interview. The order is to get a vote at commissioners’ March 22 meeting (see 1803010047) and it may be OK'd 3-2 (see 1803070044). “This order only deals with federal process,” Carr said. “There’s nothing in the changes that we’re doing right now that’s going to greenlight any particular deployment. Every deployment would still have to go through the appropriate state or local review process.” Also Monday, the National League of Cities heard in Washington that fighting is unlikely to end soon in state and federal efforts to pre-empt local authority over broadband infrastructure deployment (see 1803120051).
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.
Carr expects one or more items in the future that more directly address local control of siting. Carr played a key role on the draft order, working with FCC staff and recommending the changes the agency needs to make. Chairman Ajit Pai tasked Carr with leading work on wireless rules, much as Commissioner Mike O’Rielly is revising rules for the 3.5 GHz shared band.
The pending order would clarify that deployment of small cells isn't a “federal undertaking” within the meaning of the National Historic Preservation Act or a “major federal action” under the National Environmental Policy Act. It would cut red tape for tribal reviews of projects off tribal lands and would clarify that applicants “have no legal obligation to pay upfront fees” when seeking tribal comment on proposed deployments.
Carr said he plans to concentrate next on the local and state zoning issues that are under focus at the Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee, but hasn't made any decisions. BDAC faced many controversies, including the resignation of one of its most high-profile members (see 1801240033), San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo. “This document doesn’t get into that,” Carr said, saying he followed the work of the BDAC closely. "How do we make sure that consumers have a fair shot ... of having 5G deployed where they live?"
Tribal groups have objected, though they didn't comment to us on the latest from Carr. He said he spoke with the tribes, and discussions continue. There was “a really robust and lengthy consultation process with a lot of tribes,” he said. “The document has improved significantly as a result.” Tribes complained they’re not getting information early enough about wireless proposals and the order addresses that with new requirements, he said. The order also makes clear that projects larger than small cells still require a more complete review, he said.
Industry officials say working with the tribes can be tricky. “The tribal nation is not one single entity and there’s a lot of different perspectives,” Carr said. The record shows costs of historic and environment reviews mean less carrier investment in actual small cells, Carr said. “This is about connecting more Americans,” he said. “I don’t want to see 5G be deployed solely in urban, affluent areas, densely populated areas. I want 5G to be ubiquitous as possible.”
For the millions of dollars spent, environmental and historic reviews have found potential problems 0.033 percent of the time, Carr said. Sprint told the FCC that reviews cost it $23 million over two years, he said. AT&T projected $45 million in costs in a year. Carr said officials from Shentel told him last week if it didn't face the current requirements for reviews, it could add 13 additional cellsites.
During the transition from 3G to 4G, policymakers acted to speed deployment, Carr said. Congress passed the Spectrum Act in 2012 and the FCC imposed a series of shot clocks and took other steps aimed at speeding up siting. “We need to replicate that process again for this next generation in wireless,” he said. “This item on the infrastructure side is critically important.”
Carr just returned from speaking at South by Southwest. There was “a good conversation” on net neutrality at the Austin conference, he said. “People understood this idea that the FCC has not completely eliminated all regulation of ISPs with respect to the free and open internet,” he said. “Restoring the authority of the FTC to step in, take action, is something I think that makes sense to a lot of people.”
There’s a “neck-and-neck race” between the U.S. and China on who will lead the world on 5G, CTIA President Meredith Baker told us Monday. “The stakes are huge.” The March 22 FCC meeting is really important and the changes will slash the costs for deploying broadband, she said. “That is very significant,” she said. Carriers have really upped their game on installing small cells, Baker said. “The amount of investment is astounding now that he 5G standard has been actually approved.” The IEEE approved the first mobile standard for 5G late last year, ahead of schedule.