San Jose Fee Structure No Model for Other Cities, AT&T Says
AT&T questioned Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel’s arguments that the FCC should share San Jose's 5G agreements with industry as a model code (see 1806280007) while the agency considers rules to lower what industry says are installation barriers from local governments. “The…
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.
final agreements, which are not yet complete, are intricate, interdependent of each other, and unique to San Jose’s circumstances. They also demonstrate why Commission action is needed to prevent exorbitant fees and delays from impeding small cell deployment,” AT&T said in docket 17-79. AT&T reached agreement with the city that would let it deploy some 2,000 small cells “at rates and on timelines substantially better than previous city requirements, but still at rates and on terms that cannot be economically exported,” it said. The company wants recurring fees to place small cells on city structures to be less than $50: “The rate structure in the San Jose agreement runs up to $2,500 per site.” Rosenworcel didn't comment.