Wednesday, 4 October , 2023
امروز : چهارشنبه, ۱۲ مهر , ۱۴۰۲
شناسه خبر : 34561
  پرینتخانه » فيلم تاریخ انتشار : 24 آگوست 2012 - 23:18 | 31 بازدید | ارسال توسط :

فيلم: مقدمه ای بر فرآیند تنظیم مقررات FCC

Title:مقدمه ای بر فرآیند تنظیم مقررات FCC ۲۰۱۲-۰۸-۲۴ برج های ارتباطی و نقش کمیسیون ارتباطات فدرال – مقدمه ای بر فرآیند تنظیم مقررات FCC قسمتي از متن فيلم: Hi my name is benjamin lee and i just want to welcome everyone it is not 1 p.m. eastern time so we’ll begin our presentation shortly for […]

Title:مقدمه ای بر فرآیند تنظیم مقررات FCC

۲۰۱۲-۰۸-۲۴ برج های ارتباطی و نقش کمیسیون ارتباطات فدرال – مقدمه ای بر فرآیند تنظیم مقررات FCC

قسمتي از متن فيلم: Hi my name is benjamin lee and i just want to welcome everyone it is not 1 p.m. eastern time so we’ll begin our presentation shortly for help during today’s webcast please feel free to type your questions in the chat box found in a webinar tool bar to

The right of your screen or call one eight hundred 263 6317 for content questions please feel free to type those in the question box and we’ll be able to answer those at the end of the presentation during the question-and-answer session here is a list of sponsoring chapters divisions

And universities I would like to thank all of the participating chapters divisions and universities for making these webcasts possible these are the list of upcoming webcasts to register for these upcoming webcasts please visit utah APA org and register for your webcast of your choice we are now offering distance education webcast to

Help you get your ethics or law credits before at the end of the year these webcasts are available to view at utah webcast archive to log your distance education cm credits go to planning org select activities by provider select APA why chapter then select distance education and select

Your webcast of your choice follow us on Twitter or like us on Facebook for more information and we also upload the previous presentations on youtube search for planning webcast for more information to log your same credits for attending today’s webcast please feel please go to planning org and selected a

State then select today’s webcast this webcast is available for 1.5 cm credit we are recording today’s webcast and it will be available along with a six slide per page PDF of the presentation at Utah webcast archive and at this time I like to introduce Stephen will be introducing our

Presentation i’ll present date jitters today you we’re having some technical difficulties so we’ll get back shortly thank you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you is we have five drops okay we have five fishes are all appointed by the president nited states and confirmed by

The US Senate the president also selects one of the commissioners to serve as chairman only three the commissioners can be from one political party and generally the chairman is the same political party is the city president talks wish to serve for five-year terms my organization we have several bureaus

With with individual offices underneath and they include sumer government affairs enforcement media public safety and homeland security wireless telecommunications and wireline competition for the purposes all we’re doing today the ones are most important for our discussions are media public safety and homeland security wireless telecommunication and wireline competition the majority of the FCC

Employees are attorneys and we also do have some engineers economist the wide variety of professional not professional sports tab I’m the only hopes resource person respond here at the agency you soon we’ll have a biologist to help us with the impacts of some of our communication styles telecommunications

Hours on avian species we also have an office of Native Affairs and policy which is housed in our consumer and government affairs bureau of the work that I do is that’s federal preservation officer has across all the the agencies we have a number of ways of licensing nationwide carriers for wireless

Communications the majority of the commercial licenses are issued by the wireless telekinesis bureau which where Jeff is one of the managers these are the nationwide carriers a small regional carrier is all those folks allow your cell phones to operate the vast majority of the licenses that they have our

Geographic licenses they can operate in any kind of a regional market so Verizon ATT tmobile sprint US Cellular frontier all have licenses to operate in a market say northern Wyoming nation site their licenses for their towers anywhere within that geographic market they have authority to do that with we also have

Media bureau licenses those are the am and FM radio stations all the TV stations all receive their licenses from the media bureau these are site-specific licenses this is real important for local planning purposes the the commercial wireless licensees have some flexibility and where they can cite their towers or the broadcasters and

Also this will play into public safety those license are fairly site-specific they don’t have much flexibility in where they can be sited always save to Homeland Security they’re the ones that issue all the licenses to at least fire departments these licenses are against site specific because of the nature of

Their licenses and systems always save the police the fire departments have much less opportunity to move their towers around they need to make sure that they coordinate their sites and their frequencies with adjacent jurisdictions so um and they also like as with the broadcaster’s they tend to be exploding taller towers that what’s

That is a sort of basic introduction to who we are with that I’ll turn over to Tim and just let laptop and nothing yeah ok so again this is stem cells like seeking now what I was going to do is just talk briefly about three separate proceedings that the wireline

Competition Bureau has been working on them the last couple of years that have more impact with local issues and some of the other stuff via the FCC wire like optician bureau does sodium sorry so the so the the wireline Bureau again traditionally has regulated anything any sort of communications that goes over

Wires most notably telephone type services also data services today the you know in a world where a pretty much anybody who wants a sort of landline telephone Haslem and fewer people do the are our highest priority these days is broadband so there are approximately 19 million people in the US I don’t have

Broadband available to them at their home and sort of adoption is somewhat a separate issue but roughly a third of Americans don’t currently subscribe the broadband in their home so it’s definitely a focus is priority for us for the you know the first first issue

Is the justice of the screen here is the universal service fund so the and just at a high level so what what that is is it is an explicit support mechanism that takes money from areas that are relatively easy for providers to serve and it funnels it to areas that are

Especially expensive for providers to serve so in um sort of back in the days of ma belle the way this work is that the you know some divisions would sort of the high-cost areas would charge very high fees to other divisions of the same company and there’d be these subsidy

Like a cross subsidization within the company to make sure that everybody in the u.s. basically did more or less the same rate for phone service I’m after ma belle broke up that it was instead of just different divisions of mah belleh with different companies charging each other relatively high access rates and

To long-distance rates are high local service local rates were low and what the FCC is trying to do in a real high level is just is move away from these implicit support mechanisms to explicit support and so that you know where the goal is still for folks to pay

Relatively low rates for local telephone service but the you know to the extent that there are parts of the country where the where the support I’m sorry where providers aren’t able to you know we’re worried costly a thousand dollars a month whatever to provide phone service the goal is been to use an

Explicit funding mechanism IED us Universal Service Fund to accommodate that or make that happen so the so in this flood you’re looking at now there is own there’s basically four programs the FCC has that are related USF I guess in the Box in the the four boxes that go

Across the you know the right side there’s the high-cost program which takes money from basically from urban areas and makes it less expensive for providers or less expense for providers in rural areas to provide phone service a lifeline program which is for low-income consumers so it’s basically a subsidy to low-income Americans the

E-rate program services for school phrase and then the rural health healthcare program help support the telecommunications costs of rural healthcare providers so in the reason to go through this currently is that the turn this talk is just to show that the the past year the commissioners modernized all four of these funds which

I didn’t do it was a huge lift and it occupied a lot of resources their submission and each of these has now been modernized to include explicit support for broadband so state ball to have USF fun so the FCC which regulates just interstate and international service you know it it pays for helps

Pay the cost for these services again just from interstate funds and states have their own fun sorry I must let the slicer so the sort of just one quick note here is that the the to the extent the FTC is funding any services it imposes service quality obligations on

Providers so for example the high-cost fund fund recipients need to provide a broadband service that basically is a six megabits down one-half megabit Bob low latency so you don’t get jitter if you’re trying to use skype or something like that and and it has so apologies

And then the end usage caps that was they offered for my match but usage caps that are similar to those in urban areas so which currently are like 250 gigs per month of like that so the and then the there’s also reporting requirements and stuff like that to make sure that there

Is a minimize the risk of fraud so and in states help so there’s reports also go to the states which helps the FCC oversee the usf funds in a again minimized rot so a second topic at a high level a pole attachment so the so

At a again to starting in a real high level the you know telephone poles i’m sure you’re most of you are familiar with are basically an essential input for broadband services they given the sort of the economic uncie’s ability of undergrounding facilities in all areas you know the only way for broadband

Providers in telecom providers to get to their wire identification suffice to get to their end user customers is over telephone poles and often in many many areas sort of bounded by the footprint of many providers there there’s you know one or just a couple of owners of poles and you

Know in some areas you know the incumbent local phone company might own just as many Poles is the electric utility company and in that case the you know the market pretty much works out a deal at trade but in other areas where the you know for example a utility might

Own all of the poles that the broadband providers need to reach customers you know there’s definitely potential for a monopoly type of uses so section 224 of the Act gives the Commission the authority to regulate the rates terms and conditions of Paul attachments and also to enforce that you know and adopt

Enforcement proceedings to make sure that there’s no abuse there the the way it operates is that the that commits the FCC has authority only to the extent that a state doesn’t itself assert authority so it’s reverse preemption and to the extent of states certifies that it desires or it is regulating the

Attachments within its jurisdiction the FCC rules don’t apply in that state and I think currently there’s about 20-something states where reverse preemption has been applied and so the FC so state rules apply in this context and the FCC’s rules do not so in april of last year if they see adopted an

Order is it revised our pole attachment rules we we took a lot of inspiration and sort of guidance i guess from which various states had done in this area and the excuse me the a at a real high level or what the Commission is done is just

Wisdom is um did adopted timeline for access to polls and paul attachments or four pole attachments sort of setting out very specific timelines by which service survey needs to be done or when an estimate need would need to be in i’m going to amount of time for the

Attachment either accept or reject the estimate and then a period of time for the make work and sorry historically the way the commission and regulated pole attachments is to basically allow providers and a catcher’s to negotiate between themselves and you know given the imbalance of power that sometimes is

Present in that context and the fact that these were being sort of enforced on a case-by-case basis it wasn’t a it was a system that lends itself to abuse and so partly through you know adopting the the timelines for attachments and then also imposing other requirements

Like you know the fact that any denials now must need to be explained with specificity and the adoption of self effectuating remedies whereby if a.m. if the pole owner doesn’t complete the attachments within the prescribed time the the attackers allowed to put up their own attachment and pay forward

Using third-party contractors that have been pre-approved by the pole owner so things like that of have streamlined the access to polls reduced the time reduced the cost for sort of all providers and to the extent that their cell phone flex rating remedies it’s you know it’s gotten via federal government doesn’t

Need to be involved in the day-to-day sort of interaction between providers so we also reduced basically reduced the rate for some attaches which will help promote broadband deployment and clarified and this is sort of important especially for the other people in the room declare that that that wireless providers have

Access to the coal top and that any rules that would categorically prohibit pole top attachments are not committed and that applied the timelines also to wireless providers sort of another proceeding that relates I’m going to blow through a bunch of slides here in the interest of time that covers what I

Just went over apologies will I get the slides up to where we are so so another in another proceeding relating the infrastructure access and broadband awful last April the Commission started a proceeding relating to rights of the way and wireless facility siting so in the the goal here is to find ways for

The FCC to to work well with state local communities to minimize any I guess hurdles to accessing rights-of-way tend to streamline access infrastructure for wireless facilities the so the so at a high level with the proceeding was looking at we were seeking data from anybody who’s willing to interested in

Commenting trying to find you know incidences of best practices in the market you know areas that had already found ways to streamline access to the right of way we’re trying to get a sense to at least on the wireline side of the extent to which there are actually you

Know widespread widespread problems for providers getting access to write the way we’ve certainly over the years have had a lot of them you know anecdotal type stories about particular communities that were in a prep you no problem communities from Rogers perspective and we you know we didn’t

Have a good dentist whether that was just a couple of communities here and there or whether there was a widespread problem so the proceeding was also trying to inform us in that regard and we were you know looking for suggestions for things the Commission the FTC might do

To sort make streamline access and these these areas the things that we’re looking at you know you know if there are best practices out there we are the record is still open we’re interested in focus you know if anybody would like any of your own communities would like to uh

You know make suggestions or anything that was from the interest in that you know the Commission you know would consider anything from you know adopting rules to curb educational efforts we might engage in that didn’t involve they will making you know if we could be involved it would be helpful for the SEC

To be involved in dispute resolution or mediation that’s something we would consider for this stage we you know we are still gathering a record we’re considering different possibilities and are certainly you know welcome any comments hope some yuki folks might have so with that I’ll wrap up the wireline

Issues and turn it over to the yes Jefferies going to go next we’ll get wireless issues we’re shifting the computer all right so I brain noisy right thanks to thanks Tim um so now moving on to the wireless side of things and I’m what I’m going to do basically

It’s really two things the first for take maybe five minutes or so just talking about wireless system architecture how wireless communication systems work and my purpose in doing that is to give a little bit of background on to help understand what are the types of facilities that need to

Be built out for wireless service why are they being built out what are the new developments and new things going on in terms of the architecture that everyone’s dealing with and then after that I’m going to talk about the statutory provisions and the SEC policies that have a bearing on the

Local government regulation of siting and planning so wireless system architecture at a very high level and what I’m talking about is cellular types of strings used for communications between people on this is not broadcast towers or even the public safety systems which i think is Steve alluded to earlier

There they’re handled out of the different different bureaus here and but the great majority of the facilities that are being built out as far as number of facilities are for the wireless communication systems those would probably be you know nearly all of the applications that take you folks

Will be seeing although the tallest towers order other purpose you know with the most basic level the way wireless system works there are radio waves to carry signals between the end users devices the cell phone or smartphone or tablet and a cell site antenna which is

What you see on the towers or on a building or a water tower or some kind of other structure the purpose of the tower itself is just to hold up the intent on the antenna is you know what what if the mix and receives the radio

Wave and so you know so that’s the basic link between the phone and the system now that’s obviously not all that’s involved in the whole system from the South site the system needs to get to a carrier central office and this may be done either by means of fiber or by

Means of a microwave if there’s a microwave link that will require a dish to go up on the tower or on the building next to the antenna as well if it is done by fiber then the fiber needs to be in the ground or sprung up somewhere and

And often fiber will get high capacity more economically than a microwave not always it all depends on the situation but um you know after that you know at the central office the call then gets delivered the public network eventually gets over to the other end of the call

If it’s a wire wire that’s a call to a wireless phone at the other end then you go through the same sequence self like the devices the other end if it’s the wireline it consists of wires but one of the main points I want to make here is Wireless does not mean know

Why the only part of a wireless called it is necessarily wireless is between the handset and the cells night it’s very rare to find a call that is not transported over some form of wire or cable at some point I’m going to skip over a couple of things now and come

Back apologize this is taking a little while but there we go so just a little bit about how the cell sites work why there are so many cell sites you know as far as simply you know sending signals out um you know if you didn’t have a lot

Of demand on the system you would need a cell site to every several miles or so which is where things were in the early days of wireless communication what’s too far but the reason that doesn’t work is because of how many people we have used as a system and how often they’re

Using it and the thick stuff see the high bandwidth that they’re using for data application so forth on each carrier has only a finite amount of spectrum because there’s only a certain amount of spectrum available and you can only accommodate so many users as submitted at one time so if you have

More users than that the way to increase that generally along with some more efficient technologies is to make the cells like smaller and what that means instead of having one site covering five mile radius you would have five sites with smaller radii or for their on 225

And so forth as you need them and what happens then is in each cell sites the same frequencies can get reused so you can have five different users using the same frequency where previously you could have only had one that’s an oversimplification but i think it’s

Intended to get the idea across as it sells gets smaller you the antenna mostly operate at lower power and their lower to the ground because not only you don’t need the signal so it’s are you actually don’t want them to do is wash the potatoes interfere with each other

However this also means the carrier’s have left flexibility as to where they can locate people participants a couple of things going on so that’s the sort of the traditional cell site architecture on new developments as we have broadband and increase in usage are what we call

Small cells and you may also see the Germans psycho cells or femtocells which are our types of small cells not really necessary to distinguish between them and largely what they do is really take the traditional start get cellular architecture and bring it down to a much more granular level where you could have

Radius of the south side of measures may be at hundreds of feet or even less than that they’re used in both outdoor and in certain large indoor space to bring the your where those outdoor areas where there’s a lot of usage and you know congestion or in things like a stadium

Or convention center sometimes it’s the small cell architecture that will help accommodate lots and lots of users there’s sometimes used for small gaps in coverage or they supplement service in limited areas where this high demand where there is some coverage but it can’t get accommodation from the macrocell demands us there then we’ll

Move on to distributed antenna systems or dash which are kind of like small cells that they take the concept of sensors um and in a gas is really the best way to think of it it’s sort of an integrated system of many small antennas that are connected by fiber and where

These differs from small cells in a sense is that what difference is that one base station can serve several zones so you know where there is a cell tower or things there’s typically an equipment cabinet of some sort at the base of it that has the equipment to operate it

When you get down to the gas level where there are you know things on every X number of utility poles or something you don’t necessarily need one of these with each each node each little antenna there you can have one that covers several of them another nice thing of that gas is

Neutral host technology where multiple carriers can share the same antennas as their signal civil for the same fiber between the antennas we’re used to sharing power sir but here it is so as farther than that and there again there’s both outdoor and indoor gas out doorstep commonly are located on street

Lights or utility pole indoor job applications include things like stadium hotels shopping mall awesome now to give you just a bit of a picture of it so so this is just sort of an illustration of the many things interacting with each other we have the macro coverage

Represented by the big towers here and to be a rooftop could be a new tower and these are all ways that you can improve coverage and entering broadband services wireless broadband so sometimes it involves building a new tower or adding an antenna switch hours it’s already

There can help you just even even if you don’t need to go to those to the smaller level of the small cells or dad you may need to add an antenna to a tower just because of the different technology that’s involved or in some cases we still talent and then the other things

There the outdoor the indoor data systems which can supplement the architecture that’s already out there for broadband going quickly over sort of a little bit of review of some different perspective on it so what are some of the advantages of using small cells they’re all right um

These are the small cell and dad solutions can expand capacity by many multiples more than just adding the splitting cells in the macro system so you know you don’t need to keep on top of it and can keep splitting cells as demand increases one gas or small cell

Build-out can cover future proof you for at least you know for quite a while they create capacity for high-speed broadband data services and can be used to improve indoor coverage and also the opportunity to share infrastructure but a few caveats because these are not the answer to everything they may not be

Economically reasonable in all circumstances more rural areas and you know any number of other circumstances depends on a lot of things also the small cells and the data typically supplement the existing network network they don’t generally replace that so once again just you know another little overview what are these reasons that

We’re having new construction going on one is you know still increasing coverage of deployment as new areas that are covered yet not a lot of that but you know in some rural areas for fillion dead spots also it’s not just the first carrier to an area to bring competition

By bringing more carriers to an area that they may need their own construction often they’ll be able to locate on the first carriers tower but sometimes the you know the character tower what the structure will be designed for it or the way they have their network designs the same location

But I said filling in dead spots also indoor coverage second basic region is increasing this increase in capacity either by the traditional splitting of cells or by small so fast solutions and then the third reason for new construction is broadband services I sort of went over this so what are the

Statutory provisions of regulatory provisions to relate to our planning I’m going to go through three things first of all there’s 47 USC section 332 C 7 which is was part of been part of the Communications Act since 1996 you may be fairly familiar with that there is the declaratory

Ruling called the general a notice the shot clock ruling interpreted section 332 C 7 in night in 2009 and then more recently this year there are provisions of the middle class tax relief in job creation so just an overview of each of those starting with 332 C 7 the basic

Structure of section 332 C 7 which you may also see sometimes referred to as section 704 for reasons the matter only to the lawyers on it governs all personal wireless service facilities site that includes new towers and colocation and the general structure of it is that it generally preserve state

And local authority over facility siting regulation subject to several specific limitations that are set forth of the statute I me it does not address the allocation of authority between safe mode so if the state chooses to preempt localities and handle part of this estate level they day they choose to let

The localities too out of it to things they may also success 332 C 7 has no bearing up and another important piece of it is that if there are disputed cases for whether a local regulation complies with it those are resolved by the courts they may not be taken to the

FCC with the solar section if there’s an allegation that a decision was impermissibly based on the effective radiofrequency emission those can be brought either to afford against just running very quickly what are the limitations the 332 C 7 imposes a state or local government may not unreasonably discriminate among providers of

Functionally equivalent services on its regulations may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the producers a local or state governments must act on an application to site facilities within a reasonable period of time and all come banging is that a little bit and a denial must be in writing and must be

Supported by substantial evidence in a written record and regulation of these facilities places may not be based on the effective radiofrequency emission to the extent that these emissions comply with me now on to the shop class and the shop cause decision interpreted the provisions reasonable period of time

And failure to act in sections research again that decision dresses and towers complications there’s also a second part of the shot clock decisions have got less attention but which resolves a conflict between the federal circuit courts in different parts of the country by offering some interpretation of what

Is meant by having the effect of prohibiting surface and the FCC rules that this means that a local government may not deny an application solely because one or more carriers poverty serve a given geographic markets shot clock piece of it just going over what the outlines of that profession are the

FCC held that presumptively a reasonable period of time for a local or state government to act upon a facility siting application is 90 days if this application is for a colocation that is locating an antenna on an existing structure either a existing communications tower or a building water

Tank any other kind of structure or a hundred fifty days of it involves construction of a new channel and the Commission’s reasoning there was that collocations are collocations are unlikely to have significant effects on community so those could be response with one should expect them to be

Reviewed more quickly and that was also based on and these time periods are based on evidence subscribers that most community seem to the thieves were well within the time frame communities largely seem to be able to ask them if these period is exceeded then by staff issues an aggrieved party may file suit

Within 30 days that 30-day period exactly sent as a communication thing we did provide the applicants in the government they agree to told the period there is no intention of productive negotiations are going on we don’t want to force anybody to court the presumption that the period of time was

Reasonable may be provided in work so the government could introduce evidence that because of whatever set of facts here are the 90 days or hundred fifty days it’s not reasonable and we should have more time and if the court finds a violation it’s up to the courts

To decide I’m going to very quickly go through these provisions of the middle class tax relief in job creation tank and which contains three sets of provisions that are relevant to collocations there’s section 60 409a involving local review of tower modification request and the most time

On that was directly relevant I’m 64 0 9 B and C which talk about federalism effectively a building and there’s also section 62 of 6 which talks about the use of existing infrastructure for a new National Public Safety broadband network provisions relating to federal lands buildings with rights-of-way on 5409 be

Authorizes federal agencies to grant easements wireless structures equipment and bad call transmission equipment and also directs the development of a common application form and see principles 64 0 9 C directs on the development of master contracts and form I also do want to mention at this point executive order

۱۳۶ ۱۶ which came out from June and kind of overlaps with these provisions on what it did was on directed the development of a strategy and it’s not limited to wire the covers both wireless and wireline so it overlaps but it’s basically to promote broadband health federal agencies bring broadband and it

Established an interagency working group the FCC is working with that working group there’s an initial report due it’s December and then they’re supposed to complete further work by next June also want to just mention that they also have responsibility for your big one strategy that that’s also part of the executive

Order and what these are our strategies to enable when a when there is work being done on a road to get enough fiber put in to accommodate future users and and I’m sure many of you are working on those three sg’s in your own community this is the executive order is specifically focused

On the federal angle of it so with where there are federal grants for highway construction to think about ways to work in one spot was born into that make sure that the federal policies are not unnecessarily expressing big ones and even to encourage policies that works

For everybody on the next quick ly the provisions on public safety collocations on the statute established a policy an agency known as firstnet which is in the Department of Commerce as a nationwide licensee for a National Public Safety license there are provisions directing the firstnet to use existing infrastructure to the extent

Economically desirable to use partnerships with commercial providers and to consult with state and local jurisdictions but facilities place so these will all affect your work I think assistance forward the first step toward was named actually just earlier this week you could find that by going to the

Website of ncia which is the agency within the Department of Commerce finally 60 409a which is the provisions of work directly related to the local regulation of facility siting and what it provides is that a state or local government may not deny and shall approve any application that’s covered

By that section what is it applied to it applies to colocation removal or modification of equipment on a wireless power or base station and it doesn’t define what’s meant by base stations so some of that may need to be worked at so it’s as if so will not apply to

Colocation on something that’s not a wireless tower or base station whatever exactly a gate station it also doesn’t apply if the action will substantially change the physical dimensions of the existing power base station but if it within those provisions that then here in this may not denying challengers one

Of the questions under there what is the dispatcher change in physical dimensions just want to point out and so that has not been interpreted but one thing that may be useful which I can feed make such a gentleman more if the decision it’s the provision in our nationwide colocation agreements

For substantial increase in size which may be a which we also use to have a shot glass you know that again I’m not aware of any court decision at this point interpreting there are no official FCC interpretations but that may be a sunrise class and what this substantial increase basically provides is there’s

Substantial increase in size if there’s an increase in the tower height of more than ten percent or the height of an additional in 10 or a plus 20 feet more than 42 equipment cabinets or one shelter a protrusion of Lords as many people the width of the tower or

Excavation applies existing lease to own properties administration of 60 409a it takes precedence over 332 C 7 in the event of any conflict it was close this for 332 C 7 there’s no conflict and finally there is a provision it does not expect affect the FCC’s responsibilities

Under DJ and the NHIAA um I think in the interest of time I’m going to go past this one which is basically to review and then I will handle things over to see you back again shifted machine this way a little bit okay um well i tee up

My slide and those pieces one of the things that we have talked about is new towers you should be aware of the fact that the subject communications companies have been real busy the past several years building out for the increased demand for used cell phones for smartphones especially 4G and LTE

Arm our records indicate that over the past two years the the communications that the wireless communications providers have been proposing between ten and twelve thousand towers new towers a year so as local planners you should if you have regulations that impact on the siting of communication

Towers you should be busy with them I know my community is so with that what I want to talk about is some of the things that that apply to the work that I do for the siting of new towers and wrongly that our preservation officer here I worked with a group of

Attorneys that provide assistance in some of the legal aspects of tower citing all new towers must apply with with the federal of our federal regulations which includes section 106 of the National store Preservation Act the National Environmental Policy Act endangered species act fema playing regulations on record of Engineers

Wetlands that those kinds of things you should also be aware as local planners that all of our environmental compliance regulations involve public notice and we very much intend that our applicants and consultants will often work for the applicants and getting towers built whether their attorneys or engineering firms include public comment in the

Tower starting processes at the federal level at least most of the public involvement is done through the section 106 store preservation process which is a federal level regulation we require all relation seized for new towers and for colocation to require it to do some form of local no that’s generally the

Injuries of people to do the sighting do that as a legal notice in the local newspaper it doesn’t have to be that way there are some communities in certain parts of the state where there are no our country where there are no newspapers and what low cost of smoke

Will notice for those particular counties is a notice place it on the bulletin board by the courthouse door and we sort of go along with texts that’s the tradition of those communities if there are questions then then people can call us and I’ll mention this at the end I’m actually now all

Thinking about it is that if you have questions on the things that we’ve been taught about this afternoon my contact information is at the end I thought it was easier just to have a single point of contact for at the FCC for all of your questions and I will make sure that

Questions to have get to the right person within the SSC but I want to make sure that you all understood that we do firmly believe in the public input process the other piece that is with radiofrequency aspects new towers or licensees collocations can appear with somebody else’s use of that spectrum

Sexual and 61 s or Preservation Act requires federal agencies to consider the effective federal undertakings on properties including eligible for inclusion and asterisks restore places these are things such as historic districts downtown historic neighborhoods farmsteads mining sites rare roads bridges wide variety of things can be on the National Register

Places and that the National store Preservation Act further defines what another taking is requires a federal permit a license or approval our licensees our licensees we regulate what they do the act of that regulation requires the permitting one of the things that is is an interesting piece

Of that is that there are a lot of companies out there that that are in the business of building towers on speculation and then they go out and attract our licensees to locate on their towers so that you may have encountered some of those in terms of your local

Zoning work we are more concerned with what our licensees are doing than those towers but they all work together it works out to be a fairly common system that is easy Philly easy to understand at the SEC we we have defined the undertaking as anything that includes things associated

With their tower construction so that for the project is a tower defense equipment sheds access roads power fire optic connections other kinds of things on reading from the bottom to the top those things are in our environmental regulations and there’s a citation if you would like to have that in while we

As the federal agency are ultimately responsible for the section 106 compliance process that is for preservation review arm we do rely on the status or preservation offices in each state and the district columbia and the territories because of the ship offices attorney may have heard occasionally or they do much the

Ordinary review so over ten or twelve thousand projects a year we see the ones to become most difficult and contentious by and large at least at the federal level outside your local zoning processes these things tend to be fairly non-controversial and we always try to remind our licensees because everyone’s

Why they forget switch those don’t build towers very often the height of the design of the tower is not relevant in determining the proposed Howard subject to section 106 and sunita the grant of a license view of geographic places to build a tower somewhere in New Hampshire that doesn’t give you permission to

Actually construct the tower and that applicants are required to involve federally recognized tribes in the review process and as local planners one of the things that sometimes happens or what blundering firms to is that the tribes are might be concerned about a particular tower are not necessarily

Resident and look where or even in the state they may have been removed at one point or held by and large the mix thoroughly the tower projects end from the surface of Asia standpoint to avoid directly impacting or adversely affecting the historic districts in landscapes the most of the commercial

Carriers you’ve got real good of trying to avoid those kinds of things occasionally they have to and when that happens there is an adverse effect one of those historic districts or landscape mode church farm said et cetera that those projects come to the sec to myself

And at least one of the attorneys been working on that an adverse effect and the store property does not stop a project or it gives it pause as we go through the process when there is an adverse effect we make the applicants submit an alternative analysis where

Else could that tower be located what we mean by in terms of alternative analysis and a mitigation plan what are they suggesting to mitigate about the effect of that tower on that historic property the applicant is required to involve the local community in determining appropriate mitigation measures we’ve been involved in numerous negotiations

Between the community whether it’s by advocacy groups or neighborhood groups or whether an organized armed involvement of the jurisdiction through a local planner oh and the applicant to develop mitigation measures we encourage that sort of thing it’s hard sometimes here in DC decide what’s appropriate as a mitigation measure for a tower project

In South Dakota so we rely on what the community to to do those and then the mitigation measures must be directed as impacted as for property so that we don’t want the mitigation measure whatever it is to to benefit and store properties 10 miles down the road and

We’re running out of time some of the suggestions we have for mitigation measures lower the tower reduce the size UK severe paint and towering here that can be real difficult to mountainous areas where color change to go up the tower install a stealth power you may have seen mono pines planning’s around tower

Basis that have some sort of benefits from the store property and benefits to historic properties can be preparing a stretch denominations who have sore hair documentation photographs mesh drawings do signs brochures we like things that have public benefits of signs where sures cellphone tours our favorite mitigation measures here at least with

Me at least and then we encourage everybody to work with the ship or the community to develop those preservation needs there’s some useful websites free wall for some of our regulations and these will all be on the site the archive of this then some additional steps we’ve been doing a lot of

Educational programs in addition to this webinar we’ve also been holding sessions here suc headquarters on that small cell solutions collocations the videos of those are on our website that address for the fall we’re planning at least two sessions here the FCC one on the technology of wireless communications

We’re also going to be holding one that is for our licensees and consultants little dress some tribal issues that have to do with our sighting and then let me give my full contact information if you have questions contact me here and i’ll make sure that the right person

At the FCC get your information and the logistics email works best for me so i can send i can send a question directly as you ask it to the appropriate person so with that I think you I can just have one other quick thing in terms of

Resources that we have that we hadn’t mentioned the FCC also has an intergovernmental visor e committee consisting of representatives of state local and tribal governments we work very closely with them they make recommendations to us they’re very engaged in these infrastructure issues and again you could find the membership of that on our

Website so that they may be someone else you may be interested in talking I believe this organizers those programs have probably have some questions that that people would like us to answer yeah and I will have a question and answer time all right first question is from

Doug are there any programs which could assist to reduce the cost of during overhead wires community-wide I don’t think so unfortunately there’s not even much more than I can say about that i mean i know that often there are you know sometimes local areas have for example in the cable franchising

Agreement you know or the cable ordinance there may be provisions in those type of documents that relate to you know how cost allocated for undergrounding and things like that but the FCC to my knowledge doesn’t have any programs about that in primarily just at a high level video you know the main

Reason for that is that because we deal with just interstate communications and then are you know in or overseas communications to the DM sort of the costs related to the movement of local facilities underground really isn’t a a federal concern of our state local effect what else you have okay the

Second question is from ryan verizon is planning to get rid of dsl service in rural areas as they more 4G LTE what what are the implications of this planner in these communities and especially as 4G LTE is very expensive and they have also recently made large deals with other

Options k cable service providers yeah well that that is an issue we are looking at you know we you know the Commission is you are our highest or in these days you know especially on the wireline side is with broadband deployment and ensuring that all Americans have access to broadband so we

Recognize that you know some providers have you know you know not found it in their interest to continue providing dsl services and overrides and recently change the terms of the TSL offerings and it’s no longer offering standalone dsl and the you know you made reference or the questioner made reference to the

Spectrum cojio which is the verizon wireless you know the transfer spectrum from a collection of cable companies to verizon wireless and in association with that joint marketing agreements and a technology venture you know we commissioned took a very close look at that transaction or set of transaction

Along with the department of justice you probably have seen the trade press on that so anyway did you know it’s an issue we are concerned about we’re looking at I don’t you know there’s nothing you know I can they really be on that at this okay the third questions

From Mike since the municipality cannot deny an application from a carrier under the middle-class tax act why didn’t the FCC implicitly preempt the need for public hearings etc it seems that under the regulations only odd administer creative review should be necessary along with a building permit and he is a

Zoning representative in the wireless industry okay well I mean I can take that one the FCC has has not acted in any way to interpret the terms of section 64 09 those of the other middle class tax relief act i mean i think that the interpretation that was proposed

There is a possible one reasonable to think that um you know that that procedures should be proportionate to the types of powers that a local government has substance ibly but on its face the statute as you know speak substantively to may approve and shall not deny these things would have to be

Worked out you know as the law is developed i expect this the principles will take shape as to you know exactly what the provision means does questions from Scott you said that the height of the proposed tower has no bearing on NEPA review which federal regulations address potential impacts

From increased our height or the proposal of vitara which significantly exceeds community standards here I’m thinking that at all your tower implies a greater fall zone which in turn implies more potential for environmental impact we we don’t rate we’re not in the business as the federal agency in determining fall zones and whether

Communities need to have all zones that’s a local decision I can address that piece of it at least the structural safety regulation is is up to the local governments and that would include anything for fall zones again provided that the regulation is done in a manner that’s consistent with section 332 C 7

Falls those could not be enforced in a manner that that prevents services being provided but within that constraint you know and certainly ensuring that you know that the structure is safe and compliance complies with standard codes that the local government responsibility there are codes that have been developed a nationwide basis for communication

Towers but that’s not something we usually get involved in okay this questions from David you talked about licenses but how do you regulate unlicensed providers unlicensed providers are actually handled by a different Bureau within the Commission our office of engineering and technology but generally on the the FCC’s regulations you know provides that

Certain types of transmissions do not require a life oops they just need to comply with certain rules particularly involving low power which spectrum bands that are allowed to operate over and they’re not allowed to cause interference with licensed operations and need to accept interference from licensed operations that are I mean if

Someone operating within the bounds of their life and son licensed provider can’t complain that they’re being interfered with you given that um you know they’re sort of you know free to operate within those constraints and and subject to enforcement actions if they violate those constraints and and and

Our view is that an unlicensed operation since there’s not a you know a license involved that those are not required to comply with our section 106 and other environmental regulations others and the RF safety exposure to the admissions this questions from George are there FCC regulations for a race and distance from

The pole can repeat that question are there FCC regulations for a race and distance from the pole give me the communications arrays on the communication tower at distant separation well vertical separation any that subject I think so generally the commercial providers have more or less decided on their own that there needs to

Be at least 10 feet between each of the platforms or the arrays as the third persons using so that we do encourage publications on towers which we’re trying to discourage people building new towers right next to each other so that and most of the new towers are designed to

The music tend to be the one for under 200 feet the most of you see they don’t have light the whole three to five different collocations different carriers are different arrays and this questions from Robert do you know any examples of hybrid systems with a combination of cell towers and das

Systems well I mean certainly carriers as part of their you know as part of their their system pretty much any carrier operates from a combination at this point of both other than maybe in very rural areas where they only have traditional right but you know certainly the major carriers have both within

Individual communities they have both they interact they speak to each other they pretty much have to in order for the system to function so so I think the answer is that you know in some sense every system is a hybrid I’m not sure there really is such a thing as a

Standalone dad and that’s at some point it does relate dis questions from Laura we have been told by the FAA that it is legal according to FCC regulations to both light at our and painted is this true any individual tower should be lighted or painters must be lighted or

Painted in accordance with the specifications by the FAA and we require compliance with what the FAA has specified I you know I can’t say for sure whether there are situations in which the FAA requires both painting and lighting I believe it does painting for day and and lighting at night in most

Instances where there’s painting there are no lights during the day but there are lights on during it nice but I’m not an expert on all the details of the FAA regulation whatever it is that that the FAA requires into specifications we will then ordinarily enforce this question is from Amelia do you see

Substantial change and significant increases as two different things I mean they may or may not be Don Congress for whatever reasons chose to use different language so therefore you know that that does pose the question does it need anything different if it does mean something different there is no

Indication anywhere in the legislative history of exactly what it means but that’s something that’s probably going to have to be worked out through the court system or if if there is a petition to the FCC’s and then we would address it as with any of these issues

Of interpretation at present and and you know there could be subject to change but at present there are no immediate plans on the part of the FCC to you know to on our own initiative take any action to interpret the terms of that statutory provision and this is from nikki is

Collocation required on a tower so Tower located within the railroad right-of-way ostensibly for railroad operation and purposes under 49 USC 11 0501 there are not there are no provisions at least as far as federal law that require colocation we would encourage railroads the firm echo location as we encourage other tab where

Owners to accommodate collocations on reasonable terms and of course there would be a benefit to the railroad tower owner than in terms of revenue coming in from there we we don’t have any kind of regulations that would require it there could be I you know I know that local

Jurisdictions often as part of zoning approvals will require you know the tower owner accommodate colocation okay this is from Daniel could you mention about the tower construction notification system the tower construction notification system is the system electronic system that the SSP developed is the only one like it in federal government that

Provides notice to federally recognized tribes all the federally all the 566 federally recognized tribes participated it what they have done is identified to the FCC those counties of which they are interested and are because our licensees are required to provide notice to the tribes whenever they find starts of

Tower this makes it more efficient tribes can if they actually receive a notice every Wednesday of all the towers were posed to there and the county’s the which they’re interested and they can respond back to the other chronic system so it makes it efficient that’s that’s

All that is used for is the tribal notices this questions from Robert and view of potential storm events do you have any plans for regulations on emergency power back up that some things that the Commission is considering nothing more than that okay this is from Shannon our zoning ordinance the missed

A number of antenna / structure 23 structure can be defined as tower array building etc any structures with more than three antennas have required a zoning code variance does this limit run afoul on FCC regulation I mean again that’s a question that that in court would have to decide I think the

Argument if somebody were to challenge is probably the most likely argument would be effective prohibition of services under section 332 C 7 and I think that was you know that that may end up being a fact-specific inquiry okay I think that’s it for the question so thank you very much for your

Presentation and thank you all for participating for today’s webcast well thank you for value to the opportunity all right thank you hi for those of you who are still in attendance I just want to go through a few reminders first go off off to log your CM credits for

Attending today’s webcast please go to planning the org slash CM cell today’s date August twenty-fourth then select today’s webcast this webcast is available for 1.5 same credit also we are recording today’s session so you’ll be able to find recording of this webcast along with our six slide per

Page PDF at Utah this concludes today’s session and I want to thank everyone again for attending you you you you

ID: RaB06d-0Qwc
Time: 1345834080
Date: 2012-08-24 23:18:00
Duration: 01:18:24


به اشتراک بگذارید
تعداد دیدگاه : 0
  • دیدگاه های ارسال شده توسط شما، پس از تایید توسط تیم مدیریت در وب منتشر خواهد شد.
  • پیام هایی که حاوی تهمت یا افترا باشد منتشر نخواهد شد.
  • پیام هایی که به غیر از زبان فارسی یا غیر مرتبط باشد منتشر نخواهد شد.
با فعال سازی نوتیفیکیشن سایت به روز بمانید! آیا میخواهید جدید ترین مطالب سایت را به صورت نوتیفیکیشن دریافت کنید؟ خیر بله