WASHINGTON-Following a nearly two-year-old presidential memorandum, a notice of inquiry and several industry forums held earlier this year, the General Services Administration instituted rules June 11 governing the placement of commercial wireless antenna sites on government lands.
Published in the Federal Register June 16, the GSA bulletin provides “general guidelines and processes” allowing wireless network buildouts on federal properties.
A committee comprised of industry and federal agency representatives considered such issues as evaluation processes, site pricing, fee reimbursement mechanisms, site security and access and site request denial tracking prior to crafting the guidelines.
Federal agencies along with independent regulatory commissions and agencies now must consider how their rights of way, properties and easements can be used for siting. Procedures adopted by any federal agency “should be clear and simple so as to facilitate the buildout of the national wireless communications infrastructures.” Appropriate personnel then must be kept apprised of agency policies in order to comply with the new rules. If an agency receives a siting request, it is required to reply to the carrier within 60 days; prior to that response, an initial evaluation of the request should have taken place.
In performing this first part of due diligence, agencies must weigh such things as interference with other antenna sites, public health and safety, effects on historic places, protection of cultural and natural resources, compliance with a number of federal protection acts and compliance with Federal Communications Commission rules regarding radio-frequency exposure.
On the carrier side, service providers have been asked to be specific in any siting requests they submit. In any letter of inquiry, the carrier should provide its own location information, a description of the project as a whole, the exact location of the site on which it wants to build, the type and size of antenna, any modification requirements, frequencies on which operation will take place, length of contract time, and how the carrier will comply with environmental and/or historic issues if need be.
If the federal agency, following its initial assessment, finds no reason to deny the siting request, a site survey will be scheduled. Applicants will then be apprised of any additional information needed by the agency and if there are any conditions or restrictions on use of the site. In addition, any site requests that involve the Washington, D.C., metro area must be passed through the National Capital Planning Commission.
Agencies have been instructed to grant licenses on a nondiscriminatory basis, and collocation is encouraged. If collocation cannot be accomplished, agencies also may resort to competitive bidding for sites.
If the applicant needs to cross nonfederal lands to gain access to a federal-lands antenna site, a separate contract may need to be negotiated with that landowner. Applicants also must be informed in writing of any fees attached to processing their applications; a list of these fees was established in 1993. As of the signing of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, agencies can charge “reasonable fees”-those based on market value determined by appraisal, use of set rate schedules or by other means-for antenna sites located on federal property.
Final decisions are required in writing. If a request is denied, the agency must provide a detailed explanation along with information regarding the agency’s appeal process. If the application is accepted, the next step is to complete a lease, permit, license or other legal instrument between both parties.
Any federal agency that processes a siting request is required to comply with a one-time reporting rule by submitting a report within the next six months detailing the number of requests received, the number approved and the number denied; all denied requests must be accompanied by a narrative that explains the agencies’ reasons.
Sheldon Moss of the Personal Communications Industry Association worked with GSA in committee to formulate the bulletin. However, while he characterized the guidelines as “a modest next step,” Moss thinks they did not go far enough.
“We wanted a more consistent leasing process that would have covered all agencies,” he said. “Each agency pretty much can do what it wants.” Moss also had a problem with a “murky” appeals process that he feels was not spelled out as simply as it could have been; again, each agency can handle appeals as it wishes, with no standardization.
Perhaps what Moss criticized most was the lack of a continuing reporting mechanism regarding the progress and success of siting on federal lands; in his opinion, the one-time-only reporting process is weak.
“GSA could have acted as a monitor to report to Congress yearly on how well things are going,” he said. “The six-month deal doesn’t extend the time line long enough. Without centralized reporting, there is no accountability.” It now is up to GSA and the wireless associations to make siting on federal lands work, and the industry now has a responsibility, Moss said, to “hold GSA’s feet to the fire.”
