The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRFI14-0178 - Antenna Modification Request.pdfProject Summary Sprint Proposed Modification to Existing Wireless Telecommunications Facility SF03UB318 – 5670 Lincoln Blvd., Oroville, CA 95965, APN: 078-170-046 Introduction On July 9, 2013 SprintPCS completed the acquisition of Clearwire, including all spectrum assets. Sprint has announced its plan to utilize its new 2.5 GHz spectrum in a network it calls “Spark”, which they announced on October 30, 2013. This network will allow data transfer speeds up to 4 times faster than existing LTE networks, benefiting local consumers such as public works, emergency responders, local businesses, and residents. Mobile data usage is on the rise and networks such as “Spark” will allow mobile data to offer a viable alternative to hard line internet. Sprint has chosen select markets within which to begin its deployment. Permitting officials within these markets will probably notice that Sprint sites which were very recently modified, will be the subject of the newest modifications. This is by design: the “Spark” network will be deployed as an “overlay” to its existing LTE network, meaning that it will require only modifications to existing cell sites, not brand new sites. In fact, in most cases, the modification will only require the addition of (1) antenna and (1) RRH per sector on these sites; in most cases maintaining a total antenna count within the original entitlements. Project Description The proposed Sprint modification consists of the installation of (1) new panel antenna per sector for a total of (3) new panel antennas. Each new antenna will be supported by (1) RRH, or Remote Radio Head, that will be installed behind the proposed antenna on the same mount. Below is a table identifying the equipment currently installed at the existing facility, the equipment being proposed, and the equipment pursuant to proposed modifications. Existing Height of Tower: 150' Center line of Antennas: 137' Number of Antennas: 6 Number of RRH's: 9 Number of Cabinets: 2 Proposed Height of Tower: 150' Center line of Antennas: 137' Number of Antennas: 3 Number of RRH's: 3 Number of Cabinets: 0 Final Height of Tower: 150' Center line of Antennas: 137' Number of Antennas: 9 Number of RRH's: 12 Number of Cabinets: 2 Justification Statement Project Purpose. The purpose of this project is to upgrade the existing facility with the latest technology in wireless broadband. This faster network and increased bandwidth will allow for faster broadband connection speeds for local consumers such as public works, emergency responders, local businesses, residents, and visitors. Compliance with Original Approvals: The proposed modifications are in compliance with the original entitlements for this wireless facility. The number of antennas and ground equipment are not being increased above what was originally permitted. The purpose of the proposed modification is to upgrade the existing facility with the latest technology. Doing so will not alter the physical dimensions or appearance of the facility beyond original entitlements. Federal Regulation: Section 6409 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, which was signed into law February 22, 2012, mandates that state and local governments provide a nondiscretionary approval of an eligible facilities request for the modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station. The FCC defines substantial change as the mounting of a proposed antenna that would increase the existing height of the tower by more than 10%. Sprint’s proposed modifications fall within the scope of this statute. For further clarification on Section 6409 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, please review the attached explanatory document included with this submittal, which includes links to all necessary materials. Streamlined Wireless Facilities Deployment: Federal Regulation in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 For more information, please contact PCIA’s Government Affairs Department: advocacy@pcia.com Section 6409 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 mandates that state and local governments must approve an eligible facilities request for the modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station. The Act was signed into law February 22, 2012. The section mandating streamlined modification and collocation approval ensures the timely deployment of wireless services. Section 6409 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012i (a) Facility Modification.— (1) In general.—Notwithstanding section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–104) or any other provision of law, a State or local government may not deny, and shall approve, any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station. (2) Eligible facilities request.—For purposes this subsection, the term ‘‘eligible facilities request’’ means any request for modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that involves – (A) collocation of new transmission equipment; (B) removal of transmission equipment; or (C) replacement of transmission equipment. (3) Applicability of environmental laws.—nothing in paragraph (1) shall be construed to relieve the Commission from the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act or the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The Act applies to eligible facilities requests for modification of existing wireless towers and base stations: The Act defines “eligible facilities request” as any request for modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that involves: Collocation of new transmission equipment; Removal of transmission equipment; or Replacement of transmission equipment. The Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) defines “collocation” as “the mounting or installation of an antenna on an existing tower, building or structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes.”ii The FCC defines a “substantial change” as: The mounting of a proposed antenna on the tower that would increase the existing height of the tower by more than 10%, or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty feet, whichever is greater, except that the mounting of the proposed antenna may exceed the size limits set forth in this paragraph if necessary to avoid interference with existing antennas; or The mounting of a proposed antenna that would involve adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater, except that the mounting of the proposed antenna may exceed the size limits set forth in this paragraph if necessary to shelter the antenna from inclement weather or to connect the antenna to the tower via cable.iii The FCC defines a “tower” as “any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting FCC-licensed antennas and their associated facilities.”iv The federal regulations define a “base station” as “[a] station at a specified site authorized to communicate with mobile stations;” or “[a] land station in the land mobile service.”v Federal Regulation of Wireless Siting in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, cont. For more information, please contact PCIA’s Government Affairs Department: advocacy@pcia.com Updated 4/20/2012 The Act requires approval for all eligible facilities requests that do not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station and: Applies despite section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which preserves the authority of a state or local government or instrumentality thereof over decisions regarding the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities;vi Preempts zoning review and conditional approvals of eligible facilities requests;vii Requires eligible facilities requests only be subject to administrative review processes and not discretionary review processes that allow a state or local government to deny or condition an eligible facilities request. Requires that eligible facilities requests for the modification of legal, non-conforming towers must be approved. The FCC’s Wireless Facility Siting “Shot Clock” applies to eligible facilities request for collocation: State and local governments have 90 days to act on an application to collocate wireless facilities on existing structures.viii Under the Act, state and local governments must approve within 90 days any eligible facilities requests for collocation or replacement of transmission equipment on existing towers that do not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower. i For the full text of the Act and its legislative history, see Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-96, §6409 (2012), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr3630enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr3630enr.pdf; see also H.R. Rep. No. 112-399 at 132-33 (2012) (Conf. Rep.), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112hrpt399/pdf/CRPT-112hrpt399.pdf. ii Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation of Wireless Antennas (2001), 47 C.F.R. Part I, Appendix B, available at http://wireless.fcc.gov/releases/da010691a.pdf (“Collocation Agreement”); see also Petition for Declaratory Ruling To Clarify Provisions of Section 332(C)(7)(B) To Ensure Timely Siting Review and To Preempt Under Section 253 State and Local Ordinances That Classify All Wireless Siting Proposals as Requiring a Variance, Declaratory Ruling, 24 FCC Rcd 13994, 14021 ¶ 71 (2009) (“Shot Clock Ruling”), recon. denied, 25 FCC Rcd 11157 (2010), aff’d, City of Arlington, Tex., et al. v. FCC, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1252 (5th Cir. 2012), available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-99A1_Rcd.pdf; see also Wireless Telecommunications Bureau & Mass Media Bureau Announce the Release of a Fact sheet Regarding the March 16, 2001 Antenna Collocation Programmatic Agreement, Public Notice, 17 FCC Rcd 508 (2002), available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-28A1.pdf . iii Collocation Agreement. iv Id. v See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§24.5, 90.7. vi 47 U.S.C. §332(c)( 7)(A). The Telecommunications Act of 1996 defines “personal wireless service facilities” as facilities for the provision of personal wireless services, including commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange access services. 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(C). vii See 158 CONG. REC. E237-239 (daily ed. Feb. 24, 2012) (statement of Rep. Upton), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2012-02-24/pdf/CREC-2012-02-24-pt1-PgE237-5.pdf. Zoning review and/or conditional approvals of eligible facilities request can have the effect of denying such requests as a conditional approval is not an approval per se; therefore it is a denial and a violation of the Act. viii Shot Clock Ruling.