May 4, 2016–The FCC plans to seek input on an upcoming proposal to address “twilight towers,” – communications structures built between 2001 and 2005 that did not go through the section 106 review process required by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), an FCC official said today.

Chad Breckinridge, associate chief of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, discussed twilight towers during a workshop on environmental compliance and historic preservation review procedures required for wireless communications facilities. The towers were built between the adoption of two nationwide programmatic agreements (NPAs) concerning the construction of towers. “This is still very much a fluid process,” said Mr. Breckinridge, noting that the FCC has met with state historic preservation officers (SHPOs), industry, tribes, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation on the twilight tower issue.

“We are actively working on it and we are committed to bringing it to closure as quickly as we can,” he said, noting that industry is frustrated because collocations are not allowed on twilight towers. The goals are to account for historic preservation review of the towers and to make them available as quickly as possible, he said.

“There are some thorny issues and some strong feelings about how best to resolve this,” said Mr. Breckinridge, noting that the bureau welcomes any additional input from stakeholders. “At this point, the ball is squarely in our court. We are developing a single solution, proposed solution that we will want to present for broader feedback.”

He said after making sure FCC officials approve of the proposal and vetting it with the Office of General Counsel, staff will work closely with ACHP before releasing it for public comment. “I don’t think it’s going to be particularly swift. I wouldn’t anticipate an end game in the next few months on this, the next couple of months, but this remains a high priority for us,” Mr. Breckinridge said. He noted that twilight towers can be made available for collocations now if they individually go through the section 106 review process.

Also at today’s workshop, Wireless Bureau Chief Jon Wilkins stressed the importance of facilitating the siting of wireless infrastructure “to ensure that the United States wins in the 5G wireless future.” While Commissioners often are divided on contentious issues at the agency, there is consensus on the importance of wireless infrastructure, he added.

He noted that in a 2014 order streamlining the deployment of distributed antenna systems (DAS) and small cells, the FCC committed to work with stakeholders on a broader programmatic alternative to further streamline, within 18 to 24 months, the deployment of DAS and small cell infrastructure (TRDaily, Oct. 17, 2014).

The FCC has been working with tribal nations, the ACHP, and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO) “to work on those nuts and bolts [and] …  to revise the section 106 review process in situations where a project does not have the potential to cause adverse effects,” Mr. Wilkins said.

“We are going to very soon release a public notice spelling out in more detail proposed new exclusions for small facility installations like DAS and small cell systems,” he added. “And these exclusions …, if and when ultimately adopted, we think will continue to mark, you know, real improvements in the section 106 review process in that they will allow small cell, small deployments onto existing structures like bridges, buildings, water towers without any or very light federal review.”

“The Commission staff is in the final stages of developing a program alternative,” Bill Stafford, an attorney-adviser in the Wireless Bureau’s Competition and Infrastructure Policy Division, said later today. “We’re on schedule to meet that October deadline,” he added.

Also during today’s workshop, Claire DiNardo, president of Arionda and a wireless cell site acquisition specialist, said that the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, which streamlined collocations on towers, has shaved six months to a year off of the process by eliminating the need for zoning hearings. “That new legislation has meant a lot to us,” she said. – Paul Kirby, paul.kirby@wolterskluwer.com

Courtesy TRDaily