Wireless Communications

Introduction
Legal References
Documents
Links

Introduction

This page provides a range of materials related to wireless telecommunications issues faced by local governments, including the permitting procedure for wireless antenna facilities, and the federal prohibition on local government restrictions dealing with DBS (direct broadcast satellite) dishes, TV antennas and ham radio antennas. Sample local government regulations for wireless antenna facilities are also provided.

Legal References

Regulations

Over the Air Reception Devices - In 1996, the Commission adopted the Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule concerning governmental and nongovernmental restrictions on viewers' ability to receive video programming signals from direct broadcast satellites ("DBS"), multichannel multipoint distribution (wireless cable) providers ("MMDS"), and television broadcast stations ("TVBS"). The rule is cited as 47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000 . It prohibits restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance or use of antennas used to receive video programming. The rule applies to video antennas including direct-to- home satellite dishes that are less than one meter (39.37") in diameter (or of any size in Alaska), TV antennas, and wireless cable antennas. The rule prohibits most restrictions that: (1) unreasonably delay or prevent installation, maintenance or use; (2) unreasonably increase the cost of installation, maintenance or use; or (3) preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal. Effective January 22, 1999, the Commission amended the rule so that it also applies to rental property where the renter has an exclusive use area, such as a balcony or patio. On October 25, 2000, the Commission further amended the rule so that it also will apply to customer-end antennas that receive and transmit fixed wireless signals.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance - All licensees (companies) erecting antenna facilities must comply with the federal NEPA regulations. If a licensee's proposed action falls within one of the eight categories listed in federal regulation 47 CFR 1.1307, then 47 CFR 1.1308(a) requires the licensee to consider the potential environmental effects from its construction of antenna facilities or structures, and disclose those effects in an environmental assessment (EA) which is filed with the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau for review. The categories that trigger the need for an EA include impacts on: endangered species; archaeological, cultural or historic properties; tribal lands; and floodplains.
It is the responsibility of all companies erecting wireless facilities to comply with the federal regulations. Local government jurisdictions should assist by informing applicants of all known potential siting problems. Any required EA will also provide valuable information to local officials.
Moratoria Guidelines - RCW 35.99.050 (section 5 of the legislation) refers to the "guidelines for facilities siting implementation." Those guidelines are fairly short, and not too onerous. They are posted on the FCC Website.

Court Cases

T-Mobile v. Fairfax County Board of Supervisors - United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 03/01/2012. This decision is not directly binding in our Ninth circuit, but it provides a good discussion of the applicable federal standards and the criteria typically used to review a local government’s decision on whether to grant or deny an application for a wireless antenna installation.
Laurence Wolf Capital Management Trust v. City of Ferndale - United States District, Court Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, 12/18/2000. This decision on wireless antenna siting deals with typical issues in facility siting litigation: burden of proof on appeal, alternative locations for facility, and adequacy of the written findings of the local government decision denying the permit.
Omnipoint v. Newtown Township - United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 07/13/2000. This cell tower decision recognizes the broad discretion of local zoning decisions. It deals with an antenna permit denial that the company alleged caused a "significant gap" in service. The U.S. Supreme Court denied cert on 11/06/2000.

Documents

Ordinances/Policies

Bothell Municipal Code Ch. 12.11, Personal Wireless Service Facilties, amended/updated in 2010
Marysville Municipal Code Chapter 5.73, Wireless Communication Facility Franchise Regulations, adopted originally in 2006
Sammamish Municipal Code Ch. 21A.55 , Wireless Communication Facilities, adopted 2010
Snohomish County Ordinance No. 05-038 () adds Ch. 30.28A, development standards and siting process for personal wireless telecommunications services facilities; adds and amends development regulations for personal wireless telecommunications services
Tukwila Ordinance No. 2135 () adds Ch. 12.18, Wireless Communications Facilities, passed 10/13/06

Articles

A Local Government Official's Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF Emission Safety: Rules, Procedures, and Practical Guidance () - This document, adopted by the FCC and the Local and State Government Advisory Committee on June 2, 2000, is written in a language approaching English and deals with the day-to-day issues faced by local governments dealing with tower siting radio frequency safety questions.
Misconceptions About Regulating Towers and Wireless Facilities - From The Center for Municipal Solutions - Assertions, statements and beliefs that reflect common misconceptions related to the issue of regulating the siting of towers and wireless facilities, along with a synoptic discussion of each. The article gives a basic review of significant wireless facility issues that may be helpful to those new to facility siting issues.
New Federal Law Changes Local Zoning Rules for Wireless Antenna Sitings - This short article, sent to California cities by a major California law firm that represents many cities, provides a summary of the impact the February 2012 federal law change has on approvals of wireless collocation applications. This amendment to the federal Telecommunications Act applies to all Washington local governments.