Commission debates approval of controversial new wireless tower

In a recent government meeting, the Commission discussed the approval process for a proposed wireless tower aimed at addressing a significant coverage gap in broadband service. The application, identified as CEP 2415, was presented by ComNet, which argued that the tower is necessary as there are no existing structures to co-locate on for signal propagation.

The Commission outlined three key criteria for approval: first, the applicant must demonstrate a significant gap in coverage; second, if the proposed tower is deemed the least intrusive solution, approval is warranted; and third, if alternatives exist that are less intrusive, the application may be denied. The discussion clarified that the coverage gap pertains specifically to the applicant's service and not to other providers, as federal law dictates that each provider's coverage is assessed individually.

Commissioner Ruggles raised concerns about the implications of allowing multiple carriers to build towers in the same area, suggesting that it could lead to an influx of similar requests. Legal counsel confirmed that the significant gap must be evaluated based on the specific provider's coverage, referencing a 2013 9th Circuit ruling.

The meeting also touched on public safety implications, with some commissioners questioning whether the new tower would enhance emergency communication capabilities. While the tower would not provide cellular service, it would enable broadband connectivity, allowing for voice over IP services, which could facilitate emergency calls. However, concerns were raised about the reliance on broadband for emergency communications, as it requires a subscription, unlike cellular services.

The applicant, represented by William Jenkins of CIS Communications, emphasized the economic impracticality of constructing multiple towers, stating that the proposed tower is essential for providing uninterrupted service to underserved areas. He also clarified that the tower would not require lighting due to its height and would utilize solar power with a propane generator as a backup.

As the Commission deliberates on the application, the discussions highlight the complexities of balancing infrastructure needs with regulatory compliance and public safety considerations. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for future wireless tower applications in the region.