Infrastructure Rules Change Sought as Nokia Cites Trade; Lincoln, Nebraska, Disputes AT&T Claims
With FCC Chairman Ajit Pai expected to circulate the next round of wireless infrastructure rule modifications Wednesday for the Sept. 26 commissioners’ meeting (see 1808220051), CTIA and Nokia said last week changes are critical. “Although some states and municipalities have…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
taken actions to create a more favorable environment for deployment, many delays continue,” CTIA said in docket 17-79. “Despite the shot clocks the Commission adopted that were intended to streamline action, providers report that they have had to wait many months and sometimes years for action by a locality on a siting request.” Some "localities have imposed ‘pre-application’ requirements that must be satisfied before the locality will accept individual site applications,” the group said. Nokia officials met with Mike O’Rielly and Jessica Rosenworcel, and aides to the other commissioners, on the importance of spectrum and infrastructure to 5G. “Of particular concern to Nokia are the recent tariffs imposed on trade with China, which specifically target a wide range of components that are critical to 5G," Nokia said. “Unless exemptions are provided for these products, these latest duties threaten to raise the cost of 5G infrastructure in the U.S. by hundreds of millions of dollars. This is an important context that further emphasizes the need for the Commission to lower barriers to deployment where it can.” Lincoln, Nebraska, disputed AT&T claims (see 1808130041) it's “high fees have delayed its residents the benefits of AT&T’s small cell deployments.” AT&T didn’t, as it claims, pause a deployment of small cells there, the city said. “A review of our records fails to reveal any permit applications filed by AT&T for such as deployment,” the city said. “That means that AT&T either deployed without permission and unknown to the city, or AT&T provided misleading statements to the Commission.” Lincoln said, contrary to the carrier's claims, recurring attachment fees it imposes aren't a barrier: “Lincoln has researched our rates, submitted them to national companies for evaluation, and as a result has signed small cell agreements with three different companies.” Lincoln said its rates are “right in the middle” of fees assessed across the U.S. for small-cell attachments. AT&T didn't comment.