NY Town Disagrees FCC Ruling Supports Crown Castle Complaint
A New York town sued by Crown Castle disagreed that an FCC September declaratory ruling “has any impact" on the case. At the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Crown Castle claimed Hempstead violated Communications Act…
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.
Section 332 when it delayed and effectively denied a request to install wireless facilities in the right of way (see 1806130052). Crown Castle said last week (in Pacer) the FCC’s declaratory ruling supported its case. Hempstead disagreed (in Pacer) Monday: The company's distributed antenna system sites aren't small wireless facilities as defined by the FCC. The FCC ruling applies only to small wireless facilities that provide wireless broadband and telecom, but the DAS facilities will provide 4G LTE broadband information services, it said. “The Declaratory Ruling is irrelevant.”