In comments filed with FCC, CTIA called draft agreement on stream...

Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers. Point is to try to streamline reviews involving whether proposed transmission facility may affect historic properties. CTIA pointed out that if licensee determines after review that proposed facility doesn’t affect historic property, FCC isn’t required to conduct further processing. But under draft, “any person, whether qualified or not, at any time can allege at the FCC that the proposed colocation has an adverse effect on historic properties,” CTIA said. As result, Sec. 106 process under National Historic Preservation Act could be invoked to delay proposed antenna siting “based on nothing more than a mere allegation of an adverse effect,” CTIA argued. Draft proposal would allow colocations on wireless towers constructed on or before Dec. 31, 2000, without further review unless certain exceptions apply. Draft stipulates that attaching antenna can’t result in major increase in tower size. CTIA is calling on NPA to recognize that “colocations are generally in the public interest and are categorically unlikely” to adversely affect historic properties. Group said that would limit cases subject to review to scenarios where facility increases substantially in size, prior finding of unmitigated impact on historic properties or pending environmental review. Otherwise, CTIA said burden should be on ACHP and state or tribal historic preservation officers to provide evidence of impact on historic property. Late last year, issue of how to craft interim proposal for colocation generated disagreement among some state historic preservation officers, who have been addressing increased loads of applications for proposed colocations. MG