June 26, 2009: Jonathan has just released another update to the extremely popular and widely used Supplemental Wireless Application form.

This is a MAJOR update addressing DAS providers who are not FCC licensees of their own sites.

Used by governments around the country for nearly 5 years, this form helps governments collect relevant and necessary data to assist the government with complying with Telecom Act Sections 253, 332, and 704 data collection and analysis requirements. In California, the form also assists in determining rights under PUC Code Sections 7901 and 7901.1 related to a carriers interest in siting in the public right of way, as well as CEQA and the California Government Code.

This copyrighted form is free to use and modify by federal, state, and local government agencies.

To download the current version of the form, please follow this link to the Cellular/PCS section and scroll to the bottom of the middle column. You'll find the form there in three different formats (.doc; .rtf; and .pdf).

Special thanks to Jeff A. Lewis, Esq., City of Inglewood, California for his insights and recommendations to make the form even more useful for local governments.

June 25, 2005: With my personal thanks to Tom Bunton (County of San Diego) and Kannon Shanmugam (Sprint's Counsel of Record), both have provided me with a copy of Sprint's Supplemental Brief urging the Supreme Court to hear Sprint's application for cert from the 9th Circuit En Banc ruling against the carrier. The brief was filed with the court on June 9th. We should learn next week whether the court will grant cert.

Sprint's supplemental brief opens as follows:

"In response to the Courts invitation, the government has filed a most peculiar brief. The government concedes that there is a circuit conflict concerning the interpretation of 47 U.S.C. 253(a)one of the central provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The government further contends that the Ninth Circuit erred to the extent that it held that a regulation is preempted under Section 253(a) only if it effects a complete ban on the provision of telecommunications service. And the government does not dispute that this case presents an issue of enormous practical significance to the telecommunications industry in general and the wireless industry in particular."

To download your copy of Sprint's brief, please click here (PDF: 85 Kb).

June 24, 2005: Clearwire, which is an over-the-air (wireless) Internet provider, is apparently about to submit somewhere north of 1,000 site applications to local governments in Southern California.

Clearwire's network, which is a wireless "mesh" of interconnected sites connecting back to POPs (points of presence to connect to the Internet) generally uses 5 GHz microwave links to provide site-to-site communications, and 2 GHz panel antennas to connect to its subscribers. Some of the frequencies Clearwire uses are licensed by the FCC; others appear to be in license-free spectrum.

While not nearly as fast as many DSL, cable, and fiber providers, Clearwire does offer throughput speeds in excess of WiFi, as well as its big-ticket feature: wireless portability across a large area single-vendor network. And unlike most cable and fiber providers, Clearwire also offers low cost static IP addresses that will permit Clearwire subscribers to run their own web, mail, FTP, DNS, and other servers. This will be great for redundant and back-up Internet connectivity. I suspect it's likely I'll dump my second DSL line at the office in favor of Clearwire's network when it's available in West Los Angeles.

Local governments should expect to see Sprint carry in some/many of the applications to the planning counter. Sprint is a 51% owner of Clearwire. While Sprint has the majority ownership position, be aware that this project is not covered by a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN). Although they may be proposed to be collocated on existing wireless sites and towers ... especially Sprint and Nextel sites...in the right-of-way, the lack of a CPCN should be considered for its impact on the planning versus permitting process.

Also, if Clearwire does propose multi-site interconnection, local governments should remember that CEQA is offended when piecemealing of projects occurs. For example, if an application comes in and shows microwave antennas pointed at three other sites, then the government should look at the entire project and evaluate it as a whole.

For those governments that routinely strike microwave dish elements from wireless projects where less visible back-haul options exist, think about whether granting requested microwave antennas for Clearwire's back haul jeopardizes your ability to deny future microwave antenna requests from other similarly-situated wireless applicants.

From an RF safety standpoint, Clearwire is subject to the FCC RF safety rules. The Clearwire applications I have seen so far indicate that its sites are relatively low power, but there may be times when a detailed RF safety review and permit conditions may be required.

For more good information about Clearwire, check out their press kit site by following this link.

For those local governments that use a version of my wireless application form, please download the most current version (6/22/09 or later) which has been updated to address wireless Internet mesh network applications, as well as updates for DAS providers (who are not wireless providers, but that's a different story). The form is free for local governments to use, and available at the bottom of this linked page.

I'll be writing more about Clearwire's exciting deployment plans, and their technology, in the coming weeks and months. Watch this space!

"This brief is filed in response to the Court’s order inviting the Solicitor General to express the views of the United States in these cases. In the view of the United States, both of the petitions for writs of certiorari should be denied."

Read the SG's brief (PDF format) by clicking on this link.

This is outstanding news for governments!

May 28, 2009: The National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA) has released a major new wireless facilities siting guide geared towards helping local government officials deal with issues that arise in connection with requests to located cell towers and facilities.

This guide is written by government and wireless industry experts.

Jonathan authored the chapter on RF emissions safety, and provided many of the wireless site photographs contained in the guide.

Copies of the e-Guide can be ordered directly from NATOA. THe member price is just $50. The non-member price is only $100. Delivery is electronic, so you don't have to wait for shipping. You can print a hard-copy of the guide for your own use.

Please follow this link to visit NATOA's order page.

Highly recommended!