|
Commission is limited to be able to deny those applications based on health emissions, and the
<br />reason why is if you look at your Background Report on page 2, number 5, it talks about the
<br />Telecommunications Act of 1996. They are saying that there's not enough evidence to prove
<br />that there are these health risks being generated. Until such time as that has been proven, the
<br />Federal Government limits the ability to deny those permits based on that fact. So, what has
<br />been suggested in the past has, is there be these new studies done, these new updated studies to
<br />be able to show those types of conclusions. But, at this point, until that law has changed,
<br />because it has happened before and that usually is brought up. Thank you.
<br />REPLOGLE: Thank you.
<br />HALL: I would also like to add that it's not just limited, it's prohibited from making your
<br />decision concerning that. So, he used the nice word "limited" but it's prohibited.
<br />RAFFIPY: I have a question, Mr. Chair. I know that this tower has a provision for co -location.
<br />You know, our earlier discussion and in the presentation, there is a co -location provision on this
<br />tower. Who monitors these towers when there is a new tower? If somebody comes in, and a
<br />new provider comes into that area to tell them you don't need to install a tower, you can just go
<br />to that tower because there's a provision for co -location on that tower.
<br />CLARKSON: That would be the Planning Department and the, well—
<br />AGUINALDO: —Those guys—
<br />CLARKSON: Yeah, no, but the—he asked me, and my understanding is, is that if a cell tower
<br />applicant comes in and says we want to erect a cell tower, that the Planning Department would
<br />say wait a minute, there's a cell tower very close to that, your proposed location that has a co -
<br />location provision; therefore, we are not going to take your application. Go to them and put your
<br />antennas on their tower.
<br />RAFFIPIY: Exactly, and then the thing is they're going to present us with their studies on
<br />coverage because they're going to tell us, oh, we cannot be co -located on that tower because
<br />there's no overlapping coverage, so, it isit is better that we install another tower. So, I'm just
<br />raising this concern because it may become, you know, we don't want our islands to become,
<br />you know, cell tower islands.
<br />DARROW: If I could chime in again on this. This is great discussion on these topics. The
<br />Planning Department had the exact same concerns regarding the number of towers that were
<br />being constructed around the island, so we started requesting that the companies try to co -locate.
<br />We were encouraging that. We'd rather see four antennas on one tower than four towers. And,
<br />so, when an applicant comes in with a cell tower permit, there's an additional form that they
<br />have to fill out called a "Telecommunication Tower Attachment Form." And, on that form, there
<br />are ten questions, and one of those questions is, "Have you made attempts in this area to seek co -
<br />location on other towers" and if you, if there are other towers and you're not co -locating on
<br />there, provide reasons why, and that's why at times, you'll see anterior companies come before
<br />the Commission and again try to state that if they go on that tower, they won't have the signal
<br />EXHIBIT D
<br />15
<br />
|