Industry Urges FCC to Revisit Environmental Review Rules

WASHINGTON, April 22, 2025 – Industry leaders spotlighted a CTIA petition on Tuesday that urges the Federal Communications Commission to update its environmental review procedures in light of a recent White House directive and rule change.

Representatives from AT&T, Breezeline, and the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners were gathered for a Federalist Society webinar on 5G regulatory reform, during which changes to the National Environmental Policy Act emerged as top concerns.

Their remarks came just days after the Trump administration issued an executive memo directing agencies to digitize and accelerate infrastructure permitting. That directive followed a February interim rule from the Council on Environmental Quality that took effect April 11, rescinding longstanding NEPA regulations and instructing federal agencies to revise their own environmental review procedures.

“The Trump administration, over the last three months, has issued a number of executive orders that impact the telecom space,” said Danielle Thumann, senior counsel to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. “That includes an order directing CEQ to propose rescinding its NEPA regulations and to provide updated guidance in light of amendments made by Congress in 2023.”

Originally enacted in 1970, NEPA requires federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of major projects before approving them. Often described as the “Magna Carta” of environmental law, NEPA is praised by supporters of the law for giving communities a voice and protecting ecosystems, while critics say it’s frequently used to delay or block infrastructure projects through litigation and red tape.

CTIA’s March 27 petition urged the FCC to declare that wireless deployments under geographic area licenses are not “major federal actions” under NEPA, arguing that the FCC lacks “substantial control and responsibility” over these site-level projects. If adopted, the change could exempt most private-sector wireless builds from federal environmental reviews.

While panelists stopped short of fully endorsing CTIA’s proposal, several suggested that the FCC should use this moment to reevaluate its role in permitting reviews.

“It's a great opportunity for the FCC to look at its rules, particularly the NEPA rules… and really think about how that aligns with the Fiscal Responsibility Act that came out in 2023,” said Caroline Van Wie, vice president of federal regulatory at AT&T. The FRA narrowed the definition of a “major federal action” to include only actions with substantial federal control and responsibility.

Van Wie said the CTIA petition raises an important question: Whether a large geographic license is actually a major federal action as it relates to the building of wireless towers?

“CTIA makes the strong argument that it’s not," Van Wie said.

Van Wie laid out steps required by NEPA that AT&T must “go through every single time that we are building a tower, expanding our wireless footprint, sometimes even collocating” facilities on towers, she said. NEPA “creates a lot of paperwork and expenses.” AT&T typically has to hire a specialist contractor to review every site, she added.

NEPA reform may ease one layer of regulatory review, but providers also face mounting friction at the state and local levels, said Paul Beaudry, vice president of regulatory and government affairs at Montreal-based Cogeco, which owns regional U.S. ISP Breezeline.

Beaudry noted that while the company doesn’t operate licensed facilities subject to NEPA, it often encounters delays at the state and local level. Beaudry urged the FCC to exercise its authority under Section 253 of the Communications Act, to preempt “unreasonable” state and local permitting practices, citing high fees and redundant engineering requirements as key obstacles.

“We recently had to wait a year and a half to get a denial of a permit requirement, which we still do not fully understand,” he said. “There should be a threshold for low- or no-impact projects to move forward more quickly. In some cases, delays have forced us to abandon projects altogether.”

Tony Clark, executive director of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and a former commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, pointed to broader structural issues with NEPA itself.

“It’s a process statute,” he said, “But what we have seen time and again is that it can be used as a cudgel to try to block infrastructure projects that may be needed, even in cases where the state believes the project is needed.” 

Clark said providers sometimes reroute projects off of federal lands to avoid triggering NEPA, which can result in higher costs and legal complications. He emphasized that rural broadband builds are disproportionately impacted, especially when federal lands or rail crossings are involved. “Streamlining would be enormously helpful,” he said.

Clark also pointed to pending federal legislation as a possible solution. He highlighted the Reducing Barriers for Broadband on Federal Lands Act, introduced by Rep. Russ Fulcher, R-Idaho, which would create a categorical exclusion under NEPA for projects crossing previously disturbed federal lands. 

“It didn’t go anywhere last session, but it’s been reintroduced,” Clark said.