To amend section 332 of the Communications Act of 1934 to preserve State and local authority to regulate the placement, construction, and modification of certain telecommunications facilities, and for other purposes.

Summary: Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to:  (1) repeal a provision which prohibits a State or local government from regulating the placement, construction, or modification of personal wireless service facilities (communications towers) on the basis of the environmental effects of frequency emissions from such facilities when such facilities comply with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations; (2) require that, in any action in which a person seeking to place, construct, or modify such a facility is a party, such person bear the burden of proof of its necessity; and (3) prohibit the FCC from adopting as a final rule a certain proposed rule which would preempt State and local zoning and land use restrictions on the siting, placement, and construction of broadcast station transmission facilities.

SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

    (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
            (1) States and localities should be able to exercise 
        control over the construction and location of such towers 
        through the use of zoning, planned growth, and other controls 
        relating to the protection of the environment and public 
        health.
            (2) The placement of commercial telecommunications, radio, 
        or television towers near homes can greatly reduce the value of 
        such homes, destroy the views from such homes, and reduce 
        substantially the desire to live in such homes.
            (3) There are alternatives to the construction of 
        additional telecommunications towers to effectively provide 
        wireless services, including the collocation of transmitters on 
        existing towers and the use of alternative technologies, 
        including satellites.
            (4) The Federal Communications Commission does not consider 
        itself a health agency and turns to health and radiation 
        experts outside the agency for guidance on the issue of health 
        effects due to radio frequency exposure. Additionally, both the 
        Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection 
        Agency agree that the research completed to date is 
        insufficient to determine whether using portable cellular 
        telephones presents risks to human health. It is therefore in 
        the interest of the Nation for the Congress to authorize a 
        thorough Federal study into the health effects of low-level, 
        prolonged exposure to nonionizing radiation.
            (5) The rapid proliferation of personal wireless 
        transmitters and the expected rollout of digital television 
        transmitters mean that the number of sources of nonionizing 
        radiation and the relative strength of these sources will 
        increase dramatically in our Nation's communities in the near 
        future. Until independently funded, conclusive, peer-reviewed 
        studies are completed on this subject, we should exercise 
        caution and give States and local governments full authority to 
        protect the public from radio frequency emissions.
            (6) The Federal Communications Commission has proposed 
        rules regarding the siting of personal wireless transmitter 
        towers. It is in the interest of the Nation that the second 
        memorandum opinion and order notice of proposed rulemaking of 
        the Commission with respect to application of such ordinances 
        to the placement of such towers, WT Docket No. 97-192, ET 
        Docket No. 93-62, and RM-8577, be modified in order to permit 
        State and local governments to exercise their zoning and land 
        use authorities, and their power to protect public health and 
        safety, to regulate the placement of telecommunications towers. 
        Further, the proposed rules should be modified to allow a 
        licensee or applicant to seek relief from an adverse action 
only after they have exhausted all available administrative or judicial 
remedies at the local or State levels of jurisdiction, and, that when 
petitioning before the Commission for relief from an adverse decision, 
the applicant shall bear the burden of proof relating to the placement 
of such towers.
            (7) On August 19, 1997, the Federal Communications 
        Commission issued a proposed rule, MM Docket No. 97-182, which 
        would preempt the application of State and local zoning and 
        land use ordinances regarding the placement of 
        telecommunications towers for digital television services. It 
        is in the interest of the Nation that the Commission not adopt 
        this rule.
    (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are as follows:
            (1) To repeal the limitations on the exercise of State and 
        local authorities regarding the placement, construction, and 
        modification of personal wireless service facilities that arise 
        under section 332(c)(7) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
        U.S.C. 332(c)(7)).
            (2) To permit State and local governments to regulate the 
        placement, construction, and modification of such facilities on 
        the basis of the environmental effects of the operation of such 
        facilities.
            (3) To prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from 
        adopting rules which would preempt State and local regulation 
        of the placement of such facilities.

SEC. 2. STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITY OVER PLACEMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND 
              MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES.

    (a) Repeal of Limitations.--Section 332(c)(7)(B) of the 
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)) is amended--
            (1) in clause (i), by striking ``thereof--'' and all that 
        follows through the end and inserting ``thereof shall not 
        unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally 
        equivalent services.'';
            (2) by striking clause (iv);
            (3) by redesignating clause (v) as clause (iv); and
            (4) in clause (iv), as so redesignated--
                    (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``30 days 
                after such action or failure to act'' and inserting 
                ``30 days after exhaustion of any administrative 
                remedies with respect to such action or failure to 
                act''; and
                    (B) by striking the third sentence and inserting 
                the following: ``In any such action in which a person 
                seeking to place, construct, or modify a tower facility 
                is a party, such person shall bear the burden of 
                proof.''.
    (b) Prohibition on Adoption of Rule.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, the Federal Communications Commission may not adopt 
as a final rule the proposed rule set forth in ``Preemption of State 
and Local Zoning and Land Use Restrictions on Siting, Placement and 
Construction of Broadcast Station Transmission Facilities'', MM Docket 
No. 97-182, released August 19, 1997.