(a) The General Assembly finds that the sharing of towers for fair consideration whenever technically, legally, environmentally and economically feasible, and whenever such sharing meets public safety concerns, will avoid the unnecessary proliferation of towers and is in the public interest.

(b) As used in this section, “facility” means a tower owned or operated for a commercial or public purpose by a person, firm, corporation or a public agency which uses such tower for transmitting or receiving signals in the electromagnetic spectrum pursuant to a Federal Communications Commission license.

(c) (1) A person, firm, corporation or public agency which transmits or receives signals in the electromagnetic spectrum for a commercial or public purpose pursuant to a Federal Communications Commission license may submit a request, on a form specified by the council, to the owner of a facility that the owner permit shared use of the facility. If such an owner agrees to the proposed shared use, the entity which would share the use of the facility shall comply with reasonable conditions established by the owner concerning the use of the facility. The council may arbitrate any issue between the owner of the facility and the requesting entity concerning the establishment of or compliance with any such conditions. An owner of a facility which agrees to shared use of the facility pursuant to this section may request in writing that the council approve the proposed shared use of the facility. If the council finds that the proposed shared use of the facility is technically, legally, environmentally and economically feasible and meets public safety concerns, the council shall issue an order approving such shared use.

(2) If an owner of a facility refuses permission for the proposed shared use, the requesting entity may bring the issue of the proposed shared use to the council. Upon written request by the requesting entity, the council shall initiate a feasibility proceeding to determine whether the proposed shared use is technically, legally, environmentally and economically feasible and meets public safety concerns. A feasibility proceeding shall include a hearing in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54, to be held (A) at a location determined by the council, and (B) not later than ninety days following the council's receipt of the written request for such a proceeding. The council shall provide the owner of the facility, the entity requesting the feasibility proceeding and the municipality in which the facility is located with notice of the proceeding not later than thirty days preceding the hearing. In a feasibility proceeding, the council shall render a decision upon the record, not later than one hundred eighty days following the council's receipt of the written request for such a proceeding, stating whether the proposed shared use of the facility is technically, legally, environmentally and economically feasible and meets public safety concerns. The council shall include appropriate findings in its decision. If the council determines that the proposed shared use of the facility is technically, legally, environmentally and economically feasible and meets public safety concerns, the decision shall include an order requiring the owner of the facility to permit the proposed shared use upon such terms, conditions or limitations as the council determines appropriate.

(d) (1) If a person, firm, corporation or public agency which transmits, receives or will transmit or receive signals in the electromagnetic spectrum for a commercial or public purpose pursuant to a Federal Communications Commission license and the owner of a facility agree to shared use of a facility but cannot agree on fair compensation for the proposed shared use, or if the council, following a feasibility proceeding, orders shared use of a facility but the parties cannot agree on fair compensation for such shared use, the parties may either submit the issue of fair compensation to arbitration or petition the Superior Court to determine the issue. If the parties submit their dispute to arbitration, they must do so not later than ninety days following the issuance of the council's decision in a feasibility proceeding or conclusion by the parties that they cannot agree on fair compensation, as the case may be. If the parties submit their dispute to arbitration and a party is not satisfied with the ruling of the arbitrator, any party may petition the Superior Court to determine the issue. If either party petitions the Superior Court to determine the issue of fair compensation, the petition shall be submitted to the superior court for the judicial district in which the facility is located. The Public Utilities Regulatory Authority shall accept, absent good cause to the contrary, the ruling of the arbitrator or the decision of the Superior Court, as the case may be, for rate-making purposes.

(2) If a public service company owns a facility which is used to provide a regulated service and another entity shares or will share the use of such facility pursuant to the provisions of this subsection, the public service company shall incorporate the agreement of the parties, the ruling of the arbitrator or the decision of the Superior Court, as the case may be, regarding compensation for shared use of the facility in a tariff, special contract or other applicable filing submitted by the owner to the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority.

(e) The council, in consultation with the parties involved, shall determine the expenses associated with the proceedings set forth in this subsection, except expenses associated with any petition or appeal taken to the Superior Court, prior to their expenditure. All such expenses shall be borne by the person, firm, corporation, or public agency which seeks shared use of a facility under the provisions of this section.

(P.A. 93-268, S. 2; P.A. 94-242, S. 6, 9; P.A. 11-80, S. 1.)

History: P.A. 94-242 amended Subsec. (c)(1) by adding provision re council approval of agreed shared use, effective July 1, 1994; pursuant to P.A. 11-80, “Department of Public Utility Control” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “Public Utilities Regulatory Authority” in Subsec. (d), effective July 1, 2011.