3. The Proposed Standards

3.1 Objective of the standards

The objective for the telecommunications industry, as expressed in the Industry Reference Group report,⁴ is:

To provide for consistent and certain regulatory planning provisions that apply on a national basis, to assist in network and equipment design and equipment sourcing for roll outs, and a reduction in compliance costs and timeframes.

3.2 Detail of the standard

Proposed subject matter of the proposal

A national environmental standard is a legally enforceable regulation. The exact wording of these standards will be legally drafted after government decision following this consultation. A national environmental standard may allow an activity. However, if an activity has significant adverse effects on the environment, a national environmental standard must not state that the activity is a permitted activity.

In essence, the proposed standards say:

• an activity (such as a mobile phone transmitter) that emits radio-frequency fields will be a permitted activity provided it complies with the existing New Zealand Standard⁵

• the installation of telecommunications equipment cabinets alongside roads or in the road reserve will be a permitted activity, subject to specified limitations on their size and location

• noise emitting from telecommunications equipment cabinets located alongside roads or in the road reserve will be a permitted activity, subject to specified noise limits

• the installation of masts and antennas alongside roads or in the road reserve will be a permitted activity, subject to specified limitations to height and size.

The RMA details the relationship between national environmental standards and rules in plans, resource consents and bylaws. For all of the above standards, the Ministry for the Environment proposes that they be 'absolute' standards, whereby rules in plans, resource consents and bylaws may not be more stringent than the standards.

3.3 Exposure to radio-frequency fields from wireless telecommunications infrastructure

Industry proposal for radio-frequency fields exposure

The Industry Reference Group recommends a standard for radio-frequency field exposure from wireless telecommunications infrastructure based on a permitted activity rule.

Ministry for the Environment comments

The Ministry for the Environment supports the industry proposal for a national environmental standard for exposure to radio-frequency fields.

The industry proposal for a permitted activity rule is reproduced from the existing national guidelines for radio-frequency fields (Ministry for the Environment and Ministry of Health, 2000). The national guidelines were issued to provide direction for local authorities, the public and resource consent applicants on how the effects of radio-frequency transmission facilities can be appropriately addressed under the RMA.

The national guidelines are based on the relevant New Zealand Standard, NZS2772.1: 1999 Radio-frequency Fields Part 1: Maximum Exposure Levels 3 kHz – 300 GHz. The New Zealand Standard is based on international guidelines produced by the International Council for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). The New Zealand Standard has been confirmed through case law as being relevant to the RMA.

The proposed permitted activity rule allows councils to maintain a record of the location of radio-frequency transmitters. Where exposures are predicted to exceed 25% of the New Zealand Standard limit, the requirement through the permitted activity rule for an additional report of actual exposures after construction provides certainty that the transmitter complies with the New Zealand Standard.

The national guidelines recommend that where a facility does not meet the requirements of the New Zealand Standard, the activity should be treated as a non-complying activity under the resource consent process. A national environmental standard would need to clarify how non-compliant activities are to be addressed.

What would this standard mean for district plans?

The proposed standard would introduce more restrictive provisions for exposure to radio-frequency fields for approximately 51% of district plans. Approximately 25% of the district plans refer to the out-of-date New Zealand Standard for radio-frequency fields (NZS6609 rather than NZS2772). A number of district plans do not contain any rules relating to radio-frequency fields at all.

Auckland and Christchurch City Councils have more restrictive district plan provisions than are proposed by the standard. Auckland City Council also has a bylaw for radio-frequency that is more conservative than the New Zealand Standard. This bylaw is due for review in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002; if not renewed, it will expire on 1 July 2008.

No plans refer explicitly to the national guidelines. This is to be expected given that almost all district plans were developed before the guidelines were introduced in 2000. However, some plans have used the national guidelines as a base for preparing their provisions (eg, Christchurch City Council uses similar wording to the national guidelines, but with some additional constraints).

The proposed standard would enable exposure to radio-frequency fields to be controlled in a manner consistent with the national guidelines and the most recent New Zealand Standard. There would be no immediate need for plans to be reviewed as a result of the standards being introduced because a national environmental standard overrides existing plan rules. However, over time councils may choose to alter their plans to reflect the existence of the standards when going through their next plan review.

A comparison of the national environmental standard provisions with existing district plan provisions for radio-frequency emissions shows that the national environmental standard is:

• less restrictive than 22% of plans

• consistent with 27% of plans

• more restrictive than 51% of plans.

Potential health effects from exposure to radio-frequency fields

Potential health effects from exposure to radio-frequency fields have been extensively researched by organisations such as the International Council for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). International guidelines developed by the ICNIRP are based on a careful analysis of the scientific literature and offer protection against all identified hazards of radio-frequency energy, with large safety margins. Both measurements and calculations show that radio-frequency signal levels in areas of public access from base stations are far below international guidelines, typically by a factor of 100 or more. Radio-frequency exposure levels to a user from mobile phones are considerably larger, but still below international guidelines (World Health Organisation, 2000).

The World Health Organisation advises that none of the recent reviews have concluded that exposure to the radio-frequency fields from mobile phones or their base stations cause any adverse health consequence. However, there are gaps in knowledge that have been identified for further research to better assess health risks (World Health Organisation, 2000). Ongoing studies relating to health effects include the World Health Organisation international electromagnetic fields project (note that this study covers electromagnetic fields, of which radio-frequency fields are only a small part).

The New Zealand Standard (NZS2772:1999) was adopted after a comprehensive investigation, including an international review of other standards and guidelines. The New Zealand Standard sets limits for public exposure that are 50 times lower than the level at which health effects may start to occur. The Environment Court has concluded that there are no adverse health effects arising from radio-frequency fields that comply with the New Zealand Standard. The Environment Court has also rejected arguments relating to psychological effects.

Leading RMA case law on the effects of radio-frequency transmitters includes:

• North Shore City Council v Vodafone, A206/03 (October 2003)

• Shirley Primary School v Christchurch City Council, C136/98 (December 1998)

• McIntyre v Christchurch City Council, A015/96 (March 1996).

It was acknowledged in the Shirley case that this decision may be referred to by communities elsewhere in New Zealand.

3.4 Telecommunications equipment cabinets within road reserves

Industry proposal for cabinets

The Industry Reference Group recommends a standard for equipment cabinets within the roads or in the road reserve based on a permitted activity rule.

It is important to note that the above standard is the recommendation of the Industry Reference Group. If approval is given to continue developing the proposed standards, the above wording may be altered as a result of submissions and the drafting process.

The industry report describes what an equipment cabinet is (see text box below), and Figure 2 provides an example of cabinets in the road reserve.

Ministry for the Environment comments

The Ministry for the Environment would be interested in hearing your views on the industry proposal.

Appropriate siting and location will be vital to the effective implementation of the proposed standard (eg, avoiding areas of high amenity value). The proposal has addressed siting in relation to heritage, landscape and trees. However, waahi tapu and areas of high amenity or design control that are not specifically identified in plans may also need to be included in any standards (eg, pedestrian malls in business areas).

However, the industry report has not addressed the potential conflicts between telecommunications cabinets and other equipment cabinets (eg, gas and electricity) in the road reserve and associated potential clustering. Also, the proposal does not promote the appropriate use of screening, colour or other ways to avoid potential adverse effects on visual amenity. The Ministry for the Environment is interested in your views on appropriate heights, volumes (or areas) and locations for cabinets in residential and other areas.

Although the proposal addresses district plan restrictions, it does not affect processes under the Telecommunications Act 2001, such as road-opening notices.

Broadband and unbundling of the local loop

Broadband is a high-capacity, high-speed telecommunications service with a greater bandwidth (capacity) than a standard telephone call connection. Broadband access links, depending on the speed, can carry one or more services such as video, voice and data simultaneously. In May 2006 the Government announced a telecommunications package that included unbundling of the local loop (copper circuit access) and sub-loop copper-wire lines between telephone exchanges and homes and businesses, allowing other internet service providers to compete fully with Telecom to provide faster, cheaper broadband.⁶

The unbundling decision was made after the Ministry for the Environment received the industry proposals for telecommunications facilities, so the Ministry sought advice from the Telecommunications Industry Reference Group on the implications of unbundling on the proposals. Members of the Group advised that there is likely to be increased demand for cabinets in the road reserve. Telecom advised that with its move towards a “Next Generation Network”, it will become increasingly important to have equipment cabinets closer to customers. Space in Telecom’s existing cabinets is constrained, meaning that other operators will need to install new cabinets for their networks.

No problems are anticipated for rural, business and mixed-use areas given the maximum size of cabinets and no limit on the number of cabinets per property frontage. However, the proposal for residential areas limits the number of cabinets (over 900mm in height) to one per separate property frontage. It has been suggested that this could be amended to allow more than one cabinet to be installed as a permitted activity provided that:

1. the combined height and volume dimensions of the cabinets do not exceed the dimensions of a single cabinet (ie, height 1.8m and volume 2.5m3)
2. the cabinets are only separated by 50mm from each other.

The Ministry for the Environment is interested in views on this suggestion.

In some locations, the volume and height might need to be allocated carefully among all possible service providers to ensure the standard does not act as a barrier to new providers entering the market. The Ministry for the Environment is interested in your views on how the standard could include a process for allocating maximum height and volume dimensions among all service providers and encourage co-location.

Hardened DSLAMS

A DSLAM (digital subscriber line access multiplexer) is a device located in a cabinet (or a telephone exchange) which allows telephone lines to make faster connections to the internet. Smaller service providers, in particular, may want to employ hardened DSLAMS, which can be buried in the ground, or attached to lampposts or other freestanding structures. It might be useful for the standard to include hardened DSLAMS, which are inherently less intrusive than cabinets. Likewise, smaller providers in particular may want to use small pedestal cabinets, and it may be useful for the standard to specifically mention such cabinets.

The Ministry for the Environment is interested in your views on whether it should refer to small pedestal cabinets, and if so, how.

Roadside cabinets and traffic safety

Network utility operators have statutory rights to use the road corridor (or road reserve) to locate and maintain network utilities, subject to the ability of the road-controlling authority to impose reasonable conditions to protect the safe and efficient functioning of the road and the assets invested in it. These rights are also subject to common law rights and Resource Management Act controls (New Zealand Utilities Advisory Group, 2004).

When it comes to telecommunications infrastructure, the rights of network utility operators are specified in the Telecommunications Act 2001. The Ministry for the Environment notes that under that Act, road-controlling authorities (such as the local authority or Transit New Zealand) can set reasonable conditions on works on the road relating to, for example, the safe and efficient flow of traffic (whether pedestrian or vehicular), and the need to lessen the damage that is likely to be caused to property (including structural integrity of the roads) as a result of work on the road. The proposed standards will not affect any of the processes under the Telecommunications Act.

What would this standard mean for district plans?

The vast majority of district plans (82%) are more permissive with respect to cabinet size when compared with the proposed standard. However, some of the larger cities are currently more restrictive, such as Waitakere City (1.5m high, 2m2 area) or have proposed plan changes that would be more restrictive (eg, Auckland City Isthmus Section, 0.9m high, 0.4m2 area).

Most plans restrict cabinets to a maximum height and gross floor area. Although the proposed standard also restricts cabinets to a maximum height (which is more restrictive in most respects), it controls dimension via a maximum volume rather than gross floor area.

In many cases it is difficult to determine whether district plan setback/location requirements ('yards' and recession planes) apply specifically to structures within the road reserve. The proposed standard does not prescribe any setbacks.

There would be no immediate need for plans to be reviewed as a result of the standards being introduced, because a national environmental standard overrides existing plan rules. However, over time councils may choose to alter their plans to reflect the existence of the standards when going through their next plan review.

A comparison of the national environmental standard provisions with existing district plan provisions for cabinets shows that the national environmental standard is:

• less restrictive than 9% of plans.

• consistent with 8% of plans.

• more restrictive than 82% of plans.

3.5 Noise from telecommunications equipment located within road reserves

Industry proposal for cabinet noise

The Industry Reference Group recommends a standard for noise from equipment cabinets alongside roads or in the road reserve based on a permitted activity rule.

Ministry for the Environment comments

The proposal is largely based on the voluntary New Zealand Standards for noise (NZS 6801:1999 Acoustics – Measurement of Environmental Sound and NZS 6802:1991 – Assessment of Environmental Sound). The New Zealand Standards were commissioned by the Ministry of Health and prepared by a committee of noise experts and representatives of key organisations.

NZS 6802:1991 was revised in 1999 to become NZS 6802:1999 Acoustics – Assessment of Environmental Noise; however, the 1991 version is still widely used. NZS 6802:1991 uses the acoustical metric L10, whereas 6802:1999 uses Leq. The Ministry of Health advises that referring to 6802:1991 and Leq without reference to L10 is incorrect. The wording of the proposal could be amended to allow for averaging and ensure that the two different metrics (L10, and Leq) can be referenced accurately, without changing the general concepts or noise limits.

The Ministry for the Environment supports the general intent of those aspects of the proposal that are based on the New Zealand Standards. The New Zealand Standards give a range of noise levels as a guideline for the reasonable protection of health and amenity for land used for residential purposes. The proposal is within the recommended range of noise limits for residentially zoned sites. Noise limits for less sensitive areas (business and industrial) are typically less stringent, as reflected by the proposal.

It should be noted, however, that the proposed assessment point for measuring noise varies from the New Zealand Standards and existing district planning approaches. NZS 6802:1999 recommends that the noise limits not be exceeded at any point within the boundary required to be protected. The proposed assessment point of 3m inside the boundary would not be appropriate for buildings that are not set back from the road boundary. An appropriate assessment method may be to set an assessment point that can be altered if the dwelling on the adjoining property is located closer than 3m to the road boundary. Alternatively, noise may be measured indoors, according to NZS 6802:1999 indoor noise limits.

Measuring noise at the property boundary is also used for traffic noise. The Ministry of Transport and Standards New Zealand are developing a New Zealand Standard for noise emissions from roads. Officials note that any standards for noise from telecommunications equipment cabinets should be consistent with any standards for traffic noise.

The Ministry for the Environment is interested in your views on the most appropriate assessment point, and associated noise limits, for measuring noise from equipment cabinets.

What would this standard mean for district plans?

The proposal is generally more restrictive than 51% of district plans. This is due to the differing assessment points for existing district plans and the proposal, with district plans typically requiring noise to be measured at the property boundary or notional boundary. Noise levels in some district plans, however, are more restrictive than the New Zealand Standards and set very low limits (eg, 40dBA at night-time in commercial areas).

The two key differences between existing district plans and the proposed standard are the assessment point and the acoustical metric (Leq or L10). These differences make it difficult to describe what adjacent landowners may experience.

There would be no immediate need for plans to be reviewed as a result of the standards being introduced, because a national environmental standard overrides existing plan rules. However, over time councils may choose to alter their plans to reflect the existence of the standards when going through their next plan review.

A comparison of the national environmental standard provisions with existing district plan provisions for noise shows that the national environmental standard is:

• less restrictive than 30% of plans

• consistent with 19% of plans

• more restrictive than 51% of plans.

3.6 Masts and antennas for wireless telecommunications networks within road reserves

Industry proposal for antennas and masts

The Industry Reference Group recommends a standard for masts and antennas alongside roads or in the road reserve based on a permitted activity rule.

It is important to note that the above standard is the recommendation of the Industry Reference Group. If approval is given to continue developing the proposed standards, the above wording may be altered as a result of submissions and the drafting process.

Figure 3 illustrates an example of panel antennas attached to an existing streetlight.

Ministry for the Environment comments

The Ministry for the Environment generally supports the intent of this proposed standard, and would be interested in hearing your views.

The Industry Reference Group report notes that the main concern in placing masts and antennas is when this occurs within residential areas or areas of high amenity value. The proposed standard addresses areas of landscape and heritage, and should also include waahi tapu. Large antennas can have visual effects when situated on prominent sites such as a ridge. In contrast, small panel antennas may have minimal visual effects when situated on, or attached to, existing structures (ie, co-located). The proposed standard for antennas promotes co-locating with existing structures within the road reserve (eg, traffic light pole, streetlight) as a potential solution to amenity concerns. New freestanding masts are not included in the proposal, and the Industry Reference Group report notes that additional new masts may create additional clutter in the road reserve, resulting in effects that are more than minor.

A number of Environment Court cases relating to amenity effects (see, for example, Telecom New Zealand Limited v Christchurch City Council W165/96) show that masts and antennas can, potentially, have effects on visual amenity. These effects will vary according to the type, height and design of the antenna or mast, its location, and the characteristics of the surrounding environment.

The Ministry for the Environment notes that the proposed maximum size for panel antennas as permitted activities is the largest size currently used by telecommunications companies. Antennas of the maximum size proposed are usually only required where it is very hard to get a signal (eg, in hilly terrain) or where the antenna is required to transmit over large distances, such as in rural areas. A smaller maximum antenna size may be more appropriate as a permitted activity to ensure there are no significant adverse effects on the environment.

The proposed additional mast height of 3m above an existing structure may not be appropriate in all areas, and a lesser height may be more appropriate to ensure that any effects are minimised. The proposal does not appear to have a maximum height limit for additions to existing structures; an overall maximum height limit would be required as part of any standard. Furthermore, an antenna mast should be no higher than is required to be effective for transmitting in a specific location, provided it is within the maximum height specified in the standard.

The Ministry for the Environment sought comments from the Industry Reference Group on dish antennas, which are not specified in the proposals but appear in many district plans. Members of the Group supported the inclusion of dish antennas located on structures in the road reserve, with a suggested maximum diameter of 300mm. Group members noted that, depending on where a dish antenna is being installed, it may protrude approximately 450mm from the side of the support structure. This protrusion would need to be taken into account if any standard were to include dish antennas.

To support the deployment of wireless broadband it may also be desirable to have the flexibility for service providers to attach antennas up to a certain size onto cabinets.

What would this standard mean for district plans?

There are significant differences between the proposal and existing district plan provisions. While most district plans take a more general approach to infrastructure, the proposed standard is more specific and tailored to structures within the road reserve.

District plans generally provide for new freestanding structures and specify a maximum height and antenna diameter, often at heights generally less restrictive than the proposed standard for masts and antennas. Most district plans set maximum height limits and antenna dimensions for different areas that generally apply district-wide, not specifically to the road reserve. The proposal makes specific mention of panel antennas in three dimensions, whereas district plans refer to antennas in general and usually only restrict the diameter (implicitly referring to dish antennas, which are not covered by the proposal).

Only 7% of the current district plan provisions are broadly consistent with the proposal with respect to anticipated heights and antenna dimensions. The proposed standard is more restrictive than 54% of the district plans and less restrictive than the remaining 39%.

There would be no immediate need for plans to be reviewed as a result of the standards being introduced, because a national environmental standard overrides existing plan rules. However, over time councils may choose to alter their plans to reflect the existence of the standards when going through their next plan review.

A comparison of the national environmental standard provisions with existing district plan provisions for masts and antennas show that the national environmental standard is:

• less restrictive than 39% of plans

• consistent with 7% if plans

• more restrictive than 54% of plans.

3.7 What the standards do not involve

The proposed standards do not apply to:

• telecommunications equipment or structures outside the road reserve

• new freestanding mobile phone transmitters or masts

• over-ground or underground wires

• permission for leasing the road reserve or opening the road to install new telecommunications facilities.