Sunday, November 7, 2010

Letter to Mr. Milind Bembalkar

Mr Milind Bembalkar,

‘Parijat’, Guru Krupa Colony,
Ambejogai Road, Latur 413531
094226-56058

Sir,

I have come to know about you from Mobile Tower Grievance Forum. Since last two years I’m facing lot of problem due to the installation of a roof top mobile tower. The problem I am described you briefly.

I’m a resident of Barasat (under Barasat Municipality ), Kolkata 700126, West Bengal . A powerful rooftop mobile tower is situated just within 10 m of my house of different Service provider. In the year 2009 BSNL has started two install another tower just 5 m far away from my house. Local people had submitted their bjection to Barasat Municipal Authority, District Magistrate, Police In charge of Barasat Thana of West engal Police. I personally meet with Chairman, Barasat Municipality to stop the work because I am the most sufferers in this situation. Then I had submitted my objection to West Bengal Pollution Control Board. Pollution Control Board arrange a hearing and it was found that guide lines to erects Mobile Tower , which was issued by WB Govt., was not followed properly in this case. Moreover no BSNL representative was present. A false consent letter of unknown people was submitted to Municipal Authority to opt the permission. After that they stopped the work and directed to BSNL to submit all relevant document to Municipality.

Presently BSNL has started the tower without any consent letter, without maintaining the guideline of Circular issued by West Bengal Govt. Nobody takes any action in same. I informed every where that BSNL violet the following point issued in the order

WB Govt declared that EMR has bad effect on human body, so why BSNL has again started to install 2nd tower. The BSNL office is approx 800 m from the effected area. It is better to install the tower at BSNL office only.

WB Govt ordered that tower can not be installed in School premises because it affects children more. In my house a new born bay is present. How can I survive him?

WB Govt advised to install one tower in a locality an share the same tower. Within 1 km from my house at least 15 nos of tower present. No need to install a new tower I same locality.

Approach of fire tender is nil. So how can we survive if any disaster will occur?

Without consent of local people how BSNL install their tower.

Most interesting point is when I asked through RTI to Municipality that how BSNL got permission though they are not followed the rules; the answer was “Municipal Authority looks after only the structure stability of house upon which the tower will be installed. Pollution Control Board looks after only the pollution regarding Generator set use in the tower.

Human Rights told me that they are not entertained this type of problem.

Public Grievance Cell, Govt. of India, does not take any action.

West Bengal Municipal Authority is not awarded about the pollution and health hazardous problem with Electro Magnetic radiation.

BSNL comments that without tower how they can provide service to their customer?

In view of that I requeted you give me some advise how I can fight against the installation of Mobile Tower.

Wait your valuable comments.

Arunava Choudhury
3, Pratapaditya Road,
11 No Rail Gate, Nabapally
Barasat, Kolkata 700126
West Bengal
09432020181

Friday, November 5, 2010

EFFECT OF CELL PHONE TOWERS ON VALUATION OF BUILDINGS

EFFECT OF CELL PHONE TOWERS ON VALUATION OF BUILDINGS


(Indian Valuer Oct.2010)

Page No. 1186 To 1188

S.R. Ramamurthy

BE, CE(I), FICA, FIE, FIV

Retd. Engineer-in-Chief

Hyderabad.

1. Erection of Cell Phone Towers:

Erection of cell phone towers is spreading an epidemic in Hyderabad City. For correct numbers one has to guess between 1,300 to 5,000. Initially Govt. permitted vide memo No. 8463/M1/98-1 dt. 16-04-1998, various cellular, tele services and telecom companies to erect their roof top towers, ground based towers, its equipment etc. without obtaining permission from the respective Urban Development Authorities or Municipal Corporations or Municipalities etc. Those orders were extended on 30-03-2001, 10-05-2001, 27-02-2002, 16-06-2004 and 01-08-2006. Those orders were quashed by the Hon. High Court of AP in W.P.No. 23228 of 2007 dated 31-12-2007.

The Govt. therefore, issued order vide G.O. Ms.No.183, MA&UD (M) Dept. dt. 27-02-2008 based on which all cellular companies have to obtain permission from the respective local authorities for the existing as well as proposed installations.

This article deals with those Govt. order’s public complaints and this author’s suggestions for valuation of buildings with cell phone towers.

2. Guidelines for according permission:

Taking into account the AP High Court’s directions, the AP State Govt. formulated the following guidelines to be followed by the local authorities while according permissions to be existing and the proposed land based and roof top installations vide G.O.Ms. No. 183, MA&UD(M) Dept. dt. 27-02-2008

o The applicant to obtain necessary approval of the Air Traffic Controller of the Airport Authority of India.

o The applicant shall take precautions for fire safety and lightning etc.

o The applicant shall furnish a legally valid undertaking that they are solely responsible for any damage to the building and for public safety.

o The applicant shall furnish “ from the surrounding building owners and from the concerned building owner, in case of roof top installations within their jurisdictions and in case any structure is found endangering the building or the lives of the residents, action shall be taken in accordance with law to remove such structure.

o The GO does not specify that the applicant shall enclose the structural stability calculation of the building as well as the tower. The GO is defective, as it had shown importance to legal, environmental and social aspects but omitted technically essential structural safety calculations and certificates.

The Chief Engineer, MCH was stated to have empanelled the engineers from the Osmania University, Jawaharlal Nehru Techonological University, Chiatanya Bharathi Institute of Technology and MJ College Of Engineering to issue structural stability certificates. A fee of Rs. 25,000 per structure was also stated to have been specified as a consultation fee to be paid by the cell phone companies to the engineers.

Similarly the other local authorities may have to empanel their engineers for issuing structural stability calculation and certificates.

It is suggest by this author that the local authorities pay the consultation fees to the empanelled engineers directly as if the structural stability of the building and the tower are jeopardized, the companies may not pay the consultation fees to the engineers. The local authorities may collect the required amount from the companies while receiving the applications.

In spite of the Govt. orders, permissions are the stated to have not been obtained by the companies.

3. Nature of complaints

The complaints are of two types. Certain complaints expressed by the public relate to structural defects of the building over which the tower was installed and other complaints relate to health hazards due to electromagnetic waves from the towers.

In Kapra Municipality, Hyderabad, a 10MT Reliance tower was stated to have caused cracks in a five storeyed building ultimately, on intervention of the Hon. High court of AP, the tower was dismantled during February 2008.

Vodafone cell tower at Ashoknagar, Hydeabad caught fire due to short circuit as a photo at page 5 of Deccan Chronicle, an English daily from Hyderabad city dt: 30-04-2009.

At page 19 of Deccan Chronicle dt: 07-03-2009, it was reported that Hyderabad city doctor had attributed headaches, fatigue and nausea to exposure to electromagnetic wavees. According to Prof. V.M. Pandhari Pande, a Director of Center for Excellence in Micro Waves Engineering, Osmania University, Hyderabad, who has done extensive research on this subject, the dangers are for more serious than we imagine viz. exposure to electromagnetic waves generates heat in the body, affect the enzyme system, cause mutation of DNA, protein structure and cell membranes.

However, according to Telecom Regulatory Commission of India, there was no conclusive study to confirm that health was adversely affected by cell phone radiation. Hon. High Courts of Kerala, Haryana and Punjab were also stated to have dismissed these allegations.

Fire Dept. of AP was stated to have suggested to install towers in open lands.

4. Huge hoardings :

A huge hoarding at Nampally fell on a car and two wheelers as reported in Deccan Chronicle at page 4 on 20-05-2009. Similarly a hoarding on the top of an apartment at Chapel Road, Addagutta, another at Attapur and third at I-max near Necklace Road were reported to have fallen, vide a report at page 3 of Deccan Chronicle dt.21-05-2009.

It was also reported that the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) has no data about hoardings that were structurally stable. According to the report, about 500 unauthorised hoardings were existing in city. The MCH was stated to have framed rules regarding size of the hoardings etc. but they are not being complied with.

Sri S. Krishnamurthy’s article at page 1066 of Sept. 2008 Indian Valuer deals in calculation of rent for erected hoardings, ATMs, and mobile tower in open lands.

Similarly rent can be calculated for hoardings and tower on terraces of buildings based on this author’s article on “Valuation of terraces of buildings by different authors” at page 662 of june, 2008 Indian Valuer.

Hoarding may not affect the valuations of the buildings over which they are erected, but stability aspects require to be considered by the competent authority, while according permissions.

5. Valuation of buildings with cell phone towers:

Recently valuation of a building near Ali CafĂ© at Amber pet, Hyderabad was referred to this valuer. On its second floor terrace, a Reliance tower installed at a monthly rent of Rs. 10,000/-. Though in live the valuation report it was mentioned that the installation was without permission from the MCH, without permission from the structural stability verification and without obtaining “No Objection Certificates”(NOCs) from the neighbors, the loan was sanctioned.

As valuers we may not be interested in health hazards due to cell phone towers, but stability and safety of the building and tower may influence the valuations.

Normally the rent from the cell phone towers on the terraces of the buildings should increase its rent capitalization value. But in view of the risks associated with un-stable towers and fire accidents due to short circuits etc. as valuers, we may consider only.

o 50% of building valuation, if permission from the competent authority only is available covering the risk involved due to erection of the towers,

o balance 50% valuation may be released only if insurance for the building is available covering the risk involved due to erection of towers,

o the bank may be advised to treat the valuation as nil, if the erection of the tower is unauthorized.

These are however purely, this author’s suggestions.

In future, the author wants to adopt the above guidelines and advise the banks to seek another property for collateral security, in case the tower is unauthorized and without insurance coverage.

This author further feels that it is high time that an ACT is either enacted by the State or the Centre and rules framed there under for implementation.

-------------------------------- THE END ----------------------------------------------

Friday, October 29, 2010

PROCEDURE TO OPPOSE ERECTION OF MOBILE TOWERS

Milind Bembalkar,

‘Parijat’, Guru Krupa Colony,
Ambejogai Road, Latur 413531

Date: 22.1.2010

PROCEDURE TO OPPOSE ERECTION OF MOBILE TOWERS :



The application complaining about mobile tower may be sent to the concerned Chief Executive Officer of the Municipality, Concerned Municipal Commissioner, or Sarpanch, Tahsildar, Grampanchayat and District Collector Office respectively of the area concerned.

The copies of the complaint application may please be forwarded to :

• Ward Officer of the area.

• Circle Office of the Mahavitaran Karyalaya (Electricity Office) of the area.

• The Principal Secretary-1, Urban Development Department, 4th floor, Mantralaya, Madam Cama Road, Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032.

• District Office of the Environment Control Board.

• Officer-inCharge of the local police station.

THE RULES AND LAWS RELATING TO MOBILE TOWERS :

1. The erection of a mobile tower on a residential building violates the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which deals with the right of citizen to live in peace.

2. Further it is binding on the concerned mobile companies want to erect mobile tower, to ensure that 1.5 times square area in relation to the height of the tower, is free from all safety hazards . (Reference Pune Municipal Corporation Circular dated 26.11.2007, agenda No. 6/207, dated 27.11.2007 and Order No. TPS 1806 dated 7.8.2007 of UDD, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai).

Illustration:

If the height of the tower is 120 feet (approximately 12 floors of the building), then 1.5 times square area means 120 x 1.5 = 180 square feet area. The concerned agency is under obligation to obtain NOC from the people residing in 180 square feet area before erecting the mobile tower.

3. The mobile towers erected without permission from local bodies (Gram Panchayat, Municipality or Municipal Corporation etc.) are illegal.

Reference: Writ Petition No. 7396 of 2008, Vodafone Essar Ltd. V/s State of Maharashtra & Ors., High Court, Mumbai. Coram : Bilal Kazi & J. H. Bhatia J.J. dated 12.11.2008.

The Supreme Court of India confirmed the decision of Mumbi High Court and disposed off the Special Leave Petition (SLP)(Civil) No. 27480 of 2008, Vodafone Essar Ltd. V/s State of Maharashtra dated 28.11.2008.

4. It is binding on the mobile companies to strictly follow the rules & regulations of local bodies and state government (Reference : Letter No. K-19012/1/RT/2009-CFA dated 18.5.2009 of Ministry of Transporattion, Sanchar Bhavan, New Delhi).

5. A committee under the chairmanship of Dr. N. K. Ganguly (Director General, Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi) to study :

(a) How to avoid health hazards being caused due to radiations from mobile towers,

(b) What measures should be taken to study and conduct research in the matter,

Was appointed by the Government of India, Ministry of Health & Welfare, New Delhi as per the orders of the Supreme Court of India in Writ Petition No. 2112 of 2004, Shri Farukh Contractor V/s Government of India).

The I.C.M.R., New Delhi submitted its report to the Health Ministry, government of India on 29th March 2006. It is laid down in the said report that

a. That, if the height of the mobile tower is 36 meters (120 feet or equal to 12 storied building approximately), then the people moving/commuting below the tower will not suffer from radiations but those coming in close vicinity of the tower may suffer.

b. It is further submitted in the report that complaints about insufficient sleep and proper rest, memory or hearing disorders etc. have been received from the people residing and/or working in the vicinity of mobile towers and that there is a need to conduct research in the matter, for which, sufficient funds should be made available.

For want of adequate research in the matter Dr. Ganguly has advised to take precautionary measures. In short, if there is a possibility of causing irreversible loss by some act or decision, then in the absence of any scientific evidence, the liability to give evidence shall lie upon the person doing the act or taking the decision and that the responsibility of taking preventive measures shall also lie on such person and that the person causing pollution (Radiation, e-smog, Radio Frequency Radiation) will be liable to pay the compensation (Reference : Vellor Citizen Forum V/s Government of India, 1996(5) S.S.C.P.P. 246, para 65 and Andhra Pradesh Pollution Board V/s Professor M. V. Naidu 1999(2) S.S.C. 718).

On the basis of ‘precautionary’ principle, the court in France ordered and caused to remove the mobile tower erected on a building by the Boigus mobile company on 6th March 2009, because the concerned mobile company failed to furnish evidence tp prove that the mobile tower is free from all hazards and safe.

It is observed that the courts through out the world have adopted the principle of ‘Precautionary Measures’ in the cases of mobile towers. The Courts & Scientists are always in search of truth but the only difference between them is that the findings of the scientists may change, the finding may be uncertain due to inadequate information and therefore, proper analysis of the subject matter is not possible. On the other hand the courts are required to issue orders and settle the disputes by taking into consideration the overall welfare of the public in general.

6. The people residing in the vicinity of mobile towers should always incorporate the indemnity term regarding health and accident, fire due to short circuit, tower collapse etc. and damages, in the agreement with mobile companies erecting the mobile towers.

The people are advised to think seriously and take appropriate decision keeping in mind their own health.

Milind Bembalkar


094226-56058 / bemsons@yahoo.com

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Wildlife dept’s nod must for new cell towers

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2010/10/26&PageLabel=13&EntityId=Ar01305&ViewMode=HTML&GZ=T


Wildlife dept’s nod must for new cell towers


Thiruvananthapuram: In view of the possible ill-effects of radiation from cellphone towers on animals, the telecommunications department has decided to ask mobile operators to obtain clearance from the wildlife division of the environment ministry. 
    A telecommunications official spoke about this plan at a meeting of an experts’ committee formed by the ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) to study the possible impact of telecom towers on wildlife, Sainudeen Pattazhy, a member of the panel, said. 
    Mobile phone operators are already required to get clearance from defence and civil aviation authorities for installing towers in areas which have a bearing on their operations. 
    “Quite a few studies have pointed out that radiation from mobile towers harmed wildlife. So, it is important that telecom operators get clearance from the wildlife department before erecting towers, especially in areas close to forests, parks and zoos,” Pattazhy said. AGENCIES

Friday, October 15, 2010

WORK SHOP

WORK SHOP

In order to have a full scale debate to discuss on the issue of “Mobile tower”, and to hear the complaints of those who have suffered of health hazards due to radiations, a workshop is organized:

Radiation Threats from CELL TOWER Masts EMR – Health Implications and Awareness

Sunday, 17 October 2010 at 11:30 am

Presented by Mr. Hari Shetty


Organised by Centre for Community Organisation (CCO)

at

The Community Centre Sacred Heart Church, Mahakali Caves Road, Opp Canossa School, Andheri(E), Mumbai 400093

A platform will be available for those affected by radiation from mobile tower, scholars from the field of environment, news reporters, MLA’s & MP’s to discuss the issue and come out with suggestions that could be valuable for making rules and regulations regarding erection of mobile towers.

Friday, September 17, 2010

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, DELHI - Office order No. TP/G/6901/10 dated 8.4.2010

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, DELHI



Office order No. TP/G/6901/10 dated 8.4.2010


OFFICE ORDER


SUBJECT : Permission for Installation of Temporary Structures for Cellular Mobile Phone Services on roof Top / Ground Level or various Premises falling in the Area under Jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation of Delhi.


In supersession of all earlier orders on the subject mentioned above, Permission / License for installation of temporary structures on Roof Tops / Ground level of various premises for Cellular / Basic Mobile Phone Services shall be accorded as per the policy approved by the Corporation vide Item No. U.B. No. 392 dated 16th March 2010, earlier approved by the Standing Committee vide Resolution No. 722 dated 09.02.2010 and para 25 modified vide in anticipation approval from Chairman Standing Committee dated 29.03.2010 and Hon’ble Mayor (for Corporation) on dated 06.04.2010, subject to the following conditions :

1. For installation of Base Station Antennas, clearances is required from Airports Authority of India, DUAC, Chief Fire Officer (DFS), ASI & DMRC (wherever applicable)

2. Structural stability certificate from any one of the following five institutions are required to be obtained by the Cellular and

Basic Cellular Operators:-

a) Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi.

b) Central Building Research Institute (CBRI), Roorkee.

c) Rail India Technical & Economic Services Ltd. (RITES), 

d) National Council for Cement & Building Material, 34 KM Stone, Delhi, Mathura Road, Faridabad (Haryana).

e) Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Roorkee.

3. In case of building which were unauthorized or which may be so declared at a later point of time, permission for installation
of tower shall be granted on fulfillment of all the conditions.

However, that shall not imply any change whatsoever in the status of the unauthorized building and shall be without prejudice to the right of MCD to demolish the said building through the due process of law. While undertaking such a demolition, MCD will not be under any obligation to send prior intimation to the owner of the tower, nor will it be liable for loss of the tower as a consequence of demolition of the unauthorized building. The operators shall indemnify MCD to this effect.

4. The licenses shall share the towers for fixing their respective antennas provided that the prescribed conditions are duly fulfilled so as to ensure curtailing of multiple towers and optimizing the use of the existing ones.

5. Priority of Selection of site shall be as under :

a) All Municipal Buildings including Community Centres, except schools, hospitals & dispensaries.

b) Other Government Building,

c) Other Non-Residential buildings i.e. Industrial, commercial & institutional buildings,

d) Along the right of way of major drains after clearance from DEMS of MCD.

e) Vacant land after clearance from concerned authority.

f) i) Residential vacant plot leaving 3M setback all round.

ii) Residential buildings,

Note : Erection of Cell Tower on residential buildings shall only be allowed in those case where no alternative is available.

iii) Group Housing.

6. Fees :

Rs. 5 Lacs per tower plus.

Rs. 1 lacs per service provider in case of sharing.

7. For Municipal Building Rs. 25/- per sq. ft. per month shall be charged towards license fee for the space to be used for erecting the temporary structure subject to a minimum of Rs. 25,000/- per month. License fee shall be payable for three months in advance and thereafter by 10th day of each month.

Any Cell Operator desirous to erect tower on any Municipal Building or land will make an application to the land owning agency i.e. to the office of ADC (L & E) for Municipal Buildings and to the Estate Department of Slum & JJ for their buildings and also execute an agreement for license fee as mentioned above.

The license fee shall be deposited in the office of ADC (L & E) and Estate Department of Slum & JJ, as the case may be.

i) No objection from the concerned department having its administrative control on the building /and where erection of Cell Tower is proposed.

ii) No objection from Engineering Department from structural safety point of view. In case, the Engineering Department is not in a position to certify the structural safety aspect, the same could be got examined by Cell Operators from the Institutes already identified and approved for private building.
Once the agreement for license is entered into, Cell Operator can apply for a permission to the EE (Bldg.) of concerned Zone, who will process the case for grant of permission in accordance with the guidelines issued.

8. That Cell Operator shall be solely responsible for any damage to the building and for public safety.

9. That Cell Operator shall take special precautions for fire safety, lightening etc.

10. That Cell Operator shall furnish to Assessor & Collector, MCD a copy of the agreement executed between the Cellular or Basic Telecom Operator and the owner of the building.

11. Generator sets installed at the tower site to cater to the power requirements of the antenna should conform to the noise and omission norms and other requirements prescribed by DPCC.

12. That Cellular & basic Telecom Operators shall produce a certificate from the Manufacturer of D.G. set to the effect that set installed meets the following Standards and

Guidelines as as laid down in the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 as notified by Ministry of Environment and Forest vide its notification dated 14th February, 2000.

NOISE STANDARDS FOR DG SETS (15-500 KVA)

The total sound power level, Lw of a DG set should be less than 94+10 log10 (KVA), db(A), at eth manufacturing stage, where KVA is the nominal power rating of a DG Set.

This level should fall by 5 db (A) every five year, till 2007 i.e. in 2002 and then in 2007.

13. MANDATORY ACOUSTIC ENCLOSURE (ACOUSTIC TREATMENT OF ROOM FOR STATIONARY DG SETS 95 KVA & ABOVE)

Noise from the DG Set should be controlled by providing an acoustic enclosure or by treating the room acoustically.

The acoustic enclosure / acoustic treatment of the room should be designed for minimum 25 (dB(A) Insertion loss or for meeting the ambient noise standards, whichever is on the higher side (if the actual ambient noise is on the higher side), it may not be possible to check the performance of the acoustic enclosure / acoustic treatment. Under such circumstances the performance may be checked for noise reduction upto actual ambient noise level, preferably, in the right time. The measurement for insertion loss may be done at different points at 0.5m from the acoustic enclosure/room, and then averaged.

The DG set should also be provided with proper exhaust muffler with insertion loss of minimum 25 dB(A). To ensure the compliance of Guidelines at user end, Cell Operators will furnish noise – monitoring report from DPCC.

14. The Operator shall ensure to prohibit the access to base station antenna sites for general public by suitable means such as wire fencing, locking of the door to the roof etc., access to tower site even for maintenance personnel should be for a minimum period as far as possible.

15. Installation of Base Station Antennas shall be allowed only on:-

a) The buildings which abuts on minimum 9.00 M wide road in order to reduce the risks caused by any earthquake or wind related disaster.

b) The existing sites of the Cell Towers abutting on roads having ROW less than 9.00 M could only be regularized after the specific clearance from the Fire Department regarding the width of the road.

16. The Base Station Antennas should be at least 3 m away from the nearby building and antennas should not directly face the building. Further, the lower end of the antenna should be at least 3.00 meter above the ground or roof.

17. In case of multiple transmitter sites at a specific locality sharing of a common tower infrastructure should be explored, as far as possible which can be coordinated through a nodal agency.

18. Access to base Station Antenna sites should be prohibited for general public by suitable means such as wire fencing, locking of the door to the roof etc. Access to lower site, even for the maintenance personnel, should be for a minimum period as far as possible.

19. Sign boards / Warning signs are to be provided at Base Station Antenna sites which should be clearly visible and identifiable. A warning sign should be placed at the entrance of such zone.

20. The ‘Warning Sign’ should discourage longer stay in the zone, even for the maintenance personnel. The sign board may contain the following text :

i) Danger ! RF radiations, Do not enter.
ii) Restricted Area.

21. The operators and maintenance personnel, who are dealing with radio frequency devices, specially with Base Station Antenna installed on towers and at any other outdoor sites, should be protected from electromagnetic radiations. The operator and maintenance personnel dealing with the radio frequency devices should be properly educated for possible hazards and for taking measures for protection from electromagnetic radiations when & where required.

22. Submission of an undertaking from the Operator that installation of Cell Tower does not cause any adverse effect to the health of human being of the area and MCD shall be kept harmless out of this.

23. The operator shall display on board (minimum size 24” x 48’) at conspicuous space of the building at Ground Floor, the following details :

i) Operators name and address

ii) Contact persons name, address and Telephone number

iii) Address of Complaint Redressing Authorities with Telephone Numbers.

iv) Police Control Room : 100

v) Fire Control Room : 101

vi) Ambulance : 102

vii) Any other important information, if any

viii) Details of Insurance policy.

24. In case of any complaints against such tower construction, the same shall be referred to the office of Director / General Cellular Operators Association of India and Secretary General, Association of Basic Telecom Services, to investigate the complaints and to take remedial measures wherever necessary.

25. The operators, who have erected cell towers without permission, shall apply to MCD for regularization within 30 days, as per earlier policy in force, prior to implementation of this new policy after obtaining NOC from ASI & AAI wherever applicable. NOC from R.W.As shall not be insisted upon and the fee shall be paid as per the new policy. In case of noncompliance, action for removal of Cell towers shall be initiated as per Law. The existing towers abutting on roads having ROW less than 9 mtrs. Shall be regularized after clearance of the Fire Department.

26. Identification of the sites :

For issuing of any NOC, a recommendation is to be given by TRAI to the fact that the proposed tower is essentially required at the site / vicinity as the nearest tower of this company is existing at a distance of ……………. M and no sharing of tower with other company is available. In case of residential buildings, it shall also be certified that no other alternative is available with the service provider.

27. NOCs :

i) In case of group housing, residential building, NOC from all the occupants of the housing block along with the NOC of the society is required.

ii) a) In case of the plotted residential building owned by different floor owners, NOC from all the floor owners is required.

b) In case of leasehold property, NOC of lessor is required.

iii) In case, building abuts on road having less than 9 M ROW, NOC from Fire Department is required.

28. APPLICATION:

a) Before erection of Cell Tower, application shall be filed jointly by the owner(s) of the building & the Mobile Service Provider Co. Copy of agreement between the service provider company and the owner shall also be submitted alongwith the application.

b) In case of the Municipal building, NOC of the Head of the Department / Land & Estate Deptt. under whose jurisdiction building or land is situated is required.

c) The application shall be filed under the signature of Architect, registered with the Council of Architecture who will certify that the proposed tower is safe in all respect. Alongwith the structural design calculation on the basis of which certificate is being issued for record purpose.

d) Erection of tower shall only be permitted only on regularized buildings.

e) A certificate on affidavit shall be submitted by the service provider company that erection of the proposed tower is not harmful to the health of the nearby residents.

f) Permission shall only be granted to the service provider who have license from Telecommunication Department, Govt. of India.

g) The service provider company shall provide 3rd party insurance and details of the insurance policy shall be depicted on the display board.

h) i) The NOC shall be got renewed on payment of requisite fee very 5 years.

iii) The Towers existing more than 5 years, are also required to be renewed within one month on payment of requisite fee.

iv) MCD reserves its right to withdraw permission at any time without assigning any reason.

v) The erection of the tower shall be completed within 3 months from grant of NOC and report of erection be made to the Building Deptt. of the concerned Zone.

29. Revised guidelines shall be prepared time to time keeping in mind the international standards & technology.


“ CHIEF TOWN PLANNER ”