Disclaimer
The opinions and options contained in this document are for consultation purposes only, do
not reflect final government policy and are not intended to constitute legal advice. The
Government does not accept any responsibility or liability whatsoever for any action taken as a
result of reading, or reliance placed because of having read, any part, or all, of the information
in this discussion document, or for any error, inadequacy, deficiency, flaw or omission from
this document.
This report may be cited as: Ministry for the Environment. 2015. Proposed Amendments to the
National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities: Preliminary evaluation
under section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991. Wellington: Ministry for the
Environment.
Published in March 2015 by the
Ministry for the Environment
Manatū Mō Te Taiao
PO Box 10362, Wellington 6143, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-0-478-41265-9
Publication number: ME 1175
© Crown copyright New Zealand 2015
This document is available on the Ministry for the Environment’s website:
www.mfe.govt.nz
Contents
Executive summary
5
1
Introduction
1.1 Purpose
1.2 Report structure
7
7
7
2
Background
2.1 National environmental standards
2.2 National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF)
2.3 Review of the NESTF
2.4 The evaluation process
2.5 Scale and significance of the proposal
9
9
9
10
11
12
3
Problem statement
3.1 Overview
3.2 National variation in district plans
3.3 Activities not covered by the current NESTF
3.4 Non-Resource Management Act controls over telecommunications facilities
3.5 Summary
14
14
15
16
17
18
4
Proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards
for Telecommunication Facilities
4.1 Permitted activities
4.2 Amendments to existing permitted activities
4.3 Potential further amendments required
19
19
19
20
5
Evaluation of objectives
5.1 Policy objectives
5.2 Evaluation of objectives
5.3 Conclusion
21
21
21
22
6
Options for achieving the objectives
6.1 Overview of options
6.2 Maintaining the status quo
6.3 Non-regulatory approaches
6.4 RMA amendment
6.5 National policy statement
6.6 Amended national environmental standard
6.7 Uncertain or insufficient information
6.8 Conclusion
23
23
23
24
25
25
26
26
27
7
Efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed amendments
7.1 Overview
7.2 Effectiveness
7.3 Efficiency
7.4 Economic
28
28
28
30
32
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
3
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
8
Environmental effects
Social effects
Cultural effects
Conclusion
Summary of evaluation
35
37
37
38
39
Appendix A: Information sources
40
Appendix B: Relevant sections of the Resource Management Act 1991
41
Appendix C: Proposed amendments
44
Tables
Table 1:
Cost required for resource consent compared to certificate of compliance for
permitted activities
14
Table 2:
District plan activity status for telecommunications cables
15
Table 3:
District plan activity status for mobile antennas
16
Table 4:
Evaluation of whether the proposal objectives are the most appropriate way to
achieve the purpose of the RMA
22
Table 5:
Assessment of options for achieving the proposal’s objectives
24
Table 6:
Evaluation of proposed provisions for effectiveness
29
Table 7:
Environmental, economic, social and cultural effects of the amendments to the
NESTF as compared to the status quo
31
Example savings that could be met by a large telecommunications operator under
the amended NESTF
32
Table AC1:
Proposed new permitted activities with associated standards
44
Table AC2:
Proposed amendments to standards for existing permitted activities
47
Table 8:
4
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
Executive summary
The Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Communications are proposing to
amend the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities 2008 (NESTF)
to support the development of Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB), the Rural Broadband Initiative
(RBI) and fourth generation (4G-LTE) mobile infrastructure. This document presents the
preliminary findings of the evaluation of the efficiency, effectiveness and risks associated with
the proposed amendments under section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). In
summary, the proposal to amend and broaden the scope of the current NESTF is seen as the
most appropriate option for achieving the objectives of the NESTF.
The current NESTF enables the development of telecommunications infrastructure by
permitting certain activities in all districts across New Zealand. However, it does not provide
for the development of telecommunications technologies such as those associated with UFB,
RBI and 4G mobile infrastructure. There is minimal national consistency in consent
requirements for this type of infrastructure, which has resulted in substantial processing and
compliance costs for both industry and local government, and associated time delays in
infrastructure deployment. As a result, the NESTF will not be able to continue to fully achieve
its original policy objectives.
As required by section 32 of the RMA, a preliminary assessment of the proposed amendments
to the NESTF was undertaken to assess the efficiency, effectiveness and risk of introducing the
provisions. This assessment found that, on balance, the benefits of implementing the proposed
amendments are likely to exceed the costs.
The main benefits associated with the proposed amendments to the NESTF were found to be:

national consistency and certainty for the telecommunications industry

reduced processing and compliance costs

reduced time delays for infrastructure deployment

enabling New Zealanders to realise the benefits of UFB and RBI sooner.
In freeing up time and resources, the telecommunications industry and local government will
also have more time and resources to invest elsewhere.
The costs of implementing the proposed amendments were identified as:

the potential environmental effects of telecommunications infrastructure

the reduction in public participation in local decision-making.
Consideration is being given to whether local environmental factors should override the
permitted activity status in certain defined areas, such as areas of historic heritage or cultural
significance, or areas susceptible to natural hazards. In doing so, this would allow local
authorities to address special requirements in certain areas or protect specific features
through district plan rules, enabling the effect of the proposed provisions to be managed in
certain circumstances and providing for public participation if it is considered necessary.
However, this has the potential to create additional costs for those councils that need to
update their district plans to ensure these areas are identified and protected.
This is a preliminary evaluation and should be read alongside the discussion document
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication
Facilities: Discussion Document. This section 32 evaluation is intended to be revised following
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
5
the consultation process as more information becomes available and to more accurately
reflect the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments.
6
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
1
Introduction
The National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF), which came
into force in 2008, facilitates the roll-out of telecommunications infrastructure by permitting
certain types of activities across New Zealand. Its objectives are to assist telecommunications
infrastructure design and development, reduce compliance costs and workloads for industry
and local government, and enable New Zealanders to access improved telecommunications
faster, while maintaining a balance between local participation in community planning and
cost-effective national infrastructure investment.
Since the introduction of the NESTF, however, a number of limitations have been identified
that reduce its ability to achieve these objectives. In particular, the current NESTF does not
facilitate the development of new and emerging telecommunications infrastructure, such as
that associated with Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB), the Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI), and
fourth generation (4G-LTE) mobile infrastructure. This has resulted in avoidable ongoing costs
and delays for the telecommunications industry and has limited the ability of the NESTF to
achieve its objectives.
To address these concerns, the Minister for the Environment and the Minister for
Communications, pursuant to section 44 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), are
proposing to expand the scope of the NESTF to cover a wider range of telecommunications and
mobile broadband infrastructure.
1.1
Purpose
This draft report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of section 32 of the
RMA (as revised by the 2013 RMA amendments). Section 32 requires an evaluation of a
proposal to determine whether the:

objectives of that proposal achieve the purpose of the RMA

provisions of the proposal are appropriate in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, risk, costs
and benefits to achieve those objectives.
This is a preliminary evaluation and should be read in conjunction with the discussion
document Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for
Telecommunication Facilities: Discussion Document (the discussion document). This report will
be amended following the consultation process as more information becomes available to
accurately reflect the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments.
A full list of sources of information obtained in producing this report is contained in
appendix A.
1.2
Report structure
This report is structured as follows:

Background: an introduction to the existing NESTF and the statutory context for regulating
telecommunication facilities in New Zealand.

Problem statement: an outline of the limitations of the existing NESTF.

Proposed amendments to the NESTF: an outline of the changes proposed to the NESTF to
address the identified problem.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
7

Policy objectives: an evaluation of the policy objectives against the purpose of the RMA
and the risks.

Options: identification and assessment of the options to achieve the policy objectives.

Effectiveness, efficiency and risk: an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the
preferred option and the status quo, including a cost–benefit analysis.
8
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
2
Background
2.1
National environmental standards
National environmental standards (NES) are regulations that apply nationally and are issued
under section 43 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). They are binding on local
authorities. NES can be established to maintain a healthy environment, protect people and the
environment, and secure a consistent approach and decision-making process nationally. They
address a range of environmental issues, such as air quality or water quality, and manage the
effects of specific activities on people and the environment, such as from electricity
transmission or telecommunications technologies.
Under section 43A of the RMA, an NES can:
a)
prohibit an activity
b) allow an activity
c)
restrict the making of rules or granting of resource consents to matters specified in the
NES
d) require a certificate of compliance for activities that comply with the NES regulations
e) specify, in relation to a rule made before the commencement of the NES:
f)
i.
the extent to which a matter or standard continues to have effect
ii.
the time period the matter/standard continues to apply
require local authorities to review existing permits within particular timeframes.
Where an NES allows an activity, it can:
a)
state that a resource consent is not required for that activity; or
b) do one or both of the following:
i.
state an activity is permitted subject to terms and conditions specified in the
standards
ii.
require compliance with the rules in a plan or proposed plan as a term or condition.
Section 43 and section 43A are provided in full in appendix B.
2.2 National Environmental Standards for
Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF)
The current NESTF was developed to provide a nationally consistent planning framework for
the radio-frequency fields of all telecommunications facilities operated by a person with
network operator status under the Telecommunications Act 2001, and some
telecommunications infrastructure on road reserves that have low environmental impact.
The objectives of the NESTF are to:

assist in network and equipment design and equipment sourcing for national network
deployment

reduce compliance costs and timeframes for service providers
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
9

reduce the timeframe and lower the costs for the availability of new services to
consumers

contribute to a reduced council workload in processing and determining consent
applications

set an appropriate balance between local participation in community planning and costeffective national infrastructure investment.
Under the NESTF, the following activities are permitted so long as they comply with certain
standards and conditions:
1.
radio-frequency fields: the planning and operation of a telecommunications facility by a
network operator1 (such as mobile phone transmitter) that generates radio-frequency
fields, provided it complies with the existing New Zealand standard (NZS 2772.1:1999
Radio-frequency Fields Part 1: Maximum Exposure Levels 3 kHz – 300 GHz)
2.
roadside cabinets: the installation of telecommunications equipment cabinets in the road
reserve, subject to specified limitations on size and location
3.
noise: noise emitting from telecommunications equipment cabinets located in the road
reserve, subject to specified noise limits
4.
roadside masts and antennas: the installation or replacement of masts and antennas on
existing structures in the road reserve, subject to specified limitations on height and size.
The NESTF takes precedent over rules in district plans for these activities. However, where
these activities are to be located adjacent to significant sites, such as sites with cultural or
historic heritage significant, visual amenity, or the coastal marine area, the NESTF allows local
authorities to continue to control these activities through district plan rules.
2.3
Review of the NESTF
The Ministry for the Environment undertook an evaluation of the NESTF in 2013 to determine
its effectiveness. This evaluation was undertaken with input from industry and councils. It was
found that the NESTF is largely achieving its objectives. In particular, the NESTF has:

reduced timeframes and compliance costs for mobile providers, and costs for the
availability of new services to consumers in the mobile market

assisted telecommunications providers in designing and sourcing equipment for roll-outs

reduced council workloads for single processes, such as permitting individual cabinets.
The evaluation also found that the scope of the NESTF is limited, reducing its ability to fully
achieve the policy objectives for certain new infrastructure. The Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB)
and Rural Broadband initiatives are two key Government programmes to expand and develop
New Zealand’s broadband services. However, most of this telecommunications infrastructure
is outside the scope of the NESTF’s provisions, which generally means resource consent is
required. Both the telecommunications providers and the councils involved in the evaluation
raised this as a concern. It was therefore determined that the NESTF needs to be reviewed to
potentially include UFB and mobile infrastructure and installation activities.
1
10
‘Network operator’ is a term defined in section 5 of the Telecommunications Act 2001.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
2.4
The evaluation process
2.4.1 Amending the NESTF
The Ministers propose to amend the NESTF under section 44 of the RMA. Section 44 requires
that the Minister for the Environment prepare an evaluation report for the proposed
amendments to the NESTF in accordance with section 32, and have particular regard to that
report when deciding whether to notify the NESTF. When amending an NES, the Minister is not
required to prepare an evaluation report if the effects are considered to be no more than
minor. In this case, this report has been prepared under section 32 on the basis that the
potential cumulative effects of the proposal, and particularly the environmental effects and
the effects associated with reduced public participation in community planning, are considered
to be more than minor.
2.4.2 Section 32 evaluation
Section 32(1) of the RMA states that an evaluation must:
a)
examine the extent to which the objectives of the proposal being evaluated are the most
appropriate way to achieve the purpose of this Act;
b)
examine whether the provisions in the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve
the objectives by—
c)
i.
identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives; and
ii.
assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in achieving the
objectives; and
iii.
summarising the reasons for deciding on the provisions; and
contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the
environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the
implementation of the proposal.
Section 32(2) says assessment of efficiency and effectiveness must also:
a)
identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social, and
cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the provisions, including
the opportunities for—
i.
economic growth that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and
ii.
employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and
b)
if practicable, quantify the above benefits and costs; and
c)
assess the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information
about the subject matter of the provisions.
Further, if a proposal is to amend an existing NES, section 32(3) states that the evaluation of
costs and benefits must relate to:
a)
the provisions and objectives of the amending proposal; and
b)
the objectives of the existing proposal to the extent that those objectives—
i.
are relevant to the objectives of the amending proposal; and
ii.
would remain if the amending proposal were to take effect.
Section 32 is provided in full in appendix B.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
11
2.5
Scale and significance of the proposal
Section 32(1)(c) of the RMA states that the evaluation must contain a level of detail that
corresponds to the scale and significance of the effects of the proposal. Section 32(1)(c) means
that the scale and significance of the proposal are the key factors influencing the level of detail
required for this section 32 evaluation. They will also influence the choice of methods for
assessing efficiency and effectiveness.
For the purposes of section 32(1)(c), ‘scale’ essentially refers to the scale or reach of the issue
(eg, geographic area), the anticipated size or magnitude of the anticipated effects from the
proposal, or both. ‘Significance’ refers to the importance or impact of the issue the proposal is
intended to respond to, or the significance of the response itself (on the community).
In this case, the scale and significance are as follows:

the current NESTF and district plans set an existing baseline for regulating
telecommunication facilities

the proposal is an amendment to an existing NES; however, it significantly expands the
scope of the NESTF

the reach of the proposal relates to the entire country

the effects (especially the cumulative effects) of outcomes of the proposal are likely to be
more than minor in some cases

the importance of the proposal is that the deployment of telecommunications technology
will generally be able to be undertaken without requiring resource consent

one impact of the proposal is that the activities will be permitted, subject to conditions
stated in the NESTF, and not subject to district plans or local rules. As a result, the
environmental impacts and effects on people no longer ned to be considered as a
prerequisite for authorisation of a land activity

another impact of the proposal is that the public and other stakeholders will not
necessarily be included in decision-making processes for activities permitted by the
NESTF (including district plan reviews and resource consents). Public participation will be
limited to consultation on significant areas, as identified in district plans and protected by
the NESTF.
Based on the scale and significance of the proposal, the evaluation report must include:

an evaluation of the assessment of the effects of the proposed changes versus the
status quo (being the existing NESTF) – the assessment of effects is against the existing
baseline, being what is currently provided for in the NESTF and generally provided for by
district plans

an assessment of efficiency, effectiveness and risk against the effects, costs and benefits
of the proposal

an evaluation of the proposed amendments and additions against the objectives of both
the current NESTF and the objectives of the proposed changes

a comparative analysis of the regulatory effects of the proposal against the status quo,
and justification of the proposed degree of effect, because the provisions created should
not be too stringent or too lenient.
The level of analysis required in creating and assessing the proposal and the level of evaluation
required needs to correspond with the level of effect, scale and significance arising from the
proposed additions and alterations to the NESTF.
12
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
The scale and significance of the proposal are described further throughout this assessment of
effects, efficiency, effectiveness and risk of the proposed amendments and additions.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
13
3
Problem statement
3.1
Overview
Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB), Rural Broad Band Initiative (RBI) and forth generation (4G-LTE)
mobile networks require the installation of new telecommunications infrastructure throughout
New Zealand. The new infrastructure requirements were not anticipated when the National
Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF) was developed, nor when
many territorial authorities developed their operative district plans. As a result, the UFB, RBI
and mobile infrastructure and installation activities are largely outside the scope of the existing
NESTF. Resource consent is required if an activity is not permitted under the NESTF or district
plan.
This situation creates a number of issues, including:

costs:
-
telecommunication operators face costs for the time taken to understand different
district plan provisions and to obtain resource consent (the estimated consent cost is
shown in Table 1)
-
councils face costs for staff time required for processing and monitoring resource
consents and enforcing district plan provisions
-
customers and/or shareholders face telecommunication operational costs, which are
either passed on through charges to customers or lower investment yields for
shareholders

time delays in the work programme for installation of the telecommunications
infrastructure due to undertaking planning checks, preparing consent applications, and
council time to process applications

uncertainty of outcomes where telecommunications infrastructure and/or associated
installation activities are not permitted

planning restrictions, which may reduce route optimisation, resulting in increased
inefficiencies and network risk.
The potential delays in deployment due to council consenting requirements can affect
customers, such as businesses that rely on communications technologies to remain
competitive internationally, health care and education providers, and individual users.
Table 1:
Cost required for resource consent compared to certificate of compliance for
permitted activities
Activity
Antennas in rural areas
Estimated average
cost per consent
Estimated average cost
per certificate of
compliance
$14,000
$3,900
Antennas on multi-storey buildings
$5,000
$3,200
New masts to carry antennas in the road reserve
$5,500
$3,300
Co-location of multiple telecommunications operators’
antennas
$4,800
$3,300
Replacement or additional antennas at existing sites
$4,900
$3,300
14
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
3.2
National variation in district plans
The way different territorial authorities manage telecommunications infrastructure through
their district plans varies across the country in terms of certainty, time and costs to
telecommunications operators. This variation is likely to be a consequence of the devolution
of planning decisions to territorial authorities and generally does not reflect actual local
environmental differences that would require different rules for telecommunications
infrastructure.
For some types of infrastructure, variability relating to the local environment is appropriate to
reduce the potential environmental effects. However, the environments in which
telecommunications infrastructure is placed are very similar across the country, and this
inconsistency creates similar problems to those the NESTF was originally intended to address.
The two main types of infrastructure that are not currently incorporated in the NESTF (as
further discussed below) are:

telecommunications cables

mobile network infrastructure.
3.2.1 Telecommunication cables
District plan rules for telecommunications cables, which are required for UFB, vary widely
between districts. For example, a review of 54 district plans found that the installation of
above-ground cables (both distribution and lead-ins) is a permitted activity in 36 districts
but requires resource consent in 18 districts. Of the 36 districts where above-ground cables
are permitted, 11 are subject to controls. Underground cables are permitted across all
districts, but they are sometimes subject to various controls on the nature and management
of earthworks.
Table 2 illustrates the diversity in activity status across different district plans for the roll-out of
telecommunications cables in urban areas.
Table 2:
District plan activity status for telecommunications cables
Above-ground cables
(urban areas)
Underground cables
(urban areas)
Permitted activity
25
52
Permitted subject to controls/conditions
11
2
Consent required
18
0
Activity status in district plans
3.2.2 Mobile infrastructure
Under the existing NESTF, the placement of antennas and associated mounts on existing
structures such as power-poles or street-light poles (referred to as ‘original utility structures’)
is permitted where the original utility structure is located within the road reserve and the
equipment complies with specified limitations on height and size. However, a lot of mobile
network infrastructure falls outside these criteria, and therefore is subject to district plan
provisions. As with telecommunications cables, district plan rules regarding new wireless
network infrastructure vary across the country.
Table 3 illustrates the difference in activity status across different district plans for the roll-out
of mobile antennas.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
15
Table 3:
District plan activity status for mobile antennas
Antennas (on
urban streetlights,
rooftops, etc)
Micro-cells (on urban
streetlights, bus
stops, etc)
20 m
25 m
30 m
Permitted activity
19
41
26
10
1
Permitted subject to
controls/conditions
30
12
28
22
3
Consent required
5
1
19
41
69
Rural masts and antennas
3.2.3 Effects of variation on industry
The section 32 report completed in 2008 outlined how the variable provision for
telecommunication facilities can affect the resource use efficiency of the network. These
comments are still relevant to the current proposal with regard to UFB, RBI and 4G-LTE mobile
infrastructure, as follows:

companies incur costs that consume labour and materials for no saleable output in the
preparation and processing of applications for consents, in delays in authorisation of work,
and in uncertainty of outcome

inconsistent approaches in different districts may reduce the realisation of economies of
scale through the use of standardised equipment

these impacts on operational costs of the networks are either passed on to and recovered
from the network’s customers, or met by reduction in profits and shareholder returns,
slowing down the rate of new investment

configuration of the networks may be redirected from its otherwise optimal route by the
stringency of some local provisions, resulting in increased inefficiencies and risks to the
ongoing network operation

there is the potential for delays in rolling out new services, because resources used in
additional compliance activity are diverted from new investment (regulatory compliance
crowds out investment expenditure)

the current situation is compounded for new-entrant operators, who have no existing
network to build on and are particularly dependent on the rapid deployment of new
facilities to provide viable services and competition against incumbent operators.
In short, variable planning provisions both reduce the level of investment and delay any
investment occurring. A local authority approach to work on telecommunications
infrastructure that would make them permitted activities (subject to specific limitations) would
reduce both impediments.
3.3
Activities not covered by the current NESTF
Aside from the activities outlined above, there are further general limitations on the scope of
the NESTF, including the following:

Antenna placement: the existing council antenna placement rules do not always strike an
optimal balance, as the following examples show:
-
16
in most central city areas the placement of antennas on the sides or rooftops of
buildings may provide the best coverage with the lowest visual impact
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
-
in residential areas there are multi-storey buildings in excess of five storeys, such as
apartment buildings and public buildings, which generally provide the most
appropriate place to locate an antenna, providing the best coverage with the lowest
visual impact
-
existing structures in the road reserve (such as street-light poles) are not always in the
optimal location to provide network coverage, and a telecommunications operator
may require multiple antennas on existing structures within a relatively small area.

Infrastructure in rural areas: the NESTF provisions rarely apply to telecommunications
infrastructure in rural areas, because the most appropriate location for antennas is usually
on private land outside of the road reserve (eg, on hill tops). Although the majority of
district plans provide for cell sites 20 m or higher in rural zone areas, and many for 25 m,
the associated rules are not nationally consistent.

Co-location: co-location of different operators’ equipment on the same mast is generally
encouraged because it results in fewer individual structures in an area. However, this
generally requires taller structures than single-operator masts, and therefore a greater
visual effect per site, because the equipment needs to be sufficiently spaced to avoid
interference.

Modern antenna specifications: existing antennas will not be able to meet the
performance standards required to satisfy the modern demand for mobile
telecommunications (such as carrying frequency ranges to include higher-spectrum
bands, like the 700 MHz band). This means upgrades are required. Newer technology
antennas are often larger, enabling them to increase their capability and allowing them to
operate over new spectrum bands. This means network operators need to either replace
existing antennas with new, larger antennas, or install additional antennas.

Small units: a significant increase of small units associated with telecommunications is
anticipated, including micro-cells, pico-cells, femto-cells and wi-fi. These units are used
to fill gaps in the coverage of mobile networks and provide additional services, such as
free public space wi-fi. However, these units do not always fit within the permitted
antenna rules.
3.4 Non-Resource Management Act controls over
telecommunications facilities
In addition to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and the NESTF, other legislation
affects telecommunications facilities and installation activities. This further contributes to
inconsistency in the management of new telecommunications infrastructure.
The Telecommunications Act 2001 is the other major piece of legislation governing
telecommunications infrastructure. The Act provides telecommunications network operators
with a statutory right to occupy the road, under agreement with the road controlling authority
(as the land owner), “subject to reasonable conditions” regarding size and positioning of the
facilities so as not to impede use of the road. This agreement process undertaken under the
Telecommunications Act runs in parallel with the RMA process. The road controlling authority
in most instances is the local territorial authority, but it can also be the New Zealand Transport
Authority or the Department of Conservation, depending on the location of the proposed
telecommunications facility.
Under the provisions of the Telecommunications Act, telecommunications operators and
the road controlling authorities reach what are essentially property agreements for
occupation. These are subject to reasonable conditions that are primarily aimed at ensuring:
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
17
the safe and efficient flow of traffic and pedestrians within road reserves, access is maintained,
co-ordination with other works that may occur in the road, and reinstatement works are
provided for.
There are other minor pieces of legislation that have an impact on telecommunications
structures and associated installation activities, including:

the National Code of Practice for Utility Operators' Access to Transport Corridors, which
prescribes requirements for the use of road corridors

the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014, which requires activities such as
earthworks on sites that may have archaeological significance to obtain an archaeological
authority.
3.5
Summary
Overall, the main issue with the current NESTF is that UFB and 4G-LTE mobile
telecommunications facilities often fall outside the scope of the NESTF, which means
these activities are subject to resource management consenting processes. There is no
unified regulatory approach due to the variation between the 67 territorial and unitary local
authorities in New Zealand. A lack of national consistency in the rules of district plans is leading
to uncertainty and inconsistencies relating to time, costs and outcomes of the RMA process.
Thisis seen as impeding the delivery of new and improved telecommunications services that
can provide availability, choice of services and cost savings to consumers.
The original NESTF sought to alleviate these costs and delays by permitting certain activities
(subject to specific limitations). However, as the telecommunications landscape has evolved,
these new technologies are often not permitted, creating the same issues of added cost, time
and uncertainty. Enabling the roll-out of telecommunications infrastructure through a more
permissive system can result in environmental, economic, social and cultural effects.
18
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
4 Proposed amendments to the
National Environmental Standards
for Telecommunication Facilities
The proposed amendments seek to include the infrastructure and installation activities
required for the roll-out of Ultra-Fast Broadband and fourth generation (4G-LTE) mobile
infrastructure in the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
(NESTF), and to clarify some of the exiting NESTF provisions. This section summarises the
proposed amendments to the NESTF. These proposed amendments have been evaluated in
accordance with section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 in the remaining sections
of this report. Each section outlines the evaluation approach that has been taken.
The amendments are outlined in full in appendix C. A further outline and discussion of the
proposed amendments is included in the Proposed Amendments to the National
Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities: Discussion Document (discussion
document).
4.1
Permitted activities
The proposed amendments to the NESTF will widen the scope of permitted activities. The
proposed new permitted activities are to:

deploy telecommunications cables (both underground and overhead)

locate antennas on multi-storey buildings (except in residential areas), and erect new
antenna structures in rural areas

co-locate multiple telecommunications operators’ antennas

erect new masts in the road reserve

replace existing antennas to upgrade services to enable 4G-LTE

place additional antennas at existing antenna sites to enable 4G-LTE

erect new small-cell units in the road reserve or on the outside of buildings.
4.2
Amendments to existing permitted activities
As well as introducing new permitted activities, the proposal will also make some amendments
to the existing permitted activities. The proposed amendments are to:

expand the area in which a replacement utility structure can be located in the road
reserve

modify (increase) the size envelope for antennas

modify (increase) the size of replacement utility structures

clarify the definition of ‘site’

allow for replacement cabinets to be erected before existing cabinets are removed
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
19

remove the existing reference to the 1990 national radio-frequency standard and replace
it with the 2011 national radio-frequency standard2

increase the threshold at which reporting for radio-frequency exposure under Regulation
4 is triggered

exclude small cells from Regulation 4 reporting requirements

include ‘natural hazard zones’ in the list of plan zones that may be exempt from the NESTF

expand the coverage of special protection zones to include all new activities covered by
the NESTF, in and outside the road reserve.
4.3
Potential further amendments required
It is important to note the proposed amendments and discussion document have not yet been
notified, which means these are draft amendments and are still subject to change. More data
regarding the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments to the NESTF will be collected
during the public consultation on the discussion document.
Further mitigation measures to manage the potential effects of the proposed amendments will
also be considered. For example, consideration will be given to whether local environmental
factors should override national standards set in the NESTF in certain defined areas, such as
areas of historic heritage or cultural significance, or areas susceptible to natural hazards. It
may be appropriate in these circumstances to provide for an exemption from the permitted
activity status to ensure effects are managed and to allow local authorities to address special
requirements in certain areas, or protect specific features, through district plan rules.
As an example, the National Environmental Standards for Electricity Transmission Activities
2009 exempts all areas considered to be a historic heritage area3 from the permitted activity
status. The discussion document on the NESTF seeks respondents’ views on when such
exemptions might be appropriate for telecommunications facilities. We expect that the
submissions we receive will enable us to fully test the assumptions and to help us ensure the
mitigations in place are appropriate.
2
This relates to an additional proposal to update the radio-frequency national environmental standard, referred
to in the NESTF, to the proposed AS/NZS 2772.2:2011 Radiofrequency Fields Part 2: Principles and Methods of
Measurement and Computation – 3 kHz to 300 GHz. This update will affect practitioners working under the
NESTF by making the measurement requirements more comprehensive. However, this will be a minor impact
because the new standard is based on current best practice. Refer to the discussion document for more
information.
3
Defined as an area that is protected by a rule because of its historic heritage, including an area that is protected
by a rule because it is a site of significance to Māori.
20
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
5
Evaluation of objectives
5.1
Policy objectives
The primary objective of the proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards
for Telecommunication Facilities (NESTF) is to “provide greater national consistency for a wider
range of telecommunications infrastructure and locations”. This will, in turn, ensure the NESTF
will remain fit for purpose and be able to fully achieve its original objectives, which are to:

assist in network and equipment design and equipment sourcing

reduce compliance costs and timeframes for service providers

reduce the timeframe and lower the costs for the availability of new services to
consumers

contribute to a reduced council workload in processing and determining consent
applications

set an appropriate balance between local participation in community planning and costeffective national infrastructure investment.
The objective of the proposed amendments is compatible with the existing objectives of the
NESTF and reinforces the fact that the current NESTF is unable to fully achieve its objectives.
5.2
Evaluation of objectives
Section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires that the evaluation examine
the extent to which the objectives of the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve the
purpose of the RMA. The purpose of the RMA is to promote the sustainable management of
natural and physical resources, which means:
… managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way,
or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and
cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while—
a.
sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet
the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and
b.
safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems; and
c.
avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment.
The original objectives of the NESTF were assessed against the purpose of the RMA in the
original section 32 evaluation. For this evaluation, Table 4 contains an assessment of the
objective of the proposed policy, which is to provide greater national consistency for a wider
range of telecommunications infrastructure and locations, against the purpose of the RMA.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
21
Table 4:
Evaluation of whether the proposal objectives are the most appropriate way to achieve
the purpose of the RMA
Relevance to the RMA
Policy objective: to provide greater national consistency for a wider range of
telecommunications infrastructure and locations
Directly related to a resource
management issue
Amending the NESTF to provide greater national consistency is directly related
to Part 2, Section 5, of the Act, which seeks to enable the use and development
of resources, including physical resources such as telecommunications
networks, so that people and communities can meet their needs.
Will achieve one or more
aspects of the purpose and
principles of the RMA
Providing for national consistency will ensure that New Zealanders have access
to telecommunications facilities that provide for future needs, including:

enhanced teaching and learning resources contributing to education

maintaining or enhancing access to up-to-date telecommunications
technology, allowing New Zealand business to remain competitive in
regional, national and international market places.
This will provide for the social and economic wellbeing of New Zealanders, in
accordance with Part 2 of the Act.
Relevant to Māori
environmental issues
(sections 6(e), 6(g), 7(a), 8)
Amending the NESTF seeks a balance between providing for cost-effective and
reliable national infrastructure and recognising the need for local community
input, where appropriate. Community participation enables the identification
and management of issues important to maintaining cultural wellbeing. Thus,
iwi and the wider public will be invited to comment on the proposed changes
through formal consultation.
Relevant to statutory
functions or to give effect to
another plan or policy
The objective meets the statutory function of an NES. It builds on the already
developed NESTF to develop regulations that apply more broadly across the
development and implementation of telecommunications technology
nationally.
Activities that do not qualify as permitted activities under the regulations will
continue to be managed by local councils through the existing rules in their
district plans under the RMA.
Will effectively guide
decision-making
The objective contributes to effective decision-making by allowing for a national
approach for the implementation of a wider range of telecommunications
infrastructure and locations. It will contribute to a streamlined planning process
through updated national regulations that reduce the occasions when it is
necessary to obtain resource consent from local authorities. This will result in a
more streamlined and cost-effective process.
Meets sound principles for
writing objectives
This objective is achievable and fit for purpose.
Consistent with existing other
objectives
The objective of the proposed amendments is consistent with the current
objectives of the NESTF.
The existing objectives of the NESTF will not be changed as a result of the
amendments. We consider that the amendments to the NESTF will mean the
objectives of the current NESTF will be met more effectively.
5.3
Conclusion
In summary, the objective of the proposed amendments is considered to represent the most
appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA. Broadly, the objective is considered to
appropriately reflect the balance contained within the RMA’s purpose between enabling the
use and development of resources and managing the adverse environmental effects of this use
and development.
22
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
6
Options for achieving the objectives
6.1
Overview of options
Section 32(1)(b)(i) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requires an evaluation to
identify alternative practicable options for achieving the proposal objective, as outlined in
section 5. We have conducted a high-level review of other reasonably practicable options for
achieving the policy objective, which is to provide greater national consistency for a wider
range of telecommunications infrastructure and locations. These options are:

maintaining the status quo

non-regulatory approaches (eg, partnership with district councils, production of voluntary
guidelines, guidance notes)

amending the RMA

a national policy statement

amendments to the current the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication
Facilities (NESTF)
Of the options identified, only the proposed amendments to the NESTF are considered
appropriate to meet the policy objective, as summarised in Table 5. The proposed
amendments to the NESTF will be straightforward and time efficient to implement, and
they will:

ensure national consistency in decision-making and certainty of outcome

enable new telecommunications activities

be cost effective and reduce workloads

provide New Zealanders with access to Ultra-Fast Broadband and Rural Broadband
Initiative faster.
For these reasons, the other options that were assessed are not considered appropriate to
meet the policy objectives.
6.2
Maintaining the status quo
The existing NESTF covers only a small proportion of telecommunications facilities that are
now being installed. As discussed in section 3, any other facility that falls outside the NESTF,
such as most of the Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB), Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI) and mobile
infrastructure, is subject to district plan rules. If the status quo continues, then there will
continue to be varying plan rules for this equipment across the country.
This creates significant costs and uncertainties for telecommunications operators seeking to
roll out new services, or to extend their networks and improve the capacity of their services,
using their right to occupy road reserves in providing utility services. This may in turn create
barriers to new services, choice and competition between service providers. The costs may
then be ultimately passed on to consumers. Therefore, maintaining the status quo is not
considered to be an appropriate option for achieving the policy objective.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
23
Table 5:
Assessment of options for achieving the proposal’s objectives
Alternative options that did not satisfy
the selection criteria
Preferred
option
Status quo
Nonregulatory
approaches
Amend
RMA
NPS
Amend NES
National consistency
~
~
~
~

Manage effects of telecommunications
infrastructure

~



Certainty of outcome
~

~
~

Local input
~



~
Enables new telecommunications activities
~
~



Cost-effective
~


~

Timeliness of process
~




Reduced workload for councils and industry
~


~

Criteria
Key to table:
 Meets the criterion
 Does not meet the criterion
~ Partly meets the criterion
6.3
Non-regulatory approaches
The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
could, through the use of voluntary measures, encourage and support district councils and
telecommunications companies to develop consistent plan provisions and improve the
processing of resource consents. There are a range of potential measures to support local
government, which could include:

issuing best practice guidelines on appropriate levels of permitted development for new
telecommunications infrastructure, and how to develop appropriate district plan rules

recommending protocols for consulting with affected parties on relevant resource
consents

partnership models to improve communication between district councils (planning and
road controlling authority departments) and consent applicants

issuing best practice guidelines on how to assess the potential effects of new
telecommunications infrastructure on the built environment, and how to develop
appropriate consent conditions and/or district plan rules.
This approach could lead to greater consistency in how councils manage consenting
requirements and the processing of consent applications for telecommunications
infrastructure.
Although this option would keep regulatory complexity to a minimum and allow greater
flexibility for local decisions, there is no guarantee there would be significant improvement
to the current situation. Without regulatory compulsion there is no guarantee councils would
work together to provide national consistency. In essence, there is a risk that the status quo
would prevail through a non-regulatory approach, and the objective would be unlikely to
be achieved.
24
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
Even if a non-regulatory approach did achieve national consistency, this approach would take
significantly longer to implement. It may take up to 10 years for all councils to go through the
process of plan changes. By this stage it is possible that much of the infrastructure would have
already been completed, meaning the derived benefit would only apply to part of the UFB and
RBI roll-out. Exactly how much development would have occurred will depend on the
extension timeframes for UFB and RBI roll-out, which are yet to be determined. Nonregulatory approaches are therefore not considered to be the most time-efficient option for
achieving the policy objectives.
6.4
RMA amendment
The RMA could be amended to clarify that councils need to explicitly provide for
telecommunications infrastructure when preparing plans and making decisions on resource
consents. However, the RMA is an enabling and broad-scale piece of legislation. Amending the
head statute to accommodate specific matters as they arise would make the legislation
unnecessarily complex. The RMA provides for more specific matters to be addressed through
regulation-making powers (such as national environmental standards) for individual
environmental management issues.
Legislative amendments can be expensive and time consuming, for both central and local
government, through the legislative development, select committee and submissions
processes. In addition, it is more difficult to amend legislation if changes are needed at a later
date (eg, if amendments are made to the Telecommunications Act). It would be an
unnecessarily complex option to select for the amendments we are seeking to make. As with
non-regulatory approaches, it is possible that much of the development would have already
occurred by the time any RMA amendments came into force. The derived benefit would
therefore only apply to part of the UFB and RBI roll-outs.
6.5
National policy statement
Under Part 5 of the RMA the Minister for the Environment can issue a national policy
statement (NPS) “to state objectives and policies on matters of national significance that are
relevant to achieving the purpose of this Act”. Local authorities must then give effect to a NPS
by amending regional policy statements and plans and having regard to the NPS in decisionmaking.
A NPS could be prepared stating that enabling telecommunications infrastructure and services
is a matter of national significance. This would give clear guidance to consent authorities that
they need to make provision for this when making decisions on resource consents, and when
preparing plans and regional policy statements.
There are, however, limitations to the certainty of decision-making that could be achieved by a
NPS alone. A NPS will not ensure there is national consistency at the required level of detail in
the areas necessary for the roll-out of UFB and mobile infrastructure, because it can only state
objectives and policies – not how to achieve them. As a result, a NPS alone cannot be
sufficiently specific to ensure national consistency in the approach to allowing low-impact
development in the road reserve.
Further, although councils must have regard to a NPS when making a decision on a resource
consent application (under section 104 of the RMA), to have full effect a NPS would need to be
incorporated into the regional policy statement, then district plans. Therefore, it would be
some time before the NPS could consistently enable telecommunications infrastructure.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
25
6.6
Amended national environmental standard
A national environmental standard (NES) can be more prescriptive instruments than a NPS and
legislation. This provides some key benefits over other options. An extended NESTF would fulfil
the policy objectives by providing certainty about the levels of permitted development
provided for modern telecommunications in every local authority area in New Zealand. The
NESTF requirements would remove any ambiguity over whether or not infrastructure
equipment in the expanded scope would require resource consent or not.
The updated NESTF will take precedence over the existing rules in every district plan in
New Zealand. An immediate plan change would not be required for the expanded NESTF to
become part of a district plan, although the NESTF will need to be eventually incorporated
into district plans. Local authorities may choose to undertake a plan change process
specifically to incorporate the new rules into their plan or through an unrelated plan change
(ie, ‘piggy-backing’).
The risks associated with this option remain the same as those identified in the previous
section 32 report, which are:

the potential environmental effects of telecommunications infrastructure

the reduction in public participation in local decision-making.
An assessment of the environmental effects of current methods of infrastructure deployment,
which was commissioned as part of this evaluation, concluded that “with the exception of
infrastructure in sensitive environments, most of the infrastructure and activities will have a
low effect”. More than 96 per cent of foreseen effects are considered to have a less than
minor environmental impact. The remaining effects, all classified as visual or amenity effects,
were considered to be minor to moderate.
The report did, however, highlight the cumulative effects of telecommunications
infrastructure. When the same analysis was conducted to assess the cumulative effects,
24 per cent of the activities were considered to have a minor to moderate effect. These
conclusions will be examined in more detail later in this report.
These concerns have been managed in the existing NESTF in the following ways:

the standards would only apply to low-impact activities

the standards provide for the protection of matters of national importance and values
identified by communities through district plans.
In addition, the standards may contain links to district plan provisions, particularly for sensitive
environments. Where specific values such as amenity or historic heritage have been identified
as a local issue by the community, these values will continue to be preserved. It is appropriate
that local input into identifying issues of importance to communities is through the plan
process, and not on an ad hoc or case-by-case basis.
6.7
Uncertain or insufficient information
Section 32(4)(b) of the RMA requires an evaluation to take account of the risk of acting or not
acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter. The risks of
acting and not acting have been refined through the discussion above.
26
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
6.7.1 Risks of not acting
The existing NESTF does not cover many new and emerging telecommunications facilities,
slowing down the process and increasing the time for telecommunications industries to get
this infrastructure off the ground. In this sense, many of the risks identified in the section 32
evaluation for the existing NESTF remain and are impairing industry growth. The risks of not
acting in this situation are:

telecommunication networks may need to be rerouted to less optimal routes to comply
with district plan rules and conditions, resulting in inefficiencies and network risk

the introduction of new services may be delayed and may not be able to meet the
deadlines for the UFB and RBI contracts

funds allocated for investment may be diverted to regulatory compliance, reducing
investment expenditure

new entrant operators may not be able to benefit from emerging new infrastructure
technologies for building their networks if consenting delays the implementation of these
technologies.
The risks cannot be mitigated by continuing with the status quo.
6.7.2 Risks of acting
The key risks of acting, as identified in the previous sections, are:

the potential of new infrastructure to create adverse environmental effects

the loss of local input in the decision-making process for telecommunications
infrastructure.
These risks can be mitigated by preserving significant areas, as identified in district plans.
Through this preliminary section 32 evaluation and consultation approach we hope to receive
additional feedback from the public on whether they believe the proposed amendments will
adequately address the reduced local input in the decision-making process, and whether the
risks of acting can be mitigated in any other way.
6.8
Conclusion
The options assessment has identified that, while there are other options for achieving the
policy objectives, the proposed amendments to the existing NESTF are the most appropriate
means of achieving the policy objectives. The proposed amendments will ensure national
consistency in decision-making and certainty of outcome, enable new telecommunications
activities, be cost-effective and reduce workloads. While there are some risks associated with
the proposed amendments, these can be mitigated through additional provisions in the NESTF
and public consultation on this proposal.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
27
7 Efficiency and effectiveness of the
proposed amendments
7.1
Overview
Under section 32(1)(b)(ii) of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the benefits and costs
of the environmental, economic, social and cultural effects that are anticipated from the
implementation of the proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for
Telecommunication Facilities(NESTF) must be assessed for effectiveness and efficiency.
The following is a preliminary assessment of effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed
provisions. The assessment is based on information provided by local industry stakeholders,
a high-level assessment of environmental effects, and other information obtained as part of
the section 32 evaluation for the current NESTF. It is important to note that the information
received is preliminary and incomplete, and so the information should be regarded as
indicative only. The intention is that the consultation process will help further refine
this assessment.
In summary, the assessment has identified that the proposed amendments to the NESTF are
the most effective and efficient means for achieving the objectives. The balance of costs and
benefits shows that, while there are costs in implementing the proposed provisions – in
particular, the potential environmental effects and reduction in public participation in
decision-making – these are outweighed by the economic and social benefits of the proposal;
namely, the time and cost savings to industry and local government, and the social benefits of
providing improved telecommunications to the community faster, freeing up resources for
further investment.
7.2
Effectiveness
For the purposes of section 32, ‘effectiveness’ refers to the ability of a provision to meet the
desired outcome or result. The fundamental question for assessing effectiveness is whether
the provisions will achieve the outcome sought. To assess effectiveness, Table 6 evaluates the
proposed amendments to the NESTF against the objective of this proposal. The proposed
amendments have also been evaluated against the policy objectives of the current NESTF to
ensure they are still fit for purpose and will help the current NESTF fully achieve its objectives.
The evaluation identified that the proposed amendments will be effective in achieving the
objectives of the proposed amendments and the original objectives of the NESTF. The
proposed amendments will be more effective than the status quo in that they will widen the
scope of telecommunications activities that are permitted under the NESTF, with particular
regard to Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB) and mobile infrastructure. The proposed amendments
will also be effective in helping the NESTF achieve its original policy objectives.
28
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
Table 6:
Evaluation of proposed provisions for effectiveness
Objectives of the
proposed NESTF
amendment
Proposed
amendments
Increase the scope of
permitted activities
through:
(a) introducing new
provisions
(b) amending existing
provisions
Provide greater
consistency for a wider
range of
telecommunications
infrastructure and
locations
The proposed
amendments will enable
telecommunications
cables and mobile
infrastructure to be
installed in a nationally
consistent way, reducing
costs and time delays.
This will provide
operators with certainty
and consistency in
decision-making and aid
the national deployment
of telecommunications
infrastructure.
Objectives of current NESTF
Assist in the network and
equipment design and
equipment sourcing for
roll-outs
The proposed
amendments will assist in
network and equipment
design through freeing up
time and costs to invest
in other infrastructure.
Reduce compliance
costs and timeframes
for service providers
The proposed
amendments will
further reduce
compliance costs and
timeframes for service
providers by removing
the requirement to
obtain resource consent
for telecommunications
activities in some
districts, or to comply
with permitted activity
conditions.
Reduce the timeframe
and lower the costs for
the availability of new
services to consumers
The proposed
amendments will reduce
timeframes and lower
costs for consumers by
being able to deploy
telecommunications
infrastructure faster and
not needing to pass
regulatory costs on to
consumers.
Contribute to a reduced
council workload in
processing and
determining consent
applications
The proposed
amendments will
contribute to reduced
workload for councils
through removing
processing time and
resources for resource
consents where activities
are permitted (note that
further information
about the processing
delays is being sought
through consultation to
ensure this objective can
be met).
Set an appropriate
balance between local
participation in
community planning and
cost-effective national
infrastructure
investment
The proposed
amendments will seek to
set an appropriate
balance between local
participation and
investment by
considering whether
certain areas can
continue to be protected
through district plan
overlays. This will further
strengthen existing
provisions in the NESTF.
Information on this is
being sought through
the consultation process.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
29
7.3
Efficiency
Section 32(1)(b)(ii) of the RMA requires an assessment of the efficiency of the proposed
provisions. The assessment must identify and assess the benefits and costs of the
environmental, economic, social and cultural effects that are anticipated from the
implementation of the provisions, including the opportunities for (i) economic growth and (ii)
employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced. If practicable, the benefits and
costs must be quantified. However, benefits and costs can also be qualitative where
quantification is not possible.
This section presents the findings of the preliminary efficiency assessment. In summary, the
analysis shows, relative to the scale of costs and benefits, the proposed amendments are an
efficient approach to achieve the objectives of the NESTF and to help address the identified
problems.
7.3.1 Assessment approach
The efficiency of the proposed amendments to the NESTF has been assessed by balancing the
benefits and costs of the proposed amendments. Information about the costs and benefits has
been gathered through preliminary consultation with industry, councils and environmental
planners. At this stage, many of the costs and benefits have not been quantified for a number
of reasons, including the following:

Many of the benefits of the proposed amendments relate to the benefits of UFB and Rural
Broadband Initiative (RBI) programmes generally. The actual net benefits to the economy
of facilitating the roll-out of UFB, RBI and forth generation ( 4G-LTE) mobile upgrades
through the proposed amendments, however, are currently unknown.

The UFB and RBI will occur regardless of whether or not the proposed amendments are
introduced. As such, many of the benefits relate to facilitating a faster roll-out of UFB, RBI
and mobile to enable the industry and consumers to realise the benefits of these
programmes sooner.

Territorial authorities were unable to provide estimates of the financial benefits of the
proposed amendments within the timeframe available, so estimates can only be made
based on known processing costs and expected future consent applications (this will be
further refined through consultation).

The assessment of environmental effects is based on a general high-level review of the
anticipated effects of UFB and 4G-LTE mobile infrastructure. It does not address the
environmental effects of infrastructure in specific environments, such as sensitive or highamenity areas. Further, environmental effects can only be assessed in a qualitative way,
with no attempt made to quantify the value of the environment.

The costs of the loss of public participation in community planning can only be assessed in
a qualitative way and the actual effects are not well known. Public participation is
provided through making submissions on plan changes or publicly notified consents. The
effect of the amendment would be experienced predominantly in the consenting process,
but would be tempered due to the likelihood that when resource consent is needed under
the status quo, it is more likely than not to have been processed on a non-notified basis.
These limitations and how they have been addressed are further discussed throughout this
evaluation. The intention is for this cost–benefit analysis to be further refined following the
consultation process. Data gained from submissions will be analysed in order to conduct a
more complete and up-to-date cost–benefit analysis that will inform the case for amending
the NESTF.
30
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
7.3.2 Effects of proposed amendments
To undertake the cost–benefit analysis, the economic, environmental, social and cultural
effects of the proposal were identified in comparison to the status quo. Table 7 outlines the
positive and negative effects that have been identified in relation to the status quo. Note that
many of these effects will be a combination of environmental, economic, social or cultural
effects, but they have been grouped in the area that is considered most relevant. The effects
are further assessed in the following section.
Table 7:
Environmental, economic, social and cultural effects of the amendments to the NESTF
as compared to the status quo
BENEFITS
 Realising the benefits of UFB and the RBI sooner: the New Zealand economy will be
Economic
able to realise the estimated $32.8 billion financial benefits over 20 years sooner.
 Cost savings for the telecommunications industry: the telecommunications industry will
be able to save costs spent on reviewing district plans and plan changes, applying for
resource consents, attending hearings and complying with consent conditions.
 Reduced processing delays: telecommunications infrastructure will be able to be
installed faster without regulatory delays caused by rules in district plans and resource
consent processing times.
 Reduced local government expenditure on resource consenting: councils will save time
and resources that would otherwise have been spent processing resource consents and
ensuring compliance with consent conditions.
 Cost savings for the end consumer: regulatory costs will not need to be passed on to the
ultimate consumer, enabling them to have access to improved telecommunications
services.
 Increased certainty and national consistency: telecommunications providers and
consumers will have increased certainty and national consistency in provision.
Economic
Economic
Economic
Economic, social
Economic, social
COSTS
 Potential for moderate cumulative environmental effects: the cumulative
environmental effects of telecommunications infrastructure could be moderate,
particularly in sensitive environments.
 Dilution of public participation in community planning: the ability of the public to be
involved in community planning decisions relating to telecommunications infrastructure
will be reduced for those activities that are permitted.
 Policy development and implementation: there will be increased costs for central
government to develop and implement the proposed changes.
 Potential cost and resources spent on amending district plans: if the amendments
include reference to special protected areas in district plans, councils may have to spend
time and resources updating their district plans to account for these areas.
 Proposed changes may enable infrastructure to be developed in culturally sensitive
areas: this will only occur if these areas are not protected through additional proposed
provisions.
 Reduction in amenity: there is the potential for reduction in amenity for residents and
the community, particularly when the cumulative effects are considered.
 Reduced employment opportunities: the proposed amendments could potentially
reduce employment opportunities in both industry and local government by reducing
the requirement for resource consent processing.
Environmental
Social
Economic
Economic
Cultural
Environmental
Economic, social
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
31
7.4
Economic
7.4.1 Economic growth
The major benefit of the roll-out of RBI, UFB and mobile infrastructure in general is that it will
provide improved and cheaper services to industries and New Zealand citizens. For example,
an Alcatel-Lucent study found that in New Zealand the economic benefits to New Zealand end
users of high-speed broadband applications will amount to $32.8 billion over 20 years. This
only addresses the net benefits from upgraded high-speed broadband, but being able to
deliver on this broadband faster and with minimal regulatory delays would also result in an
economic benefit to New Zealand. While this benefit will be of a smaller magnitude than the
net benefits of UFB and RBI, it will not be insignificant.
7.4.2 Cost savings for the telecommunications industry
Information was sought from industry on the economic benefits of the proposed permitted
activities. In general, consistent consenting requirements will result in more certainty for
network operators. Improved certainty will enable operators to purchase equipment and
commence site designs earlier, making their operations more efficient. It will also mean
reduced time and resources spent reviewing and interpreting district plans and applying for
varying resource consents nationally, cost savings through not needing to apply for resource
consents, and time efficiencies.
Table 8 provides an example of the costs currently faced by the telecommunications industry
under the status quo. The following section discusses the benefits to the industry of reducing
these costs through the proposed amendments.
Table 8:
Example savings that could be met by a large telecommunications operator under the
amended NESTF
Reviewing district plans
$100,000 annually
Resource consent
applications
$4,800 to $14,000 per
application
Appeals
Additional processing
time
> $200,000 per appeal
~3 months per consent
Telecommunications cables / UFB network

While many of the consents required for the initial phase of the UFB build will be in place
before the NESTF amendments, the expansions to the project mean the NESTF would still
result in significant savings.

There are up to 37 areas that have been announced as potential UFB extension candidate
areas, covering 28 local authorities and over 30 district plans. Resource consent for aerial
telecommunications cables is required in 19 of these areas. The remaining 21 plans that
‘permit’ aerial deployment are likely to impose a range of different conditions. There are
considerable costs associated with reviewing plans and preparing applications for consent
where such variation exists.
32
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
Mobile network / RBI

In addition, critical equipment roll-outs and upgrades will be required over the coming
years. For example, to upgrade existing sites to operate over the new 700 MHz spectrum
band because the required equipment does not fit under the existing NESTF provisions,
making the actual potential savings much higher. All three mobile network operators
expect an increase in their resource consenting costs if amendments to the NESTF are
not made.

Network operators’ involvement in council planning processes can also be a costly
exercise. For example, two operators jointly spend between $350,000 and $400,000 per
year reviewing district plans, and have spent $275,000 to date submitting on the Proposed
Auckland Unitary Plan. They expect further involvement in the Auckland planning process
to cost up to $1 million. Each network operator may save around $100,000 per year
reviewing and submitting on plans, bearing in mind that they will still have to review plans
for activities not covered by the proposed NESTF.

The expansion of the RBI will see the potential benefits of the NESTF extended even
further. While policies are yet to be determined, there could be another 100 to 200 rural
towers built under the RBI. Hypothetically, based on the analysis undertaken by Jacobs
SKM, this could mean that 56 per cent (112) of the new towers would require a resource
consent, costing the telecommunications operators an estimated $1,586,000.
There are additional cost savings that would accrue as a result of the NESTF. The conditions
attached to the permitted activity would be consistent across all regions, meaning
telecommunications operators would be able to achieve certainty and economies of scale
when planning their roll-out. This would result in additional savings, meaning the
Government’s $100 million fund to extend the RBI could reach more people across rural
New Zealand.
While the proposed amendments are expected to generally benefit the telecommunications
industry, some operators may face increased costs in some areas as a result of the changes.
Costs will occur where the amended NESTF results in more stringent regulation for activities
than is provided in district plans (eg, district plans may have more permissive conditions for
permitted activities, or no conditions at all, than the proposed NESTF). This will apply in a
minority of local authority districts, and is expected to be less significant than the opposite
effect of benefit for industry from reduced and more consistent regulation country-wide.
7.4.3 Local government
The proposed changes to the NESTF would likely result in financial benefits to local
government as a result of reduced resource consent processing and compliance costs and
workload. In assessing the benefits to local government, we were advised by local government
members of the Technical Advisory Group that it would not be possible for councils to provide
the type of information we sought within the available timeframe. Instead, we have ensured
that this information can be collected through the consultation process by including additional
questions for councils in the discussion document.
Previous analysis conducted for the establishment of the current NESTF, however, indicated
that councils may save around $1,300 per resource consent avoided. As an example, assuming
100 to 200 new rural towers will be built for the RBI network, and 56 per cent of these (112)
will require resource consent, this could be a saving for local governments of $145,600. This
does not take into account higher costs for notified resource consents and hearings.
The proposed changes may also result in costs to local government to implement the changes,
which will involve updating and training staff, particularly those processing applications.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
33
Territorial authorities may also need to update district plans to protect significant areas to
align with the proposed amendments (if the amendments include specific protection for these
areas). Preliminary consultation with some councils has highlighted concerns about the costs
of plan changes for areas of cultural or heritage value, and for natural hazard zones. The
discussion document proposes that plan overlays, detailing areas where the proposed
standards in the NESTF are not appropriate, may not have been developed by many councils.
These plan overlays may be costly to develop and may not be available for the commencement
of the amended NESTF. More feedback is requested from councils in order to better
understand the costs and timeframes to councils in developing these overlays.
Councils will also lose the option of controlling the visual and disruptive impacts of deploying
cables and antennas, as proposed by the amendments to the NESTF. They may also face
increased costs from managing road space between competing users, and for adjusting their
district plans to be consistent with the amended NESTF, if introduced. There were concerns
from some councils that amending the NESTF would result in costs associated with updating
their plans to align with the NESTF. Councils do not have to do this immediately and may
incorporate it into any other relevant plan change. However, a council undertaking a plan
change specifically to incorporate the amended NESTF might incur an estimated one-off cost
of $80,000 to $100,000.
The Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunications
Facilitie: Discussion Document (discussion document) will provide councils with an opportunity
to assess these assumptions further and to provide a better indication of likely costs and
savings.
7.4.4 Central government
The central government will incur costs as a result of amending the NESTF, which would not
result from the status quo. These costs will be the costs associated with developing and
implementing new legislation, including hearing and addressing submissions. These costs have
not yet been quantified.
7.4.5 Residents
The analysis conducted for the establishment of the NESTF in 2008 found evidence on the
relationship between cellular facilities and property values to be mixed. While media reports
and qualitative surveys of residents at the time suggested an expectation of substantial price
falls following the installation of cell towers, quantitative analysis of actual transaction data
suggested the negative impact is small and falls away rapidly with distance from the site. The
perceived reduction in value from close location of towers is much greater than that realised
across the neighbourhoods in which they are located. It is also greater in cases where tower
location attracts a lot of media interest in the locality.
The release of a discussion document will provide an opportunity to assess whether values
have changed significantly since the establishment of the original NESTF. Given the rising
popularity of smartphone use, and the expectation for cell phone connectivity, there may in
fact be an opposing effect, such that reduced or bad mobile connectivity in a region has a
negative effect on property values.
34
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
The current analysis does not quantify such property value effects because:

property value effects are often not considered in national cost–benefit assessment

the facilities that are the main subject of the NESTF amendment are considered to have a
less than minor, to a minor to moderate, environmental impact (the discussion document
will provide residents with the opportunity to comment on these assumptions)

attempting to model impacts on a geographical basis would be complex, costly and
provide marginally useful information for a cost–benefit analysis.
7.5
Environmental effects
In order to assess the proposed amendments, a high-level review was undertaken of the
environmental effects of installing telecommunications infrastructure across New Zealand.
This review of effects was based on the RMA section 3 meaning of ‘effect’:
In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, the term effect includes—
(a) any positive or adverse effect; and
(b) any temporary or permanent effect; and
(c) any past, present, or future effect, and
(d) any cumulative effect which arises over time or in combination with other effects –
regardless of the scale, intensity, duration, or frequency of the effect, and also includes –
(e) any potential effect of high probability; and
(f)
any potential effect of low probability which has a high potential impact.
Telecommunications infrastructure is required wherever services are provided, so a large
number of people will be affected in some way or another. The assessment of effects
undertaken was generic, based on each piece of UFB and mobile infrastructure and the
associated installation activities. The environmental effects were concentrated in two areas:
the installation/construction phase, and permanent amenity effects. The key environmental
effects are assessed below.
7.5.1 Installation/construction effects
Environmental effects from the installation of telecommunications and mobile network
infrastructure include:


earthworks effects from trenching, and in some cases micro-trenching, including
-
dust
-
noise
-
vibration
-
land stability/erosion
-
water quality and stormwater effects from sediment run-off
traffic congestion and access effects during installation activities.
Effects related to installation, specifically in relation to earthworks and traffic management,
are temporary and can be managed and mitigated with appropriate control measures.
Installation activities and earthworks are common in the built-up environment and tend to be
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
35
focused on modest and discrete areas, so that the effect on people would be temporary and
generally of a low level.
7.5.2 Permanent effects
The ongoing permanent effects of telecommunications and mobile networks infrastructure
include:

permanent visual amenity effects from above-ground structures, including above-ground
cables, above-ground cabinets, masts and antennas – the extent of visual amenity effect
on the community will be increased with the visual clutter created cumulatively due to
infrastructure.
Note: there will be no permanent visual effects from underground cables and cabinets and
their installation activities (such as trenching).
7.5.3 Overall effects
Overall, the environmental effects from each piece of telecommunications infrastructure
individually, and their installation activities, tend to be low (less than minor or negligible).
However, cumulative visual effects of above-ground infrastructure were found to be greater
(minor or more than minor). Note that under the consent process, when effects are more than
minor, the consent is publically notified. Also, visual effects in the urban environment will
largely be related to visual clutter from infrastructure. In the rural environment a single piece
of infrastructure (mast and antenna) and the associated accessway created could create
moderate visual effects. Note that the level of effect determined was generic and may be
more or less significant depending on the local environment.
The visual effects are unlikely to result in any quantifiable cost to the community. The risk of
proliferation of telecommunication cables is considered to be low. Given the high capacity of
these cables and the high costs of deployment, telecommunications operators have a big
incentive to deploy as few cables as possible to meet demand. Appropriate mitigations for the
proposals can ensure any environmental effects remain minor.
Also, the risk of cumulative effects is low for two reasons. First, infrastructure can be expensive
to install, providing an incentive for telecommunications network operators to design efficient
networks that avoid installing more equipment than is necessary. Second, cumulative effects
can be effectively mitigated via conditions on permitted activities proposed in the NESTF. For
example, the installation of aerial cables is only permitted where aerial lines already exist.
Insensitive siting of such structures in places that obscure sightlines or detract from the street
appeal of properties is a potential concern. This will be mitigated by minimum separation
distances (already in the current NESTF) and requirements to comply with performance
standards in existing district plans. Through the district plan process the community has had
the opportunity to identify whether the potential effects on amenity from street clutter is an
issue for them. The extent to which residents have any effective say in that process is,
however, difficult to judge. The level of response on previous RMA and other local government
consultation has demonstrated that most residents are not active in trying to influence
decisions, except where it affects them directly. Therefore, these effects are expected to be
minimal.
Comments on this assessment are welcome via the discussion document regarding this
proposal and mitigations for these activities.
36
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
7.6
Social effects
There are many social effects that arise as a result of fast, reliable broadband infrastructure.
Education, health care, communities and small business all stand to gain from improved
communications technologies. The NESTF will ensure that these benefits can be realised
sooner, as well as ensuring the UFB and RBI programmes can reach as many people as
possible. While these effects cannot always be quantified, some of the potential applications
and benefits that could be furthered by fibre networks include the following:

Business: businesses will have an improved capability to expand and compete globally
through greater access to research and development, and investment, and greater ability
to collaborate with customers, supplier and partners in real time.

Health: new applications and improved health services over broadband are likely to make
it easier to identify and treat people through electronic health records, to open up the
ability for people to be diagnosed and treated from a distance, to allow people to better
assess their personal health and know when to seek medical advice, and to ameliorate
social isolation in older people and enable them to stay in their homes longer.

Education: broadband in schools delivers a broad curriculum regardless of where a child
lives, and promotes digital literacy.

Environment: ultra-fast broadband promotes the development of technologies that enable
better monitoring of the environment to assist the agricultural sector with crop care, and
the development of more sustainable and environmentally friendly living practices
through the use of devices that encourage smarter and more efficient use of resources
(eg, smart cars and smart meters/grids).

Quality of life: broadband enables other increases in quality of life through better enabling
flexible working practices such as remote working, social networking, the ability to make
better buying decisions online and the promotion of more sustainable living practices.
Aside from the social benefits, there are also social costs. Under the current structure, local
residents can be involved in the decision-making process for telecommunications
infrastructure not currently covered by the NESTF. Local residents can be involved through
making submissions on their district plans and making submissions on notified resource
consents or resource consents where they are considered an affected party.
The proposed amendments to the NESTF will reduce the ability of residents to comment on
proposals or rules that may affect them. This effect will be mitigated by protecting sensitive
areas, as identified in district plans. However, the discussion document will provide people
with an opportunity to comment further on this, and whether or not it is perceived that the
proposed amendments constitute a significant loss to residents.
7.7
Cultural effects
The cultural impacts of the proposals are considered to be very limited. There is a risk that
permitting a wider range of activities will mean that telecommunications infrastructure may be
installed in areas of cultural or heritage value, where they should not be. Regulation 6 of the
existing NESTF provides that a district plan’s rules need to be complied with if consent is
already required for works within the drip line of a tree, or where the adjacent site is accorded
specific protection under the relevant district plan, such as for historic heritage, visual amenity
or coastal protection. The existing NESTF allows these district plan rules to be more stringent
than the standards in the NESTF. If the plan’s rules are not complied with, then resource
consent may be required.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
37
Regulation 6 was intended to preserve existing district plan rules relating to protecting trees
and vegetation, historic heritage values, visual amenity values and the coastal marine area. It is
not intended to create new consenting requirements where none previously existed. Under
the existing NESTF, district plan rules relating to historic heritage values, visual amenity values
and the coastal marine area must specifically relate to network utility structures in road
reserves (not just the adjacent land) for these to be applicable under Regulation 6.
It is not proposed that the application of Regulation 6 to the existing standards in the NESTF be
changed. These existing protection provisions relate to the status of the adjacent site.
However, in extending the scope of the NESTF to a wider range of infrastructure and beyond
the road reserve, it is important to ensure that cultural impacts for the new proposed
permitted activities are also managed.
7.8
Conclusion
Preliminary consultation with industry, territorial authorities and environmental planners
indicates that there will be a substantial net benefit from adopting the proposed amendments
to the NESTF. Although there are costs associated with potential environmental effects and the
loss of public participation in decision-making, these can be mitigated through further
refinement of the proposal. For this reason, it is important to obtain more data from key
stakeholders. The discussion document will provide an opportunity to gather this information.
Data gained from submissions will be analysed in order to conduct a more complete and up-todate cost–benefit analysis that will inform the case for amending the NESTF.
38
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
8
Summary of evaluation
A preliminary section 32 evaluation has been undertaken to test the efficiency, effectiveness
and risk of the proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for
Telecommunication Facilities(NESTF). The proposed amendments have been assessed against
the status quo of keeping the current NESTF provisions unchanged.
The evaluation has found that the proposed amendments would ensure that the objectives of
the NESTF could be fully achieved to enable the delivery of the current communication
infrastructure, including the development of the Ultra-Fast Broadband and mobile
infrastructure. Further, the proposed amendments are considered compatible with the current
policy objectives, which would remain in the event the amendments are adopted, consistent
with section 32(3) of the Resource Management Act 1991.
The preliminary cost–benefit analysis suggests that, on balance, the proposed amendments
would provide the most cost-efficient means for achieving the policy objectives. There are
some risks associated with acting in this instance, and these risks mainly relate to the potential
cumulative environmental effects of the proposed amendments and the loss of public
participation in community planning decisions.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
39
Appendix A: Information sources
Alcatel-Lucent. 2012. Building the Benefits of High-speed Broadband for New Zealanders.
Retrieved from: www.alcatel-lucent.com/press/2012/002592.
Jacobs SKM. 2014. Environmental Effects of Implementing Ultra-Fast Broadband, Innovation
and Employment. Prepared for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment by Jacobs
SKM. Wellington: Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Ministry for the Environment. 2015. Outcome Evaluation of the National Environmental
Standards for Telecommunication Facilities. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.
40
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
Appendix B: Relevant sections of the
Resource Management Act 1991
Section 32. Requirements for preparing and publishing evaluation reports
(1)
An evaluation report required under this Act must—
(a)
examine the extent to which the objectives of the proposal being evaluated are
the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of this Act; and
(b)
examine whether the provisions in the proposal are the most appropriate way to
achieve the objectives by—
(c)
(2)
identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the
objectives; and
(ii)
assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in achieving the
objectives; and
(iii)
summarising the reasons for deciding on the provisions; and
contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the
environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from
the implementation of the proposal.
An assessment under subsection (1)(b)(ii) must—
(a)
(3)
(i)
identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social,
and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the
provisions, including the opportunities for—
(i)
economic growth that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and
(ii)
employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and
(b)
if practicable, quantify the benefits and costs referred to in paragraph (a); and
(c)
assess the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient
information about the subject matter of the provisions.
If the proposal (an amending proposal) will amend a standard, statement, regulation,
plan, or change that is already proposed or that already exists (an existing proposal), the
examination under subsection (1)(b) must relate to—
(a)
the provisions and objectives of the amending proposal; and
(b)
the objectives of the existing proposal to the extent that those objectives—
(i)
are relevant to the objectives of the amending proposal; and
(ii)
would remain if the amending proposal were to take effect.
Section 43. Regulations prescribing national environmental standards
(1)
The Governor-General may, by Order in Council, make regulations, to be known as
national environmental standards, that prescribe any or all of the following technical
standards, methods, or requirements:
(a)
standards for the matters referred to in section 9, section 11, section 12, section
13, section 14, or section 15, including, but not limited to—
(i)
contaminants
(ii)
water quality, level, or flow
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
41
(2)
(3)
(iii)
air quality
(iv)
soil quality in relation to the discharge of contaminants
(b)
standards for noise
(c)
standards, methods, or requirements for monitoring.
The regulations may include:
(a)
qualitative or quantitative standards
(b)
standards for any discharge or the ambient environment
(c)
methods for classifying a natural or physical resource
(d)
methods, processes, or technology to implement standards
(e)
exemptions from standards
(f)
transitional provisions for standards, methods, or requirements.
Section 360(2) applies to all regulations made under this section.
Section 43A. Contents of national environmental standards
(1)
National environmental standards may—
(a)
prohibit an activity:
(b)
allow an activity:
(c)
restrict the making of a rule or the granting of a resource consent to matters
specified in a national environmental standard:
(d)
require a person to obtain a certificate from a specified person stating that an
activity complies with a term or condition imposed by a national environmental
standard:
(e)
specify, in relation to a rule made before the commencement of a national
environmental standard,—
(i) the extent to which any matter to which the standard applies continues to
have effect; or
(ii) the time period during which any matter to which the standard applies
continues to have effect:
(f)
(2)
A national environmental standard that prohibits an activity—
(a)
(b)
(3)
42
require local authorities to review, under section 128(1), all or any of the permits
to which paragraph (ba) of that subsection applies as soon as practicable or within
the time specified in a national environmental standard.
may do one or both of the following:
(i)
state that a resource consent may be granted for the activity, but only on
the terms or conditions specified in the standard; and
(ii)
require compliance with the rules in a plan or proposed plan as a term or
condition; or
may state that the activity is a prohibited activity.
If an activity has significant adverse effects on the environment, a national
environmental standard must not, under subsections (1)(b) and (4),—
(a)
allow the activity, unless it states that a resource consent is required for the
activity; or
(b)
state that the activity is a permitted activity.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
(4)
(5)
(6)
A national environmental standard that allows an activity—
(a)
may state that a resource consent is not required for the activity; or
(b)
may do one or both of the following:
state that the activity is a permitted activity, but only on the terms or
conditions specified in the standard; and
(ii)
require compliance with the rules in a plan or proposed plan as a term or
condition.
If a national environmental standard allows an activity and states that a resource
consent is not required for the activity, or states that an activity is a permitted activity,
the following provisions apply to plans and proposed plans:
(a)
a plan or proposed plan may state that the activity is a permitted activity on the
terms or conditions specified in the plan; and
(b)
the terms or conditions specified in the plan may deal only with effects of the
activity that are different from those dealt with in the terms or conditions
specified in the standard; and
(c)
if a plan’s terms or conditions deal with effects of the activity that are the same as
those dealt with in the terms or conditions specified in the standard, the terms or
conditions in the standard prevail.
A national environmental standard that allows a resource consent to be granted for an
activity—
(a)
(b)
(7)
(i)
may state that the activity is—
(i)
a controlled activity; or
(ii)
a restricted discretionary activity; or
(iii)
a discretionary activity; or
(iv)
a non-complying activity; and
may state the matters over which—
(i)
control is reserved; or
(ii)
discretion is restricted.
A national environmental standard may specify the activities for which the consent
authority—
(a)
must give public notification of an application for a resource consent:
(b)
is precluded from giving public notification of an application for a resource
consent:
(c)
is precluded from giving limited notification of an application for a resource
consent.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
43
Appendix C: Proposed amendments
Table AC1:
Proposed new permitted activities with associated standards
Permitted activities
Aerial distribution
Aerial placement of telecommunications cables by a telecommunications operator
over road reserve and other land, including all necessary ancillary equipment,
subject to the following conditions:
 no additional poles are installed
 there is existing aerial cabling using the poles to be used for the new
telecommunications cables (for electricity or telecommunications or other
utilities)
 the diameter of the new cabling does not exceed 30 mm
 cables use existing crossing and corridors (ie, no new road crossings may be
installed).
Necessary associated earthworks and ancillary equipment affixed to poles may
include (but is not limited to) fibre access terminals, fibre coils or loops, protection
guards, ducting, and aerial to underground connections.
Ongoing operation and maintenance of the network is permitted.
Relocation and/or replacement of poles where necessary for structural or safety
reasons may be up to 3 m from the original location.
Aerial provisioning
Aerial provisioning of telecommunications cables by a telecommunications operator
is permitted, including all necessary ancillary equipment, subject to the following
conditions:
 no additional poles are installed in the road reserve
 the aerial provisioning uses existing crossing and corridors (ie, no new road
crossings are installed)
 the diameter of the new cabling, including hybrid solutions such as a copper-fibre
hybrid cable, does not exceed 30 mm.
Necessary associated earthworks and ancillary equipment affixed to poles may
include (but is not limited to) fibre access terminals, fibre coils or loops, protection
guards, ducting, and aerial to underground connections.
Ongoing operation and maintenance of the network is permitted.
Relocation and/or replacement of poles where necessary for structural or safety
reasons may be up to 3 m from the original location.
Underground
distribution
Underground placement of telecommunications cables by a telecommunications
operator is permitted, including any necessary drilling and trenching and associated
earthworks and underground ancillary equipment, including (but not limited to)
ducting, feeder breakout points, and hand holes or plinths.
Underground
provisioning
Underground provisioning of telecommunications cables by a telecommunications
operator is permitted, including any necessary drilling and trenching and associated
earthworks and underground ancillary equipment, including (but not limited to)
ducting, feeder breakout points, and hand holes or plinths.
Antennas on multistorey buildings
The placement of antennas on the roof or side of a building is permitted, subject to
the following conditions:
 the building is no less than 15 m high
 rooftop antennas do not extend beyond 5 m higher than the part of the building
to which they are attached
 the diameter of the antenna at its widest point does not exceed 0.8 m.
Lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antennas.
Associated cabinets with a footprint of no more than 2 m2 and no more than 2 m
high are permitted.
All other equipment necessary for the operation of the antenna, such as the mast or
other support structure, feeder cables and ancillary antennas, is permitted.
44
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
Permitted activities
Antennas in rural areas
The placement of an antenna in an area zoned rural in the relevant district plan is
permitted, subject to the following conditions:
 the total height (of the mast and antenna) does not exceed 25 m
 the diameter of the structure at its widest point (excluding the concrete plinth)
does not exceed 6 m
 the site is not a scheduled site or area subject to any special rules (eg, landscape
provisions for outstanding natural landscapes or outstanding natural features)
 the antenna is not located closer than 50 m from the boundary of an area zoned
residential
 the antenna is not located closer than 50 m from the closest external wall of a
dwelling in a sensitive land-use area
 lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antenna
 all equipment necessary for the operation and security of the antenna, such as
the mast or other support structure, casing or coverings, feeder cables, ancillary
antennas, cabinets, security equipment, fences, handrails, and steps or ramps, is
permitted
 the support structure is coloured recessive grey or recessive green
 if any earthworks are required to prepare the site:
 the earthworks do not occur closer than 20 m from the nearest waterbody
 the ground must be reinstated within 72 hours
 if any vegetation clearance (trimming or removal) is required to prepare the site:
 the tree(s) must not be scheduled
 any indigenous vegetation must be reinstated or replaced within the
practicable vicinity of the site.
New masts to carry
antennas in the road
reserve
The installation of a new mast with antennas attached in the road reserve is
permitted, subject to the following condition:
 the total height and width of the mast and antenna are no larger than they would
have been if installed in accordance with Regulation 7 (of the existing NESTF) on
an existing utility structure within 100 m of the installation site. If there are
multiple poles in the 100 m radius, operators must take the average of the poles .
Co-location of multiple
telecommunications
operators’ antennas
Increasing the total height of an existing mast and antenna by up to 5 m is permitted,
subject to the following conditions:
 one or more additional telecommunications operators place an antenna on the
existing mast at the time the height is increased
 the area is not zoned residential in the relevant district plan
 the existing mast and antenna are lawfully established (i.e., authorised by a
regulation, plan or consent under the RMA)
 this provision is not applied to a single site more than once
 telecommunications operators cannot exercise this right of activity until they
have disclosed their co-location agreement with the relevant local authority and
the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antenna.
An additional cabinet with a footprint of no more than 2 m2 and no more than 2 m
high housing the necessary equipment of the additional telecommunications
operator(s) may be installed at the site.
Additional ancillary equipment (such as feeder cables) on the outside of the support
structure is permitted.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
45
Permitted activities
Replacement of existing
antennas to improve
service or operate on
additional or new
spectrum bands such as
the new 700 MHz
spectrum band
Replacing an existing antenna with a larger antenna capable of operating over
additional or new spectrum bands is permitted, subject to the following conditions:
 the total height of the replacement infrastructure (mast and antenna) is no more
than 2 m higher than total height of the existing infrastructure
 the diameter of the replacement antenna is no more than the diameter of the
existing antenna plus 50%
 the diameter of any existing mast is extended no more than the diameter of the
existing mast plus 30%
 the existing mast and antenna is lawfully established (i.e., authorised by a
regulation, plan or consent under the RMA).
Lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antennas.
An additional cabinet with a footprint of no more than 2 m2 and no more than 2 m
high housing the necessary equipment of the additional telecommunications
operator(s) may be installed at the site.
Additional ancillary equipment (such as feeder cables) on the outside of the support
structure is permitted.
Additional antennas at
existing sites to improve
service or operate on
additional or new
spectrum bands such as
the new 700 MHz
spectrum band
Installation of additional antennas at a telecommunications operator’s existing site
(ie, on an existing mast on which that telecommunications operator has an existing
antenna) to ensure that the site is capable of operating over additional or new
spectrum bands is permitted, subject to the following conditions:
 the total height of the replacement infrastructure (mast and antenna) is no more
than 2 m higher than the total height of the existing infrastructure
 the total diameter of the headframe of the structure at its widest point is no
more than the diameter of the existing structure plus 100%
 the diameter of any existing mast at its widest is extended no more than the
diameter of the existing mast plus 30%
 the area is not zoned residential in the relevant district plan
 the existing mast and antenna are lawfully established (i.e., authorised by a
regulation, plan or consent under the RMA).
Lightning rods may extend beyond the height of the antenna.
An additional cabinet with a footprint of no more than 2 m2 and no more than 2 m
high housing the necessary equipment of the additional telecommunications
operator(s) may be installed at the site.
Additional ancillary equipment (such as feeder cables) on the outside of the support
structure is permitted.
Small-cell units in the
road reserve
Installation of a small-cell unit on a structure (eg, bus stop, cabinet, traffic pole,
signage, light pole) and all ancillary equipment necessary for the operation of the
small-cell unit (eg, mounts, cables, combiner/junction boxes) by a
telecommunications operator within the road reserve is permitted, subject to the
following condition:
 the small-cell unit and the ancillary equipment do not exceed a volumetric
dimension of 0.11 m3 (eg, 700 mm h x 500 mm w x 300 mm d).
Small-cell units on
private land (eg, on the
outside of buildings)
Installation of a small-cell unit on private land (eg, on the outside of a building) and
all ancillary equipment necessary for the operation of the small-cell unit (eg, mounts,
cables, combiner/junction boxes) by a telecommunications operator is permitted,
subject to the following condition:
 the small-cell unit and the ancillary equipment do not exceed a volumetric
dimension of 0.11 m3 (eg, 700 mm h x 500 mm w x 300 mm d).
46
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
Table AC2:
Proposed amendments to standards for existing permitted activities
Amendments
Location of replacement
utility structures
A replacement utility structure may be moved to within a 3 m radius of the
original utility structure location, provided the structure is still located on the
road reserve.
Size envelope for antennas
The antenna(s) – excluding the mount, if there is one, and the shroud, if there is
one, and ancillary equipment, if there is any – must fit within the dimensions of
a cylindrical shape that, when measured along the centre line of the mast (new
structure, original utility structure or replacement utility structure), is not more
than 3.5 m high and no more than 0.7 m in diameter.
The height of the replacement utility structure must be no more than the
original utility structure’s highest point plus the lesser of 3.5 m or 35%.
Size of replacement utility
structure (including the
antenna and the mast)
The replacement utility structure must not have a diameter that is more than
the original utility structure’s diameter at its largest point plus 100%.
Clarification of per ‘site’
terminology
‘Site’ will be defined as an area where cabinets are located. The requirement
that each site must be located a minimum of 30 m from another site will remain
unchanged.
Time for cabinets to be
replaced
Two cabinets on the same side of the road may be located within 30 m of each
other, but more than 500 mm apart, as a permitted activity subject to the
following conditions:
 the purpose of the new cabinet is to replace the existing cabinet
 the existing cabinet must be removed no later than 12 months following
installation of the replacement cabinet.
Additional cabinets
This condition applies if two or more cabinets are located at the same site in a
road reserve next to land that a relevant district plan or proposed district plan
classifies as primarily for residential activities. Each cabinet’s footprint must be
no more than 1.4 m². The total footprint of all the cabinets must be no more
than 2 m². The distance between each cabinet and the cabinet or cabinets
closest to it must be no more than 500 mm. The cabinets must be no higher
than the height of the concrete foundation plinths, if there are any, plus 1.8 m.
Incorporation by reference
Replace reference to NZS 6609.2:1990 Radiofrequency Radiation – Principles
and Methods of Measurement – 300 kHz to 100 GHz with reference to
AS/NZS 2772.2:2011 Radiofrequency Fields Part 2: Principles and Methods of
Measurement and Computation – 3 kHz to 300 GHz.
Amendment of section 6 –
protection zones
To expand the conditions under section 6 to include all new activities (in and
outside the road reserve) covered by the amended NESTF and adding a
provision that would allow zones classified as ‘natural hazard zones’ to be
exempt from the NESTF.
Proposed Amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Telecommunication Facilities
47