Conn., Other States Weigh Pole Attachment Rules

PURA is weighing a one-touch policy after its May pole-attachments decision on engineering phase policies (see 2104230057). The agency plans technical meetings in docket 19-01-052RE01 Aug. 19 and 20.

OTMR would allow “a single crew to move all attachments on a pole on a single visit, rather than sending in a unique crew to move each attachment sequentially,” commented the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities and Connecticut Council of Small Towns. “Sending in separate crews is time-consuming and disruptive to local communities and municipal governments.” The local groups said providers “are likely to look more favorably at OTMR communities as they plan their investments.”

PURA should “specifically recognize municipal requirements for OTMR,” said Northwest ConneCT in an attachment to the local groups' filing. The nonprofit said it represents 25 northwest towns seeking fiber in a region where private companies are unlikely to provide fast enough service. “Municipalities will have to fill the gap, either with municipal networks, municipal dark fiber wiring offered to private partners, or direct subsidies to private partners.”

“Pole owner delays remain the largest impediments to wireless deployment in Connecticut,” CTIA wrote. Like Pennsylvania and West Virginia, Connecticut should closely mirror FCC rules, the wireless association said. “Having a consistent framework for pole attachments from state to state facilitates broadband deployment by promoting efficient use of resources.” OTMR lets “the most motivated parties ... expedite deployment should they choose to do so, while still promoting safe attachment practices,” it said.

Others asking PURA to mostly adopt FCC rules included Lumen, Crown Castle and the Office of Consumer Counsel. Lumen sees delays with application and invoicing for make-ready work and pole replacements, the ILEC said. “The costs can become extremely expensive (e.g., to move a transformer) and delay in receiving make-ready estimates for such work impacts implementation.” The New England Telecommunications and Cable Association supports FCC rules for simple work, with protections for existing attachers.

New York's OTMR process allowed Tilson to complete 300 placements in one year, but in Connecticut, “the pole owners may take several years to prepare a pole for and then authorize a new attachment,” the telecom infrastructure builder said. United Illuminating warned a New York-style OTMR process would be an administrative burden because it would mean much more billing. PURA should base rules on Maine and make OTMR available only for simple attachments in communications spaces, said Eversource Energy. “Work on and around electrical lines requires specialized training to help ensure the safety of workers, the public, and surrounding property, and also to help preserve reliable customer electrical service.”

A one-touch policy risks jobs and worker and public safety, said Communications Workers of America: That’s why the legislature declined to require PURA to develop OTMR rules in the governor's broadband package this year.

Florida

The Florida Public Service Commission will soon open a docket to decide how it will regulate pole attachments, with a workshop expected later this month, a spokesperson told us.

Florida lawmakers required the PSC to propose rules by January to regulate pole attachments and mediate disputes, through a law enacted in June (see 2106300047). Florida, which deregulated telecommunications nearly two decades ago, will soon join 22 other states and Washington, D.C., in reverse preempting the FCC. Pennsylvania and West Virginia recently joined that list after many years with no additions.

The electric industry “tends to be more powerful at the state level” and may prefer the Florida PSC in charge rather than the FCC, which more often sides with communications companies in disputes, said GrayRobinson’s Gary Resnick, a local government attorney in Florida. Also, the legislature seemed keen this year on getting broadband out to unserved areas, as shown by the state enacting a separate law requiring $1 wireline broadband pole attachment rates for one year in unserved areas, he said. The change could give local Florida governments more say, said Resnick, though he cautioned that “the PSC has to develop the rules, so the devil will be in the details.”

“There’s always an opportunity that the state commission will do better by electric utility pole owners than the pole owners feel the FCC treats them,” plus states may think that with “closer control and scrutiny, they can promote broadband in their state,” said Keller Heckman’s Thomas Magee, an attorney for electric utilities and cooperatives. Reducing attachment rates and requiring more favorable terms won’t necessarily lead to more rural deployment, he cautioned. Magee praised Florida requiring $1 rates in unserved areas, following a similar Georgia PSC decision (see 2012150059). Georgia’s policy led to announcements this year about rural broadband deployments by electric cooperatives, he said.

Other States

The Louisiana PSC is looking at rate levels for attaching 5G wireless equipment to electric distribution poles in docket R-35568. Staff “has engaged all parties to the docket in the discovery process in anticipation of organizing a technical conference in the near future, notice of which will be posted in the docket,” a PSC spokesperson emailed.

The Maine Public Utilities Commission’s next phase of pole-attachments work “will focus on identifying and implementing a statewide database of existing poles and attachments and the allocation of costs when a pole must be replaced to facilitate new attachments,” a PUC spokesperson emailed: “They are hoping to start the next round sometime this fall.” The PUC adopted one-touch, make-ready in April (see 2104060036).

The Kentucky PSC filed new pole attachment administrative regulations with the Legislative Research Commission (LRC) May 14. It held a public hearing July 29 on the filed rules and received written comments July 31. “The next step is for the PSC to accumulate comments (including written) and file with LRC a Statement of Consideration along with any changes in the regulation made in response to comments,” a spokesperson emailed.

Carriers supported California adopting OTMR rules, in spring comments at the PUC, while others warned about possible safety issues and the agency’s safety division sought more study (see 2104130053). The commission in December estimated a Q2 proposed decision, but it's now Q3. A CPUC spokesperson said a draft “will be issued as soon as it’s ready.”

An ExteNet petition to update Michigan pole rules awaits an order by the PSC, a spokesperson said. “No date has been set for it.”