Maine Rep Says PUC Pole-Attachment Proposal Misses the Mark
A Maine legislator and CLECs raised concerns proposed pole-attachment rule changes by the Public Utility Commission don't include competitive requirements suggested by the 2017 state law that ordered the changes. At a PUC hearing livestreamed Wednesday, the law’s House sponsor, Rep. Seth Berry (D), said the Sept. 27 rulemaking notice in docket 2017-00247 doesn’t strongly regulate pole attachments and leaves out “Oxford rules” that CLECs support but FairPoint Communications opposes. “We remain dubious about what appears at this point to be a step backward,” Berry said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
It's one of about 20 states that regulate pole attachments, while others follow FCC rules. Berry urged “adoption of a pole-attachment rule which reduces time, costs and delays for attaching communications facilities for poles and which creates a supportive environment for the prompt and economic deployment of competitive options.” He said the proposal missed the legislative authors’ directive that the agency write proscriptive rules governing conduct. The PUC instead proposed “presumptive” rules that would set up a longer complaint process, he said. “We did not want it to be necessary for broadband providers to have to undertake costly litigation at the commission to enforce the rules.”
Berry and CLEC officials complained the plan doesn’t fully adopt Oxford rules, written 10 years ago for pole attachments of CLEC Oxford Networks, now owned by FirstLight Fiber. The Oxford rules, which don’t apply to any other CLECs, resulted from a dispute between Oxford and Verizon Maine -- now FairPoint -- and are in an October 2006 PUC order in docket 2005-00486.
The Oxford rules should apply to all pole attachers with no conditions, but the PUC proposal says Oxford rules apply only if the pole owner allows it, Berry said. A key Oxford rule listed in the 2017 law but left out by the PUC gives the right to attach equipment below an ILEC’s facilities when higher space isn’t available, the lawmaker said. The rule saves attachers money because they otherwise would have to pay costs of lowering all existing facilities to make room for new equipment.
FairPoint opposes wide adoption of Oxford rules, said Senior Director-Government Relations Sarah Davis. “They do not provide greater efficiency [but] they do compromise safety, and that is not acceptable.” The PUC should adopt well-tested FCC pole-attachment rules, she said.
The 2006 rules reduced costs and safely sped deployment for Oxford, said FirstLight Director-OSP Engineering & Construction Peter SeeHusen. Other CLECs should get the same benefits, he said. Andy Hinkley, owner of CLEC Cornerstone Communications, said the ability to be lowest on the pole would save money and allow his CLEC to deploy more broadband. Hinkley said he was disappointed in 2006 when he learned the rules applied to only one company, and dismayed again this year when the PUC didn’t include them. The proposed rules “don’t change things,” protested GWI CEO Fletcher Kittredge, another CLEC official who supports applying the rules to all. "The status quo isn’t working,” he said. “We do not have the network we need and there needs to be a change.”
One-touch, make-ready could speed deployment since the policy would allow one third-party contractor to move all pole riders’ equipment in one go rather than the current process of each rider moving facilities on a sequential basis, said CenturyLink Associate General Counsel Pamela Hollick. FairPoint opposes allowing third parties to move its facilities, said Davis.
The PUC said it’s not yet proposing changes to rate formulas, but industry officials urged the commission to take that up soon. Contemplated pole-access rules are important, but recurring rates are “a very significant part of the economic case … that is necessary for providing service,” especially in rural areas, said Dave Thomas, outside counsel for Comcast, Charter Communications and other cable companies.
CTIA supports “full adoption of the FCC timelines” for pole attachments, said outside counsel David Bogan, calling the PUC plan a “strong start.” The PUC should try to include best practices from the FCC’s ongoing proceeding to streamline broadband infrastructure deployment, CenturyLink’s Hollick said. Written comments at the PUC are due Dec. 18.