Maine Ponders Access, Who Pays for Planned Pole Database
A centralized database for pole attachments proposed in Maine could reduce costs and help expand broadband, said Crown Castle and other fiber companies. But to work, the PUC must set access and other rules, they said in Friday comments at the Maine Public Utilities Commission. Some smaller utilities resisted mandatory participation in Alden One, a joint use software system developed by pole owner Central Maine Power (CMP).
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.
"If implemented and managed properly, a pole attachment management database could result in efficiencies, cost savings, and other benefits to … pole owners and joint users alike,” said Crown Castle, GoNetSpeed and Great Works Internet in docket 2021-00321. Access "to information regarding whether and where there are existing attachments on the pole and their license numbers ... would allow attachers or prospective attachers to shortcut surveys or other process steps,” freeing resources for broadband, said the pole attachers.
But the PUC would need rules on system access, confidentiality, costs and fees and responsibilities of system operators, pole owners, attachers and requesting parties, the fiber companies said. The PUC "should require that all parties in possession of a pole attachment license granted by the Commission should have access to the database, subject to confidentiality restrictions, data security measures, and reasonable user training,” they said. Include confidentiality rules "to protect against users’ obtaining information about their competitors’ actual or planned deployments,” they said.
"Pole owners should be entirely or at least predominantly responsible for the costs of developing and operating the system,” said Crown Castle and other attachers. If attachers must pay, the ones with the most attachments -- ILECs and electric utilities -- should pay most of the costs, they said.
Pole owners and attachers should share system costs because both will benefit from Alden One, commented CMP and Versant: Attachers should pay 80% and owners should pay 20%. "For this system to succeed, all attaching entities must participate in the use of the system,” they said.
Don't put "an unreasonable and financially burdensome requirement" on small and consumer-owned utilities to participate, said Fox Islands Electric Cooperative. FIEC "accommodates only 10-15 new pole attachments per year, which are typically in conjunction with new line extensions without make-ready modifications,” it said. "FIEC does not have enough attachments or attachment requests to warrant a dedicated staff member or separate software system to manage the projects." Total attachment revenue probably wouldn’t cover the cooperative’s Alden One fees, it said.
Eastern Maine Electric Cooperative probably lacks the data that would be needed and the workforce to gather it, the utility said. "Having the personnel gather this information, learn, and use the new system would only create the problem in the EMC service territory that the Alden One system is attempting to fix in other parts of the state.” Houlton Water Co. said requiring “staff to learn yet another software system given other pressing matters would only further strain resources and would undermine HWC’s ability to meet current demands.” Van Buren Light and Power District filed similar comments.
Cable operators generally supported the proposed database. However, Comcast, Charter Communications and two other cable companies raised concerns with the proposed rule, possibly saying that "information from cable operators and other attaching entities about their existing pole attachments would need to be collected and inputted into Alden One to make the system operable.” Owners already have that information and “would integrate that existing data into Alden One, subject to effective confidentiality and information-security safeguards," said the operators: Parties will regularly exchange and update information through the system once it’s up. Also, cable companies cautioned the PUC that the proposed system shouldn’t “disallow boxing or placement of a new attachment below existing attachments.”