FCC Record, Volume 26, No. 7, Pages 4843 to 5761, March 28 - April 08, 2011 Page: 5,261
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
224(f)(1), we presume that utilities could structure attachment agreements to include provisions for
transfer of facilities, or otherwise address liability or other concerns they might have in cases where they
elect to perform make-ready themselves. A utility may also assert its 15-day right of control in order to
add flexibility to the timeline, which several utilities cite as a concern."6 While it would not be
reasonable for a utility to exercise its 15-day right merely to delay make-ready, a utility may, for example,
depending on the circumstances, use the additional 15 days to make up for weather-related delays without
surrendering the project to the new attacher. If a utility is working diligently to complete make-ready
when its 15 days expire, a new attacher may prefer not to interrupt it for the sake of efficiency.
Otherwise, if the attachment is in the communications space, the utility must cede control of the project to
the new attacher, which may use approved contractors, accompanied by a representative of the utility, to
perform any remaining make-ready work."'7 Thus, the timeline and this optional 15-day stage conclude
either with the utility granting access to attach (i.e., in cases where make-ready has been completed) or
the passing of control over make-ready to the new attacher (i.e., in cases where make-ready has not been
2. Scope of the Timeline
40. The timeline we adopt today-which is modeled after the timeline that has been in use in
Utah- applies to all requests by telecommunications carriers (including wireless) and cable operators for
attachment in the communications space on a pole. The timeline begins when an application is complete,
such that the utility has been provided with the information necessary under its procedures to begin to
survey the requested pole(s), including developed engineering specifications for the particular equipment
to be attached. A modified form of the timeline applies to wireless attachments by telecommunications
carriers and cable operators that are made above the communications space. The timeline does not apply
to section 224 ducts, conduits, or rights-of-way. We affirm that completion of an initial pole agreement
or "master agreement" is not a prerequisite to starting the clock on a completed application, which may
have multiple attachment requests within it. Applications that are outside the scope of the timeline
remain subject to the general requirement that the pole owner provide a specific written response within
41. Technology Neutrality. In the Further Notice, the Commission sought comment on
developing timelines for section 224 access other than for wired pole attachments, and on whether the
wired pole attachment timeline would be appropriate for wireless pole attachments (i.e., antennas and
other wireless telecommunications equipment). ' Specifically, the Commission stated that its goal was to
bring regularity and predictability to attachment of wireless facilities, while acknowledging that the
attachment of wireless telecommunications equipment in or near the electric space may raise different
safety, reliability, and engineering concerns."' Such predictability is important because it affords
broadband providers an enhanced ability to attract investment and plan for buildout of needed
116 See, e.g., Idaho Power Comments at 12 (arguing that utilities need flexibility to retain control of relocation
schedules); Qwest Comments at 6-7 (arguing timeline must be flexible enough to address realities of pole
attachment process); EEI/UTC Comments at 17-18 (arguing against fixed timeline as not sufficiently flexible).
17 Some utilities allege that facilities on some poles, such as attachments by municipalities, are not subject to
section 224, and may not be moved by them or anyone else. See, e.g., Florida IOUs Comments at 20-21 (arguing
that governmental attachments may not be moved); Coalition Comments at 70-71 (arguing that pole owners may
not move municipal attachments). The record does not indicate the extent to which governmental attachments are
implicated in make-ready delays in the communications space. In any event, the ability to hire contractors need not
remove every impediment to attachment to every pole to be a meaningful remedy for attachers.
"a Further Notice, 25 FCC Red at 11887-88, paras. 52-53.
"~9 Id. at 11888, para. 53.
Federal Communications Commission
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 26, No. 7, Pages 4843 to 5761, March 28 - April 08, 2011, book, April 2011; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc52169/m1/433/: accessed October 17, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.