PURA Urged to Probe Frontier Pole Attachment Practices

NetSpeed-Frontier dispute about the bigger company's requirements on where third parties may attach facilities on poles. NetSpeed complained Frontier’s policy lets the company reserve the lowest spots for its own attachments, ban attachers from placing theirs lower, and assess charges including for relocating Frontier and other attachments. OCC and NetSpeed agreed PURA should consider the issue as part of a broader investigation of pole attachment. Frontier’s practice isn’t “grounded in safety and engineering principles,” NetSpeed commented. Many states with pole-attachment jurisdiction “expressly found that reserving the lowest point on the pole for the telephone company is unjustified or placed a substantial burden on the pole owner to justify such practices on a case by case basis,” it said. The New England Cable and Telecommunications Association agreed Frontier should “follow reasonable, non-discriminatory attachment positioning practices that will promote competition and broadband deployment in Connecticut.” The telco said it’s “standard and accepted industry practice for ILECs such as Frontier to maintain the lowest position on utility poles,” for “public safety and efficient and cost-effective management of pole attachments.” The pole owner said it knows of no other state that prevents the practice: “Permitting third party licensees to choose where to place their facilities on the pole would both erode Frontier’s ownership interests and its ability to manage the poles.”