2

POLE ATTACHMENTS: FEDERAL AND STATE DEVELOPMENTSAPPA ANNUAL CONFERENCEJUNE 19, 2018 NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

SEAN STOKES GABRIEL GARCIA

PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR, SENIOR COUNSEL,

BALLER STOKES & LIDE CPS ENERGY

SSTOKES@BALLER.COM GGARCIA1@CPSENERGY.COM

202-833-0166 210-353-2033

3

Disclaimer

• The opinions and views expressed in this

presentation are those of the authors, and not

those of Baller Stokes & Lide, CPS Energy, or the

City of San Antonio.

• This presentation is intended for educational

purposes. It does not constitute the provision of

legal advice.

4

CHANGE IS IN THE AIR: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

5

Rules of Road Are Changing

• Everybody wants access to the same ROW, Poles and Conduit. And, they want it yesterday!

6

Why?: Explosive Growth in Data

• Cisco Systems estimates that between 2016 and 2021:

▪ Global mobile data traffic usage will increase sevenfold

▪ Video traffic will increase from 60% to 78% of mobile data

• Ericsson study for 2016-2021 period is more bullish:

▪ Video traffic will increase from 55% to 95% of mobile data

• Kagan Research expects:

▪ 455,000 small cells by 2020

• Wireless industry indicates:

▪ Over 50% of small cells will be installed on utility poles

7

What?: Go from Congestion to Capacity

8

How?: Heterogenous Wireless Network

• Vision of the Future: Integration of macro

and small cell technology into one network

that can support both broadband and IoT

applications:➢ Wireless Towers (Macro-cells)

➢ Outdoor Small Cells (Micro-cells)

➢ Large Event Centers (Metro-cells)

➢ Office Buildings (Pico-cells)

➢ Residential Premises (Femto-cells)

• But … the wireless industry claims

investment in small cell deployments

requires access to public:➢ Rights-of-Way (PROW)

➢ Conduits

➢ Poles

9

New and Increasing Challenges▪ Environment over Past Two Decades

▪ Typical pole had an average of 3-4 attaching entities: Utility, Telco, Cable and perhaps a CAP (competitive access provider)

▪ Existing attaching entities made new attachments or modified existing attachments on a gradual, incremental basis

▪ Wireless macro facilities located outside of ROW

▪ Streetlight poles for streetlights

▪ Current Environment

▪ New entrants seek to build out in high volume in rapid timeframe through use of bulk deployment, one touch make-ready and dig-once

▪ Existing attaching entities responding to competitive pressure seeking to upgrade large portions of plant

▪ Wireless entities seeking access to poles, streetlight poles and other “street furniture” for small cell antennae and wireless attachments for backhaul

▪ Congress, FCC and many states seeking to expedite permits, lower rates and accelerate make-ready time frames

10

FEDERAL REGULATIONS

11

Federal Regulatory Framework -- Pole Attachments

• Section 224 of Communications Act (47 U.S.C. 224)

• Regulates rates, terms and conditions of access to IOU utility poles, ducts and conduits for attachments by “telecommunications carriers” and “cable television systems,” as defined under Communications Act

– Applies to wireline and wireless facilities

– Does not apply to broadband in post non-net neutrality world

– Applies to distribution facilities, not transmission

▪ What about streetlight poles?

• Rates – FCC has detailed attachment formulas based on an allocation of the net costs of pole

• Access – Prescribed timelines for access to poles

• Cardinal Rule – Cost causer pays for make-ready

• Non-Discrimination – Similar treatment of similarly-situated entities, but not necessarily equal treatment• States can “reverse preempt” and adopt own rules; 21 have done so; many follow federal framework

and apply FCC rulings as benchmarks

12

Federal Regulatory Framework -- Pole Attachments

Public power and coops (and railroads) exempt from FCC pole attachment rules -224(a)(1)

• Several states regulate access to public power utility poles

• Several states incorporate federal requirements into state laws governing municipals –e.g., Missouri, Texas, Colorado, Indiana

• New wireless bills state bills increasingly incorporating FCC rules or standards (More on this later)

• Federal standards often invoked by state PSCs, courts and attaching entities

• Cable and telco often argue that FCC methodologies are the only sanctioned standard of reasonableness

• Section 253 barriers to entry related to use of public rights-of-way has possible implications (47 U.S.C. 253)(More on this later)

• FCC has recommended that Congress remove the municipal and coop exemption

• Chairman Pai has renewed this suggestion

• BDAC recommendations would effectively remove the exemption (More on this later)

13

Access to ROW vs. Access to Facilities

• Access to ROW – Locality acting in governmental capacity

▪ Subject to federal law 253 (telecom), 332(c)(7) (wireless),

6409(a) (wireless), 521 (cable)

▪ Subject to state law

• Access to Public Power Poles and Other Facilities – Governmental unit

acting in “proprietary capacity”

▪ Greater Flexibility than When Acting as Regulator – For now, at least

• In Many Instances Public Power Utilities May Wear Two Hats – Pole owner

and regulator

• Who owns access to streetlight poles and other “street furniture”?

14

Wireless Siting Key Federal Statutes

• 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7) -- Authorization to construct personal wireless service facilities

▪ No unreasonable discrimination

▪ No actions that “prohibit the provision of personal wireless services”

▪ Shot clocks: must act “within a reasonable period of time”:

o 90 days for collocation applications (i.e., mounting of transmission equipment upon a support

structure designed for, or currently used to support, wireless facilities)

o 150 days for applications other than collocations

o Not “deemed granted”, only “presumptively reasonable”

• 47 U.S.C. 253 Prohibition against state and local barriers to entry

▪ Safe harbor / affirmative defense for ROW management (253(c))

o Nondiscrimination and competitive neutrality; Reasonable compensation

• Section 6409(a) of 2012 Spectrum Act (47 U.S.C. 1455)

▪ Modifications to existing facilities

o Modifications that do not make “substantial changes” must be approved

o “Deemed granted” after 60 days

15

Wireless Siting and 5G

• Explosive growth in data, particularly through wireless projected

• Wireless carriers seeking to accommodate 5G deployment by installing a large number of smaller cellular facilities operating at lower power – “densification” –than traditional macro cell towers

• Wireless carriers increasingly seeking to install wireless facilities on utility poles, streetlight poles, traffic poles and other “street furniture” located within the public rights-of-way

• Will also require large amounts of additional fiber for “backhaul”

• Existing laws, regulations and practices were not developed to address a large volume of wireless installations within the rights-of-way

• Congress, the FCC and many states – want lower rates and faster make ready to accommodate small cell (especially 5G)

16

Wireless Attachments are Different

• Elements of Small Cells:

▪ Space needed from top to

bottom

▪ Safety considerations

▪ Cabinets on poles

▪ Fiber or wireless backhaul

▪ Power & Meter

17

What’s Happening at the FCC?

• FCC NPRM/NOI -- WC Docket No. 17-84 – on revising pole attachment rules (again)

• Inquiries as to whether FCC has regulatory authority over public power utility poles andstreetlights through Section 253

• Carriers attempt to argue that public power poles and streetlight poles are governmentalactivity and public property akin to ROW

• One Touch Make Ready (OTMR)

• Does overlashing require advance notice, and does it apply to mid-span wireless attachments?

• FCC NPRM/NOI -- WT Docket No. 17-79 – on removing barriers to wireless deployment

• 332(c)(7) vs. 253(a) (cumulative? independent?)

• Asks whether non-cost-based fees are proper

• Seeks comment on statutory application to states/localities acting in proprietary vs. regulatory capacity

• FCC creates Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC)

• Thune (R-SD) – Circulating draft bill that would address some of these issues

18

Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee

• Purpose – To provide advice and recommendations to the FCC on how to accelerate the deployment of high speed internet access

• Comprised almost entirely of industry or industry-friendly representatives

• No public power representative

• Committees:

▪ Federal Lands

▪ Barriers to Deployment

▪ Competitive Access to Broadband Infrastructure

o Addresses pole attachment practices

▪ Model Code for Municipalities

▪ Model Code for States

▪ Rates and Fees

19

Model Code for States

• Approved at the April 25th BDAC meeting (subject to harmonization)

▪ Essentially a corporate wish list including

o Mandatory access to public facilities, including poles

o OTMR

o Creation of registry of public infrastructure

o Lease fees for publicly owned assets limited to “actual, direct and reasonable cost”

o No in-kind contributions

o Requirement to lease dark fiber

o “Mother May I” restrictions on public broadband deployment

o Etc., Etc.,

• APPA has filed letter objecting

20

STATE LAW DEVELOPMENTS

21

State Legislation

• The Wireless Industry has been aggressively sponsoring small cell wireless siting legislation in states around the country

• In 2017 more than twenty state wireless bills were introduced. Several of these bills directly addressed attachments to public power utility poles and streetlight poles.

• 13 passed (e.g., AZ, CO, DE, FL, IA, IN, KS (2016),MN, NC, OH (2016)(in litigation), RI, TX (in litigation), VA)

• Several were blocked or ran out the clock (e.g., AR, CA (veto), CT, GA, IL, MO, NE, NY, PA, WA, WI)

• CA already requires public power utilities to provide pole access to any “telecommunications corporation”

• 2018 bills adopted in IL, OH, OK, NM, TN, UT and pending in MO and MI

• Defeated in GA, MD, ME, NE, NY, VA, WV

•

22

State Legislation – Public Power Poles

• Some state laws exempt some or all public power utility poles from scope of requirements

o E.g. IA, OH, MN, NC, TN and (MO pending) exempt facilities owned by municipally-owned utilities

o AZ and FL exempt government-owned poles used for electric distribution but not other public power poles such as streetlight poles

• Some state laws apply to public power utility poles

o CO, IN, KS, RI, and TX apply a non-discriminatory access requirement to all government-owned poles, including electric distribution poles

▪ CO attachment fees may not exceed FCC rate

▪ IN attachment fees may not exceed $50 per pole, per year

▪ RI attachment fees may not exceed $150 or FCC telecom rate

▪ Il attachment fees may not exceed $200

▪ TX attachment fees may not exceed FCC telecom rate

▪ VA attachment fees must be non-discriminatory, cost-based and competitively neutral

― FCC formulas not developed for vertical attachments

― What happens if FCC changes its rules?

• Many bills contain provision allowing for mid-span installations of “micro wireless facilities”

o No permits required

23

The Wireless Struggle for Governmental Entities in a Nutshell

Source: Omar Masry

24

Small in Name Only – Truth About the “Pizza Box”

• Carriers, legislators and FCC often characterize small cell wireless antennae as being no bigger

than a “pizza box.” But this does not include associated equipment.

• Missouri House Bill No. 1991:

"Small wireless facility", a wireless facility that meets both of the following qualifications:

(a) Each wireless provider's antenna could fit within an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet in

volume; and

(b) All other equipment associated with the wireless facility, whether ground or pole mounted, is

cumulatively no more than twenty-eight cubic feet in volume, provided that no single piece of

equipment on the utility pole shall exceed nine cubic feet in volume and no single piece of ground

mounted equipment shall exceed fifteen cubic feet in Volume, exclusive of equipment required by an

electric utility or municipal electric utility to power the small wireless facility. The following types of

associated ancillary equipment shall not be included in the calculation of equipment volume:

electric meter, concealment elements, telecommunications demarcation box, grounding equipment,

power transfer switch, cut-off switch, and vertical cable runs and related conduit for the

connection of power and other services

•

25

Dr. Jonathan Kramer standing inside a homemade 28 cubic foot “small cell.”

26

Problematic State Wireless Provisions Impacting Localities

• Small wireless facilities and networks (SWFNs) exempted from zoning, land use,and other similar requirements

• In granting permits, local authorities must treat SWFNs like other communicationsservice providers, even though their facilities are very different

• Local authorities not allowed to limit the duration of permits or approvals grantedto SWFNs

• Moratoria not allowed

• Must agree to “non-substantial” modifications

• Limitations on ROW site fees

• Restrictions against in-kind compensation

27

THE TEXAS EXPERIENCE: CPS ENERGY’S WIRELESS

STANDARDS

28

Passage of Texas Small Cell Bill – SB 1004

• Texas Legislature passed SB 1004 in 2017 -- Created Chapter 284, Texas Local Gov’t Code

• Chapter 284 became effective September 1, 2017:

▪ Subchapter A: Definitions & Dimensions for Small Cell Equipment

o Equipment dimensions apply to small cells deployed on city-owned poles and municipally-owned utility (MOU) distribution poles.

▪ Subchapter B: Establishes Rent for Use of ROW

▪ Subchapter C: Grants Wireless Providers Access to ROW

o ROW permitting requirements do not apply to pole attachment permit applications.

▪ Subchapter D: Outlines Permitting Requirements for Use of ROW

▪ Subchapter E: Conditions to Access MOU Distribution Poles

o Wireless providers must execute pole attachment agreement and comply with MOU pole attachment permitting requirements.

▪ Subchapter F: Excludes IOUs, E&T Coops, and Telcos

▪ Subchapter G: Retains Cities’ ROW & Zoning Authority

29

CPS Energy’s Wireless Standards• Prior to the passage of SB 1004, Texas law required MOUs to

grant communications providers access to distribution poles for

wire attachments. CPS Energy had developed Pole Attachment

Standards to complement pole attachment agreement.

• With passage of SB 1004, CPS Energy set out to revise the Pole

Attachment Standards to incorporate Wireless Standards based

on three principles:

➢ Safety

➢ Reliability

➢ Customer Service

• Applicability of Wireless Standards based on:

➢ Non-discriminatory treatment

➢ Ease of administer

➢ Enforceability

• Pole Attachment Standards cannot breach three fundamental

principles.

30

Response to Small Cell Legislation• Overall Perspective of Wireless Standards

➢ Consideration of the entire life cycle of the pole in crafting Wireless Standards

➢ Recognition of the long-term mass deployment of small cells (referred to as “Network Nodes” in SB 1004)

• Safety

➢ Keep CPS Energy facilities, employees, and the public safe at all times

➢ Install mock-ups of Network Nodes at CPS Energy training yard prior to deployment

• Reliability

➢ Avoid RF interference with CPS Energy’s use of wireless systems

➢ Minimize impact of Network Node installations on utility operations

➢ Exempt certain poles from Network Node installation

• Customer Service

➢ Reduce profile of Network Nodes on utility pole

➢ Install ground cabinet in ROW with radio equipment and meter where possible

➢ Work closely with local jurisdictions that control ROW

➢ Minimizing disruption to community

➢ Appropriate cost recovery for Network Nodes and Micro Network Nodes (strand-mounted small cell equipment)

31

The Pole Attachment Standards

The CPS Energy’s Pole Attachment Standards:

• Section I – Statement of Purpose

• Section II – General Administrative Provisions

• Section III – General Technical Requirements

• Section IV – Specifications for Wire Attachments

• Section V – Specifications for Wireless Attachments

• Section VI – Specifications for Banner Attachments

• Appendices – Technical & Administrative Information, Forms, Diagrams, Charts, and Tables

• Note: Pole Attachments Standards are currently in Version 3.

32

Transparency and Open Communications

Public Website

• Primary source for communications

• Document downloads

• Document submittals

• Useful information & links

Quarterly Workshops

• Information sharing

• Communicate proposed updates to Pole Attachment Standards

Technical Workshops

• NJUNS

• One-Touch Contractors

• Electrical Contractors

Personal Communications

• Frequent one-on-one meetings

• Conference calls

• Request for written comments

• Written response to stakeholder comments

33

Pole Attachment Agreement Structure

• An executed Agreement will grant the entity a license to attach to CPS Energy’s poles contingent on securing an Attachment Permit.

• A Permit will grant authority to attach to a specific pole provided there is compliance with the Pole Attachment Standards.

• A Pole Attachment Agreement without compliance with the Pole Attachment Standards does not authorize access to any pole.

Pole Attachment Agreement

Pole Attachment Standards

Pole Attachment Installation

Permit Approval

34

Texas Law Grants Access to City-Owned Poles

• Network Providers have access to city-owned Service

Poles in ROW:

▪ Streetlight Poles

▪ Traffic Light Poles

▪ Signage Poles

• Network Providers do not have access to:

▪ Decorative Poles

• Network Providers may install their own:

▪ Node Support Poles

• Network Providers have access to:

▪ MOU Distribution Poles

35

Specifications for Small Cell Installations

• CPS Energy’s Wireless Standards

recognize three installation types:

▪ Pole-Top Antenna Installation

▪ Mid-Pole Antenna Installation

▪ Strand-Mounted Antenna Installation

• Backhaul types:

▪ Fiber Backhaul

▪ Wireless Backhaul

36

Specification – Antenna Enclosures and Size

• Texas Law – Antenna may

be exposed or enclosed.

• CPS Energy requires that

all antennas be enclosed in

cylinders.

• Texas Law – Limits

antennas to height to 36”

on pole top.

• CPS Energy adopted same

36” height dimension limit.

37

Specifications – Pole Top Antenna Clearance

• Texas Law – Authorizes pole top antenna installation and requires that Network Node equipment must be installed subject to NESC, local codes, and utility pole owner’s construction standards.

• CPS Energy requires that every request for a pole top antenna installation will require pole replacement with taller pole in order to achieve 5 foot clearance from electrical primary.

• CPS Energy requires that only certified electrical contractor may install pole top antenna.

38

Specifications – Mid-Pole Antenna Installations

• Texas Law – Antenna may

protrude by no more than

24” from pole.

• CPS Energy requires that

mid-pole antennas may not

protrude beyond 12” from

pole.

• Mid-pole antennas are not

allowed in communications

space of pole and must be

installed at lease 12” below.

• Mid-pole antennas may be

used for wireless backhaul.

39

Specifications – Micro Network Nodes

• Texas Law – Defines “Micro Network Node” as a Network Node with dimensions not large than 24” X 15” X 12” with exterior antenna not longer than 11”.

• Texas Law – An MOU must allow Network Nodes (which include Micro Network Nodes) on its distribution poles.

• CPS Energy requires Micro Network Nodes to have a clearance of 15” to 72” from a pole.

• CPS Energy requires that all cabinets that energize Micro Network Nodes be metered.

40

Specifications – Pole-Mounted Cabinets

• Texas Law – Radio equipment may be exposed or enclosed.

• CPS Energy requires that all radio equipment be enclosed in cabinet.

• Texas Law – Pole-mounted cabinet may not exceed 60” tall nor protrude more than 24” from pole.

• CPS Energy adopted the 60” dimension limit for cabinet, but requires that cabinet rest against pole.

41

Specifications – Ground-Mounted Cabinets

• Texas Law – Limits ground cabinet dimensions to 42” X 42” X 42” above grade.

• CPS Energy requires the installation of pad-mounted cabinets that would house radio equipment and electric meter, which must be no closer than 25 feet from pole.

• Charles Cube Small Cell Cabinets above right (48” X 24” X 21”) & (72” X 24” X 25”).

• GE Small Cell Cabinet below right.

42

Specifications – Battery Backup

• Texas Law – Definition of “Network Node” includes battery backup and the cumulative size of wireless equipment (other than antenna) may not exceed 28 cubic feet, including radio equipment and battery backup.

• Photo in far right highlights dimensions of 28 cubic feet enclosing Dr. Kramer.

• CPS Energy prohibits battery backup equipment for safety reasons.

43

Specifications – Equipment Wires/Conduit

• Texas Law – Does not contain any specifications regarding connecting wires for small cell equipment.

• CPS Energy requires that all small cell connecting wires be placed inside conduit or protected by U-Guard band.

44

Specifications – Grounding Network Node Equipment

• Texas Law – Small cell equipment

attached to utility pole must be

installed in accordance with NESC,

municipal codes, and utility pole

owner’s construction specifications.

• CPS Energy requires that Network

Node equipment be properly

grounded and may not use pole’s

grounding rod.

• Qualified electrician must install

meter and verify proper grounding.

45

Specifications – Inspection of Installations

• Texas Law – Small cell equipment attached to utility pole must be installed in accordance with NESC, municipal codes, and utility pole owner’s construction specifications.

• CPS Energy inspects and approves Network Node installation as part of its pre-certification process.

46

Specifications – RF Warning Signage• Texas Law – Defines the

term Antenna as “communications equipment that transmits or receives electromagnetic radio frequency signals used in the provision of wireless service.”

• CPS Energy requires that all Network Nodes comply with FCC regulations, including the installation of proper RF warning signs.

47

Specifications – RF Interference Testing

• Under FCC regulations, interference with any licensed frequency is considered the fault of the third-party (utility).

• CPS Energy prohibits wireless interference from licensed and unlicensed frequencies with utility systems and operations, and requires RF interference testing as part of pre-certification process.

48

Specifications – Color of Network Node Equipment

• Following passage of SB 1004, the City of San Antonio passed a small cell ordinance that requires all Network Node equipment installed on poles in the ROW to match the color of the pole.

• CPS Energy is has adopted the color specification applicable to all Network Node installations on distribution poles throughout its service area.

49

Specifications – Macro Cell Installations

• Texas Law –

Definition of

Network Node

excludes “a macro

tower.”

• CPS Energy

prohibits “macro

cell” equipment on

its poles.

50

Specifications – Node Support Poles

• Texas Law – Network Provider may install a Node Support Pole.

• CPS Energy requires that Node Support Poles be installed at least 10 feet away neutral / secondary and 25 feet from its poles.

• Under current standards, CPS Energy provides electricity to Node Support Pole with pad-mounted cabinet.

51

Annual Rent for Use of Distribution Poles

• Texas Law – Provides that the annual pole attachment rate per Network Node shall be based on FCC Telecom Pole Attachment Formula, applied on a per-foot basis.

• CPS Energy determines the number of pole feet utilized by each Network Node design during the mock-up installation process (part of the pre-certification process).

52

CPS ENERGY’S MOCK-UP INSTALLATION PROCESS

53

Mock-Ups of Small Cell Installations

• As part of its pre-certification process, CPS Energy invited

wireless providers to install mock-ups of their proposed small cell

installations at CPS Energy’s training grounds.

• Each provider’s mock-up installation was based on all applicable

construction requirements and was inspected for compliance with

the CPS Energy’s Wireless Standards.

• Participating wireless providers:

oSprint (Mobilitie)

oT-Mobile (Extenet)

oAT&T Mobility

54

Initial Mock-Up Small Cell Installations

55

Final Mock-Up Small Cell Installations

56

Benefits of Mock-Up Installation Process

• The mock-up process allows for small cell installations on actual poles to proceed in controlled environment – mistakes can be made without negative consequences.

• Working in electrical space of poles is new for wireless industry.

o Wireless providers’ contractors do not know how to construct small cell installations according to local codes and applicable technical utility standards.

• Allowing small cell equipment in electric space is new to electric industry.

o Important lessons learned from mock-up small cell installations:

▪ Process serves for getting input and buy-in from internal utility linemen.

▪ Field installations are not as clean as they appear in drawings leading to customer complaints.

▪ Wireless Standards revised with measures to improve safety & reduce profile of wireless equipment on pole.

▪ Wireless contractors must wear proper PPE and work closely with utility personnel – leads to trust.

▪ Wireless providers want established technical standards – willing to work with utility to establish standards.

▪ Utility approval of each wireless provider’s small cell design ahead of field deployment.

▪ Mock-up installations highlight the need for utility to work closely with local jurisdictions controlling ROW.

▪ No two small cell installations are the same – every pole site must be evaluated independently.

▪ Requirement to provide power to small cells points out need for innovation in meter delivery.

57

Pilot in Small Cell Power Delivery

• City of San Antonio has challenged CPS Energy to eliminate the installation of ground cabinets housing meters for small cell equipment on city traffic light poles in the downtown core.

• CPS Energy is aware that given the number of small cells expected to be deployed in the downtown area, the proliferation of ground cabinets would diminish the charm of downtown corridors with limited sidewalk space.

58

Proposed Smart Meter Solution

• Pilot project to test alternative

metering/monitoring solution

for electric service for small

cell installations in downtown

San Antonio.

59

Purpose of Pilot Project

• Determine if alternative metering or monitoring device can be integrated into small cell equipment to eliminate the need for ground meter cabinets or standard meter enclosures on traffic poles.

• The most popular proposed solution is to install specially constructed trash receptacle that will enclose radio equipment and smart meter with enclosed antenna atop traffic light pole.

60

OPEN OPERATIONAL ISSUES

61

Coordination with City ROW Officials

• CPS Energy is working closely with the City of San Antonio to

develop a coordinated process to expedite small cell installations on

electric distribution poles, traffic light poles, and Node Support Poles.

▪ CPS Energy must provide electricity regardless of type of pole installation.

▪ Recommend coordination of site visit for every proposed pole site

installation with Engineering Construction, Pole Attachment Services, and

wireless provider prior to filing ROW permit application.

▪ Purpose of site visit is to eliminate pole locations that wireless provider

may consider too costly to serve with electricity, and identify best solution

for meter and small cell equipment installation at the site.

▪ By coordinating site visit prior to filing ROW permit application, wireless

provider will have more accurate cost information and avoid construction

delays from later changing pole location, which would require designation

of a new pole address and revision to the ROW permit application.

▪ At conclusion of construction, CPS Energy coordinates its own inspection

of the small cell installation with the City’s electrical inspector prior to

energizing the small cell equipment.

• Once the process is established, CPS Energy will roll out an uniform

process to 30 other local jurisdictions within its service area.

City of El Paso Small Cell

Permitting Process

62

Coordination with Telephone Company

• When a small cell is installed on joint use pole

owned by the incumbent telephone company

(AT&T Texas), CPS Energy must coordinate

the provision of electricity with the teleco:

▪ Request that telco follow the same technical

specifications as CPS Energy related to small cell

installations on telephone poles.

▪ Coordination of Make-Ready Construction affecting

the electrical space of joint use poles owned by

telco.

▪ Coordination of meter installations in pad-mounted

cabinets for small cell installations on telephone

poles.

63

Limitations on Use of Distribution Poles

• CPS Energy has restricted certain poles from small cell installations due to safety or operational concerns:

▪ Poles inaccessible by utility truck

▪ Poles with underground electrical or communications riser conduit

▪ Poles on private easements

▪ Poles that are 60 feet or longer

▪ Poles containing any traffic control cabinets

▪ Poles with electrical gear

▪ Pole used for guying purposes

▪ Limit of one small cell permitted per pole

• CPS Energy is encouraging the use of streetlight poles as an alternative to the use of distribution poles, but:

▪ Restricts access to streetlight poles with detachable bases and underground fed streetlight poles

64

LEGAL ISSUES OF CONCERN TO MOUs

65

Metering Micro Network Nodes

• Some cable providers are deploying

strand-mounted Micro Network Nodes

(WiFi APs) in order to provide

broadband Internet and wireless

services.

• A coaxial cable provides Ethernet

connectivity and energizes the WiFi AP

from a network cabinet.

• If the network cabinet was established

as a flat rate electricity account and the

provider fails to identify additional

equipment installed/connected to the

cabinet, it will result in the unauthorized

use of electricity.

• CPS Energy requires that all network

cabinets be metered.

66

Potential Resale of Electricity

• For several years, Cox has been providing backhaul service to wireless carriers with strand-mounted small cells.

• Where the cable provider energizes the small cell equipment owned by the wireless carrier, this may constitute the unauthorized resale of electricity in an MOU service territory.

67

Rent from Micro Network Nodes• Cable providers assert that strand-mounted WiFi Access Points

(APs) should not pay any pole attachment rent because they are

not installed directly on a pole. Infrastructure providers make a

similar argument in regard to strand mounted small cells.

• Cable and infrastructure providers are currently asking the FCC to

rule that strand mounted small cell equipment be considered an

“overlashing” not subject to pole attachment rent or advance

notice of installation to the pole owner.

• CPS Energy’s position is that the dimensions of the wireless

equipment effectively prohibit the pole owner from renting the foot

of pole space directly below the strand wire that supports the small

cell equipment because of lack of necessary clearance to

accommodate a wire attachment in that space. Therefore, the

pole owner should be compensated for the extra foot of space

used on the two poles that support the wire strand on which the

equipment is mounted.

• Diagram on upper right illustrates pole & strand mounted APs,

while the lower right picture shows a strand mounted small cell in

the upper wire and WiFI AP in lowest wire.

68

QUESTIONS