4. Comments of Parties on the Technical Conference Report
4.1. SCE
SCE supports the proposed revisions to GO 95 contained in the TCR. SCE believes the proposed construction standards for pole-top antennas will protect workers, the public, and the reliability of the electric supply system.
SCE emphasizes that the new rules are untested, individual antenna installations are not standard in nature, and supply lines have a variety of construction methods and arrangements. As a result, SCE anticipates it will need to develop and enforce internal standards as a supplement to the new rules to help ensure that all antenna installations are constructed and maintained in a safe manner and do not affect electric system reliability.
SCE recommends one correction to proposed Rule 92.1-F(2). As shown below, the correction consists of inserting the term "Rule 38" in the fourth line:
92.1 Vertical Clearances
F. Between Conductors, Cables, Messengers and Miscellaneous Equipment)
(2) Cable Terminals or Metal Boxes: On jointly used poles, all parts of metal communication cable terminals, metal boxes or similar equipment shall maintain vertical clearances from conductors not less than those specified in Rule 38, Table 2, Col. C, Cases 8 to 13 inclusive.
SCE also proposes several revisions to Rule 94.5 (Marking) that were not addressed in the OIR, Scoping Memo, technical conferences, or TCR. Currently, Appendix H of Rule 94.5 consists of the entire Settlement Agreement adopted by D.07-02-030. SCE recommends that the Commission amend Rule 94.5 to exclude parts of the Settlement Agreement (e.g., the recitals and the signature page) that, in SCE's opinion, are not useful for understanding or implementing GO 95.
4.2. CCTA and AT&T California
CCTA and AT&T California support the proposed revisions to GO 95. They agree the proposed rules will protect the safety of workers and the public, and ensure that pole-top antennas do not compromise the reliability of electric utility, telecommunications, and cable facilities attached to joint-use poles. They also agree that the proposed rules are neutral regarding (1) the type of wireless technology utilized, and (2) the nature of the entity installing pole-top antennas. They state that such neutrality will encourage the deployment of wireless infrastructure.
4.3. Joint Municipal Parties
CMUA, the Northern California Power Agency, and the City of Anaheim (collectively the "Joint Municipal Parties") assert that publicly owned utilities are not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction with respect to the subject matter of this proceeding. Due to jurisdictional concerns, the Joint Municipal Parties do not support or oppose the proposed revision to GO 95 contained in the TCR.
4.4. PacifiCorp, PG&E, and SDG&E
PacifiCorp, PG&E, and SDG&E support the proposed revisions to GO 95. They believe the proposed revisions will protect the safety of workers and the public, maintain the reliability of electric service, and facilitate the efficient expansion of California's wireless infrastructure. They also support SCE's proposed correction of Rule 92.1 and proposed revisions of Rule 94.5.
The most contentious issue resolved by the TCR is the vertical clearance between supply lines and pole-top antennas. PacifiCorp, PG&E, and SDG&E endorse the TCR's proposed 6-foot vertical clearance for supply lines in the range of 750 to 35,000 volts because it (1) allows electric utilities to work on supply lines using existing equipment and practices; (2) puts pole-top antennas outside the work space of electrical workers; (3) minimizes the need to power down electric facilities and/or antenna installations in order to conduct maintenance, repairs, and construction activities; and (4) provides wireless workers with adequate space to access antennas. For the same reasons, they support proposed Rule 94.4-C, which prohibits the encroachment of antenna equipment and support elements into the 6-foot clearance zone.
To evaluate the safety of pole-top antennas, SDG&E installed a mock pole-top antenna using different vertical clearances (measured from the bottom of the antenna's support element) above supply lines. SDG&E's crew found that a 6-foot vertical clearance was acceptable and does not compromise safety and reliability, but that anything less than 6 feet would be unacceptable in terms of safety and reliability.7
PG&E and SDG&E intend to develop supplemental standards to ensure that each pole-top antenna is installed in a safe manner and does not compromise the reliability of the electrical system. PG&E observes that the proposed rules do not address many of the details for constructing antenna facilities, such as detailed design requirements, material specifications, worker qualifications, site safety, work procedures, scheduling and resources. Nor do the rules address patrol, inspection, and maintenance of installed antennas. In addition, emergency response procedures must be developed. PG&E concludes that pole owners and wireless companies will need to work cooperatively to develop such processes and work procedures to facilitate the initial antenna installations.
PG&E also notes that taller poles resulting from pole-top antennas may cause local agencies or individuals to raise aesthetic concerns. PG&E believes these concerns can be reduced through careful siting of pole-top antennas.
SDG&E states that each proposed antenna installation will have to be assessed with respect to the unique characteristics of each site, including the local climate conditions, arrangement of supply lines and equipment already on the pole, space restrictions, pole condition, and proximity to potential hazards. Not every pole will qualify for a pole-top antenna due to these factors. As a result, SDG&E requests that the new rules be implemented nine months after the date of the decision to allow time to develop internal standards and to complete necessary training.
Finally, PG&E and SDG&E disagree with the Wireless Parties that the National Electric Safety Code (NESC) provides a useful benchmark for determining clearances in this proceeding. SDG&E asserts that because there are several fundamental differences between the NESC and GO 95, such as grounding requirements, it is inappropriate to compare isolated pieces of the two different regulatory and safety frameworks.
4.5. Wireless Parties
AT&T Mobility, Crown Castle USA Inc., NextG Networks of California Inc., T-Mobile, Sprint Nextel, Verizon Wireless, and ExteNet Systems LLC (collectively, the "Wireless Parties")8 support the TCR. They believe the proposed revisions to GO 95 will facilitate increased deployment of wireless services in California while providing workers with safe access to joint-use poles.
The Wireless Parties represent that the vertical clearance between most supply circuits in California is 2 to 6 feet. They see this as convincing evidence that the TCR's proposed 6-foot vertical clearance between pole-top antennas and supply lines in the range of 750 to 35,000 volts is a safe and practicable standard. The Wireless Parties also cite the NESC, which is the electric safety code used by several other states. Although the NESC has not been adopted by California, the Wireless Parties believe it is a useful benchmark. The Wireless Parties state the NESC requires a vertical clearance of only 40 inches for most pole-top antennas, which shows the larger vertical clearances proposed in the TCR are reasonable.
The Wireless Parties express a concern that SCE's comments suggest that SCE would unilaterally impose clearances that exceed those in the proposed rule. The Wireless Parties, on the other hand, believe that a cooperative process involving all parties is required to further the goals of this rulemaking.
The Wireless Parties also oppose SCE's recommendation to delete from Rule 94.5, Appendix H, some parts of the Settlement Agreement adopted by D.07-02-030. The Wireless Parties prefer to keep all of the Settlement Agreement in Rule 94.5, as it provides context for understanding the rule. They further assert that SCE's proposal is outside the scope of this proceeding, since it was never identified as an issue in the OIR or the Scoping Memo.
7 SDG&E presented a video of the mock installation at the technical conferences.
8 The Wireless Parties include wireless carriers and antenna systems suppliers.
