COM/CRC/sid Mailed 2/16/2007
Decision 07-02-030 February 15, 2007
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking to Revise Commission General Order Number 95 pursuant to D.05-01-030. |
Rulemaking 05-02-023 (Filed February 24, 2005) |
(See Appendix A for a list of appearances.)
OPINION ADOPTING PROPOSED RULE 94 IN
GENERAL ORDER 95 DEALING WITH INSTALLATION
OF WIRELESS ANTENNAS ON UTILITY POLES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
OPINION ADOPTING PROPOSED RULE 94 IN GENERAL ORDER 95 DEALING WITH INSTALLATION OF WIRELESS ANTENNAS ON UTILITY POLES 2
1. Summary 2
2. Procedural Background 3
3. Commission Jurisdiction 5
4. Rule 94 Initial Proposals 6
5. Disputed Provisions 9
6. Pole-Top Antennas 9
7. Settlement Agreement 10
8. Additional Marking and De-energizing Safeguards 16
9. Implementation of Rule Changes 23
10. Comments on Alternate Proposed Decision 24
11. Assignment of Proceeding 26
Findings of Fact 26
Conclusions of Law 29
ORDER 30
APPENDIX 1 - Definition of New GO 95, Rule 20 and Settlement Agreement
APPENDIX A - List of Appearances
OPINION ADOPTING PROPOSED RULE 94 IN
GENERAL ORDER 95 DEALING WITH INSTALLATION
OF WIRELESS ANTENNAS ON UTILITY POLES
1. Summary
This decision revises General Order (GO) 95 to establish uniform construction standards for attaching wireless antennas to jointly used poles. In adopting these revisions, this decision approves an unopposed settlement agreement between the Commission's Consumer Protection and Safety Division (CPSD); the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245 (IBEW); the Communications Workers of America-Ninth District (Communications Workers); Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E); AT&T California; California Cable & Telecommunications Association (CCTA); ClearLinx Network Corporation (ClearLinx); Crown Castle USA, Inc.; New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC; NextG Networks of California Inc.; Omnipoint Communications, Inc., dba T-Mobile; Southern California Edison Company (SCE); Sprint Nextel; Verizon California Inc.; Verizon Wireless; and William Adams.
We adopt the Rule 94 agreed to by the settling parties and attached to this decision as Appendix 1. Rule 94 clearly defines antennas; treats antennas as Class C equipment, thereby establishing many construction requirements; provides additional vertical clearances from other conductors and equipment; maintains vertical clearances from the ground; requires a sign for each antenna installation marked with the contact information of the antenna operator; and calls for each antenna installation to be subject to an agreement with the pole owner(s) that includes marking and de-energizing protocols that are substantially similar to and achieve at least the same safety standards as those set forth in the settlement agreement.
The settlement agreement approved by this decision adopts additional marking and de-energizing requirements. First, the settlement requires signatory antenna owners to provide further pole-mounted signage on joint use, utility poles. This signage describes compliance with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) exposure limits for each antenna installation and identifies the FCC's recommended minimum approach distance. Second, the settlement requires protocols for de-energizing antennas that emit radio frequency (RF) energy in excess of the FCC's General Population/Uncontrolled maximum exposure limits.
