My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.3 ERMUSR 03-13-2018
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Packets
>
2014-2024
>
2018
>
03-13-2018
>
6.3 ERMUSR 03-13-2018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2018 1:20:28 PM
Creation date
3/9/2018 1:20:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUSR
date
3/13/2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DMDMIJ/ <br /> //////S/�'► Position Statement <br /> Preserve Local Control of Pole Attachments <br /> • The municipal exemption from FCC pole <br /> attachment rates and other pole attachment <br /> regulations must be retained, and any attempt to <br /> grant the FCC authority to regulate public power <br /> utility poles must be rejected. :111 PPP <br /> • The exemption recognizes the public nature and — — - • °' <br /> accountability of municipal utilities. <br /> t <br /> • The FCC has not shown a single example in z" _ <br /> which local control or fees have been an impediment`~ <br /> to broadband deployment. <br /> • Granting the FCC authority over public power ? r : <br /> utility poles would be a backdoor method of <br /> preempting local control over pole attachments and % <br /> their related rates. "" <br /> Background ..._. <br /> Municipal utilities are exempt from Federal - „ .; I41, 4.* '"' <br /> Communications Commission (FCC)jurisdiction .'< {* . I `'' <br /> over pole attachments. This exemption was <br /> expressly granted in 1978 based on the recognition <br /> of the public process and accountability to <br /> constituents involved with adopting local �» ; + <br /> regulations and setting fees, and it has been ". ' <br /> retained in multiple updated versions of the federal f41- F <br /> Communications Act. Further, Section 224 of ••• <br /> the Communications Act prohibits the FCC from * 1 -4ra • <br /> regulating public power utility poles. <br /> Local technical, health, reliability, and safety Municipalities have zoning,land use,and technical <br /> considerations(including the National Electric Safety Code) <br /> considerations, need to be considered when that justify local authority over the use of our infrastructure. <br /> establishing appropriate pole attachment <br /> regulations. And with the FCC pole attachment <br /> rate having been lowered to the cable rate, a (R—South Dakota), chairman of the Senate <br /> municipality is unlikely to recover the maintenance Commerce Committee, and Senator Brian Schatz <br /> and management costs for the attached facilities. (D —Hawaii,) developed draft legislation to grant <br /> Thus, the authority to regulate pole attachments the FCC authority to regulate municipal power <br /> and to set applicable rates must remain at the local utility poles, a move widely viewed as an attempt to <br /> municipal level. backdoor the authority of the FCC to regulate pole <br /> attachments and rates. <br /> Since 2010, the FCC has repeatedly recommended <br /> to Congress that the municipal exemption from In 2016, Mobilitie, a major manufacturer and <br /> FCC regulation of pole attachment and rates supplier of wi-fi equipment and networks, <br /> be repealed. Last year, Senator John Thune petitioned the FCC for a declaratory ruling <br /> 2018 Federal Position Statements/6 <br /> 238 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.