House bill takes aim at Pennsylvania's 'ghost poles'

For a borough of fewer than 900 people, Export has a lot of utility poles. And quite a few of them are right next to each another.

Known as ghost poles, the side-by-side poles number in the thousands across Southwestern Pennsylvania.

In areas where the poles are a problem, the limited enforcement options available to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission prompted several state legislators to address the situation by way of House Bill 1619.

Todd Meyers, spokesman for FirstEnergy and its subsidiary West Penn Power, said there are 7,500 ghost poles within the company’s service area.

They occur when the utility that owns a pole — in Export’s case, West Penn Power — replaces it. The next step is to notify all other utilities and companies that use the pole so they can migrate their wires to the replacement. The last utility to do so is supposed to take down the pole.

That is not always happening.

“We’re breeding half-poles in this town,” Mayor Joe Zaccagnini said, gesturing up the street. “See that pole up on Lincoln Avenue? It’s been there for about a decade.”

After a pole was replaced recently on Washington Avenue outside the Export Deli, the leftover ghost pole was left sitting on the sidewalk, lashed to its replacement by a couple of metal straps and tilting several degrees from upright.

“It’s kind of worrisome,” said Export Deli owner Jennifer Olsen of Monroeville.

“It’s a safety hazard,” Councilman John Nagoda said. “The way they have that pole cut, you can reach right up to the (rungs) and climb up there.”

At Zecker Street and Old William Penn Highway in the borough, another ghost pole is embedded where a car taking the corner too sharply could easily sideswipe it.

“It’s not right,” Nagoda said.

The problem is not limited to Export.

In Leechburg, Mayor Anthony Roppolo has two ghost poles near his house.

“They’re cut off down at the bottom, and there are big piles of dirt where they took the old pole out,” Roppolo said. “I don’t know how many we have in town, but I wish we could get rid of them.”

Former Murrysville Chief Administrator Jim Morrison said double poles have been an issue for that municipality as well.

“A couple of years ago, I had to write the Public Utility Commission to get Kinetics to remove a splintered pole on Old William Penn Highway,” he said.

It is not a universal problem, though. New Kensington Municipal Clerk Dennis Scarpiniti said city officials haven’t had many problems with ghost poles.

“I’ve gotten calls from people who thought the second pole was not secured properly,” Scarpiniti said. “We’ve called West Penn Power about that, but we haven’t gotten complaints about the other utilities not moving their lines over.”

Legislation in works

State Reps. Alec Ryncavage and Aaron Kaufer, both of Luzerne County, introduced House Bill 1619, which would empower the PUC to set a timetable for removal of old poles and penalties for companies that ignore it.

“What I found during my time as a borough councilman was that there are no regulations on how fast you have to move those lines and remove those poles,” said Ryncavage, R-Plymouth, who has three ghost poles outside his house. “I went to my state rep, who circulated a memo for sponsorship, but it didn’t go anywhere. So when I was elected to the General Assembly, I decided I was going to make this my priority.”

Ryncavage recruited Kaufer, who had expressed similar concerns about ghost poles situated near bus stops in his district.

“We also observed that there’s no standard to how to secure these poles either,” Ryncavage said. “I’ve seen metal brackets. I’ve seen wire. I’ve even seen some secured with just rope.”

Ryncavage said his goal is to solve the problem without overregulating the utilities or giving the PUC too much power.

“I wanted to work with all the stakeholders,” he said. “We met with energy and telecom associations, and we drafted legislation that has gotten bipartisan support.”

It has also received support from industry workers.

“Damaged, abandoned poles that are no longer in active service pose a direct safety threat to utility workers and the public,” said Michael Simmonds, assistant business manager for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Philadelphia Local 126, during testimony regarding House Bill 1619 this summer. “Left in place, these old poles can fall or collapse, potentially causing harm to individuals or damage to property. Failing responsible, timely removal of damaged or unused poles, state laws need to exist to deter this practice.”

Meyers said West Penn Power supports the legislation.

In August testimony before the General Assembly, Terrance Fitzpatrick, president of the Energy Association of Pennsylvania, said while the rights and responsibilities of pole owners and companies that piggyback on their usage are spelled out in contractual agreements, “this legislation would add a level of regulatory oversight to these in order to promote more timely migration of facilities to replacement poles and ease the proliferation of double poles.”

With no enforcement mechanism, there is no motivation for companies to move outdated infrastructure.

“A lot of these lines are just dead,” Ryncavage said.

Nagoda agreed.

“They’re giving all this money to expand internet broadband — they need to get the ‘old-band’ out of here first,” he said.

Roppolo said his concern runs from the wires at the top to the dirt at the bottom.

“These piles of dirt around the ones near my house are going to get covered in snow this winter,” he said. “Then they’re going to melt in the spring, run down the street and get into our catch basins. They’re eyesores.”

What would the bill do?

House Bill 1619 would require the Public Utility Commission to formulate regulations to:

• Address the duration, place and manner of acceptable use of double utility poles.

• Require that third-party attachers register with the PUC annually and provide a responsible point of contact and legal service agent for each utility service area in which the attacher has facilities.

• Put procedures in place for pole owners to provide reasonable notice of the requirement and a reasonable period of time to migrate facilities to a replacement pole.

• Provide for pole owners to be compensated for their costs of moving another company’s facilities and enforcement procedures when the attacher does not cooperate.

• Establish procedures for pole owners to determine that facilities have been abandoned and create compensation for the pole owner’s costs to remove infrastructure out of necessity or in response to the order of a governing authority.

• Adopt a rule authorizing pole owners to require a surety bond from attachers to reimburse pole owners for costs to migrate an attacher’s facilities, remove abandoned facilities, or rectify a preexisting violation caused by the attacher to accommodate a new attachment.

• Encourage expeditious removal of double poles following removal of all attached infrastructure.