20260217Request for Clarification.pdf

RECEIVED
February 17, 2026
Robert H. Jackson, D.C. Bar No. 388397 (pro hac vice) IDAHO PUBLIC
Marashlian & Donahue, PLLC UTILITIES COMMISSION
1430 Spring Hill Rd., Suite 310
Tysons, VA 22102
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Gregory M. Adams, ISB No. 7454 (local counsel)
Richardson Adams, PLLC
515 N. 27th Street Boise, Idaho 83702
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Wired or Wireless, Inc.
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
WIRED OR WIRELESS, INC., )
Complainant, ) Case No.AVU-E-25-11
VS. )
AVISTA CORP., )
Respondent. )
PETITION OF WIRED OR WIRELESS,INC. FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE
COMMISSION'S JANUARY 27, 2026 ORDER
Wired or Wireless, Inc. ("WOW"),by and through counsel, and pursuant to Idaho Admin.
Code r. 31.01.01.325, respectfully submits this petition requesting that the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission ("Commission" or "PUC") clarify its January 27, 2026 Order (Order No. 36917) as
follows:
1. The Commission did not have authority over pole attachments, as defined in Idaho Code
Sec. 61-538, when provided by a utility to a telecommunications or broadband company
until July 1, 2025;
2. The Commission has not issued and made effective rules and regulations implementing the
state's regulatory authority over pole attachments (including a specific methodology for

such regulation which has been made publicly available in the state)as required by Section
1.1405(b)(3) of the rules of the Federal Communications Commission("FCC"), 47 C.F.R.
§ 1.1405(b)(3) or specifically addressing overlashing, as set forth in Section 1.1416 of the
FCC's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1416; and
3. The Commission's pending rulemaking proceeding,House Bill 180A Re Pole Attachments,
Case No. RUL-U-25-01, does not contain a specific methodology for determining "just
and reasonable rates" for pole attachments or specifically address overlashing.'
WOW has approached the FCC's Market Disputes Division of the Enforcement Bureau
(`BB") with a request to start the FCC's Rapid Broadband Assessment Team ("RBAT") Review
and Assessment process. That process involves:
The RBAT provid[ing] guidance and advice to the parties on the
most effective means of resolving their dispute, including RBAT-
supervised mediation. The RBAT also has discretion to decide
whether a complaint (or portion of a complaint) is suitable for
inclusion on the Commission's Accelerated Docket based on
consideration of specified criteria.2
The Parties (WOW and Avista Corp. ("Avista"))met with the EB via video conference on
February 3, 2026. During that conference, counsel for both WOW and Avista agreed to RBAT
mediation for the matters covered in the now-dismissed PUC complaint. Should mediation not
resolve the disputed issues,WOW will file an FCC complaint requesting its inclusion on the EB's
accelerated docket.3
I The proposed rule, 37.27.01, provides definitions; timelines for the permitting process;
requirements for non-discriminatory access to poles, just and reasonable rates and situations
permitting the denial of access to facilities; make-ready work; enforcement and unauthorized
attachments; and decision deadlines and procedural rules for complaint proceedings.
2 https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/rapid-broadband-assessment-team-rbat-review-and-
assessmentent(visited Feb. 16, 2026)
3 The FCC recently released a pole attachment complaint decision within 60 days of its filing.
Comcast Cable Communications, LLC. v. Appalachian Power Co., Proceeding No. 25-330,
Bureau ID Number EB-25-MD-002, FCC 26-6 (rel. Feb. 5, 2026).
2

The delicate Federal-State relationship for pole attachment disputes created by Congress
with Section 224(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 224(c), must
be respected and protected. Hence, it is critical for the Commission to make clear what it does not
have jurisdiction to do in respect to this docket so that the FCC fills the gap, protecting WOW's
rights without otherwise interfering with the State of Idaho's ongoing authority, pursuant to
Section 224(c). WOW respectfully submits that providing clarification herein will do so. Finally,
in the interests of encouraging broadband access in rural Idaho, WOW urges the Commission to
take immediate action.
Respectfully submitted.
Wired or Wireless, Inc.
Robert H. Jackson, D.C. Bar No. 388397 (pro hac vice)
Marashlian& Donahue, PLLC
1430 Spring Hill Rd., Suite 310
Tysons, VA 22102
Phone: [phone]
Email: rhjgcommlawgroup.com
Gregory M.Adams,ISB No. 7454 (local counsel)
Richardson Adams, PLLC
515 N. 27th Street
Boise,Idaho
83702
Phone: [phone]
Email: greggrichardsonadams.com
Dated: February 17, 2026
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 17th day of February 1026, 1 delivered true and correct copies
of the foregoing Petition of Wired or Wireless, Inc. for Clarification of the Commission's
January 27, 2026 Order to the following persons via the method of service indicated below:
Electronic mail only
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
Monica Barrios-Sanchez, Secretary
[e-mail]
Avista Corporation
M. Todd Colton, Senior Counsel
[e-mail]
Eric B. Langley, ASB- 8139- E66E
LANGLEY& BROMBERG LLC
2700 U.S. Highway 280, Suite 350E
Birmingham, Alabama 35223
[e-mail]
4