Connecticut power struggle, SNET fights back on safety accusations >BY SHIRA LEVINE, New Media Editor

Defending itself against allegations that its broadband powering solution is unsafe, Southern New England Telecommunications went head to head with Cablevision of Connecticut before the Connecticut Department of Public Utility Control last week.

At stake is SNET's patented fiber optic cable technology, which the telco designed specifically for I-SNET, its statewide integrated hybrid fiber/coax (HFC) network (see figure).

Consultants hired by Cablevision claim that the cable violates National Electrical Safety Code specifications, endangering both SNET's and its own outside plant technicians. Cablevision has asked the DPUC to order SNET to stop using the cable in its construction (Telephony, Jan. 13, page 28).

In testimony last week, SNET defended the safety of its cable and questioned Cablevision's motives in pressing the issue.

"[Cablevision's] consultant says that our cable does not comply with the rules governing powering circuits within communications cable and does not fit any of the criteria for an exception," said Hoshang Mulla, vice president of I-SNET. "We are conducting a supervised trial of an innovative approach, and that is sanctioned by the code.

In conjunction with Bellcore and its own consultants, SNET has determined that its cable design is actually a safer solution than NESC's design and is petitioning the agency to change the code, Mulla said.

And while he admitted that some of Cablevision's other concerns are valid, such as allegations that SNET strung its cable too low in some places, said that Cablevision shouldn't be casting stones.

"Just as [Cablevision] videotaped SNET's violations, we did a videotape of them, and as of [last Thursday], some of those violations had not yet been corrected, including cable strung too low over public rights of way," Mulla said.

Cablevision told the DPUC that it didn't know the details of SNET's powering solution until last April, but SNET produced a letter to Cablevision dated Oct. 18, 1995, at last week's hearing that detailed the cable design. SNET attorneys also pointed out that Cablevision aired a story on its own news program about the network's patented design.

SNET and the DPUC have both questioned why-instead of going to the media, the governor and the state attorney general-concerned parties within Cablevision didn't simply call either SNET or the commission.

"They've testified that they became concerned about safety in August 1996, but they did not write a letter to SNET or bring it to the DPUC until November, shortly after SNET got its statewide cable TV franchise," Mulla said. "If they were so concerned with a 'grave danger,' why did they sit on this for almost three months?" The DPUC is expected to decide whether SNET will be permitted to continue with its powering plans within the next few weeks. Meanwhile, SNET is complying with a commission order to hold off on powering its network until the situation is resolved.

Regardless of the DPUC's decision, a SNET spokeswoman said the telco will go forward with its plans to launch telephony and cable TV service over the HFC network in Stamford this spring, albeit with a more conventional powering solution.