Fiber for Breakfast Week 29: Right of Way Wars: Winning the Fiber Deployment Battle 

Fiber for Breakfast Week 29: Right of Way Wars: Winning the Fiber Deployment Battle 

Fiber deployment is often discussed in terms of funding, labor, technology, and demand. But for many projects, the biggest delays happen in much smaller, more specific places: a railroad crossing, a bridge, a right-of-way agreement, a permit, or a complication that no one expected until the project was already underway. 

This week’s Fiber for Breakfast focused on one of the least glamorous but most important parts of broadband deployment: knowing how to navigate the right-of-way and permitting issues that can slow projects down, drive up costs, and in some cases, stop them altogether. Gary sat down with Dave Thomas, CEO of Eagle One Resources, to discuss what fiber providers, contractors, utilities, and municipalities need to understand before they get too far into a build. Thomas has spent decades working through railroad crossings, utility coordination, right-of-way agreements, state statutes, and federal rules. His message was straightforward: the details matter and not knowing the rules can get expensive quickly.  

Railroad crossings were a major focus of the conversation. Thomas made clear that safety comes first, and that no one should compromise worker safety or railroad safety to accelerate a project. But he also explained that some fees, agreements, insurance requirements, and scheduling demands may not always apply the way project teams assume they do, especially at public road crossings.  

As Thomas put it, “The first thing you need to do is be aware of what state you’re in and what the laws are in that state.” That point matters because the rules can vary widely. Some states have statutes that limit what railroads can require at public crossings. Other situations may depend on whether the crossing is public or private, whether the railroad owns the land, and whether state or federal law applies. Thomas noted that too often, project teams accept a railroad agreement, application fee, license fee, or insurance requirement without first asking whether it is legally required.  

Those costs can add up quickly. Thomas described railroad agreements with application fees, license fees, recurring fees, flagging fees, inspection fees, and insurance requirements that can dramatically change project economics. In one example, he said a 100-foot crossing in Florida came back with a cost of $170,000 to $200,000, a number that could be enough to kill a project. 

The scheduling issues can be just as serious. Thomas pointed to flagging delays that can stretch for months, creating a new challenge for contractors trying to coordinate crews, equipment, and construction timelines. Gary noted that this becomes even more complicated when multiple railroads are involved at a single crossing, each with its own process and schedule.  

The conversation also turned to planning. Some of the most valuable advice was not about fighting after a problem appears but designing projects in a way that avoids unnecessary costs later. Thomas gave examples such as adjusting bore depth to avoid expensive monitoring requirements, extending casing outside the railroad corridor so future work does not require re-entering that space, and considering larger conduit or multi-duct options where they make sense.  

That kind of expertise can make a major difference before anything is submitted for approval. Once a plan is approved by a railroad, even a slight change can restart the process and cost months of time. The earlier project teams bring in people who understand the rules, the more chances they have to avoid mistakes.  

Gary compared it to bringing in an expert negotiator who knows which hotel event fees are real, which are negotiable, and which can be challenges. The same idea applies here. Fiber providers do not need to become railroad experts, but they do need someone at the table who understands what can be questioned, what must be followed, and where the real risks are. The discussion also comes as railroad right-of-way reform is gaining attention in Washington. The Broadband and Telecommunications RAIL Act would create a clearer process for deployments in railroad corridor. 

The broader takeaway is that the right-of-way strategy is not a side issue. It is part of deployment strategy. Fiber projects can have the funding, the demand, the equipment, and the crews, but still lose time and money if they are not prepared for the infrastructure hurdles in their path. 

Winning the fiber deployment battle means building smarter before the first shovel hits the ground.  

Click here to watch the full interview.  

Click here to view the slides.