Alaska USF’s possible June 30 termination is raising concerns and producing much discussion among industry and consumer advocates in the state. A spokesperson for Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) told us the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) may decide the fate of AUSF, which was established to keep phone rates low in high-cost rural areas. If those dollars go away, “somebody has to pay those costs, and the somebody is most likely going to be those rural ratepayers,” said Alaska Chief Assistant Attorney General Jeff Waller in an interview Friday.
More areas are eligible for state broadband funding under the California Public Utilities Commission’s more granular mapping approach for 2023, CPUC officials said Monday. The CPUC held a California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) virtual workshop with ISPs, consumers, local governments, and regional consortia. “The validation process we’re using for CASF … is more rigorous and more responsive to the reality on the ground than what we’re seeing at the federal level,” said Communications Division Director Robert Osborn.
Public advocates objected to AT&T seeking relief of carrier of last resort (COLR) and other obligations last week. Rural counties objected to the carrier’s application earlier that week (see 2304040030). “AT&T seeks wholesale permission to abandon the guarantee of communications services for an unspecified number of its customers in unknowable areas simultaneously, and in bulk,” said the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office. AT&T incorrectly argues that COLR obligations require it to maintain copper, diverting resources from fiber, said PAO: But COLR is technology-neutral. And AT&T’s application breaks with California USF rules, it said. “The Application is so unclear, vague, and factually insufficient that the Commission cannot even begin to determine whether AT&T’s request is in the public interest.” The Utility Reform Network (TURN) and Center for Accessible Technology (CforAT) jointly agreed with PAO that the CPUC should reject the AT&T application. “AT&T has failed to clearly identify which customers, and which areas of its service territory would lose COLR protections,” TURN and CforAT said. “The Commission should not make a determination based on a minimal showing of customer impact for such an important fundamental obligation.” AT&T "submitted applications with the CPUC to start the process for an orderly transition from outdated, copper-based telephone services and network to broadband communications networks," an AT&T spokesperson said. "The proceeding should not be delayed because Californians will be disadvantaged if the network modernization is hampered by outdated regulations of legacy telephone service." AT&T is "firmly committed to ensuring all its customers will continue to have access to reliable voice service," the spokesperson added.
The Vermont House won’t try to pass a privacy bill this year, Commerce Committee members agreed at a meeting livestreamed Thursday. With multiple members raising concerns with the current state of H-121, Chair Michael Marcotte (R) suggested working on the bill over the summer with a goal of having a bill ready for the House to pass in January. He said he planned to talk to House Speaker Jill Krowinski (D) about the best way procedurally to continue work. The bill wouldn’t have to be reintroduced in 2024 since Vermont has a two-year session. Conflicts and lack of clarity within H-121 bother Marcotte, he said. The chair would prefer a more comprehensive bill that closely matches Connecticut’s law since that state is in the same region, he said. Rep. Jarrod Sammis (R) noted compatibility with other states in the region could make it easier to join multi-state lawsuits, which Vermont may have to do given its limited resources. The current draft is trying to be everything but not doing anything well, he said. Two committee Democrats said they wanted to move forward with the bill. "We can't let perfect stop us from making good progress here,” said Rep. Edye Graning (D). However, Rep. Monique Priestley (D) said she wasn’t comfortable voting now. H-121 currently “is such a copy-and-paste of pieces of [other state[ bills, and not even whole sections of bills,” which leaves "a whole bunch of gaps,” she said.
The telecom industry recoiled at the new direction for a California Public Utilities Commission rulemaking that previously focused on state USF charges. The CPUC has no business investigating provider-imposed charges, said phone, cable and wireless companies in comments Wednesday. Consumer advocates welcomed the review into discretionary charges they said aren’t always expected by customers.
Texas and Indiana legislators advanced sweeping privacy bills. The Texas House voted 146-0 Wednesday for HB-4, a priority bill for House Speaker Dade Phelan (R) that got industry praise for being compatible with Virginia and Connecticut laws (see 2303130045). After a similarly unanimous vote to pass the bill on second reading Tuesday, Phelan tweeted that the bill by Rep. Giovanni Capriglione (R) “will crack down on companies profiting from personal info & grant Texans new data privacy rights.” On Wednesday, the Indiana House Judiciary Committee voted 12-0 to advance to the floor SB-5 with an amendment requiring the attorney general office to post best practices on its website. The committee revised the amendment to remove “at least annually” from a line requiring data protection impact assessments by controllers. Majority Floor Leader Matt Lehman (R), the bill’s House sponsor, said he wants to establish a commission that can recommend legislative changes after the bill becomes law. It’s not currently in the bill, but Lehman said a letter on that subject will be circulated to the leadership. The Senate passed SB-5 in February but would have to vote again to concur with House changes. Indiana’s opt-out privacy bill is based on Virginia’s law (see 2301260044). Florida, Oregon and Tennessee privacy bills also moved forward this week (see 2304040042).
Alaska officials are making arrangements for the state USF’s expected demise June 30. “There is still a lot of preparation and research to be completed,” said Alaska Universal Service Administrative Co. (AUSAC) Agent Keegan Bernier at a Regulatory Commission of Alaska meeting livestreamed Wednesday. The RCA seeks written comments by May 5 on proposed regulatory revisions related to AUSF, said Chair Keith Kurber.
Businesses said privacy protections are too limited in a comprehensive Florida bill approved by a Senate panel Tuesday. The Senate Commerce Committee voted 9-0 for SB-262, a third attempt in three years by Sen. Jennifer Bradley (R) to pass a privacy bill. "We'll continue to work on it,” the state senator said at the webcast hearing.
T-Mobile appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after a district court refused to stop California from switching to a connections-based method for state USF contribution. The carrier notified the U.S. District Court for Northern California about the appeal Monday. U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler late Friday denied the motion of T-Mobile and its subsidiaries for a preliminary injunction that sought to block the California Public Utilities Commission's change to a $1.11 monthly per-line fee from the previous revenue-based mechanism. "The new rule is different from the FCC rule, but the plaintiffs did not establish that it is inconsistent and preempted,” said Beeler's order in case 3:23-cv-00483. The CPUC order took effect Saturday." The CPUC didn’t comment on T-Mobile’s appeal. The carrier didn’t comment on the court decision.
New Jersey prorating rules are allowed under the federal Cable Act, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled Monday. No justices opposed the opinion by Justice Douglas Fasciale to reinstate the state Board of Public Utilities’ 2019 cease-and-desist order against Altice for failing to prorate canceled bills. "The regulation does not set the ‘rate’ that companies can charge,” wrote Fasciale. “It simply protects cable users from paying for service they no longer want.” Also, the court found that Altice never sought or received a BPU waiver from the prorating requirement. The court remanded the case to the appellate court to resolve Altice's argument the board failed to follow proper procedures in its enforcement action. The BPU and Division of Rate Counsel had appealed a 2021 state Appellate Division decision that the federal Cable Act preempts the state prorating rule. Chief Justice Stuart Rabner and Justices Anne Patterson, Fabiana Pierre-Louis and Rachel Wainer Apter joined Fasciale’s opinion. Justice Lee Solomon and temporarily assigned Judge Jack Sabatino recused themselves from the case. "This is a win for New Jersey's ratepayers who will no longer be forced to pay for cable service they do not want or need," said Rate Counsel Director Brian Lipman. Altice and the BPU didn’t comment.