Vermont legislators failed to override a veto of the state's comprehensive privacy bill. Last week Gov. Phil Scott (R) vetoed H-121, which controversially included a private right of action and a kids code section similar to a California law that was temporarily enjoined. The tech industry lauded Scott's veto, while consumer advocates and the bill’s sponsor urged a legislative override (see 2406140017). Overrides require a two-thirds majority from each chamber. On Monday, the House met that threshold with a 128-17 vote, but the effort died in the Senate, where members voted 14-15. “Industry feared this legislation and worked so hard to kill it because it had real teeth to prevent their harmful data practices,” Consumer Reports Policy Analyst Matt Schwartz said. But the fight for strong Vermont privacy protections will continue, he added. The failure also disappointed Design It For Us, said co-Chair Zamaan Qureshi: The bill “would have been a much-needed step toward protecting youth from the sustained exploitation and undue harms that we experience from social media.”

A California bill requiring more public information on resiliency efforts by telecom companies cleared the Senate Communications Committee on Tuesday. The bill (AB-2765) would require the California Public Utilities Commission to report on inspections that ensure companies comply with resiliency plans. The Assembly previously passed the measure in a unanimous vote last month (see 2405220055). Communication during an emergency can be a matter of “life and death,” sponsor Gail Pellerin (D) said during the committee’s livestreamed hearing. The Utility Reform Network lobbyist Ignacio Hernandez said the bill would give Californians more confidence that communications networks will have backup power during disasters. While the state requires telecom companies to have backup power plans, the public currently can’t tell the degree to which companies are complying and whether remedial actions are needed, he said. The bill goes next to the Appropriations Committee.

Following a Connecticut probe that discovered evidence of Frontier Communications' service-quality failures, the carrier may have to prepare additional reporting and could receive a violation notice, the state’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) said in a draft decision Monday (docket 24-01-15). PURA could make a final decision July 10; exceptions to the draft are due June 25, a separate notice said. Responding to a petition from the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel, PURA investigated Frontier and found it wasn't complying with two of five Connecticut service-quality standards, the agency said. Frontier "repeatedly failed" to meet minimum standards for "maintenance appointments met" (MAM) and "out-of-service repair" (OSR), it said. During a 108-month period -- Jan. 1, 2015, to Dec. 13, 2023 -- Frontier failed to meet the MAM standard in 35 months and the OSR standard in 51 months, PURA found. During that period, Frontier didn't file required reports to PURA in 16 instances when the companies fell below one of the standards for three consecutive months, the agency added. In May comments, Frontier noted it performed strongly on the state’s other three service-quality standards, metrics that the carrier deemed more important (see 2405200053). However, PURA responded in the draft order, "Frontier’s compliance with three out of the five standards does not excuse the Company from completely complying with the regulations.” Meanwhile, on Tuesday, Verizon filed a petition asking PURA to reclassify its remaining services as competitive and retire the company’s alternative form of regulation plan (docket 24-06-15). “Today, Verizon serves only a small sliver of the Greenwich area as the incumbent telephone company, with multiple others offering competing services in the same area that give consumers a wide range of choices,” and yet “we remain subject to outdated classifications and regulations on some of our legacy services,” the carrier said. If PURA grants the petition, Verizon said it would continue serving Connecticut customers “but under the same rules that apply to all competitive providers in the state.”

New York state’s affordable internet law won’t be enforced for now, ISP associations said Monday. The industry groups won’t file a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc of a 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision upholding New York state’s Affordable Broadband Act, according to a Friday letter to the court from ACA Connects, CTIA, NTCA, USTelecom and the New York State Telecommunications Association. The 2nd Circuit ruled in April that federal law doesn’t preempt the 2021 New York law requiring $15 monthly plans with 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload speeds for qualifying low-income households (see 2404260051). The 2nd Circuit issued its mandate on that decision Monday. While Friday’s letter to the court didn’t say why ISPs wouldn’t seek rehearing, the industry groups previously told the court they were working toward an agreement with the state that would make a rehearing petition unnecessary (see 2406060038). In a joint statement Monday, the associations said they agreed not to seek rehearing because Attorney General Letitia James (D) agreed to “suspend enforcement of this law while the courts consider the litigation in this case.” The ISP groups said they “continue to support state and federal measures that foster broadband affordability without requiring rate regulation.” While the groups won’t seek rehearing by the 2nd Circuit, they could still seek U.S. Supreme Court review by the end of July. However, the industry groups expect a 6th Circuit ruling before that deadline -- possibly in the next three weeks -- on the FCC’s order reclassifying broadband as a Title II service, said an industry lawyer involved in the appeals process. The 6th Circuit ruling would affect how ISPs proceed on their challenge to the New York law because the 2nd Circuit decision was based on broadband as Title I, the lawyer said. If the 6th Circuit stays the FCC order, preserving a Title I world, industry would likely appeal the 2nd Circuit decision to the Supreme Court, the source said. However, if there isn’t a stay and the Title II order takes effect, industry could instead file a fresh lawsuit at the district court challenging the New York law under the Title II regime, the attorney said. AG James agreed not to enforce the state law until Aug. 21 or 14 days after a potential 6th Circuit stay of the FCC order, the attorney said. New York’s AG office referred us to the New York Public Service Commission for comment. However, a PSC spokesperson said the commission doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

The North Carolina Department of Information Technology awarded $67 million in Completing Access to Broadband program money to provide connectivity to nearly 16,000 households and businesses in 15 counties. It said Monday nearly $35 million from the American Rescue Plan Act will fund the projects, along with $16 million from counties and more than $16 million from broadband providers.

The Idaho Public Utilities Commission denied an application from Lumen’s CenturyLink asking for equipment installed in 2022 to be designated as qualified broadband equipment (case QWE-T-23-05). Taxpayers can receive an Idaho income tax credit for installing qualified broadband equipment during a calendar year, but the PUC must confirm it can transmit signals with at least 0.2 Mbps download and 0.125 Mbps upload speeds. CenturyLink claimed it spent $23.3 million installing equipment with at least 0.5 Mbps/0.25 Mbps. “The commission denied CenturyLink’s application after reviewing it and determining it did not properly describe the broadband equipment in question,” the PUC said. “The company also did not respond to audit requests from commission staff for information on the equipment that would have included the brand, model number and manufacturer.” The carrier declined to comment on the PUC order.

Illinois, Oregon and Puerto Rico received NTIA clearance to collect federal funding for the $42.5 billion broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program, the agency said Thursday. With both volumes of their initial proposals now approved, Illinois may request access to about $1 billion, Oregon about $196 million and Puerto Rico roughly $334 million, NTIA said. The states and territory will have one year to submit a final proposal, including the outcome of their subgrantee selection process. NTIA greenlit Colorado and New Hampshire earlier this week (see 2406110046). It has approved volume 2 for 12 states and Puerto Rico. All states, territories and the District of Columbia have received volume 1 approval (see 2405310050).

The connections-based Utah Universal Service Fund surcharge will increase 27 cents to 98 cents monthly per access line, a 38% rise, on July 1, a Tuesday notice in docket 24-R008-01 said. The Utah Public Service Commission said it didn't receive comments on the proposed change. Previously it said the increase was needed because of an AT&T error (see 2404160023 and 2405280028).

Multiple consumer privacy advocates urged Rhode Island legislators to halt passage of weak privacy protections. The Senate voted 36-1 to pass the comprehensive bill (S-2500) on Wednesday. The “critical bill” is a “marriage” of Connecticut’s privacy law and the work of a Rhode Island commission, said sponsor Sen. Louis DiPalma (D) at the livestreamed floor session. The commission included five legislators, Attorney General Peter Neronha (D) and Verizon, TechNet and the New England Cable and Telecommunications Association. Sen. Samuel Bell (D) voted no. He said the bill was too weak during a committee meeting earlier this week. The House passed the similar H-7787 earlier. Consumer Reports, which signaled its opposition previously (see 2406110033), joined with the Electronic Privacy Information Center and Restore the Fourth in a Tuesday letter. The proposed comprehensive privacy law “would do little to protect Rhode Island consumers’ personal information, or to rein in major tech companies like Google and Facebook,” they wrote. “The bill needs to be substantially improved before it is enacted; otherwise, it would risk locking in industry-friendly provisions that avoid actual reform.” The groups suggested several changes, including adding data minimization rules and requiring that companies honor browser-based privacy signals as global opt-outs. Also, they said the bill's privacy notice rules should cover all data controllers, not just commercial websites and ISPs. Cut the proposed exemption for pseudonymous data and narrow another carveout for loyalty programs, they said. In addition, adding a private right of action will strengthen enforcement, the groups said.

NTIA gave Colorado and New Hampshire a green light to collect federal funding for the $42.5 billion broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program, the agency said Tuesday. With both volumes of their initial proposals now approved, Colorado may request access to about $826 million and New Hampshire about $196 million, NTIA said. The states will have one year to submit a final proposal that will include the outcome of its subgrantee selection process. A BEAD dashboard shows the agency has approved volume 2 for 10 states and volume 1 for all states, territories and the District of Columbia (see 2405310050). NTIA will announce more approvals “on a rolling basis,” the agency said.