Bills · 2009-2010 Regular Session
authority of the Public Service Commission over certain telecommunications utilities, telecommunications access charges, universal service fund contributions based on interconnected voice over Internet protocol service, tandem switching provider electronic call records, granting rule-making authority, and making an appropriation.
- Introduced, stopped here
- Passes Senate, not reached
- Passes Assembly, not reached
- Governor signs, not reached
- Law, not reached
Unfamiliar terms? Glossary
What this bill does
Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill: 1) makes changes to the authority of the Public Service Commission
(PSC) over telecommunications utilities; 2) imposes limits on charges for access
services by telecommunications utilities; 3) specifies the PSC's authority over
interconnected voice over Internet protocol (VOIP) service; 4) makes changes to the
PSC's authority for ensuring universal access to telecommunications service; and 5)
requires certain telecommunications providers to make electronic call records
available to other telecommunications providers.
PSC regulation of telecommunications utilities
Under current law, a telecommunications provider that provides basic local
exchange service is defined to be a telecommunications utility. The PSC's authority
over a telecommunications utility depends on whether the PSC has certified the
telecommunications utility as a telecommunications utility (TU) or an alternative
telecommunications utility (ATU). In general, the PSC has certified as TUs those
telecommunications providers that are incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs)
under federal law, which are telecommunications providers that resulted from the
breakup of the Bell System pursuant to a federal antitrust action. In general, the
PSC has certified as ATUs those telecommunications providers that are competitive
local exchange carriers (CLECs) under federal law, which are telecommunications
providers that compete with ILECs to provide basic local exchange service.
Under current law, TUs are subject to varying degrees of regulation by the PSC,
depending on certain factors, such as whether the TU has elected price regulation,
under which the PSC regulates the rates charged by a TU, but not the TU's rate of
return. The degree of PSC regulation also depends on whether a TU is a cooperative
association, or whether the TU is a "small TU," which is a TU that had fewer than
50,000 access lines in this state on January 1, 1984. With certain exceptions, current
law exempts an ATU from PSC regulation, except that, if certain conditions are
satisfied, the PSC may impose on an ATU a requirement that otherwise applies to
a TU or other public utility.
With respect to ATUs, the bill limits the requirements that the PSC may
impose. Under the bill, the PSC may impose requirements on an ATU that relate
only to the following: 1) submission of stockholder and other business management
information; 2) PSC examination of accounting and other business records; 3) use of
and connection to transmission equipment and property by other
telecommunications providers; 4) confidential treatment of records by the PSC; 5)
rates and costs of unbundled network elements; 6) interconnection agreements and
other interconnection requirements; 7) telephone caller identification, pay-per-call,
and toll-free services; 8) PSC privacy rules; 9) universal service and contributions
to the state universal service fund; 10) impairment of speed, quality or efficiency of
services, products, or facilities offered to consumers; 11) access to
telecommunications emergency services; 12) compliance with price lists, contracts,
What it would cost
Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs
Sponsors
Votes
Senate: Report adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy, and Rail, Ayes 6, Noes 1
Passed 6–1 Mar 23, 2010 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Full history
- Jan 22, 2010 · Senate
Introduced by Senator Plale;Cosponsored by Representative Zepnick
- Jan 22, 2010 · Senate
Read first time and referred to committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy, and Rail
- Feb 5, 2010 · Senate
Senate amendment 1 offered by Senator Plale
- Feb 9, 2010 · Senate
Public hearing held
- Feb 9, 2010 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 18, 2010 · Senate
LRB correction (Senate Amendment 1)
- Mar 19, 2010 · Senate
Senate amendment 2 offered by Senator Plale
- Mar 22, 2010 · Senate
Senate amendment 1 to Senate amendment 2 offered by Senator Erpenbach
- Mar 22, 2010 · Senate
Senate amendment 2 to Senate amendment 2 offered by Senator Erpenbach
- Mar 23, 2010 · Senate
Report adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy, and Rail, Ayes 6, Noes 1
- Mar 23, 2010 · Senate
Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy, and Rail, Ayes 6, Noes 1
- Mar 23, 2010 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- Mar 23, 2010 · Senate
Executive action taken
- Mar 31, 2010 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Apr 2, 2010 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Apr 16, 2010 · Senate
Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e)
- Apr 28, 2010 · Senate
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1