Skip to content

Bills · 2009-2010 Regular Session

SB 469

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

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.

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Senate, not reached
  3. Passes Assembly, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. 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

Introduced by: Plale (D)

1 cosponsors

Zepnick (D)

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 page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Jan 22, 2010 · Senate

    Introduced by Senator Plale;Cosponsored by Representative Zepnick

  2. Jan 22, 2010 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy, and Rail

  3. Feb 5, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 offered by Senator Plale

  4. Feb 9, 2010 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  5. Feb 9, 2010 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  6. Feb 18, 2010 · Senate

    LRB correction (Senate Amendment 1)

  7. Mar 19, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 2 offered by Senator Plale

  8. Mar 22, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 to Senate amendment 2 offered by Senator Erpenbach

  9. Mar 22, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 2 to Senate amendment 2 offered by Senator Erpenbach

  10. Mar 23, 2010 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy, and Rail, Ayes 6, Noes 1

  11. Mar 23, 2010 · Senate

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy, and Rail, Ayes 6, Noes 1

  12. Mar 23, 2010 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  13. Mar 23, 2010 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  14. Mar 31, 2010 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  15. Apr 2, 2010 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  16. Apr 16, 2010 · Senate

    Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e)

  17. Apr 28, 2010 · Senate

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1