State Lawmakers Turn to Wireless, 911, Regulatory Administration

The Kan. Senate’s Utilities Committee scheduled hearings for today (Feb. 6) on a House-passed VoIP 911 bill that would set VoIP E-911 service and customer fee requirements. HB- 2590 would let VoIP providers charge 25 monthly per phone number to be paid into a fund for grants to rural towns and counties to set up and maintain VoIP E-911 systems. The bill would authorize another 25 fee to cover ongoing local E-911 system costs. Each surcharge would raise about $300,000 annually. Meanwhile, a N.H. House committee defeated a VoIP 911 bill that would have extended the state’s 42 cents monthly E-911 surcharge to VoIP providers. HB-1232 died 14-1 in the House Science, Technology & Energy Committee because of concerns about tracking and collecting surcharges from unregulated providers.

A Colo. House committee narrowly defeated a bill (HB- 1173) that would have barred municipal taxation of VoIP services. The House Finance Committee killed the bill 7-6, a vote conditioned on a stipulation that a defeat would be final for the rest of the 2006 session. Municipalities can tax conventional landline and wireless services; opponents of the ban said exempting VoIP from local taxes would accelerate customer migration from services that are taxed, ultimately depriving municipalities of telecom tax revenue. A similar bill failed in the 2005 session.

The S.D. Senate Commerce Committee advanced a 911 bill (SB-130) to extend E-911 surcharges to prepaid wireless phone services and phone cards. Surcharges would be based on prepaid service purchases’ value; prepaid service providers would deduct the surcharge from the units of usage a customer buys. Service providers would have to give notice of the surcharge and usage deduction at the point of sale. The Cal. Assembly passed a 911 bill that would authorize appropriations from the state universal service high-cost fund to maintain 911 public safety answering points in high- cost areas. The bill (AB-326) also would declare that adequate funding levels in the state high-cost fund are “critical” to public health and safety.

Legislatures are addressing wireless services and gear. The N.Y. Assembly unanimously passed a cellphone recycling bill that would require wireless retailers to take back used cellphones from customers without charge, for recycling or reuse. HB-3390 would require retailers to post signs saying they accept used cellphones at no charge. The bill sent to the Senate would outlaw knowing incineration or dumping of wireless phones. The state Commissioner of Environmental Conservation would have 9 months from enactment to issue cellphone recycling rules for retailers. An identical bill in the 2005 session passed the Assembly but died in the Senate.

A N.H. wireless infrastructure bill (HB-1164) that would have made wireless providers supply a minimum 72-hour backup power supply at each tower there was defeated unanimously in the House Science, Technology & Energy Committee. A new N.J. wireless consumer protection bill (SB-1128) would require that wireless carriers give new customers a 14-day grace period during which they could cancel service contracts without penalty. The bill also would require that carriers inform customers coming up for contract renewal that they can quit the contract at the expiration date without penalty. A Pa. wireless consumer bill (HB-2418) would require wireless providers to offer new cellphones at the “lowest advertised price” to customers changing their service plans. It’s in the House Consumer Affairs Committee.

The Va. Senate passed a carphone safety bill that would bar drivers under 19 from using mobile phones while driving. SB-137 would make underage carphone use a primary motor vehicle offense, meaning a police officer could cite an offender even if there were no other violation. A similar bill in the House (HB-715) would bar only handheld phone use by under-19 drivers. A new Ia. carphone safety bill (HB- 2196) would triple fines for traffic violations if the driver was using a mobile phone while committing the offense.

Parallel regulatory administration bills in the N.M. legislature would bar the Public Regulation Commission from compelling payment of fines or customer refunds if the utility or telecom carrier has appealed the final order to the courts. Under SB-638/HB-600, a firm appealing a PRC order can comply with the order or negotiate a settlement but can’t be compelled to do so while appeals are pending. The bills also would create a settlement fund to collect financial penalties from telecom companies and deposit them for later use by the PRC to benefit the fined firms’ customers.

The S.D. Senate passed a bill (SB-101) to turn the PUC from a sub-agency of the state Labor Dept. into a separate agency with its own operating budget. The bill wouldn’t change PUC duties and responsibilities. A new regulatory administration bill in Ariz. (SB-1486) would require written consent from both the complaining customer and the defendant provider in telecom complaint cases before the Corporation Commission could administer binding arbitration of the dispute. The bill would cover informal and formal complaints. The Colo. House passed HB-1002, which would continue the Office of Consumer Counsel 9 years, until July 2015.

A Kan. telemarketing bill (SB-463) to require that all local exchange carriers annually tell residential customers about the state and national no-call lists is set for hearing Feb. 8 in the Senate Utilities Committee. The notices would explain how to join the lists and what types of telemarketing calls are exempt from no-call rules. A new telemarketing bill in N.J. (HB-2165) would amend a no-call list provision that allows telemarketing calls made in response to customers’ requests. The bill would require that the request be made in writing or that the seller be able to prove the called party previously made a verbal request for a return call. Either way, the telemarketing call would have to be limited to the information sought by the customer.

Another state wants to guard telecom customer privacy. A new Ariz. bill would bar unauthorized acquisition, sale or distribution of customer telephone call records. HB-2785 also would require telecom carriers to set up reasonable procedures to safeguard customer phone records against unauthorized or fraudulent access. It would exempt law enforcement agents or govt. agents performing official duties. Aggrieved customers could sue for the greater of $1,000 or actual damages.

The Kan. Senate Commerce Committee is to open hearings Feb. 7 on a statewide video franchising bill that would shift all video franchising authority to the Secretary of State and set a statewide video franchise fee. SB-449 would require current municipal franchises to be honored until they expire. The bill would require new video entrants to give municipalities at least 10 days’ notice before launching service.