DOCSLIB.ORG

Staff Report: Inquiry Into the Appropriate

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Staff Report: Inquiry Into the Appropriate INQUIRY INTO THE APPROPRIATE SCOPE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS REGULATION A Staff Report to the Iowa Utilities Board Elizabeth S. Jacobs, Chair Nick Wagner, Board Member Sheila K. Tipton, Board Member October 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................... 1 II. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 10 III. TOPICS FOR INQUIRY .......................................................................................... 12 A. VoIP..................................................................................................................... 12 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 19 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 22 B. Carrier of last resort obligations, Iowa Code § 476.29(5) .................................... 22 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 23 2. Recommendation .......................................................................................... 25 C. Consumer protection and complaint resolution, including unauthorized changes in service (slamming and cramming), §§ 476.3 and 476.103 ........................................ 25 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 27 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 29 D. Fees assessed to telecommunications carriers ................................................... 29 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 30 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 33 E. Federally-delegated regulatory authority ............................................................. 33 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 35 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 38 F. State authority to hear and resolve intercarrier disputes, Iowa Code § 476.11 ... 38 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 39 2. Recommendation .......................................................................................... 40 G. Quality of service regulations .............................................................................. 40 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 41 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 42 H. Management of public right-of-way, including joint use of utility poles ................ 42 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 43 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 43 I. Railroad crossings by telecommunications utilities .............................................. 43 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 44 i 2. Recommendation .......................................................................................... 44 J. Alternative operator services companies ............................................................. 44 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 45 2. Recommendation .......................................................................................... 46 K. Tariff Retention .................................................................................................... 46 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 48 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 50 L. Monitoring and protection of the competitive marketplace................................... 50 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 52 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 53 M. Certificates of public convenience and necessity ................................................ 54 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 54 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 56 N. Review of proposed reorganizations ................................................................... 56 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 58 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 60 O. Discontinuance of service .................................................................................... 60 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 61 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 62 P. Universal service provisions of § 476.102 ........................................................... 62 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 64 2. Recommendation .......................................................................................... 65 Q. Deployment of broadband service ....................................................................... 65 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 66 2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 66 R. Other ................................................................................................................... 67 1. Staff Analysis ................................................................................................ 67 2. Recommendation .......................................................................................... 68 S. Non-substantive legislative changes ................................................................... 68 IV. GLOSSARY ............................................................................................................ 71 V. ENDNOTES ............................................................................................................ 72 ii I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On January 11, 2013, the Board initiated an inquiry into the appropriate scope of Iowa’s regulation of telecommunications services. With the emergence of new technologies and changes in market conditions, the Board found that it would be beneficial to engage in a general review of the existing regulatory framework, with the goal being to eliminate unnecessary statutory and regulatory provisions, target regulations for future review to ensure their relevancy and to maintain compliance with changes in federal laws where necessary, and to identify industry issues that should be closely monitored for possible future action. In recent years, numerous states have engaged in a similar review of their regulation of telecommunications. Many states, including Iowa, have deregulated retail rates. Some states have altered or eliminated tariff requirements, changed service quality standards, or otherwise acted to reduce regulation. Increased competition in the marketplace appears to be the most common catalyst for these actions, including competition between wireless carriers, Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service providers, and competitive traditional wireline local exchange carriers. The Board saw the need to examine the Board’s regulatory approach to VoIP service. To initiate this part of the discussion, the Board asked participants to address whether any technological differences between VoIP and traditional telephone service warranted a difference in regulation. A wide range of other topics relating to telecommunications regulation were set for discussion, including a carrier’s obligation to serve all parts of its exchange, service quality and consumer protection issues, the Board’s role in resolving disputes between carriers, market entry requirements (including certification and tariffing requirements), and the Board’s role in approving discontinuance of service, carrier reorganizations, and broadband deployment in Iowa. The Board received written comments from 15 interested parties representing consumers and telecommunications service providers and held a workshop to discuss in an open forum the participants’ positions on certain issues. The Board has been delegated a specific regulatory policy by the Legislature, codified in Iowa Code § 476.95, which charges the Board with ensuring that communications services are available throughout the state at just, reasonable, and affordable rates from a variety of providers; furthering competition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Michael Starkey
    Michael Starkey President Founding Partner QSI Consulting, Inc. 243 Dardenne Farms Drive Cottleville, MO 63304 (636) 272-4127 voice (636) 448-4135 mobile (866) 389-9817 facsimile [email protected] Biography Mr. Starkey currently serves as the President and Founding Partner of QSI Consulting, Inc. QSI is a consulting firm concentrating primarily on regulated markets including the telecommunications industry. QSI assists its clients in the areas of regulatory policy, business strategy, financial and econometric analysis and inter-carrier issues involving rates and charges assessed by incumbent carriers. Prior to founding QSI Mr. Starkey served as the Senior Vice President of Telecommunications Services at Competitive Strategies Group, Ltd. in Chicago, Illinois. Mr. Starkey’s consulting career began in 1996 shortly before the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Since that time, Mr. Starkey has advised some of the world’s largest companies (e.g., AT&T, MCI, Time Warner, Covad Communications, Comcast, Siemens Corporation, etc.) on a broad spectrum of issues including the most effective manner by which to interconnect competing networks. Mr. Starkey’s experience spans the landscape of competitive telephony including interconnection agreement negotiations, mediation, arbitration, and strategies aimed at maximizing new technology. Mr. Starkey’s experience is often called upon as an expert witness. Mr. Starkey has since 1991 provided testimony in greater than 150 proceedings before approximately 40 state commissions, the FCC
    [Show full text]
  • "Connect America" & Date(2011)
    Westlaw Delivery Summary Report for YOUNG,DANIEL Your Search: "CONNECT AMERICA" & DATE(2011) & "WC DOCKET NO. 10-90" Date/Time of Request: Monday, June 25, 2012 09:41 Central Client Identifier: HALO Database: FCOM-FCC Citation Text: 26 F.C.C.R. 17663 Lines: 51292 Documents: 1 Images: 0 The material accompanying this summary is subject to copyright. Usage is governed by contract with Thomson Reuters, West and their affiliates. 26 F.C.C.R. 17663, 26 FCC Rcd. 17663, 54 Communications Reg. (P&F) 637, Page 1 2011 WL 5844975 (F.C.C.) FEDERAL-STATE JOINT BOARD ON UNIVERSAL SERVICE 26 F.C.C.R. 17663, 26 FCC Rcd. 17663, 54 Communic- ations Reg. (P&F) 637, 2011 WL 5844975 (F.C.C.) CC Docket No. 96-45 NOTE: An Erratum is attached to the end of this docu- LIFELINE AND LINK-UP ment WC Docket No. 03-109 NOTE: A Second Erratum is attached to the end of this document UNIVERSAL SERVICE REFORM -- MOBILITY FUND Federal Communications Commission (F.C.C.) WT Docket No. 10-208 Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule- FCC 11-161 making **1 IN THE MATTER OF Adopted: October 27, 2011 CONNECT Released: November 18, 2011 AMERICA Comment Date on Sections XVII.A-K: January 18, FUND 2012 WC Reply Comment Date on Sections XVII.A-K: February Docket 17, 2012 No Comment Date on Sections XVII.L-R: February 24, . 2012 10 Reply Comment Date on Sections XVII.L-R: March 30, - 2012 90 *17663 By the Commission: Chairman Genachowski A NATIONAL BROADBAND PLAN FOR OUR FU- and Commissioners Copps and Clyburn issuing separate TURE statements; Commissioner McDowell approving in part, concurring in part and issuing a statement.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Public Regulation Commission Staffing and Budget Allocation
    Evaluation of Public Regulation Commission Staffing and Budget Allocation A Report to the New Mexico Legislative Council Service Santa Fe, New Mexico Ken Costello, Principal Researcher, NRRI Rajnish Barua, Ph.D., Executive Director, NRRI Report No. 17-02 May 2017 © 2017 National Regulatory Research Institute 8403 Colesville Road, Suite 1100 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Tel: 301-588-5385 www.nrri.org Report No. 17-02 About NRRI NRRI was founded in 1976 by the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC). While corporately independent, NARUC and NRRI are linked in multiple ways to ensure accountability. NARUC, as the association of all state regulators, is invested in quality research serving its members. NRRI coordinates its activities to support NARUC's policy, research, educational and member-support service to state commissions. Mission Statement To serve state utility regulators by producing and disseminating relevant, high-quality applied research that provides the analytical framework and practical tools necessary to improve their public interest decision-making. In all its activities, NRRI embodies the following values: relevance, excellence, objectivity, creativity, independence, fiscal prudence, ethics, timeliness and continuous improvement. Board of Directors Chair: Hon. ToNola D. Brown-Bland, Commissioner, North Carolina Utilities Vice Chair: Hon. John Rosales, Commissioner, Illinois Commerce Commission Treasurer: Hon. Betty Ann Kane, Chairman, District of Columbia Public Service Commission Secretary: Rajnish Barua, Ph.D., Executive Director, NRRI Hon. David W. Danner, Chairman, Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission Hon. Elizabeth B. Fleming, Commissioner, South Carolina Public Service Commission Hon. Sarah Hofmann, Commissioner, Vermont Public Service Board Hon. John E. Howard, Commissioner, South Carolina Public Service Commission Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • MARC By-Laws
    BY-LAWS of the MID-AMERICA REGULATORY CONFERENCE, INC. The foregoing are the By-Laws of the corporation adopted January 26, 1990, as amended June 4, 1991, January 24, 1992, June 7, 1993, January 21, 1994, November 14, 1995, June 19, 2007, June 7, 2011, April 17, 2017, July 26, 2017, and February 11, 2019. Article I The Principal office of the corporation shall be the office of the Iowa Utilities Board, 1375 East Court Avenue, Des Moines, Iowa. The corporation may also maintain such branch offices and places of business as the Board of Directors may deem necessary or of advantage in the conduct of its business. Article II The corporation has and shall have no members. Article III Section 1. General Powers. The business and affairs or the corporation shall be managed by its Board of Directors. The Board of Directors may authorize any officer or officers, agent or agents, to enter into any contract or execute and deliver any instrument in the name of and on behalf of the corporation, and such authority may be general or confined to specific instances. Section 2. Number, Tenure, and Qualifications. The members of the Board of Directors shall be the members of the Arkansas Public Service Commission, the Illinois Commerce Commission, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, the Iowa Utilities Board, the Kansas Corporation Commission, the Michigan Public Service Commission, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, the Missouri Public Service Commission, the Nebraska Public Service Commission, the North Dakota Public Service Commission, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission, the Texas Public Utility Commission, and the Wisconsin Public Service Commission or their successor agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Calendar Year 2002 Annual Report of the Iowa Utilities Board
    2014 ANNUAL REPORT Iowa Utilities Board 1375 E. Court Avenue, Rm. 69 Des Moines, Iowa 50319-0069 1.515.725.7321 http://iub.iowa.gov [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS THE BOARD ................................................................................................................ 4 History.............................................................................................................................................7 Jurisdiction .................................................................................................................................... 13 Vision ............................................................................................................................................ 15 Mission .......................................................................................................................................... 15 ORGANIZATION .........................................................................................................16 Executive Secretary ..................................................................................................................... 17 Deputy Executive Secretary ......................................................................................................... 18 General Counsel ........................................................................................................................... 20 Customer Service ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nrri94-17 State Public Service Commission Disposition Of
    NRRI94-17 STATE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION DISPOSITION OF THE GAIN ON SALE OF UTILITY ASSETS David W. Wirick Associate Director Administration and Special Projects August 1994 The views and opinions expressed by the author are not necessarily those of The National Regulatory Research Institute, The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, or any particular state public utility commission. I Introduction and Background Fairly frequently, regulated utilities dispose ofassets once regarded as necessary to the provision ofutility service. Examples ofcircumstances that might cause utilities to sell assets are: •A utility outgrows its headquarters office space. It builds elsewhere and sells the fonmer headquarters. •A utility sells land previously held for future use after it detenmines that the land will not be necessary for utility service. •A utility sells productive assets or office space to an unregulated subsidiary with the intention ofpurchasing the services from the subsidiary or entering into a lease agreement for the use ofthe space. • An electric utility sells excess generating capacity to another utility and enters into an agreement with it to share that capacity. •A telecommunications utility sells rural exchanges to another provider. •A gas company sells a gas field and storage facility to another gas utility. In each ofthese instances and others, the disposition ofthe gain on the sale (or, in rare circumstances, the loss) is ofconcern to regulatory commissions and is the subject of intense debate. The gain, which is measured as the difference between the book value ofthe asset (the original cost less accumulated depreciation) and its selling price, could be allocated to ratepayers, to utility shareholders, or split between the two.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT Iowa Utilities Board 1375 E. Court Avenue, Rm. 69 Des Moines, Iowa 50319‐0069 1.515.725.7321 http://iub.iowa.gov [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS THE BOARD ......................................................................................................... 4 History.............................................................................................................................................7 Jurisdiction .................................................................................................................................... 13 Vision ............................................................................................................................................ 15 Mission .......................................................................................................................................... 15 ORGANIZATION ................................................................................................. 16 Executive Secretary ...................................................................................................................... 17 Deputy Executive Secretary .......................................................................................................... 18 General Counsel ............................................................................................................................ 20 Customer Service .......................................................................................................................... 21
    [Show full text]
  • State Public Utility Commissions – Lifeline Information
    State State Agency Contact Information-Home Contact Information-Lifeline Other AL Alabama Public Service Commission http://www.psc.state.al.us/ http://psc.alabama.gov/Telecom/assistance.htm Alaska Regulatory Commission http://rca.alaska.gov/RCAWeb/home.aspx http://rca.alaska. gov/RCAWeb/NewsItems/NewsItemDetails.aspx? AK id=5e2c20af-91f5-47a5-baa3-05d04ac72cef Arizona Corporation Commission http://www.cc.state.az.us/ http://www.azcc. AZ gov/divisions/utilities/telecom/financial-aide.asp Arkansas Public Service Commission http://www.state.ar.us/psc/ http://arkansasag. gov/programs/consumer-protection/my- AR http://www.apscservices.info/telecom.asp phone/lifeline-and-link-up-programs CA California Public Utilities Commission http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/puc/ https://www.californialifeline.com/en http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/lifeline/ Colorado Public Utilities Commission http://www.dora.state.co.us/PUC// https://www.colorado. CO gov/pacific/dora/telecomprograms CT Connecticut Dept. of Public Utility Control http://www.ct.gov/dpuc/site/default.asp Delaware Public Service Commission http://depsc.delaware.gov/ http://depsc.delaware.gov/consumer. DE http://depsc.delaware.gov/telecomm.shtml shtml District of Columbia Public Service Commission http://www.dcpsc.org/ http://www.dcpsc.org/Consumers- Corner/Programs/Low-Income-Discount-Program. DC aspx Florida Public Service Commission http://www.psc.state.fl.us/ http://www.psc.state.fl. FL us/ConsumerAssistance/LifelineAssistance Georgia Public Service Commission http://www.psc.state.ga.us/ http://www.psc.state.ga. us/consumer_corner/cc_telecom/advisory/lifeline. GA asp Hawaii Public Utilities Commission http://www.puc.hawaii.gov/ Department of Commerce and http://cca.hawaii.
    [Show full text]
  • Pipeline and Hazmat Safety Grants
    2020 Pipeline and Hazmat Safety Grants PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION (PHMSA) FY 2020 1 PHMSA Grants Overview The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) announced a combined total of over $97 million in awards for ten separate pipeline safety and hazardous materials safety grant programs. The grants will be awarded to states, local communities, tribal entities, territories, universities, emergency responders, and non-profit organizations to support various safety programs at the state and local levels. The awards include: . $61 million in Pipeline Safety State Base grants . $5.4 million in Underground Natural Gas Storage grants . $1.25 million in State Damage Prevention grants . $1.05 million in Pipeline Safety One Call grants . $2 million in Pipeline Safety Competitive Academic Agreement Program awards . $1.2 million in Pipeline Safety Technical Assistance grants . $20 million in Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness grant . $3.4 million in Hazardous Materials Instructor Training grants . $941 thousand in Supplemental Public Sector Training grants . $750 thousand in Community Safety grants The grants will be awarded to states, local communities, Tribal entities, and non-profit organizations to support state pipeline and hazardous materials safety programs. Grantees will use awarded funds to train first responders; educate the public on local safety initiatives, including pipeline damage prevention; and develop community incident response plans. PHMSA
    [Show full text]
  • Illinois Landowners Alliance, NFP V. Illinois Commerce Comm'n, 2017 IL 121302
    Illinois Official Reports Supreme Court Illinois Landowners Alliance, NFP v. Illinois Commerce Comm’n, 2017 IL 121302 Caption in Supreme ILLINOIS LANDOWNERS ALLIANCE, NFP, et al., Appellees, v. Court: THE ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION et al., Appellants. Docket Nos. 121302, 121304, 121305, 121308 cons. Filed September 21, 2017 Rehearing denied November 20, 2017 Decision Under Appeal from the Appellate Court for the Third District; heard in that Review court on a petition for review of order of the Illinois Commerce Commission. Judgment Affirmed. Counsel on Sean R. Brady, of Wind on the Wires, of Wheaton, for appellant Wind Appeal on the Wires. Diana Z. Bowman, Christina A. Jacobson, and Owen E. MacBride, of Schiff Hardin LLP, and Mara S. Georges and Michael J. Synowiecki, of Daley and Georges Ltd., both of Chicago, for appellant Rock Island Clean Line. John N. Moore, of Natural Resources Defense Council, of Chicago, for appellant Natural Resources Defense Council. Patrick K. Shinners and Rochelle G. Skolnick, of Schuchat, Cook & Werner, of St. Louis, Missouri, for appellant International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Douglas P. Harvath, General Counsel, of Illinois Commerce Commission, and Matthew L. Harvey and James E. Weging, Special Assistant Attorneys General, all of Chicago, for appellant Illinois Commerce Commission. John D. Albers, Jonathan LA Phillips, Melissa N. Schoenbein, and William M. Shay, of Shay Phillips, Ltd., of Peoria, and Michael T. Reagan, of Ottawa, for appellee Illinois Landowners Alliance, NFP. Charles Y. Davis and Claire A. Manning, of Brown, Hay & Stephens, LLP, of Springfield, for appellee Illinois Agricultural Association. Jenner & Block LLP (Clifford W. Berlow, of Chicago, Matthew E.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission FCC 12-115 Before The
    Federal Communications Commission FCC 12-115 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Federal-State Joint Conference on Advanced ) CC Docket No. 99-294 Telecommunications Services ) ) ORDER Adopted: September 24, 2012 Released: September 25, 2012 By the Commission: 1. By this order, and pursuant to section 410(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Communications Act), we hereby fill two vacancies on the Federal-State Joint Conference on Advanced Services (Joint Conference).1 The Joint Conference was convened in 1999 as part of the Commission’s ongoing efforts to ensure that advanced services are deployed as rapidly as possible to all Americans, and it serves as a forum for an ongoing dialogue among the Commission, state regulators, and local and regional entities regarding the deployment of advanced telecommunications capabilities.2 The Joint Conference comprises representatives from state public utility commissions and from the Federal Communications Commission.3 2. Pursuant to section 410(b) of the Communications Act, the Commission hereby appoints the Honorable Swati Dandekar, Board Member, Iowa Utilities Board, and the Honorable Stephen Michael Bloom, Commissioner, Oregon Public Utility Commission, to serve on the Joint Conference.4 These two appointments fill the positions vacated by Robert Clayton, former Chairman of the Missouri Public Service Commission, and Vendean Vafiades, former Commissioner of the Maine Public Utilities Commission. The Commission gratefully acknowledges the important contributions of these individuals to the work of the Joint Conference. 1 47 U.S.C. § 410(b); Letter from James Bradford Ramsay, General Counsel, National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, to Julius Genachowski, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission, CC Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix Table 1 Sources
    Appendix Table 1 Sources • Alabama Public Service Commission, "Mission and History," available at http://www.psc.alabama.gov/News/ComHist.html (last accessed September 2018). • Alabama Public Service Commission, "Utility Services Division," available at http://www.psc.state.al.us/Telecom/index.htm (last accessed September 2018). • Regulatory Commission of Alaska, "About RCA," available at http://rca.alaska.gov/RCAWeb/AboutRCA/Commission.aspx (last accessed September 2018). • Regulatory Commission of Alaska, "Programs and Utilities," available at http://rca.alaska.gov/RCAWeb/Programs/ProgramsAndUtilities.aspx (last accessed September 2018). Arizona Corporation Commission, "Our Mission and Background," available at https://www.azcc.gov/Divisions/Administration/about.asp (last accessed September 2018). • Arizona Corporation Commission, "Utilities Division," available at https://azcc.gov/Divisions/Utilities/default.asp (last accessed September 2018). • Arkansas Public Service Commission, "Commission Information," available at http://www.apscservices.info/commission.asp# (last accessed September 2018). • California Public Utilities Commission, “About the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC),” available at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/aboutus/ (last accessed September 2018). • Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies, "About the PUC," available at https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/dora/aboutpuc (last accessed September 2018). • Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies, "Public Utilities Commission," available at https://colorado.gov/pacific/dora/puc (last accessed September 2018). • Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Public Utilities Regulatory Authority, "About Us,” available at https://www.ct.gov/pura/cwp/view.asp?a=3157&q=404410&puraNav_GID=1702 (last accessed September 2018). • Delaware Public Service Commission, “About the Public Service Commission,” available at http://depsc.delaware.gov/public-service-commission/ (last accessed September 2018).
    [Show full text]