Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

Comparison with existing or proposed federal regulations

Most retail regulation of telecommunications services, apart from long distance and payphone services, and reporting by state-certificated providers to the commission, have been the historical regulatory domain of state commissions. Act 22 has essentially removed these state obligations, leaving to the commission, with some exceptions in s. 196.219, Stats., only those regulatory duties affecting wholesale relations among telecommunications services providers. Section 196.016, Stats., grants the commission the authority to exercise duties within the 1996 TA that have been granted by that law or the FCC to the state commissions to administer if they so elect. The commission retains authority over areas such as telephone numbering, universal service (including designation of eligible telecommunications carriers), and determinations under 47 USC 251 (f) (1) and (2) to terminate or maintain a rural or small incumbent local exchange carrier's claim to an exemption from interconnection. The proposed changes based on concerns identified in D. above arguably can be addressed and resolved through carrier-to-carrier proceedings under the 1996 TA administered by the commission, specifically the negotiation and arbitration of interconnection agreements under 47 USC 251 and 252 and the provisions preserving state service quality standards cognizable under 47 USC 252 (e) (3), 253 (b), 254 (f), and 261.

Comparison with similar rules in adjacent states

To conduct this comparison, inquiries were made to the state commissions of Iowa, Illinois, Michigan and Minnesota about the current telecommunications regulatory framework (statutes and rules) prevailing in each state. The inquiry asked questions regarding (1) the extent of reduction of carrier reporting requirements; (2) whether retail rate regulation remained; (3) what provider of last resort (POLR) duty existed, if any; (4) whether the state was seeking parity of regulation among the incumbents and competitors; and (5) whether wholesale jurisdiction as allowed to the states by the 1996 TA was in place. The responses for the four states indicated variations as to (1) through (4), noted in the next paragraphs, but a uniform retention of state wholesale jurisdiction, as allowed by the 1996 TA in response to (5).

Illinois still imposes significant financial and service quality reporting duties on incumbent carriers under rate of return regulation. However, many large carriers have elected market regulation of their rates, a scheme which deregulates most pricing except for certain “safe harbor" basic service type packages for consumers. A POLR duty of the incumbent may not be abandoned as to classes of service except upon approval by the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC). Small carriers having fewer than 35,000 lines are not rate-of-return regulated, but may be subjected to a rate-of-return rate case before the ICC upon complaint by a substantial number of the customers (10%). On the wholesale side, it is sufficient for one carrier to complain about a small carrier's access rates and thereby trigger an ICC rate case on those rates. Illinois did undertake some legislation to equalize the reporting among incumbent and new carriers, in Pub. Act 96-0927, effective June 15, 2010.

Iowa had previously reduced reporting requirements and in 2005 deregulated all rates except for retention of complaint jurisdiction over intrastate switched access rates. Tariffing was removed in favor of mandatory price catalogues of services. Iowa has never had an explicit POLR duty for incumbents, but frames a duty for both incumbents and new competitors to serve “all eligible customers." Incumbent local exchange providers are required to file maps and competitors are obliged to indicate the extent they concur in those maps as to their service territories.

Michigan currently requires reporting to assist the Michigan Public Service Commission prepare an annual “Status of Competition" report. However, that duty expires with the last report due in 2013 and will effectively end the current reporting obligations. Access charge tariffs are still required. In June, 2011, Michigan totally ended retail rate regulation, paralleling the effect of Act 22. However, there is still a provider of last resort duty, relief from which is permitted, but only under the state commission's supervision and control. Michigan much earlier equalized level of regulation by unifying its certification process under one certification category for local exchange service, but with defined territories.

Minnesota more than two years ago substantially reduced its reporting requirements to a one-page inquiry. Minnesota has an alternative form of regulation statute enacted before 2010 that has been elected by most incumbents and new competitors. Almost all rates are deregulated except for single-line residential and business customer services that are subject to a $1/year price increase cap. The state still retains a POLR duty and has not to this point engaged in legislative attempts to create more parity of regulation among providers.

Effect on small business

The removal of the proposed regulations should have a positive effect on small business by removing obsolete regulations, thereby simplifying and reducing the costs incurred by small businesses.

Comments

Comments on this rulemaking may be submitted as outlined in the Notice of Hearing.

Accommodation

The commission does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the provision of programs, services, or employment. Any person with a disability who needs accommodations to participate in this proceeding or who needs to receive this document in a different format should contact the Docket Coordinator, as indicated in the following paragraph, as soon as possible.

Agency Contacts

Questions regarding this matter, including small business questions, should be directed to Docket Coordinator Gary A. Evenson, Telecommunications Division, at [phone] or [e-mail]. Media questions should be directed to Kristin Ruesch, Communications Director, at [phone]. Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may also use the commission's TTY number. If calling from within Wisconsin, use [phone]; if calling from outside Wisconsin, use [phone].

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

The intention of this rulemaking is to clarify those activities removed from state regulation, thereby affording a benefit to providers that might otherwise believe they have to observe both federal and state requirements with respect to those activities. Confusion that could be caused by retention of obsolete provisions in the Wisconsin Administrative Code should be largely, if not completely, avoided. The reduction in compliance costs is a positive financial benefit for both small and large telecommunications providers, effecting an across-the-board reduction of regulatory compliance obligations and associated costs. Those limited duties preserved for the commission largely relate to wholesale interactions among providers. Other duties (chiefly regarding access rates, numbers and service maps) are clarified and updated consistent with Act 22's provisions that involve federal law.

Fiscal Estimate

The proposed rule changes and repeals will likely result in a small, positive fiscal impact in that compliance costs will be reduced through the removal of non-applicable regulations or textual clarification that a retained rule does not apply to a particular type of telecommunications service provider. This rulemaking seeks to update and clarify the scope of the commission's remaining telecommunications jurisdiction in the wholesale, carrier-to-carrier sector of the telecommunications industry.

The Economic Impact Analysis for this rulemaking is attached.

Text of Proposed Rule Changes

SECTION 1. PSC 8.07 (7) and (11) are repealed.

SECTION 2. PSC 100.01 is amended to read:

PSC 100.01 Person defined. Under s. 196.52 (1), Stats., the term “person" includes trustees, lessees, holders of beneficial equitable interest, voluntary associations, receivers and partnerships. “Person" does not include a telecommunications provider, as defined in s. 196.01 (8p), Stats. This definition should be observed in filing information in response to this order.

SECTION 3. PSC 102.01 is amended to read:

PSC 102.01 Record of disbursements. Each public utility for which a system of accounts is prescribed by this commission shall so maintain its records as to disclose full particulars concerning any disbursement, including the name of the payee and the purpose of the payment. The records shall likewise disclose the name of the person intended to be paid and the purpose of such disbursement, regardless of whether payment is made by check, cash, cashier's check, bank draft, postal money order, property or other means, whether paid directly to the ultimate recipient, or indirectly through an affiliated company, officer, employee, attorney, or other intermediary. The purpose of any disbursement, regardless of size, shall be shown by the records and the provisions of this order shall apply in their entirety to each disbursement in excess of $10. This chapter does not apply to a telecommunications provider, as defined in s. 196.01 (8p), Stats.

SECTION 4. PSC 104.02 (3) is amended to read:

PSC 104.02 (3) The term “public utility" or “utility" is defined by s. 196.01 (5), Stats., but does not include an alternative telecommunication utility certified by the commission under s. 196.203, Stats.

SECTION 5. Chapter PSC 162 is repealed.

SECTION 6. Chapter PSC 163 is repealed.

SECTION 7. Chapter PSC 164 is repealed.

SECTION 8. PSC 165.01 (2) is amended to read:

PSC 165.01 (2) The rules making up ch. PSC 165 are designed to effectuate and implement, in part, commission responsibilities and jurisdiction in ss. 196.02, 196.016, 196.03, 196.04, 196.191, 196.199, 196.10, 196.12, 196.15, 196.16, 196.17, 196.19, 196.21, 196.22,196.60, 196.625, 196.72, and 196.50 (2) (g), Stats., and parts of other sections of Wisconsin statutes.

SECTION 9. PSC 165.02 (2) to (5), (11), (13) to (16), and (18) to (20) are repealed.

SECTION 10. PSC 165.031 is repealed.

SECTION 11. PSC 165.032 (intro.), (6), (7), and (9) are amended to read:

PSC 165.032 Schedules to be filed with the commission. (intro.) The provisions of the schedules of rates and rules filed with the commission and comprising the filed tariff of the utility shall be definite and so worded as to minimize ambiguity or the possibility of misinterpretation, and shall may include, together with such other information as may be deemed pertinent, any of the following subjects:

(6) Rules governing the establishment or re-establishment of service including credit requirements. (See s. PSC 165.052.)

(7) Rules governing the procedure followed in disconnecting and reconnecting service. (See s. PSC 165.051.)

(9) Rules governing the billing procedures and payment requirements. (A sample bill form should be submitted.)

SECTION 12. PSC 165.033 is amended to read:

PSC 165.033 Exchange area boundaries. (1) Each telecommunications utility shall file accurate exchange area boundary maps in compliance with ch. PSC 166 depicting each specific geographical area in which it furnishes a local exchange service, as defined in s. 196.219 (1) (b), Stats., under its statewide telecommunications utility certification under s. 196.50 (2) (g) 1., Stats. Except as provided in sub. (2), the commission shall use the exchange area boundaries designated by the maps on file with it on June 9, 2011, to assist in the following activities:

(a) Administration of numbering resources and federal local number portability requirements by determining rate center boundaries.

(b) Designation of eligible telecommunications carriers by determining wire center boundaries to the extent feasible.

(2) Where multiple rate centers or wire centers existed within an exchange on June 9, 2011, the commission shall use the rate centers or wire centers existing on that date to assist its activities identified in subs. (1) (a) and (b).

Note: Identification of the use of exchange boundary maps is not intended to delimit the entire scope of commission activities in its administration of numbering resources and federal local number portability requirements or in its designation of eligible telecommunications carriers.

SECTION 13. PSC 165.034 to 165.065 and 165.07 to 165.10 are repealed.

SECTION 14. Chapter PSC 166 is repealed.

SECTION 15. Chapter PSC 167 is repealed.

SECTION 16. PSC 168.05 (1) (d) is amended to read:

PSC 168.05 (1) (d) Own, operate, manage or control, in Wisconsin, transmission facilities, including wire, cable, fiber optics or radio, and associated electronics, whose cost basis, including capital leases as defined by generally accepted accounting principles, does not exceed $400,000. The requirements of this paragraph shall be determined for the reseller as of the date of its application for certification and as of December 31 of each calendar year, based upon responses to annual reports commission questionnaires filed pursuant to under s. PSC 168.12.

SECTION 17. PSC 168.05 (3) is amended to read:

PSC 168.05 (3) Nothing in this section authorizes a telecommunications reseller to provide facilities-based local exchange services, as defined in s. 196.50 (1) (b) 1., 2009 Stats., in municipalities served by small telecommunications utilities having 150,000 or fewer access lines in service in this state and for which certification in compliance with s. 196.50 (1) (b), Stats., is required.

SECTION 18. PSC 168.09 (4) is amended to read:

PSC 168.09 (4) Pursuant to Under s. PSC 168.12, alternative telecommunications utility resellers shall file with the commission responses to annual reports for questionnaires regarding Wisconsin operations.

SECTION 19. PSC 168.10 (1) (intro.) and (a) are renumbered PSC 168.10 and amended to read:

PSC 168.10 General notification requirement. An alternative telecommunications utility reseller certified under this chapter shall do the following; (a) Within , within 20 days of the occurrence, notify the commission in writing of any change to information supplied in response to s. PSC 168.06 (2) (a), (b), (c) or (g).

SECTION 20. PSC 168.10 (1) (b) to (d), and (2) are repealed.

SECTION 21. PSC 168.11 is repealed.

SECTION 22. PSC 168.12 (1) (intro.) is amended to read:

PSC 168.12 (1) (intro.) Each reseller shall file with the commission by April 1 of each year responses to an annual report providing commission questionnaire that provide details concerning the following:

SECTION 23. PSC 168.12 (1) (f) is repealed.

SECTION 24. PSC 168.13 (1) (a) is amended to read:

PSC 168.13 (1) (a) Failure to file a substantially complete responses to the commission's annual report questionnaire required by s. PSC 168.12.

SECTION 25. Chapter PSC 169 is repealed.

SECTION 26. PSC 171.02 (5) is amended to read:

PSC 171.02 (5) “Telecommunications service" has the meaning prescribed given in s. 196.01 (9m), Stats., and includes but is not limited to, point-to-point service for the transport of electronic signals.

SECTION 27. PSC 171.06 (1) is amended to read:

PSC 171.06 (1) All qualified cable television telecommunications service providers shall be subject to the following sections of ch. 196, Stats.: ss. 196.02, 196.08, 196.12, 196.025 (6), 196.203, 196.25, 196.39, 196.395, 196.40, 196.41, 196.43, 196.44, 196.65, and 196.66, 196.85, 196.858, and 196.859, Stats.

SECTION 28. PSC 171.06 (2) and (3) are repealed.

SECTION 29. PSC 171.07 (4) and (5) are repealed.

SECTION 30. PSC 171.08 is repealed.

SECTION 31. PSC 171.09 is repealed and recreated to read:

PSC 171.09 New franchise areas. A qualified cable television telecommunications service provider may offer telecommunications services in a franchise area other than the one specified in a qualified petition by notifying the commission in a transmittal updating the information supplied under s. PSC 171.03. The transmittal shall be filed no later than 20 days after the initial offering of the telecommunications services in the additional franchise area.

SECTION 32. PSC 171.10 (1) is amended to read:

PSC 171.10 (1) File with the commission responses to an annual report questionnaire providing details as to its identity, franchise service areas, and revenues and number of customers.

SECTION 33. PSC 171.10 (3) is repealed.

SECTION 34. Chapter PSC 174 is repealed.

STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION DOA-2049 (R03/2012)			Division of Executive Budget and Finance 101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor P.O. Box 7864 Madison, WI 53707-7864 FAX: [phone]
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis
1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original   ⍽ Updated   ⍽ Corrected
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Wis. Admin. Code Chapters PSC 8, 100, 104, 102, 162 to 171, 174.
3. Subject
Repeal and amendment of PSC telecommunications rules to conform with 2011 Wis. Act 22, with miscellaneous updates and clarifications.
4. Fund Sources Affected				5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
⍽ GPR   ⍽ FED   X PRO   ⍽ PRS   ⍽ SEG   ⍽ SEG-S				None.
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
⍽ No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues ⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues			⍽ Increase Costs ⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget X Decrease Cost
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		⍽ Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers ⍽ Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A)
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes   X No
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
Clarifies law by removing regulations no longer needed due to statutory change.
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
This rulemaking removes regulations no longer needed as a result of statutory change. Since these regulations will no longer exist, any costs of complying with them will disappear. As a result, any economic impact will be a positive one. Telecommunications providers, trade associations for wireline providers, wireless providers, and cable providers. Public interest group (CUB) also contacted.
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
Not Applicable.
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
Expected reduction in costs as entities previously subject to rules can substantially simplify compliance with state telecommunications requirements. The issues raised by commenting parties were substantive rather than economic.
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
Expected reduction in costs as entities previously subject to rules can substantially simplify compliance with state telecommunications requirements.
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
See No. 12 above. Also reduced regulation will lead to more entrants, more vigorous competition, and a greater variety of price and service options.
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
There is no strict comparability with federal government regulations in this area because Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, leaves retail telecommunications regulation to the states.
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
Not applicable as level of deregulation in WI matches or exceeds levels of adjacent states.
17. Contact Name					18. Contact Phone Number
Sarah Klein					[phone]

This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.

ATTACHMENT A

1. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Small Businesses (Separately for each Small Business Sector, Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)

Implements Act 22 by removing or amending rules rendered obsolete or inapplicable, and makes miscellaneous language updates. Since these rules will no longer exist, any costs of complying with them will disappear. As a result, any economic impact will be a positive one.

2. Summary of the data sources used to measure the Rule's impact on Small Businesses

Not deemed necessary.

3. Did the agency consider the following methods to reduce the impact of the Rule on Small Businesses?

⍽ Less Stringent Compliance or Reporting Requirements ⍽ Less Stringent Schedules or Deadlines for Compliance or Reporting X Consolidation or Simplification of Reporting Requirements ⍽ Establishment of performance standards in lieu of Design or Operational Standards ⍽ Exemption of Small Businesses from some or all requirements X Other, describe: Almost all substantive repeals and amendments are required by Act 22. However, in the process minor technical changes will be made to improve rule organization, clarify rule application, modernize rule language, and remove obsolete requirements. Since certain rules will no longer exist, any costs of complying with them will disappear. As a result, any economic impact will be a positive one.

4. Describe the methods incorporated into the Rule that will reduce its impact on Small Businesses

As Act 22 already created the effect on small businesses, this proceeding simply advances the clarity of the rules remaining, simplifying management of compliance obligations that remain. This rulemaking removes regulations no longer needed as a result of statutory change. Since these regulations will no longer exist, any costs of complying with them will disappear. As a result, any economic impact will be a positive one.

5. Describe the Rule's Enforcement Provisions

Not applicable.

6. Did the Agency prepare a Cost Benefit Analysis (if Yes, attach to form)

⍽ Yes X No

Notice of Hearing

Safety and Professional Services

Professional Services, Chs. 1—299

rulemaking_notices CR 13-026 EmR1302, CR 13-026

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Department of Safety and Professional Services in ss. 227.11 (2) (a); 440.03 (1); 440.08 (3) (b); 440.62 (5) (b) 2.; 440.64 (1) (b); 454.23 (6) (b); 454.25 (1) (a), (2) and (3); 454.26 (3) (b); and 454.265 (1), Wis. Stats., and interpreting ss. 440.03 (1), 440.08 (3) (b), 440.62 (5) (b) 2., 440.64 (1) (b), and 454.20 to 454.295., Wis. Stats., the Department of Safety and Professional Services will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider emergency rules and an order for permanent rules to amend ss. SPS 60.01, 61.02 (1) (a), (2) (a), (3) (a) and (4) (a), 62.10 (title) and 62.10, 65.01, 65.02 (1), 65.07, and 65.12 (1) (h) and (i) 6., and to create chapter SPS 205, relating to barbers and to barbering and cosmetology schools and instructors.

As provided in s.227.24 (4), Wis. Stats., this hearing will also be for emergency rules currently in effect that have identically amended these SPS sections and nearly identically created chapter SPS 205.

Hearing Information

Date:   Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Time:   10:00 a.m.
Location:   1400 East Washington Ave.
  Room 121A
  Madison, Wisconsin

Appearances at the Hearing