Rule-Making Notices (Hearing Notices)

•   Updates the existing rule by incorporating and defining “manufactured home" and “manufactured home community." Current definitions applies only to “mobile homes" and “mobile home parks."

•   Repeals the definition “television service" and creates the definition “electronic communication service" which will specify the mechanisms operators are allowed to use, or are prohibited from using, when billing tenants for these services.

•   Amends the definition “utility service" to exclude water and sewer services. Section 100.20 (2) (b), Stats., was created after the promulgation of the current rule, which prohibits DATCP from regulating water and sewer services provided by manufactured home community operators.

•   Updates the phrase “mobile home parking fee assessed by local units of government" with the term “municipal permit fee," as specified under ch. 66, Stats.

•   Repeals outdated and obsolete provisions in the current rule.

Under the current rule, rent and other charges may not be increased during the term of the rental agreement. However, this provision does not apply to “mobile home parking fees" and charges for utility services not included in rent. This rule expands the exceptions to include waste hauling or recycling fees that are assessed by local units of government.

Under the current rule, rental agreements are required to express the amount of rent due in each rent paying period in dollars. Under the proposed rule, if the tenant requests a rental agreement that is three years or greater, the amount of rent due in each rent paying period may be expressed in either a dollar amount or a defined formula based on the consumer price index.

Under the current rule, a rental agreement may not include a security deposit greater than either $350 or three months' rent, whichever is less. This rule updates the maximum security deposit to $750, or two months' rent, whichever is less.

Small business affected

This rule will have some limited effect on manufactured home community operators. Many operators are small businesses. According to the Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS) web page (www.dsps.wisconsin.gov), there are approximately 1,074 licensed manufactured home communities in Wisconsin, with a total of 52,316 home sites (these statistics are from an on-line listing of licensed manufactured home parks by DSPS (March, 2011)).

Many of the differences between this rule and the current rule are technical in nature (such as updating terms to conform to other rules and statutes, etc.) and have no impact.

One change that has an impact on small business involves the definition of “utility" in the rule. The current rule includes “television services" in the definition of “utility". The proposed rule repeals “television services" and replaces it with “electronic communication services" which includes such services as cable service, video service, and internet access service as well as television service. These are services that in recent times are commonly bundled under one fee. Under the proposed rule, the manufactured home community operator must follow the current rules for charging for television services for these additional types of electronic communication services. This change may require the operator to incur the cost of sending an invoice to the tenant whenever charging the tenant for any of the services added to the definition of “utility."

Other changes that might have some limited impact are listed below.

•   Municipal waste hauling or recycling fees. Current rule prohibits manufactured home community operators from increasing rent and other charges during the term of the rental agreement. There are exceptions to this prohibition for utility services (that are not included in rent) and municipal permit fees. This rule also allows an exception for waste hauling fees charged by a municipal government.

  This change may benefit manufactured home community operators because it allows them to pass municipal fee increases to tenants at the time they are incurred, rather than waiting until the next rental agreement renewal date.

•   Inflation indexing on rental agreements of three years or longer. Current rule requires rental agreements to include the amount of the rent due in each rent-paying period. Under this proposed rule, rental agreements that are three years or longer may include a formula for adjusting future rental amounts based on the Consumer Price Index.

  Manufactured homes can be financed using home mortgages. However, many lenders are hesitant to offer a mortgage if the term of the mortgage is longer than the term of the rental agreement. But, community operators are generally unwilling to commit to long-term leases under current rules because they are unwilling to specify a dollar amount that will be in place far into the future. This proposed rule should benefit manufactured home owners by making it more likely that they will be able to finance the purchase of their home as a mortgage (rather than personal property).

•   Maximum security deposits. Current rule limits the amount of security deposit that an operator can collect to three months' rent or $350, whichever is less. This rule provision dates back to 1987. $350 in 1987 is roughly equivalent to $715 in 2012. This proposed rule revises the maximum security deposit to either two months' rent or $750, whichever is less.

  Raising the dollar amount to $750 may benefit some manufactured home community operators because it allows them to collect security deposits that are more realistic with current economics. Limiting the security deposit to two months rather than three will benefit tenants whose monthly rents are relatively low.

Reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures

This proposed rule does not make any changes from current rule relating to reporting, bookkeeping and other procedures.

Professional skills required

The proposed rule does not make any changes from current rule relating to professional skills required.

Accommodation for small business

Many of the businesses affected by this rule are “small businesses." For the most part, this rule does not make special exceptions for “small businesses." The nature of the subject matter does not lend itself to differentiating between business sizes.

Conclusion

This rule will generally benefit affected businesses, including “small businesses." Negative effects, if any, will be few and limited. This rule will not have a significant adverse effect on “small business," and is not subject to the delayed “small business" effective date provided in s. 227.22 (2) (e), Stats.

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES FISCAL ESTIMATE AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original ⍽ Updated ⍽ Corrected
Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Ch. ATCP 125, Mobile Home Parks
Subject
Manufactured Home Communities – Fair Trade Practices
Fund Sources Affected			Chapter 20 , Stats. Appropriations Affected
X GPR ⍽ FED ⍽ PRO ⍽ PRS ⍽ SEG ⍽ SEG-S			Section 20.115 (1) (a)
Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
X No Fiscal Effect ⍽ Indeterminate	⍽ Increase Existing Revenues ⍽ Decrease Existing Revenues		⍽ Increase Costs ⍽ Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget ⍽ Decrease Costs
The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
⍽ State's Economy ⍽ Local Government Units		X Specific Businesses/Sectors ⍽ Public Utility Rate Payers
Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million? ⍽ Yes X No
Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
This rule updates the existing rule by incorporating and defining “manufactured home" and “manufactured home community." The current definition applies only to “mobile homes" and “mobile home parks." The current rule regulates how mobile home park operators can charge tenants for utility services, including “television service." This rule repeals the definition “television service" and creates the definition “electronic communication service" which will specify the mechanisms operators are allowed to use, or are prohibited from using, when billing tenants for these services. In current rules, the definition of “utility service" includes water and sewer services. This rule amends the definition “utility service" to exclude water and sewer services. Section 100.20 (2) (b), Stats., was created after the promulgation of the current rule, which prohibits DATCP from regulating water and sewer services provided by manufactured home community operators. This rule updates the phrase “mobile home parking fee assessed by local units of government" with the term “municipal permit fee," as specified under ch. 66, Stats. Under the current rule, rent and other charges may not be increased during the term of the rental agreement. However, this provision does not apply to “mobile home parking fees" and charges for utility services not included in rent. This rule expands the exceptions to include waste hauling or recycling fees that are assessed by local units of government. Under the current rule, rental agreements are required to express the amount of rent due in each rent paying period in dollars. Under the proposed rule, if the tenant requests a rental agreement that is three years or greater, the amount of rent due in each rent paying period may be expressed in either a dollar amount or a defined formula based on the consumer price index. Under the current rule, a rental agreement may not include a security deposit greater than either $350 or three months' rent, whichever is less. This rule updates the maximum security deposit to $750, or two months' rent, whichever is less.
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)
This rule makes minor updates and revisions to the existing rule and does not represent any significant shift in policy. Therefore, the economic and fiscal impacts are expected to be minimal. This rule does make some minor changes to park operators' duties and responsibilities, but these changes are not expected to have an economic impact. Under the current rule, the maximum amount of security deposit that a park operator can collect is three month's rent or $350, whichever is less. Under this rule, the maximum security deposit is two month's rent or $750, whichever is less. This means that, in many cases but not all, park operators will be able to ask prospective tenants for higher security deposits. Under current rules, rental agreements are required to express the amount of rent due in each rent paying period in dollars. Under the proposed rule, if the tenant requests a rental agreement that is greater than three years, the amount of rent due in each rent paying period may be expressed in either a dollar amount or a defined formula based on the consumer price index. This provision should benefit some tenants by removing an impediment to obtaining home mortgage loans. Generally, banks are unwilling to finance the purchase of a manufactured home if that home is sitting on a rented lot and the term of the rental agreement will expire before the term of the mortgage. However, because current rules require park operators to state rent payments in dollar amounts; park operators are generally unwilling to agree to long-term rental agreements. This rule removes this disincentive, and therefore, may benefit residents.
Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
Benefits This rule will benefit mobile home owners and park operators. Generally, it continues policies that have been in place for a number of years. Alternatives The alternative to updating this rule is to do nothing. However, certain portions of the rule are now obsolete (such as the regulation of water and sewer services) and other portions are dated (such as the use of the term “mobile home" as opposed to “manufactured home").
Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
There are no long term implications of implementing this rule.
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
The federal government does not generally regulate manufactured home sales or rental practices. However, Congress did pass the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974, which direct the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to develop regulations; which are now known as the Federal Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards.
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
Illinois statutes contain the Mobile Home Landlord and Tenant Rights Act. Among other things, this act restricts park owners from prohibiting television antennas, requires written leases, allows for temporary occupancy in certain situations, requires park owners to disclose information about rent charged during the last five years and projections for the next three, and restricts park owners' ability to control the sale of mobile homes within the park.
Minnesota administrative code regulates mobile home parks and the methods park owners can use to bill residents for utility costs incurred by the community. For example, rental agreements must be in writing and specify certain terms and conditions related to the location of the lot, amount of rent, services or facilities that the park owner agrees to provide, and the name of any person holding a security interest in the resident's home. Minnesota law prohibits park owners from requiring residents to use the services of a particular dealer or broker when selling their home, or buy goods or services from a particular vendor.
Iowa does not have any laws in place related to mobile or manufactured homes or parks. Iowa legislation was introduced in 2011 to grant mobile home residents rights similar to tenants and proposed to place restrictions on park operators operating as real estate agents. This legislation did not pass.
Michigan has law in place related to mobile home park owners and specifies the rights of a tenant. Park owners are prohibited from charging entrance and exit fees, charging more than 1.5 times the amount of monthly rent as a security deposit and cannot require a person to buy a mobile home from another person as a condition of renting space in that park. Park owners must offer tenants a written lease for one year or more, and provide a copy of rules that govern maintenance, pets, fees, and charges that may be incurred by the tenant. Park owners must keep specific written records for each tenant.
Comments Received in Response to Web Posting and DATCP Response
No comments were received in response to either to the posting on the DATCP external website or the statewide administrative rules website.

Notice of Hearing

Public Service Commission

rulemaking_notices CR 13-025 CR 13-025

(PSC # 1-AC-237 )

NOTICE IS GIVEN that pursuant to s. 227.14 (4m), Stats., the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin proposes an order to repeal s. PSC 8.07 (7) and (11), chs. PSC 162 to 164, ss. PSC 165.02 (2) to (5), (11), (13) to (16), and (18) to (20), 165.031, 165.034 to 165.065, and 165.07 to 165.10, chs. PSC 166 and 167, ss. PSC 168.10 (1) (b) to (d) and (2), 168.11, and 168.12 (1) (f), ch. PSC 169, ss. PSC 171.06 (2) and (3), 171.07 (4) and (5), 171.08, and 171.10 (3), and ch. PSC 174; to renumber and amend s. PSC 168.10 (1) (intro.) and (a); to amend ss. PSC 100.01, 102.01, 104.02 (3), 165.01 (2), 165.032 (intro.), (6), (7), and (9), 165.033, 168.05 (1) (d) and (3), 168.09 (4), 168.12 (1) (intro.), 168.13 (1) (a), 171.02 (5), 171.06 (1), and 171.10 (1); and to repeal and recreate s. PSC 171.09.

Hearing Information

Date:   Friday, April 26, 2013
Time:   10:00 a.m.
Location:   Amnicon Falls Hearing Room - 1st Floor
  Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
  610 North Whitney Way
  Madison, Wisconsin

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 docket or who needs to obtain this document in a different format should contact the docket coordinator, as indicated in the previous paragraph, as soon as possible. Any hearing location is accessible to people in wheelchairs. The Public Service Commission Building is accessible to people in wheelchairs through the Whitney Way first floor (lobby) entrance. Parking for people with disabilities is available on the south side of the building.

Written Comments

Any person may submit written comments on these proposed rules. The record will be open for written comments from the public, effective immediately and until May 6, 2013, at noon. All written comments must include a reference on the filing to docket 1-AC-237. File by one mode only.

Industry: File comments using the commission's Electronic Regulatory Filing (ERF) system. This may be accessed from the commission's web site (http://psc.wi.gov).

Members of the Public: Please submit your comments in only one of the following ways:

•   Electronic Comment. Go to the commission's web site at http://psc.wi.gov, and click on the “ERF – Electronic Regulatory Filing" graphic on the side menu bar. On the next page, click on “Need Help?" in the side menu bar for instructions on how to upload a document.

•   Web Comment. Go to the commission's web site at http://psc.wi.gov, click on the “Public Comments" button on the side menu bar. On the next page select the “File a comment" link that appears for docket number 1-AC-237. Web comments shall be received no later than noon, Monday, May 6, 2013.

•   Mail Comment. All comments submitted by U.S. Mail shall be received no later than Monday, May 6, 2013. A mail comment shall include the phrase “Docket 1-AC-237 Comments" in the heading, and shall be addressed to:

  Gary A. Evenson

  Docket 1-AC-237 Comments

  Public Service Commission

  P.O. Box 7854

  Madison, WI 53707-7854

The commission does not accept comments submitted via e-mail or facsimile (fax). Any material submitted to the commission is a public record and may appear on the commission's website. Only one comment may be submitted per person during a comment period. The commission may reject a comment that does not comply with the requirements described in this notice.

Analysis Prepared by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

Statutory authority and explanation of authority

This rulemaking is conducted by the commission under ss. 196.02 (1) (“do all things necessary and convenient to its jurisdiction"); 196.02 (3) (“The commission may adopt reasonable rules to . . . regulate the mode and manner of all . . . investigations and hearings."); and 196.44, Stats. (“The commission . . . shall enforce all laws relating to public utilities . . . ."). In addition, the commission has the general power granted to all state agencies under s. 227.11 (2) (a), Stats. (“Each agency may promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by it, if the agency considers it necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute, . . . .").

Statutes interpreted

The primary purpose of this rulemaking is the removal of all those regulations no longer consistent with the regulatory scheme for telecommunications services in Wisconsin enacted and framed by 2011 Wis. Act 22 (Act 22), effective June 9, 2011. Updating changes in the regulations are also included where appropriate to conform to existing law apart from Act 22.

Specifically, telecommunications utility regulatory and reporting requirements removed by Act 22 warrant the amendment and repeal of various provisions, as detailed in Attachment B, in chs. PSC 8, 100, 104, 162, and 168. Act 22's repeal of commission regulation of retail services offered by telecommunications utilities to the consuming public warrant the repeal of most of ch. PSC 165 (retaining minor clarifications of the remaining tariff and map rules), the repeal (with other minor conforming changes) of any retail rate regulation of resellers in ch. PSC 168, and the repeal of all retail ratemaking and service-related regulations in chs. PSC 163, 164, 166, 167, and 174. Reflecting existing federal preemption of most state regulation of payphone providers by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996) (1996 TA), payphone regulation in ch. PSC 169 is proposed for repeal. Finally, ch. PSC 171 governing cable television telecommunications providers is amended to reflect the reduction in data reporting to the commission and the removal of limitations on alternative telecommunications providers included in Act 22's changes to s. 196.203, Stats.

Related statutes or rules

The above-referenced rules are uniquely limited to the commission's jurisdiction. No other related state or federal statutes or rules are affected, whether adversely or positively, by the changes and repeals generally outlined in B. above.

Brief summary of rules

The description in B. above describes the general purpose of this rulemaking which is to remove or clarify the application of existing commission regulations that primarily impose reporting requirements, retail service offering constraints, or other regulatory oversight. Almost all of the changes are non-controversial.

The proposed changes include repeal of certain regulations that arguably reflect state-imposed service quality standards that also intertwine with promoting wholesale competition: (1) Sections PSC 165.064, 165.085, 165.086 and 165.087, involving trunking duties and transmission service quality between at least two telecommunications providers' networks, and (2) Section PSC 165.055, regarding the distribution and contents of alphabetical local exchange directories (“white pages"). This notice does not retain the foregoing regulations in the draft proposed rules, but this should not be treated as a final commission view of whether the regulations should be retained. An argument may be advanced that retention of one or more of the regulations is compatible with the commission's remaining telecommunications regulatory authority. The commission encourages comments by interested persons as to policy and legal arguments for or against retention of the identified regulations or any part thereof.

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.