Georgia Bill Restricts PSC Voice Oversight

Telecom Policy Report, Jan 17, 2006

Georgia's General Assembly will be considering new communications legislation that effectively deregulates voice telephony regardless of technology by restricting or removing much of the state's Public Service Commission authority and oversight ? based mainly on a three-month-long study and recommendation made late last year by a joint Senate-House advisory committee consisting of government and industry members.

The proposed Competitive Emerging Technologies Act of 2006 was crafted on the premise that Georgia's consumers already have many communications choices due to competition between various technologies; these include services from traditional telecom carriers, cable-TV companies, Internet service providers and wireless operators.

Nevertheless, the intent appears to make available options even more commonplace, ostensibly by promoting market-based competition and by the continued development of multiple providers in all technologies, but especially earmarking a wish list for additional broadband (defined as not less than 200 Kbps) as well as VoIP offerings.

By amending existing acts and repealing all contrary laws, the proposed measure essentially would prevent Georgia's PSC from regulating the deployment of facilities or equipment used to provide broadband VoIP and wireless services or imposing regulation of rates, terms, conditions and availability.

The proposed act, however, doesn't affect any franchising obligations, doesn't preclude lawful access charges or applicable taxes nor does it limit the regulator's authority to arbitrate or enforce interconnection agreements on network elements, local loop, collocation, etc.

In this and other respects, the measure takes heed of FCC mandates, so the state PSC still has the ability to obligate broadband and VoIP companies on 911 public-safety communications capabilities (TPR, May 23, 2005) as well as compliance with the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) (TPR, Aug. 8, 2005).

The state proposal also takes into account that, following the FCC's lead, incumbent local exchange carriers don't need to provide DSL over unbundled network element platform (UNE-P) lines on standalone basis to rivals voice customers, a.k.a. naked DSL.

Reflecting a business-favored movement toward less government regulation of the industry, the State Senate's proposed Competitive Emerging Technologies Act is a substitute version of SB120 on telecom deregulation introduced earlier last year by Sen. Mitch Seabaugh (R-28th District) with several sponsors.

Seabaugh, majority whip in the State Senate, last week told TPR the bill will move to the Senate floor following its approval in a 10-1 vote by the Senate's Regulatory Industries and Utilities Committee. Seabaugh, chairman of the committee, said the bill doesn't have a House number to date.

"This bill will increase competition in Georgia by protecting the areas of regulation and non-regulation of broadband and continuing the telecom industry's dedication to consumers," he added.

Seabaugh and House Rep. Jeff Lewis (R-15th District) were co-chairs of the joint Emerging Telecommunications Technologies Study Committee; a Senate resolution established the committee in August 2005 to study what role state regulators should play, if any, in the growth and development of the wireless, broadband and VoIP industries in the state. The final report (with recommendations and proposed legislation) was completed in mid-November 2005 and adopted by the full committee a month later.

The bill currently in consideration is pretty much self-explanatory regarding the committee's consensus conclusions and recommendations:

* Competition and choice are desirable.

* A vibrant telecom environment aids economic development and jobs.

* Consumer protections remain important.

* There's no need to regulate prices.

* All providers should be subject to the same laws.

* The PSC's authority should be revamped and streamlined.

The committee consisted of three members each from the Senate and House, two PSC members, several other state and municipal officials, and some 17 representatives of companies and industry associations, among them Alltel, AT&T, BellSouth, Cingular, Covad, EarthLink, MCI, Microsoft, Nortel, NuVox, Sprint Nextel and Verizon.

Meanwhile, On The Wireless Side

A pending bill to govern cellular contracts might be construed as taking an opposite approach ? heavier-handed government oversight ? or be regarded as a proper consumer protection measure. The proposed measure is likely to draw opposition from the industry.

State Sen. Cecil Staton (R-8th District) recently introduced a bill that would prevent cellular operators from requiring subscribers to extend or renew their contracts in order to obtain changes in their levels or types of wireless services. He says the proposed SB 395 is in response to citizen complains about cellular business practices that tie longer contracts to service upgrades and changes, handset swapouts and other subscriber-desired requests.