Brief (1)
Sub. for HB 2743 would amend the Kansas Telecommunications Act of 1996 in the following manner:
Purpose of the bill. The bill would authorize any telecommunications carrier to provide high speed data transmission service (Internet service) in the service area of a local telephone company that elects not to deploy that service in response to a customer's request. In this context, "high speed data transmission" refers to a telecommunications service capable of transmission rates of not less than 128 kilobits per second.
Procedure for service deployment. The authorization to provide this service would apply to a time period prior to July 1, 2003. The local telephone company would have 90 days to determine whether to respond to that request. If the company decides to do so, it must deploy the service within 12 months. If the company decides not to do so, it must notify the customer promptly in writing.
Nature of provider and means of service deployment. A telecommunications carrier that wants to and can provide the service must be given access to the local telephone company's facilities, infrastructure, and, if appropriate, technology in a manner approved by the Kansas Corporation Commission. The bill places no restrictions on the type of technology that may be used to transmit the data, nor does it require the provider of such service to be eligible for support from the Kansas Universal Service Fund.
Rural telephone companies. The bill would authorize rural telephone companies to recover from the Kansas Universal Service Fund the actual costs of providing the service. In addition, rural telephone companies would not lose any protections granted them by the Kansas Corporation Commission, in accordance with the 1996 Kansas Act, with respect to resale and unbundling of network services for use by potential competitors if rural companies deploy the service outside their service areas.
Prices for high speed data transmission service. The bill would require local telephone companies to charge for the service a price that cannot vary by more than 10 percent in any service area.
Information to customers. Each local telephone company, long distance telephone company, and wireless service provider must inform its customers of the availability of the high speed data transmission service and the means by which they may order such service.
Background
The introduced version of HB 2743 would have included digital subscriber line (DSL) service as an enhanced universal service in the Kansas Telecommunications Act of 1996. The bill was requested to address Southwestern Bell's plans for deploying DSL in generally more urban areas of the state. The concern was that rural Kansans would be denied such access. The bill outlines a procedure for authorizing any telecommunications carrier and any rural telephone company to provide DSL service in a local telephone company's service area if the local telephone company refuses to provide the service within 12 months of a customer's request. A facilities-based telecommunications carrier or rural telephone company could recover its actual deployment costs from the Kansas Universal Service Fund.
In testimony on the introduced version of the bill, staff of the Kansas Corporation Commission raised questions about the Kansas Corporation Commission's jurisdiction of DSL services. Staff noted that the Federal Communications Commission determined that GTE's DSL service is an interstate service that should be tariffed at the federal level. Opponents of the bill included: Gary Shorman, Eagle Communications; Mike Murray, Sprint; Mike Reecht, AT&T; and Doug Lawrence, Southwestern Bell. Greg Reed, Wheat State Telephone, spoke in support of the bill. In addition to jurisdictional concerns, conferees noted that:
The Special Committee on Information Management recommended a substitute bill which made the high speed data transmission service technology neutral and removed such service from the enhanced universal service definition in the Kansas Telecommunications Act of 1996. Cost recovery from the Kansas Universal Service Fund still would be authorized for rural telephone companies deploying the high speed data transmission service. However, other carriers could not recover such costs although they could deploy the service. The substitute bill also: reduced from 12 months to 90 days the time period afforded a local telephone company to determine whether it would respond to a customer's request for the service; local telephone companies would be required to charge for such service a price that cannot vary by more than 10 percent in any service area; and information must be relayed to customers about the availability of the service and the means by which it may be ordered. Other amendments pertain to the application of existing statutory protections governing rural telephone companies that elect to provide the service outside their service areas.
1. *Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at http://www.ink.org/public/legislative/bill_search.html