Taking on IP transition issues, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) voted 4-0 Wednesday to approve several changes to its rules, including a new process for ILECs seeking to withdraw or abandon basic local exchange service (BLES). The PUCO order in docket 14-1554-TP-ORD implemented section 749.10 from Ohio’s FY2016 and FY2017 budget legislation (HB-64), which set up a collaborative process whereby ILECs, CLECs, cable operators and the Ohio Consumers' Counsel identify what alternatives are available to BLES customers, including wireline and wireless alternatives. The rule changes aren’t final; under the Ohio process, intervenors have 30 days to apply for rehearing, then PUCO submits final rules to the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review. Under the PUCO rule changes, an ILEC must provide at least 120 days' advance notice to affected customers when withdrawing basic service. If a residential customer receiving notice can't obtain reasonable and competitively priced voice service, the customer may file a petition within 30 days of receiving the notice. If no residential customers file a petition or are identified as having no alternatives in the collaborative process set by the statute, the ILEC's notice to withdraw will be deemed to have satisfied state requirements. If no alternatives exist, the ILEC requesting withdrawal must provide a reasonable and competitively priced voice service, via any technology, for at least 12 months and for as long as there is no alternative provider.

Connecticut law might preclude the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority from developing rules enabling cities and towns to use utility poles for fiber networks, a Frontier Communications attorney told PURA Thursday in oral argument. Connecticut has a “municipal gain” statute by which it reserves a space on each pole for municipal use for any purpose. This summer, the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel petitioned the regulator to clarify rules on pole access, attachments, maintenance and make-ready costs so localities can use the municipal gain space for fiber (see 1608030013). At oral argument, Frontier counsel Daniel Venora said the OCC request is premature and PURA must first decide whether the municipal gain statute even gives municipalities the right to build competitive telecom networks. One commissioner asked whether the term “municipal gain” implied municipalities may use the space; Venora said no. The statute “doesn’t grant municipal powers,” the Frontier attorney said. Consumer Counsel Elin Katz responded that the statute allows a municipality to use the space “for any purpose.” While 20 states have laws specifically prohibiting municipal fiber, Connecticut doesn't, Katz emailed afterward. “Our petition is about how municipalities can access the gain, not a referendum on municipal networks, which is what the opponents seems to want it to be about. The questions that need to be resolved … are what is the proper process for munis to access the gain, how is the gain supposed to be delineated or reserved for their use, and how should efforts by certain pole owners to impede use of the gain for municipal networks be resolved.”

Rhode Island wants to lead the nation on 5G wireless, Gov. Gina Raimondo (D) said Wednesday as she announced a request for information on how to build 5G and other next-generation infrastructure. “We are sending a signal that Rhode Island is open for business as a lab state for innovation -- the ideal place to test new technologies like 5G wireless,” she said in a news release. The Department of Administration's Division of Purchases posted the RFI on behalf of the Public Utilities Commission. The state wants "to work with all stakeholders to accelerate, and lower the cost of deployment and operation of next generation broadband networks," the request said. "This RFI is primarily directed at making the Rhode Island the first state to have 5G networks accessible everywhere while assuring the State and its communities have the Civic Internet of Things and the fiber networks … that they will need to thrive. The State plans to collaborate closely with municipalities to realize these goals.” The state said it has fiber infrastructure already, but it “faces a significant challenge with extending the fiber backbone to all eligible end users.” Submissions for the request (RFI #7551177) are due Dec. 27. Brookings Institution Fellow Blair Levin is an adviser to the state and said the RFI shows the Nutmeg State is “getting ahead of the curve by looking at the multiple issues holistically.” While the federal government “has laid a lot of foundation stones for 5G, the rubber will meet the road for deployment at the state and local level,” he emailed Wednesday. “Rhode Island has the potential to create a playbook that others can use to lower the cost and time of deployment.” In the governor’s news release, AT&T New England President Patricia Jacobs praised the initiative. "Wireless infrastructure deployment is critical to economic growth and public safety in Rhode Island," Jacobs said.

FTC staff partly supported a proposed telehealth rule in Delaware to allow telepractice by hearing and speech practitioners with an initial in-person evaluation. The FTC staff submitted a comment to the Delaware Board of Speech/Language Pathologists, Audiologists and Hearing Aid Dispensers, the agency said in a news release Wednesday. The staff “stated that allowing licensees to determine whether telepractice is an appropriate level of care could enhance consumer choice by providing an alternative to in-person care, potentially reducing travel expenditures and increasing both access to care and competition,” the FTC said. “However, because the proposed regulation does not include evaluations in its definition of telepractice, and would require that all initial evaluations be conducted in person, it may unnecessarily discourage the use of telepractice and limit its potential benefits.” The FTC voted 3-0 to issue the staff comment. Also this week, DOJ backed a Michigan telehealth bill (see 1611290026).

DOJ supported a Michigan bill (SB-753) that would add “telehealth” to the Michigan Public Health Code, ease the process by which patients may consent to the treatments, and allow telehealth providers to prescribe drugs. The department said in a letter to its sponsor, Michigan Sen. Peter MacGregor (R), the bill would promote competition. “Consumers benefit when innovative technologies further competition to deliver convenient and affordable quality health care,” said Antitrust Division Acting Assistant Attorney General Renata Hesse in a Tuesday news release. “Telehealth, when used consistent with patient health and safety, has the potential to improve not just access to certain types of health care, but also the cost of that care. Better access and lower health care costs are especially important, as consumers may forego or delay care if it is inconvenient or costly to obtain.”

New Mexico joined other states seeking waiver of an FCC Dec. 2 implementation deadline for aligning state Lifeline rules with the updated federal low-income program that added broadband as a supported service. In a petition dated Monday, the Public Regulation Commission said it needs seven more months “to make technical, administrative, and operational changes.” An extension will ensure eligible consumers continue to receive Lifeline benefits in the state, the PRC said. An FCC Wireline Bureau official earlier this month said the federal agency will respond soon to USTelecom and state petitions for postponement (see 1611140052).

FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn plans to address the Florida Public Service Commission Tuesday, the PSC said in a Monday news release. The Democrat, a former state commissioner from South Carolina, will provide an FCC update and “is expected to discuss pending rules to modernize the Lifeline Assistance telephone discount program, the Connecting Communities initiative, the Solutions 2020 conference, and other issues,” the PSC said. States face a Friday FCC deadline to align their low-income programs with the updated federal Lifeline. Clyburn is to speak after the PSC’s 9:30 a.m. special commission conference.

The New York Public Service Commission hearings for its Verizon copper probe are postponed until April 19, the PSC ruled Wednesday. The commission granted an extension of time for testimony that the Communications Workers of America sought and Verizon supported. CWA asked for delay because it said discovery is incomplete (see 1611230049). Initial testimony is now due Jan. 16, and rebuttal testimony March 13, with hearings to start April 9, the commission said.

Charter and the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission attempted to shoot down each other’s motions for summary judgment before Dec. 13 oral argument in federal court on whether the PUC may regulate Charter’s VoIP service as a telecom service (see 1611020037). Charter’s complaint alleged the PUC overstepped its authority by imposing on VoIP services state regulations for traditional phone services. The case began in March 2013, when the company transferred 100,000 Minnesota customers to an affiliate that provided VoIP phone service that wasn't certified by the PUC. The agency said interconnected VoIP is a telecom service subject to state regulation, but the operator and the Voice on the Net Coalition said it’s an information service subject only to FCC regulation. The U.S. District Court in St. Paul should deny Charter’s motion “because it charts an incorrect legal course rife with genuine disputes of material fact,” the PUC said Wednesday (in Pacer). There’s not enough evidence to support Charter's claim that its VoIP service is an information service, the state commission said. Rather, the record "only supports classifying Charter Phone as a telecommunications service," it said. Charter gave an opposite assessment of the record as it sought denial of the Minnesota PUC’s motion. "While the MPUC's motion urges that Spectrum Voice should be classified as a telecommunications service, its motion fails to present any competent evidence -- much less undisputed evidence -- in support of that conclusion,” the cable company said (in Pacer).

The Vermont Public Service Board may not require cable and fiber VoIP providers to provide backup power because federal law pre-empts state regulation of VoIP, said the Voice on the Net (VON) Coalition. In a Nov. 22 brief emailed to us Wednesday, the VON Coalition sought amicus curiae status in a proceeding about Vermont 911 reliability (docket 8842). The backup power isn’t necessary, the coalition said, because the FCC already requires voice companies, including VoIP providers, to sell backup power options to consumers. The Vermont board plans to soon rule in a separate docket on state authority over VoIP services, PSB member Sarah Hofmann said earlier this month on a panel at the NARUC annual conference (see 1611150014). Meanwhile, at the Iowa Utilities Board, the VON Coalition submitted comments (docket RMU-2015-0002) supporting a new definition for a telephone utility that excludes VoIP services. “The proposed changes align with federal law and recognize that the Board does not have jurisdiction over VoIP or IP-enabled services,” the coalition said. “The Board action is also consistent with decisions by at least 31 other states that do not exercise regulatory authority over IP communications.” CenturyLink and other former Bells also supported the new definition, but competitors and Iowa rural LECs objected to them in comments last week (see 1611230040).