A disappointed Lumen is reviewing its options after the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission rejected a proposed settlement between the company and UTC staff related to the state’s method of regulation, a Lumen spokesperson said Tuesday. The pact would have reduced regulation of the telco by classifying Lumen’s CenturyLink ILECs as competitive. In a 3-0 order Friday, the commission took issue with a proposed process for discontinuing service in challenging customer locations (CCLs), which the agreement defines as “an existing CenturyLink local service customer location in Washington that lacks both fixed internet availability from at least one provider at [25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload] speed or greater priced at $61.13 per month or less, and mobile wireless service at $61.13 per month or less.” Under the pact, CenturyLink would have to get UTC approval before discontinuing stand-alone residential or business exchange service to any area including a CCL. However, the commission agreed with concerns by the state attorney general’s public counsel office that “that the CCL definition is too narrow, and that the discontinuance process could leave some customers without adequate service.” The commission sought “broader protections and a more stringent approval process.” The UTC added that “CenturyLink, a profitable company that has previously accepted federal money to provide these services to customers needs to do more to meet the needs of its most vulnerable customers who would be affected by the inequities of this proposal.” The rejection means a “temporary extension” of the current alternative form of regulation (AFOR) scheme until parties can adjust the settlement and the commission can resolve Lumen’s Jan. 8 petition seeking competitive reclassification, said the order in docket UT-240029. CenturyLink has operated for nearly a decade under an AFOR in Washington state (see 2402060015). Lumen “worked closely with [Washington UTC] staff to reach a settlement creating a comprehensive new regulatory structure reflective of today’s competitive market,” said the company’s spokesperson. “The proposed settlement contained multiple levels of safeguards that ensured no CenturyLink customers would be left without service.”
Adam Bender
Adam Bender, Deputy Managing Editor for Privacy Daily. Bender leads a team of journalists and reports on state privacy legislation, rulemaking and litigation. In previous roles at Communications Daily, he covered telecom and internet policy in the states, Congress and at the FCC. He has won awards for his reporting from the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), Specialized Information Publishers Association (SIPA) and the Society for Advancing Business Editing and Writing (SABEW). Bender studied print journalism at American University and is the author of multiple dystopian sci-fi novels. Keep up to date with Bender by reading his blog and following him on social media including Bluesky, Mastodon and LinkedIn.
By not issuing a written reason, Elkhart, Indiana, improperly denied Verizon Wireless’ application to build a 135-foot monopole, the U.S. District Court for Northern Indiana ruled Friday. The court granted summary judgment for Verizon but remanded the matter to Elkhart’s Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to provide the missing explanation by Oct. 21. Verizon argued that the BZA’s unanimous decision violated Section 332 of the 1996 Telecom Act, but the city claimed that substantial evidence supported its denial. In a Friday opinion, Judge Damon Leichty said the BZA violated the Telecom Act (TCA) because it gave “no written reasons for its denial that would facilitate a meaningful appeal or enable judicial review.” As a result, “Verizon cannot meaningfully articulate a challenge to any one reason, if in fact any reason existed,” Leichty wrote. However, the court decided it will give BZA a chance to explain. “There is no question the BZA violated the TCA in never providing a written explanation, but no one seriously contends that it otherwise acted with anything but reasonable promptness in its decision,” said the judge. “Accordingly, the court will remand this matter to the BZA for a prompt TCA-compliant decision. The court will be receptive to expedited briefing and review of this matter should the BZA decline to issue the variance without such a compliant decision or without substantial evidence, upon any necessary appeal and assignment here.”
California should shut down AT&T’s deregulation bid, consumer groups argued in briefs to the California Public Utilities Commission Friday. After denying AT&T relief from carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations in June (2406200065), the state commission is weighing AT&T’s separate application to relinquish its eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) designation (docket A.23-03-002). AT&T claimed that the CPUC has no choice but to grant the application for statewide relief.
A controversial AI safety bill in California isn't expected to have major consequences for the telecom sector, though some lawyers said last week it could have indirect effects. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto SB-1047, which the legislature passed last month (see 2408290005). The measure would require large AI developers and those providing computing power to train AI models to implement protections for preventing critical harms. Several top tech associations oppose signing the bill into law despite support for it from consumer groups and SpaceX founder Elon Musk.
CTIA presented a 109-page argument against California regulating wireless service quality. Comments were posted through Tuesday at the California Public Utilities Commission. The commission is weighing a staff proposal that moves away from the CPUC’s light-touch approach to wireless and interconnected VoIP. While industry widely panned the plan and hinted at lawsuits, public advocates said expanding regulation of newer voice services is a must.
California lawmakers supported stopping kids from accessing social media through smartphones at school before the 2024 legislative session wrapped up last week. On Friday, the Assembly voted 51-0 for SB-1283, which would require that schools to adopt limits or bans on student use of smartphones. The legislature passed a similar bill (AB-3216) earlier last week (see 2408280033). Amendments to SB-1283 ensure the bill won’t expand surveillance of children but simply keeps them off social media at school, said Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D) on the floor. Also Friday, the legislature passed a bill to require social media platforms to have a staffed hotline for responding to law enforcement information requests, and to comply within 72 hours to search warrants. No senator opposed concurring with Assembly changes to SB-918. Voting continued after our deadline. On Thursday, state lawmakers passed video franchise and privacy bills. The Assembly voted 50-16 Thursday to concur with Senate changes to AB-1826 to update the state’s 2006 video franchise law, the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act. If signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), the bill will increase DIVCA fines for service-quality problems and seeks increased participation from the public and its advocates in the franchise renewal process. The Assembly also concurred with the Senate on AB-1949, which would set stricter limits on sharing children’s personal data under the California Consumer Privacy Act. Also on Thursday, the Assembly voted 71-0 to pass SB-1504, which would tighten a cyberbullying law that requires social platforms to have reporting mechanisms. It still needed another vote in the Senate. The same day, the Senate voted 30-2 to pass AB-2481, which would create a mechanism for people who report threatening content on social media platforms. That bill still needed another vote in the Assembly. The legislature earlier passed bills on AI, privacy, social media and network resiliency (see 2408290005 and 2408280033).
A state court allowed an Iowa lawsuit against TikTok that claims the social media company duped parents about children’s access to inappropriate content. The Iowa District Court for Polk County in Des Moines denied TikTok’s motion to dismiss the state’s Jan. 17 petition in a ruling this week. While the court also denied Iowa’s motion for preliminary injunction, Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird (R) said in a Wednesday statement that the decision is “a big victory in our ongoing battle to defend Iowa’s children and parents against the Chinese Communist Party running TikTok. Parents deserve to know the truth about the severity and frequency of dangerous videos TikTok recommends to kids on the app.” Bird claimed TikTok violated the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act through misrepresentations, deceptions, false promises and unfair practices, which allowed it to get a 12+ rating on the Apple App Store despite containing content inappropriate for kids aged 13-17. “Considering the petition as a whole, the State has submitted a cognizable claim under the CFA,” wrote Judge Jeffrey Farrell. TikTok doesn’t get immunity from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act because the state’s petition “addresses only the age ratings, not the content created by third parties,” the judge added. However, Farrell declined to preliminarily enjoin TikTok since the state hasn’t “produced any evidence to show an Iowan has been viewed and harmed” by videos with offensive language or topics. The judge said, “The State presented no evidence of any form to show irreparable harm.” TikTok didn’t comment Wednesday.
Pennsylvania should quickly adopt the FCC’s December changes to pole attachment rules, Verizon and wireless companies said in comments posted Tuesday at the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission. Some additional work may be needed to adapt the FCC’s rapid-response team, they acknowledged in docket L-2018-3002672. However, energy companies disagreed with the Pennsylvania PUC adopting either the team or a rule requiring reports on pole inspection.
California appropriators last week halted multiple telecom-related bills meant to help vulnerable communities. Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D) blamed the broadband industry after the Senate Appropriations Committee held back her bill that would have banned digital discrimination as the FCC defines it (AB-2239). However, that committee and its Assembly counterpart advanced several other telecom and privacy bills to final floor votes.
A change in presidential administration doesn’t worry state broadband offices around the U.S., though stability in NTIA's broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program would help, several directors from red, blue and purple states said. Since President Joe Biden stepped aside, a new president in 2025 is certain. Yet in interviews this month at the Mountain Connect conference in Denver, state leaders stressed that their goal of expanding high-speed internet to everyone will remain no matter who wins in November. A President Kamala Harris is seen as especially unlikely to change NTIA’s BEAD program in major ways, several said.