The tech industry urged Vermont Gov. Phil Scott (R) to veto the state’s privacy bill. Vermont could be the first state to include a broad private right of action. That and other “outlier provisions” have led businesses to lobby Scott to kill the measure, a Wiley lawyer said Wednesday (see 2405290072). In a Thursday letter to Scott, the Computer & Communications Industry Association said it was concerned about differences between Vermont’s bill and other states’ privacy laws, such as “the inclusion of a private right of action, the definition of ‘sale’, the language included around targeted advertising, and data minimization principles.” Allowing consumers to sue businesses, “the measure would open the doors of Vermont’s courthouses to plaintiffs advancing frivolous claims with little evidence of actual injury,” CCIA wrote, adding that other states vest enforcement with their attorneys general. “We encourage you to resist signing legislation that poses significant compliance and constitutional concerns.” The legislature passed the bill (H-121) May 10 but hasn't sent it to Scott yet. Once the governor receives the bill, he will have five days to veto it or it will become law. Scott's office didn’t comment.

The New York Senate cleared an amended wireless tower bill that would give cellphone companies and third-party infrastructure firms one year to publish studies on the feasibility of powering their towers with 100% renewable energy. State senators voted 39-19 Tuesday to pass S-4305 and send it to the Assembly. The Senate previously passed it on May 7 (see 2405080004) but then reconsidered the vote so it could amend the bill May 14. The earlier version would have required companies to submit plans for powering their towers entirely with renewable energy by 2031.

The California Public Utilities Commission again postponed an AT&T enforcement item that had first appeared on the CPUC’s Feb. 15 meeting agenda and was scheduled for Thursday's meeting. Staff held the repeatedly revised item (resolution T-17789) until June 20, said a Tuesday hold list released in advance of Thursday’s meeting. The proposal would deny AT&T’s plan for correcting failures and improving service after failing to meet the state’s out-of-service repair interval standard in 2021. The CPUC didn’t comment Wednesday on the reason for the continuing delays.

Some businesses are pushing for a veto of Vermont’s privacy bill, Wiley attorney Joan Stewart said on a webinar Wednesday. The Vermont legislature passed H-121 earlier this month but Gov. Phil Scott (R) hasn’t signed it yet (see 2405130050). “Outlier provisions” in Vermont’s bill have raised grave concerns in the business community “and there are some strong efforts going on right now to try and persuade the governor to veto that [proposed] law,” said Stewart. One key difference with other state laws is the Vermont bill’s broad private right of action (see 2403220040). Most existing privacy laws allow enforcement by only the state attorney general, though California gives individuals a more limited right to sue, she said. Vermont could be the 20th state to enact a privacy law. Minnesota became the 19th on Friday (see 2405280038).

Colorado will be the fifth state with a right-to-repair law covering consumer electronics. Gov. Jared Polis (D) signed HB-1121 on Tuesday. Consumer Reports applauded. “In this legislative season we have seen Oregon and Colorado pass comprehensive right to repair laws that also cover parts pairing, and we hope to see further legislative action to prevent software from becoming a tool to enforce manufacturers’ monopolies on the repair process,” said CR Tech Policy Director Justin Brookman. Parts pairing is a manufacturer practice of using software to identify component parts through a unique identifier. Oregon made a similar law in March (see 2403270066. California, New York and Minnesota enacted digital right-to-repair laws previously. Also, Polis signed HB-1234 to indefinitely extend the state's high-cost support mechanism, which provides subsidies to a dozen rural telecom providers and is scheduled to sunset Sept. 1. The legislature passed the bill last month (see 2404220051).

It wouldn’t be an “unfunded mandate” to require ISPs to have $15 affordable broadband plans as a condition of getting support from the California Public Utilities Commission’s federal funding account (FFA), The Utility Reform Network said Tuesday. TURN replied in docket R.20-09-001 to industry objections to the group’s petition asking the CPUC to pause FFA grants until it modifies rules to account for the federal affordable connectivity program (ACP) winding down (see 2405160055). "The courts have previously held that funding conditions for voluntary programs are permissible; funding conditions are not unfunded mandates or rate regulations,” said TURN. "Providers are free to decline FFA participation and instead charge customers whatever they wish.” Existing ISP-designed affordable plans are no substitute for ACP, added the consumer group: Such industry plans "tend to have significantly more restrictive eligibility requirements than the ACP and therefore will not be available to all ACP recipients.” TURN has two other petitions related to ACP's end (see 2405240060).

The Utah Public Service Commission should repay AT&T for the carrier's error of assessing a higher Utah Universal Service Fund (UUSF) surcharge than the PSC required for two years, AT&T officials said during testimony Friday. AT&T seeks recovery of overpayment to the Utah USF from July 2021 to June 2023 totaling $2.26 million, AT&T tax directors Jannet Tolley and Randy Phoenix testified in docket 24-087-02. The mistake occurred because AT&T failed to fully implement a July 2021 drop in the UUSF surcharge to 36 cents from 54 cents previously. AT&T properly entered the change in its systems for only AT&T affiliates but not the company itself, which uses a different billing system, Tolley testified. "The excess collection and remittances were the result of an inadvertent administrative error. The Company did not benefit from the error as the excess collections for July 2021 through June 2023 were not retained but were remitted to the UUSF each month.” Customers weren’t harmed because AT&T quickly provided credits after learning about the error in July 2023, Tolley said. AT&T has enhanced its billing system with automation features to prevent the problem from recurring, she said. AT&T overpayment to UUSF might mean a 38% increase to the surcharge will be needed, the PSC said in April (see 2404160023).

Many applications for federal broadband funds at the California Public Utilities Commission propose projects that would mostly cover already served areas, the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office said Friday. PAO has “major concerns about several grant request proposals” seeking federal funding account (FFA) cash, it said in a letter to CPUC Communications Division Director Robert Osborn. PAO reviewed 484 pending applications seeking $4.6 billion from the $2 billion fund. “Even with this oversubscription, the applications appear to cover less than half of eligible unserved FFA locations,” it said. PAO urged the CPUC to prioritize projects that cover the most unserved locations and “especially those that cover low-income and disadvantaged locations.” Also, the commissions should work with applicants to expand proposed project areas to cover more unserved locations, it said.

Due to recent state legislative activity, the Regulatory Commission of Alaska will extend comments on phone deregulation draft rules until July 29, the RCA said in a Friday order (docket R-24-001). Comments had been due Monday in the state’s renewed effort to implement SB-83, Alaska's 2019 telecom deregulation law (see 2404100058). However, earlier this month, Alaska lawmakers approved a bill (HB-307) that clarifies the RCA’s telecom powers. The bill still needs a signature from Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R). The Matanuska Telecom Association and Alaska Communications supported delaying comments so they could analyze HB-307’s impact.

Reject T-Mobile’s request to make it optional for California Lifeline providers to accept applications for low-income support from people who lack social security numbers, said consumer and low-income advocates in replies Friday at the California Public Utilities Commission. In comments earlier this month (see 2405130044), T-Mobile’s Assurance Wireless raised concerns about “requiring companies to process, review and collect a fluid set of unfamiliar and unverifiable ‘identity documents’ without any safe harbor.” Legal Services of Los Angeles County, the Legal Aid Association of California and other low-income advocates disagreed. "While providers may assist with collecting additional identity documents, the [third-party administrator] will make eligibility determinations based on identity documents, so the alleged basis for the need for providers to discriminate against individuals without SSNs is specious.” The Utility Reform Network and the Greenlining Institute “oppose any call for California LifeLine to discriminate against people without SSNs.” The consumer groups noted that people lacking SSNs include "some of the most vulnerable members of our communities: survivors of domestic violence, refugees, and people facing housing insecurity.” Meanwhile, AT&T urged the CPUC to slow down. That every commenter suggested revisions to the staff's proposal shows that the CPUC should take additional time to develop a plan, said the carrier: Require staff to submit a revised, more-detailed proposal and seek more comments. But the low-income advocates said it’s time to act. “Despite any lingering questions or disagreements … the Commission should immediately change the application and expand the list of acceptable identification documents ... without further undue delay,” they said. “Any other feedback on the staff proposal can be resolved later."