Committee hears proposal to move telecom registration details from statute to PSC rule

2129147 · January 14, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Senate Bill 51 would remove a prescriptive statutory list of registration requirements for telecommunications providers and direct the Montana Public Service Commission to specify registration details by rule, allowing the commission to update requirements without new legislation.

Helena — The Senate Energy, Technology and Federal Relations Committee heard Senate Bill 51, a bill that would remove a prescriptive list of telecommunications-provider registration requirements from statute and instead allow the Montana Public Service Commission to adopt registration requirements by rule.

Sponsor Senator Daniel Zolnikov said some statutory registration items have become outdated and that the change would permit the commission to adapt registration requirements to new technologies and market structures without repeated legislative bills.

Trevor Graff of the Public Service Commission told the committee the agency seeks flexibility because legacy regulated landline companies have declined while newer technologies and many nonlegacy providers have entered the market. Graff said the proposed approach would allow the PSC to "update these lists in order to 1, get rid of old references to technology that some of these companies aren't using anymore, and 2, be able to adapt to some of the newer technologies and require those things if we need to in the future."

No opponents or informational witnesses appeared. The committee questioned technical impacts and whether some registration items the PSC still considers important would remain required under the new rule-driven approach; Graff said some elements would likely still be required but that the rule process is more adaptable than statutory lists. The committee did not take a final vote at the hearing.