House committee clears language changes to copper-to-fiber transition bill, defers vote pending quick edits

Representative Kathleen James convened the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee on Feb. 11 to consider committee bill 260726, legislation aimed at guiding the transition from copper-based, line-powered telephone networks to fiber- and IP-based services and at strengthening customer disclosures and state reporting on service continuity and 9-1-1 access.

Legislative Council attorney Maria Royal told the committee the posted draft (Draft 1.3, dated Feb. 9, 11:11 a.m.) removes the earlier bill's explicit battery-backup mandate and instead focuses on disclosure and reporting requirements. "Carriers do not have to are not required to offer battery backup," she said, explaining the change was intended to avoid imposing a federal-style backup-power requirement while still gathering information to guide state policy.

The bill's stated purpose, Royal said, is to "balance telephone network modernization with customer safeguards" and to establish reporting duties so the state department can assess whether locations in Vermont are vulnerable to extended loss of access to emergency services. Committee members pressed for language that would require carriers to tell customers whether they remain obligated to provide regulated landline service in a given area and whether they will offer "reasonably comparable" replacement service after retiring copper networks.

Members and Legislative Council discussed which authorities make determinations about retirement of copper networks and of legacy obligations. Royal noted carriers have filed petitions with the Federal Communications Commission seeking relief from legacy obligations and that the Public Utility Commission (PUC) will investigate whether, for specific areas, there is sufficient competition to permit a carrier to retire copper facilities. "That will be based on their investigation of the market and looking at consumers," Royal said, describing the PUC's role.

On customer-facing requirements, committee members agreed the draft should require carriers to provide multiple notices before service transitions; the group referenced 120-, 60- and 30-day notice timeframes during discussion. The draft also would require carriers to report to the department the number of customers who purchased battery-backup systems from the carrier and to include purchase and installation costs for those systems, a change members described as informational for the department rather than an enforcement metric.

The committee also considered reporting tied to known 9-1-1 impairments or interruptions. Royal explained the department would review outage reports submitted to 9-1-1, carrier outage reports and the department's own availability data to identify locations at higher risk of extended loss of emergency access. Members discussed reporting thresholds; one illustrative threshold mentioned was outages lasting more than about 30 minutes, which was cited conversationally during the discussion.

Members asked clarifying edits on definitions (for example, where the draft uses "facility-based" versus "fiber-based") to ensure the bill's scope covers VoIP and other non-line-powered services as intended. They also asked the Legislative Council to confirm that the department's report would compile service-provider reports rather than duplicate existing reporting.

After discussing clarifications and minor drafting points, Representative James asked Legislative Council to make the agreed edits and return the revised draft for a vote. Maria Royal said she could make the changes quickly; the committee agreed to go off live for a short period and reconvene to vote.

What happens next: Legislative Council will prepare an amended draft reflecting the committee's clarifications. The committee plans to reconvene to proceed to a formal vote after reviewing that revised language.