<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Wisconsin Utility Regulation Report &#187; Telecommunications</title>
	<atom:link href="http://preferred-int.com/category/telecommunications/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://preferred-int.com</link>
	<description>Published by Preferred Intelligence, LLC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:40:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>AT&amp;T Keeps TRIMS program</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/att-keeps-trims-program/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/att-keeps-trims-program/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:39:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Regulatory Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AT&T]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wisconsin utility regulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The TRIMS (Telecommunication Revenue Interactive Management System) program established toll charge credit limits for customers who have been determined to be potential credit risks. The stated goals of the TRIMS pilot were to assist customers in managing their telecommunications bills, to reduce disconnection for nonpayment, and to reduce AT&#038;T&#8217;s uncollectibles.
Overall, the TRIMS program appears to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>The TRIMS (Telecommunication Revenue Interactive Management System) program established toll charge credit limits for customers who have been determined to be potential credit risks. The stated goals of the TRIMS pilot were to assist customers in managing their telecommunications bills, to reduce disconnection for nonpayment, and to reduce AT&#038;T&#8217;s uncollectibles.<br />
Overall, the TRIMS program appears to be operating as designed. AT&#038;T states that it is an important tool in managing toll debt and uncollectible amounts, and complaint data indicates that TRIMS allows customers to manage their telecommunications bills and reduce disconnections for nonpayment without causing undue hardship.<br />
The Commission approved the program for an additional 4 years.</p>
<p>Docket 6720-GF-101</p>
<p><a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-3818351-10723198" target="_top"><br />
<img src="http://www.awltovhc.com/image-3818351-10723198" width="468" height="60" alt="Learn more about our award-winning services!  " border="0"/></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/att-keeps-trims-program/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PSCW Opens Docket to Determine whether to continue ETC for Wireless Providers</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-opens-docket-to-determine-whether-to-continue-etc-for-wireless-providers/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-opens-docket-to-determine-whether-to-continue-etc-for-wireless-providers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:43:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Regulatory Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=141</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This investigation, opened on the Commission’s own motion, will determine whether the different requirements adopted as part the Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (ETC) designation of various wireless providers should be repealed and, if so, whether to make all ETCs subject to the same requirements and obligations.  ETC status was created by the Federal Communications Commission [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>This investigation, opened on the Commission’s own motion, will determine whether the different requirements adopted as part the Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (ETC) designation of various wireless providers should be repealed and, if so, whether to make all ETCs subject to the same requirements and obligations.  ETC status was created by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and codified in 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(2). Under FCC rules, the state commissions are required to designate providers as ETCs. 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(2), 47 C.F.R. § 54.201(b). If a provider seeks to be designated as an ETC, it must follow the procedures and requirements in Wis. Admin. Code § PSC 160.13 and, if such a designation is granted, that designation serves to qualify the provider for both state and federal universal service funding.  However, Wis. Admin. Code § PSC 160.01(2)(b) provides that: Nothing in this chapter shall preclude special and individual consideration being given to exceptional or unusual situations and upon due investigation of the facts and circumstances involved, the adoption of requirements as to individual providers or services that may be lesser, greater, other or different than those provided in this chapter.<br />
For certain wireless providers, the Commission determined that an unusual situation exists and adopted different requirements than those in Wis. Admin. Code § PSC 160.13. These providers are only required to meet the federal eligibility requirements for ETC designation and are only required to fulfill the federal ETC obligations.  This investigation will determine whether to continue applying those different requirements to any wireless provider and, if not, whether to apply all of the requirements and obligations found in ch. PSC 160.</p>
<p>Docket 5-TI-1972</p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&amp;location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fs%3Fie%3DUTF8%26ref_%3Dnb%255Fsb%255Fss%255Fi%255F3%255F9%26field-keywords%3Dtelecommunications%2520law%2520and%2520policy%26url%3Dsearch-alias%253Dstripbooks%26sprefix%3Dtelecommu&amp;tag=wavelengthpat-20&amp;linkCode=ur2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957">Learn more about telecom law and regulation at Amazon.com</a><img style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important;" src="https://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=wavelengthpat-20&amp;l=ur2&amp;o=1" border="0" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-opens-docket-to-determine-whether-to-continue-etc-for-wireless-providers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wisconsin PSC Opens Telco Access Charge Proceeding</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/wisconsin-psc-opens-telco-access-charge-proceeding/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/wisconsin-psc-opens-telco-access-charge-proceeding/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:51:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Regulatory Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is an investigation to examine the structure and level of intrastate access charges, including both switched and special access, for incumbent and competitive local exchange carriers. The proceeding will also address the appropriateness and uses of cost studies and cost data for pricing access service.
The Commission will investigate what levels of intrastate access rates [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>This is an investigation to examine the structure and level of intrastate access charges, including both switched and special access, for incumbent and competitive local exchange carriers. The proceeding will also address the appropriateness and uses of cost studies and cost data for pricing access service.<br />
The Commission will investigate what levels of intrastate access rates are reasonable and just. This proceeding will investigate how, and to what extent, the Commission can control the charging of unreasonable and unjust intrastate access rates by both incumbent and competitive local exchange carriers in Wisconsin. The Commission may impose limitations or restrictions on access rates of providers serving in Wisconsin. Methods of addressing excessive rates may include complaint procedures, rate ceilings, establishment of “safe harbors,” or other mechanisms. The Commission will examine, and may modify, the intrastate access “benchmark rates” set in docket 05-TR-103, in 1993. </p>
<p>Docket 5-TR-105</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/wisconsin-psc-opens-telco-access-charge-proceeding/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PSCW Wants Comments on Status of Investments in Advanced Telecommunications</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-wants-comments-on-status-of-investments-in-advanced-telecommunications/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-wants-comments-on-status-of-investments-in-advanced-telecommunications/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 14:27:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Regulatory Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISDN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PSCW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Service Fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wisconsin utility regulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=103</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This investigation, opened on the Commission’s own motion, will gather information needed for reports describing the status of investments in advanced telecommunications infrastructure in Wisconsin and the Universal Service Fund (USF).  These reports are mandated by statute.  The reports must include information on the progress made in:
•	Distance learning, including the number of schools [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>This investigation, opened on the Commission’s own motion, will gather information needed for reports describing the status of investments in advanced telecommunications infrastructure in Wisconsin and the Universal Service Fund (USF).  These reports are mandated by statute.  The reports must include information on the progress made in:<br />
•	Distance learning, including the number of schools and other educational institutions connected to the distance learning network<br />
•	Interconnection of libraries, including the number of libraries with videoconferencing and network access capabilities.<br />
•	Access to health care.<br />
•	Education, healthcare and employment opportunities for the disabled and other persons in the home.<br />
•	Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) deployment.<br />
•	Other infrastructure investments identified by the Commission.<br />
The Commission is also required to include in the report recommendations for improving the progress of investments in advanced telecommunications infrastructure.<br />
Comments are also being solicited on additional topics that would be of interest to the Legislature regarding the deployment of broadband services and advanced telecommunications infrastructure and on possible sources for information. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-wants-comments-on-status-of-investments-in-advanced-telecommunications/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PSCW Denies AT&amp;T Wisconsin&#8217; Petition for Rehearing</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-denies-att-wisconsin-petition-for-rehearing/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-denies-att-wisconsin-petition-for-rehearing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 23:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Regulatory Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AT&T]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wisconsin utility regulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=89</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Commission issued its Final Decision in this contested case proceeding on June 6, 2009. On June 25, 2009, Wisconsin Bell, Inc., d/b/a AT&#038;T Wisconsin (AT&#038;T), timely petitioned for rehearing. The &#8220;Sprint&#8221; entities filed a reply on July 7, 2009. The Final Decision approved Sprint&#8217;s porting to Wisconsin, subject to terms and conditions, a BellSouth [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>The Commission issued its Final Decision in this contested case proceeding on June 6, 2009. On June 25, 2009, Wisconsin Bell, Inc., d/b/a AT&#038;T Wisconsin (AT&#038;T), timely petitioned for rehearing. The &#8220;Sprint&#8221; entities filed a reply on July 7, 2009. The Final Decision approved Sprint&#8217;s porting to Wisconsin, subject to terms and conditions, a BellSouth Corporation interconnection agreement (ICA) from Kentucky (Kentucky ICA), pursuant to the Merger Docket 6720-TI-211 Commitment 7.1 in the Federal Communications Commission&#8217;s (FCC) Merger Order. </p>
<p>At it&#8217;s open meeting today, the Commissioners determined that AT&#038;T had not met the requirements for rehearing and denied the petition.</p>
<p>Docket 6720-TI-211</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-denies-att-wisconsin-petition-for-rehearing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AT&amp;T Wisconsin&#8217;s petition for rehearing denied</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/att-wisconsins-petition-for-rehearing-denied/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/att-wisconsins-petition-for-rehearing-denied/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:46:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AT&T]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interconnection agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sprint]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=120</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On June 6, 2009, the Commission issued its Final Decision approving Sprint&#8217;s porting to Wisconsin, subject to terms and conditions, a BellSouth Corporation interconnection agreement (ICA) from Kentucky (Kentucky ICA), pursuant to the Merger Docket 6720-TI-211 Commitment 7.1 in the Federal Communications Commission&#8217;s (FCC) Merger Order.  AT&#038;T filed for rehearing, asserting a material error [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>On June 6, 2009, the Commission issued its Final Decision approving Sprint&#8217;s porting to Wisconsin, subject to terms and conditions, a BellSouth Corporation interconnection agreement (ICA) from Kentucky (Kentucky ICA), pursuant to the Merger Docket 6720-TI-211 Commitment 7.1 in the Federal Communications Commission&#8217;s (FCC) Merger Order.  AT&#038;T filed for rehearing, asserting a material error of fact or law was made.  </p>
<p>The PSC determined AT&#038;T had not met its burden.</p>
<p>Docket 6720-TI-211</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/att-wisconsins-petition-for-rehearing-denied/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Commission approves a $5.94 million operating budget for the Universal Service Fund for FY 2010</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/commission-approves-a-5-94-million-operating-budget-for-the-universal-service-fund-for-fy-2010/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/commission-approves-a-5-94-million-operating-budget-for-the-universal-service-fund-for-fy-2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:07:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Regulatory Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nonprofit Access Grant Program]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telemedicine Equipment Grant Program]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Service Fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wisconsin utility regulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=112</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Commission awarded the full $500,000 for the Telemedicine Equipment Grant Program for FY 2009 to applicants in early July 2008. No Nonprofit Access Grants were awarded in FY 2009 due to the transfer of funds budgeted for that program to the general fund as a result of 2009 Wisconsin Act 2. At its June [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>The Commission awarded the full $500,000 for the Telemedicine Equipment Grant Program for FY 2009 to applicants in early July 2008. No Nonprofit Access Grants were awarded in FY 2009 due to the transfer of funds budgeted for that program to the general fund as a result of 2009 Wisconsin Act 2. At its June meeting, the Council recommended that because no grants were awarded for the Nonprofit Access Program in FY 2009, grant awards for the Nonprofit Access Grant Program be made early in FY 2010. Full funding for the Telemedicine Equipment Grant Program is also included in the proposed operating budget for FY 2010. It is anticipated that awards for that grant program would be made in early spring 2010.</p>
<p>Docket 05-GF-104</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/commission-approves-a-5-94-million-operating-budget-for-the-universal-service-fund-for-fy-2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PSCW Grants Conditional Approval for Century Tel</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-grants-conditional-approval-for-century-tel/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-grants-conditional-approval-for-century-tel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:54:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=34</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Commission conditionally approved an extension of the existing alternative regulation plans for CenturyTel of the Midwest-Kendall, LLC, CenturyTel of Wisconsin, LLC and CenturyTel of the Midwest-Wisconsin, LLC to September 30, 2009 to give time for staff to develop alternatives, set forth the deadline of Friday for the data request, and asked staff to prepare [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>The Commission conditionally approved an extension of the existing alternative regulation plans for CenturyTel of the Midwest-Kendall, LLC, CenturyTel of Wisconsin, LLC and CenturyTel of the Midwest-Wisconsin, LLC to September 30, 2009 to give time for staff to develop alternatives, set forth the deadline of Friday for the data request, and asked staff to prepare an order consistent with its discussion.  This involves the Applications of CenturyTel of the Midwest-Kendall, LLC (2815-TI-105); CenturyTel of Wisconsin, LLC (2930-TI-104), and CenturyTel of the Midwest-Wisconsin, LLC (4260-TI-103)<br />
<!--adsense--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/pscw-grants-conditional-approval-for-century-tel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Commission reviews 3rd Annual Report on Partial Deregulation of BLES</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/commission-reviews-3rd-annual-report-on-partial-deregulation-of-bles/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/commission-reviews-3rd-annual-report-on-partial-deregulation-of-bles/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=25</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On November 25, 2005, the Commission issued a final decision that granted, with conditions, the petition of Wisconsin Bell, Inc., d/b/a AT&#038;T Wisconsin (AT&#038;T), (Wisconsin Bell, Inc., was then doing business as SBC Wisconsin) for suspension of Wis. Stat. § 196.196(1) with regard to basic local exchange service (BLES).  The Commission found that substitutable [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>On November 25, 2005, the Commission issued a final decision that granted, with conditions, the petition of Wisconsin Bell, Inc., d/b/a AT&#038;T Wisconsin (AT&#038;T), (Wisconsin Bell, Inc., was then doing business as SBC Wisconsin) for suspension of Wis. Stat. § 196.196(1) with regard to basic local exchange service (BLES).  The Commission found that substitutable services provided by Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLECs) and other providers, including wireless and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services; AT&#038;T&#8217;s declining market share; and the ability for other providers to enter the market created a sufficiently competitive market to justify the suspension of Wis. Stat. § 196.196(1). The Commission also found that although the market was currently effectively competitive, there were uncertainties about the sustainability of such competition. Consequently, the suspension of regulation was made subject to conditions. The conditioned suspension allowed AT&#038;T to increase the monthly BLES residential charge in the 17 exchanges in Rate Groups A and B, by no more than $2.50 per year for the next two 12-month periods beginning December 1, 2005. Beginning in December 2007, AT&#038;T was allowed to increase the charges for stand-alone BLES by any amount.  AT&#038;T is required to maintain uniform rates within each rate group. Also because of the uncertainty of the sustainability of competition, AT&#038;T was required to submit data to enable Commission staff to prepare annual reports on competitive conditions and the impacts of partial deregulation on BLES customers.</p>
<p>The Commission decided that the partial deregulation for Basic Local Exchange Service,  authorized in its November 25, 2005 final decision in docket 6720-TI-196, should be subject to further monitoring.</p>
<p><!--adsense--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/commission-reviews-3rd-annual-report-on-partial-deregulation-of-bles/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Commission determines 715 and 920 area codes will get overlays</title>
		<link>http://preferred-int.com/commission-determines-715-and-920-area-codes-will-get-overlays/</link>
		<comments>http://preferred-int.com/commission-determines-715-and-920-area-codes-will-get-overlays/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:03:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>preferred</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Alternative Energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://preferred-int.com/?p=24</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Docket 5-TN-100.  The most recent forecast indicates that the 715 area code will run out of assignable central office codes (or NXXs) in the first quarter of 2011, while the 920 area code is expected to exhaust in fourth quarter of 2011.
The two basic methods of area code relief are an overlay or a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Docket 5-TN-100.  The most recent forecast indicates that the 715 area code will run out of assignable central office codes (or NXXs) in the first quarter of 2011, while the 920 area code is expected to exhaust in fourth quarter of 2011.<br />
The two basic methods of area code relief are an overlay or a geographic split (split).<br />
An overlay occurs when more than one area code serves the same geographic area. </p>
<p><!--adsense--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://preferred-int.com/commission-determines-715-and-920-area-codes-will-get-overlays/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

