NOTE:  As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for other purposes.

 

The most recent FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative Website.  The Adobe PDF version includes all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not.  Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

 

 

F I S C A L   I M P A C T   R E P O R T

 

 

 

SPONSOR:

Sharer

1/27/03

01/27/03

 

HB

 

 

SHORT TITLE:

Poor Telecommunications Service

 

SB

103

 

 

ANALYST:

Wilson

 

APPROPRIATION

 

Appropriation Contained

Estimated Additional Impact

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY03

FY04

FY03

FY04

 

 

 

 

Substantial – See Narrative

Recurring

General Fund

 

 

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

 

Responses Received From

 

Public Regulation Commission (PRC)

 

SUMMARY

 

     Synopsis of Bill

 

Senate Bill 103 requires the Public Regulation Commission to enact rules to allow businesses to recover revenues due to poor public telecommunications service.

 

     Significant Issues

 

SB 103 provisions will only cover businesses that purchase service from a telecommunications provider with over 50,000 lines which in New Mexico is only Qwest and Valor.

 

Quality of Service Standards for both companies with more than 50,000 access lines are already defined in the current law, Alternative Forms of Regulation, that sets rates, terms and conditions of service for 5 years. AFOR is a form of “contract” where breaches in Quality of Service Standards trigger remedies as set forth in the contract, including individuals and businesses, but these remedies do not cover the loss of business revenues.

 

Private causes of action involving loss of business revenues are normally handled in judicial court where the burden of proof is on the complainant who is in a better position to determine the amount of business revenues lost.

 

The PRC claims that its expertise is in determining issues of public convenience and necessity, establishing rates and standards for telecommunications companies, not litigating a “private causes of action” as implied in SB 103. 

 

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The PRC estimates that they will need four new FTEs at an estimated cost of $300,000  to implement the provisions of SB 103.  These FTEs will be used to settle additional adjudications before the PRC and to handle those that would affect the Commission in other courts.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

 

The PRC notes that currently it does not have expertise in the area of lost business revenues and that the additional workload from the provisions of SB 103 could be substantial.

 

DW/njw