utilityregulation.com Your best source for in-depth information about regulated industries.  
  Home Contact Search Sitemap
  Welcome
Essays
Orders
Reports
testimony
Links
feedback



Kentucky Seal

Kentucky

2004

Order
In the Matter of Investigation Into the Need for Public Interest Payphones in Kentucky
Case No. 2003-00492
August 23, 2004
Approximately 11 Pages
View the document

Order
In the Matter of the Review Of BellSouth's Telecommunications, Inc.'S Price Regulation Plan
Case No. 2003-00304
June 29, 2004
Approximately 6 Pages
View the document

Order
In the Matter of the Investigation Concerning The Propriety of Provision of INTERLATA Services by BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1996
Case No. 2001-00105
May 11, 2004
Approximately 10 Pages
View the document

2002

Order
Case No. 2001-00399
In the Matter of the Petition by Alltel Corporation to Acquire the Kentucky Assets of Verizon South, Incorporated
February 13, 2002
Approximately 21 Pages
View the document

2001

Order
Case No. 2000-465
In the Matter of Petition by AT&T Communications of the South Central States, Inc. and TCG OHIO for Arbitration of Certain Terms and Conditions of a Proposed Agreement with BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. Section 252
June 22, 2001
Approximately 9 Pages
View the document

Order
Case No. 2000-480
In the Matter of Petition of SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P. for Arbitration with BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. Pursuant to Section 252(b) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
June 13, 2001
Approximately 13 Pages
View the document

Order
Case No. 2000-465
In the Matter of Petition by AT&T Communications of the South Central States, Inc. and TcG Ohio for Arbitration fo Certain Terms and Conditions of a Proposed Agreement with BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. Section 252
May 16, 2001
Approximately 17 Pages
View the document

Order
Case Nos. 96-608 and 2001-105
In the Matter of Investigation Concerning the Propriety of InterLATA Services by BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1996 )
April 26, 2001
Approximately 26 Pages
View the document

Order
Administrative Case No. 382
In the Matter of An Inquiry into the Development of Deaveraged Rates for Unbundled Network Elements
April 12, 2001
Approximately 6 Pages
View the document

Order
Case No. 2000-207
In the Matter of American Electric Power and BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. Alleged Failure to Comply with Administrative Regulations
March 16, 2001
Approximately 8 Pages
View the document

Order
Case No. 2001-030
Verizon Select Services, Inc.'s Intent to Withdraw from Provision of Local Dial Tone Service in Kentucky
February 8, 2001
Approximately 6 Pages
View the document

Order
Case Nos. 96-608 & 2001-105
Investigation Concerning the Propriety of Interlata Services by Bellsouth Telecommunications,Inc., Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1996
No Date
Approximately 26 Pages
View the document

2000

Order
Case No. 2000-465
Petition by AT&T Communications of the South Central States, Inc. and TCG Ohio for Arbitration of Certain Terms and Conditions of a Proposed Agreement with BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. Pursuant tO 47 U.S.C. Section 252
November 17, 2000
Approximately 10 Pages
View the document

Order
Administrative Case No. 381
A Certification of the Carriers Receiving Federal Universal Service High-cost Support
September 29, 2000
Approximately 4 Pages
View the document

Order
Case No. 94-121
Application of Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. D/B/A South Central Bell Telephone to Modify Its Method of Regulation
August 29, 2000
Approximately 3 Pages
View the document

Order
Case No. 2000-410
The Demand Side Management Programs and Demand Side Management Cost Recovery Filing of American Electric Power D/B/A Kentucky Power CompanyAugust 25, 2000
Approximately 2 Pages
View the document

Order
Case No. 2000-082
The Tariff Filings of GTE South Incorporated to Reduce Rates and Provide for an Expansion of its Optional Local Calling Plans
August 24, 2000
Approximately 2 Pages
View the document

Order
In the Matter of: Exemptions for Interexchange Carriers, Long-Distance Resellers, Operator Service Providers and Customer-Owned, Coin-Operated Telephones
Administrative Case No. 359
August 8, 2000
Approximately 7 Pages

Pursuant to regulatory statutes 278.512 and 278.514, the Commission, on its own motion, reopened proceedings to review and clarify existing exemptions from regulatory requirements of certain telecommunications providers as well as to determine whether providers of wireless telecommunications services, providers of pay telephone service and providers of pre-paid calling card telephone services should be exempted from additional regulatory requirements.

Choices in the telecommunications market in Kentucky have multiplied: approximately 40 providers of wireless telecommunications services and approximately 300 providers of pay phone service currently operate in the Commonwealth, in addition to numerous competing carriers of traditional wireline service.

Under existing rules, the Commission may exempt carriers or their services from regulation or provide alternative means of regulation of telecommunications services and products if it determines an exemption or reduced regulation is in the public interest. In this order it ruled that the lack of market power of providers of pre-paid calling card services, wireless telecommunications carriers and pay phone providers, together with the availability of competitive choices and the deregulation of these providers' rates, renders elimination of their tariffs reasonable and inevitable.

As of the effective date of this Order, wireless carriers, pay phone providers, and providers of pre-paid calling card services that wish to provide service in Kentucky need only submit a letter to the Commission stating that intention. The Commission will also remove all existing wireless tariffs, pay phone tariffs and pre-paid calling card tariffs from its records. The elimination of a requirement to tariff its services does not exempt wireless carriers from collecting and remitting Commission-ordered universal service funding, however. Nor does it exempt any carrier from complying with Commission-mandated maximum charges and other requirements such as those specified for operator services in both the public and the confinement facility arenas.

The Commission hopes that the elimination of unnecessary record-keeping enables it to expend its administrative resources elsewhere, thereby more effectively promoting the public interest.
View the document

Order
Case No. 99-434
In the Matter of the Review of BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.'s Price Regulation Plan
August 3, 2000
Approximately 19 Pages
View the document

Order
Administrative Case No. 381
A Certification of the Carriers Receiving Federal Universal Service High-cost Support
March 24, 2000
Approximately 3 Pages
View the document

Order
Case N0. 98-212
In the Matter of American Communications Services of Louisville, Inc. d/b/a e.spire Communications, Inc., American Communications Services of Lexington, INc. d/b/a e.spire Communications, Inc., ALEC, Inc., and Hyperion Communications of Louisville, Inc. f/k/a Louisville Lightwave, Complainants v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., Defendant
May 16, 2000
Approximately 7 Pages
View the document

1998

Order
Case No. 97-402
Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company's Avoided Cost Study
December 4, 1998
Approximately 4 Pages

On April 24,1998, the Commission ordered that the wholesale discount rate for competitive local exchange carriers (“CLECs”) purchasing services from Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company (“CBT”) should be 15.37 percent. On May 14, 1998, CBT filed its request for rehearing. On June 3, 1998, the Commission granted rehearing to further consider CBT’s arguments and scheduled an informal conference. An informal conference was held on July 7, 1998 at the Commission’s offices.
View the document

Order
In the Matter of: AT&T Communications of the South Central States, Inc. vs. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.
Case No. 97-521
November 6, 1998
Approximately 9 Pages

On December 22, 1997, AT&T Communications of the South Central States, Inc. (“AT&T”) filed a Complaint against BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. (“BellSouth”) alleging violations of federal law, PSC Orders, and the parties’ interconnection agreement. Subsequently, BellSouth filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint, and motion was denied by Order dated April 8, 1998. A hearing was held on this matter on August 4, 1998. On September 3, both parties filed post-hearing briefs.1 AT&T requests a declaration of rights, an Order restraining BellSouth from further alleged violations of law, and establishment of a monitoring process pursuant to which BellSouth will provide monthly reports to the Commission regarding its efforts to comply with applicable law, the parties’ interconnection agreement, and Commission Orders. (Approximately 9 pages)
View the document

Order
Case No. 96-440
In the Matter of Petition by MCI for Arbitration of Certain Terms and Conditions of a Proposed Agreement with GTE South Incorporated Concerning Interconnection and Resale Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996
October 12, 1998
Approximately 5 Pages

On September 1, 1998, the Commission entered its Order in this case ruling on continuing disputes between GTE South Incorporated (“GTE”) and MCI Telecommunications Corporation and MCImetro Access Transmission Services, Inc. (collectively, “MCI”) in regard to the parties’ proposed interconnection agreement (the “Agreement”). GTE has filed a petition requesting the Commission to reconsider its portions of the Order and to clarify its decision regarding the quality of service GTE is required to provide to MCI pursuant to the Agreement.(Approximately 5 pages)
View the document

Order
Case No. 98-348
Investigation Regarding Compliance of the Statement of Generally Available Terms of Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. with Section 251 and Section 252(D) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
August 21, 1998
Approximately 14 Pages

On June 22, 1998, BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. (“BellSouth”) filed its updated Statement of Generally Available Terms (“SGAT”), with supporting documents, together with a request that the SGAT be approved by this Commission. By Order dated July 6, 1998, the Commission established this case to determine, pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996) (the “Act”), at 47 U.S.C., § 252(f), whether the SGAT meets the requirements of 47 U.S.C., § 251 and 252(d) and relevant requirements of state law. The parties to Case No. 96-608 1 were also made parties to this proceeding and were invited to submit comments on the SGAT. Comments have been filed by e.spire Communications, Inc. (“e.spire”), MCI Telecommunications Corporation and MCImetro Access Transmission Services, Inc. (collectively, “MCI”), Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (“Sprint”), AT& of the South Central States, Inc. (“AT&T”), and the Competitive Telecommunications Association (“CompTel”). BellSouth has filed a response AT&T Communicationso those comments. The issue of whether BellSouth’s SGAT complies fully with applicable law is ripe for Commission decision.
View the document



Energy Orders                                                                                          


Copyright ©1996-2008 Ben Johnson Associates, Inc.® All Rights Reserved