Texas Attorney General Opinion: JM-1280 Page: 2 of 10
This text is part of the collection entitled: Texas Attorney General Opinions and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Honorable Bob Bullock - Page 2
of defraying the costs and expenses incurred
in the administration of this Act. There-
after the commission shall, subject to the
approval of the Legislature, adjust this
assessment to provide a level of income
sufficient to fund the commission and the
office of public utility counsel. Any
interexchange telecommunications carrier
found dominant as to any service market under
Section 100(b) or filing a petition under
Section 100(f) of this Act shall be required
to reimburse the Office of Public Utility
Counsel for the costs of participation before
the commission on behalf of residential
ratepayers in any of the proceedings under
Section 100 of this Act to the extent found
reasonable by the commission. Recovery of
costs under this section by the Office of
Public Utility Counsel shall not exceed
$175,000 per annum. Nothing in this Act or
any other provision of law shall prohibit
interexchange telecommunications carriers who
do not provide local exchange telephone
service from collecting the fee.imposed under
this Act as an additional item separately
stated on the customer bill as 'Utilityv Gross
Receipts Assessment'. (Emphasis added.)
You first ask:
What telephone companies should be paying
this assessment -- does it apply to all
telephone companies which may be subject to
any facet of the PUC's jurisdiction, whether
for rate making purposes or for more limited
purposes?
You inform us that you have advised all "long distance
telephone companies" that they fall within the reach of
section 78 and are thereby subject to the assessment, but
that several carriers disagree with your construction. We
assume that there is no question that local exchange
carriers (known as LECs) who provide local services to
residential and business subscribers fall within the ambit
of the act. We assume that, with the phrase "long distance
telephone companies," you refer to interexchange carriers
(known as IXCs) that offer either interLATA or intraLATA
long distance service. You state that the PUC has failed to
take any consistent position on whether the assessment
applies to all carriers subject to any facet of its
jurisdiction or just to "dominant carriers" as defined in
section 3(c)(2)(B) of PURA. It is suggested that section 78p. 6867
(JM-1280)
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
Texas. Attorney-General's Office. Texas Attorney General Opinion: JM-1280, text, December 31, 1990; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth273718/m1/2/: accessed April 23, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.