NM Stat § 63-9A-5 (2021)
2021 New Mexico Statutes|Chapter 63 - Railroads and Communications|Article 9A - Telecommunications Services|Section 63-9A-5 - Regulation by commission.

A. Except as otherwise provided in the New Mexico Telecommunications Act, each public telecommunications service is declared to be affected with the public interest and, as such, subject to the provisions of that act, including the regulation thereof as provided in that act. B. The commission has exclusive jurisdiction to regulate incumbent local exchange carriers that serve fifty thousand or more access lines within the state only in the manner and to the extent authorized by the New Mexico Telecommunications Act, and Subsection B of Section 63-7-1.1 NMSA 1978 does not apply; provided, however, that the commission's jurisdiction includes the regulation of wholesale rates, including access charges and interconnection agreements consistent with federal law and its enforcement and determinations of participation in low-income telephone service assistance programs pursuant to the Low Income Telephone Service Assistance Act [Chapter 63, Article 9C NMSA 1978]. The New Mexico Telecommunications Act expressly preserves and does not diminish or expand: (1) the rights and obligations of any entity, including the commission, established pursuant to federal law, including 47 U.S.C. Sections 251 and 252, or established pursuant to any state law, rule, procedure, regulation or order related to interconnection, intercarrier compensation, intercarrier complaints, wholesale rights and obligations or any wholesale rate or schedule that is filed with and maintained by the commission; (2) the rights and obligations of any competitive telecommunications service provider holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity, or the rights and obligations of any competitive local exchange carrier to obtain such a certificate; (3) the authority of the commission to resolve consumer complaints regarding basic local exchange service; provided, however, that the commission's authority to resolve such complaints shall be limited to resolving issues of consumer protection and shall not include the authority to determine or fix rates, provider of last resort obligations or service quality standards except as expressly set forth in the New Mexico Telecommunications Act; (4) the authority of the commission to establish reasonable quality of service standards; provided, however, that the enforcement of such standards shall be limited to the commission's fining authority set forth in Section 63-7-23 NMSA 1978 and the authority to seek an injunction set forth in Section 63-9-19 NMSA 1978; (5) the rights and obligations of any entity, including the commission, regarding the fund; (6) the rights and obligations of any entity, including the commission, regarding access to emergency service to the extent consistent with the Enhanced 911 Act; or (7) the rights and obligations of any entity, including the commission, regarding the administration of slamming and cramming rules, telecommunications relay service and numbering resources to the extent permitted by and consistent with federal law. C. For incumbent local exchange carriers that serve fifty thousand or more access lines within the state, the commission shall adopt relaxed regulations that provide for: (1) reduced filing requirements for applicants in rate increase proceedings under the New Mexico Telecommunications Act; and (2) expedited consideration in all proceedings initiated pursuant to the New Mexico Telecommunications Act in order to reduce the cost and burden for incumbent local exchange carriers and other applicants. D. The regulatory requirements and the commission's regulation of competitive local exchange carriers, competitive access providers and interexchange carriers shall be no greater than, and no more extensive than, that of incumbent local exchange carriers that serve fifty thousand or more access lines. E. The provisions of the New Mexico Telecommunications Act do not apply to incumbent rural telecommunications carriers. History: Laws 1985, ch. 242, § 5; 2017, ch. 71, § 2. ANNOTATIONSThe 2017 amendment, effective June 16, 2017, provided the scope of jurisdiction of the public regulation commission to regulate telecommunications carriers, and provided an exemption to incumbent rural telecommunications carriers from the provisions of the New Mexico Telecommunications Act; added the subsection designation "A."; in Subsection A, after "thereof as", deleted "hereinafter", and after "provided", added "in this act"; and added Subsections B through E. Authority of public regulation commission. — The public regulation commission has broad authority to regulate telecommunications in New Mexico and find that the New Mexico Telecommunications Act explicitly authorized the PRC to enter into an AFOR plan and add a consumer credit or refund order incentive. The PRC's consumer credit or refund order based primarily on the AFOR plan terms is not a prohibited form of retroactive remedy. The incentive order is neither premature nor speculative because Qwest admitted it would not meet the $788 million investment commitment and that it should not be forced to comply. Qwest Corp. v. NMPRC, 2006-NMSC-042, 140 N.M. 440, 143 P.3d 478. Local ordinance not preempted by state law. — Reading the New Mexico Telecommunications Act, Section 63-9A-1 NMSA 1978 et seq., and N.M. Const., art. XI, § 2 in pari materia with New Mexico's Municipal Code, Chapter 3 NMSA 1978, and N.M. Const., art. X, § 6, the provisions of a Santa Fe telecommunications ordinance, regulating the power to contract with a service provider and to enforce provisions related to land use and rights of way held by the city, were not preempted by state law, inasmuch as they did not purport to usurp New Mexico's public regulation commission power to issue certificates of public convenience and necessity to providers of public telecommunications services or to regulate rates and quality of service for intrastate telecommunications services. Qwest Corp. v. City of Santa Fe, 224 F. Supp. 2d 1305 (D.N.M. 2002), 380 F.3d 1258 (10th Cir.).