RCW 53.08.380 Wholesale telecommunications services—Petition for review of rates, terms, conditions.
(1) A person or entity that has requested wholesale telecommunications services from a port district may petition the commission under the procedures set forth in RCW 80.04.110 (1) through (3) if it believes the district's rates, terms, and conditions are unduly or unreasonably discriminatory or preferential. The person or entity shall provide the district notice of its intent to petition the commission and an opportunity to review within thirty days the rates, terms, and conditions as applied to it prior to submitting its petition. In determining whether a district is providing discriminatory or preferential rates, terms, and conditions, the commission may consider such matters as service quality, technical feasibility of connection points on the district's telecommunications facilities, time of response to service requests, system capacity, and other matters reasonably related to the provision of wholesale telecommunications services. If the commission, after notice and hearing, determines that a port district's rates, terms, and conditions are unduly or unreasonably discriminatory or preferential, it shall issue a final order finding noncompliance with this section and setting forth the specific areas of apparent noncompliance. An order imposed under this section shall be enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction.
(2) The commission may order a port district to pay a share of the costs incurred by the commission in adjudicating or enforcing this section.
(3) Without limiting other remedies at law or equity, the commission and prevailing party may also seek injunctive relief to compel compliance with an order.
(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the commission's authority and jurisdiction with respect to actions, proceedings, or orders permitted or contemplated for a state commission under the federal telecommunications act of 1996, P.L. 104-104 (110 Stat. 56).
[ 2018 c 169 § 3; 2000 c 81 § 9.]
NOTES:
Findings—2000 c 81: See note following RCW 53.08.005.
Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.
LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.
The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.
You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.
The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.
Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.