Relating to advanced communications infrastructure security; authorizing a fee; providing administrative penalties.
Summary
SB 1897 would create a new Chapter 67 in the Texas Utilities Code to regulate the security of advanced communications infrastructure. The bill prohibits advanced communications service providers from constructing new infrastructure after August 31, 2025, if it includes equipment produced or provided by a “federally banned company,” defined by reference to the FCC’s covered list. It also requires providers already operating such equipment to disable and remove it as soon as possible after September 1, 2025, while allowing replacement without a state or local permit if the provider notifies the relevant authority and the replacement is similar to the removed infrastructure.
The bill establishes an annual registration program at the Public Utility Commission of Texas for providers using covered equipment, along with reporting obligations and a fee set to cover administrative costs. Providers participating in the federal Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Reimbursement Program must submit additional annual and quarterly reports. The commission must also create a map of known in-state infrastructure tied to federally banned companies, including locations, service areas, providers, and equipment details.
Impact
SB 1897 would add a new regulatory framework to Texas law governing telecommunications and broadband infrastructure security. It would give the Public Utility Commission authority to collect registrations, require reports, assess administrative penalties, and maintain a statewide map of affected infrastructure. The bill also limits access to state and local funding, including universal service fund support, and bars noncompliant providers from receiving certain federal funds distributed through state or local governments for communications infrastructure development or maintenance.
Sentiment
The available legislative record suggests the bill moved forward without recorded floor opposition in the provided vote history, and there are no committee transcript excerpts indicating debate or amendments. Its placement on the General State Calendar and passage through third reading indicate it received sufficient support to advance. Overall, the bill appears to have been treated as a security and compliance measure rather than a highly contested measure in the available materials.
Contention
The main points of contention likely center on the bill’s broad restrictions on equipment from federally banned companies, the mandate to remove existing infrastructure, and the financial and administrative burdens placed on providers through registration, reporting, and penalties. Telecommunications providers affected by the bill may view the requirements as costly and operationally disruptive, especially where replacement infrastructure must be deployed quickly. Supporters would likely emphasize supply-chain security, network integrity, and alignment with federal national-security concerns, but no specific opposing arguments are captured in the provided transcripts.
Relating to the regulation of residential solar retail transactions; requiring an occupational registration; authorizing fees; providing civil and administrative penalties.
Relating to critical infrastructure and utilities, including affiliation with certain foreign entities of certain persons working or participating in the electricity market; authorizing and increasing administrative penalties.
Relating to the sale of certain e-cigarettes in this state and a directory of e-cigarette manufacturers and their products; authorizing fees; authorizing administrative and civil penalties; creating a criminal offense.