California Public Utilities Commission staff proposed ways to let low-income consumers apply for the state's LifeLine program without providing the last four digits of their social security numbers. In a Friday order in docket R.20-02-008, CPUC Administrative Law Judge Robyn Purchia sought comments on the plan by May 10, with replies due May 24. “This staff proposal recommends revisions to the application, identity verification, and eligibility determination processes to create a defined path for individuals without SSNs to apply for California LifeLine and when qualified, to begin receiving California LifeLine benefits,” said the April 11 plan, which was attached to the ALJ’s order. Consumer advocates in January comments urged the CPUC to make such a policy (see 2401290041).
Votes are again delayed on foster youth and AT&T items at the California Public Utilities Commission. Both were scheduled for Thursday’s meeting, but CPUC staff postponed them until the May 9 meeting, said a hold list Tuesday. The commission originally planned to vote on both items at its Feb. 15 meeting and has now held them multiple times (see 2403200013). The first item would make the CPUC’s pilot foster youth program permanent (docket R.20-02-008). The second would deny AT&T’s corrective action plan explaining how it will correct failures and improve service after failing to meet the state’s out-of-service repair interval standard in 2021 (resolution T-17789).
Possibly facing the end of the federal affordable connectivity program (ACP), the California Public Utilities Commission should quickly modify grant rules to ensure service stays affordable, said The Utility Reform Network in petitions Friday and Monday. “We don’t have the luxury of time here,” said TURN Telecom Policy Analyst Leo Fitzpatrick in an interview Monday. The state cable association slammed TURN’s proposals. But the California Emerging Technology Fund (CETF), a group that has led efforts to sign up low-income Californians for ACP, supports having “another opportunity to discuss the imperative for California to have a back-up plan to replace the” federal program, said CEO Sunne Wright McPeak in an email Monday.
The California Public Utilities Commission plans to propose a decision in Q2 2025 on possible updates to the state’s deaf and disabled telecommunications program, Commissioner Darcie Houck said in a scoping memo Wednesday in docket R.23-11-001. The CPUC will consider whether and how it should modify program rules “in light of the changing communications landscape and participants' needs,” among other issues, it said. The agency will hold hearings and workshops from April to July and will collect more comments in Q4 this year, the memo said.
Some Democrats warned they might join Republicans opposing a California digital equity bill when it reaches the Assembly floor. At a livestreamed hearing Wednesday, the Assembly Communications Committee voted 7-3, with one member not voting, to advance AB-2239 to the Judiciary Committee. The bill would codify in state law the FCC’s definition of digital discrimination (see 2402080068).
California next month could approve challenge process rules for NTIA’s broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program. The California Public Utilities Commission said it may vote at its May 9 meeting on a proposed decision, released Friday in docket R.23-02-016, to revise and adopt volume one of the state’s initial proposal for BEAD. The CPUC proposed opening its challenge process “no later than 60 calendar days” after issuing a final decision and “no sooner” than seven days after publishing eligible locations, the draft said. A 30-day challenge process would be followed by a 14-day evidentiary review period. After that, the CPUC would notify ISPs about challenges and give them 30 days to rebut. Then CPUC staff would get 30 days to make a final determination to the commission. Staff would publish final eligible locations not later than 60 days after the NTIA approves those final determinations. The agency attached a cured version of volume one. Comments on the proposed decision are due April 25. Meanwhile, Washington state's BEAD challenge process is delayed due to a glitch with the challenge portal, the state's Commerce Department said Monday. It was scheduled to open Monday. "Part of the registration process requires the challenge portal to send a confirmation email to someone registering to participate," the department said. "Due to a technical problem with the system, some individuals had trouble receiving these messages." The department said it will announce a new opening date when it resolves the problem.
The California Public Utilities Commission released NTIA curing instructions for volume one of California’s initial proposal for the broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program. The CPUC gave parties until Thursday at 5 p.m. PST to comment on the Tuesday notice in docket R.23-02-016. The record for volume one will stand submitted at the same time and date, said Administrative Law Judge Thomas Glegola. “A proposed decision may be issued anytime thereafter.” The CPUC attached NTIA’s curing instructions from Feb. 6 and March 8, plus the CPUC Feb. 23 response and a Jan. 13 letter to the FCC about the state’s challenge to the national broadband map. In California’s cured volume one, the CPUC added information from the FCC’s Jan. 6 broadband report showing that “advertised or claimed DSL speeds rarely meet or exceed actual speeds delivered to customers,” the agency said. That and other “sources of objective data provide ample evidentiary basis to substantiate” a CPUC modification to NTIA’s model that presumes “locations for which providers have claimed to deliver speeds only slightly above the ‘unserved’ threshold, up to [30 Mbps download and 5 Mbps upload], are actually receiving speeds below the ‘unserved’ threshold of 25/3 Mbps,” the commission said. “This modification is consistent with the CPUC’s and NTIA’s longstanding efforts to phase out legacy copper network infrastructure, and it does not seek to modify in any way the unserved threshold established in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.”
State senators in California advanced a bill that could mean ISPs no longer must provide free internet to receive public housing broadband grants. The California Senate Communications Committee voted 15-0 to clear SB-1383 at a livestreamed hearing Tuesday. Backed by the cable industry, the bill would remove restrictions included in the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) public housing account. If the bill is enacted, the grants could support projects with plans that charge as much as $30 monthly. Also, the bill would let more types of organizations apply for and expressly authorize the California Public Utilities Commission to award funds for range extenders and other network enhancers. The fund is currently underutilized, said bill sponsor and committee Chair Steven Bradford (D). “Multiple low-income housing providers” say that the account’s free internet condition “is a major deterrent” to applying for grants, he said. Requiring free broadband “is a major deterrent,” echoed Amanda Gualderama, California Broadband and Video Association director-legislative and regulatory advocacy. The CPUC last year denied the cable industry group’s petition to reconsider what counts as free broadband service as it doles out public housing grants (see 2309010006). Last month, the commission approved changes to the public housing account with a clarification that grant recipients should provide free service without government subsidies (see 2403080010).
The California Public Utilities Commission will audit carriers for compliance with the state’s April 2023 shift to connections-based contribution to universal service public purpose programs. In a Wednesday ruling, CPUC Administrative Law Judge Hazlyn Fortune directed the agency's utility audit branch to ensure carriers are reporting and remitting the surcharge in a reasonable manner and as directed in the CPUC's October 2022 decision (docket R.21-03-002). T-Mobile has resisted the contribution mechanism change in the courts (see 2310170042). In a separate ruling Wednesday, ALJ Robyn Purchia clarified that California LifeLine pilot programs using federal affordable connectivity program (ACP) funds will continue through at least May 31. "If the ACP receives additional federal funding, the pilot programs may continue up to June 8, 2025," said the ALJ: If the ACP doesn't receive more funding by April 30, providers must notify California LifeLine customers by May 1 "that their service may be discontinued or otherwise changed."
The California Public Utilities Commission scolded Verizon Wireless in an order Thursday for its handling of a case of alleged customer fraud. The CPUC granted relief to a family of complainants through a 4-0 vote on a consent agenda during a Thursday meeting. Verizon could face further sanctions, the agency said. “During the course of this proceeding, Verizon failed to disclose material information concerning the porting and reassignment of at least one of Complainants’ mobile phone numbers,” said the draft decision in docket C.23-12-005. “This proceeding will remain open in order to explore an Order to Show Cause against Verizon for this material omission.” The complainants alleged that, without notice, Verizon terminated service to and locked their five iPhones and associated phone numbers for reasons of fraud. The customers said that, as a result, they had to buy five phones and suffered irreparable injury to their businesses because they couldn’t port their locked numbers to another carrier. Verizon asked to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because its agreement with customers requires arbitration. However, the CPUC said the arbitration clause doesn’t circumvent the commission’s authority. Also, the carrier argued that it may terminate customers’ phone services without notice under its agreement and in exigent circumstances. Verizon argued that it acted after determining that the customers committed fraud. The CPUC agreed that the carrier could terminate customers’ service, but was “not satisfied with the way Verizon's Fraud Department handled this case and the allegations against the Complainants.” Accordingly, the CPUC required that Verizon confidentially “submit a comprehensive report of the procedures and criteria used … to identify and accuse customers of fraud,” with “specific evidence that supported Verizon's claim that the Complainants in this case engaged in fraudulent activity.” Also, the CPUC said the customer agreement “does not authorize Verizon to lock a phone or lock a number associated with a mobile phone.” So, the agency required Verizon to unlock five iPhones and their associated numbers. In addition, the CPUC required the carrier to refund the customers the costs of three of the five locked phones, plus the five replacement phones they bought after their service was terminated. Verizon declined to comment.