The California Public Utilities Commission delayed by four months its deadline to approve applications for California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) infrastructure support. Postponing the deadline to June 30 from Feb. 29 “will provide the time necessary to complete coordination with the Federal Funding Account (FFA) and enable the CPUC to award grants for reliable and affordable networks to communities that need it most,” Executive Director Rachel Peterson wrote in an email to the CASF service list Friday. On June 1, the CPUC received 74 applications seeking about $527 million from the CASF infrastructure account, exceeding the $32.8 million available for FY 2023-24, said Peterson. On Sept. 9, the CPUC received 484 FFA applications, with many projects overlapping those in the CASF infrastructure program. Expect the delay to affect the release of a state broadband map and the deadline for 2024 CASF infrastructure account applications, said Peterson. “After new funds have been authorized for the 2024/2025 fiscal year, the CPUC will provide an update on the timing for the Broadband Map and the 2024 CASF Infrastructure application deadline via an email to the CASF Service and Distribution Lists.”
Verizon said it reached and executed a settlement agreement with consumer advocates Center for Accessible Technology (CforAT) and The Utility Reform Network on migrating Tracfone customers still using non-Verizon networks in California, the carrier said last week. Within seven business days, CforAT will attach the agreement to a motion to withdraw its Oct. 6 petition to modify the CPUC’s 2021 decision approving the Verizon/Tracfone deal, Verizon said in a Thursday email to California Public Utilities Commission Administrative Law Judge Thomas Glegola. The email was shared with the service list for docket A.20-11-001.
AT&T’s California application for relief of carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations attracted interest from Congress last week. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., raised concerns about the request in a Wednesday letter to California Public Utilities Commission President Alice Reynolds. Schiff wrote "the withdrawal of AT&T landlines will not only harm consumer choice but also pose safety issues in California.” In fires, earthquakes and other natural disasters, “our landlines become the most dependable form of communication,” he added. “While wireless connection is unreliable and cell phones can run out of battery, copper landlines have stronger receptions during power outages.” Schiff cited Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC) data that more than 580,000 affected AT&T customers would be left with few options. “AT&T’s proposed withdrawal would harm rural residents disproportionately and the CPUC should weigh this factor heavily in its review of their application to end their COLR obligation,” Schiff wrote. Others from Capitol Hill could weigh in on the CPUC proceeding (docket A.23-03-003). RCRC saw “a lot of interest in this subject” when its delegation visited congressional offices earlier this month, Senior Legislative Advocate Tracy Rhine told us Thursday. Yet an AT&T spokesperson said Friday it will not leave customers behind, though millions have already moved to wireless and high-speed internet services. “We’re working with the remaining consumers who use traditional copper-based phone service to upgrade to newer technologies from us or other providers, so everyone will still be able to make their most important life connections.”
The California Public Utilities Commission will release more than $7 million in California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) support for broadband, commissioners decided Thursday. They voted 3-0 on three separate items that clear the way for projects by fixed wireless ISPs Cruzio and Kwikbit and the Anza Electric Cooperative. The CPUC delayed voting on an AT&T service quality enforcement item and a plan making the California LifeLine foster youth program permanent.
California could be first in the nation to codify the FCC’s definition of digital discrimination into state law. Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D) introduced AB-2239 on Wednesday, the California Alliance for Digital Equity said Thursday. “This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to adopt subsequent legislation that codifies a definition of ‘digital discrimination of access’ in state law that conforms to the definition adopted by the Federal Communications Commission,” said a legislative digest on the measure. In a November order (see 2311150040), the FCC defined “digital discrimination of access” as “policies or practices, not justified by genuine issues of technical or economic feasibility, that (1) differentially impact consumers' access to broadband internet access service based on their income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin or (2) are intended to have such differential impact.” Defining digital discrimination could help move a proceeding on digital redlining at the California Public Utilities Commission, said Shayna Englin, California Community Foundation director-digital equity initiative, in an interview. The proceeding stalled amid argument about the definition, said Englin. CPUC digital redlining rules would guide the agency in the years ahead as it distributes $8 billion state and federal broadband funding, she said. Englin predicted a fight between digital equity advocates and the telecom industry, which is expected to oppose AB-2239. The California Broadband and Video Association is reviewing the legislation, said a spokesperson for the state cable group. USTelecom declined to comment. The Los Angeles City Council passed a similar law at the local level last month.
The California Public Utilities Commission must ensure a smooth transition from a pilot to a permanent California LifeLine foster youth program, commenters said Tuesday in docket R.20-02-008. The CPUC may consider a Jan. 10 proposed decision to make the program permanent at its Feb. 15 meeting. However, the proposal doesn't address how pilot program participants will receive service after the proposed permanent program replaces it July 31, said T-Mobile, the pilot’s service provider. The permanent program would use other service providers. "Due to confidentiality concerns with foster youth, T-Mobile has no direct contractual relationship with any of the youth nor does it know their identities,” the carrier said. "T-Mobile simply has no way -- or authority -- to continue to provide service after July 31, 2024.” The pilot’s administrator iFoster said the CPUC should allow foster youth to continue receiving pilot program services for a year after the pilot ends “to encourage continuation of service and reimbursement of the current service.” Otherwise, the transition could result in inadvertently cutting off service to the pilot's 11,700 participants, it warned. Also, iFoster raised concerns that the proposed decision wouldn’t require data-sharing agreements with counties before transferring pilot program data to the new administrator. Without them, iFoster can’t transfer pilot data, it said. Also, the CPUC should allow foster youth to participate in the program until they are 26, iFoster said. The CPUC proposal would end benefits at 18, or 21 if the youth is in extended foster care. “Foster youth are extremely vulnerable once they leave the foster youth system” and will need a phone to apply for jobs, college or government benefits, iFoster said. The Utility Reform Network (TURN) urged the CPUC to clarify that it will own all data from the program. Also, establishing that the agency “will enter contracts and data sharing agreements for the permanent program will prevent the need to re-negotiate those agreements any time the [third-party administrator] changes, which would reduce transition time and enhance program continuity,” TURN said. The CPUC should require providers to replace mobile devices at no cost, it added. "Foster youth can change placement frequently, sometimes with little advance notice, so there is a risk of losing devices when they move.”
Public housing broadband grant recipients should provide free service without government subsidies, the California Public Utilities Commission could soon clarify. The CPUC may vote March 7 on a proposed decision that would adopt changes to the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) broadband public housing account and tribal technical assistance program (docket R.20-08-021). Responding to some commenters’ questions about the public housing program’s no-cost broadband obligation (see 2312140034), the CPUC would clarify that "the Commission’s intent is for BPHA grant recipients to provide broadband service at no cost to residents of the low-income community, without public purpose subsidies or other funding, which is consistent with our determination in Resolution T-17775 that ‘no cost’ means unsubsidized service that is free to customers.” The CPUC rejected a cable industry challenge to that resolution in September, affirming that service the affordable connectivity program subsidizes doesn’t count as free (see 2309010006). In general, the CPUC’s possible changes to the broadband public housing account “expand eligibility for non-publicly supported housing developments and for project costs to facilitate deployment of broadband networks in low-income communities that lack access to free broadband service that meets state standards,” the proposed decision said Monday. Changes to the tribal technical assistance program would align it with the local agency technical assistance program, the CPUC added. In a separate proceeding on utility service affordability (docket 18-07-006), the California Broadband and Video Association warned the CPUC not to expand the proceeding's focus beyond gas, water and electric. ISPs aren’t public utilities, the state cable association said Thursday. “The broadband marketplace continues to be marked by extensive and rapidly increasing competition across a variety of technologies and platforms, which disciplines prices and improves affordability without regulatory price controls.”
California should allow low-income consumers to apply for the state's LifeLine program without providing the last four digits of their social security numbers, consumer advocates told the California Public Utilities Commission Friday. The CPUC last month sought comments about expanding the program for those without SSNs (see 2312200019). Lifeline providers said they would consider it if the state makes up for a possible gap in federal funding and waives liability for incorrect enrollments.
Wireless carriers in comments this week condemned a “dynamic approach” to data and other proposals for California’s low-income program. The California Public Utilities Commission received feedback Wednesday on an Oct. 30 staff proposal for setting California LifeLine specific support amounts (SSA) and minimum service standards (MSS). Some urged the CPUC to tap the brakes, especially with uncertainty about continued funding for the federal affordable connectivity program (ACP).
The California Public Utilities Commission set a two-day evidentiary hearing April 9-10 on AT&T’s application to relinquish its eligible telecom carrier (ETC) designation across the state (docket A.23-03-002). The hearing starts at 10 a.m. PST each day, said Administrative Law Judge Thomas Glegola in a Friday ruling. Under the new schedule, AT&T remains required to file rebuttal testimony by Friday (see 2310200050). Opening briefs are due May 17, reply briefs June 7, said the ruling. The CPUC expects to post a proposed decision in September, it said.