TURN Calls Foul on IP Transition Bill in California Legislature

“We’re against the bill because it allows AT&T to abandon the public-switched network,” TURN Executive Director Mark Toney said in an interview. “It allows them to abandon any part of the copper network anywhere it wants to, any time after 2020.” TURN is setting up a meeting with Low and coordinating a coalition of consumer organizations to fight the bill, he said. The bill is in the Utilities and Commerce Committee, and Toney predicted a hearing on the proposed legislation April 13 or April 20. AT&T has been the biggest supporter of AB-2395, Toney said.

The VON Coalition “supports the bill and its goal of transitioning all customers to IP services,” said Executive Director Glenn Richards. The VON Coalition represents IP communications providers. “IP services drive infrastructure investment and accelerate broadband deployment; and will bring advanced communications features and functionality to California consumers,” he said. CALinnovates also supported the bill. “In 2016, access to modern telecommunications infrastructure is critical to every Californian's success,” said CALinnovates Chief Evangelist Kish Rajan. “To fail to keep up with industry evolution, or to hold back critical technological investment, would do disservice to Californians, especially to disadvantaged communities.” The group said its members include C-level executives, political leaders and entrepreneurs.

The California bill would “require a telephone corporation that is transitioning to IP enabled services and networks to complete a customer education and outreach program explaining the transition from legacy public switched telephone network services regulated by the commission to IP enabled services, the benefits and advantages of IP enabled services, a description of the advanced services available to consumers, and information regarding the projected timeframes for the transition, including that withdrawal of any voice grade single-line telephone service will not take place prior to January 1, 2020.”

“Upon completion of these steps, but no sooner than January 1, 2020, the bill would authorize a telephone corporation to elect to discontinue legacy telephone service upon providing not less than 90-days' notice to the affected customers and to the commission, as specified,” the bill says. After receiving such a notice, a customer could petition the state commission to review the availability of the IP service at the customer’s location. “The bill would authorize the commission, if it determines after investigation that no alternative service is available to that customer at the customer's location, to attempt to identify a willing provider of voice service to serve the customer, and if no willing provider is identified, to order the withdrawing telephone corporation to provide voice service to the customer for a period no longer than 12 months after withdrawal,” according to the bill.

TURN believes the bill would “eliminate the California Public Utility Commission’s role in guaranteeing universal phone service and affordable phone service,” Toney said. Millions of California residents still depend on the copper network, he said, including many vulnerable communities, including low-income households, seniors, rural customers and people with disabilities. Also, the 911 public safety network works more reliably over copper networks than over VoIP and wireless networks, he said. TURN isn’t ready to choose a year for a transition to IP services, Toney said. First, telcos would have to address disadvantages with digital and mobile services, including 911 location accuracy and backup power, he said.