NARUC Combined Lifeline Resolutions Pass Unanimously, Quickly

Two initially separate resolutions were combined because both deal with Lifeline, said Cullen Robbins, Nebraska Public Service Commission communications director, at the telecom committee's business meeting Tuesday. This was as expected (see 1907220041). In a Lifeline national verifier, failure rates can be high to reverify subscribers to the carrier-provided government subsidized program, which can lead to low-income customers being de-enrolled, he said. "Lack of APIs also make enrollment more challenging" and can reduce those numbers, the staffer said of application program interfaces. Those working on the resolution made "very minor and largely just editorial changes to the draft resolution and it was subsequently approved unanimously by the staff subcommittee," he said.

The TC-1 resolution, up for a vote by all NARUC members Wednesday, would recommend Lifeline continue fully supporting at $9.25 monthly per customer voice service instead of reducing that over the next few years until it would end for voice only. It asks the FCC to freeze broadband minimums at 2 GB monthly until the agency's 2021 Lifeline study. On the national verifier for eligibility, it would have the FCC end hard launches and only soft launch the NV in additional states. That would be until Dec. 31 or until "service provider APIs are established, and electronic access to state databases," such as for food stamps, disability payments and Medicaid, "are available to confirm subscriber eligibility," whichever is later.

The approved draft notes that neither the FCC nor Universal Service Administrative Co. "has made available complete data showing the National Verifier's impact." Available figures show "many potentially and apparently eligible" customers aren't reverified and some are nixed from the program, "and new enrollments have dropped substantially in states" with the NV.

States can't get their Lifeline-related databases to properly exchange data with the NV until an API is released so they can determine what data fields and other variables will work seamlessly, stakeholders said. Lack of objections shows commissioners, staffers and others including USAC and industry had time to react before the vote, said experts including NARUC General Counsel Brad Ramsay: "If industry has a problem, they'll make themselves known well in advance." USAC apparently sent at least one representative to the meeting, we were told. USAC didn't comment.

"We're recognizing that there are some issues" with the NV rollout and want to avoid "unintended consequences," said U.S. Virgin Islands Public Services Commissioner Johann Clendenin, one of three combined-resolution co-sponsors. States have "gone as far as they can" to execute on the NV, and now FCC Chairman Ajit Pai is getting information (see 1907170033) to help guide next steps, Clendenin said. "This is a vehicle for him to get the official feedback from the states." It's a "complex system of systems" and "probably the tip of the iceberg is coming up with common APIs," Clendenin said.

The FCC "should stop and look ... because this isn't working as intended," Clendenin said of the API. "If you know that people have fallen through the cracks, you should do something." An API will help show the extent of the problem, he and others said. The FCC declined to comment.

State Authority

On an earlier panel Tuesday, speakers debated state authority given the move from landlines to IP technology. Moderator and Indiana Utility Regulatory Commissioner Sarah Freeman noted that she and others generally were speaking (see 1:30 p.m. event) for themselves, not their employers.

With landlines declining and wireless ascendant, panelists discussed FCC and state authority over VoIP. That's at issue in a case the Supreme Court will decide in early October whether to hear (see 1907180004). It's on appeal of the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling for Charter Communications and against the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission that the cable ISP's an information service exempt from state rules.

State oversight is important here, Ramsay said, as PUCs usually get customer complaints first. "I don’t think there’s a feedback mechanism that makes the FCC responsive like the states." Service quality, assuring universal service and other factors are reason for such involvement, Ramsay added: States like Vermont "are out there exercising authority" over IP voice, with about a half dozen states having oversight roles.

The Charter case may not be that significant given "state authority over VoIP has been very, very, very limited if at all," said Director Michael Santorelli of New York Law School's Advanced Communications Law & Policy Institute. "Is there an overwhelming need for state intervention there?" He "fail[s] to see the urgency."

The FCC hasn't acted here by issuing a rule on what type of service VoIP is, stakeholders noted; and an agency spokesperson confirmed. "For protecting states rights, the FCC has not yet made a decision yet" on whether to deem it a less-regulated information service or a telecom service, said Granite Telecommunications Senior Corporate Counsel Sana Sheikh.

The Minnesota PUC as well as one of its commissioners attending the meeting didn't comment on the case. Charter declined to comment.

USTelecom Petition

On USTelecom's petition for forbearance from requirements some voice and broadband access be made available to potential rivals, Freeman said "it seems like the FCC is taking small bites of this." The agency has acted on parts of the association's request. Commissioners have some parts left to vote on, including forbearance related to certain voice services, in coming days or else that portion will be deemed granted (see 1907160071).

While Sheikh credited USTelecom with withdrawing part of its request, she said her company still needs access to incumbent LECs' pipelines to serve its users. "Our customers still want TDM services" and the number has risen at Granite, she said. "There still is a huge market for local and long-distance services."

Competitive-type telco customers requiring "TDM service will continue to have options following forbearance, whether from CLECs purchasing wholesale offerings, alternative competitive carriers, or from the ILECs themselves, whose prices will be constrained by fierce competition," USTelecom recently told the FCC. A group spokesperson referred us to the filing when we sought comment.

Such circuit-switched TDM services aren't "necessarily going away per se," said panelist and USF consultant Joe Gillan. "TDM networks are sliding into obsolescence but it is not uniform, it is not universal." He cited many "uses for TDM that IP doesn’t satisfy well."