The California Public Utilities Commission scaled back some conditions in its proposed conditional OK of Verizon/Tracfone before a planned Thursday vote. Administrative Law Judge Thomas Glegola issued a revised draft Tuesday after Verizon and Tracfone raised concerns in docket A.20-11-001 (see 2111050039). Verizon would have to participate in California LifeLine for 20 years rather than endlessly, as at first proposed. Another change increases to two years from six months how much time Verizon would have to migrate to its network all Tracfone customers currently on other networks. Citing global supply constraints, the revised draft allows Verizon to give 4G devices to LifeLine customers for the first year of the migration, but it would have to offer 5G handsets from then on. Verizon now would have until Dec. 30, 2025, to have at least 200,000 LifeLine subscribers. The first draft would have required that by June 30, 2023. The revised draft extended interim milestones. Glegola added findings that the applicants “failed to make commitments or provide certainty that former TracFone customers will have more options in terms of devices and plans without incurring additional costs” or “to make commitments to pass on any verifiable or quantifiable cost savings or service improvements to former TracFone customers despite claiming such benefits would occur as a result of the merger.” The Center for Accessible Technology, one intervenor that sought conditions, thinks the revised proposal “is thoughtful, incisive, and strong, and implements meaningful and enforceable mitigation measures that will help ensure that former TracFone customers and low-income customers will have access to low-cost telephone services after the merger closes,” Legal Counsel Paul Goodman emailed Wednesday. Lengthening the migration timeline is reasonable because “it’s more important that the migration be successful,” he said. The edits "provide additional flexibility for Verizon to offer free devices for TracFone customers during the transition" and "confirm that the combined company will participate in the state Lifeline program in meaningful ways," emailed The Utility Reform Network Managing Director-Telecom Brenda Villanueva. She praised the plan for requiring collaboration between the CPUC and combined company. Verizon didn’t comment.
The California Public Utilities Commission unanimously cleared Verizon/Tracfone. The FCC may be the only U.S. regulatory OK now needed for the multibillion-dollar takeover.
The Oregon Health Authority “accepts some criticisms” about a 2020 report that found insufficient evidence that cellphone exposure can cause cancer, said Center for Health Protection Administrator Andre Ourso at an Oregon Senate Education Committee virtual hearing Monday. Ourso generally defended the agency’s work after RF safety advocates urged state lawmakers to retract the report.
Amazon violated California labor law when it concealed from warehouse workers state-required information about COVID-19 cases in the workplace, California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) alleged Monday. Amazon would be required to change its practices under a stipulated judgment agreed upon by the state and the company. Also Monday, California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) Executive Director Ashkan Soltani said the fledgling agency is focused on speeding up staffing as it develops and prepares to enforce updated state privacy rules.
Consumer advocates said to reject changes proposed by Verizon and Tracfone to the California Public Utilities Commission’s conditional draft OK of the companies’ combining. CPUC members plan to vote Nov. 18 on Verizon/Tracfone, showed a Tuesday agenda. The companies disagreed last week with state LifeLine and customer migration conditions in the draft (see 2111050039). The companies' proposed edits are “factually incorrect, legally unsupported, and, if adopted, would make this merger detrimental to the interests of California consumers,” the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office replied Tuesday. The companies seek to “weaken or outright eliminate critical conditions” for low-income customers, PAO said. The Utility Reform Network and the Center for Accessible Technology agreed. Verizon said the proposed decision, with its recommended changes, “accomplishes the goal of ensuring that the Transaction is in the public interest.” Additional conditions proposed by the other three groups are “unnecessary and appropriate,” it said.
Texas urged a state court to again dismiss carrier claims that the Public Utility Commission didn’t adequately fund Texas USF (TUSF). Judge Karin Crump of Travis County District Court in Austin heard livestreamed, virtual oral argument Tuesday on a challenge by AMA TechTel. Crump dismissed a similar challenge by two state telecom associations June 7 (see 2106210048). The Texas Appeals Court for the 3rd Judicial District in Austin will hear the associations’ appeal of that decision Dec. 15, said Texas Assistant Attorney General Carl Myers. “This case is about AMA and AMA only,” and the court should decline relief because “it would take the pot of money ... from the case pending before the 3rd Court of Appeals” and due to lack of jurisdiction, he said. The legislature, not the court, should fix TUSF, he said. The other case’s plaintiffs are ILECs, but AMA is suing from its perspective as a CLEC, said its attorney Kevin Terrazas of Cleveland Terrazas. AMA isn’t asking the court to order the PUC to increase TUSF surcharges, but to follow a law requiring the commission to maintain an adequately funded TUSF. The PUC set the amount AMA should receive, but it isn’t paying that amount, he said: The law gives the PUC discretion on how to fund TUSF but not whether to fund it. Crump believes she made the right decision in the first case but wants to understand the distinctions between cases, the judge said. The hearing continued after our deadline.
As states prepare for a significant role spending broadband funds from the bipartisan infrastructure bill, telecom industry representatives cautioned NARUC Tuesday against applying traditional telephone rules. “States will have a bigger role than they’ve ever had before” since the infrastructure package includes $42.5 billion for broadband deployment that NTIA will distribute to states, said Verizon Director-Public Policy Paul Vasington on a livestreamed, partially virtual NARUC conference panel. State commissioners asked companies to do more to help them resolve customer complaints.
The FCC’s pause on the phasedown for voice-only Lifeline support won't stop the Oregon Public Utility Commission from seeking to make permanent its increase to the state subsidy next week, a PUC spokesperson told us Monday. The PUC temporarily increased the state’s Lifeline subsidy July 28 to $10 from $7 for Sept. 1-Jan. 31 to offset the reduction in federal support and opened a rulemaking that would make it permanent (see 2109160028). “Staff will petition the Oregon PUC at the” Nov. 16 meeting “to issue a notice of permanent rulemaking in which the Oregon subsidy is permanently set at $10.00, effective” Feb. 1, the spokesperson said. The FCC paused the phasedown Friday for one year (see 2111050058).
Verizon disagreed with draft conditions on state LifeLine and customer migration proposed in the California Public Utilities Commission’s Tracfone acquisition review. The CPUC posted comments Friday in docket A.20-11-001 on a proposed decision by Administrative Law Judge Thomas Glegola to conditionally clear the deal that would affect many low-income customers (see 2110150051). California commissioners may vote Nov. 18 on Verizon/Tracfone, which also needs FCC OK.
West Virginia Public Service Commission staff urged strict action against Altice so the cable operator known there as Suddenlink understands "its current inability or unwillingness to provide adequate, safe and reliable cable television service to West Virginia subscribers is simply unacceptable.” Staff, Altice, localities and the state consumer advocate filed briefs Wednesday on the PSC’s Altice probe in case 21-0515-CTV-SC-GI. Altice doesn’t seem to be taking concerns seriously, said staff. “The old saying that ‘actions speak louder than words’ was affirmed by Suddenlink” when executives left early from last month’s hearing (see 2110060056), showing “they had no interest in what” other hearing participants “had to say about Suddenlink’s performance in West Virginia.” Altice failed to provide knowledgeable witnesses, staff added. The Consumer Advocate Division urged the PSC to impose "statutory penalties to the full extent permitted by West Virginia law" and to remediate current Altice customer service practices. The cabler isn’t taking the inquiry seriously, it agreed. Kanawha County supported PSC staff recommendations: “The Commission has received thousands of complaints, and the Staff has responded accordingly, giving those customers a loud voice.” High rates, poor service, no competition and insufficient local franchise leverage are "the result of abusive monopoly power by a loosely regulated service providers,” said Beckley, Charleston and Elkins. The company acknowledged its “performance challenges ... particularly with respect to its delivery of field services and customer care," saying it acted to address problems, is investing millions of dollars in its West Virginia network and is committed to do more. Don’t penalize or take remedial action because staff recommendations exceed commission authority under state and federal law and Altice is “substantially in compliance” with the Cable Act, it said.