CPUC Denies COLR Relief to AT&T but Will Weigh Updating Rules

The CPUC dismissed AT&T’s COLR relief application despite the carrier raising legal and constitutional concerns in comments and ex parte meetings (see 2405310029). Commissioners agreed to deny the application through a 4-0 vote on a consent agenda. The proposed decision (docket A.23-03-003) received support from local and consumer groups (see 2406050016).

The CPUC will collect feedback this fall on whether to revise COLR rules, under a separate draft order commissioners approved in a 5-0 vote. The proposed rulemaking would adopt “a rebuttable presumption that the COLR construct remains necessary, at least for certain individuals or communities in California,” it said (see 2406110032). Among other questions, the CPUC would ask if any areas may no longer require a COLR, if it should require VoIP or wireless providers to be COLRs, and if it should revise rules on how current COLRs may shed those obligations. The draft said comments would be due Sept. 30, replies Oct. 30.

AT&T’s legal interpretation of California COLR rules was incorrect, Commissioner John Reynolds said. AT&T is investing in newer network technologies despite the obligations, he said: Plus, COLR rules don’t require the company to use copper to meet its obligations. However, given changes to the telecom landscape since the rules were made in 1996, it's time to consider an update, he said. “While the rulemaking may result in a change to COLR rules, what will not change is the commission’s commitment to universal service that provides safe, reliable and affordable communications for all Californians, regardless of the customer's location, financial circumstances or the remoteness and difficulties of the terrain.”

COLRs “are essential to ensuring universal telephone service, especially in our rural areas … with limited or no alternative providers,” said CPUC President Alice Reynolds. She pointed out that the state subsidizes COLRs to offset the high costs of providing service in those areas. “The rules reflect the public’s expectation that all these utility services be dependable," said the president: But it’s also important to modernize the rules to reflect changes over the last 30 years.

Denied relief by the state commission, AT&T turned its attention to the California legislature, AT&T California President Marc Blakeman said in a statement Thursday. State lawmakers should pass AB-2797, which would modify what information telcos must submit to get COLR relief, he said. “No customer will be left without voice and 911 services,” he said.

Under the COLR relief bill supported by AT&T, companies would have to identify “a census block of the telephone corporation’s service territory where there is no population or where the company has no basic exchange telephone service customers,” or “a census block designated as urban where [two] or more different service providers offer alternative voice services … to customers.” Also, the bill would prevent the telco from discontinuing service until it meets certain federal requirements and require them to make some public benefit commitments, including “education to affected customers to explain the benefits and advantages of transitioning to modern networks and services.”

Also at the CPUC meeting, commissioners denied an AT&T 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. The CPUC’s draft resolution (T-17789) found that the plan failed to satisfy the commission’s requirements. In addition, the CPUC approved another draft resolution (T-17816) assessing more than $1 million in fines for Frontier Communications, Consolidated Communications and three other telcos for failing service quality standards in 2023. Commissioners approved both items as part of the 4-0 vote on the consent agenda.

Commissioners approved multiple broadband grants in a series of 4-0 votes. The CPUC cleared CASF broadband infrastructure grants for LCB Communications (about $29.5 million), Surfnet Communications (about $10 million) and CalNeva Broadband (about $519,000). Also, the commission approved $1.3 million from the CASF broadband adoption account for three projects and about $596,000 from the broadband public housing account for six projects. "These grants are essential components to increasing broadband access across California,” said Commissioner Darcie Houck. Also applauding the grants, John Reynolds noted that many of the projects include affordable broadband plans costing at most $15.

The CPUC will set a $136.2 million total budget for CASF in FY 2024-25, under a 4-0 approved resolution that also allocates that cash to the fund’s various programs. Also, the CPUC cleared a proposal to set the annual Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act (DIVCA) fee to 0.0253885 cents per dollar of gross video revenue received by each franchise holder from California subscribers.

Commissioner Matthew Baker recused himself from most of the votes because previously he was director of the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office, which participated in the proceedings. Baker didn’t recuse himself from votes to open a COLR rulemaking or the DIVCA item.