AT&T submitted “flawed and erroneous assertions,” California agency judge says.
AT&T’s application to end its landline phone obligations in California is likely to be rejected by state officials following protest from residents worried about losing access to phone lines.
An administrative law judge at the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) recommended rejection of the application in a proposed decision released Friday. The CPUC is set to vote on finalizing the proposed decision at its June 20 meeting.
Administrative Law Judge Thomas Glegola found that AT&T’s application to end its Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) obligation should be dismissed with prejudice. State rules require a replacement COLR in order to relieve AT&T of its duties, but there is no other COLR in AT&T’s wireline territory “and no potential COLR volunteered to replace AT&T,” he wrote.
“It is not clear why AT&T filed this Application, under existing rules, and then attempted to convince the Commission that it should ignore its rules, based on flawed and erroneous assertions regarding the law and regulatory policy that slowed down the adjudication of this proceeding,” Glegola wrote.
AT&T accused of false claims
The proposed decision said AT&T falsely claims that commission rules “require AT&T to retain outdated copper-based landline facilities that are expensive to maintain, or that AT&T needs Commission approval in order to be able to retire copper facilities and instead, invest in more modern technologies such as VoIP, wireless, and fiber.”
In reality, Glegola wrote, the CPUC “does not have rules preventing AT&T from retiring copper facilities. Furthermore, the Commission does not have rules preventing AT&T from investing in fiber or other facilities/technologies to improve its network.”
AT&T has replaced copper lines with fiber in the more profitable areas of its network. “If AT&T’s arguments were accurate, this activity [AT&T’s fiber deployment projects in California] would be illegal,” the proposed decision said.
The utility commission appears likely to approve Glegola’s proposed decision.
“After hearing from consumers across the state and reviewing the evidence in the record, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) today issued a proposal rejecting AT&T’s request to withdraw as a carrier of last resort (COLR) and indicating that the CPUC intends to initiate a new Rulemaking process to address COLR telecommunications service obligations,” a CPUC press release said on Friday.
The new rulemaking would consider whether the state’s carrier-of-last-resort rules should be revised, the proposed decision said.
Ending AT&T’s COLR obligation would make it easier for the company to drop its phone lines, though AT&T said it won’t do so right away. AT&T’s application said the company would keep providing basic phone service in all areas for at least six months and for longer in areas without any alternative voice service.
ARS VIDEO
How Lighting Design In The Callisto Protocol Elevates The Horror
No suitable replacement, agency says
AT&T is the largest carrier of last resort in California and must follow rules requiring universal access to telecommunications service in the parts of California where it is the designated COLR, the CPUC said in its Friday press release. “Where AT&T is the default telephone service provider means that the company must provide traditional telephone service over copper, fiber, cable, Voice over Internet protocol (VoIP), or wireless to any potential customer in that service territory. AT&T is proposing to withdraw as the COLR without a new carrier being designated as a COLR,” the press release said.
The CPUC received over 5,000 public comments responding to AT&T’s application. It also held public forums in three cities and virtual hearings that drew more than 5,800 attendees combined. Residents “highlighted the unreliability of voice alternatives such as mobile wireless or VoIP,” the CPUC said.
“Despite AT&T’s contention that providers of voice alternatives to landline service—such as VoIP or mobile wireless services—can fill the gap, the CPUC found AT&T did not meet the requirements for COLR withdrawal,” the agency press release said. “Specifically, AT&T failed to demonstrate the availability of replacement providers willing and able to serve as COLR, nor did AT&T prove that alternative providers met the COLR definition.”
The CPUC’s proposed decision said the commission rules “do not allow for non-COLR alternatives to replace a COLR.” While a VoIP service could technically meet the definition of a COLR under California rules, the proposed decision said there isn’t another carrier of last resort to replace AT&T:
The alternatives for voice service that AT&T claims can replace its COLR service—including VoIP service from cable companies such as Comcast or Cox, and mobile voice providers such as Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T Mobility—do not meet the definition of a COLR. These companies did not apply to be COLRs and the Commission has not designated them as such. The voice alternatives AT&T claims can replace its COLR service are not required to offer voice service to everyone that requests it. Further, these companies may not even be able to meet that requirement.
AT&T: Monopoly rules are outdated
Santa Cruz County Second District Supervisor Zach Friend called the tentative ruling “a victory for many in our community that rely on landlines as a lifeline,” according to the Santa Cruz Sentinel. “It’s clear there is no adequate backup system for many of our rural residents,” he told the news organization. “Until that is the case, requests to abandon the service, which I believe functionally abandons these residents, have no place coming forward.”Advertisement
AT&T provided Ars with a statement saying it is “disappointed by the CPUC’s proposed dismissal… as we’d hoped the commission would allow us the opportunity to demonstrate why the number of options for voice service available to customers make the COLR obligation unnecessary. Not surprisingly, no providers were interested in bidding on a service with a declining number of customers given the competitive options available in today’s marketplace. We remain committed to keeping our customers connected to voice service and will continue working with state leaders on policies that allow us to bring modern communications to Californians.”
AT&T said the COLR rules are no longer necessary because they were enacted for monopoly providers “when copper-based landlines were a primary means of communication.”
“Today, competition is robust, and the monopoly rationale behind COLR no longer holds,” AT&T said. Fewer than 5 percent of California households served by AT&T still use copper-based landline phone service, the company said.
Other states have granted AT&T’s request to eliminate or relax Carrier-of-Last-Resort obligations. AT&T’s California application said it has received at least some relief from COLR obligations in 20 of the 21 states in its wireline service territory.
