Case Background
On March 6, 2019, Cox Florida
Telcom, L.P. d/b/a Cox Communications d/b/a Cox Business d/b/a Cox (Cox) filed
a petition with the Florida Public Service Commission (Commission) for
relinquishment of its Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (ETC) designation in
Florida effective August 1, 2019. Cox has been a Competitive Local Exchange
Carrier in Florida since 2005. On May 31,
2012, Cox filed an application for
designation as an ETC in the state of Florida for purposes of receiving Lifeline support
in its non-rural service areas. On June 15,
2012, Cox filed a separate application for designation as an ETC in its rural service areas. On September
28, 2012, and October 17, 2012, the
Commission issued orders granting Cox’s
applications for ETC designation, respectively.
ETC
designation is a requirement for telecommunications carriers to receive federal
Universal Service Funds for the Lifeline program. The Lifeline program enables
low-income households to obtain and maintain telephone service by providing
qualifying households with discounts on their monthly telephone bills. Since
the inception of the Lifeline program there have been a variety of changes.
However, Cox asserts that the most significant change which has led to its
request for ETC relinquishment was the Federal Communications Commission’s
transition plan that will essentially eliminate the Lifeline discount for
standalone voice service after December 1, 2021.
Cox states
their number of Lifeline customers in Florida has been declining. At the beginning
of 2019, Cox had 498 Lifeline customers, which is only .07 percent of the
Lifeline customers in Florida. Cox contends that the declining trend in
Lifeline customers and the upcoming decrease in federal Lifeline support for
voice service have led to its request for relinquishment.
The Commission is vested with jurisdiction
in this matter pursuant to Sections 364.10, Florida
Statutes, 47
U.S.C. §214 (e)(4) and 47 C.F.R. §54.205.
Discussion
of Issues
Issue 1:
Should the Commission approve Cox's request to
relinquish its ETC designation in Florida?
Recommendation:
Yes. The Commission should approve Cox’s request to
relinquish its ETC designation in Florida. (Deas, Fogleman, Wendel, DuVal)
Staff Analysis:
Federal rules allow an ETC to relinquish its ETC
designation pursuant to 47 C.F.R. §54.205(a), which provides that:
A state commission shall permit an eligible
telecommunications carrier to relinquish its designation as such a carrier in
any area served by more than one eligible telecommunications carrier. An
eligible telecommunications carrier that seeks to relinquish its eligible
telecommunications carrier designation for an area served by more than one
eligible telecommunications carrier shall give advance notice to the state
commission of such relinquishment.
In approving a relinquishment state commissions must
require the remaining ETCs to ensure that existing customers will continue to
be served. 47 C.F.R. §54.205(b), provides that:
Prior to permitting a telecommunications carrier
designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier to cease providing
universal service in an area served by more than one eligible
telecommunications carrier, the state commission shall require the remaining
eligible telecommunications carrier or carriers to ensure that all customers
served by the relinquishing carrier will continue to be served, and shall
require sufficient notice to permit the purchase or construction of adequate
facilities by any remaining eligible telecommunications carrier. The state
commission shall establish a time, not to exceed one year after the state
commission approves such relinquishment under this section, within which such
purchase or construction shall be completed.
In its petition, Cox identified all of the designated ETCs currently
serving in its service territory (Attachment A). A data request was sent to
each of the ETCs identified in Cox’s petition asking each provider to verify
that it is a designated ETC in Cox service areas. ETCs were also asked to
confirm that they currently provide or are capable of providing Lifeline service
to customers in those areas. Staff analyzed and reviewed the responses to
verify that the customers in the relinquished areas would continue to be
served. Based on staff’s review and analysis, staff determined that in Cox’s
service areas, customers will continue to be served by one or more ETC.
In its petition, Cox has asserted that its Lifeline customers will receive
adequate notice to select another ETC to continue receiving the Lifeline
discount. The first notice will be sent to customers, via U.S. Mail, at least
60 days prior to the effective date of the relinquishment. A second notice will
be sent out via bill messages at least 30 days prior to the effective date of
relinquishment. Both notices will explain that Cox will no longer offer a
Lifeline discount. If the customer does not choose another Lifeline provider,
they have the option of being transitioned to Cox Voice service at a new
promotional rate of $9.99 per month for 12 months. Cox’s notice will also
provide a list of Lifeline providers that may offer service in the customers’
service area. Cox plans to stop enrolling customers in the Lifeline program 30
days prior to its relinquishment.
After reviewing Cox’s petition and the responses to the
ETC data requests, staff has verified there will be one or more ETCs remaining
in Cox’s service territory. Therefore, Lifeline service will continue to be available
to customers residing within the relinquishment area if Cox’s petition is
granted. Staff believes Cox has met 47 C.F.R. §54.205 requirements to
relinquish its ETC designation in its service territory. Therefore, staff
recommends that the Commission should approve Cox’s petition for relinquishment
of its ETC designation.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Recommendation:
Yes, if no person whose substantial interests are
affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the
issuance of the order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a Consummating
Order. (DuVal)
Staff Analysis:
At the conclusion of the protest period, if no
protest is filed this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a Consummating
Order.
