CPUC Clears Foster Youth and BEAD Vol. 1 Rules
The California Public Utilities Commission set next steps for foster youth and broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) programs through two 4-0 votes at a livestreamed meeting Thursday. The vote on extending the CPUC’s current foster youth pilot program beyond July came after multiple delays as the agency and stakeholders considered how to ensure a seamless transition. And even with the first volume of California’s BEAD plan done, much work remains to achieve maximum broadband across the state, California commissioners said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The CPUC originally planned a Feb. 15 vote on the foster youth proposal, but the agency postponed the item multiple times. In March, the agency received a dire warning from the foster youth pilot program’s administrator, iFoster (see 2403110042), saying the current draft would create a program “destined to fail.” In addition, the pilot’s service provider T-Mobile had said neither it nor subsidiary Assurance Wireless would participate in the permanent program after the pilot ends July 31 (see 2401310030). Also, Verizon Wireless’s Tracfone told the commission that it couldn’t say immediately if it would participate.
The CPUC shares concerns that no provider may decide to provide service for the proposed permanent program, said the revised proposal (docket R.20-02-008). Therefore, “staff should be given flexibility through a pilot program to provide wireless services to Foster Youth Program participants,” it said. Under a new pilot, which would start the day the order is issued and last five years, staff could directly or indirectly procure wireless service from a single provider. To ensure successful transition to the new pilot from the old one, with “minimal service disruptions,” the CPUC will require all current participants to be “deemed eligible” for the new pilot and long-term program until May 14, 2025. Also, they “should be automatically transitioned to the new Foster Youth Pilot and Foster Youth Program unless they opt out,” it said.
Commissioner Darcie Houck praised the foster youth decision for ensuring a new pilot “will be in place before the current pilot ends” and foster youth have “uninterrupted wireless service.” Houck particularly praised other aspects of the revised proposal that would allow device costs to be reimbursed and letting foster youth as old as 21 to stay in the program. However, because the original pilot covered ages up to 26, Houck said she wants the agency to monitor whether young people 22-26 get adequate help transitioning to the state LifeLine program.
“Smartphones and the internet can be critical for safety, information and connection, and can be a counterbalance to isolation” for foster youth, said Commissioner John Reynolds. Thursday’s decision will “make sure that foster youth are not negatively impacted through this transition.”
The commission also unanimously approved BEAD rules to implement volume 1 of the state’s initial proposal (see 2404080039). NTIA had on July 4 approved the plan for the state’s challenge process for determining the status of broadband serviceable locations. Thursday’s vote approving the proposed decision in docket R.23-02-016 marks “an important milestone” for California, said Houck. “While we are limited by” NTIA rules, “we intend to conduct a robust challenge process under the rules set out in this proposed decision to make sure that the maps are as accurate as possible,” the commissioner said. She noted a great amount of work ahead to finalize volume 2.
“Even with this significant step … there remains much work to be done,” agreed CPUC President Alice Reynolds. “California is a large state and the cost of deployment is high and rising. We expect that we’ll need every last dollar to ensure Californians have adequate broadband speed at an affordable price.”
Commissioner Matthew Baker recused himself from both votes because he was previously director of the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office, which participated in the proceedings. Meanwhile, the CPUC staff again delayed a vote on an AT&T enforcement item, also postponed many times, that proposes denying the carrier’s plan for correcting failures and improving service after failing to meet the state’s out-of-service repair interval standard in 2021. The commission might take it up May 30, said the agency’s hold list.