Verizon Faces Intensified State Oversight on IP Transition
Verizon faces rising state scrutiny over telecom customers’ exodus from traditional copper. The Maryland Public Service Commission this week joined multiple other East Coast state regulators querying the Fios provider about its handling of the fiber migration. In a letter to the company Wednesday, the Maryland PSC asked Verizon to respond to allegations by the Communications Workers of America that the telco deceived customers into making the IP transition under a policy known as “Fiber is the Only Fix.”
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.
Verizon must respond by July 13 to the CWA claims detailed in the union’s May 3 request for investigation. The telco must also soon answer questions about its copper practices in three other eastern states. In Pennsylvania, Verizon must file its first round of testimony in the state Public Utility Commission’s copper service quality investigation by June 30. The PUC has set more filing deadlines throughout 2016 and scheduled hearings for the week of Feb. 6. In a New York PSC investigation on the same subject, Verizon must file testimony by July 18. The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities is still determining a hearing date for its own Verizon inquiry. “We are currently working with Verizon and the Senator’s Office on securing a date and time,” a BPU spokesman emailed. The board had been waiting for the end of the Verizon strike to schedule hearings (see 1606010052).
Meanwhile, the District of Columbia is floating possible new rules on copper abandonment and backup power, following its own two-year investigation of Verizon. The telco has opposed the proposals as redundant to existing FCC regulations (see 1604200046). Formal comments are due to the D.C. PSC on June 27, with reply comments to follow July 11.
State regulators likely are keeping a closer eye on Verizon as the company seeks to migrate copper customers who haven't adopted fiber voluntarily, said Public Knowledge staff attorney Meredith Rose in an interview. How Verizon informs those customers about the transition and addresses their concerns about possible lost benefits, like a phone that still works in a power outage, will be of strong interest to the states, she said. States have stepped in to protect consumers as an interim measure while the FCC continues work on its tech transition rulemaking (docket 13-5), said Rose, predicting states may transfer their investigations to the federal agency when the FCC proceeding wraps. “Because this is a transition that been ongoing for some time, I think there is … some level of state discontent about what they see as a sub-optimal level of enforcement,” she said.
Verizon has disputed CWA’s characterization of the policy at issue in Maryland, by which copper customers with problems are moved to fiber services. According to the union, Public Knowledge and others who complained, when a customer calls in about a copper-related complaint, the company creates a “ghost” service order to transfer the customer to fiber, without the customer's knowledge. Then Verizon technicians inform customers with copper-related complaints that the company no longer repairs copper lines and the customer must upgrade to fiber; if the customer refuses to upgrade, the telco cuts the line, the complainants said. But Verizon described the practice differently, saying it moves a customer to fiber only if there’s not a simple fix for the copper, and the company explains the situation to customers and asks them for consent before proceeding. CWA also complained to the FCC (see 1605030019).
With its letter to Verizon, the Maryland PSC didn’t formally commence an investigation like those in New York and Pennsylvania, but Verizon's response could inform the state on whether one is needed. “It is a step in the process to determine what further actions would be warranted,” a PSC spokeswoman emailed. In general, when the Maryland PSC receives any request for investigation, options include opening a proceeding with possible hearings, assigning the matter to its Public Utility Law Judge Division, and issuing a data request, she said.
“It’s great that Maryland is looking into this,” Rose said. She questioned how transparent Verizon has been with consumers about the practice. “This is a program of Verizon’s that raised a lot of concerns, especially when applied to vulnerable communities and consumers who are being potentially coerced onto technologies that have their own limitations and don’t always work with the devices that they own.” A Verizon spokesman said the company plans to respond to the Maryland PSC request by its deadline.