Word Document PDF Document

PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Communications Division RESOLUTION T-17284

Carrier Oversight and Programs Branch February 24, 2011

R E S O L U T I O N

RESOLUTION T-17284. This Resolution grants the request of Virgin Mobile USA, LLC dba Virgin Mobile USA L.P. (U-4327-C) for limited eligible telecommunications carrier status within California. The request is reasonable given Virgin Mobile USA LLC has met the requirements for eligible telecommunications carrier designation and General Order 153 Lifeline requirements.

SUMMARY

By this Resolution, the Commission approves the request of Virgin Mobile USA LLC (U-4327-C) [hereafter Virgin] for limited eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) designation in California, for the purpose of offering Federal-only LifeLine services statewide to qualifying end-user customers. The Commission finds that Virgin complies with the federal ETC requirements and the Commission's ETC requirements in Commission Resolution T-17002.

BACKGROUND

Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (ETC) is a federal designation1 given to

a common carrier that is eligible to receive federal support for providing services that are supported by the federal universal support mechanism2 to low-income consumers and/or those in high cost areas of a state.

To be designated an ETC, an applicant must meet the following five generally established ETC requirements:

The FCC encourages state Commissions to apply these requirements to all ETC applicants over which they have jurisdiction. Additionally, the FCC and state commissions must determine that an ETC designation is in the public interest. Factors to be included in the public interest analysis are the following: 1) increased consumer choice, 2) advantages and disadvantages of particular service offerings, and 3) potential for cream-skimming in rural service areas. 4

To be eligible for universal service subsidies, an ETC must offer the services the FCC reimburses through the federal universal service support mechanisms under 47 U.S.C. § 254(c). The ETC can accomplish this either by using its own facilities or through combining its own facilities with resale of another carrier's services. The ETC must advertise the availability of such services and the charges for these services using media of general distribution.5

The primary responsibility for designating a carrier as an ETC rests with state commissions for those carriers over which they have jurisdiction6. In cases where a state does not have jurisdiction over a carrier, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) conducts the ETC designation process.7

To discharge its obligation to evaluate ETC designation requests, the California Public Utilities Commission (hereafter referred to as the Commission or CPUC) issued

Resolution T-17002 in May 2006 that contains comprehensive procedures, guidelines, and reporting requirements that are consistent with, yet broader than federal rules8 for ETC designation requests. Resolution T-17002 reflects the ETC designation requirements found in FCC 97-1579 and portions of FCC 05-4610, which are contained in Appendices A & B of the resolution, and are included as Attachment 1 to this resolution.

In addition to reviewing ETC designation requests for compliance with the federal and CPUC ETC requirements, the Communications Division (CD) staff reviews the requests for compliance with CPUC Lifeline rules contained in General Order (G.O.) 153 and Decision (D.) 10-11-033, and other state regulatory requirements for telephone corporations operating in California, including but not limited to paying CPUC User Fees, Public Purpose Program surcharges, and submitting required reports.

G.O. 153 implements the Moore Universal Telephone Service Act, and contains California LifeLine service requirements for wireline carriers offering basic residential telephone service in California, including twenty-two elements of LifeLine service that carriers must provide. A list of the LifeLine service elements is included in Attachment 2 to this resolution. CD staff has applied the provisions of G.O. 153 in its evaluation of Virgin's ETC designation request. CD recommends that, until the Commission adopts California LifeLine rules for wireless service providers in Phase II of R. 06-05-028, Virgin's federal LifeLine offerings must comply with G.O. 153. Once the CPUC adopts rules for the offering of wireless LifeLine in California, wireless ETCs, including Virgin, must comply with those rules.

On November 19, 2010, the Commission adopted D. 10-11-033, which made changes to the California LifeLine program. The decision allows customers living in Small LEC service areas to choose alternative/non-traditional providers, such as wireless and VoIP, for California LifeLine service11

All telephone corporations operating in California are required to possess a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) for wireline carriers, or a wireless identification number (WIN) for all commercial mobile radiotelephone services (CMRS) providers12. Both of these classes of carriers are required to pay CPUC user fees13 and submit surcharge14 amounts assessed on customers' intrastate telecommunications services to support the CPUC's universal service programs. CD reviews each ETC applicant for compliance with these regulatory requirements as part of the determination as to whether it is in the public interest to approve an ETC designation request.

SUBJECT OF ADVICE LETTER/FILING

On April 29, 2009 Virgin filed its Tier III Advice Letter 1, requesting limited ETC status for the purpose of offering Federal LifeLine services to qualifying California customers. Virgin is not seeking federal Universal Service high-cost support or California state Universal Service support. In this advice letter, Virgin originally proposed to offer Federal LifeLine customers a phone costing $15.00. If the customer purchased the phone, the customer would pay no one-time activation fee and no recurring service charge for up to 120 anytime minutes per month. If the customer exceeds the 120 LifeLine minute cap, the additional minutes would cost $.020 each and $0.10 per text message15.

On June 23, 2009, in response to the Small LEC's protest of Advice Letter (AL) 1, Virgin filed supplement 1A to its advice letter, which narrowed the designated area of Virgin's request to exclude the service territories of the Small LECs, provided service area maps, and committed to abiding by the certification and verification requirements found in G.O. 153.

On March 18, 2010 Virgin filed supplement 1B to its advice letter to notify the Commission that it is now a facilities-based provider of wireless service in California as a result of its acquisition by Sprint Nextel, and that it intends to launch a new service plan that offers offer Federal LifeLine customers 500 minutes per month for $5.00 (with a free handset to the LifeLine customer under this plan). AL 1B also revised the original 120-minute plan in AL 1 with 200 minutes at no charge. Both plans would offer Caller ID, Call Waiting, and voicemail, and nationwide long distance at no extra charge, with all taxes included in the price for the $5/500 plan and waived for the 200-minute plan. In AL 1B, Virgin proposed to price additional call minutes for both plans at $0.10 per minute and text messages would cost $0.15, rather than $0.10 each. Virgin stated that its remittance of public purpose program surcharges and the CPUC User Fee is current.

On August 23, 2010, Virgin filed supplement 1C to provide additional information demonstrating that it satisfies applicable ETC designation requirements regarding offering federal universal service fund supported services, the ability to remain functional in emergency situations, meeting consumer protection and service quality standards, and to provide equal access to long distance carriers if all other ETCs relinquish their designation within Virgin's ETC designated territory.

On November 4, 2010 Virgin filed supplement 1D to increase its free 200 minute plan to 250 minutes, and to allow a customer to purchase 750 additional minutes for an additional $20 per month, for a combined total of 1,000 minutes for voice and text messages ($20/1,000). Virgin also reduced the price of individual text messages from $0.15 proposed to $0.10. 16

The following summarizes proposed Virgin's Federal LifeLine offerings:

(1) 500 anytime minutes for $5.00 per month (which includes all taxes)17

(2) 1,000 anytime minutes for $20.00 per month ( 250 minutes for free with the

purchase of 750 minutes for $20.00, taxes included)19

(3) 250 anytime minutes for free.

Virgin is a Delaware based limited liability company (LLC) with principal offices at 10 Independence Blvd., Warren New Jersey. Virgin is a facilities-based wireless service provider20, to which the Commission issued a registration, number WIN U-4327-C, on April 16, 2002. A copy of this authorization is included in this resolution as Attachment 3. Requirements for providing service in California include, but are not limited to, payment of surcharges and fees. Failure to comply with the requirements as identified in Virgin's April 16, 2002 wireless identification authorization may result in revocation of the WIN21

NOTICE/PROTEST

Virgin filed its Advice Letter for ETC status on April 29, 2009, and the filing was published in the Commission's Daily Calendar on May 1, 2009.

On May 14, 2009, the Small LECs requested a 10-day extension of time, until May 28, 2009, to file a protest to Virgin's AL. The request was granted on May 19, 2009.

On May 28, 2009, the Small LECs filed a Protest pursuant to G.O. 96-B § 7.4.2(2), 22 recommending that the CPUC reject Virgin's advice letter, or alternatively reject the advice letter subject to re-filing a revised version that would exclude the Small LECs' service territories from the areas in which Virgin proposes to offer federal Lifeline service. The Small LECs claim that even if Virgin resubmits the ETC advice letter to exclude offering Federal LifeLine service in the Small LEC service areas, the CPUC still should hold the request in abeyance at least until the CPUC more fully considers the implications of providing LifeLine funding to wireless providers in proceeding R.06-05-028 (Universal Service reform).

The Small LECs assert that Virgin has not complied with federal ETC requirements to offer service throughout a rural LEC's service area23 and to demonstrate that it is in the public interest to grant Virgin ETC designation in rural areas 24. The Small LECs allege that granting Virgin ETC designation in Small LEC territories places these carriers at a competitive disadvantage. Additionally, the Small LECs assert that Virgin does not expressly state that it will abide by G.O. 153, and has asked for a waiver from the requirement to provide service area maps. The Small LECs submit that these maps are necessary to understand the areas that Virgin intends to serve and whether these areas are in Small LEC areas and subject to the FCC's requirements for small rural LECs.

The Small LECs also argue that the CPUC should not grant Virgin ETC designation prior to the CPUC's completion of the Universal Service reform proceeding, because it is unclear in what terms and conditions the CPUC will adopt for the offering of wireless LifeLine services in California. As a consequence, the Small LECs argue, customer confusion will result from having two LifeLine programs available in the state.

DISCUSSION

I. Did Virgin Comply With Federal ETC Eligibility Requirements?

CD concludes that Virgin has complied with Federal requirements for ETC's.25 Virgin is now a facilities-based provider since being acquired by Sprint Nextel on November 24, 2009, and will offer services that are supported by the USF. Virgin also will advertise the availability of its Federal LifeLine services through general advertising media that it uses for its non-Lifeline service. The advertisements will include a combination of general media, social service/government agencies, and third-party retail outlets through brochure distribution.

CD also concludes that Virgin has complied with other FCC ETC eligibility requirements26, because it (1) has committed to provide the supported services, as previously discussed; (2) has demonstrated the ability to remain functional in an emergency situation through internal programs and policies, and teams dedicated to analyzing, assessing and responding to emergency situations; (3) has committed to satisfy consumer protection and service quality standards, and complies with the CTIA Consumer Code for Wireless Service; (4) offers a local usage plan comparable to that provided by the ILEC; and (5) acknowledges that it may be required to provide equal access to long distance carriers if all other ETCs in the service area relinquish their ETC status.

Comparable Local Usage Analysis

Neither the CPUC nor the FCC has adopted minimum local usage standards or quantity of minutes to measure comparability. However, the FCC encourages state commissions to consider whether an ETC offers a local usage plan comparable to those offered by the incumbents in examining whether the ETC applicant provides adequate local usage to receive designation as an ETC and does not prevent states from determining what the minimum number of local usage minutes should be for an applicant to be awarded ETC status.27

No specific federal or state policies or standards for comparable local usage for wireless carriers exist. Consequently, CD used CPUC General Order (G.O.) 153 call allowance rules and Decision (D.)10-11-033 pricing rules for Measured Rate (MR) Lifeline service as a baseline in evaluating Virgin's request regarding the comparable local usage requirement. The Commission adopted the use of G.O. 153 for evaluating wireless carriers' requests for ETC designation in Resolution T-17266, Ordering Paragraph 3.

Under G.O. 153, MR wireline Lifeline customers are given a call allowance of 60 untimed outgoing calls. Calls in excess of the call allowance are priced at $.08 per call.28 D.10-11-033 adopted a price range for MR Lifeline service with a floor of $2.50 and a cap of $3.66 per month29. Virgin has three plans that it proposes to offer to Lifeline customers, as identified on page 5. These plans are similar to wireline MR service, providing a base level of usage for a set fee with additional charges for usage in excess of the base amount.

In evaluating wireless LifeLine plans that have similar characteristics to wireline MR service, CD deemed it appropriate to determine how many wireless MOU a wireless MR Lifeline customer should receive, and at what cost, based on G.O. 153 MR criteria and wireless industry average length of call data, and D.10-11-033 LifeLine measured rate service rates.

For its analysis, CD used wireless MOU, average bill, and average revenue per MOU data for the six-month period ending December 31, 2008 from Table 19 of the FCC's 14th Mobile Wireless Competition Report to Congress (14th Report) and data for the same period from the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association's (CTIA) Semi-Annual Wireless Industry Survey30. CD used the 2008 data because the FCC data ended at that period, even though the CTIA data went through the six-month period ending June 30, 2010. See Attachment 5 for summaries of the FCC and CTIA data used by CD.

In order to evaluate Virgin's offerings on a consistent and comparable basis with G.O. 153 MR lifeline service requirements, CD converted the G.O. 153 MR per call allowance to the minute of use (MOU) unit of measure that Virgin's plans are based on by using CTIA average call length data.

CD estimated the average number of MOU per month that a typical wireless customer would reasonably be expected to use for purposes of estimating what each of Virgin's plans could cost an average Lifeline customer. CD estimated that a Lifeline customer with average monthly voice usage would use an average of 769 voice MOU per month for local calls. To arrive at this estimate, CD used data from the 14th Report, dividing the average local monthly bill (excluding data) by the average revenue for voice minute ($38.45/$0.05 = 769 MOU). See Attachment 6 for pricing details.

CD further estimated that a wireless lifeline customer should get 146 wireless voice MOU's per month, and calculated this amount by multiplying the average call length from the CTIA study, by the G.O. 153 call allowance (2.43 minutes*60 untimed calls = 146 MOU). Using these estimates, CD determined that a typical wireless Lifeline customer will use 623 MOU in excess of the estimate of the G.O. 153 MR calculated MOU monthly call allowance (769 average monthly voice MOU - 146 calculated MOU call allowance = 623 excess MOU). CD calculated the cost of each excess MOU to be $.033 ($.08 per call in excess of allowance/2.43 average minutes per call).

CD therefore, estimates that a wireless Lifeline plan that is consistent with G.O. 153 MR service requirements and D.10-11-033 MR pricing policies would cost a Lifeline customer between $23.07 [$2.50 allowance + ($.033*623 excess MOU)] and $24.23 [$3.66 allowance + ($.033*623 excess MOU)] per month for 769 local voice only MOU.

To determine if Virgin's Lifeline plans are comparable to CPUC local usage requirements for MR service, CD compared each of Virgin's proposed plans priced using 769 monthly average local voice MOUs to the cost of MR LifeLine plans based on G.O. 153 and D.10-11-033 requirements with 769 average monthly MOUs. CD concludes that only Virgin's 1,000 minutes for $20.00 plan is comparable to G.O. 153/D.10-11-033 MR requirements when converted to MOU's, and using 769 wireless average monthly local voice MOU. The table below shows a comparison of each plan.

Estimated Cost of Virgin Mobile's Plans Compared to G.O. 153 Measured Rate Calculated Costs for 769 MOU

 

Virgin 250 Minute Plan

Virgin - 500 Minute Plan

Virgin - 1,000 Minute Plan

AT&T

Estimate per G.O. 153

Verizon

Estimate G.O. 153

LifeLine Plan Cost to Customer

$51.90

$31.90

$20.00

$23.07 to $24.23

$23.07 to $24.23

Caller ID, Call Waiting, Long Distance, Voicemail and Tax Cost

$0

$0

$0

$17.06 to $17.09***

$31.47 to $31.50

Total Cost to LifeLine Customer for 769** MOU

$ 51.90

$ 31.90

$ 20.00

$ 40.12 to $41.32*

$ 54.53 to $55.73*

* Price range reflects $2.50 LifeLine floor and $3.66 cap established in D. 10-11-033.

** 769 MOU reflects calculated average local wireless usage based upon FCC and CTIA Data.

*** CD could not find an AT&T package that contained all the elements Virgin Mobile has included in its packages. Neither AT&T or Verizon packages include Call Waiting.

Because Virgin's plans include free nationwide long distance, caller I.D., voice mail, and Call Waiting in addition to local calling, CD believes that for comparison purposes it is appropriate to consider what a Lifeline customer would pay under G.O. 153 for MR service with these additional features. CD used the cost of ILEC packages that include the additional features contained in Virgin's plans to calculate the cost of G.O. 153/D.10-11-033 based MR service and compared the results to the calculated cost of Virgin's plans using the 769 average local voice MOU.

CD finds that only one of Virgin Mobile's three plans ($20.00/1,000 minutes) is comparable to the cost of ILEC measured rate LifeLine plans. However, when the cost of the additional features is factored into the analysis, CD considers the cost all three of Virgin's LifeLine plans comparable to the ILEC plans with the additional features. Virgin's most expensive plan for 769 MOUs, its 250 free anytime minutes Lifeline plan, is $2.63 lower than the lowest Verizon's LifeLine offering, when the advanced features are considered.

II. Is Granting ETC Status to Virgin in the Public Interest?

The Small LECs allege that Virgin has not demonstrated that granting it ETC status is in the public interest. However Virgin states, "...[t]here is no question that limited designation of Virgin Mobile as an ETC in California would promote the public interest by providing low-income California consumers with more affordable and higher quality wireless services."31

CD believes that Virgin Mobile meets the FCC's three criterion for being in the public interest. Virgin Mobile will increase consumer choice by providing wireless LifeLine service to areas that do not currently have wireless options. The advantages of Virgin Mobile's offering outweigh the disadvantages. The advantages to Virgin's offering 1,000 anytime minutes for $20.00 including (1) Caller ID, Call Waiting, and free voicemail; (2) receipt of a free handset; (3) expanded local calling area; (4) no credit check, deposit, or contract; (5) no customer bills or termination fees; and (6) telephone mobility.

The disadvantages of the wireless service include the potential that the handset is removed from the home and poor mobile reception resulting from weather conditions, terrain, or gaps in service coverage. CD believes that customers can exercise judgment in determining whether the Virgin wireless service meets their needs given customer-specific circumstances and location.

There is no possibility of cream-skimming in rural areas because Virgin Mobile is not requesting Federal High Cost funding.

In addition to the three FCC established public interest criteria, CD considered what the total cost of each of Virgin Mobile's plans is to LifeLine customers that have average MOU per month. CD does not consider it to be in the public interest to recommend a plan that costs the LifeLine customer more than an off-the-shelf retail priced wireless plan. Attachment 8 compares the three Virgin proposed Lifeline offerings to the off-the-shelf wireless offerings of Virgin's PayLo, AT&T wireless, Verizon Wireless, Sprint, Metro PCS. CD concludes that only Virgin's $20.00 for 1,000 minute plan meets CD's additional public interest.

Both Virgin Mobile's 250 free anytime minutes plan and its 500 minutes for $5.00 plans are more expensive to the LifeLine customer than Virgin's own PayLo 1500 minutes plan for $30.00 (see Attachment 8).

The LifeLine customer subscribing to Virgin's 250 minutes free plan, would pay $51.90 for 769 minutes, whereas a LifeLine customer would only pay $30.00 for Virgin's PayLo service, and save $ 21.90. Virgin's $5.00 for 500 minute plan costs nearly $2.00 ($1.90) more than Virgin's non-LifeLine PayLo plan. It is for this reason, CD believes the offering of these two plans would not be in the public interest, and does not recommend that these plans be approved by the Commission.

Virgin's 1,000 minutes for $20.00 plan offers the LifeLine customer significant cost savings over the off-the-shelf retail offerings available (see attachment 8). CD finds that this plan is in the public interest and recommends that the Commission approve it.

Based on consideration of the comments by the Small LECs, and CD's analysis, the Commission rejects the Small LEC's claim that Virgin did not demonstrate that its designation as an ETC would be in the public interest.

III. Did Virgin Comply With State Requirements?

Resolution T-17002 ETC Designation Compliance

CD believes that Virgin has met thirteen of the fourteen ETC requirements found in Resolution T-17002. Attachment 4 to this resolution provides an evaluation of Virgin's request for compliance with Commission rules. Two of the elements, local usage requirement and public interest determination, are also part of the Federal Eligibility requirements and were previously discussed in that section of this resolution.

Virgin did not provide a list of geographic service areas, .shp files for the service area maps provided and shade the map to identify the location of cell sites, now that Virgin is a facilities based carrier. As a result, CD recommends that Virgin be required to provide the Communications Division Director a list of geographic service areas and a compact disc with computer readable .shp files for the service area maps provided previously, and to include on the maps the location of cell sites, as required by Resolution T-17002, five business-days prior to offering lifeline service to customers.

G.O. 153 Basic Elements of Service Compliance

CD finds that Virgin's offering does not meet four of the twenty-two elements of basic service set forth in G.O. 15332 (see Attachment 2 for a complete list):

CD also believes that G.O. 153 § 4.2 LifeLine enrollment procedures provide a reasonable means for wireless carriers, including Virgin, to determine if a prospective LifeLine customer is eligible for LifeLine service. Therefore, until the Commission establishes rules for wireless ETC applicants in California, CD recommends that G.O. 153 LifeLine certification and verification rules continue to be used in evaluating wireless carrier ETC designation requests.

Based upon CD's analysis, the Commission agrees that Virgin has met the California ETC designation requirements for offering Federal LifeLine service.

IV. Has Virgin Complied with Federal ETC Requirements Regarding Offering

Service Throughout a Rural LECs Service Area, and Will the Small LECs be

Placed at a Competitive Disadvantage?

The Small LECs assert that Virgin has not complied with federal ETC requirements regarding offering service throughout a rural LEC's service area. Virgin responded by submitting AL 1A, which revised its proposed service area to be limited to those portions of the state served by carriers subject to the Commission's Uniform Regulatory Framework36, but did not respond to the allegation that the Small LECs would be at a competitive disadvantage if the CPUC designates Virgin as a limited ETC in California.

While Virgin has amended its ETC designation request to limit its service area to the areas served by the URF carriers, excluded Small LEC areas, and provided the required maps, CD believes the exclusion of Small LEC territory is no longer necessary in light of CPUC D. 10-11-033 issued on November 19, 2010. In that decision, the Commission placed no geographic restrictions on the service offerings of wireless LifeLine providers37. As such, Virgin should be allowed to offer LifeLine supported service to qualifying California customers as it originally requested38

Additionally, CD does not find the Small LECs argument of competitive disadvantage resulting from designating Virgin an ETC to be persuasive. In D.10-11-033, the Commission found that the rate-of-return carriers' overall financial results would not differ if wireless carriers receive LifeLine support for customers living in the rate-of-return carriers' service territory39.

Based upon CD's review of the comments by the Small LECs and CD's analysis, the Commission approves Virgin's request to provide Federal LifeLine throughout California, and rejects the Small LECs' allegation Virgin's designation as an ETC places them at a competitive disadvantage.

V. Did Virgin Demonstrate Compliance with G.O. 153 Certification

and Verification Requirements?

The Small LECs allege that Virgin has not committed to comply with G.O. 153 certification and verification requirements. Virgin responded in its AL 1A that it will abide by the requirements of G.O. 153, including those governing customer certification and verification, to the extent the Commission applies these requirements to wireless carriers40.

G.O. 153 requires that a verification form be sent annually to California LifeLine customers to determine continued program eligibility41. In California, certification and verification are accomplished through a third-party administrator or certification agent42, currently Solix. CD recommends that Virgin be required to comply with G.O. 153 requirements, including the third-party certification and verification process, and that Virgin not be allowed to provide Federal LifeLine service to a California customer until the third-party verification process for that customer has been completed and is operational.

Based on CD's analysis, the Commission adopts CD's recommendation that Virgin be required to comply with requirements in G.O. 153 pertaining to the third-party verification agent.

VI. Would Virgin's ETC Designation in Advance of Concluding the Commission's

Review of the Telecommunications Public Policy Programs (R. 06-05-028) Result

in Customer Confusion?

The Small LECs argue that the CPUC should not grant Virgin ETC designation, prior to completion of the CPUC's Rulemaking (R. 06-05-028) regarding Universal Service reform. The Small LECs further assert that it is unclear what form wireless LifeLine offerings will take in California; accordingly, they argue, customer confusion will result from having two LifeLine programs in the state. Virgin did not respond to this assertion.

Commission order D. 10-11-033, issued on November 19, 2011 in R. 06-05-028, allows LifeLine customers to choose alternative LifeLine providers, thus rendering this Small LEC request moot.

CD believes that Virgin can provide sufficient disclosure to customers to minimize confusion. CD recommends that Virgin be required to clearly label its LifeLine service as being offered under the Federal program to ensure no confusion between the two programs. CD also recommends that Virgin submit its LifeLine marketing materials to CD for review for clarity prior to their publication.

VII. Summary of CD Recommendations

CD recommends that Virgin's limited ETC designation request be approved with the following conditions until such time that the Commission adopts specific LifeLine rules for wireless carriers:

CD recommends that G.O. 153 be used as a guideline and part of evaluating wireless carrier ETC designation requests until such time that the Commission adopts wireless LifeLine rules for California.

COMMENTS

Public Utilities Code Section 311(g)(1) requires that the Commission (1) serve a draft resolution on all parties, and (2) make that draft resolution available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days or more, prior to a vote of the Commission on the resolution. On January 25, 2011, the Commission distributed a draft of this resolution for comments to the Virgin Service List, utilities and other interested parties.

FINDINGS

3. On May 28, 2009 the Small LECs, filed Late Protest against Advice Letter 1.

4. Virgin supplemented Advice Letter 1 on June 23, 2009 with Advice Letter 1A,

limiting its ETC designation request to the service areas of the URF ILECs, and

provided service area maps.

5. On March 18, 2010 Virgin filed Advice Letter 1B, modifying/expanding its

LifeLine offering and declaring it was now a facilities-based wireless carrier.

6. On August 23, 2010 Virgin filed Advice Letter 1C, specifically committing to the

requirements of Resolution T-17002.

7. On November 4, Virgin filed Advice Letter 1D, modifying/expanding its LifeLine

offering.

10. Virgin has committed to provide the services supported by the USF.

11. Virgin has demonstrated the ability to remain functional in an emergency

12. Virgin has committed to satisfy consumer protection and service quality

13. Virgin acknowledges that it may be required to provide equal access to long

14. It is in the public interest to designate Virgin as an ETC to offer Federal LifeLine

15. Virgin has not met four of the G.O. 153 elements of basic telephone services,

16. Virgin is authorized a waiver from the G.O.153 requirements that it offer free

incoming calls to customers, flat rate service, offer one free directory listing per

year, and provide a free white pages directory.

17. Virgin's 1,000 minutes for $20.00 plan is comparable to the local usage

18.Virgin's 1,000 minutes for $20.00 plan is in the public interest, and should be

approved.

19. Virgin's 250 Free Anytime minutes and its 500 minutes for $5.00 LifeLine plans

are more expensive than its off-the-shelf retail PayLo 1500 minutes plan, therefore

is not in the public interest

20. The free component of Virgin's 250 Free Anytime Minutes plan and the 1,000

minutes for $20.00 plans do not comply with D. 10-11-033's pricing policies for

measured rate service and should not be approved.

21. Virgin should clearly label its LifeLine offering as Federal LifeLine to minimize

customer confusion between State and Federal LifeLine programs, and to provide

copies of marketing materials to CD staff for review of message clarity prior to

publication.

22. Virgin's ETC designation is contingent upon Virgin complying with

Commission rules, including continuing to pay public purpose surcharges and

PUC user fees.

23. Virgin should comply with G.O. 153's certification and verification with Solix to

establish customer's LifeLine eligibility, and not be allowed to begin to offer

lifeline service to customers until the verification and certification process has

been put into place with the 3rd party administrator and is operational. Virgin

should be required to inform the Communications Division Director within five

business-days of when these processes are put into place and are operational.

24. It is reasonable to use Commission rules and policies for California LifeLine

service, including D. 10-11-033 and G.O. 153 for evaluating ETC designation

requests, including Federal LifeLine offerings by wireless carriers until the

Commission adopts specific rules for wireless LifeLine offerings.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that:

9. Virgin Mobile USA LLC must provide the Communications Division Director a

list of geographic service areas, a compact disc with computer readable .shp files

for the service area maps provided previously, and include on the maps the

location of cell sites, as required by Resolution T-17002 five business-days prior to

offering lifeline service to customers.

This resolution is effective today.

I certify that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted at a conference of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California held on _______________, the following Commissioners voting favorably thereon:

Resolution T-17002

Appendix A

Comprehensive Procedures and Guidelines

For

Eligible Telecommunications Carrier Designation

Each telecommunications carrier seeking eligible telecommunications carrier designation must file an advice letter with the Commission with the following information:

Section I - Compliance with FCC 97-157

A) The service areas for which the carrier is requesting ETC designation including a List of Geographic Service Areas and a map in .shp format showing the proposed service area. For wireless petitioners, the map should identify the location of cell sites and shade the area where the carrier provides commercial mobile radio service or similar service.

B) An itemized list of the designated services to be provided, i.e.

C) A list of any services which the carrier proposes not to provide and for which the carrier is seeking an extension of time.

D) An indication of whether the carrier plans to apply for a waiver of the requirement that an ETC not disconnect lifeline for non-payment of toll.

E) A description of the carrier's advertising plan, indicating the advertising media to be used, and an explanation of how its plan meets the advertising requirement in section 214(e) of the Telecommunications Act.

F) If necessary, implement tariff changes via the advice letter filing process. This provision would not apply to carriers that are not required to maintain tariffs.

G) If applicable, request additional time to perform network upgrades to provide single-party service, access to E911 service, and/or toll limitation to low income customers.

Section II - Compliance with FCC 05-46

A) Commitment to Provide Service

B) Submission of Two-Year Service Quality Improvement Plan

Carriers should provide this information for each wire center in each service area for which they expect to receive universal service support. Service quality improvements in the two-year plan do not necessarily require additional construction of network facilities.

C) Ability to Remain Functional

In order to be designated as an ETC, the carrier must demonstrate that it has back-up power to ensure functionality without an external power source, is able to reroute traffic around damaged facilities, and is capable of managing traffic spikes resulting from emergency situations.

D) Consumer Protection

The carrier seeking ETC designation should demonstrate its commitment to meet consumer protection and service quality standards in its application. Thus, an ETC applicant should report information on consumer complaints per 1,000 handsets or lines on an annual basis. Likewise, a carrier should commit to serve the entire service area and provide two-year network improvement plans addressing each wire center for which it expects to receive support.

E) Local Usage

The carrier should be able to demonstrate that it offers a local usage plan comparable to the one offered by the incumbent LEC in the service areas for which the carrier seeks designation.

F) Equal Access

The carrier should be able to provide equal access if all other ETCs in the service area relinquish their designations pursuant to section 214 (e) (4) of the ACT.

G) Public Interest Determination

The carrier should be able to show that the carrier's designation as an ETC is consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. Therefore, the ETC applicant should demonstrate: that the designation will increase consumer choices, the advantages and disadvantages of its service offerings, and the absence of creamskimming.

Appendix B

Comprehensive Reporting Requirements

For

Eligible Telecommunications Carriers

Eligible for Federal High-Cost Support

Each telecommunications carrier eligible for federal universal service high-cost support must file an advice letter with the Commission with the following information:

Section I - Compliance with FCC 03-249

Section II - Compliance with FCC 05-46

A. A two-year service quality improvement plan, including, as appropriate, maps detailing progress towards meeting its prior two-year improvement plan, explanations of how much universal service support was received and how the support was used to improve service quality in each wire center for which designation was obtained, and an explanation of why network improvement targets, if any, have not been met. If a designated ETC has submitted a five-year plan in a GRC application that has been approved by the Commission and is still in effect, the carrier may refer to its GRC filing and submit a progress report on the plan covered by the GRC.

B. Detailed information on outages in the ETC's network caused by emergencies, including the date and time of onset of the outage, a brief description of the outage, the particular services affected by the outage, the geographic areas affected by the outage, and steps taken to prevent a similar outage situation in the future. If an ETC has submitted a Major Service Interruptions report in accordance with CPUC Memorandum dated October 5, 1977, the ETC need not submit the same report. However, in their self-certification letter, the ETC should cite the date(s) of submission of the report; and

C. Information on the number of unfulfilled requests for service from potential customers for the past year and the number of complaints per 1,000 handsets or lines. If an ETC has submitted the Held Primary Service Order and Customer Trouble Reports in accordance with Sections 3.1 and 3.3 of G. O. 133-B, the ETC need not submit the same reports. However, in their self-certification letter, the ETC should cite the date(s) of submission of the reports.

Virgin's Compliance with the Service Elements of LifeLine

Source: Virgin's Advice Letters 1 - 1D

December 10, 2010

 

Service Element of LifeLine

In Compliance

Comments

1)

Access to single party local exchange service that is substantially equivalent to single party local exchange service.

Yes

 
       

2)

Access to all interexchange carriers offering service in the LifeLine customer's local exchange.

Yes

 
       

3)

Ability to place calls

Yes

 
       

4)

Ability to receive free incoming calls

No

Virgin does not provide this.

       

5)

Free touch-tone dialing

Yes

 
       

6)

Free unlimited access to 911/E-911

Yes

 
       

7)

Access to local directory assistance (DA). Each utility shall offer its LifeLine customers the same number of free DA calls that it provides to its non-LifeLine customers.

Yes

 
       

8)

Access to foreign Numbering Plan Areas.

Yes

 
       

9)

LifeLine rates and charges.

Yes

 
       

10)

Customer choice of flat-rate local service or measured-rate local service. The 17 smaller LECs identified in D. 96-10-066 do not have to offer LifeLine customers the choice unless they offer the choice to their non-LifeLine customers.

No

Virgin offers a measured- rate to all customers.

       

11)

Free provision of one directory listing per year as provided for in D. 96-02-072.

No

No Publicly available wireless listings of telephone numbers are available.

Virgin's Compliance with the Service Elements of LifeLine

Source: Virgin's Advice Letters 1 - 1D

December 10, 2010

 

Service Element of LifeLine

In Compliance

Comments

12)

Free white pages telephone directory

No

Wireless carriers do not provide this resource.

       

13)

Access to operator service.

Yes

 
       

14)

Voice grade connection to the public switched telephone network.

Yes

 
       

15)

Free Access to 800 or 800-like toll-free services.

Yes

There is no additional charge for 800 access; however usage minutes are deducted.

       

16)

Access to telephone relay services as provided for in PU Code § 2881 et seq.

Yes

Hearing impaired service.

       

17)

Toll free access to customer service for information about LifeLine, service activation, service termination, service repair, and bill inquires.

Yes

 
       

18)

Toll free access to customer service representatives fluent in the language (English and non-English) the LifeLine service was originally sold in.

Yes

 
       

19)

Free access to toll blocking service.

N/A

Virgin service provides uniform pricing for local and long distance calls.

       

20)

Free access to toll control service, but only if (i) the utility is capable of offering toll-control service, and (ii) the LifeLine customer has no unpaid bill for toll service.

N/A

Virgin service provides uniform pricing for local and long distance calls.

Virgin's Compliance with the Service Elements of LifeLine

Source: Virgin's Advice Letters 1 - 1D

December 10, 2010

 

Service Element of LifeLine

In Compliance

Comments

21)

Access to two residential telephone lines if a low income household with a disabled person requires both lines to access LifeLine

Yes

 

22)

Free access to the California Relay Service via 711 abbreviated dialing code.

Yes

 
       

California ETC Requirements

Resolution T-17002

Virgin Mobile USA, LLC (U-4327)

Each carrier seeking ETC status must file an Advice Letter containing the following information

Section I - Compliance with FCC 97-157

Requirement

In Compliance

Comments

A) Provide the service areas for which the carrier is requesting ETC designation, including a list of Geographic Service Areas and a map in .shp format showing the proposed service area. For wireless petitioners, the map should identify the location of cell sites and shade the area where the carrier provides commercial mobile radio service or similar service

No

Virgin is facilities based, and did not provide this element.

     

B) Provide an itemized list of the designated services to be provided, i.e. single party service, voice grade access to the PSTN, etc.

Yes

 
     

C) Provide a list of any services which the carrier proposes not to provide and for which the carrier is seeking an extension of time.

Yes

 
     

D) Provide an indication of whether the carrier plans to apply to apply for a waiver of the requirement that an ETC not disconnect lifeline for non-payment of toll.

Yes

 
     

E) Provide a description of the carrier's advertising plan, including the advertising media to be used, and an explanation of how its plan meets the advertising requirement in section 214(e) of the Telecommunications Act.

Yes

 
     

F) If necessary, implement tariff changes via the advice letter filing process. This provision would not apply to carriers that are not required to maintain tariffs.

N/A

Wireless carriers do not have tariffs.

     

G) If applicable, request additional time to perform network upgraded to provide single party service, access to E911 service and/or toll limitation to low-income customers.

Yes

 

California ETC Requirements

Resolution T-17002

Virgin Mobile USA, LLC (U-4327)

Each carrier seeking ETC status must file an Advice Letter containing the following information

Section II - Compliance with FCC 05-46

Requirement

In Compliance

Comments

A) A commitment to provide Service: The ETC applicant must demonstrate that it has the commitment and ability to provide supported services throughout the designated area by providing services to all requesting customers within its designated service area.

Yes

 
     

B) The ETC must submit a 2 year Service Quality Improvement Plan.

N/A

Virgin is not requesting High-Cost support.

     

C)Ability to Remain Functional: The ETC applicant must demonstrate the ability to remain functional in an emergency situation.

Yes

 
     

D) Consumer Protection: The ETC applicant should demonstrate its commitment to consumer protection and service quality standards.

Yes

 
     

E) Local Usage: The ETC applicant should show that it offers a local usage plan comparable to the plan offered by the incumbent local exchange carrier in the area it seeks to offer service in.

Yes for (1) out of the (3) plans

The $20.00/1,000 minute plan meets this requirement.

No for (2) out of the (3) plans

The $0.00/250 minute plan and the $5.00/500 minutes plan do not meet this requirement.

     

F) Equal Access: The ETC applicant should be able to provide equal access if all other ETCs in the territory relinquish their designation.

Yes.

 
     

G) Public Interest Determination: The ETC applicant should be able to show its designation will increase consumer choices, the advantages and disadvantages of its service offerings, and the absence of creamskimming.

Yes

 
     

Table I

Conversion of Measured Rate Call Allowance to Wireless MOUs

FCC Average Local Voice MOU

   

769

G.O. 153 Call Allowance

 

60 untimed calls

 

CTIA Average Call Duration

 

X 2.43 Minutes

 

G.O. 153 Call Allowance in MOU

   

<146>

MOU in Excess of G.O. 153 Allowance

   

623

       
       

Table II

Pricing of Converted MOUs per G.O. 153 & D. 10-11-033

D. 10-11-033 Measured Rate Price Call Allowance Range for first 146 MOU (60 calls allowance)

 

$ 2.50

$ 3.66

Price of 623 MOU in Excess of 146 MOU allowance

$0.033 ($.08 per call/2.43 average call duration)

$20.57

$20.57

Total G.O. 153/D. 10-11-033 Cost for 769 MOU

 

$ 23.07

$ 24.23

       
       

1 C.F.R § 54.201

2 C.F.R § 54.101

3 FCC 05-46 §IV. ETC Designation Process ¶20

4 FCC 05-46 § IV.B

5 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(1)

6 47 U.S.C § 214(e)(2).

7 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(6).

8 Resolution T - 17002, pg. 2 ,"CPUC finds that additional mandatory requirements for ETC designation and ETC eligibility reasonable as it provides a means to monitor and ensure that any funds given to California ETCs are used to achieve the goals of universal service."

9 FCC 97-157, adopted May 7, 1997, established the definition of services to be supported by the federal USF support mechanism and a timetable for implementation. It also adopted the statutory criteria in 47 U.S.C. §214(e) as the rules to govern which carriers are eligible to receive federal USF support.

10 FCC 05-46, Docket No. 96-45, adopted February 25, 2005, addressed the minimum requirements for a telecommunications carrier to be designated an ETC.

11 See D. 10-11-033, mimeo, at 72

12 See D. 94-10-031.

13 See P.U. Code § 432.

14 See D. 96-10-066 (8)(g).

15 See Virgin AL 1, at 7

16 See Virgin AL 1D, at 2

17 See Virgin AL 1B, at 3

18 See Virgin AL 1D, at 2

19 See Virgin AL 1D, at 2

20 See Virgin AL 1B, at 3

21 See requirement #14, April 16, 2002 letter addressed to Virgin Mobile USA, LLC issuing Wireless Identification Number U-4327-C (Attachment 1).

22 G.O. 96-B § 7.4.2 in general provides Grounds for Protest of advice letters. Subsection (2) states the "The relief requested in the advice letter would violate statute or Commission order, or is not authorized by statute or Commission order on which the utility relies."

23 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(1)(A) requires that an ETC offer USF supported service throughout the Small LECs service areas, or alternatively have the service area redefined pursuant to 47 U.S.C. §214(e)(5) and Title 47 §54.207(c) CFR.

24 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(2).

25 47 U.S.C. §§ 214 (e)(1) and 254(c)

26 FCC 05-46 ¶¶ 20 - 68 addresses Federal ETC eligibility requirements.

27 FCC 05-46, 34

28 G.O. 153 §8.5.1

29 D.10-11-033, pg.56, mimeo

30 http://files.ctia.org/pdf/CTIA__Survey_Midyear_2010_Graphics.pdf

31 See Virgin AL 1, at 20

32 See G.O. 153, Service Elements of Life, at 32

33 See G.O. 153, at, 3

34 See G.O. 153, at 5

35 See 47 U.S.C. 332 (c)(3)(A) See also D. 95-10-032, mimeo at 17.

36 See Virgin AL 1A, at 3

37 See D. 10-11-33, mimeo at 72

38 See Virgin AL 1, at 3

39 See D. 10-11-33, mimeo at 72

40 See AL 1A, at 3

41 G.O. 153, §§ 4.4, 4.5

42 G.O. 153, § 4.2.1

Top Of Page