V. Request for Further Comments and Proposals

The purpose of this OIR is to review and, where necessary, revise the Commission's Telecommunications Public Policy Programs. The preliminary work has greatly advanced this purpose and we are now ready to inaugurate a formal process to consider revisions to our Programs.

Interested parties should provide further comments and specific proposals as set forth in the schedule below. To guide the parties' work, we have provided a few core questions on each topic, which should not be interpreted as limitations but rather as beginning points. We encourage all proposals for change to explicitly address consistency with statutory goals, necessity, feasibility and cost effectiveness. Again, remedial proposals should be included when identifying program deficiencies.

A. Funding Mechanism (LifeLine, Access, Teleconnect, and High-Cost A&B)

1. Is the surcharge on intra-state telephone services currently a suitable mechanism for assessing and collecting revenue the Programs?

2. Is the suitability of the current surcharge mechanism expected to change in the foreseeable future?

3. What are the necessary features of any replacement mechanism?

4. What funding mechanism might better achieve funding goals?

5. Please provide funding mechanism proposals that will maintain funding in the face of market and regulatory changes.

B. California LifeLine

1. Is the current LifeLine Program achieving its statutory goals?

2. Is the concept of providing basic service over a landline telephone system an appropriate way to advance universal service goals given advances in communications technology?

3. Do federal program requirements impose practical limitations on revisions to the California LifeLine Program? If so, what are those limitations?

4. Should the program be revised to reflect technological changes in telecommunications services? If so, how? What are the estimated costs of such revisions? What are the projected, specific benefits? Would the revisions require statutory changes? If so, what is the likely time frame for adoption of the revised statutes?

5. Please provide any other proposals to maintain this program in the face of market and regulatory changes.

C. Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program

1. Is the current program achieving its statutory goals?

2. Should the program be revised to reflect technological changes in telecommunications services? If so, how? What are the estimated costs of such revisions? What are the projected, specific benefits? Would the revisions require statutory changes? If so, what is the likely time frame for adoption of the revised statutes?

3. Should the program be available regardless of the income of the customer? If income should be a factor, how should eligibility be structured and administered? Are there any synergies with other universal service programs that could be used to further the goals of both programs?

4. Given limited resources, is it more important to expand the program to include new technologies or to keep the current landline program available to all customers regardless of income?

5. If an income limitation were necessary to preserve the program, what is an appropriate income limitation?

6. Please provide proposals for revising the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program in the face of market and regulatory changes.

D. California Teleconnect

1. Is this program achieving its goals?

2. Should the program be revised to reflect technological advances in telecommunications services? If so, how? What are the estimated costs of such revisions? What are the projected, specific benefits? Would the revisions require statutory or jurisdictional changes? If so, what is the likely time frame for adoption of the changes?

3. What is the cause of the significant fluctuation in the annual number of program participants? And how could this cause be addressed?

4. Are non-profit entities serving transient persons eligible for the program and, if not, should the program be expanded to include these entities?

5. Please provide proposals for improving the California Teleconnect Program.

E. Payphone Provider Enforcement and Public Policy Payphone Programs

1. What is the current status of these programs? What is the current funding mechanism, and is it sufficient?

2. What is the current and forecasted state of the payphone market?

3. Are these programs achieving their goals?

4. In light of changing telecommunications services and technology, are these programs necessary to achieve universal service objectives?

5. Please provide proposals for modifying the Payphone Programs in light of market and regulatory changes.