V. Verification

The FCC requires states to establish a process to verify customers' continued eligibility for the ULTS program. Verification occurs annually after a customer has already been enrolled in ULTS. Verification procedures may include random beneficiary audits, periodic submission of documents, or annual self-certification.¹⁷ In our OIR, we propose that at verification, customers must self-certify, under penalty of perjury, as to the number of individuals in their household and that they meet the ULTS income guidelines.

A. Scope of Verification

Several parties (ORA, DRA, Greenlining, SBC, Cox, Verizon, and TURN) support self-certification as a means of verifying continued eligibility for the ULTS program. SBC states that self-certification is the most efficient and cost effective means of ensuring customer compliance with ULTS eligibility rules.

In addition, some parties support random audits of customer eligibility (Cox, ORA, and Verizon), ORA strongly supports periodic audits of the ULTS program. ORA's stand is consistent with its position that regular audits should be conducted of various public purpose programs. ORA cites the following from the Lifeline Order in support of its position:

All ETCs must maintain records to document compliance with all [Federal Communications] Commission and state requirements governing the Lifeline/Link-up programs and provide that documentation to the Commission or Administrator upon request.¹⁸

Several parties oppose random audits. According to NECA, unless random beneficiary audits are conducted frequently and in very large numbers, they would fail to verify the continued eligibility of most Lifeline beneficiaries, and should therefore be rejected as an alternative to the periodic submission of documents.

SBC asserts that conducting random audits or requiring proof of ongoing eligibility in conjunction with self certification is superfluous. According to SBC, the FCC's Lifeline Order approved annual self-certification as a suitable procedure for verifying consumers' continued eligibility under Lifeline/Link-Up for both program-and income-based criteria. The Commission is not required to impose additional verification requirements on consumers as long as self certification is done annually.

TURN asserts that by maintaining the current self-certification process for verification of continued eligibility it will avoid placing another barrier in the way of participants to continue their enrollment.

We adopt annual self-certification as the means of verifying continued eligibility for the ULTS program. The annual verification process will include those who qualified under the income-based and program-based tracks. This is consistent with the requirements of the FCC Order. For those customers who apply for the program under program-based eligibility, the verification process will be almost identical to the initial certification process, which should facilitate program participation.

We are not going to require random audits at this time. However, GO 153 includes a section whereby we can conduct periodic audits. When we make our revisions to GO 153, we will retain that section. The Commission has ongoing oversight over the ULTS program, and can institute audits as it deems necessary.¹⁹

B. Certification of Existing ULTS Customer Base

Verizon and AT&T suggest that the verification program should apply to the existing ULTS customer base. According to AT&T, the OIR is silent on the logistics of implementing the new procedures to existing ULTS participants. AT&T states that applying the new requirements to the existing base of ULTS customers is consistent with the underlying intent of the federal requirement.

Verizon states the Commission should conduct a statistically valid audit of a small sample of current ULTS customers and if the results indicate that a significant portion of the sample is not eligible, then all existing ULTS customers should be required to re-certify by providing income documentation.

ORA encourages the Commission to clarify its interpretation of whether the FCC Order requires documentation of the continuing eligibility of current participants. ORA states that if it is not required to retain federal funding, asking all participants to provide documentation in order to remain in the program seems unnecessarily cumbersome and expensive. ORA also believes that such a process might discourage some qualified participants from continuing in the program.

We find that the FCC's Order does not address documentation of eligibility for current ULTS customers. It would be costly and time-consuming to recertify all the current 3.4 million ULTS subscribers, and it is not cost-effective to do so, since the requirement for annual verification would cover existing customers, as well as new customers. We do not want to institute a process which could have the effect of discouraging qualified consumers from continued participation in the program.