FCC Staff Pauses Lifeline Voice-Only, MSS Changes

The FCC Wireline Bureau paused phasedown of Lifeline voice-only support until Dec. 1, 2022, said an order Friday (see 2111050051). Staff waived the increase of minimum service standards for mobile broadband until then, as expected (see 2111030038). The bureau didn't address the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates’ petition for reconsideration and instead acted on its own motion.

"The persistent subscriptions to voice-only service offerings, pace of adoption of broadband, and net benefits of continuing voice-only support ... provide strong considerations for maintaining Lifeline support for voice-only services for at least one additional year," the order said. The Lifeline market report released in June and "extenuating circumstances unforeseen until this year ... provide additional evidence in favor of pausing the phase-down."

The planned phasedown was part of the 2016 Lifeline order, which would keep voice-only service available for consumers in census blocks served by one Lifeline provider. Despite the reduction in support last year, a "potential elimination of voice-only support poses a heightened threat to the safety of low-income Americans during the pandemic," the order said. The one-year pause will "allow the commission to further analyze the future role of Lifeline support for voice-only services."

The FCC pause "is great news for consumers," emailed NARUC State Universal Service Fund Administrators Staff Subcommittee Chair Sandy Reams. The federal move "will ensure all low-income consumers continue to benefit from the Federal Lifeline Program," added Reams, also of the Kansas Corporation Commission.

CTIA "[appreciates] the FCC’s action to preserve Lifeline support for low-income consumers who continue to rely on wireless voice services," said Senior Vice President-Regulatory Affairs Scott Bergmann: "This step is important for vulnerable communities and will give the FCC an opportunity to review and modernize its low-income support programs taking into account its experience with new Congressional programs focused on meeting these consumers’ needs.”

NTCA is "pleased and grateful" for the bureau's action, emailed Senior Vice President-Industry Affairs Mike Romano. "We’re also looking forward very much to the discussion teed up in today’s order regarding the need for modifications to this policy on a longer-term basis." NASUCA is "thrilled," emailed Executive Director David Springe. The FCC didn't comment beyond the order.

The bureau also waived the scheduled MSS increase for mobile broadband Friday from 4.5 GB to 18 GB, citing current data usage of fewer than 4 GB per month among most Lifeline subscribers. The bureau took into consideration the emergency broadband benefit program and said the "relatively new nature of the program ... underscores the need for more data to adequately assess the effects on the Lifeline program and its role in shaping the broadband market for low-income Americans."

The decision “is welcome news for consumers," but the FCC's "continuing failure to address the core problem is disheartening," emailed National Lifeline Association counsel John Heitmann of Kelley Drye. "Having a Lifeline minimum service standard rule that fails to consider affordability is an error worth owning up to and fixing. Same can be said for the rule that eliminates Lifeline support for voice services."

Some states were preparing for a possible Dec. 1 phaseout. The Missouri Public Service Commission said earlier Friday it would increase monthly state USF support for voice-only Lifeline services to $24 from $18.75 if the FCC stopped paying $5.25. PSC members supported the order 5-0 (docket TO-2019-0346). A PSC spokesperson didn't immediately comment after the federal order.

The California Public Utilities Commission adopted a LifeLine proposal in September that set varying amounts of state support to replace federal support for wireline that doesn’t meet broadband MSS, depending on how much the FCC phases down support (see 2109230067). The Oregon Public Utility Commission also considered offsetting the possible federal reduction (see 2109160028).