Big Telcos Object to FCC Proposal for Lifeline Document Retention Duty

AT&T urged the FCC to "move forward expeditiously with bold reform" of Lifeline, and particularly with a draft proposal in the NPRM to consider shifting administration of the program from participating telecom carriers to a third-party administrator or public agency. "This is the most important step the commission can take to protect the integrity of the program," AT&T said in a filing posted in docket 11-42 Thursday after its representatives met with FCC officials on Monday. CenturyLink also encouraged the move to a centralized administrator as "more economically efficient and convenient for Lifeline consumers, as there would be just one process for determining Lifeline eligibility and a single independent entity determining their eligibility and, to the extent necessary, retaining documentation."

But AT&T, CenturyLink and Verizon criticized an FCC proposal in the draft order for telecom carriers to retain documentation on the eligibility of Lifeline customers in order to facilitate oversight and audits. CenturyLink said that under current rules the documentation is reviewed and then destroyed; requiring carriers to retain it "would increase security concerns for consumers and administrative costs for providers."

AT&T said the FCC should fully consider the potential ramifications and argued "it makes no sense to risk consumer privacy with a temporary retention requirement" in particular, given the possible shift to a centralized administrator. "The documents that hundreds of service providers would be required to collect and store for a decade or more could include income tax returns, qualification for public benefits, proof of alimony payments, and other highly private information unrelated to the provision of telecommunications service," AT&T said. Depending on the details, carriers could even have to retain copies of birth certificates, Social Security cards and/or passports, and when consumers change carriers, they would have to produce the documentation again with both carriers retaining it for years, AT&T said.

At the very least, AT&T said, the FCC should restrict retention duties to only those documents needed to prove Lifeline eligibility, such as cards for Medicaid or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or acceptance letters from agencies overseeing those programs, not birth certificates, Social Security cards or tax returns. "Asking consumers to even show this highly confidential information to private companies is problematic enough," AT&T said. "If the commission requires companies to collect and retain such documents it is exposing Lifeline customers to unacceptable levels of risks of identity theft."

Verizon said implementing the document retention requirement would take it several months and impose information technology and training costs. If the FCC moves ahead with the proposal, Verizon said it should consider it along with other proposals to be considered in the companion NPRM seeking comment "on larger changes to the eligibility verification process."

Meanwhile, Nexus, True Wireless and, jointly, Terracom and YourTel America all lobbied the FCC in defense of Lifeline and shifting to a broadband focus and centralized eligibility data base. In meetings at the FCC, officials of all four companies, all of which are represented by the Davis Wright law firm, "explained that much of the criticism of the Lifeline program cannot be supported by the evidence, which shows that the program is decreasing in size and has an extraordinarily low rate of erroneous payments under the federal government’s own [Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act] standard." The officials "also shared some suggestions for the future of the Lifeline program, including supporting broadband services and creating a national eligibility database based on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program," they said in individual filings (here, here and here). True Wireless did voice concern about what it understands to be the draft order's proposed change to the definition of "Tribal lands" in Oklahoma, which it said would "have immediate and substantial negative impacts, both on numerous Native Americans living in Oklahoma and on True Wireless," and without adequate consultation, notice and comment.

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and other groups urged the FCC "to move rapidly to expand the Lifeline program to support broadband Internet access for low-income people." In a letter to Chairman Tom Wheeler, the groups said "we strongly support your statements, and those of Commissioners [Mignon] Clyburn and [Jessica] Rosenworcel, outlining steps to update the Lifeline program for the 21st century and align it with" FCC modernization of other USF programs.

Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, National Association of the Deaf and other deaf advocates backed the proposed FCC Lifeline move to broadband support. "Broadband services are increasingly necessary for daily living. Numerous comments focused on the socio-economic effect of the lack of access to broadband," the groups said in a filing. "In addition to the 'Digital Divide' or 'Homework Gap,' deaf and hard of hearing consumers without access to broadband are essentially excluded from access to IP-based Telecommunications Relay Services. Because Video Relay Service ('VRS') and IP Captioned Telephone Service ('IP-CTS') have improved the communications options available to deaf and hard of hearing consumers, lack of broadband access threatens to deny these consumers a basic right to communications services. Deaf and hard of hearing consumers generally experience higher poverty and unemployment rates than the general population. Without broadband subsidies for low income consumers, access to VRS or IP-CTS by low income deaf and hard of hearing consumers can be cost prohibitive."