20240718Reply Comments.pdf

RECEIVED
Thursday, July 18, 2024
IDAHO PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION
Ii1 NELSON M U L L I N S NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW
101 Constitution Ave, NW, Suite 900
Debra McGuire Mercer Washington, DC 20001
T: 202.689.2949 T: 202.689.2800 F: 202.689.2860
[e-mail] nelsonmullins.com
July 18, 2024
Via Electronic Mail
Jan Noriyuki
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
11331 W. Chinden Blvd. Building 8
Suite 201-A
Boise, ID 83714
[e-mail]
RE: Reply Comments of TruConnect Communications, Inc.; Case No. TCC-T-24-01
Dear Ms. Noriyuki:
Attached please find TruConnect Communications, Inc.'s reply comments in response to
the comments of the Commission Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission. Should you
have any questions, please contact the undersigned.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra McGuire Mercer
Counsel for TruConnect Communications, Inc.
CALIFORNIA I COLORADO I DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA I FLORIDA I GEORGIA I ILLINOIS I MARYLAND I MASSACHUSETTS I MINNESOTA
NEW YORK I NORTH CAROLINA I OHIO I PENNSYLVANIA I SOUTH CAROLINA I TENNESSEE I TEXAS I VIRGINIA I WEST VIRGINIA

BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
TruConnect Communications, Inc. )
Case No. TCC-T 24-01
Application for Designation as an )
Eligible Telecommunications Carrier )
REPLY COMMENTS OF TRUCONNECT COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
TruConnect Communications, Inc. ("TruConnect" or the "Company") submits these reply
comments in response to the comments of the Commission Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission(Commission).' The Commission Staff's recommendation that the Commission
deny TruConnect's request for designation as an eligible telecommunications carrier("ETC")
disregards information in TruConnect's ETC Application and Supplement,2 is not supported by
Commission precedent, and is inconsistent with Staff's position regarding similar types of
carriers. For the reasons detailed in these reply comments, TruConnect's ETC Application meets
the federal and Idaho requirements for ETC designation, and therefore, the Commission should
expeditiously grant the Company's request for ETC designation in the State of Idaho.
INTRODUCTION
The Commission Staff relies on two unsupported bases for its recommendation that the
Commission should deny TruConnect's request for designation as an ETC: (1)TruConnect does
' See Comments of the Commission Staff, Case No. TCC-T 24-01 (July 11, 2024) ("Commission
Staff Comments").
2 See Application of TruConnect Communications, Inc. for Designation as an Eligible
Telecommunications Carrier in the State of Idaho, Case No. TCC-T-24-01 (March 4, 2024)
("ETC Application"), as supplemented by Supplement to Application of TruConnect
Communications, Inc. for Designation as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier in the State of
Idaho, Case No. TCC-T 24-01 (July 9, 2024) ("Supplement").

not fully address the requirement in Commission Order No. 351263 that it demonstrate the ability
to remain functional in an emergency and (2)TruConnect does not satisfy the public interest
requirements in Commission Order No. 35126.4 However, TruConnect possesses the same
ability to remain functional in an emergency as other wireless resellers that have been designated
as ETC and for which the Commission Staff recommended designation. TruConnect also meets
the public interest standard set forth Commission Order No. 35126, as well as in other
Commission orders designating wireless resellers as ETCs.
I. TRUCONNECT HAS DEMONSTRATED ITS ABILITY TO REMAIN
FUNCTIONAL IN EMERGENCIES
Commission Order No. 35126, consistent with Section 54.202(a)(2) of the Federal
Communications Commission's ("FCC")rules, requires an ETC applicant to demonstrate that"it
has a reasonable amount of back-up power to ensure functionality without an external power
source, is able to re-route traffic around damaged facilities, and is capable of managing traffic
spikes resulting from emergency situations."5 The Commission Staff notes that TruConnect will
"utilize the extensive and well-established network and facilities of T-Mobile and Verizon to
provide its Lifeline services."6 In addition, the Commission Staff acknowledges that T Mobile
and Verizon's "networks have access to a reasonable amount of backup power to ensure
3 In the Matter of Torch Wireless's Application for Designation as am Eligible
Telecommunications Carrier in Idaho, Case No. TOR-T 21-01, Order No. 35126 (August 25,
2021) ("Order No. 35126").
4 See Commission Staff Comments, at 6-8, 10.
5 Order No. 35126,Appendix, at 3; 47 C.F.R. § 54.202(a)(2).
6 Commission Staff Comments, at 8.
2

functionality without an external power source, can reroute traffic around damaged facilities,
and are capable of managing traffic spikes resulting from emergencies."
Despite the Commission Staff's conclusion that TruConnect's underlying carriers'
networks have the ability to function in emergency situations, it states that "an ETC applicant
must demonstrate that it has a reasonable amount of backup power to ensure functionality
without an external power source" and that"the Company does not appear to provide any value-
added services regarding emergency functionality."8 This position ignores the fact that
TruConnect, as a wireless reseller, does not use its own facilities to provide service nor does it
have any ability to directly impact the functionality of services provided by its underlying
carriers. Moreover, neither the FCC's rules nor Commission Order No. 35126 requires an ETC
applicant to itself provide "value-added services regarding emergency functionality." The
Commission Staff unilaterally, and without authority, attempts to expand the ETC designation
standards by introducing a requirement that an ETC applicant must itself provide emergency
functionality, while also relying on its underlying carriers to provide emergency functionality.
The Commission Staff's assertion that TruConnect did not demonstrate an ability to
remain functional in an emergency is inconsistent with its position in other proceedings
addressing ETC applications filed by wireless resellers and with Commission precedent. For
example, the Commission Staff determined that AirVoice Wireless, LLC ("AirVoice"), a
wireless reseller, satisfied the requirement that it could remain functional in emergencies
because it utilized the network facilities of Tier I wireless carriers, which "have access to a
reasonable amount of backup power to ensure functionality without an external power source,
Id.
s Id.
3

can reroute traffic around damaged facilities, and are capable of managing traffic spikes resulting
from emergencies."9 The Commission agreed with the Commission Staff s assessment and
found that AirVoice complied with the requirement that it demonstrate an ability to remain
functional in emergencies.10 The Commission similarly found that IM Telecom, LLC ("IM
Telecom"), a wireless reseller, relied on"its underlying carriers in such a manner as to remain
functional in an emergency" thereby enabling the company to demonstrate sufficient compliance
with the requirement.'1 The Commission did not mention in its orders that AirVoice or IM
Telecom needed to provide value-added services regarding emergency functionality.12
The Commission Staff offers no justification for deviating from clear Commission
precedent holding that a wireless reseller's reliance on its underlying carriers' networks to ensure
functionality in emergencies meets the Commission's requirement. Contrary to the Commission
Staffs claim, TruConnect fully addressed and met the Commission's requirement regarding the
ability to remain functional in an emergency. As such, TruConnect requests the Commission to
9 In the Matter of AirVoice Wireless, LLC d/b/a Airtalk Applicationfor Limited Designation as an
Eligible Telecommunications Carrier in the State of Ohio, Case No. AVW-T-22-01, Comments
of the Commission Staff(August 5, 2022), at 5.
10 Id., Order No. 35515 (August 30, 2022) ("AirVoice ETC Order").
11 In the Matter of IM Telecom, LLC d/b/a Infiniti Mobile's Application for Designation as an
Eligible Telecommunications Carrier, Case No. IMT-T-23-01, Order No. 36155 (April 19, 2024),
at 5 ("IM Telecom ETC Order"); see also id., Comments of the Commission Staff(March 25,
2024), at 6 ("The Underlying Carriers'networks have access to a reasonable amount of backup
power to ensure functionality without an external power source, can reroute traffic around
damaged facilities, and are capable of managing traffic spikes resulting from emergencies ....
Therefore, the Staff accepts that the Company satisfies this requirement.").
12 See also In the Matter of Telrite Corporation's d/b/a Life Wireless Application for Designation
as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier, Case No. TEC-T 22-01, Order No. 35600
(November 17, 2022), at 3 ("Telrite ETC Order") (noting that"Staff believed the Company's
underlying carriers provided sufficient ability for the Company to remain functional in
emergencies ... ."), and 5 (finding that the company"demonstrated sufficient compliance with
this requirement").
4

find that TruConnect, like other wireless resellers, has demonstrated compliance with the
emergency functionality requirement.
IL TRUCONNECT SATISFIES THE COMMISISON'S PUBLIC INTEREST
REQUIREMENTS
The Commission Staff asserts that the "specific reason"TruConnect should not be
designated as an ETC in Idaho is that"Staff does not believe that the Company's Application
fully satisfies the public interest requirements of Commission Order No. 35126."13 In Order No.
35126 the Commission examined three factors when considering whether it was in the public
interest for Torch Wireless to offer Lifeline services: (1)the company's commitment to provide
low-income Idaho consumers with low prices and high-quality services, offer Lifeline services in
its service area, and satisfy applicable state and federal requirements related to consumer
protection and service quality standards; (2)the company's commitment to contribute to
appropriate Idaho funds; and(3) whether the company is engaged in cream-skimming(i.e., when
an applicant seeks ETC designation for only part of a rural telephone company's study area, thus
leaving some customers (who are likely less-profitable)without service).14 TruConnect's ETC
Application satisfies each of the foregoing public interests factors. Moreover, the Commission
Staff does not conclude otherwise. Rather, the Commission Staff points to other issues, none of
which are part of the Commission's established public interest analysis or are valid reasons for
the Commission to determine that designation of TruConnect as an ETC would not serve the
public interest.
13 Commission Staff Comments, at 6.
14 Commission Order No. 35126, at 5.
5

First, in the ETC Application, TruConnect committed to provide low-income Idaho
consumers with low prices and high-quality services,15 offer Lifeline services in its service
area,16 and satisfy applicable state and federal requirements related to consumer protection and
service quality standards.17 The Commission Staff acknowledges that TruConnect made these
commitments.18
Second, TruConnect stated that it"currently contributes to the ITSAP and TRS programs
as required by relevant state law, and will continue to do so after being designated as an ETC."19
Third, TruConnect noted that"because TruConnect is seeking ETC designation for the entire
state, a cream-skimming analysis is not required. ,20 Despite these foregoing two factors being
part of the Commission's established public interest analysis,21 the Commission Staff did not
address them. Importantly, the Commission Staff also did not indicate that TruConnect failed to
satisfy these factors.
15 See ETC Application, at 4 ("TruConnect's prepaid wireless services are affordable, easy to use,
and attractive to low-income consumers, providing them with access to emergency services and a
reliable means of communication") 5 (TruConnect offers "attractive and affordable
communications options"), 21 (TruConnect offers a"competitive, and highly affordable
service").
16 See ETC Application, at 11 (requesting ETC designation throughout its service area), 13
(committing to offer Lifeline service in all areas served by its underlying carriers).
17 See ETC Application, at 4 (referencing high quality customer service), 14 (committing to
comply with the CTIA Consumer Code for Wireless Service).
18 See Commission Staff Comments, at 3 (referencing the Company's Lifeline offer of"an
unlimited amount of voice and a generous amount of broadband access included without cost, after
application of the Lifeline support"), 8 ("Company commits to providing all supported services
through its Underlying Carriers' service throughout its proposed ETC-designated service area to
all customers"), 8 ("Company stated that it is committed to satisfying all such applicable state
and federal requirements related to consumer protection and service quality standards").
19 ETC Application, at 24.
20 Id.
21 See, e.g., Telrite ETC Order, at 5-6.
6

The Commission Staff's public interest analysis instead focuses on issues that the
Commission has not previously considered and that mischaracterizes information in
TruConnect's ETC Application. In particular, the Commission Staff references TruConnect's
statement that its no-cost services are an invaluable resource for cash-strapped and unbanked
consumers and states that it"does not believe this alone is a compelling public interest
argument"22 and that the "Company does not show evidence of this pent-up demand. ,23
According to the Commission Staff, TruConnect must demonstrate that it can provide a unique
service or a compelling advantage to low-income consumers that current ETCs (including
wireline and wireless carriers, such as TruConnect's affiliate, Sage Telecom Communications,
LLC ("Sage Telecom")) cannot provide.24 However, the Commission has found that wireless
carriers offering of Lifeline services in their service area will promote the public interest because
the services will assist underserved or unserved people, not because they offer a unique service
or a compelling advantage to low-income consumers.21 Indeed, such undeserved and unserved
people include the cash-strapped and unbanked consumers that would benefit from receiving
TruConnect's no-cost Lifeline services. The Commission did not consider whether any of those
22 Commission Staff Comments, at 7.
23 Id. at 10.
24 See id. at 7, 10. In the Supplement, TruConnect explains that grant of TruConnect's ETC
Application will serve the public interest as it will allow for the development a new Lifeline
brand with differentiated service offerings and marketing strategies that will provide low-income
consumers with more competitive choices.
25 See AirVoice ETC Order, at 4;see also IM Telecom ETC Order, at 4-5; Telrite ETC Order, at
4.
7

wireless carriers offered a service that differed from current Lifeline service providers when it
designated them as ETCs.26
Furthermore, Commission precedent does not support placing a cap on the number of
carriers that can be designated as ETCs so long as they meet the federal and state requirements
for designation.2' Although the Commission has designated several ETCs, the Lifeline
participation rate in Idaho is among the lowest in the country with only eight percent of eligible
Idaho households participating in the Lifeline program.28 This low participation rate
demonstrates that the current Lifeline service offerings in Idaho are not fully meeting the needs
of low-income Idaho households and that Idaho households would benefit from additional
Lifeline service providers who can better serve them.
Finally, the Commission Staff incorrectly claims that"[t]he Company provides no
factual information to support its assertion that a lack of advertising exists."29 TruConnect's
ETC Application does not include any statements that there is a lack of advertising by any ETCs
in Idaho. Rather, TruConnect notes that it will engage in targeted advertising campaigns to
promote its cost-effective services to a neglected consumer segment.30 The "neglected"
26 TruConnect's ETC Application points out several attributes that make its services unique,
including the strength and experience of its management team, a solid history as a Lifeline
provider, and innovative outreach and advertising campaigns. See ETC Application at 13, 22.
27 See generally id. (noting in each case that the Commission has granted ETC designations to
numerous carriers in Idaho, including wireless carriers).
28 See USAC, Program Data, Lifeline Participation, available at
https://www.usac.org/lifeline/resources/program-data/#Participation(last visited July 15, 2024)
(estimating the 2023 Lifeline participation rate in Idaho to be eight percent).
29 Commission Staff Comments, at 7.
so See ETC Application, at 13.
8

consumer segments refer to low-income consumers who do not have access to affordable
telecommunications services, not to consumers who are not receiving advertisements.
The Commission Staff s public interest analysis is not supported by TruConnect's
Application or Commission precedent. As explained above, TruConnect fully satisfies the
Commission's public interest requirements for designation as an ETC. Therefore, TruConnect
requests the Commission to apply its precedent and determine that granting TruConnect's ETC
Application serves the public interest.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated in TruConnect's ETC Application and Supplement, as well as in
these reply comments, designation of TruConnect as an ETC in the State of Idaho satisfies the
federal and state requirements for designation as an ETC. TruConnect respectfully requests that
the Commission promptly designate TruConnect as an ETC in the State of Idaho for the purpose
of participating in the Lifeline program.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra McGuire Mercer
Nelson Mullins Riley& Scarborough LLP
101 Constitution Avenue,NW
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20001
[phone]
debra.mercerknelsonmullins.com
Counsel for TruConnect Communications, Inc.
July 18, 2024
9