California Public Utilities Commission Issues Regulatory Update on Verizon and Frontier Merger

Strategic Insights -

The California Public Utilities Commission has issued a ruling on the joint application of Verizon Communications Inc. and Frontier Communications Parent, Inc. to approve the transfer of control of Frontier California Inc. to Verizon Communications Inc. The ruling involves the exclusion of certain testimony related to the cost sharing mechanism under Public Utilities Code Section 854(b)(2).

In a May 30, 2025, motion, the Joint Applicants sought to strike portions of the testimony of Dr. Lee L. Selwyn on behalf of the Public Advocates Office. The Joint Applicants argued that certain portions of Dr. Selwyn's testimony regarding the cost sharing mechanism under Public Utilities Code Section 854(b)(2) are improper and outside the scope of the proceeding. However, Cal Advocates and Center for Accessible Technology disagreed with the Joint Applicants' arguments, stating that the Commission has the authority to apply Section 854(b)(2) to this transaction.

After reviewing the parties' arguments, the Administrative Law Judge partially granted the Joint Applicants' motion to strike portions of Dr. Selwyn's testimony. The excluded testimony includes 14 passages that directly and narrowly address Section 854(b)(2).

Key Takeaways:

  • The California Public Utilities Commission issued a ruling on the joint application of Verizon Communications Inc. and Frontier Communications Parent, Inc. to approve the transfer of control of Frontier California Inc. to Verizon Communications Inc.
  • The ruling involves the exclusion of certain testimony related to the cost sharing mechanism under Public Utilities Code Section 854(b)(2).
  • The Joint Applicants sought to strike portions of the testimony of Dr. Lee L. Selwyn on behalf of the Public Advocates Office, arguing that certain portions of Dr. Selwyn's testimony regarding the cost sharing mechanism under Public Utilities Code Section 854(b)(2) are improper and outside the scope of the proceeding.
  • Center for Accessible Technology stated that the Commission has the authority to apply Section 854(b)(2) to this transaction.
  • The Administrative Law Judge partially granted the Joint Applicants' motion to strike portions of Dr. Selwyn's testimony, excluding 14 passages that directly and narrowly address Section 854(b)(2).

Statistics:

  • 14 passages of Dr. Selwyn's testimony were excluded from the record.
  • The excluded passages directly and narrowly address Section 854(b)(2).
  • The Commission has ratesetting authority over the Joint Applicants.
  • The Assigned Commissioner previously stated that although the Commission has the authority to review this transaction under Section 854(b)(2), "I decline to use the Commission's authority to do so at this time."
  • There is no plan to reverse the Assigned Commissioner's finding.

Sources:

  • California Public Utilities Commission, "Administrative Law Judge's Ruling Granting Motion to Strike in Part," July 21, 2025.
  • Joint Applicants' Motion to Strike Portions of the Testimony of Lee L. Selwyn, May 30, 2025.
  • Cal Advocates Response to Joint Applicants' Motion to Strike Portions of the Testimony of Lee L. Selwyn, June 2025.
  • Center for Accessible Technology Response to Joint Applicants' Motion to Strike Portions of the Testimony of Lee L. Selwyn, June 2025.