ISPs, Advocates Split on FCC Preemption of California Copper Rules
Also, the state’s telecom regulator urged the FCC to reject AT&T’s copper retirement request
WASHINGTON, June 16, 2026 – Broadband providers and consumer advocates are split on whether federal rules overrule California's state-level policy on returning copper networks.
In March, the Federal Communications Commission updated its copper retirement rules, eliminating some filing requirements and making it easier to grandfather legacy services like voice and low-speed broadband.
The order also said states could not require the maintenance of copper gear the FCC had approved the decommissioning of. Those rules would be preempted, the agency said.
California is less willing to accept wireless service as a full-on substitute for copper than the FCC, meaning it functionally has stricter copper retirement policies. The California Public Utilities Commission sought comment earlier this month on how the FCC’s new rule affected its copper retirement policy, which the state is in the process of reviewing and updating.
Agencies like the FCC and CPUC regulate companies’ requests to discontinue legacy telecom services in an effort to ensure areas aren’t left without access to essential services. Major ISPs are eager to transition customers to other technologies, as copper doesn’t provide competitive broadband service and is expensive to maintain.
In response to the CPUC’s inquiry, AT&T, Consolidated Communications, and Frontier (now owned by Verizon) submitted comments saying the state’s carrier of last resort (COLR) rules didn’t pass muster under the FCC preemption.
“Because federal law makes the hurdles of the COLR rules impermissible, those rules are effectively preempted and should be repealed,” Frontier attorneys Daniel Kahn and Jackson Stoddard wrote.
Consolidated agreed, writing “The FCC has confirmed that once it has authorized a discontinuance, no additional state approvals are required.”
Consumer advocacy groups took a different tack. A group of four, including the Center for Accessible Technology and the Media Alliance, said California’s requirement for universal and reliable telephone service in rural areas was not a needless technology-specific mandate and thus wouldn’t be preempted.
The groups said the FCC wouldn’t have authority to scrap the state’s COLR rules if that was the intention.
“Courts have consistently recognized that, absent clear congressional intent, federal law should not be read to displace state authority in areas such as consumer protection, emergency preparedness, and access to essential infrastructure. Such congressional intent is wholly absent here,” they wrote.
The CPUC’s own public advocates’ office, called CalAdvocates, agreed the agency should be able to ground its updated COLR rules in the state’s “authority to protect public safety by ensuring access to 911 service and universal service obligations.”
CalAdvocates did say that a CPUC staff proposal on updated COLR rules, which has not been officially adopted, would invite some legal risk under the FCC rules. The staff proposal would still not consider wireless mobile service a full substitute for copper voice service.
Small Business Utility Advocates, which represents small businesses in California, said its members might in some places rely on some services available through copper lines that wireless or VoIP couldn’t replace, like alarm systems or extended power outage reliability.
CPUC to FCC: Reject AT&T’s discontinuance application
Also, the CPUC on Monday asked the FCC to reject AT&T’s request to discontinue copper service at 200,000 locations in the state.
After the FCC’s preemption order, AT&T accepted the agency’s invitation, and the company put it, and asked it to strike down Calirofnia’s restrictions. The company at the same time asked for FCC permission to discontinue service at its copper locations in the state, arguing that was the only regulatory approval it needed.
“Although AT&T asserts that every customer affected by its proposed discontinuances will have access to replacement services, it does not adequately demonstrate that to be true — and, indeed, AT&T is currently seeking to invalidate state regulations that ensure the continuity of service,” CPUC attorneys Jonathan Koltz and Christine Hammond wrote.
AT&T said mobile service was available in the areas it was looking to discontinue, and that its AT&T Phone Advanced (APA) landline replacement service was also an adequate substitute. The CPUC said in its filing that the company hadn’t shown the mobile service worked well enough indoors to qualify as a true replacement.
While the company was looking to discontinue 200,000 locations, the CPUC said there were an estimated 5 million in the wire center footprint at issue, and wanted a more detailed showing that each of those would have access to voice service.
AT&T is also suing the CPUC in federal court over a previous refusal to release the company from COLR status. In a bid to show consumers wouldn’t be left hanging, the company said last month it would invest $19 billion in expanding fiber in California by 2030, which it said would reach an extra 4 million homes.
Jeff McElfresh, the company’s COO, said at a March Morgan Stanley conference the carrier had approval to stop selling new service at 85 percent of its more than 5,000 wirecenters, and could start fully shutting down 30 percent. The carrier is aiming to shut down most of its copper by the end of 2029.
