FCC ELIMINATES SEPARATE OI&M REQUIREMENT
The FCC eliminated a prohibition on Bell companies and their long distance affiliates using the same operating, installation and maintenance (OI&M) functions. Voting at its agenda meeting Thurs., the agency said allowing Bells to integrate such services will enable them to be more efficient and provide cost savings that can be passed onto the Bells’ long distance consumers.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The OI&M prohibition was part of the so-called “operate independent” rules adopted in 1996 by the FCC to implement Sec. 272 of the Telecom Act’s separate affiliate requirements. The rules also barred the Bells from jointly owning switching and transmission facilities, a requirement that wasn’t changed by Thurs.’s action. The FCC said it concluded the OI&M sharing ban was “an overbroad” safeguard against discrimination by BOCs against unaffiliated rivals and existing nonstructural safeguards, such as cost allocation and affiliate transaction rules, were “sufficient.” A Wireline Bureau official who presented the item at the meeting said the FCC concluded “the benefits of the OI&M prohibition no longer outweigh the costs.”
OI&M functions include such things as monitoring network operations and handling customer trouble reports. Keeping them separate required the Bells to have separate work forces. Now they will be able to use a single set of employees, the FCC said. “We are pleased the Commission recognized that efficient, appropriate oversight, rather than unnecessary regulation, is most beneficial to consumers, companies and competition in general,” said Susanne Guyer, Verizon senior vp-federal regulatory. She said Verizon’s technicians “are now free to do what they do best -- serve customers efficiently -- without worrying about artificial barriers or unnecessary restrictions.” However, an AT&T spokeswoman said the company thinks the FCC is “prematurely chipping away at Telecom Act requirements that were aimed at preventing the Bells’ ability and incentive to abuse its continuing market power.” She said the Bells’ “residual market power provides them enormous advantage.”
Notable in the FCC’s vote was that 3 commissioners -- Copps, Adelstein and Martin -- mentioned what they said was a complementary need for special access performance measurements, contained in a proceeding that’s been on the back burner at the agency since it was introduced about 2 years ago. Comr. Copps concurred on the OI&M item, saying he had no problem with it, other than that he thought the special access measurements also should be taken up because the measurement process would be a good nonstructural safeguard. He said the agency “ought to take it off the regulatory shelf as a logical complement to what we do today.”