The FCC’s “In Re: Delete Delete Delete” proceeding could draw a huge number of response filings and is expected to require numerous subsequent rulemakings to lead to actual changes, said industry officials and academics. “Every single regulated entity will sit on Santa's lap and ask for presents,” said TechFreedom Senior Counsel Jim Dunstan. “It will take months just to sift through all the asks and determine how to proceed.”
Private-sector communications companies interpret the record in the FCC's proposed customer service standards proceeding as going against the agency, while states and localities say the need for agency action is clear. That according to docket 24-472 reply comments this week. Industry groups pushed back against the NOI's proposals in initial comments last month (see 2411250020). In comments posted Tuesday, Mosaicx said tech such as virtual assistants and interactive voice response can be tailored to meet service providers' customer service needs. Accordingly, the FCC should let these technologies continue evolving, giving industry flexibility to tackle customers' needs. While many communications providers have "problematic" customer service practices, the FCC shouldn't proceed with a rulemaking, the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association said. This would add unneeded customer service regulations and administrative burdens on entities, with rural electric coops "a prime example," it said. Applauding the NOI, 15 state attorneys general said it's valid for the FCC to consider extending cable customer service rules to cover satellite TV, voice and broadband service providers. They added that changing technologies mean there are decreasingly few distinctions between customer service needs of various providers. Accordingly, they urged the FCC to require that customer calls are recorded and that customers may request the recordings. In addition, missed service appointments is an issue that cries out for solutions, the attorneys general argued. Signing the filing were the AGs of Pennsylvania, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont and the District of Columbia. The cable industry's argument that customer service rules are unnecessary because market forces and competition ensure good customer service ignores the fact that cable operators don't always provide good customer service, said Fairfax County, Virginia, which applauded the proceeding. "The market forces on which the industry relies consist of corporate executives wondering whether spending serious money to improve customer service would capture enough new customers to justify the costs," it said.
Competition is a better guarantor of good customer service than FCC rules, multiple industry groups said as they pushed back against proposals floated in the FCC's customer service NOI. The NOI was adopted 3-2 in October along party lines (see 2410230036). In comments in docket 24-472, which were due Friday, some industry groups also argued that the agency lacks legal standing on customer service rules. "Careful consideration will confirm that the Commission lacks anything like the plenary authority" to adopt a single set of customer service rules, CTIA said. Disability advocacy organizations, meanwhile, made suggestions for customer service requirements.
A plan for cutting regulations and federal institutions such as the FCC could target broadband access programs and media regulations, but it's likely that a wave of litigation will stymie it, administrative law professors and attorneys told us. Future Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) heads Vivek Ramasawamy and Space X CEO Elon Musk laid out their plans in a Wall Street Journal opinion column. “It's not to say that maybe some of these changes shouldn't be happening, but, you know, they're taking a wrecking ball to fix something that requires a little bit more finesse than that,” said University of Idaho law professor Linda Jellum. Asked about possible DOGE cuts at the FCC, incoming FCC Chairman Brendan Carr last week told reporters, “There's no question, there's tons of room for driving more efficiency at the FCC." He didn't elaborate.
Telecom companies balked at consumer advocates’ call to apply California carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations to broadband. The California Public Utilities Commission posted reply comments Thursday in a rulemaking about how to update the state’s 30-year-old COLR rules (docket R.24-06-012). In initial comments last month, carriers subject to COLR requirements asked that the CPUC shed those obligations in many parts of the state, while consumer advocates said COLR obligations remain necessary and should be updated to include high-speed internet service, not just voice (see 2410020037). Frontier Communications replied Wednesday that it opposes expanding the proceeding to do “a complex, controversial evaluation of legal and policy matters pertaining to the Commission’s potential regulation of broadband services.” Likewise, Consolidated Communications said the CPUC should "decline the invitation to undertake a substantial review of its regulatory jurisdiction over broadband services.” TDS protested that the consumer groups "seek to greatly expand this OIR beyond its intended purpose” without providing factual or legal reasons. Don’t let public advocates "transform this … into a generic telecommunications industry reexamination docket,” said a coalition of small rural local exchange carriers. Representing cable companies, the California Broadband and Video Association warned that adding broadband to the definition of a basic service or extending COLR obligations to broadband providers would be federally preempted. Meanwhile, the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office pushed back on companies that said COLR obligations are outdated and should be eliminated. "In reality, the COLR concept remains essential to the guarantee of universal service, but must be updated to reflect the state’s transformed telecommunications landscape,” PAO said. AT&T disagreed. "Maintaining COLR obligations where they are superfluous would divert resources from vital broadband investments to outdated [time division multiplexed] networks, which are increasingly unwanted by consumers,” the carrier said. “It would not only stifle competition by arbitrarily constraining ILECs alone but also result in unnecessary operational costs and increased environmental harm due to prolonged use of copper networks.”
The FTC violated the Constitution and exceeded its rulemaking authority when it issued a rule aimed at making it easier for consumers to cancel subscriptions, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, NCTA, the Interactive Advertising Bureau and other industry groups said in three different lawsuits filed Tuesday in three separate appeals courts.
Maine should harmonize its Chapter 880 pole-attachment rules with recent FCC rules changes, Comcast and Charter Communications commented last week at the Maine Public Utilities Commission. However, the cable companies disagreed with various Maine Connectivity Authority (MCA) recommendations contained in a recent report. Versant Power, an electric utility that owns poles, said Maine needn’t make more regulatory or legislative changes.
Broadcasters, MVPDs and network programmers want the FCC to shelve plans that require disclosures about the use of AI in political ads because they’re unworkably burdensome, exceed agency authority and won’t affect digital platforms, said reply filings in docket 24-211.
With the California Public Utilities Commission planning a vote within days about regulating VoIP, AT&T and the cable industry urged that commissioners at least delay -- if not outright reject -- the controversial item. Industry groups representing voice technologies stressed in comments last week in docket R.22-08-008 that the CPUC lacks legal authority to regulate VoIP.
California should shed carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations in many parts of the state, carriers that are subject to those regulations said in comments posted this week at the California Public Utilities Commission. Just don’t extend the rules to other kinds of companies, warned a cable broadband association, whose members are free from such regulations. However, consumer advocates said COLR obligations remain necessary and should be updated to include high-speed internet service, not just voice.