article

Round Table

Posted: 2/2002

Round Table

 

On FCC enforcement of Bell Section 271 compliance … 

“As the BOCs continue to gain Section 271 approvals, the bureau may be getting more 271 complaints on backsliding in the coming months. We’re committed to handling them as quickly as we can. But [remember that] the purpose of enforcement is compliance — not to say, ‘ah-ha! We gotcha!’ We are proactive in the sense that we start investigations, not fishing expeditions.”

— David Solomon, Enforcement Bureau Chief, FCC
(www.fcc.gov/eb)

“The FCC must be more proactive rather than reactive. For instance, it should go into an ILEC’s central office and watch what happens with competitors. That would be a fishing expedition and I think you’d find a lot of stinky fish.”

— John
Ambrosi, vice president of regulatory affairs,
PaeTec Communications Inc. (www.paetec.com)

“We hang in there with you for as long as it takes. As long as we see a glimmer of hope, we will continue to devote resources in order to get the parties to come to a resolution. Before you [the competitor] put together a formal complaint, call us and try to get us involved.”

— Alex Starr, division chief for market disputes resolution, FCC Enforcement Bureau

“Some of the cons associated with filing a formal complaint at the FCC are that such filings are limited to Communications Act violations. Contracts and antitrust cases can’t be brought to the FCC. There’s also not enough staff at the FCC to handle complaints, so it may not get needed attention. The pros include the use of the FCC’s good offices. Litigation is less costly and can be more easily controlled. The cases are managed by experienced staff and they can be decided more quickly.”

— Mitchell F.
Brecher, partner, Greenberg Traurig (www.gtlaw.com) in Washington.

 


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The ID is: 69185