a. In 1991, the Legislature acted to exempt competitive telecommunications services from traditional public utility regulation upon a finding that this type of regulation is generally not necessary to protect the public interest in the competitive marketplace. However, in its report to the Governor and Legislature on the implementation of P.L.1991, c.428 (C. 48:2-21.16 et seq.) the Board of Public Utilities found that where a captive market exists for competitive telecommunications services, market conditions are not always able to protect the public interest.

b. In particular, the board received many complaints concerning “alternate operator service” providers, which provide operator assistance for collect, third-party billed, and credit card calls, usually at pay phones on the premises of hotels, restaurants, hospitals, or airports, with these establishments receiving a commission for calls placed through the alternate operator service arrangement. Given the provisions of P.L.1991, c.428 (C. 48:2-21.16 et seq.), there has been some debate on the extent of the board’s authority to protect consumers’ interests with regard to alternate operator service providers.

c. It is appropriate, therefore, that the Legislature act to clarify the powers of the board with regard to alternate operator service providers, and to specifically require the board to take appropriate action, including, but not limited to, rate and terms and conditions of service regulation, to protect the interests of consumers of alternate operator service providers.

L.1995, c.172, s.1; amended 2013, c.278, s.1.