FCC Web Documents citing 51.317

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1863A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1863A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1863A1.txt
  • 252. Section Number and Title: 51.301 Duty to Negotiate. 51.303 Preexisting agreements. 51.305 Interconnection. 51.307 Duty to provide access on an unbundled basis to network elements. 51.309 Use of unbundled network elements. 51.311 Nondiscriminatory access to unbundled network elements. 51.313 Just, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions for the provision of unbundled network elements. 51.315 Combination of unbundled network elements. 51.317 Standards for requiring the unbundling of network elements. 51.319 Specific unbundling requirements. 51.321 Methods of obtaining interconnection and access to unbundled elements under section 251 of the Act. 51.323 Standards for physical collocation and virtual collocation. 51.325 Notice of network changes: Public notice requirement. 51.327 Notice of network changes: Content of notice. 51.329 Notice of network changes: Methods for providing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-26A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-26A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-26A1.txt
  • outbound transport facilities); Rhythms Joint Declaration at para. 96 (noting that competitive LECs would interconnect via an ATM user-network interface on the central office switch). This architecture uses a single path for voice and data from the remote terminal back to the central office as compared to the SBC architecture that separates voice and data into different paths. 47 C.F.R. 51.317(d)(1)(C). See UNE Remand Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 3838, para. 313. 47 C.F. R. 51.317(c)(3). See, e.g., Comments of Rhythms, CC Docket Nos. 98-147 & 96-98 at 19 (filed Oct. 12, 2000) (citing use of line cards with DSLAM functionality as ``[t]he most efficient and effective means'' for a competitive LEC to interconnect at the remote terminal). For example, this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-36A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-36A1.pdf
  • vacated and remanded for further consideration the portions of the Commission's UNE Remand Order that adopted an interpretation of the ``impair'' standard and established a list of mandatory UNEs, and vacated and remanded as well the Commission's Order requiring that the high-frequency portion of the loop be made available as a UNE. Specifically, it appears that the court reversed rule 51.317(b) (the ``impair'' standard) and rule 51.319 (specific unbundling requirements). As explained below, other rules related to these topics, such as the rules relating to spectrum management and the rule defining the ``necessary'' standard, remain in effect. While recognizing ``the extraordinary complexity of the Commission's task[,]'' the court found the Commission's analysis wanting in a number of respects. At the outset,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-290A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-290A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-290A1.txt
  • accesses and uses an unbundled network element consistent with paragraph (b) of this section may provide any telecommunications services over the same unbundled network element. * * * * * (g) * * * (2) Shares part of the incumbent LEC's network with access services or inputs for mobile wireless services and/or interexchange services. * * * * * Section 51.317 is amended by designating the paragraph heading ``Proprietary network elements'' as paragraph (a), redesignating paragraphs (a) and (b) as paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2), respectively, redesignating paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) and (b)(3) as paragraphs (a)(2)(i), (a)(2)(ii), and (a)(2)(iii), respectively, and adding new paragraph (b) to read as follows: § 51.317 Standards for requiring the unbundling of network elements. * * * *
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.txt
  • and Order and Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd 3696, 3767, para. 154 (1999) (UNE Remand Order), reversed and remanded in part sub nom United States Telecom Ass'n v. FCC, 290 F.3d 415 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (USTA I), cert. denied sub nom. WorldCom, Inc. v. United States Telecom Ass'n, 538 U.S. 940 (2003 Mem.). 47 C.F.R. § 51.317(b)(4) (2000); UNE Remand Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 3767-70, paras. 153-61. Id. Deployment of Wireline Services Offering Advanced Telecommunications Ability and Implementation of the Local Competition Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Docket Nos. 98-147, 96-98, Third Report and Order in CC Docket No. 98-147 and Fourth Report and Order in CC Docket No. 96-98, 14 FCC Rcd 20912,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-96-325A1.pdf
  • 51.301 Duty to negotiate. 51.303 Preexisting agreements. 51.305 Interconnection. 51.307 Duty to provide access on an unbundled basis to network elements. 51.309 Use of unbundled network elements. 51.311 Nondiscriminatory access to unbundled network elements. 51.313 Just, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions for the provision of unbundled network elements. Federal Communications Commission 96-325 B-7 51.315 Combination of unbundled network elements. 51.317 Standards for identifying network elements to be made available. 51.319 Specific unbundling requirements. 51.321 Methods of obtaining interconnection and access to unbundled elements under section 251 of the Act. 51.323 Standards for physical collocation and virtual collocation. Subpart E - Exemptions, suspensions, and modifications of requirements of section 251 of the Act. 51.401 State authority. 51.403 Carriers eligible for suspension
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-99-70A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-99-70A1.txt
  • 251(d)(2) to determine in the first instance that a network element need not be unbundled in light of the availability of that element outside the incumbent's network in that state. If so, under what circumstances, if any, should the Commission review state decisions? 21 Local Competition First Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 15641-42, paras. 281-83; 47 C.F.R. § 51.317. Although the Supreme Court's analysis of section 251(d)(2) may have a bearing on Rule 317, which allowed states to identify additional network elements for unbundling, the court did not directly address that role. The Commission has asked the Eighth Circuit for a voluntary remand of Rule 317 so that the Commission may consider it further in light of the Supreme
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1999/fcc99070.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1999/fcc99070.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1999/fcc99070.wp
  • establish minimum national unbundling requirements. We therefore tentatively conclude that the Commission should continue to identify a minimum set of network elements that must be unbundled on a nationwide basis. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion. We Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-70 21 Local Competition First Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 15641-42, paras. 281-83; 47 C.F.R. § 51.317. Although the Supreme Court's analysis of section 251(d)(2) may have a bearing on Rule 317, which allowed states to identify additional network elements for unbundling, the court did not directly address that role. The Commission has asked the Eighth Circuit for a voluntary remand of Rule 317 so that the Commission may consider it further in light of the Supreme
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1999/fcc99238.pdf
  • Local Competition First Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 15643, para. 285. 25 Id. at 15683, para. 366. Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-238 16 following network elements: (1) local loops; (2) network interface devices; (3) local switching; (4) interoffice transmission facilities; (5) signaling networks and call-related databases; (6) operations support systems; and (7) operator services and directory assistance.26 Section 51.317 of the Commission's rules allowed states to impose additional unbundling requirements pursuant to the Commission's interpretation of section 251(d)(2).27 19. Following adoption of the Local Competition First Report and Order, incumbent LECs and state commissions filed various challenges to the Commission's rules; these appeals were consolidated in the Eighth Circuit. The Eighth Circuit, among other holdings, rejected the incumbent LECs'
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1999/fcc99070.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1999/fcc99070.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1999/fcc99070.wp
  • establish minimum national unbundling requirements. We therefore tentatively conclude that the Commission should continue to identify a minimum set of network elements that must be unbundled on a nationwide basis. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion. We Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-70 21 Local Competition First Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 15641-42, paras. 281-83; 47 C.F.R. § 51.317. Although the Supreme Court's analysis of section 251(d)(2) may have a bearing on Rule 317, which allowed states to identify additional network elements for unbundling, the court did not directly address that role. The Commission has asked the Eighth Circuit for a voluntary remand of Rule 317 so that the Commission may consider it further in light of the Supreme
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1996/fcc96325.pdf
  • 51.301 Duty to negotiate. 51.303 Preexisting agreements. 51.305 Interconnection. 51.307 Duty to provide access on an unbundled basis to network elements. 51.309 Use of unbundled network elements. 51.311 Nondiscriminatory access to unbundled network elements. 51.313 Just, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions for the provision of unbundled network elements. Federal Communications Commission 96-325 B-7 51.315 Combination of unbundled network elements. 51.317 Standards for identifying network elements to be made available. 51.319 Specific unbundling requirements. 51.321 Methods of obtaining interconnection and access to unbundled elements under section 251 of the Act. 51.323 Standards for physical collocation and virtual collocation. Subpart E - Exemptions, suspensions, and modifications of requirements of section 251 of the Act. 51.401 State authority. 51.403 Carriers eligible for suspension
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1999/fcc99238.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1999/fcc99238.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1999/fcc99238.txt
  • to make available to requesting carriers on an unbundled basis. Section 51.319 of the Commission's rules required incumbent LECs to offer unbundled access to the following network elements: (1) local loops; (2) network interface devices; (3) local switching; (4) interoffice transmission facilities; (5) signaling networks and call-related databases; (6) operations support systems; and (7) operator services and directory assistance. Section 51.317 of the Commission's rules allowed states to impose additional unbundling requirements pursuant to the Commission's interpretation of section 251(d)(2). Following adoption of the Local Competition First Report and Order, incumbent LECs and state commissions filed various challenges to the Commission's rules; these appeals were consolidated in the Eighth Circuit. The Eighth Circuit, among other holdings, rejected the incumbent LECs' argument
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2001/fcc01026.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2001/fcc01026.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2001/fcc01026.txt
  • outbound transport facilities); Rhythms Joint Declaration at para. 96 (noting that competitive LECs would interconnect via an ATM user-network interface on the central office switch). This architecture uses a single path for voice and data from the remote terminal back to the central office as compared to the SBC architecture that separates voice and data into different paths. 47 C.F.R. 51.317(d)(1)(C). See UNE Remand Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 3838, para. 313. 47 C.F. R. 51.317(c)(3). See, e.g., Comments of Rhythms, CC Docket Nos. 98-147 & 96-98 at 19 (filed Oct. 12, 2000) (citing use of line cards with DSLAM functionality as ``[t]he most efficient and effective means'' for a competitive LEC to interconnect at the remote terminal). For example, this
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1997/iowa51.html http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1997/iowa51.wp
  • that incumbent LECs presumably must provide unbundled access to "all network elements for which it is technically feasible to provide access on an unbundled basis." First Report and Order, 278. A finding that it is technically feasible to unbundle a particular element creates a presumption that the element must be unbundled according to the FCC. See id., 281; 47 C.F.R. 51.317. Although we just upheld the Commission's definition of the term "technically feasible," we reject the Commission's use of this term to determine what elements must be unbundled. As mentioned above, subsection 251(c)(3) places a duty on incumbent LECs to provide "access to network elements on an unbundled basis at any technically feasible point." By its very terms, this provision only
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1998/iowa51.html
  • that incumbent LECs presumably must provide unbundled access to "all network elements for which it is technically feasible to provide access on an unbundled basis." First Report and Order, 278. A finding that it is technically feasible to unbundle a particular element creates a presumption that the element must be unbundled according to the FCC. See id., 281; 47 C.F.R. 51.317. Although we just upheld the Commission's definition of the term "technically feasible," we reject the Commission's use of this term to determine what elements must be unbundled. As mentioned above, subsection 251(c)(3) places a duty on incumbent LECs to provide "access to network elements on an unbundled basis at any technically feasible point." By its very terms, this provision only
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1999/iowa.html http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1999/iowa.wp
  • of seven network elements: the local loop, the network interface device, switching capability, interoffice transmission facilities, signaling networks and call-related databases, operations support systems functions, and operator services and directory assistance. 47 CFR 51.319 (1997). If a requesting carrier wants access to additional elements, it may petition the state commission, which can make other elements available on a case-by-case basis. 51.317. Section 251(d)(2) of the Act provides: 'In determining what network elements should be made available for purposes of subsection (c)(3) of this section, the Commission shall consider, at a minimum, whether-- '(A) access to such network elements as are proprietary in nature is necessary; and '(B) the failure to provide access to such network elements would impair the ability of
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2000/96-3321.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2000/96-3321.html
  • the part of our opinion vacating the superior quality rules, 47 C.F.R. § § 51.305(a)(4) and 51.311(c), and the additional combination of network elements rule, 47 C.F.R. § 51.315(c)-(f). On remand we must now review on the merits the FCC's forward-looking pricing methodology, proxy prices, and wholesale pricing provisions. The petitioners also request that the court vacate 47 C.F.R. § 51.317, regarding the identification of additional unbundled network elements, and that the court reaffirm its previous decision vacating the superior-quality rules and the additional combination of network elements rule. We also must review on the merits 47 C.F.R. § 51.405, regarding rural exemptions, and 47 C.F.R. § 51.303, pertaining to preexisting agreements. II. Analysis The United States Courts of Appeals have
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/00-1012.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/00-1012.html http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/00-1012.pdf
  • into consideration the availability of alternative elements outside the incumbent's network, including self-provisioning by a requesting carrier or acquiring an alternative from a third-party supplier, lack of access to that element materially diminishes a requesting carrier's ability to provide the services it seeks to offer." Local Competition Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 3725, p 51 (emphasis added); 47 C.F.R. § 51.317(b)(1). In weighing the availability of alternative network elements, the Commission noted that it would examine five factors--cost, effect on timeliness of entry, quality, ubiquity, and impact on network operations. Local Competition Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 3731, p 65, 3734-45, p p 71-100; 47 C.F.R. § 51.317(b)(2). Finally, it said that beyond looking simply to "impairment," it would consider five
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/att-comcast/bellsouth_comment042902.pdf
  • not earn a return on its investment at prices below costs, SBC ceased further deployment.58 55 In the Matter of Implementation of the Local Competition Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, CC Doc. No. 96-98, Third Report and Order and Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd 3696, 3838-39 (1999) (ģUNE Remand Orderī). 56 47 C.F.R. ß 51.317 (b)(4). 57 See, In the Matter of Deployment of Wireline Services Offering Advanced Telecommunications Capability and Implementation of the Local Competition Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 16 FCC Rcd 2101 (2001); Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 17806 (2000). 58 BellSouth Comments, CC Doc. No. 01-337 (filed Mar. 1, 2002), Exhibit 1, pp. 21-22 (Professor Robert G. Harris,