445 12th Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
Fax-On-Demand 202 / 418-2830
Internet: http://www.fcc.gov
TTY: 202/418-2555
This is an unofficial announcement of Commission action. Release of the full text of a Commission order constitutes official action. See MCI v. FCC. 515 F 2d 385 (D.C. Circ 1974).
| FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 10, 2000 |
NEWS MEDIA CONTACT: Michael Balmoris 202-418-0253 Email: mbalmori@fcc.gov | |
FCC STRENGTHENS RULES DESIGNED TO GIVE COMPETITORS ACCESS TO INCUMBENT PHONE COMPANIES’ NETWORKS
Washington, D.C. – Today, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) clarified collocation rules that were implemented last year by adopting time frames for the implementation of collocation provisioning. In a collocation arrangement, a competitor leases space at an incumbent local exchange carrier’s (LEC’s) premises for its equipment. Collocation rules are intended to ensure that multiple, competing providers are able to offer voice and advanced data telecommunications services, which, in turn, should bring more choices, lower prices, and increased innovation to consumers.
The Order on Reconsideration (Order) adopted today takes immediate steps to ensure that competitors can obtain collocation in a timely and efficient manner. In particular, the Order requires an incumbent LEC to provide physical collocation, including cageless collocation, no later than 90 calendar days after receiving a collocation request (except where a state sets its own standard or a requesting carrier and an incumbent LEC agree to an alternate standard). The Order also requires an incumbent LEC to allow a competing LEC to construct adjacent structures on land owned or controlled by the incumbent LEC to the extent physical collocation space is exhausted in a particular incumbent LEC structure.
Additionally, the Commission adopted a Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Second Further Notice) in CC Docket No. 98-147 that responds to the D.C. Circuit’s recent opinion in GTE v. FCC, which affirmed the Commission’s collocation rules issued last year in several important respects, but vacated and remanded for further consideration certain aspects of those rules. The Second Further Notice invites comment on the remanded issues as well as on other collocation-related issues important to local competition. These include the meaning of “necessary” and “physical collocation,” issues relating to what equipment an incumbent must allow a competitive LEC to physically collocate, and how physical collocation space should be assigned. The Second Further Notice also asks for comment on issues relating to collocation at remote incumbent LEC premises.
The Commission also adopted a Fifth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-98, inviting comment on whether the Commission’s local competition rules should be modified or clarified, particularly those applying to the transport, loop, and subloop elements, in light of the deployment of new network architectures by incumbent LECs. Action by the Commission August 9, 2000, by Order on Reconsideration and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 98-147 and Fifth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-98 (FCC 00-297). Chairman Kennard and Commissioners Ness, Furchtgott-Roth, Powell, and Tristani.
Common Carrier Bureau Contacts: William Kehoe or Julie Patterson: (202) 418-1580
News about the Federal Communications Commission can also be found on the
on the Commission’s web site www.fcc.gov.