47 U.S.C. § 271 — Bell operating company entry into interLATA services

(a) General limitation. A Bell operating company, or any of its affiliates, cannot provide "interLATA" (long-distance, across local calling areas) services except as this section allows. (b) InterLATA services this section covers. (1) In-region services: a Bell company can offer interLATA service that starts in one of its "in-region" States (defined in subsection (i)) once the Commission approves its application for that State under subsection (d)(3). (2) Out-of-region services: after February 8, 1996, a Bell company can offer interLATA service starting outside its in-region States, subject to subsection (j). (3) Incidental interLATA services: after February 8, 1996, a Bell company can offer "incidental" interLATA services (defined in subsection (g)) starting in any State. (4) Termination: nothing here stops a Bell company from providing the receiving end (termination) of an interLATA call, subject to subsection (j). (c) Requirements for certain in-region interLATA services. (1) Agreement or statement: for each State it applies for, the Bell company must meet one of two tests. (A) Presence of a facilities-based competitor: the company has signed one or more approved agreements letting an unaffiliated competitor provide telephone service to homes and businesses mostly or entirely over that competitor's own network (not counting certain regulated wireless-type services). (B) Failure to request access: no competitor asked for that kind of access in the ten months after February 8, 1996 — measured up to three months before the company applies — and the company's State-approved statement of terms for offering such access is in effect. A State can certify that a request doesn't count if the requester failed to negotiate in good faith or broke its own agreement's schedule. (2) Specific interconnection requirements: within the State, the company must (A) actually be providing, or generally offering, that kind of access and interconnection, and (B) that access and interconnection must include everything on a "competitive checklist." That checklist requires: (i) interconnection meeting sections 251(c)(2) and 252(d)(1); (ii) nondiscriminatory access to network elements under sections 251(c)(3) and 252(d)(1); (iii) nondiscriminatory access to poles, ducts, conduits, and rights-of-way at just and reasonable rates under section 224; (iv) local loop transmission from the central office to the customer, unbundled from switching or other services; (v) local transport from a local exchange switch, unbundled from switching or other services; (vi) local switching unbundled from transport, loop transmission, or other services; (vii) nondiscriminatory access to 911/E911 services, directory assistance, and operator call completion; (viii) white pages directory listings for the competitor's customers; (ix) nondiscriminatory access to telephone numbers, following any numbering rules once they exist; (x) nondiscriminatory access to the databases and signaling needed to route and complete calls; (xi) interim number portability (letting customers keep their number when they switch carriers) until the Commission's number-portability rules take effect, then full compliance with those rules; (xii) nondiscriminatory access to whatever a competitor needs for local dialing parity under section 251(b)(3); (xiii) reciprocal compensation arrangements under section 252(d)(2); and (xiv) making telecommunications services available for resale under sections 251(c)(4) and 252(d)(3). (d) Administrative provisions. (1) Application to the Commission: on or after February 8, 1996, a Bell company or affiliate can apply to the Commission for authority to offer in-region interLATA service, naming each State it wants. (2) Consultation: (A) the Commission must promptly notify the Attorney General of the application and consult with the Attorney General before deciding; any written comments the Attorney General submits go into the record, and the Commission must give the Attorney General's evaluation substantial weight, though it doesn't control the outcome. (B) The Commission must also consult with the State commission of the relevant State to check the Bell company's compliance with subsection (c). (3) Determination: within 90 days of the application, the Commission must issue a written approval or denial for each State. It cannot approve unless it finds: (A) the company met subsection (c)(1) and either fully implemented the competitive checklist through its agreements, or its general-offer statement includes every checklist item; (B) the authorization will be carried out consistent with section 272; and (C) the authorization serves the public interest, convenience, and necessity. The Commission must explain its decision. (4) Limitation on the Commission: the Commission cannot narrow or expand, by rule or otherwise, what the checklist terms mean. (5) Publication: within 10 days of its decision, the Commission must publish a brief description in the Federal Register. (6) Enforcement of conditions: (A) if the Commission later finds a company no longer meets an approval condition, it can, after notice and a hearing, order the company to fix the problem, impose a penalty, or suspend or revoke the approval. (B) The Commission must set up a process for reviewing complaints about a company failing to meet these conditions, and must act on complaints within 90 days unless the parties agree otherwise. (e) Limitations. (1) Joint marketing of local and long distance services: until a Bell company gets interLATA authority in a State, or 36 months after February 8, 1996 — whichever comes first — a carrier serving more than 5 percent of the nation's phone lines cannot jointly market, in that State, local service it buys from the Bell company under section 251(c)(4) together with its own long-distance service. (2) IntraLATA toll dialing parity: (A) once a Bell company gets interLATA authority in a State, it must provide intraLATA toll dialing parity there right away. (B) Except for single-LATA States, or States that had already ordered this parity by December 19, 1995, a State generally cannot require a Bell company to provide this parity before the company gets interLATA authority, or before 3 years after February 8, 1996 — whichever comes first. A State can still issue such an order earlier, as long as it doesn't take effect before that date. (f) Exception for previously authorized activities. Neither subsection (a) nor section 273 stops a Bell company or affiliate from continuing an activity that a pre-February 8, 1996 federal court order — issued under the AT&T Consent Decree — already authorized, as long as that order hasn't been reversed or vacated on appeal. This does not limit any activity the company is otherwise authorized to do under other parts of this section. (g) "Incidental interLATA services" defined. This term covers several narrow things a Bell company or affiliate can provide across LATA lines: (1) audio, video, or other programming to its own subscribers, along with letting those subscribers interact with the programming, providing this to distributors it owns, controls, or is licensed to serve, and alarm-monitoring services; (2) two-way interactive video or Internet service over dedicated lines to elementary and secondary schools; (3) commercial mobile (wireless) services under section 332(c); (4) letting a customer in one LATA retrieve or store information in the company's storage facilities in another LATA; (5) signaling information used for telephone exchange or exchange access service; and (6) sending and receiving network-control signaling information with other interLATA carriers within the company's telephone service area. (h) Limitations. Subsection (g) must be read narrowly. The interLATA transmissions allowed under (g)(1)(A)-(C) are limited to those incidental to the video, audio, and other programming the company already provides to the public. The Commission must make sure services allowed under subsection (g) don't hurt telephone ratepayers or competition in any telecommunications market. (i) Additional definitions. (1) "In-region State" means a State where a Bell company (or an affiliate) was authorized to provide wireline telephone service under the AT&T Consent Decree reorganization plan, as it stood the day before February 8, 1996. (2) "Audio programming services" means programming like what a radio broadcast station provides. (3) "Video programming service" and "other programming services" have the meanings given in section 522. (j) Certain service applications treated as in-region service applications. A Bell company's application to provide 800 service, private line service, or their equivalent is treated as an in-region service application — subject to subsection (b)(1) — if the service ends in one of the company's in-region States and lets the called party choose the interLATA carrier.