47 C.F.R. § 1.1407

Remedies

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) If the Commission determines that the rate, term, or condition complained of is not just and reasonable, it may prescribe a just and reasonable rate, term, or condition and may:

(1) Terminate the unjust and/or unreasonable rate, term, or condition;

(2) Substitute in the pole attachment agreement the just and reasonable rate, term, or condition established by the Commission; and/or

(3) Order a refund, or payment, if appropriate. The refund or payment will normally be the difference between the amount paid under the unjust and/or unreasonable rate, term, or condition and the amount that would have been paid under the rate, term, or condition established by the Commission, plus interest, consistent with the applicable statute of limitations.

(b) If the Commission determines that access to a pole, duct, conduit, or right-of-way has been unlawfully denied or delayed, it may order that access be permitted within a specified time frame and in accordance with specified rates, terms, and conditions.

[83 FR 44841, Sept. 4, 2018]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2023 · leading case: Georgia Power Co. v. Teleport Commc'ns Atlanta, Inc., 346 F.3d 1033 (11th Cir. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Georgia Power Co. v. Teleport Commc'ns Atlanta, Inc., 346 F.3d 1033 (11th Cir. 2003). “” 47 C.F.R. § 1.1407 (a). Commission rules do allow for additional filings, see 47 C.”

Verizon PA LLC & Verizon North LLC v. PA PUC (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2023). · cites it 8× “4 (a) (incorporating 47 C.F.R. §1.1407 (a)) (emphasis added). Here, having determined that the rates in the parties’ JUAs were unjust and unreasonable, the PUC properly exercised its statutory and regulatory authority by amending the terms of the JUAs to reflect the New Telecom…”

Texas Utils. Elec. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 997 F.2d 925 (D.C. Cir. 1993). “47 C.F.R. § 1.1407 (a). However, the Commission explained, TU offered nothing: *246 The utility offers no cost justification for the disputed surcharge, nor does [TU] suggest that it incurs any additional costs in preparing or maintaining its poles as a result of TCI’s…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.