47 C.F.R. § 51.911

Access reciprocal compensation rates for competitive LECs

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

(a) Caps on Access Reciprocal Compensation and switched access rates. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Commission's rules:

(1) In the case of Competitive LECs operating in an area served by a Price Cap Carrier, no such Competitive LEC may increase the rate for any originating or terminating intrastate switched access service above the rate for such service in effect on December 29, 2011.

(2) In the case of Competitive LEC operating in an area served by an incumbent local exchange carrier that is a Rate-of-Return Carrier or Competitive LECs that are subject to the rural exemption in § 61.26(e) of this chapter, no such Competitive LEC may increase the rate for any originating or terminating intrastate switched access service above the rate for such service in effect on December 29, 2011, with the exception of intrastate originating access service. For such Competitive LECs, intrastate originating access service subject to this subpart shall remain subject to the same state rate regulation in effect December 31, 2011, as may be modified by the state thereafter.

(b) [Reserved]

(c) Beginning July 1, 2013, notwithstanding any other provision of the Commission's rules, all Competitive Local Exchange Carrier Access Reciprocal Compensation rates for switched exchange access services subject to this subpart shall be no higher than the Access Reciprocal Compensation rates charged by the competing incumbent local exchange carrier, in accordance with the same procedures specified in § 61.26 of this chapter.

(d) Cap on Database Query Charge. A Competitive Local Exchange Carrier assessing a tariffed intrastate or interstate Toll Free Database Query Charge shall cap such charge at the rate in effect on December 28, 2020.

(e) Transition of cap on Database Query Charge. Beginning July 1, 2021, notwithstanding any other provision of the Commission's rules in this chapter, a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier assessing a tariffed intrastate or interstate Toll Free Database Query Charge shall revise its tariffs as necessary to ensure that its intrastate and interstate Toll Free Database Query Charges do not exceed the rates charged by the competing incumbent local exchange carrier, as defined in § 61.26(a)(2) of this chapter.

[76 FR 73856, Nov. 29, 2011, as amended at 77 FR 48452, Aug. 14, 2012; 85 FR 75917, Nov. 27, 2020; 85 FR 75917, Nov. 27, 2020; 91 FR 20375, Apr. 16, 2026]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2020–2022 · leading case: At&t Corp. v. Fcc, 970 F.3d 344 (D.C. Cir. 2020).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

At&t Corp. v. Fcc, 970 F.3d 344 (D.C. Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “Subsection (a) prohibits the carriers from increasing their intrastate rates above those in effect on December 29, 2011.”

Inteliquent, Inc. v. FCC, 35 F.4th 797 (D.C. Cir. 2022). “This is possible, in part, because the competitive intermediate switch carriers’ tariffs are not based upon their costs; instead, they are capped at the rates charged by the incumbent LEC, see 47 C.F.R. § 51.911 (c). The perversity of the arbitrage is compounded because the…”

At&t Corp. v. Fcc (Pub.) (D.C. Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “The FCC rested its determination on 47 C.F.R. § 51.911 , which it calls Rule 51.”

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.