Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 4927
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03 (2026)

Authority over VOIP-enabled service and other telecommunications services

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
December 20, 2012
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 360 - 129th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) Except as provided in divisions (A) and (B) of section 4927.04 of the Revised Code and except to the extent required to exercise authority under federal law, the public utilities commission has no authority over any interconnected voice over internet protocol-enabled service or any telecommunications service that is not commercially available on September 13, 2010, and that employs technology that became available for commercial use only after September 13, 2010, unless the commission, upon a finding that the exercise of the commission's authority is necessary for the protection, welfare, and safety of the public, adopts rules specifying the necessary regulation. A consumer purchase of a service that is not commercially available on September 13, 2010, and that employs technology that became available for commercial use only after September 13, 2010, shall constitute a consumer transaction for purposes of sections 1345.01 to 1345.13 of the Revised Code, notwithstanding any provision of those sections to the contrary, unless the commission exercises jurisdiction over the service in accordance with this division. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of Chapter 4911. of the Revised Code, to the extent that the commission adopts rules under division (A) of this section regarding any interconnected voice over internet protocol enabled service provided to residential customers or regarding any telecommunications service that is provided to residential customers, that is not commercially available on September 13, 2010, and that employs technology that became available for commercial use only after September 13, 2010, the office of the consumers' counsel shall have authority to assist and represent residential customers in the implementation and enforcement of those rules.

(B)(1) The commission has no authority over wireless service, resellers of wireless service, or wireless service providers, except as follows:

(a) As provided under section 4905.84 of the Revised Code;

(b) With respect to division (C) of section 4927.15 of the Revised Code;

(c) As provided in divisions (B)(2), (3), and (4) of this section.

(2) The commission has authority over wireless service and wireless service providers as follows, but only to the extent authorized by federal law, including federal regulations:

(a) To the extent that the commission carries out the acts described in divisions (A), (B), (C), (D), and (F) of section 4927.04 of the Revised Code;

(b) As provided in sections 4927.05, 4927.20, and 4927.21 of the Revised Code.

(3) The requirements of sections 4905.10, 4905.14, and 4911.18 of the Revised Code shall apply to a wireless service provider.

(4) The commission has such authority as is necessary to enforce division (B) of this section.

(C) For purposes of sections 4927.01 to 4927.21 of the Revised Code, sections 4903.02, 4903.03, 4903.24, 4903.25, 4905.04, 4905.05, 4905.06, 4905.13, 4905.15, 4905.16, 4905.17, 4905.22, 4905.26, 4905.27, 4905.28, 4905.29, 4905.31, 4905.32, 4905.33, 4905.35, 4905.37, 4905.38, 4905.39, 4905.48, 4905.54, 4905.55, 4905.56, and 4905.60 of the Revised Code do not apply to a telephone company or, as applicable, to an officer, employee, or agent of such company or provider, except to the extent necessary for the commission to carry out sections 4927.01 to 4927.21 of the Revised Code.

(D) Except as specifically authorized in sections 4927.01 to 4927.21 of the Revised Code, the commission has no authority over the quality of service and the service rates, terms, and conditions of telecommunications service provided to end users by a telephone company.

(E) The commission shall initially adopt the rules required by this chapter not later than one hundred twenty days after September 13, 2010. Subject to the authority granted to the commission under this chapter, the commission may adopt other rules, including rules regarding the removal from tariffs of services that were required to be filed in tariffs prior to September 13, 2010, as it finds necessary to carry out this chapter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1996–2008 · leading case: Disc. Cellular, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 112 Ohio St. 3d 360 (Ohio 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Disc. Cellular, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 112 Ohio St. 3d 360 (Ohio 2007). · cites it 29× “{¶ 18} Thus, the General Assembly has expressly granted the PUCO the authority to exempt, by order, telephone companies from the requirements of certain statutes, rules, and orders and from traditional regulatory requirements.”
Time Warner AxS v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 75 Ohio St. 3d 229 (Ohio 1996). · cites it 4× “Thus, the General Assembly prohibited the commission from deregulat *236 ing the traditional monopoly services in R.C. 4927.03. However, the commission was given limited authority to use non-traditional rate-setting methods for these monopoly services under R.”
Constellation NewEnergy, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 104 Ohio St. 3d 530 (Ohio 2004). “The benefits of alternative rate treatment and deregulation for the local exchange company under R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 are to be balanced by an equal offset of increased competition, infrastructure commitments, and other benefits to the ratepayers.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). · cites it 23× “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). · cites it 25× “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
Stephens v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 806 N.E.2d 527 (Ohio 2004). · cites it 8× “{¶ 3} R.C. 4927.03, 2 the statutory underpinning of both the EARF Rulemaking proceedings and the Sprint Application proceedings, provides: {¶ 4} “[T]he public utilities commission, upon its own initiative or the application of a telephone company or companies, after notice,…”
Time Warner AxS v. Pub. Util. Comm., 1996 Ohio 224 (Ohio 1996). · cites it 4× “The benefits of alternative rate treatment and deregulation for the local exchange company under R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 are to be balanced by an equal offset of increased competition, infrastructure commitments, and other benefits to the ratepayers.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A) — 3 cases
Stephens v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 806 N.E.2d 527 (Ohio 2004). “{¶ 3} R.C. 4927.03, 2 the statutory underpinning of both the EARF Rulemaking proceedings and the Sprint Application proceedings, provides: {¶ 4} “[T]he public utilities commission, upon its own initiative or the application of a telephone company or companies, after notice,…”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A)(1) — 6 cases
Disc. Cellular, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 112 Ohio St. 3d 360 (Ohio 2007). “{¶ 18} Thus, the General Assembly has expressly granted the PUCO the authority to exempt, by order, telephone companies from the requirements of certain statutes, rules, and orders and from traditional regulatory requirements.”
Time Warner AxS v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 75 Ohio St. 3d 229 (Ohio 1996). “Thus, the General Assembly prohibited the commission from deregulat *236 ing the traditional monopoly services in R.C. 4927.03. However, the commission was given limited authority to use non-traditional rate-setting methods for these monopoly services under R.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
Time Warner AxS v. Pub. Util. Comm., 1996 Ohio 224 (Ohio 1996). “The benefits of alternative rate treatment and deregulation for the local exchange company under R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 are to be balanced by an equal offset of increased competition, infrastructure commitments, and other benefits to the ratepayers.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A)(1)(a) — 2 cases
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A)(2) — 2 cases
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A)(2)(b) — 2 cases
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A)(2)(c) — 2 cases
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A)(2)(d) — 2 cases
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A)(3) — 2 cases
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(A)(l)(a) — 1 case
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(C) — 3 cases
Disc. Cellular, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 112 Ohio St. 3d 360 (Ohio 2007). “{¶ 18} Thus, the General Assembly has expressly granted the PUCO the authority to exempt, by order, telephone companies from the requirements of certain statutes, rules, and orders and from traditional regulatory requirements.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4927.03(D) — 3 cases
Disc. Cellular, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 112 Ohio St. 3d 360 (Ohio 2007). “{¶ 18} Thus, the General Assembly has expressly granted the PUCO the authority to exempt, by order, telephone companies from the requirements of certain statutes, rules, and orders and from traditional regulatory requirements.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 301 (Ohio 2008). “02, which sets forth the policy for alternative regulation, in concert with R.C. 4927.03, which sets forth the requirements for eligibility.”
Ohio Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 117 Ohio St. 3d 289 (Ohio 2008). “02(B) directs that the commission use these policy guidelines to implement R.C. 4927.03 and 4927.04 and to reduce or eliminate the regulation of telephone companies under those sections.”
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.