By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 9, 2011//
By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 9, 2011//
Telecommunications
Entrance facilities
To satisfy its duty under 47 U.S.C. 251(c)(2), an incumbent LEC must make its existing entrance facilities available to competitors at cost-based rates if the facilities are to be used for interconnection.
Contrary to AT&T’s arguments, the FCC’s interpretation is not “plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation[s].” Auer v. Robbins, 519 U. S. 452, 461. First, it is perfectly sensible to read the FCC’s regulations to include entrance facilities as part of incumbent LECs’ networks. Second, the FCC’s views do not conflict with 47 CFR §51.5’s definition of interconnection as “the linking of two networks for the mutual exchange of traffic[, but not] the transport and termination of traffic.”
597 F. 3d 370, reversed.
Local effect: The opinion is consistent with Seventh Circuit precedent, Illinois Tell Tel. Co. v. Box, 526 F.3d 1069 (7th Cir.2008).
10-313 Talk America, Inc., v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.
Thomas, J., Scalia, J., concurring.