This article has been written by Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe, P.C. Please contact them if you have any questions about the article or need their services.
Thomas K. Crowe, Principal “firm@tkcrowe.com”
Cheng Yi Liu, Staff Attorney
Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe, P.C.
1250 24th Street, N.W.
Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202) 263-3640 (voice)
(202) 263-3641 (fax)
www.tkcrowe.com
AW OFFICES OF THOMAS K. CROWE, P.C.
LEGAL ALERT
Clients and Interested Parties:
In its Report and Order, Declaratory Ruling, and Order on Remand (“Order”) adopted on October 31, 2007, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC” or “Commission”) extended certain Local Number Portability (“LNP”) obligations to interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (“VoIP”) providers. Specifically, the Commission’s Order requires that interconnected VoIP providers ensure consumers are able port telephone numbers to and from such VoIP providers, and that such providers contribute to shared numbering administration costs. The new rules underscore the FCC’s objective of enhancing competition between interconnected VoIP providers and providers utilizing other technologies, and further illustrate the FCC’s continuing piecemeal regulation of interconnected VoIP services. The LNP obligations applicable to interconnected VoIP providers will become effective thirty (30) days after the publication of the FCC’s Order in the Federal Register.
In the Order, the Commission also decided that all carriers obligated to provide LNP, including interconnected VoIP providers, may not obstruct or delay the porting process by demanding information beyond the minimum needed to validate a requested port. The FCC concluded that, for simple ports, validation information should be limited to only four alphanumeric fields. In a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) accompanying the Order, the FCC sought comments on the possibility of imposing further LNP numbering obligations on interconnected VoIP providers and whether the FCC should adopt further rules governing the porting process. The NPRM also tentatively concluded that a 48-hour porting interval should be adopted for certain types of simple port requests.
LNP Obligations for Interconnected VoIP Providers
In its Order, the FCC extended LNP obligations and numbering administration support obligations to interconnected VoIP providers. Specifically, the Order states that an end-user customer retains the right to port-in a number to an interconnected VoIP service or to port-out the number from an interconnected VoIP service. Since most interconnected VoIP providers will make numbers available to their customers through arrangements with other carriers (i.e., numbering partners), both the interconnected VoIP provider and its numbering partner are responsible for facilitating a customer’s request to port a number. Thus, an interconnected VoIP provider has an affirmative legal obligation to take all steps necessary to initiate or allow the porting of a number, either through itself or through its numbering partner, on behalf of the interconnected VoIP customer (i.e., the end-user), without unreasonable delay or procedures that would deny porting of the number.
However, the FCC’s porting obligations vary depending on the type of provider (wireline or wireless) to or from which a number is to be ported. Consequently, the porting obligations (including required porting intervals) of an interconnected VoIP provider, which obtain telephone numbers through a numbering partner, will also depend on whether its numbering partner is a wireline or wireless provider. Wireline providers are only required to port numbers from other wireline providers in the same “rate center” (i.e., the geographic area that is used to determine whether a call is local or toll). Porting of numbers from wireless to wireless is not limited to a wireless provider’s rate center. For intermodal porting (i.e., porting between wireless and wireline providers), a wireline carrier is required to port a customer’s number to a wireless carrier if that wireless carrier’s coverage area overlaps with the geographic location of the customer’s wireline rate center, and wireless carriers must port a customer’s number to wireline carrier’s within the number’s originating rate center.
The Commission also noted that interconnected VoIP providers and their numbering partners may not enter into agreements that would unreasonably prohibit or delay an end-user from porting between interconnected VoIP providers, or to or from a wireline or wireless provider. Interconnected VoIP providers are also prohibited from contracting with a customer in a way which prevents or hinders the rights of the customer to port its number. The FCC noted that to the extent that interconnected VoIP providers had existing contractual provisions that had the effect of unreasonably delaying or denying porting, such provisions would not supersede or affect the porting obligations outlined in the Order. The Commission expects interconnected VoIP providers to fully inform their customers about limitations on porting between providers, especially limitations that result from the nature and use of non-geographic numbers (i.e., numbers which may be outside the rate center of a customer) by certain interconnected VoIP providers.
LNP Contribution Obligations
The Order states that since interconnected VoIP providers benefited from LNP, they should also contribute to meet its shared costs. Since it would be potentially costly and burdensome for interconnected VoIP providers to determine the portion of traffic and revenue attributable to each regional Local Number Portability Administration (“LNPA”), the FCC has decided to allow interconnected VoIP providers to allocate their end-user revenues among these regions based on the percentage of subscribers the provider serves in a particular region. Further, interconnected VoIP providers are allowed to use their billing databases to identify subscriber locations.
To implement the contribution of interconnected VoIP providers to LNP costs, the Commission will utilize annual FCC Forms 499-A filed by interconnected VoIP providers. Interconnected VoIP providers are already required, by previous Commission orders, to file the Form 499-A to assess required contributions for the Universal Service Fund, Telecommunications Relay Service fund, and FCC regulatory fees. In their 499-A filings for April 1, 2008, interconnected VoIP providers should include historical revenue information for the 2007 year, including all information necessary to allocate revenues across the seven LNPA regions. After submitting their 499-A forms, interconnected VoIP providers will receive an invoice from the appropriate fund administrators for their contribution towards the shared costs of the respective support mechanism
Simple Port Validation Fields
The FCC considers simple ports to be ports that: (1) do not involve unbundled network elements; (2) involve an account only for a single line; (3) do not include complex switch translations; and (4) do not include a reseller. To facilitate the porting process for simple ports, the FCC concluded that validation for simple ports involving wireline-to-wireline, wireless-to-wireless, and intermodal ports should not be based on more than four customer fields: (1) the 10-digit telephone number; (2) customer account number; (3) 5 digit-zip code; and (4) pass code, if applicable. For all porting, the Commission clarified that the porting-out provider may not require more information from the porting-in provider than is reasonable to validate the port request and accomplish the port. While carriers may require additional information if it is required to accomplish the port, that does not encompass information that is merely required for the carrier to settle a customer’s account. The Commission stated that a 90 day period from the release of its ruling was sufficient for carriers obligated to provide LNP to comply with its streamlined simple porting validation requirements. Therefore, all carriers with LNP obligations should be prepared to comply with this new rule for simple port validation by February 8, 2008.
FCC Seeks Comments
In a related NPRM accompanying the Order, the Commission sought public comment on whether additional numbering requirements (such as N11 code assignments in addition to the 911 and 711 requirements already applicable to interconnected VoIP) should be applied to interconnected VoIP providers in addition to the new LNP rules adopted in the Order. The FCC also sought comment on general LNP process concerns, and on whether to adopt further rules regarding the LNP validation process and porting intervals, including comments on: (1) whether the Commission should issue further guidelines to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of the porting process; (2) how the simple port validation fields will affect the validation process; (3) additional considerations for the simple port validation process; and (4) whether it should adopt specific rules requiring carriers to identify all errors possible in a request for porting and describe the basis for rejection when rejecting a port request. Finally, the Commission tentatively concluded that wireline-to-wireline and intermodal simple port requests should have a porting interval of 48-hours.
Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions about these new LNP rules.
——————————————————————————–
Cheng Yi Liu, Staff Attorney “firm@tkcrowe.com ”
Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe, P.C.
1250 24th Street, N.W.
Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202) 263-3640 (voice)
(202) 263-3641 (fax)
www.tkcrowe.com
Possibly Similar posts (auto generated):
- Polycom ads 6 VoIP providers Polycom, Inc. [NASDAQ: PLCM], the world’s leading provider of unified collaborative communications solutions, today announced the expansion of its VoIP...
- EU Telecom VoIP policy – a bad thing according to VON Leading companies on the cutting edge of developing and delivering Internet voice communications technologies, today launched a new coalition to...
- Gartner Inc Positions Verizon in Leaders Quadrant for U.S. Telecommunications Service Providers Verizon has been positioned by Gartner Inc. in the Leaders Quadrant of the analyst firm’s newly released report, “Magic Quadrant...
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I was actually looking for a definition of “interconnected voip provider” when I came across this. It is interesting, however i must point out that companies such as tollfreeforwarding.com and didww.com, expressly prohibit portinig out numbers and it appears in their TOS. Since they are not the interconnected provider and they buy those services from other companies, how can they make such an exclusion with a company that provides the DID and is therefore clealy an “interconnected voip provider”?
ON the other hand how does this play with international numbers which are sold or offered by USA companies? It seems from what I have read there is no distinction between USA and international numbers, and if that is the case, I should be able to port an international number from a USA provider to another USA provider of my choosing. I understand that not all may be equipped to do such an international port in however the porting out should not be restricted as it is now.
Just some food for thought!
Well, every innovation in telecommunication now requires portability. From toll-free numbers, mobiles phones, local numbers and now even VoIP numbers. FCC though prevents monopoly and I’m glad their doing their job in help business to remove a thorn on their backs.