U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

69—010 

" ! SENATE 110TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2007

110–219 

Calendar No. 468 

SAME NUMBER ACT OF 2007 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND 

TRANSPORTATION 

ON

S. 1769 

NOVEMBER 2, 2007.—Ordered to be printed 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTScongress.#13
(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman 

TED STEVENS, Alaska, Vice-Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

THOMAS CARPER, Delaware 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

TRENT LOTT, Mississippi 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

MARGARET CUMMISKY, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

LILA HELMS, Deputy Staff Director and Policy Director 

JEAN TOAL EISEN, Senior Advisor and Deputy Policy Director 

CHRISTINE KURTH, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel 

PAUL J. NAGLE, Republican Chief Counsel 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
Calendar No. 468 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 110–219 

SAME NUMBER ACT OF 2007 

NOVEMBER 2, 2007.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. INOUYE, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1769] 

The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to 

which was referred the bill (S. 1769) to amend the Communications 

Act of 1934 to facilitate number portability in order to increase consumer choice of voice service provider, having considered the same, 

reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends 

that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of S. 1769 is to clarify the authority of the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC) to facilitate number portability 

in order to increase consumer choice among voice service providers. 

BACKGROUND AND NEEDS

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act) opened local exchange markets to competition by removing barriers that thwarted 

the ability of new entrants to provide competitive local telecommunications service. Among the steps that Congress took to effectuate this goal, was to require all local exchange carriers (LECs) 

to provide number portability. More specifically, section 251(b)(2) of 

the 1996 Act requires all LECs ‘‘to provide, to the extent technically feasible, number portability in accordance with requirements prescribed by the [FCC].’’ The 1996 Act defines number portability as ‘‘the ability of users 

of telecommunications services to retain, at the same location, existing telecommunications numbers without impairment of quality, 

reliability, or convenience when switching from one telecommunications carrier to another.’’ Number portability is essential to comVerDate Aug 31 2005 03:44 Nov 03, 2007 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\SR219.XXX SR219

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
2 

petition. Consumers are unable to enjoy the benefits of competition 

if they are unable to switch carriers without having to change their 

phone numbers. For residential consumers, changing numbers can 

be a substantial inconvenience, disconnecting them from friends 

and family. For business consumers, it also can involve substantial 

costs, ranging from lost opportunities to reprinting of corporate stationery and other business paraphernalia. Being able to change 

carriers and keep a phone number promotes continuity for consumers and engenders more competition among carriers. 

Following passage of the 1996 Act, the FCC issued a series of orders implementing Section 251(b)(2) and phasing in number portability requirements. The FCC has implemented a four business 

day porting period for ports between wireline carriers. The wireless 

industry has voluntarily reached a process wherein ports can be accomplished between wireless carriers in two and a half hours. 

There are no FCC porting rules for IP-enabled voice service providers (either to or from such providers). 

As the communications market has evolved, more consumers are 

seeking to port numbers between service providers and technologies. In addition, the growth of new classes of service, from 

cable providers and other voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) providers, results in new complexities. These changes in the marketplace have increased disputes between carriers, especially over 

intermodal ports, which some carriers allege take unreasonably 

long periods of time to complete. Other competitive carriers contend that some incumbent porting-out carriers require unnecessary 

amounts of customer information from the porting-in carrier before 

proceeding with the port. As a result of these technical disputes, 

consumers have experienced porting failures, delays, and occasionally dropped service. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS

S. 1769, the Same Number Act of 2007, would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to facilitate number portability in order to 

increase consumer choice of service providers. 

The bill would clarify that all providers of voice service have the 

duty to provide, to the extent technically feasible, number portability. The bill defines voice service as a telecommunications service or any service that is not a telecommunications service but otherwise is defined by the FCC in its regulations as an IP-enabled 

voice service. 

To ensure that number porting proceeds smoothly for consumers 

and carriers alike, the bill would require the FCC to establish number portability performance standards. These standards would include classes of ports, with expeditious time frames for each class 

of port. These time frames would be made available to the public 

on the FCC website. These standards also would include requirements governing the exchange of data between voice service providers in connection with porting a number. In addition, they 

would encourage the reasonable automation of the porting process, 

with a goal toward reducing errors and ensuring an efficient 

porting process for consumers. 

The bill would require voice service providers to submit an annual report to the FCC on its number portability activity during 

the preceding year. The bill also would require the FCC to submit 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
3 

an annual report to Congress on the effectiveness and efficiency of 

its number portability standards. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

The Same Number Act of 2007 (S. 1769) was introduced by Senator Stevens on July 11, 2007, and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. The bill is cosponsored by Senator Inouye. On July 12, 2007, the Committee 

held a hearing on ‘‘Number Portability.’’ On July 19, 2007, the 

Committee considered the bill in an open Executive Session. The 

bill was adopted by voice vote. The Committee, without objection, 

ordered that S. 1769 be reported. 

ESTIMATED COSTS

In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the Congressional Budget 

Act of 1974, the Committee provides the following cost estimate, 

prepared by the Congressional Budget Office: 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, September 5, 2007. 

Hon. DANIEL K. INOUYE, 

Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1769, the Same Number Act 

of 2007. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Tyler 

Kruzich (for federal costs) and Jacob Kuipers (for the private-sector 

impact). 

Sincerely, 

PETER R. ORSZAG, Director. 

Enclosure. 

S. 1769—Same Number Act of 2007 

S. 1769 would require the Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC) to establish standards that would allow voice-service customers to maintain the same phone number when switching between providers. In addition, S. 1769 would require the FCC to 

designate one or more impartial entities to administer telecommunications and voice-service numbering and would require 

the FCC to report on the effectiveness of number portability performance standards every year. The FCC would collect fees from 

voice-service providers to cover the cost of establishing numbering 

arrangements. 

Based on information from the FCC and assuming the availability of appropriated funds, CBO estimates that implementing S. 

1769 would cost less than $500,000 in each of the fiscal years from 

2008 to 2012. The FCC already has number portability programs 

in place for other types of telecommunications providers, and CBO 

estimates that implementing the bill would not significantly affect 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
4 

FCC spending for such programs. Further, the FCC expects that it 

would not collect significant new net receipts in any year because 

it has numbering administration arrangements already in place. 

Enacting S. 1769 would not affect revenues. 

S. 1769 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no 

cost on state, local or tribal governments. 

S. 1769 would impose new private-sector mandates, as defined in 

UMRA, on providers of voice services including wireless, wireline, 

and Voice-Over-Internet-Protocol. The bill would require providers 

of voice services to make number portability available in accordance with requirements prescribed by the FCC and to submit reports to the FCC on their activities related to number portability. 

CBO cannot determine whether the aggregate direct costs of complying with those mandates would exceed the annual threshold for 

private-sector mandates established in UMRA ($131 million in 

2007, adjusted annually for inflation) because such costs would depend on the regulations to be issued under the bill. 

The bill would direct the FCC to implement standards for number portability among all providers of voice services that at a minimum establish: • Expeditious time frames for each class of number portability; and • Requirements governing the exchange of data between 

voice-service providers in connection with number portability. 

Because those standards have not been established, CBO cannot 

estimate the cost to the private sector for complying with such regulations. 

In addition, the bill would require providers of voice services to 

submit a report each year to the FCC on their number portability 

activity. According to the FCC and industry sources, voice-service 

providers currently record such information for their own business 

purposes. Consequently, CBO estimates that the cost of complying 

with this reporting requirement would be small relative to UMRA’s 

annual threshold. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Tyler Kruzich (for 

federal costs) and Jacob Kuipers (for the private-sector impact). 

This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the legislation, as reported: 

NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED

S. 1769 is intended to facilitate number portability to increase 

consumer choice of voice service providers. The persons subject to 

the regulations the FCC would implement under this section are 

providers of voice service as defined under the bill. 

ECONOMIC IMPACT

S. 1769 would not have an adverse impact on the Nation’s economy. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
5 

PRIVACY

The reported bill would have no significant impact on the personal privacy of U.S. citizens. 

PAPERWORK

The reported bill should not significantly increase paperwork requirements for individuals and businesses. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

The short title is the ‘‘Same Number Act of 2007’’. 

Section 2. Voice service number portability 

Subsection (a).—Subsection (a) would add a new section 715 to 

Title VII of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Communications Act). 

New subsection (a) would require providers of voice services to 

provide number portability, to the extent technically feasible, in accordance with requirements prescribed by the FCC. 

New subsection (b)(1) would require the FCC to establish number 

portability performance standards within 270 days after the date 

of enactment of the Same Number Act of 2007. New section (b)(1) 

further would establish minimum criteria for number portability 

performance standards. These minimum criteria would direct the 

FCC to identify classes of ports (new section (b)(1)(A)); establish expeditious time frames for each class of port (new section (b)(1)(B)); 

establish requirements governing the exchange of data between 

voice service providers in connection with porting a number (new 

section (b)(1)(C)); and encourage automation of the porting process 

(new section (b)(1)(D)). 

New subsection (b)(2) would permit the FCC, in adopting performance standards pursuant to new section (b)(1), to establish 

more flexible standards for different classes of voice service providers, if it finds that uniform application of a single standard or 

time frame would result in unreasonable costs for a class of providers. 

New subsection (b)(3) would direct the FCC to make the standard timeframes it establishes pursuant to new section (b)(1) available to the public on its website. 

New subsection (c)(1) would require voice service providers to 

submit an annual report to the FCC on the provider’s number portability activity during the preceding 12 months. This report would 

be required to include a statement of the number of ports it failed 

to complete within the time required by the standards and an explanation of the reason for such failures. 

New subsection (c)(2) would require the FCC to submit a report 

each year to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on 

Energy and Commerce on the effectiveness and efficiency of the 

number portability performance standards established under this 

new section. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
6 

New subsection (c)(3) would sunset the reporting requirements of 

new section (c)(1) and new section (c)(2) 60 months after the date 

on which the FCC issues a final rule pursuant to new section (b). 

New subsection (d)(1) would direct the FCC to designate one or 

more impartial entities to administer telecommunications and voice 

service numbering and ensure that numbers are available on an 

equitable basis. New section (d)(1) would clarify that the FCC has 

exclusive jurisdiction of those portions of the North American Numbering Plan that relate to the United States. Nothing in new section (d)(1) would preclude the FCC from delegating to state commissions or other entities all or some of this jurisdiction. New section (d)(1) would be substantially similar to existing section 

251(e)(1) of the Communications Act. 

New subsection (d)(2) would state that the costs of establishing 

numbering administration arrangements and number portability 

shall be borne by all voice service providers, on a competitively 

neutral basis. New section (d)(2) would be substantially similar to 

existing section 251(e)(2) of the Communications Act. 

New subsection (d)(3) would direct the FCC and any agency or 

entity to which the FCC has delegated authority to designate 9-1- 

1 as the universal emergency telephone number within the United 

States. This designation would apply to both wireline and wireless 

telephone service. In making this designation, the FCC and any 

agency or entity to which it has delegated authority would be required to provide appropriate transition periods for areas where 9- 

1-1 is not in use on the date of enactment of the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999. New section (d)(3) would 

be substantially similar to existing section 251(e)(3) of the Communications Act. 

New subsection (e) would define the term ‘‘voice service’’ as used 

in this new section. 

Subsection (b).—Subsection (b) would amend Section 251 of the 

Communications Act to conform with this bill. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(7) 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, as 

reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets, new material is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934 

TITLE II—COMMON CARRIERS

PART II. DEVELOPMENT OF COMPETITIVE MARKETS

SEC. 251. INTERCONNECTION. 

(a) GENERAL DUTY OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS.—Each 

telecommunications carrier has the duty—

(1) to interconnect directly or indirectly with the facilities 

and equipment of other telecommunications carriers; and 

(2) not to install network features, functions, or capabilities 

that do not comply with the guidelines and standards established pursuant to section 255 or 256. 

(b) OBLIGATIONS OF ALL LOCAL EXCHANGE CARRIERS.—Each local 

exchange carrier has the following duties: 

(1) RESALE.—The duty not to prohibit, and not to impose unreasonable or discriminatory conditions or limitations on, the 

resale of its telecommunications services. 

ø(2) NUMBER PORTABILITY.—The duty to provide, to the extent technically feasible, number portability in accordance with 

requirements prescribed by the Commission.¿ 

ø(3)¿ (2) DIALING PARITY.—The duty to provide dialing parity 

to competing providers of telephone exchange service and telephone toll service, and the duty to permit all such providers to 

have nondiscriminatory access to telephone numbers, operator 

services, directory assistance, and directory listing, with no unreasonable dialing delays. 

ø(4)¿ (3) ACCESS TO RIGHTS-OF-WAY.—The duty to afford access to the poles, ducts, conduits, and rights-of-way of such carrier to competing providers of telecommunications services on 

rates, terms, and conditions that are consistent with section 

224. 

ø(5)¿ (4) RECIPROCAL COMPENSATION.—The duty to establish 

reciprocal compensation arrangements for the transport and 

termination of telecommunications. 

(c) ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS OF INCUMBENT LOCAL EXCHANGE

CARRIERS.—In addition to the duties contained in subsection (b), 

each incumbent local exchange carrier has the following duties: 

(1) DUTY TO NEGOTIATE.—The duty to negotiate in good faith 

in accordance with section 252 the particular terms and condiVerDate Aug 31 2005 03:44 Nov 03, 2007 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\SR219.XXX SR219

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
8 

tions of agreements to fulfill the duties described in paragraphs (1) through (5) of subsection (b) and this subsection. 

The requesting telecommunications carrier also has the duty to 

negotiate in good faith the terms and conditions of such agreements. 

(2) INTERCONNECTION.—The duty to provide, for the facilities 

and equipment of any requesting telecommunications carrier, 

interconnection with the local exchange carrier’s network— (A) for the transmission and routing of telephone exchange service and exchange access; 

(B) at any technically feasible point within the carrier’s 

network; 

(C) that is at least equal in quality to that provided by 

the local exchange carrier to itself or to any subsidiary, affiliate, or any other party to which the carrier provides 

interconnection; and 

(D) on rates, terms, and conditions that are just, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory, in accordance with the terms 

and conditions of the agreement and the requirements of 

this section and section 252. 

(3) UNBUNDLED ACCESS.—The duty to provide, to any requesting telecommunications carrier for the provision of a telecommunications service, nondiscriminatory access to network 

elements on an unbundled basis at any technically feasible 

point on rates, terms, and conditions that are just, reasonable, 

and nondiscriminatory in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement and the requirements of this section 

and section 252. An incumbent local exchange carrier shall 

provide such unbundled network elements in a manner that allows requesting carriers to combine such elements in order to 

provide such telecommunications service. 

(4) RESALE.—The duty—

(A) to offer for resale at wholesale rates any telecommunications service that the carrier provides at retail 

to subscribers who are not telecommunications carriers; 

and 

(B) not to prohibit, and not to impose unreasonable or 

discriminatory conditions or limitations on, the resale of 

such telecommunications service, except that a State commission may, consistent with regulations prescribed by the 

Commission under this section, prohibit a reseller that obtains at wholesale rates a telecommunications service that 

is available at retail only to a category of subscribers from 

offering such service to a different category of subscribers. 

(5) NOTICE OF CHANGES.—The duty to provide reasonable 

public notice of changes in the information necessary for the 

transmission and routing of services using that local exchange 

carrier’s facilities or networks, as well as of any other changes 

that would affect the interoperability of those facilities and 

networks. 

(6) COLLOCATION.—The duty to provide, on rates, terms, and 

conditions that are just, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory, for 

physical collocation of equipment necessary for interconnection 

or access to unbundled network elements at the premises of 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
9 

the local exchange carrier, except that the carrier may provide 

for virtual collocation if the local exchange carrier demonstrates to the State commission that physical collocation is 

not practical for technical reasons or because of space limitations. 

(d) IMPLEMENTATION.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Within 6 months after the date of enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Commission 

shall complete all actions necessary to establish regulations to 

implement the requirements of this section. 

(2) ACCESS STANDARDS.—In determining what network elements should be made available for purposes of subsection 

(c)(3), the Commission shall consider, at a minimum, whether— (A) access to such network elements as are proprietary 

in nature is necessary; and 

(B) the failure to provide access to such network elements would impair the ability of the telecommunications 

carrier seeking access to provide the services that it seeks 

to offer. 

(3) PRESERVATION OF STATE ACCESS REGULATIONS.—In prescribing and enforcing regulations to implement the requirements of this section, the Commission shall not preclude the 

enforcement of any regulation, order, or policy of a State commission that— (A) establishes access and interconnection obligations of 

local exchange carriers; 

(B) is consistent with the requirements of this section; 

and 

(C) does not substantially prevent implementation of the 

requirements of this section and the purposes of this part. 

ø(e) NUMBERING ADMINISTRATION.—

ø(1) COMMISSION AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION.—The Commission shall create or designate one or more impartial entities 

to administer telecommunications numbering and to make 

such numbers available on an equitable basis. The Commission 

shall have exclusive jurisdiction over those portions of the 

North American Numbering Plan that pertain to the United 

States. Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the Commission from delegating to State commissions or other entities all 

or any portion of such jurisdiction. 

ø(2) COSTS.—The cost of establishing telecommunications 

numbering administration arrangements and number portability shall be borne by all telecommunications carriers on a 

competitively neutral basis as determined by the Commission. 

ø(3) UNIVERSAL EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBER.—The Commission and any agency or entity to which the Commission has 

delegated authority under this subsection shall designate 9-1- 

1 as the universal emergency telephone number within the 

United States for reporting an emergency to appropriate authorities and requesting assistance. The designation shall 

apply to both wireline and wireless telephone service. In making the designation, the Commission (and any such agency or 

entity) shall provide appropriate transition periods for areas in 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
10 

which 9-1-1 is not in use as an emergency telephone number 

on the date of enactment of the Wireless Communications and 

Public Safety Act of 1999.¿ 

ø(f)¿ (e) EXEMPTIONS, SUSPENSIONS, AND MODIFICATIONS.—

(1) EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN RURAL TELEPHONE COMPANIES.—

(A) EXEMPTION.—Subsection (c) of this section shall not 

apply to a rural telephone company until (i) such company 

has received a bona fide request for interconnection, services, or network elements, and (ii) the State commission 

determines (under subparagraph (B)) that such request is 

not unduly economically burdensome, is technically feasible, and is consistent with section 254 (other than subsections (b)(7) and (c)(1)(D) thereof). 

(B) STATE TERMINATION OF EXEMPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE.—The party making a bona fide request of 

a rural telephone company for interconnection, services, or 

network elements shall submit a notice of its request to 

the State commission. The State commission shall conduct 

an inquiry for the purpose of determining whether to terminate the exemption under subparagraph (A). Within 120 

days after the State commission receives notice of the request, the State commission shall terminate the exemption 

if the request is not unduly economically burdensome, is 

technically feasible, and is consistent with section 254 

(other than subsections (b)(7) and (c)(1)(D) thereof). Upon 

termination of the exemption, a State commission shall establish an implementation schedule for compliance with 

the request that is consistent in time and manner with 

Commission regulations. 

(C) LIMITATION ON EXEMPTION.—The exemption provided 

by this paragraph shall not apply with respect to a request 

under subsection (c) from a cable operator providing video 

programming, and seeking to provide any telecommunications service, in the area in which the rural telephone 

company provides video programming. The limitation contained in this subparagraph shall not apply to a rural telephone company that is providing video programming on 

the date of enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 

1996. 

(2) SUSPENSIONS AND MODIFICATIONS FOR RURAL CARRIERS.—

A local exchange carrier with fewer than 2 percent of the Nation’s subscriber lines installed in the aggregate nationwide 

may petition a State commission for a suspension or modification of the application of a requirement or requirements of subsection (b) or (c) to telephone exchange service facilities specified in such petition. The State commission shall grant such 

petition to the extent that, and for such duration as, the State 

commission determines that such suspension or modification—

(A) is necessary—

(i) to avoid a significant adverse economic impact on 

users of telecommunications services generally; 

(ii) to avoid imposing a requirement that is unduly 

economically burdensome; or 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
11 

(iii) to avoid imposing a requirement that is technically infeasible; and 

(B) is consistent with the public interest, convenience, 

and necessity. 

The State commission shall act upon any petition filed under 

this paragraph within 180 days after receiving such petition. 

Pending such action, the State commission may suspend enforcement of the requirement or requirements to which the petition applies with respect to the petitioning carrier or carriers. 

ø(g)¿ (f) CONTINUED ENFORCEMENT OF EXCHANGE ACCESS AND

INTERCONNECTION REQUIREMENTS.—On and after the date of enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, each local exchange 

carrier, to the extent that it provides wireline services, shall provide exchange access, information access, and exchange services for 

such access to interexchange carriers and information service providers in accordance with the same equal access and nondiscriminatory interconnection restrictions and obligations (including receipt of compensation) that apply to such carrier on the date immediately preceding the date of enactment of the Telecommunications 

Act of 1996 under any court order, consent decree, or regulation, 

order, or policy of the Commission, until such restrictions and obligations are explicitly superseded by regulations prescribed by the 

Commission after such date of enactment. During the period beginning on such date of enactment and until such restrictions and obligations are so superseded, such restrictions and obligations shall 

be enforceable in the same manner as regulations of the Commission. 

ø(h)¿ (g) DEFINITION OF INCUMBENT LOCAL EXCHANGE CARRIER.—

(1) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘incumbent local exchange carrier’’ means, with respect to an 

area, the local exchange carrier that—

(A) on the date of enactment of the Telecommunications 

Act of 1996, provided telephone exchange service in such 

area; and 

(B)(i) on such date of enactment, was deemed to be a 

member of the exchange carrier association pursuant to 

section 69.601(b) of the Commission’s regulations (47 

C.F.R. 69.601(b)); or 

(ii) is a person or entity that, on or after such date of 

enactment, became a successor or assign of a member described in clause (i). 

(2) TREATMENT OF COMPARABLE CARRIERS AS INCUMBENTS.—

The Commission may, by rule, provide for the treatment of a 

local exchange carrier (or class or category thereof) as an incumbent local exchange carrier for purposes of this section if—

(A) such carrier occupies a position in the market for 

telephone exchange service within an area that is comparable to the position occupied by a carrier described in 

paragraph (1); 

(B) such carrier has substantially replaced an incumbent 

local exchange carrier described in paragraph (1); and 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
12 

(C) such treatment is consistent with the public interest, 

convenience, and necessity and the purposes of this section. 

ø(i)¿ (h) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this section shall be 

construed to limit or otherwise affect the Commission’s authority 

under section 201. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 715. NUMBER PORTABILITY. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—A provider of voice services has the duty to provide, to the extent technically feasible, number portability in accordance with requirements prescribed by the Commission. 

(b) STANDARDS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Within 270 days after the date of enactment 

of the Same Number Act of 2007, to facilitate consumer choice 

among voice service providers the Commission shall establish 

number portability performance standards for voice service providers that, at a minimum—

(A) identify classes of ports; 

(B) where appropriate, establish expeditious time frames 

for each class of port, which may include timeframes for 

different stages of the porting; 

(C) establish requirements governing the exchange of 

data between voice service providers in connection with 

porting a number, including any limits on customer validation fields or other data fields that may be required by 

voice service providers; and 

(D) encourage the reasonable automation of the porting 

process. 

(2) FLEXIBILITY.—In adopting performance standards under 

paragraph (1), the Commission may establish more flexible 

standards for different classes of providers within a type of 

voice service provider if the Commission determines that the 

uniform application of a single standard or time frame for compliance would result in unreasonable compliance costs for a 

class of providers. 

(3) PUBLIC ACCESS TO TIMEFRAMES.—The Commission shall 

make available to the public on its Internet website any standard timeframes established by the Commission under paragraph (1). 

(c) PORTING REPORTING.—

(1) PROVIDERS.—Beginning 1 year after the date on which the 

Commission issues a final rule under subsection (b) establishing number portability performance standards for voice 

service providers, a voice service provider shall submit a report 

each year to the Commission on its number portability activity 

during the preceding 12 months, including a statement of the 

number of ports it failed to complete within the time required 

by the standards, and an explanation of the reason for such 

failures. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
13 

(2) COMMISSION.—Beginning 1 year after the date on which 

the Commission issues the final rule under subsection (b), the 

Commission shall submit a report each year to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the 

House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce 

on the effectiveness and efficiency of the number portability performance standards for voice service providers established 

under this section. 

(3) SUNSET.—The requirements of this subsection shall cease 

to apply 60 months after the date on which the Commission 

issues such final rule. 

(d) NUMBERING ADMINISTRATION.—

(1) COMMISSION AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION.—The Commission shall designate 1 or more impartial entities to administer telecommunications and voice service numbering and to 

ensure that numbers are available on an equitable basis. The 

Commission has exclusive jurisdiction of those portions of the 

North American Numbering Plan that pertain to the United 

States. Nothing in this subsection precludes the Commission 

from delegating to State Commission or other entities all or a 

portion of such jurisdiction. 

(2) COSTS.—The costs of establishing numbering administration arrangements and number portability shall be borne by all 

voice service providers on a competitively neutral basis, as determined by the Commission. 

(3) UNIVERSAL EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBER.—The Commission and any agency or entity to which the Commission has 

delegated authority under section 715(e) shall designate 9–1–1 

as the universal emergency telephone number within the United 

States for reporting an emergency to appropriate authorities 

and requesting assistance. The designation shall apply to both 

wireline and wireless telephone service. In making the designation, the Commission (and any such agency or entity) shall provide appropriate transition periods for areas in which 9–1–1 is 

not in use as an emergency telephone number on the date of enactment of the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act 

of 1999. 

(e) VOICE SERVICE DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘voice service’’ means— (1) a telecommunications service; or 

(2) any service that is not a telecommunications service, but 

that otherwise is an IP-enabled voice service as defined in section 9.3 of the Commission’s regulations (47 C.F.R. 9.3), as 

those regulations may be amended by the Commission from 

time to time. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS