DOCSLIB.ORG

STATE of ILLINOIS ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION Illinois

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
STATE of ILLINOIS ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION Illinois STATE OF ILLINOIS ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION Illinois Bell Telephone Company : : Petition for Arbitration of : 11-0083 Interconnection Agreement with Big : River Telephone Company, LLC. : ARBITRATION DECISION DATED: June 14, 2011 11-0083 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY .................................................................................... 1 II. APPLICABLE AUTHORITY .................................................................................. 2 III. ISSUES IN DISPUTE ........................................................................................... 4 IV. RECIPROCAL COMPENSATION -- BILL-AND-KEEP ......................................... 4 A. Issue 1: Should the ICA provide for a bill-and-keep arrangement for traffic that is otherwise subject to reciprocal compensation but is roughly balanced? .................................................................................................. 4 1. Introduction ..................................................................................... 4 2. Staff summary of the law governing reciprocal compensation ........ 5 3. AT&T Position ................................................................................. 8 4. Big River’s Position ....................................................................... 12 5. Staff’s Position .............................................................................. 14 6. Exceptions and Replies ................................................................. 16 B. Issue No. 2: If a bill-and-keep arrangement is adopted, what terms and conditions should govern such bill-and-keep arrangements? .................. 17 C. Analysis of and Conclusions on Bill-and-Keep Issues ............................. 17 V. TRANSIT TRAFFIC SERVICE ........................................................................... 20 A. Issue No. 3: Should AT&T Illinois be required to provide transit traffic service under the ICA? ............................................................................ 20 1. AT&T Illinois’ Position ................................................................... 21 2. Big River’s Position ....................................................................... 22 3. Staff’s Position .............................................................................. 23 4. Exceptions and Replies ................................................................. 24 B. Issue No. 4: If the Commission requires the inclusion of transit in the ICA, what are the appropriate rates that AT&T Illinois should charge for such service? ................................................................................................... 24 i 11-0083 1. AT&T Illinois’ Position ................................................................... 25 2. Big River Position .......................................................................... 29 3. Staff’s Position .............................................................................. 30 4. Exceptions and Replies ................................................................. 33 C. Issue No. 5: If the Commission requires the inclusion of transit in the ICA, what are the appropriate terms and conditions for transit traffic? ............ 33 1. AT&T Illinois’ Position ................................................................... 34 2. Big River’s Position ....................................................................... 35 3. Staff’s Position .............................................................................. 36 4. Exceptions and Replies ................................................................. 36 D. Analysis of and Conclusions on Transit Traffic Service Issues ................ 37 VI. ARBITRATION STANDARDS ............................................................................ 40 VII. FINDINGS AND ORDERING PARAGRAPHS .................................................... 40 ii STATE OF ILLINOIS ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION Illinois Bell Telephone Company : : Petition for Arbitration of : 11-0083 Interconnection Agreement with Big : River Telephone Company, LLC. : ARBITRATION DECISION By the Commission: I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On January 27, 2011, Illinois Bell Telephone Company (hereafter “AT&T Illinois”) filed, with the Illinois Commerce Commission (“Commission”), a Petition seeking arbitration of an interconnection agreement (“ICA”) with Big River Telephone Company LLC (“Big River”) pursuant to Section 252(b) of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. 252(b). In the Petition, AT&T Illinois represents that AT&T Illinois and Big River attempted to negotiate terms and conditions of an ICA between them, but failed to reach agreement with respect to several points, and AT&T now requests Commission arbitration of these open issues. On February 10, 2011, pursuant to Section 761.210(b) of the Commission rules on “Arbitration Practice," 83 Ill. Adm. Code 761, AT&T Illinois filed the direct testimony of J. Scott McPhee and Carl C. Albright, Jr. On February 24, 2011, a pre-arbitration conference or hearing was held before an Administrative Law Judge. Appearances were entered by respective counsel for AT&T Illinois, Big River and the Staff of the Commission (“Staff”), and a schedule for the proceeding was established. The parties also agreed to extend the due date for entry of an arbitration decision to June 22, 2011. Big River filed its response to the Petition, and the direct testimony of Gerard J. Howe. Thereafter, the Staff of the Commission (“Staff”) submitted the direct testimony of Dr. James Zolnierek. On April 1, 2011, in response to Dr. Zolnierek’s testimony, AT&T filed the rebuttal testimony of Mr. McPhee and Big River submitted the rebuttal testimony of Mr. Howe. On April 5, 2011, an evidentiary hearing was held. At the conclusion of the hearing, the record was marked “Heard and Taken.” Thereafter, initial briefs (“IBs”) and reply briefs (“RBs”) were filed by AT&T Illinois, Big River and Staff. 11-0083 A Proposed Arbitration Decision was issued by the Administrative Law Judge. A brief on exceptions (“BOE”) was filed by Big River. Reply briefs on exceptions (“RBOEs”) were filed by AT&T Illinois and Staff. II. APPLICABLE AUTHORITY In Section III of its initial brief, titled “Applicable Statute," Staff cites the following provisions in Section 252(b)-(d) of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 252(b)-(d): (b) Agreements arrived at through compulsory arbitration. (1) Arbitration. During the period from the 135th to the 160th day (inclusive) after the date on which an incumbent local exchange carrier receives a request for negotiation under this section, the carrier or any other party to the negotiation may petition a State commission to arbitrate any open issues. (2) Duty of petitioner. (A) A party that petitions a State commission under paragraph (1) shall, at the same time as it submits the petition, provide the State commission all relevant documentation concerning-- (i) the unresolved issues; (ii) the position of each of the parties with respect to those issues; and (iii) any other issue discussed and resolved by the parties. (B) A party petitioning a State commission under paragraph (1) shall provide a copy of the petition and any documentation to the other party or parties not later than the day on which the State commission receives the petition. (3) Opportunity to respond. A non-petitioning party to a negotiation under this section may respond to the other party's petition and provide such additional information as it wishes within 25 days after the State commission receives the petition. (4) Action by State commission. (A) The State commission shall limit its consideration of any petition under paragraph (1) (and any response thereto) to the issues set forth in the petition and in the response, if any, filed under paragraph (3). (B) The State commission may require the petitioning party and the responding party to provide such information as may be necessary for the State commission to reach a decision on the unresolved issues. If any party refuses or fails unreasonably to respond on a timely basis to any reasonable request from the State commission, then the State commission may proceed on the basis of the best information available to it from whatever source derived. (C) The State commission shall resolve each issue set forth in the petition and the response, if any, by imposing appropriate conditions as required to implement subsection (c) upon the parties to the agreement, and shall conclude the resolution of any unresolved issues not later than 9 2 11-0083 months after the date on which the local exchange carrier received the request under this section. (5) Refusal to negotiate. The refusal of any other party to the negotiation to participate further in the negotiations, to cooperate with the State commission in carrying out its function as an arbitrator, or to continue to negotiate in good faith in the presence, or with the assistance, of the State commission shall be considered a failure to negotiate in good faith. (c) Standards for arbitration. In resolving by arbitration under subsection (b) any open issues and imposing conditions upon the parties to the agreement, a State commission shall-- (1) ensure that such resolution and conditions meet the requirements of section 251 [47 USCS § 251], including the regulations prescribed by the Commission pursuant to section 251 [47 USCS § 251]; (2) establish any rates for interconnection, services, or network elements according
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Illinois Bell Telephone Company, LLC AT&T Tariff ILL. C.C. NO. 22 D/B/A AT&T Illinois D/B/A AT&T Wholesale Part 22 S
    Illinois Bell Telephone Company, LLC AT&T Tariff ILL. C.C. NO. 22 d/b/a AT&T Illinois d/b/a AT&T Wholesale Part 22 Section 23 PART 22 - Resale Local Exchange Service 23rd Revised Sheet 1 SECTION 23 - Resale Local Exchange Services - Competitive Related This section sets forth the Local Exchange Services made available by Illinois Bell Telephone Company to Carrier for resale to its customers. General terms, conditions, service and feature descriptions as described in Illinois Guidebook, Part 4 and herein apply where appropriate, unless otherwise specified in this Part. The application thereof is to Carrier with regard to service ordering, repair requests or billing responsibility and to Carrier’s Customer when designating service location, use, activation, configuration, or sizing. 1. NETWORK ACCESS LINES 1.1 Network Access Line Rate Schedule (For service description, see Illinois Guidebook, Part 4, Section 2.) In addition to the following monthly rates, the End User Common Line charge and Service Provider Number Portability (SPNP) monthly charge apply. Access Area Description/Billing Codes A B C Business Direct Line NALCA NALMA NALSA Single Line Subscribers, each line $255.79(I) $341.42(I) $380.99(I) Multiline Subscribers, each line 255.79(I) 341.42(I) 380.99(I) P.B.X. Trunk/1/ Single Line Subscribers, each trunk - STF Not Applicable 255.79(I) 341.42(I) 380.99(I) - STF Applicable .04 .18 .17 Multiline Subscribers, each trunk - STF Not Applicable 255.79(I) 341.42(I) 380.99(I) - STF Applicable .04 .18 .17 Customer Owned Pay Line 0.00 2.78 6.49 COPTS Coin Line 1.39 5.67 9.72 /1/ P.B.X.
    [Show full text]
  • Illinois Bell Telephone Company AT&T Tariff ILL. C.C. NO. 22 D/B/A
    Illinois Bell Telephone Company AT&T Tariff ILL. C.C. NO. 22 d/b/a AT&T Illinois d/b/a AT&T Wholesale Part 22 Section 3 PART 22 - Resale Local Exchange Service 1st Revised Sheet 1 SECTION 3 - Resale Local Exchange Services Cancels Original Sheet 1 This section sets forth the Local Exchange Services made available by Illinois Bell Telephone Company to Carrier for resale to its customers. General terms, conditions, service and feature descriptions as described in Illinois Guidebook, Part 4 and herein apply where appropriate, unless (T) otherwise specified in this Part. The application thereof is to Carrier with regard to service ordering, repair requests or billing responsibility and to Carrier’s Customer when designating service location, use, activation, configuration, or sizing. 1. NETWORK ACCESS LINES (For service description, see Illinois Guidebook, Part 4, Section 2.) (T) The connecting facility between a Carrier’s Customer’s premises and a serving central office providing Carrier’s Customers access to the dial network for placing and receiving calls. Prices are determined by the access area. Issued: April 30, 2014 Effective: May 1, 2014 By W. Karl Wardin, Regional Vice President - Regulatory 225 West Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois 60606 ATT TN IW-14-0019 Illinois Bell Telephone Company, LLC AT&T Tariff ILL. C.C. NO. 22 d/b/a AT&T Illinois d/b/a AT&T Wholesale Part 22 Section 3 PART 22 - Resale Local Exchange Service 37th Revised Sheet 2 SECTION 3 - Resale Local Exchange Services 1. NETWORK ACCESS LINES (cont’d) 1.1 Network Access Line Rate Schedule For service description, see Part 4, Section 2 of this Tariff.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Telephone and Telegraph Company Divestiture: Background, Provisions, and Restructuring
    Report No. 84-58 E I -. <I?....*- ".YII. -n, -- THE AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY DIVESTITURE: BACKGROUND, PROVISIONS, AND RESTRUCTURING b Y Angele A. Gilroy Specialist in Industrial Organization Economics Division COLLECTION WKI HEKN !CNTUCKY LIBRARY April 11, 1984 11 i :::A L.'~~-l.ii.e makes jucn research available. without parti- ::;I.. in lr:m\ !orrns inc!uding studies. reports. cornpila- ;,)I!., I!:<?\[>. :md l:a~kqroi~ndhrietings. Cpon request. CRS .. ., :i ~ !>!r::z:rrir.e.;in ann1~-zingle+slative proposals and -tl:..b. :!nd in s>w;sinq the possible effects of these proposals . < :!I irie.The Ser~ice'ssenior specialists and ii,:c( r :iil.,;ii ?is are also at-aiiable for personal consultations ;xi-ir :.t>.;!?ecri\-elieid.; t~f'expertise. ABSTRACT On January 1, 1984, The American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) di- vested itself of a major portion of its organizational structure and functions. Under the post-divestiture environment the once fully-integrated Bell System is now reorganized into the "new" AT&T and seven Ladependent regional 5olding ?om- panies -- American Information Technologies Corp., 3ell Atlantic Corp., 3ell- South Corp., NYNEX Corp., Pacific Telesis Group., Southwestern Bell Corp., and U.S. West, Inc. The following analysis provides an overview of the pre- and post-divestiture organizational structure and details the evolution of the anti- trust action which resulted in this divestiture. CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................ iii INTRODUCTION ............................................................ 1 1 . BELL SYSTEM CORPORATE REORGANIZATION .............................. 3 A . Predivestiture Bell System Corporate Structure ................ 3 B . Divested Operating Company Structure .......................... 5 C . Post-Divestiture AThT Organizational Structure ................ 7 11.
    [Show full text]
  • AT&T and the Changing World of Telecommunications
    Book Review Essay The Titanic Remembered: AT&T and the Changing World of Telecommunications Telecommunications in Turmoil: Technology and Public Policy, by Ger- ald R. Faulhaber.* Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1987. 186 pages. $26.95. Glen 0. Robinsont Gerald R. Faulhaber's Telecommunications in Turmoil: Technology and Public Policy1 chronicles the breakup of AT&T consequent to Judge Harold Greene's approval of the Justice Department-AT&T consent set- tlement in 1982 (colloquially known as the modified final judgment or MFJ).2 Some saw the breakup as a disaster on the order of the sinking of the Titanic:' "they were sad when the great ship went down.' 4 While people mourned the Titanic as a human tragedy, however, probably no one thought of the AT&T breakup in quite that way; Ma Bell was not, after all, mom. Still, she was held in fairly high regard. In contrast to other monopolists we've loved to hate-railroads, gas utilities, broadcast * Associate Professor of Public Policy and Management, The Wharton School, University of Penn- sylvania; director, Fishman-Davidson Center for the Study of the Service Sector; formerly director of strategic planning and financial management at AT&T. t John C. Stennis Professor of Law, University of Virginia; B.A., Harvard, 1958; J.D., Stanford, 1961. The author served as an FCC Commissioner from 1974-76, when some of these events oc- curred, This may account for the occasional defensive tone of my remarks: although the statute of limitations has expired on my participation in FCC decisions, cognitive dissonance is still at work.
    [Show full text]
  • Telephomania: the Contested Origins of the Urban Telephone Operating Company in the United States, 1879-1894
    Telephomania: The Contested Origins of the Urban Telephone Operating Company in the United States, 1879-1894 Richard John Great Cities Institute College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs University of Illinois at Chicago Great Cities Institute Publication Number: GCP-05-02 A Great Cities Institute Working Paper JUNE 2005 The Great Cities Institute The Great Cities Institute is an interdisciplinary, applied urban research unit within the College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC). Its mission is to create, disseminate, and apply interdisciplinary knowledge on urban areas. Faculty from UIC and elsewhere work collaboratively on urban issues through interdisciplinary research, outreach and education projects. About the Author Richard John is Associate Professor of History in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He may be contacted at [email protected]. Great Cities Institute Publication Number: GCP-05-02 The views expressed in this report represent those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Great Cities Institute or the University of Illinois at Chicago. This is a working paper that represents research in progress. Inclusion here does not preclude final preparation for publication elsewhere. Great Cities Institute (MC 107) College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs University of Illinois at Chicago 412 S. Peoria Street, Suite 400 Chicago IL 60607-7067 Phone: 312-996-8700 Fax: 312-996-8933 http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/gci UIC Great Cities Institute Telephomania: The Contested Origins of the Urban Telephone Operating Company in the United States, 1879-1894 This essay reconsiders the origins of the urban telephone exchange in the United States in the formative era of commercial telephony that stretched from 1879 and 1894.
    [Show full text]
  • Raines V. Illinois Bell Telephone Company 2012 Il. APP (1St) 113679
    1-11-3679 2012 Il. APP (1st) 113679 FIFTH DIVISION December 7, 2012 No. 1-11-3679 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances under Rule 23(e)(1). IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT JONIKKA Q. RAINES, ) Appeal from the ) Circuit Court of ) Cook County. Plaintiff-Appellant ) ) No. 2009-L-003682 v. ) ) ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE ) Honorable Joan E. Powell, COMPANY D/B/A AT&T ILLINOIS ) Judge Presiding ("ILLINOIS"), ) ) Def e n d a n t - A p p e l l e e . ) JUSTICE TAYLOR, delivered the judgment of the court. Presiding Justice McBride and Justice Palmer concurred in the judgment. ORDER ¶1 Held: Where appellant did not provide a sufficient record of the proceedings below to evaluate the merits of the appeal, the order entered by the trial court dismissing the case was presumed to be in conformity with the law and have a sufficient factual basis. ¶ 2 Plaintiff Jonikka Q. Raines, pro se, appeals from an order of the circuit court of Cook County dismissing her complaint against her former employer, Illinois Bell Telephone Co., for breach of contract, violation of Title VII, lack of due process under the 14th amendment and 1-11-3679 fraud for failure to state a cause of action. Plaintiff alleges that defendant wrongfully terminated her by falsely claiming that she had retired. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. ¶ 3 I. BACKGROUND ¶4 Initially, we note that plaintiff has only provided us with a common law record, and has not included a transcript of the proceedings below.
    [Show full text]
  • The At&T Agreement
    UIC Law Review Volume 15 Issue 3 Article 1 Summer 1982 The At&T Agreement: Reorganization of the Telecommunications Industry and Conflicts with Illinois Law, 15 J. Marshall L. Rev. 563 (1982) Frederic D. Tennenbaum Michael P. Hurst Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview Part of the Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons, Communications Law Commons, Consumer Protection Law Commons, Contracts Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Frederic D. Tennenbaum, The At&T Agreement: Reorganization of the Telecommunications Industry and Conflicts with Illinois Law, 15 J. Marshall L. Rev. 563 (1982) https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol15/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in UIC Law Review by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE AT&T AGREEMENT: REORGANIZATION OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY & CONFLICTS WITH ILLINOIS LAW FREDRIC D. TANNENBAUM* & MICHAEL P. HURST** INTRODUCTION*** On January 8, 1982, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) and the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) signed a stipulation,1 seeking to dismiss the largest anti- trust case in history.2 Under the proposed stipulation, the DOJ's suit against AT&T would be dismissed without prejudice and the provisions of the 1956 consent decree would be substantially * Assistant Attorney General of Illinois, Public Utility Division; J.D. University of Wisconsin, 1981; B.A., magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, eco- nomics, Ohio Wesleyan University, 1978.
    [Show full text]
  • CHC Appendix
    APPENDIX COORDINATED HOT CUT (CHC)/AT&T-13STATE AT&T-13STATE/TCG ST. LOUIS 020106 APPENDIX COORDINATED HOT CUT (CHC) 000065 APPENDIX COORDINATED HOT CUT (CHC)/AT&T-13STATE AT&T-13STATE/TCG ST. LOUIS 020106 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................1 CHC SERVICE DESCRIPTION.....................................................................................................................................2 CHC PRICING ...............................................................................................................................................................3 000066 APPENDIX COORDINATED HOT CUT (CHC)/AT&T-13STATE AT&T-13STATE/TCG ST. LOUIS 020106 APPENDIX COORDINATED HOT CUT (CHC) 1. INTRODUCTION This Appendix sets forth terms and conditions for Coordinated Hot Cut (CHC) provided by the applicable AT&T Inc. (AT&T) owned Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier (ILEC) and CLEC. 1.1 AT&T Inc. (AT&T) means the holding company which directly or indirectly owns the following ILECs: Illinois Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Illinois, Indiana Bell Telephone Company Incorporated d/b/a AT&T Indiana, Michigan Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Michigan, Nevada Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Nevada, The Ohio Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Ohio, Pacific Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T California, The Southern New England Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Connecticut, Southwestern Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Arkansas, AT&T Kansas, AT&T Missouri, AT&T Oklahoma and/or AT&T Texas and/or Wisconsin Bell, Inc. d/b/a AT&T Wisconsin. 1.2 AT&T-13STATE - As used herein, AT&T-13STATE means AT&T SOUTHWEST REGION 5-STATE, AT&T MIDWEST REGION 5-STATE, AT&T-2STATE and AT&T CONNECTICUT the applicable AT&T-owned ILEC(s) doing business in Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wisconsin.
    [Show full text]
  • View Complaint
    Case 1:11-cv-00338-LPS Document 12 Filed 03/29/12 Page 1 of 37 PageID #: 313 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED ACCESS § TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, § § Plaintiff, § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:11-cv-00338-LPS v. § § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AT&T INC., § AMERITECH SERVICES, INC., § AT&T CORP., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § DELAWARE, LLC, § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § ILLINOIS, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § INDIANA, G.P., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § INDIANA, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § MICHIGAN, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE § MIDWEST, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE § MOUNTAIN STATES, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF NEW § YORK, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF NJ, § L.P., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § OHIO, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE § PACIFIC NORTHWEST, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § PENNSYLVANIA, LLC, § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE § SOUTH CENTRAL STATES, LLC, § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE § SOUTHERN STATES, LLC, § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE § SOUTHWEST, INC., § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § TEXAS, INC., § PAGE 1 Case 1:11-cv-00338-LPS Document 12 Filed 03/29/12 Page 2 of 37 PageID #: 314 AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § VIRGINIA, LLC, § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § WASHINGTON, D.C., LLC, § AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF § WISCONSIN, L.P., § AT&T OPERATIONS, INC., § AT&T SERVICES, INC., § AT&T TELEHOLDINGS, INC., § BELLSOUTH COMMUNICATION § SYSTEMS, LLC, § BELLSOUTH CORP., § BELLSOUTH § TELECOMMUNICATIONS, LLC, § ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO., § INDIANA BELL TELEPHONE CO., § INC., § MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE CO., § NEVADA BELL TELEPHONE
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2006 Appeal Wave
    Wave - Appeal Decisions Report Criteria: Appeal Wave is A13 Funding Year is 2006 Service Provider (SPIN) Applicant (BEN) State FRN Svc Status SLD Explanation Requested Amount Committed Amount AllTel Communications GEORGETOWN COUNTY SCHOOL DIST (127177) SC 1445656 T FUNDED SPLIT FRN $35,321.41 $17,660.71 (143008900) AllTel Communications SALINA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT #305 (137958) KS 1443416 T FUNDED SPLIT FRN $11,543.56 $6,055.81 (143008900) AT&T Corporation ILLINOIS DEPT. OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES (136696) IL 1425680 T FUNDED $4,992.00 $4,992.00 (143001192) AT&T Corporation LENAPE AREA VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL (17533) PA 1421048 IA FUNDED $13,450.50 $13,450.50 (143001192) AT&T Corporation SACRED HEART PRIVATE SCHOOL (10621) NY 1476190 T FUNDED $1,322.57 $1,322.57 (143001192) AT&T Corporation ATOKA INDEP SCHOOL DISTRICT 15 (140233) OK 1366798 T FUNDED SPLIT FRN $4,586.93 $701.86 (143001192) AT&T Corporation MASSENA CENTRAL SCHOOL DIST (124660) NY 1403980 T FUNDED SPLIT FRN $9,888.99 $1,228.31 (143001192) AT&T Corporation STEEL VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT (125217) PA 1632188 T (no decision) $1,224.00 $0.00 (143001192) BCN Telecom, Inc. ST JOHNSBURY ACADEMY (5003) VT 1452364 T FUNDED SPLIT FRN $5,627.94 $1,875.98 (143026752) BellSouth CYPRESS HEIGHTS ACADEMY (16028416) LA 1488387 T FUNDED $5,238.00 $5,238.00 Telecommunications, Inc. (143004824) Choice One STEEL VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT (125217) PA 1407698 T FUNDED SPLIT FRN $33,916.63 $2,448.00 Communications of Pennsylvania Inc. (143018324) Cingular Wireless CYPRESS HEIGHTS ACADEMY (16028416) LA 1488300 T FUNDED The estimated monthly $2,457.00 $2,376.00 (143025240) charge was changed to reflect the documentation provided by the applicant.
    [Show full text]
  • Ameritech Corporation, Illinois Bell Telephone Company, Ameritech
    BLS Contract Collection – Metadata Header This contract is provided by the Martin P. Catherwood Library, ILR School, Cornell University. The information provided is for noncommercial educational use only. Some variations from the original paper document may have occurred during the digitization process, and some appendices or tables may be absent. Subsequent changes, revisions, and corrections may apply to this document. For more information about the BLS Contract Collection, see http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/blscontracts/ Or contact us: Catherwood Library, Ives Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 607-254-5370 [email protected] Contract Database Metadata Elements (for a glossary of the elements see - http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/blscontracts/2/) Title: Ameritech Corporation, Illinois Bell Telephone Company, Ameritech New Media, Inc., Ameritech Network Services, Ameritech Consumer Services, Ameritech Custom Business Services, Ameritech Enhanced Business Services, Ameritech Information Industry Services, Ameritech Long Distance Industry Services, Ameritech Pay Phone Services and Ameritech Small Business Services and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Locals 165, 188, 336, 383, and 399 (1998) K#: 5727 Employer Name: Ameritech Corporation, Illinois Bell Telephone Company, Ameritech New Media, Inc., Ameritech Network Services, Ameritech Consumer Services, Ameritech Custom Business Services, Ameritech Enhanced Business Services, Ameritech Information Industry Services, Ameritech Long Distance Industry
    [Show full text]
  • Agreement Between Bellsouth Telecommunications, Llc D/B/A At&T Alabama, At&T Florida, At&T Georgia, At&T Kentuck
    SignatureContract Page/AT&T-21STATE Id: 4246449 Page 1 of 2 AT&T CORP., AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF INDIANA, INC., AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF TEXAS LLC, TELEPORT COMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC Version: 3Q13 - 08/15/13 AGREEMENT BETWEEN BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, LLC D/B/A AT&T ALABAMA, AT&T FLORIDA, AT&T GEORGIA, AT&T KENTUCKY, AT&T LOUISIANA, AT&T MISSISSIPPI, AT&T NORTH CAROLINA, AT&T SOUTH CAROLINA AND AT&T TENNESSEE, ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY D/B/A AT&T ILLINOIS, INDIANA BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY INCORPORATED D/B/A AT&T INDIANA, MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY D/B/A AT&T MICHIGAN, NEVADA BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY D/B/A AT&T NEVADA AND AT&T WHOLESALE, THE OHIO BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY D/B/A AT&T OHIO, PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY D/B/A AT&T CALIFORNIA, SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY D/B/A AT&T ARKANSAS, AT&T KANSAS, AT&T MISSOURI, AT&T OKLAHOMA AND AT&T TEXAS, WISCONSIN BELL, INC. D/B/A AT&T WISCONSIN AND AT&T CORP., AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF INDIANA, INC., AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF TEXAS, LLC AND TELEPORT COMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC Contract Id: 4246449 Signature Page/AT&T-21STATE Page 2 of 2 AT&T CORP., AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF INDIANA, INC., AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF TEXAS, LLC, TELEPORT COMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC Version: 3Q13 - 08/15/13 Signature: __________________________________eSigned - Corbin Coombs Signature: _______________________________________eSigned - William A. Bockelman Name: _____________________________________eSigned - Corbin Coombs Name: __________________________________________eSigned - William A. Bockelman (Print or Type)
    [Show full text]