DOCSLIB.ORG

18YY Calling Capability Refers to the Ability of an End-Use Customer to Dial Toll Free Numbers That Start with Prefixes Such As 800, 888, 877, Etc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
18YY Calling Capability Refers to the Ability of an End-Use Customer to Dial Toll Free Numbers That Start with Prefixes Such As 800, 888, 877, Etc S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION * * * * * In the matter of the complaint of ) AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF MICHIGAN, ) INC., against MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE ) Case No. U-12039 COMPANY, d/b/a AMERITECH MICHIGAN. ) ) At the February 3, 2000 meeting of the Michigan Public Service Commission in Lansing, Michigan. PRESENT: Hon. John G. Strand, Chairman Hon. David A. Svanda, Commissioner Hon. Robert B. Nelson, Commissioner ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT On July 8, 1999, AT&T Communications of Michigan, Inc., (AT&T) filed a complaint against Michigan Bell Telephone Company, d/b/a Ameritech Michigan, (Ameritech Michigan) alleging violations of the Michigan Telecommunications Act, MCL 484.2101 et seq.; MSA 22.1469(101) et seq. (the Act). According to the complaint, Ameritech Michigan violated Sections 305 and 363 of the Act by unreasonably refusing to implement AT&T’s proposed arrangements for providing 8YY calling capability1 to AT&T’s Digital Link (ADL) service customers located in Ameritech Michigan’s service territory. On August 11, 1999, Ameritech Michigan filed its answer to the complaint. 18YY calling capability refers to the ability of an end-use customer to dial toll free numbers that start with prefixes such as 800, 888, 877, etc. With regard to all 8YY calling, the receiving party pays the charges for the call. Pursuant to due notice, a prehearing conference was held on August 31, 1999 before Adminis- trative Law Judge Barbara A. Stump (ALJ). AT&T, Ameritech Michigan, and the Commission Staff (Staff) participated in the proceedings. Following the completion of evidentiary hearings, the record was closed on October 21, 1999. With the exception of the Staff, which elected to take no position regarding this dispute, the parties filed briefs and reply briefs on November 5 and 12, 1999, respectively. The ALJ issued her Proposal for Decision (PFD) on December 6, 1999. Ameritech Michigan filed exceptions to the PFD on December 22, 1999 and AT&T filed replies to those exceptions on January 10, 2000. Subsequently, the parties submitted a settlement agreement resolving all issues in this case. Although the Staff did not sign the settlement, it did submit a statement of non-objection. The settlement agreement, attached to this order as Appendix A, states that: (1) since 1997, AT&T made several proposals for interconnection arrangements related to the transmission and routing of ADL customers’ 8YY calls over Ameritech Michigan’s system; (2) Ameritech Michigan refused to implement any of those proposals on the grounds that, among other things, they were inconsistent with the existing interconnection agreement between Ameritech Michigan and AT&T; and (3) the PFD rejected Ameritech Michigan’s arguments, found that the refusal to implement AT&T’s proposals was in violation of the Act, and recommended, among other things, that the Commission impose a fine of over $1.5 million on Ameritech Michigan. The settlement agreement further states that AT&T and Ameritech Michigan have agreed to resolve this dispute by amending their interconnection agreement and by having Ameritech Michigan begin providing AT&T’s requested 8YY interconnection for all ADL customers within specified time frames. Finally, it indicates that Ameritech Michigan shall pay $145,000 to AT&T within 7 business days following issuance of this order. Page 2 U-12039 The Commission FINDS that: a. Jurisdiction is pursuant to 1991 PA 179, as amended, MCL 484.2101 et seq.; MSA 22.1469(101) et seq.; the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecom- munications Act of 1996, 47 USC 151 et seq.; 1969 PA 306, as amended, MCL 24.201 et seq.; MSA 3.560(101) et seq.; and the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, as amended, 1992 AACS, R 460.17101 et seq. b. The settlement agreement is reasonable and in the public interest, and should be approved. c. Ameritech Michigan and AT&T should file, within five business days of the date of this order, amendments to their interconnection agreement in substantially the same form as those attached as Exhibit B to the settlement agreement. d. Ameritech Michigan should, in accordance with the time frames set forth in the settlement agreement, commence providing AT&T’s requested 8YY interconnection for all ADL customers. e. Ameritech Michigan should, within 7 business days following this order’s issuance, pay AT&T $145,000. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that: A. The settlement agreement, attached to this order as Appendix A, is approved. B. Michigan Bell Telephone Company, d/b/a Ameritech Michigan, and AT&T Communica- tions of Michigan, Inc., shall file, within five business days of the date of this order, amendments to their interconnection agreement in substantially the same form as those attached as Exhibit B to the settlement agreement. Page 3 U-12039 C. Michigan Bell Telephone Company, d/b/a Ameritech Michigan, shall commence providing AT&T Communications of Michigan, Inc., with its requested 8YY interconnection service in accordance with the time frames set forth in the settlement agreement. D. Within 7 business days following the date of this order’s issuance, Michigan Bell Tele- phone Company, d/b/a Ameritech Michigan, shall pay $145,000 to AT&T Communications of Michigan, Inc. The Commission reserves jurisdiction and may issue further orders as necessary. Any party desiring to appeal this order must do so in the appropriate court within 30 days after issuance and notice of this order, pursuant to MCL 462.26; MSA 22.45. MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION /s/ John G. Strand Chairman ( S E A L ) /s/ David A. Svanda Commissioner /s/ Robert B. Nelson Commissioner By its action of February 3, 2000. /s/ Dorothy Wideman Its Executive Secretary Page 4 U-12039 C. Michigan Bell Telephone Company, d/b/a Ameritech Michigan, shall commence providing AT&T Communications of Michigan, Inc., with its requested 8YY interconnection service in accordance with the time frames set forth in the settlement agreement. D. Within 7 business days following the date of this order’s issuance, Michigan Bell Tele- phone Company, d/b/a Ameritech Michigan, shall pay $145,000 to AT&T Communications of Michigan, Inc. The Commission reserves jurisdiction and may issue further orders as necessary. Any party desiring to appeal this order must do so in the appropriate court within 30 days after issuance and notice of this order, pursuant to MCL 462.26; MSA 22.45. MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Chairman Commissioner Commissioner By its action of February 3, 2000. Its Executive Secretary Page 5 U-12039 In the matter of the complaint of ) AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF MICHIGAN, ) INC., against MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE ) Case No. U-12039 COMPANY, d/b/a AMERITECH MICHIGAN. ) ) Suggested Minute: “Adopt and issue order dated February 3, 2000 approving the settlement agreement, requiring an amendment to the interconnection agreement, and ordering Michigan Bell Telephone Company, d/b/a Ameritech Michigan, to pay AT&T Communications of Michigan, Inc., $145,000 and com- mence providing 8YY interconnection service to all AT&T Digital Link customers, as set forth in the order.”.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Before the Washington, D.C. 20554 in the Matter of ) ) Section 63.71 Application of ) ) File No. Bellsouth Telecommunications, L
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Section 63.71 Application of ) ) File No. BellSouth Telecommunications, LLC ) Illinois Bell Telephone Company, LLC ) Indiana Bell Telephone Company, Incorporated ) Michigan Bell Telephone Company ) Nevada Bell Telephone Company ) Pacific Bell Telephone Company ) Southwestern Bell Telephone Company ) The Ohio Bell Telephone Company ) Wisconsin Bell, Inc. ) ) For Authority Pursuant to Section 214 of ) The Communications Act of 1934, As Amended, ) To Discontinue the Provision of Service ) SECTION 63.71 APPLICATION OF AT&T AT&T Services, Inc., on behalf of its affiliates, 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, LLC, 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; 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; The Ohio Bell Telephone Company, d/b/a AT&T Ohio; and Wisconsin Bell, Inc., d/b/a AT&T Wisconsin, (collectively referred to herein as “AT&T”) applies for authority under Section 214(a) of the Communications Act, as amended (“the Act”), 47 U.S.C. § 214, and Section 63.71 of the Federal Communications Commission’s (“Commission”) rules, 47 C.F.R.
    [Show full text]
  • AT&T Benefits
    GET STARTED CONTACT INFO Where to go for COPIES AND CLAIMS more information Important Benefits Contacts � January 2017 OTHER NIN: 78-39607 Please keep this document for future reference GET STARTED Contents Important Information This document is a one-stop reference guide Distribution About this document Distributed to all employees and Agent for service of process for frequently called numbers, websites and other eligible former employees How do I look up a contact (including LTD recipients) of all important AT&T benefits contact information. AT&T companies (excluding CONTACT INFO employees of AT&T Support Services Company, Inc.; Este documento contiene un aviso y la información bargained employees of AT&T COPIES AND CLAIMS Alascom, Inc., and international en Inglés. Si usted tiene dificultad en la comprensión employees not on U.S. payroll). de este documento, por favor comuníquese con Distributed to alternate payees OTHER and beneficiaries receiving AT&T Benefits Center, 877-722-0020. benefits from the retirement plans. This document replaces your existing Where to Go Distributed to COBRA participants, recipients of company-extended On the left side of each for More Information: Contact Information for coverage, surviving dependents page, you will find navigation and alternate recipients bars that allow you to quickly Employee Benefits Plans and Programs SMM dated (QMCSOs) of the populations noted above receiving benefits move between sections. January 2015. from the health and welfare plans. Where to go for more information | January 2017 1 Contents Important information ....................................... 5 PDF NAVIGATION: What action do I need to take? ................................... 5 How do I use this document? ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ameritech PART 21 SECTION 1 Tariff
    INDIANA BELL IURC NO. 20 TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. Ameritech PART 21 SECTION 1 Tariff PART 21 - Access Services SECTION 1 - General Original Sheet No. 1 ACCESS SERVICE Regulations, Rates and Charges applying to the provision of Access Services within a Local Access and Transport Area (LATA) or equivalent Market Area for connection to intrastate communications facilities for customers within the operating territory of the INDIANA BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, INCORPORATED Access Services are provided by means of wire, fiber optics, radio and any other suitable technology or a combination thereof. Material formerly appeared in T-8 Tariff, Part 5 , Sheet 1. Effective: July 19, 1995 N. L. Cubellis Vice President-Regulatory Filename: Part 21 Section 1_001.doc Directory: D:\indiana Template: D:\Documents and Settings\ydqkckr\Application Data\Microsoft\Templates\Normal.dot Title: INDIANA BELL Subject: Author: PEGGY Keywords: Comments: Creation Date: 5/15/1995 2:37:00 PM Change Number: 42 Last Saved On: 7/21/2008 1:17:00 PM Last Saved By: Licensed User Total Editing Time: 110 Minutes Last Printed On: 9/3/2008 2:35:00 PM As of Last Complete Printing Number of Pages: 1 Number of Words: 115 (approx.) Number of Characters: 659 (approx.) Indiana Bell IURC NO. 20 Telephone Company, Inc. AT&T TARIFF Part 21 Section 1 PART 21 - Access Services 1st Revised Sheet 2 SECTION 1 - General Cancels Original Sheet 2 Concurrence Statement Submitted herewith pursuant to CAUSE NO. 39369, THIRD ORDER ON CONTINUING THE LIFTING OF THE STAY OF PROCESSING PETITIONS TO MAINTAIN PARITY ACCESS AND ORDER ON LESS THAN ALL THE ISSUES, approved April 30, 1993 and placed into effect and made final June 2, 1993 Indiana Bell hereby concurs and adopts by reference the terms and provisions of its interstate access tariff except as noted in the Table of Contents of the Indiana Bell Ameritech Operating Companies Tariff F.C.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Telesis Understands the Anxiety Over Job Retention and Growth That Can Arise When Two Major Businesses Merge. This Merger Is a Job-Growth Agreement
    JOBS IN CALIFORNIA Pacific Telesis understands the anxiety over job retention and growth that can arise when two major businesses merge. This merger is a job-growth agreement. To show confidence and good faith, Pacific Telesis agrees to the following: • The headquarters for Pacific Bell and Nevada Bell will remain in California and Nevada, respectively. In addition, a new company headquarters will be established in California that will provide integrated administrative and support services for the combined companies. Three subsidiary headquarters will also be established in California. These subsidiaries are long distance services, international operations and Internet. • The merged companies commit to expanding employment by at least one thousand jobs in Califomia over what would otherwise have been the case under previous plans if this merger had not occurred. The merged companies will report their progress to the CPUC within two years. CONSTRUCTION Nothing in this Commitment shall be interpreted to require Pacific Bell or Pacific Telesis to give any preference or advantage based on race, creed, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, disability or any other basis in connection with employment, contracting Of other activities in violation of any federal, state or local law. Nothing herein shall be construed to establish or require quotas or timetables in connection with any • undertakings by Pacific Bell or Pacific Telesis to maintain a diverse workforce, contract with minority vendors, or provide services to underserved communities. -. 8 PARTNERSHiP COMMITMENT This Commitment is a ten-year partnership and commitment to the underserved communities of California. In furtherance of this par:tnership, Pacific Bell is undertaking an obligation to the Community Technology Fund that may extend over a decade or more as well as a seven-year commitment to the Universal Service Task Force.
    [Show full text]
  • AT&T Debt Information
    AT&T Inc. and Subsidiary Debt Detail - September 30, 2010 This chart shows the principal amount of AT&T Inc.'s and its subsidiaries' outstanding long-term debt issues as of the date above. AT&T intends to update this chart quarterly after filing its Form 10-Q or Form 10-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Outstanding Long-term Notes and Debentures Amount Outstanding at Unconditional Guarantee Entity (Original Issuer) Maturity Coupon Maturity Date Current Portion Long-term Portion Total by AT&T Inc. SBC Communications Inc. $1,000,000,000 5.300% 11/15/2010 $1,000,000,000 - $1,000,000,000 AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. $3,000,000,000 7.875% 3/1/2011 $3,000,000,000 - $3,000,000,000 SBC Communications Inc. $1,250,000,000 6.250% 3/15/2011 $1,250,000,000 - $1,250,000,000 BellSouth Corporation $1,000,000,000 4.295% 4/26/2021 (a) $1,000,000,000 - $1,000,000,000 Yes BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. $152,555,337 6.300% 12/15/2015 $24,012,263 $128,543,074 $152,555,337 Ameritech Capital Funding Corporation $59,802,300 9.100% 6/1/2016 $7,299,540 $52,502,760 $59,802,300 Various $112,492,335 Various Various $103,734,725 $8,757,610 $112,492,335 BellSouth Corporation $1,000,000,000 6.000% 10/15/2011 - $1,000,000,000 $1,000,000,000 AT&T Corp. $1,500,000,000 7.300% 11/15/2011 - $1,500,000,000 $1,500,000,000 Yes Cingular Wireless LLC $750,000,000 6.500% 12/15/2011 - $750,000,000 $750,000,000 SBC Communications Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix Direct/At&T-13State
    APPENDIX DIRECT/AT&T-13STATE AT&T-13STATE/TCG ST. LOUIS 020106 APPENDIX DIRECT 0000152 APPENDIX DIRECT/AT&T-13STATE AT&T-13STATE/TCG ST. LOUIS 020106 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................1 DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................................................2 SERVICE .......................................................................................................................................................................3 RESPONSIBILITIES OF AT&T-12STATE ....................................................................................................................4 RESPONSIBILITIES OF CLEC.....................................................................................................................................5 RESPONSIBILITIES OF BOTH PARTIES ....................................................................................................................6 LIABILITY......................................................................................................................................................................7 BILLING.........................................................................................................................................................................8 USE OF SUBSCRIBER LISTING INFORMATION........................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • • Affidavit of Robert Jason Weller (Ameritech Director O/Corporate Strategy Discusses How the SBC/Ameritech Merger Advances Am
    • Affidavit ofRobert Jason Weller (Ameritech Director o/Corporate Strategy discusses how the SBC/Ameritech merger advances Ameritech 's strategic objectives and improves its ability to serve its customers) • Affidavit ofPaul G. Osland (Ameritech Director o/Corporate Strategy explains the background and current status 0/Ameritech's test involving the resale 0/local service to residential cellular customers in St. Louis) • Affidavit ofFrancis X. Pampush (Ameritech Director o/Economic and Policy Studies describes the nature and extent oflocal service competition in Ameritech's region) • Affidavit ofWharton B. Rivers (President 0/Ameritech Network Services discusses customer service quality objectives) • Affidavit ofRichard 1. Gilbert and Robert G. Harris (Economists address the consumer effects o/the SBC/Ameritech merger) SBC Communications Inc. 1997 Audited Financial Statements • Maps 1. 30 Markets Targeted for SBC's National-Local Strategy 2. SBC/Ameritech Local Service Area -'.'" Competitive Networks - Little Rock, Arkansas 4. Competitive Networks - San Francisco, California 5. Competitive Networks - San Jose, California 6. Competitive Networks - PetalumalNapa, California 7. Competitive Networks - Sacramento, California 8. Competitive Networks - Stockton, California 9. Competitive Networks - Fresno, California 10. Competitive Networks - Los Angeles, California 11. Competitive Networks - Anaheim, California 12. Competitive Networks - San Diego, California 13. Competitive Networks - Wichita, Kansas 14. Competitive Networks - Kansas City, Kansas and Missouri 15. Competitive Networks - St. Louis, Missouri 16. Competitive Networks - Springfield, Missouri 17. Competitive Networks - Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 18. Competitive Networks - Tulsa, Oklahoma 19. Competitive Networks - Austin, Texas 20. Competitive Networks - Corpus Christi, Texas 21. Competitive Networks - Dallas, Texas 22. Competitive Networks - Fort Worth, Texas ?'"--'. Competitive Networks - Houston, Texas 24. Competitive Networks - San Antonio, Texas v 25.
    [Show full text]
  • Charter Cable Versus Direct Tv
    Charter Cable Versus Direct Tv Waylen gulls fulgently while exact Elroy noddled hortatorily or fullers resentfully. Revulsive Archy planishdepartmentalize, her tsarevna his Laodiceainfirmly and riff unloosed tetanizes abstractively.tho. Praedial and thirstiest Godfry uncover while subsiding Socrates Free money and services were getting a single place we can provide standard rates a permit requirements have given a charter tv can go with a good internet Both cable to satellite television services can advance during bad weather, although durable is more vague with satellite providers. You have direct broadcast is charter cable versus direct tv comparison sites for. York spoke at his Cox counterpart or twenty minutes and his Charter counterpart on a boot or voicemail lasting about thirty seconds. Ameritech acquires tvsm inc, charter cable versus direct tv technology to determine if you. Do not last week if you get a question, and nationwide networks, california public statement to charter cable versus direct tv, such action when there are unable to rent, expanding into separate public companies. The formation of beating out what kind of charter cable versus direct tv provider for. Surround sound fairly small towns grant cable argues that charter cable versus direct tv into the tier that? Of statutory authority prior to operating the availability based on tv! The deal with amazon and, really adds onto your email access exclusive access to validate your alarm with. Several internet service provider in areas of your area for specific channels you will the charter cable versus direct tv setsnine months after a lackluster year but charges. We do the red nav on cable tv.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Mobile Carrier Services ATT TN MU-12
    AT&T MICHIGAN GUIDEBOOK PART 14 - Wireless Services Original Sheet 1 SECTION 6 - Public Mobile Carrier Services GENERAL PROVISIONS A. APPLICATION OF GUIDEBOOK (T) 1. This Part applies to the connection of facilities of the Michigan Bell Telephone Company (hereinafter referred to as the Company) to facilities of an authorized Public Mobile Carrier for the purpose of completing calls between end user customers of the Company and customers of the Public Mobile Carrier./a/ 2. To the extent not inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, the regulations specified in Part 2, Section 2, General Terms and Conditions - Regulations and Part 21, Intrastate Access Services apply to this service as appropriate. /a/ Public Mobile Carrier Service includes, but is not limited to Cellular Mobile Carriers and Radio Common Carriers. Material formerly appeared in Tariff M.P.S.C. No. 20R, on Original Sheet No. 1. ATT TN MU-12-0016 Effective: May 1, 2012 AT&T MICHIGAN GUIDEBOOK PART 14 - Wireless Services Original Sheet 2 SECTION 6 - Public Mobile Carrier Services DEFINITIONS Access Minutes - The term "Access Minutes" denotes that usage of exchange facilities for the purpose of calculating chargeable usage. On the originating end, usage is measured from the time the originating end user's call is delivered by the Company and acknowledged as received by the PMC's facilities connected with the originating exchange. On the terminating end, usage is measured from the time the call is received by the end user in the terminating exchange. Timing of usage at both originating and terminating ends shall terminate when the called or calling party disconnects.
    [Show full text]
  • AT&T Inc. and Subsidiary Debt Detail
    AT&T Inc. and Subsidiary Debt Detail - June 30, 2020 This chart shows the principal amount of AT&T Inc.'s and its subsidiaries' outstanding long -term debt issues as of the date above. AT&T intends to update this chart quarterly after filing its Form 10-Q or Form 10-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Outstanding Long-term Notes and Debentures Amount Outstanding at Unconditional Guarantee Entity (Original Issuer) Coupon Maturity Date Current Portion Long-term Portion Total Maturity by AT&T Inc. Various $1,664,410,714 (a) various various $1,215,774,429 $448,636,285 $1,664,410,714 AT&T Inc. $592,000,000 Zero 11/27/2022 (b) $527,017,731 $0 $527,017,731 AT&T Inc. € 2,250,000,000 Floating 8/3/2020 $2,527,650,000 $0 $2,527,650,000 AT&T Inc. CAD 1,000,000,000 3.825% 11/25/2020 $736,593,989 $0 $736,593,989 AT&T Inc. € 1,000,000,000 1.875% 12/4/2020 $1,123,400,000 $0 $1,123,400,000 AT&T Inc. $1,500,000,000 Floating 6/1/2021 $1,500,000,000 $0 $1,500,000,000 AT&T Inc. $1,500,000,000 Floating 7/15/2021 $0 $1,500,000,000 $1,500,000,000 AT&T Inc. € 1,000,000,000 2.650% 12/17/2021 $0 $1,123,400,000 $1,123,400,000 Michigan Bell Telephone Company $81,390,000 7.850% 1/15/2022 $0 $81,390,000 $81,390,000 AT&T Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission DA 01-1563 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 in the Matter
    Federal Communications Commission DA 01-1563 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) ) 2001 Annual Access Tariff Filings ) CCB/CPD No. 01-08 ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: July 2, 2001 Released: July 2, 2001 By the Chief, Competitive Pricing Division: I. INTRODUCTION 1. Local exchange carriers (LECs) are required by section 69.3(a) of the Commission’s rules to file annual revisions to their interstate tariffs to become effective July 1, 2001.1 Price cap LECs and LECs subject to rate-of-return regulation filed their tariff transmittals on June 18, 2001, with AT&T filing a petition to suspend and investigate on June 25, 2001.2 On June 29, 2001, certain LECs filed replies to AT&T’s petition.3 2. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, we suspend for five months and set for investigation the rates for the traffic sensitive basket filed by Moultrie Independent Telephone Company (Moultrie) in its 2001 Annual Access Tariff. We also suspend for one day and set for investigation the following LECs’ 2001 Annual Access Tariffs in the stated areas: 1) ALLTEL Telephone Systems’ (ALLTEL’s) rates for local switching; and 2) Ameritech Operating Companies’ (Ameritech’s), Frontier Telephone of Rochester, Inc.’s (Frontier of Rochester’s), Pacific Bell Telephone Company’s (PacBell’s), Qwest Communications, Inc.’s (Qwest’s), and Sprint Local Telephone Companies-Nevada’s (Sprint Nevada’s) rates for the multi-line business subscriber line charge.4 1 47 C.F.R. § 69.3(a). The filing deadline of July 1, 2001 was modified to July 3, 2001 because of the weekend schedule in June and July 2001 in order to accommodate the filing of tariff revisions under section 204(a)(3) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • 36005 Item Number
    Control Number: 36005 Item Number: 1 Adde ndum StartPage: 0 AT&T Advanced Solutions August 15, 2008 Table of Contents ~ -° Docket No. AT&T Advanced Solutions Application to Amend Certificate of Operating Authority,-, COA No. 50026 Page 1. Letter of Notification 2 II. Application to Amend COA 3 III. Addendum I Attachment A - Organization Charts 62 IV. Addendum II Attachment B - Complaint Histories 213 IV. Addendum III Attachment C - Customer Data 489 V. Addendum IV Attachment D - 2007 10K Annual Report 490 VIII. Addendum V Attachment E - 2007 Annual Reports 1080 Texas Regulato ry AT&T Texas ~j 400 W. 15'h Street ~' ~}Q,} Room 950 `V~` Austin, TX 78701-1213 August 15, 2008 Commission Filing Clerk Public Utility Commission of Texas 1701 N. Congress Avenue Austin, TX 78701 Dear Filing Clerk: Re: AT&T Advanced Solutions Application to Amend Certificate of Operating Authority COA No. 50026 AT&T Advanced Solutions files with the Commission this application for approval of an amendment to its Certificate of Operating Authority due to a change in ownership/control and corporate restructuring. Questions or comments related to this matter may be directed to me at 512-870-6457. Sincerely, 0zi;za,XZUx,- Gina LaGrone Area Manager - Regulatory Relations Attachments cc: Commission on State Emergency Communications 2 AT&T Advanced Solutions AT&T Advanced Solutions APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO A A CERTIFICATE OF OPERATING AUTHORITY DOCKET NO. CERTIFICATED APPLICANT: AT&T Advanced Solutions Authorized Representative or Attorney to contact about this Application: Gina LaGrone Area Manager - Regulatory Relations 400 W. 151 Street, Room 950 Austin, TX 78701 (512) 870-6457 (512) 870-1397 (fax) [email protected] Jose F.
    [Show full text]