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

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 commence providing 8YY interconnection service to all AT&T Digital Link customers, as set forth in the order.”