WPC 2?BJZECourier3|z#Xj\  P6G;yoXP#HP LaserJet 4Si on LPT1:HPLAS4SI.PRSx  @\-3lX@ X-#Xj\  P6G;yoXP#2,qKXCourierTimes New Roman"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd<?xxx,x6X@`7X@7jC:,yoXj\  P6G;XPts. Do you wish to overwrite it?'s;((<)<*=a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers'Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers(_o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers)h` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*pfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# 2B+>,?-+V@.Aa8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers+yW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p a1DocumentgDocument Style Style,Xqq   l ^) I. ׃  Doc InitInitialize Document Style-  0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgTech InitInitialize Technical Style.. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technical2E/B0:C1C2oDa5TechnicalTechnical Document Style/)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style0)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style1<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style29Wg  2  1.   2G3HE4E5F66Ga4TechnicalTechnical Document Style38bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document Style4F!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style5(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style6(D a) . 28M7G8K9ZzL:dLPleadingHeader for numbered pleading paper7P@n   $] X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:Q?rRSf Xfootnote ref6footnote reference. 0'ܺ*?.ںd 0E>+_Equation Ca6_Equation Caption?. 05ܺ*?.ںd 0E?(5(6"i~'K2^18MSS888S8888SSSSSSSSSS88Jxir{icx{8Aui{x`xoYi{xxxl888SS8JSJSJ8SS..S.SSSS>A.SSxSSJJSJS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSSS.xJxJxJxJxJorJiJiJiJiJ8.8.8.8.{SxSxSxSxS{S{S{S{SxSxJ{SxSxSxS{S`SxIxSxIqIqIrSrS{dgIiSiSgIxSxSxSxSxS{S{S8.SSSS8Sz]SSuSg/glHHHllxllHl`l|d\l``HHHHxx`T`l`H<`xx`l`|lll``xHl`HHlllllllH|l`H%d88"y~uud~uuEdEdhR",tB^ f ^@HdllHHHlHHHHllllllllllHHlThxHHHllHlx`x`Llx<Hx<xlxx`THxlll`llll8lllllHllllllllx<lllll`````T<T<T<T<xllllxxxxllyllllxlll__ll_ll_lllllxxR<lxllTx|llx=WlT<yyxll__lyRxTyRxlWJlxyxxyxl_`_xlxxlllHllHHHWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNlllHl\\llllllLllllLHH||l88lllllxxH|lL"l|l>lHHHllxllHl`l|h\lllHHHHxx`T```T<`xx`l`lll``xTl`HHlllllllHl`H%d88"y~uud~uuEdEdhR2@ f ȝ ."i~'K2^18MSS888S8888SSSSSSSSSS88SxoxxodAPoxdx]oxxxxo888SS8S]J]J;S].8].]S]]JA8]SxSSJSSSS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSS].xSxSxSxSxSxxJoJoJoJoJA.A.A.A.x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSd]xSxSxSxIxIxSxSxqnIoSoSnISSSSS]]?.S]SSA]_SS]n/nCoSoAo.x]x]x]SS{xIxIxS]?]A]?]SnCn9oSx]x]x]x]x]x]xxSnIoJnIx]oSx]]SoSxSq8SS888WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNxxxSSS8SGGSSSSSS;SSSS;88``S++SSffSSxSi]]8`S;"xxSx`xxS唔0S88xfxxxxxxxxxx8SxS]SxoS8SxJS`xrxxxxxxxxxxPxxxxxxofxGcxxxxxxxSxxxxxxxSxxxxSxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx8xxx8xxx8xxx8xxxxxxxxxxxxxxfo]f]oJoAoJJxJA.Jo]]xJoSJxffSfSSoJxJofx]fffxoASxxfJffffz88SSSSxSSSxxxf8fSJ8Muu]daqqZZnn{{xu{{M{aZZ5M5M҅P?k"i~'K2^$(8<><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxxqevt\tkVevttth555PP5GPGPG5PP,,P,|PPPP;>,PPtPPGGPGP*PPPPP5PPPPPPPPP,tGtGtGtGtGknGeGeGeGeG5,5,5,5,vPtPtPtPtPvPvPvPvPtPtGvPtPtPtPvP\PtFtPtFmFmFnPnPv`cFePePcFtPtPtPtPtPvPvP5,PPPP5PuYPPqPc-c:ePf0c-vP]vPvPsPtPtj:j:kPV=V=V=VPc:c-ePvPvPvPvPvPvPttPfFfFfFvPePvPVPePtP`5PP555WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNtttPPP5GAAPPPPPP8PPPP855SSP))PPbbyPPtP_YY5SP8"ttPtSttP厎.P55tbtttttttttt5PtPYPtkP5PtGP\t|httttttttttJttttttkb|tD_tttttttPtttttttGttttGtttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt5ttt5ttt5ttt5ttttttttttttttbeYbYkGe>hGvPtG5,qGkYYvGkPtGtb\PbPPeGtGkbtY|bbbtev5PtttbGbbbbu55PPPPtvPPPtttb5\PG5ؐJppZ`]mmVVjjvvsp}vvJv]VV3J3Jʀ}}}}}}}}M=f}2l f $@ADB׻",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCY~~vCN~sk~CCCddCtenve_tv5>qevt\tkVevttthYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8YYYYYY~Y~Y~Y~YC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCt~ezbk~ehvtC5qkvktts\zb~etkt|zb~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`LDocument[1]K&7>Document StyleE " "7>NGI "@F   ׃  Document[2]K&7>Document StyleGw "7>NGI "A*   Document[3]K&7>Document StyleGw "7>NGI "B0     2ICqDeEetFpٽDocument[4]K&7>Document StyleGw "7>NGI "C  . Document[5]K&7>Document StyleGw "7>NGI "D   Document[6]K&7>Document StyleGw "7>NGI "E   Document[7]K&7>Document StyleGw "7>NGI "F ` ` ` 2Gp{HIJ7Document[8]K&7>Document StyleGw "7>NGI "G` ` ` Technical[1]K&7>Technical Document Style "7>NGI "H4$     Technical[2]K&7>Technical Document Style "7>NGI "I*    Technical[3]K&7>Technical Document Style "7>NGI "J'   2!KLMNTechnical[4]K&7>Technical Document Style "7>NGI "K&   Technical[5]K&7>Technical Document Style "7>NGI "L&  . Technical[6]K&7>Technical Document Style "7>NGI "M&  . Technical[7]K&7>Technical Document Style "7>NGI "N&  . 2OSPQjRTechnical[8]K&7>Technical Document Style "7>NGI "O&   . Right Par[1]K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "P8!"@  Right Par[2]K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "QA#$@` ` `  ` ` ` Right Par[3]K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "RJ%&` ` ` @  ` ` ` 2STU>VRight Par[4]K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "SS'(` ` `  @  Right Par[5]K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "T\)*` ` `  @hhh hhh Right Par[6]K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "Ue+,` ` `  hhh@ hhh Right Par[7]K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "Vn-.` ` `  hhh@  2WXYZHZRight Par[8]K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "Ww/0` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp page numberK&7>page number"Gw* "7>NGI "X(YZfooter*(K&7>footer!E "Gw, "7>NGI "Y]^ (# ` hp x (#annotation rK&7>annotation referenceGw. "7>NGI "ZOaOb#Xv P7XP##Xv P7XP#2[\Z|]^hannotation tK&7>annotation textGw/ "7>NGI "[2c(dheader*(K&7>header!E "Gw1 "7>NGI "\gh (# ` hp x (#2G2*(K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "]8ij@  3G3*(K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "^Akl@` ` `  ` ` ` 2_5`ab<4G4*(K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "_Jmn` ` ` @  ` ` ` 5G5*(K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "`Sop` ` `  @  6G6*(K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "a\qr` ` `  @hhh hhh 7G7*(K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "best` ` `  hhh@ hhh 2c-depf68G8*(K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "cnuv` ` `  hhh@  9G9*(K&7>Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7>NGI "dwwx` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp 10G0*(Q&7tDocument Style Gl0 "7t GI "eGH` ` ` 11G1*(Q&7tTechnical Document Style "7t GI "f4I$J     2bghiIj12G2*(Q&7tTechnical Document Style "7t GI "g*KL    13G3*(Q&7tTechnical Document Style "7t GI "h'MN   14G4*(Q&7tTechnical Document Style "7t GI "i&OP   15G5*(Q&7tTechnical Document Style "7t GI "j&QR  . 2klmn#16G6*(Q&7tTechnical Document Style "7t GI "k&ST  . 17G7*(Q&7tTechnical Document Style "7t GI "l&UV  . 18G8*(Q&7tTechnical Document Style "7t GI "m&WX  . 19G9*(Q&7tRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7t GI "n8YZ@  2opq&r20G:*(Q&7tRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7t GI "oA[\@` ` `  ` ` ` 21G;*(Q&7tRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7t GI "pJ]^` ` ` @  ` ` ` 22G<*(Q&7tRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7t GI "qS_`` ` `  @  23G=*(Q&7tRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7t GI "r\ab` ` `  @hhh hhh 2^stzuB K24G>*(Q&7tRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7t GI "secd` ` `  hhh@ hhh 25G?*(Q&7tRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7t GI "tnef` ` `  hhh@  26G@*(Q&7tRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"7t GI "uwgh` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp "i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDdddddd/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN>F,"F<,,,",,,,,,,,A$^9^9^9^9^9rUV9Q9Q9Q9Q9,$,$,$,$^A^A^A^A^A^A^A^A^A^A^9^A^@^A^A^AIA^9^9^9V9V9VFV9^RQ9Q9Q9Q9^A^A^A^F^A^F^A,$,A,,,A[IFF^AQ$Q4Q,Q,Q$^AM^A^A^A^Ar^V,V,V,I1I1I1IFQ7Q$Q<^A^A^A^A^A^Az^^FQ9Q9Q9^AQ,^AI1Q,^AR"AA++W[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN/NN/hh>PW;LWWWWW17W47W4;;LLW;;hWWj>hh>gaa;LW4"rrrrWhe^WahhW"i~'K2^!.22YN!!!2Y!!!!2222222222!!dYd,YH?EJ?;HJ!'F?[JH9HC6?JH^HHA!!!22!,2,2,!222N2222%'22H22,,2,d222222!222222222H,H,H,H,H,YCE,?,?,?,?,!!!!J2H2H2H2H2J2J2J2J2H2H,J2H2H2H2J292H,H2H,D,D,E2E2J<>,?2?2>,H2H2H2H2H2J2J2!2222!2I822F2>>$?2@>J2:J2J2H2H2YHB$B$C26&6&6&62>$>?2J2J2J2J2J2J2^HH2@,@,@,J2?2J262?2H2<!22!!!WddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHHH222!,))22X222YY2#2222Y#!!442Ydd22==Ld2d2H2;SS88Y!42^x#"ddddHHddd2Hdd4HHYYddd2YYddd Y2!!dddddH=dYHHHHHHHHHH!d2H282YdHdC2!2H,29HNAddHHHHHHHHHHddddd.dHHHHdddddddddddddddddddHHddddddSC=NdHddd+;HHHHddddddHHH2HHdHHdddHHH,HHHH,HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!HHH!HHH!HHH!HHHHHHHHHHHHHH=?8=8C,?'A,J2H,!F,C8[8J,C2H,H=92=22?,H,C=H8N===H?J!2HHH=,====I!!2222HJ222HHH=!92,!ddhrZz.lZrrvvnFFZ8. zPy0ЍxId. at6.J AT&T alleges that Ameritech has refused to grant   `AT&T access to Ameritech's AIN switch triggers and has denied AT&T the ability to connect   its SCP with Ameritech's SSP. AT&T further alleges that Ameritech has not allowed other  X0  carriers to connect their own databases to Ameritech's STPs using direct connections.J?Z. zP0ЍxId. at7.J AT&T   concludes that Ameritech's refusal to provide these capabilities illustrates the illusory nature of Ameritech's proposed unbundling.  X_0 Px30.` ` In response, Ameritech contends that the proper point for interconnection with   0 Ameritech's SS7 network is an issue before the Commission in a separate proceeding, and should  X10  `not be considered in connection with the pricing reforms Ameritech proposes in the Petition.@1. zP 0 ЍxAmeritech Reply at 57 (citing Intelligent Networks, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 8FCC Rcd 6813 (1993)).   Moreover, Ameritech adds that, because SS7 TCAP messages are used for many different  X 0purposes, its proposal has value independent of AIN technologies and access to AIN features.LA F. zP0ЍxId. at 67.L  X 0x` ` 2. Analysis  X 0  X 0  x31.` `  BENIT1 We find that granting the requested waiver is in the public interest. Grant of the   waiver will permit recovery of Ameritech's SS7 costs in a way that reflects more accurately the   manner in which those costs are incurred because Ameritech's provision of SS7 services will no   P longer be bundled with the provision of switched access services, and because the rates for such   services will be charged on a permessage basis. This more accurate reflection of the underlying   costs will enable potential competitive entrants to engage in more rational economic decision-making.  X0 x32.` ` Currently, many of the costs incurred to provide signalling services are recovered   through the local switching and transport interconnection charge rate elements. This rate structure   Pforces Ameritech's access customers to pay for the provision of signalling services whether or   not they actually utilize Ameritech's signalling network. Conversely, the current bundled rate   @ structure does not allow Ameritech to offer SS7 services separately from the underlying switched   @access services. Thus, alternative local service providers cannot purchase separate signalling   0services from Ameritech to support their provision of competing local exchange and exchange access services.  X 0 x 33.` `  BENIT2 In addition, under the current rate structure, the perminute signalling service   charge is based on the duration of the underlying telephone call, thus entities making calls of   shorter duration, such as stores validating credit card numbers, pay less than those making calls"A0*((` "   of longer duration. Under the proposed rate structure, many of the individual signalling rate   elements would be charged on a permessage basis, regardless of the duration of the telephone   call that the signalling sets up. Because the cost of setting up a call is not dependent upon the   @duration of the telephone call, but does depend to some extent on the volume of traffic passed   pover the SS7 network, the proposed rate structure more accurately reflects the manner in which   signalling costs are incurred. Thus, the proposed rate structure does not subsidize telephone calls of a shorter duration with calls of longer durations.  XH0 x!34.` ` Contrary to the assertions of AT&T, we need not address the proper point for   0 interconnection with Ameritech's SS7 network to consider the Petition. The issues AT&T raises,   such as whether LECs should be required to provide access to their AIN switch triggers, are  X 0  currently before the Commission in the Intelligent Networks proceeding.iB . zP| 0ЍxSee generally Intelligent Networks NPRM.i Moreover, in   implementing the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Commission will address issues   associated with interconnection of telecommunications carriers and LEC provision of unbundled  X 0  access to network elements.4C" Z. zP0 ЍxSee Telecommunications Act of 1996, P.L. 104104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996). See also 47U.S.C.251(a)   (requiring telecommunications carriers to interconnect directly or indirectly with the facilities and equipment of other   ptelecommunications carriers) and 251(c)(3)(requiring incumbent LECs to provide, to any requesting telecommunications carrier... access to network elements on an unbundled basis at any technically feasible point).4 The Intelligent Networks proceeding and the proceedings   implementing the Telecommunications Act of 1996 are the proper fora for consideration of   AT&T's request. In the waiver context, Ameritech must only demonstrate that, because of   special circumstances, the proposed waiver would better serve the public interest than the   continued application of our existing rules. We need not and, given the limited record, cannot   ԩ decide whether some other regulatory action relating to SS7 services would also serve the public interest.  X 0 x"35.` ` Ameritech's Petition is substantially different from Bell Atlantic's petition to  X0  establish a call setup charge that we denied in 1989.1DD. zP0 ЍxBell Atlantic Telephone Companies Petition for Waiver of Sections 69.106 and 69.205 of the Commission's  zP0Rules to Permit a Call Setup Charge, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 4 FCC Rcd 7210 (Com. Car. Bur. 1989).1 Bell Atlantic sought permission to   establish a call setup charge separate from the local switching charge, but still bundled with   @transport elements. Ameritech, on the other hand, proposes individual SS7 elements, separate   `from both the local switching and transport elements. Thus, Ameritech's rate structure reflects   the manner in which SS7 costs are incurred more accurately than Bell Atlantic's proposal. Bell   Atlantic's proposal would have required its customers of interstate transport services to pay for   Pthe provision of signalling services whether or not they actually used Bell Atlantic's signalling   network. Conversely, Bell Atlantic's proposal would not have permitted alternative local service   pproviders to purchase separate signalling services from Bell Atlantic to support their provision   ` of competing local exchange and exchange access services. These differences clearly distinguish   Ameritech's proposal from Bell Atlantic's proposal. Moreover, our denial of the Bell Atlantic   @ petition was based to a large extent on our conclusion that, given the potential disruption for Bell"D0*((@ "  X0  Atlantic's access customers, such a proposal was best addressed in a rulemaking proceeding.\E. zPy0ЍxId. at 721112,  1516.\   No parties to this proceeding have suggested that Ameritech's proposal would cause the sort of customer disruption threatened by the Bell Atlantic petition.  X0 Px#36.` ` We further conclude that the benefits of granting Ameritech's proposed SS7   network unbundling clearly outweigh the detriments. For example, we realize that Ameritech's   proposal will likely increase the administrative burdens imposed on Ameritech's access customers,   because they will have to review separate bills for transport services and signalling services. In    addition, SS7 customers that carry telecommunications traffic nationwide will face a different rate   structure for signalling services in Ameritech's region than in other regions across the United   States. We believe, however, that the benefits of implementing a more costbased rate structure  X 0for Ameritech's SS7 signalling service outweigh these administrative costs.F Z. zP0ЍxSee BENIT131שBENIT233 supra.  X 0   x$37.` ` Finally, contrary to the assertions of some commenters, the waiver Ameritech   P proposes does not necessitate a broad restructuring of the Part 36 jurisdictional separations rules   or the Part 69 access charge rules. For the purposes of a waiver, we presume the validity of the   underlying rules, and then seek to determine whether, under special circumstances demonstrated   p by the petitioner, continued application of those rules in this case would be contrary to the public   interest. Although it is true that the interstate access rate structure must recover costs allocated   0 through the jurisdictional separations process, we may modify the recovery method for interstate   costs without revising the way those costs are allocated between jurisdictions. Moreover, grant   of Ameritech's Petition does not preclude the Commission from initiating a general rulemaking   proceeding to examine its Part 69 rules. In fact, Ameritech's unbundling of its SS7 rate structure    could provide the Commission with relevant empirical data and information that would be helpful in conducting a comprehensive review of Part69.  X0x C.` ` Initial Rates for New SS7 Rate Elements  X0  X|0x` ` 1. Positions of the Parties  XN0 x%38.` `  IIIC Ameritech characterizes its proposal as a "restructuring" under our LEC price cap  X70  rules, and states that the requested waiver would be revenue neutral for Ameritech.RG7. xP!0ЍxAmeritech Reply at 34.R Ameritech   @claims that it need not demonstrate the revenue neutrality of its proposal in its waiver petition,  X 0  @because it will do so in connection with its tariff filing to implement SS7 unbundling.JH |. zP6%0ЍxId. at 3.J Almost   Pall of the commenters argue that Ameritech has not provided sufficient information to"H0*((` "  X0  ` demonstrate that Ameritech's proposed restructuring is revenue neutral.I. xPy0 0ЍxAT&T Comments at 8; AT&T Reply at 4; Sprint Comments at 45; Financial Services Providers Comments at 5. The Financial Services   @Providers and Ad Hoc assert that Ameritech fails to quantify the reduction in other (new or  X0  existing) rate elements that would result from removal of SS7 facility costs.cJX . xP0  ЍxFinancial Services Providers Comments at 5; Ad Hoc Comments at 4. MCI claims that Ameritech does   ` not sufficiently specify the relationship between the proposed new rate elements and the existing rate elements from which they will be unbundled. MCI Comments at 7.c Sprint contends   that Ameritech should be required to demonstrate the precise impact of its proposal on each  X0  ` existing access rate element, and to identify the cost basis and rate impact of its proposal.RK@. xP 0ЍxSprint Comments at 45.R Some   commenters aver that Ameritech does not provide data to support its claim that TCAP and ISUP  Xv0messages should be billed at different rates.|Lv. xP0ЍxAd Hoc Comments at 5; Financial Services Providers Comments at 8.|  XH0x` ` 2. Analysis  X 0 px&39.` ` The proposed SS7 rate structure change constitutes a restructuring of existing rate   0elements under the Commission's LEC price cap regulations. Pursuant to the Commission's   @rules, price cap LECs that restructure their access charges are required to demonstrate that the  X 0  proposed restructure results in rates that do not exceed the applicable index limits.rM ` . xP0Ѝx47 C.F.R.  61.46(c), 61.47(d), 61.49(f) (1994).r In general,   this requirement is satisfied if the rate restructure change is, on the whole, revenue neutral. We   0accept Ameritech's commitment to demonstrate, in the tariff review process, the revenue   neutrality of its proposal, and we require that such a showing be made prior to Ameritech   implementing its proposal. To show that the proposed restructure is revenue neutral, Ameritech   must demonstrate that it will receive the same aggregate revenues under the new SS7 rate   structure as it does today. This requirement will ensure that Ameritech's initial SS7 rates, as a whole, are not set at predatory or excessive levels.  X0 x'40.` ` A revenue neutrality showing on its own, however, would not guarantee that   Ameritech's rate levels for each of its new SS7 rate elements reflect Ameritech's underlying   costs. As a result, Ameritech could set the initial rates for potentially competitive SS7 elements   P at predatory levels, while recouping the difference by pricing other rate elements that face a lower   level of competition much higher than cost. The Commission generally does not require LECs   pto make costofservice showings to support proposed rates for the new rate elements of a rate   restructure. In certain cases, however, such as the Open Network Architecture (ONA)"| M0*(("  X0  proceeding, the Commission has indeed imposed such a requirement.N. zPy0 ЍxAmendments to Part 69 of the Commission's Rules Relating to the Creation of Access Charge Subelements  zPC0for Open Network Architecture, Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 2104 (1993). Ameritech itself   acknowledges that elements of the signalling network, such as the proposed signal link and signal   switching charges, may be subject to different competitive pressures, because the current network   0architecture prevents competitors from providing certain signalling functions. In addition, the   @Commission has no prior experience with unbundled SS7 rates to use as a guide for evaluating   @Ameritech's proposed rate structure. Requiring Ameritech to justify the costs of its new   unbundled SS7 elements will guarantee that the new rate elements will be costbased and not   excessive, consistent with Commission precedent. Therefore, as a condition for our approval of   this waiver, we require Ameritech to demonstrate, in its tariff filing, that its proposed rates for   new signalling elements satisfy the cost justification requirement of the LEC price cap new services test. Xx(#  X 0  x HD.` ` Treatment of Subsequent Rate Changes for SS7 Rate Elements Under Price Caps(#`  X 0x` ` 1. Positions of the Parties  X0  Xy0  x(41.` `  IIID Ameritech's proposal for price cap treatment of the new SS7 rate elements is   @shown in Figure5 in AppendixA. Ameritech proposes to place the rate elements for signal   formulation and Hoptional parameters into the local switching service category of the traffic   sensitive basket. Ameritech seeks to place the remaining new elements (signal switching, signal   transport, signal tandem switching) into the signalling for tandem switching service category of   @the trunking basket. Ameritech proposes no changes to the placement of dedicated signalling  X0  transport (i.e., the signal link and STP port termination charges) and database access within the existing price cap service categories.  X0 Px)42.` ` MCI urges the Commission to consider imposing pricing safeguards on Ameritech   @to prevent it from charging higher rates for lesscompetitive unbundled SS7 services, and then  X~0  predatorily pricing those unbundled services subject to competition.MO~$. xPS0ЍxMCI Comments at 8.M Pacific Bell argues, in   response, that the services Ameritech proposes to unbundle meet the Commission's standard for  XP0  !grouping services together in the same pricing category,SPP. xP!0ЍxPacific Bell Reply at 2.S and that MCI proposes an approach that  X90the Commission has already rejected in the Price Caps proceeding.LQ9D. zP.$0ЍxId. at 34.L  X 0 0x*43.` ` AT&T contends that the proposed waiver would give Ameritech's intraLATA toll   services an unfair advantage because Ameritech is unable to measure and impute the SS7 usage"Q0*((` "  X0  by its own intraLATA toll customers into the rates for those services.PR. xPy0ЍxAT&T Comments at n.7.P In response, Ameritech   Pclaims that it will calculate the amount of SS7 usage by its intraLATA toll operations on the  X0  pbasis of the number of intraLATA messages.PSX. xP0ЍxAmeritech Reply at 5.P Ameritech states that, as required by the   Commission's rules, it will flow through access charge changes to its interexchange basket price  X0cap index.  X0  Xv0x` ` 2. Analysis  XH0 x+44.` ` As shown in Figure6 in AppendixA, we conclude that, with one modification,   Ameritech's proposal for price cap treatment of the new SS7 rate elements would serve the public   interest. As a general matter, we seek to place services that experience different competitive   pressures within different service categories, so that LECs cannot offset price decreases in a   `competitive service with corresponding increases in a noncompetitive service, and still remain  X 0  `below the applicable price cap.T . zPn0 ЍxPolicy and Rules Concerning Rates for Dominant Carriers, Second Report and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 6786  zP80(1990) (LEC Price Cap Order) at 681013,  198226. Services that are similar in nature and subject to similar   competitive pressures should be placed within the same basket or service category, so as to   minimize rate structure complexity and permit LECs greater flexibility to price services in   response to market conditions. Ameritech's proposal to place the elements of signal formulation   Pinto the local switching service category of the traffic sensitive basket is consistent with these   goals. These two rate elements generally relate to the functions of the local switch. In addition,   SS7 customers must purchase signal formulation from Ameritech when they purchase local   switching services from Ameritech, so that local switching and signal formulation are subject to   similar competitive conditions. While we recognize that signal formulation may also be   performed in tandem switches, the benefits of placing signal formulation in Ameritech's local   switching service category outweigh the costs and additional complexity that would be incurred   to create separate rate elements for end office signal formulation and access tandem signal formulation and to place each in separate price cap service categories.  X0 0x,45.` ` We also accept Ameritech's proposal to place the charges for signal switching,   `signal tandem switching, and signal transport in the signalling for tandem switching service   category within the trunking basket. We recognize that not all of these charges are related to the   P provision of tandem switching. Arguably, signal switching charges could be placed in a separate   0 service category within the switching basket, and signal transport charges could be placed in the   three flatrated transport service categories. The use of an existing signallingrelated service   pcategory avoids, however, increasing the complexity of the price cap rate structure. Moreover,   0placing these three elements within the same service category does not create an incentive for   @ Ameritech to price these SS7 services anticompetitively because Ameritech proposes no change   to the current practice of confining interconnection to LEC SS7 networks through an STP. " DT0*(( ""   @Because of this requirement, if a third party purchases SS7 services from Ameritech, that party   will likely purchase signal switching, signal tandem switching, and signal transport together,  X0  which subjects these elements to the same competitive pressures. Although some parties have   argued that LEC SS7 networks should be further unbundled so as to permit competitors to   0 perform SS7 functions that currently must be provided by the LECs, this request is more properly  X0considered in the Intelligent Networks proceeding.  Xa0 `x-46.` ` We require Ameritech to modify its proposal with respect to the price cap   @treatment of the STP port termination charge. STP port termination, which only Ameritech can   @ provide, should be placed into a separate service category from the signalling link element, which   SS7 customers can provide themselves or obtain from alternative providers rather than purchasing   @from Ameritech. Under Ameritech's proposal, Ameritech would have an incentive to lower the   price for the signalling link element and to recoup those foregone revenues through increased   0rates for STP port termination within the same service category. Under an unbundled SS7 rate   structure, the STP port termination charge is more properly grouped with the other non  competitive SS7 elements. We therefore require Ameritech to place the STP port termination   element within the signalling for tandem switching service category. The signalling link charge   shall remain within the three flatrated transport service categories. This rate structure places all   the SS7 elements that must be provided by Ameritech within one service category, while placing   the potentially competitive new rate elements within service categories that more closely match their competitive and functional characteristics.  X0 x.47.` ` Our rules require price cap LECs that provide interstate corridor and interstate  intraLATA services to impute access charges, including the transport interconnection charge, to  X0  themselves and to include any changes in those imputed charges in their interexchange basket.qU. zPS0 Ѝx1994 Annual Access Tariff Filings Nevada Bell et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order Suspending Rates,  zP0  09 FCC Rcd 3519, 3531, 26 (Com. Car. Bur. 1994)(Nevada Bell Order); Policy and Rules Concerning Rates for  zP0  Dominant Carriers, Second Report and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 6786, 6808, 174 (1990)(LEC Price Cap Order),  zP0  modified on recon., 6 FCC Rcd 2637 (1991), aff'd sub nom. National Rural Telecom Ass'n v. FCC, 988 F.2d 174  zP{0  ` (D.C. Cir. 1993), petitions for further recon. dismissed, 6 FCC Rcd 7482 (1991), further modified on recon., 6 FCC  zPE0Rcd 4524 (1991), further recon., 7 FCC Rcd 5235 (1992).q   Price cap LECs are required to make an exogenous cost adjustment to the price cap index of their   interexchange basket to reflect changes in the levels of interstate access rates that they must  X0  pimpute to themselves when they offer such interstate services.VL. zP 0 0ЍxNevada Bell Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 3531, 26. See also LEC Price Cap Order, 5 FCC Rcd at 6808, 17475. We accept Ameritech's   commitment to calculate SS7 usage by its own intraLATA operations on the basis of the number   @ of intraLATA messages. No party suggests that this measurement method would be inadequate.   After calculating such SS7 usage and pursuant to our LEC price cap rules, Ameritech will be   required to impute the costs of such SS7 operations, with other relevant access charges, to itself and include any changes in these imputed costs in its interexchange price cap basket. " V0*((0"Ԍ X0x E.` ` Optional ISUP Parameters  X0x` ` 1. Positions of the Parties  X0 0 x/48.` `  IIIE Ameritech argues that, in response to market demand, it should be permitted to   recover its costs for providing additional information as part of ISUP messages transmitted to its  Xv0  SS7 customers.KWv. xP0ЍxPetition at 67.K Ameritech proposes to recover these costs through recurring and nonrecurring  X_0  Pcharges. Most commenters claim that Ameritech's request is improper because it would permit   `Ameritech to impose new charges for various signallingrelated services and functions with  X10  virtually no oversight by the Commission.tX1X. zP: 0ЍxSee, e.g., MCI Comments at 9; Sprint Comments at 5.t These parties argue that the Commission should   @consider any proposals by Ameritech to charge for new optional parameters in separate, individualized waiver proceedings.  X 0x` ` 2. Analysis  X 0 x049.` ` We grant Ameritech's request to implement nonrecurring and recurring charges   0 to recover the costs of providing additional information as part of the ISUP messages it transmits   to SS7 customers, provided, however, that Ameritech's implementation is consistent with the   Commission's rules and policies regarding the provision of specific information or parameters.    Our current access charge rate structure does not include a specific rate element for the recovery   pof costs incurred in providing additional ISUP parameters. We disagree with those parties that   argue this is improper. Grant of this request will only permit Ameritech to establish recurring  X0  pand nonrecurring charges for the provision of additional ISUP parameters (i.e., GAP and UUI),   not other signallingrelated functions or services. Moreover, the implementation of any new   p charges pursuant to this request will require Ameritech to demonstrate in the tariff review process   that such charges satisfy the price cap rules. Granting Ameritech the ability to implement   nonrecurring and recurring charges for additional ISUP parameters would allow Ameritech to   provide more flexibly the ISUP information that SS7 customers may need to provide new and   innovative services. We agree with Ameritech that such optional parameters, which are related   to signal formulation, should be placed within the local switching service category for price cap purposes.  X"0 x150.` ` We do require, however, that recovery of costs through these charges be consistent   with other Commission rules and policies. For example, the Commission's rules require any   common carrier using SS7 call set up to transmit the calling party number associated with an  X0  interstate call to interconnecting carriers at no charge.Y^. zPx%0 Ѝx47 C.F.R. 64.1601 (1994). See generally Rules and Policies Regarding Calling Number Identification  zPB&0  Service Caller ID, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 9 FCC Rcd 1764 (1994),  zP '0  recon., Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and Order, and Third Notice of" 'X0*((H'"  zP0  @Proposed Rulemaking, 10 FCC Rcd 11700 (1995), aff'd sub nom., The People of the State of California v. FCC, 75 F.3d 1350 (9th Cir. 1996). Thus, Ameritech may not impose charges""Y0*((!"   @ pursuant to this waiver to recover the costs of providing calling party number information as part of the ISUP messages it transmits to interconnecting carriers.  X0  IV. ORDERING CLAUSES׃  X0  Xv0 x251.` ` IVAccordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications   Act, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), and Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.3, that   Ameritech's Revised Petition for Waiver of Part 69 of the Commission's Rules to Establish   @Unbundled Rate Elements for SS7 Signalling IS GRANTED subject to the limitations and conditions described herein. x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hhRegina M. Keeney x` `  hhChief, Common Carrier Bureau"b"Y0*(("  X0  @A-@< APPENDIXA FIGURES ă "Y0*(("  X0  @A-B-@ APPENDIXB GLOSSARY Z. zPy0 PЍxSee generally Jerry Whitaker and Harold Winard, The Information Age Dictionary (Intertec Publishing Corporation & Bellcore 1st ed. 1992).փ  X0 ` ACM x` `  Address complete message a message sent in the backward direction  pindicating that all the address signals required for routing a telephone call to the called party have been received.(#  Xv0  AIN x` `  Advanced intelligent network a telecommunications network in which call  `processing and routing, and network management are provided by means  Pof centralized databases, rather than from a comparable database at every switching system.(#  X 0  ANM x` `  Answer message a message sent in the backward direction indicating that a telephone call has been answered.(#  X 0   CCS x` `  Common channel signalling signalling between storedprogramcontrolled   systems for which the voice or message and signalling paths of a call are  separated. The signalling portion uses separate data links to carry   information to control the connection, monitoring, and disconnection of calls.(#  X40 p CLASS ` ` X Custom local area signalling services a group of subscriber services that   provide selectivecall screening, alerting, and callingidentification delivery functions.(#  X0  DNAL ` `  Dedicated network access line an Ameritech term used to refer to a dedicated circuit connecting a customer's SS7 network to a LEC STP.(#  X0   DS1 x` `  © a digital transmission rate using timedivision multiplexing techniques equivalent to 1.544 megabits per second or to 24 voice grade channels.(#  XN0   DS3 x` `  © a digital transmission rate using timedivision multiplexing techniques equivalent to 44.736 megabits per second or to 672 voice grade channels.(#  X 0 0 GAP x` `  Generic address parameter an ISUP parameter used in the initial address  message to carry a userprovided calling number received from an  originating ISDN access line through the SS7 network to the terminating switch.(#  X"0  IAM x` `  Initial Address Message a ISUP message that contains information about  a telephone call's destination, seeks to determine whether a transmission  0path is available to carry the call, and then instructs the network to begin"h$"Z0*((%" establishing a transmission path.(#  X0  ISDN x` `  Integrated services digital network a set of technical standards and  protocols for the subscriber line that allows digital transmission over  ordinary local telephone subscriber lines or T1 facilities (facilities capable of carrying 1.544 megabits per second).(#  X_0 ` ISUP x` `  ISDN user part the layer of the SS7 protocol that provides circuitrelated  XH0functions for both ISDN and nonISDN telephone calls.b[H. zP 0ЍxNotes on the Networks at p.147.b(#  X 0  LIDB x` `  Line information database a database application that provides validation  of information for use in alternate billing services, such as telephone calling cards.(#  X 0  X 0  POP x` `  Point of presence a physical location established by an IXC within a LATA for the purpose of obtaining access within that LATA.(#  Xy0 p SCP x` `  Service control point a database that stores and provides information  Passociated with the routing of telephone calls or other related services, such as the LIDB.(#  X0 P SSP x` `  Service switching point an end office or access tandem switch that is  capable of originating, transmitting, and receiving SS7 messages for call set up and database transactions.(#  X0 p STP x` `  Signalling transfer point a packet switch that routes signalling messages between other SS7 signalling points.(#  X|0 ` SS7 x` `  Signalling System Number 7 the international standard network protocol currently used to transmit signalling information over CCS networks.(#  X70 0 TCAP ` `  Transaction capabilities application part a part of the SS7 protocol used  0to handle queries to, and responses from, end offices (for purposes of  providing CLASS features, such as automatic callback and caller ID) or  X0databases (e.g., LIDB or the toll free database).(#  X 0   UUI x` `  Usertouser information an ISUP parameter used to carry ISDN user data from one network to another.