WPC6 2BJZ Courier3|x +x6X@`7X@HP LaserJet 5L (Local) LPT1HPLAS5P.PRS5x  @\<"{X@2 6 ZF v3|x HP LaserJet 5L (Local) LPT1HPLAS5P.PRS5x  @\<"{X@a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` 2=pRkk-a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  2votY a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` 2  o  a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h 22   Y 2 a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technical2d 4Ba1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   2"o1a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . 2 3oea8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:i:?^/<@O=A >header2>I ` hp x`    #FxX  Pg9CXP# heading 3?F` hp x #FxX  Pg9CXP# footer!@!!#d\  PCP#CitatorFormat Secretary's Citator Output FileAW r5-#d6X@`7Ͽ@# XX  X B r5-S  B2>BB@Cv@DvRAEvAFormat DownloadFormat Downloaded DocumentBiޛ r5- XX    \ #d6X@`7Ͽ@#heading 4heading 4C heading 5heading 5D heading 6heading 6E 2>DFvpBGvBHl\CIvCheading 7heading 7F heading 8heading 8G Default Paragraph FoDefault Paragraph FontH endnote textendnote textI 2)FJrpDKvDLeXEMlEendnote referenceendnote referenceJ footnote textfootnote textK footnote referencefootnote referenceL Document 8Document 8M 2HNx[FOlFPl?GQlGDocument 4Document 4N  Document 6Document 6O Document 5Document 5P Document 2Document 2Q 2]MRlIHSHTJUlLDocument 7Document 7R Right Par 1Right Par 1S` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 2Right Par 2T` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Document 3Document 3U 2VVMWOXQYSRight Par 3Right Par 3V` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 4Right Par 4W` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 5Right Par 5X` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 6Right Par 6Y` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#2^Z9V[WX\(uZ]$\Right Par 7Right Par 7Z` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 8Right Par 8[` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Document 1Document 1\` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 5Technical 5]` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#2d^$^_la`laa$aTechnical 6Technical 6^` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 2Technical 2_ Technical 3Technical 3` Technical 4Technical 4a` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#2kblEdc$dd$fehTechnical 1Technical 1b Technical 7Technical 7c` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 8Technical 8d` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#toc 1toc 1e` hp x (#(#`(#`` hp x (#2sfIkggmhoiqtoc 2toc 2f` hp x (#` (#`` (#`` hp x (#toc 3toc 3g` hp x (#` (#` (#` hp x (#toc 4toc 4h` hp x (# (# (#` hp x (#toc 5toc 5i` hp x (#h(#h(#` hp x (#2zjskvvlvmxtoc 6toc 6j` hp x (#(# (# ` hp x (#toc 7toc 7k toc 8toc 8l` hp x (#(# (# ` hp x (#toc 9toc 9m` hp x (#(#`(#`` hp x (#2Łnzo}p1qvOindex 1index 1n` hp x (#` (#` (#` hp x (#index 2index 2o` hp x (#` (#`` (#`` hp x (#toa headingtoa headingp` hp x (#(#(#` hp x (#captioncaptionq 2rlsct/u_Equation Caption_Equation Captionr para numnumbered indented paragraphss' Y- 1.(i) 1) 1.#Xw P7[hXP# 1. 1.ҲHeadingChapter HeadingtJ d  ) I. ׃  Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersu>a݅@  I.   X(# 2ZvwdIxy‡SubheadingSubheadingv0\ E A.  HIGHLIGHT 1Italics and Boldldeddw+. DRAFT ONHeader A Text = DRAFT and Datex X =8` (#FDRAFTă r  ` (#=D3 1, 43 12pt (Z)(PC-8))T2Dă  ӟDRAFT OFFTurn Draft Style offy@@    2Pz1{1|1}1LETTER LANDLetter Landscape - 11 x 8.5z 3'3'Standard'3'3StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11 ;   LEGAL LANDLegal Landscape - 14 x 8.5{f 3'3'Standard'A'AStandardZ K e6VE L"nu;   LETTER PORTLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11|L 3'3'Standard3'3'StandardZ K e6VE L"nU9   LEGAL PORTLegal Portrait - 8.5 x 14} 3'3'StandardA'A'StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 119   2?~ndqjՎTITLETitle of a Document~K\ * ăBLOCK QUOTESmall, single-spaced, indentedN X HIGHLIGHT 2Large and Bold LargeB*d. HIGHLIGHT 3Large, Italicized and Underscored V -q2:qE-Ւ8LETTERHEADLetterhead - date/marginsu H XX  3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"n3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"nE9    * 3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"n3' II"n"Tv3'StandarddZ K e VE L"nU9 Ѓ   INVOICE FEETFee Amount for Math Invoice ,, $0$0  MEMORANDUMMemo Page FormatD.   ! M E M O R A N D U M ă r  y<N dddy   INVOICE EXPSEExpense Subtotals for Math Invoice:A ,p, $0$0028lXE[INVOICE TOTTotals Invoice for Math Macroz 4p, $0$00INVOICE HEADRHeading Portion of Math Invoice+C`*   4X 99L$0 **(  ӧ XX NORMALReturn to Normal TypestyleSMALLSmall Typestyle2[*[[[;FINEFine TypestyleLARGELarge TypestyleEXTRA LARGEExtra Large TypestyleVERY LARGEVery Large Typestyle2ȚXKCENVELOPEStandard Business Envelope with Header+w ,,EnvelopeZ K e VE L"n,,EnvelopeLarge, Italicized and Under;    ,, 88+  `   1dfStyle 14Swiss 8 Pt Without Margins$$D Co> PfQ  )a [ PfQO Style 12Dutch Italics 11.5$$F )^ `> XifQ  )a [ PfQO 2l`Style 11Initial Codes for Advanced IIJ )a [ PfQK  dddn  #  [ X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 ! )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   x )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   j-n )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  jBX )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 3oDutch Roman 11.5 with Margins/Tabs )a [ PfQO  ddn  # c0*b, oT9 !Style 4 PSwiss 8 Point with MarginsDq Co> PfQ  dddd  #  Style 1.5Dutch Roman 11.5 Font4h )a [ PfQO  dddn 2|6֦vStyle 2Dutch Italic 11.5$ )^ `> XifQ Style 5Dutch Bold 18 Point$RH$L T~> pfQ_  )a [ PfQO Style 7Swiss 11.5$$V )ao> PfQ ]  )a [ PfQO Style 6Dutch Roman 14 Point$$N w [ PfQ   )a [ PfQO 2qHOV[Style 10oInitial Codes for Advanced U )a [ PfQK  dddn  ##  [[ b, oT9 !b, oT9 !n )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   f )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   Q" )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  QN~ )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 8PfInitial Codes for Beginninggi )a [ PfQK  dddn  # X` hp x (#%'b, oT9  [ &e )^ `> XifQ ` Beginning Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   d )^ `> XifQ Beginning Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   jH )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  j )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 9Initial Codes for Intermediate )a [ PfQK  dddn  # X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 Њ [ e )^ `> XifQ ` Intermediate Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   3 )^ `> XifQ Intermediate Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   jf )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc.`+ >Page  jX )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 UpdateInitial Codes for Update Module )a [ PfQK  dddn  #  [ X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 !n )^ `> XifQ ` Legal WordPerfect 5.0 Update Class Learning Guide   f )^ `> XifQ Legal WordPerfect 5.0 Update Class Learning Guide   Q" )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`7 CPage  jN~ )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 2}"'head1 #'d#2p}wC@ #a1Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf$ a2Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf/` ` ` a3Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf:` ` `  23a4Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfE` ` `  a5Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfP  ` ` ` hhh a6Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf[   a7Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrff  2:}a8Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfq Paragraph[1]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B$ab Paragraph[2]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B/cd` ` ` Paragraph[3]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B:ef` ` `  2&l gParagraph[4]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )BEgh` ` `  Paragraph[5]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )BPij` ` ` hhh Paragraph[6]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B[kl Paragraph[7]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bfmn 2X"q@eParagraph[8]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bqop toatoa` hp x (#` hp x (#2S&C6C^fDocument StyleNF2CC -2( -Ct )s t . 3S&C7C^fDocument StyleNF2CC -2( -Ct ) uv 2BeHp@4S&C8C^fDocument StyleNF2CC! -2( -Ct ) wx 5S&C9C^fDocument StyleNF2CC/ -2( -Ct )*yz   6S&C:C^fDocument StyleNF2CC= -2( -Ct ){|` ` ` 7S&C;C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK -2( -Ct )8}~@  2tH8S&C<C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersY -2( -Ct )A@` ` `  ` ` ` 9S&C=C^fDocument StyleNF2CCg -2( -Ct )0    10S&C>C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersu -2( -Ct )J` ` ` @  ` ` ` 11S&C?C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )S` ` `  @  25'd12S&C@C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )\` ` `  @hhh hhh 13S&CAC^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )e` ` `  hhh@ hhh 14S&CBC^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )n` ` `  hhh@  15S&CCC^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )w` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp 2g!+16S&CDC^fDocument StyleNF2CC -2( -Ct )F   ׃  17S&CEC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )&  . 18S&CFC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )&  . 19S&CGC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )*    2W"20S&CHC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )'   21S&CIC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )&   22S&CJC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )4$     23S&CKC^fTechnical Document StyleCC+ -2( -Ct )&  . 2}24S&CLC^fTechnical Document StyleCC9 -2( -Ct )&  . 25S&CMC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)CG -2( -Ct )$ 26S&CNC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)CU -2( -Ct )/` ` ` 27S&COC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)Cc -2( -Ct ):` ` `  2v28S&CPC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)Cq -2( -Ct )E` ` `  29S&CQC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )P` ` ` hhh 30S&CRC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )[ 31S&CSC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )f 2\*32S&CTC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )q Default ParaC^fDefault Paragraph Font2CC -2( -Ct );;#PP##PP#_Equation CaC^f_Equation CaptionF2CC -2( -Ct );;#PP##PP#endnote refeC^fendnote referenceF2CC -2( -Ct )>>#PP##PP#20Zd pfootnote refC^ffootnote referenceF2CC -2( -Ct )>#PP#1, 2, 3,?@65NumbersO@/"=(1*1÷$t ?.E1.A, B,t ?@65Uppercase Letters1 ?*1÷$t ?.E .33`O5hT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5h.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>` ` ` 2q&eea34`O5iT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5i.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  . 35`O5jT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5j.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  36`O5kT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5k.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  37`O5lT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5l.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>*   2Xp&(38`O5mT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5m.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>` ` ` 39`O5nT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>8@   40`O5oT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>A@` `  ` ` ` 41`O5pT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5p.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>0    2P.42`O5qT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>J` ` @  ` `  43`O5rT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>S` `  @  44`O5sT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>\` `  @hh# hhh 45`O5tT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>e` `  hh#@( hh# 2ZJ46`O5uT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>n` `  hh#(@- ( 47`O5vT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>w` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 48`O5wT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5w.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>F *  ׃  49`O5xT(G2PTechnical Document Stylex.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&  . 2B50`O5yT(G2PTechnical Document Styley.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&  . 51`O5zT(G2PTechnical Document Stylez.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>*    52`O5{T(G2PTechnical Document Style{.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>'   53`O5|T(G2PTechnical Document Style|.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&   2?=}54`O5}T(G2PTechnical Document Style}.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>4$     55`O5~T(G2PTechnical Document Style~.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&  . 56`O5T(G2PTechnical Document Style.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&  . 57`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>$ 2q*58`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>/` ` ` 59`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>:` ` `  60`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>E` ` `  61`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>P` ` ` hhh 28xB62`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>[ 63`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>f 64`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>q 65`O5T(G2PDefault Paragraph Font5.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>OO#P P##P P#2j`\66`O5T(G2P_Equation Caption^aO5.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>OO#PP##PP#67`O5T(G2Pendnote reference^aO5.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>RR#PP##PP#68`O5T(G2Pfootnote reference^aO5.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>R#PP#69 _5(_>7footnote text _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+tZP2p:qee70 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t` ` ` 71 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t  . 72 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t  73 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t  2KKK@74 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t*   "i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDdDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddxHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd"i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDdddddd8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""2"2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""/>/>/>/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)))))))))<)C"VV5VYO5O5O5O5^<^<^<^>^<^C^F.".C.).CaC>>^CO"O6O)O0O"VCVVCVC^<^O=O)OFVCVCVCVCVCVCxVV>O5O5O5VCO)VCC.O)V<X<<( (WTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN+HH+@<)<<<<as suggested by the RBOC Coalition, we do not include in this federal tariffing requirement  xjfeatures and functions that are generally available to all local exchange customers and are only  Xd- xZincidental to payphone service, such as touchtone services and various custom calling features.3dR yOg -#X\  P6G;qP#эxEx Parte Letter of Michael Kellogg, Counsel, RBOC Coalition to Mary Beth Richards, Deputy Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, FCC (March 25, 1997) at 2.  xIn addition, we clarify here that payphonespecific, networkbased features and functions must  xbe federally tariffed now only if the LEC provides them separately and on an unbundled basis  xfrom the basic payphone line, either to its payphone operations or to others, because the payphone  xorders did not require additional unbundling of features and functions by April 15 beyond those  X- xLthat the LEC chooses to provide.4 yOL'-#X\  P6G;qP#эxPayphone Order at para. 148.#XZ\  PQ߈XP#ѡ As required by the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding," :40*(("  xhowever, a state may require further unbundling, and PSPs may request additional unbundled  X-features and functions from BOCs through the ONA 120day service request process.5 yOb-#X\  P6G;qP#эxId.#9 @HxQX#ю  X-  X- px` ` 19.     The RBOC Coalition argues that Computer III prohibits mix and match of  X- xfederal and state tariffs required by the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding.H6X yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Ex Parte Letter of Michael Kellogg, Counsel, RBOC Coalition to Mary Beth Richards, Deputy Chief,  yOu-Common Carrier Bureau (March 25, 1997).#x6X@`7QSX@#H In contrast,  xlAPCC argues that the reasons for prohibiting mix and match do not apply for tariffs filed  xpursuant to the payphone orders because the Commission has required that rates for both state  X_- xand federal tariffs must be costbased and subject to the new services test.#X\  P6G;qP##Xj\  P6G;߈XP#<7_ yO -#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Ex Parte Letter of Albert Kramer, Counsel, APCC to Mary Beth Richards, Deputy Chief, Common  yO -Carrier Bureau (March 27, 1997).#x6X@`7QSX@#< We conclude that  XH- xthe Payphone Reclassification Proceeding does not prohibit the mixing and matching of payphone  xjservices between federal and state tariffs by LEC and independent payphone operations. This  X - xconclusion applies only to payphone services and does not affect Computer III requirements.8X  yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эxAmendments of Part 69 of the Commission's Rules Relating to the Creation of Access Charge  yO-Subelements for Open Network Architecture, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 89-79, 6 FCC Rcd  yOc-4524, 4535, para. 65#X\  P6G;qP# (1991).#Xj\  P6G;߈XP#ѳ  X - xIn Computer III, the Commission did not allow such mixing and matching because: (1) mixing  x=and matching could result in mismatch of basic service arrangements ("BSA") and BSEs costs  xand revenues; (2) it could undermine state policies; (3) states may impose terms and conditions  X - xon BSAs/BSEs that differ from those of the FCC; and (4) other jurisdictional problems.l9X (  yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эxId. See also Amendments of Part 69 of the Commission's Rules Relating to the Creation of Access  yO_-Charge Subelements for Open Network Architecture, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 89-79, 4 FCC Rcd 3983, 3989 at para. 43 (1989).l Unlike  X - xLComputer III, however, Section 276 provides the Commission with jurisdiction over all tariffing  X- xof payphone services.:H  yO-#XZ\  P@Q߈XP##X\  P6G;qP#эx Payphone Order at paras. 146147. The Commission has delegated to each state the review, pursuant to  Xy- x[federal guidelines, of payphone tariffs filed in the state.;y yO -#X\  P6G;qP#эx Order on Reconsideration at para. 163.#X\  P6G;qP#@ Given that the federal guidelines for  Xb- x{tariffing discussed above<bh yO{"-#X\  P6G;qP#эxPayphone Order at para. 146; Order on Reconsideration at para. 163. See also para. 2, above. are the same in the state and federal jurisdictions, there is no  xLundermining of state policies or the creation of jurisdictional conflicts. Moreover, in this case,  ximixing and matching provides a safeguard to ensure that unbundled features are available at rates  X- x=that comply with the guidelines established in the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding.#Xj\  P6G;߈XP# #Xx 01fX0##Xj\  P6G;߈XP#We  x?conclude that the separations issues, if any, raised by allowing mixing and matching are  xoutweighed, in this case, by the importance of this safeguard to ensure that unbundled features" <0*(('"  X- xand functions are available at rates that comply with the guidelines established in the Payphone  X-Reclassification Proceeding.= yOb-#X\  P6G;qP#э#X\  P6G;qP#xThe Commission is undertaking a proceeding to reform the separation rules. Any problems, if they  yO*-exist, will be considered in that proceeding. See Access Charge Reform, Price Cap Performance Review for Local Exchange Carriers, Transport Rate Structure and Pricing, Usage of the Public Switched Network by  yO-Information Service and Internet Access Providers, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Third Report and Order, and  yO-Notice of Inquiry, CC Docket Nos. 96-262, 94-1,91-213, 96-263, FCC 96-488 (rel. Dec. 24, 1996) at para. 6.  X-xD. ` ` Waiver  X- pcx` ` 20. As discussed above,>x yO -#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#See para. 15, above.#x6X@`7QSX@# upon reviewing the contentions of the RBOC  Xv- x?Coalition and the language it cites from the two orders in the Payphone Reclassification  X_- xLProceeding, we conclude that the while the individual BOCs are not in full compliance with the  XH- xjrequriements of the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding, they have made a good faith effort  X1- x0to comply with the requirements. The RBOC Coalition concedes that the Commission's  xpayphone orders mandate the federal tariffing of some payphone services, namely those that the  X - x[LEC provides to its own payphone operations.H?  yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Ex Parte Letter of Michael Kellogg, Counsel, RBOC Coalition to Mary Beth Richards, Deputy Chief,  yO-Common Carrier Bureau (March 19, 1997).#x6X@`7QSX@#H In addition, the RBOC Coalition states that it  xwill take whatever action is necessary to comply with the Commission's orders in order to be  X - xKeligible to receive payphone compensation at the earliest possible date.@ `  yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP##X\  P6G;qP#Id.#x6X@`7QSX@# Therefore, because the  xRBOC Coalition has indicated its intent to comply with the Commission's requirements, as  X - xestablished by the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding, and because the Coalition's narrower  xreading of what payphone services need to be federally tariffed is based on its good faith efforts  x[to comply with the Commission's rules, we adopt this Order, which contains a limited waiver of  xythe federal tariffing requirements for unbundled features and functions a LEC must meet before  XK- xit is eligible to receive payphone compensation. Because other LECs may also have failed to file  X4- xall the federal tariffs for unbundled features and functions required by the Payphone Order and  X- xthe Order on Reconsideration, we apply this limited waiver to all LECs, with the limitations set  X-forth below.vA  yO -#X\  P6G;qP#эxSee paras. 2123, below.v  X- px` ` 21. In the Payphone Order and Order on Reconsideration, the Commission  x?required that LECs file federal tariffs by January 15, 1997 with a 90day review period for  X- xKunbundled features and functions.B  yO%-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Order on Reconsideration at para. 131 (emphasis added). Consistent with our conclusions above and in the interests  X- xof bringing LECs into compliance with the requirements of the Payphone Reclassification  X|- x.Proceeding, we waive for 60 days the requirement that LECs have "in effect ... interstate tariffs"| B0*((P"  X- xfor unbundled functionalities associated with [payphone] lines" by April 15, 1997.aC yOy-#X\  P6G;qP#эxId.a We also  X- xwaive both the January 15th filing deadline and the 90day review period for interstate tariffs.  X- x]LECs must file interstate tariffs for unbundled features and functions, as required by the  X- x=Payphone Reclassification Proceeding, as clarified herein, within 45 days after the release date  x=of this order under the streamlined tariff review process. These tariffs will be effective no later  X- xthan 15 days after filing, unless suspended or rejected. DX yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx47 U.S.C.  402; Implementation of Section 402(b)(1)(A) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, CC  yO^ -Docket No. 96-187, Report and Order, FCC 97-23 (rel. Jan. 31, 1997).  Any LEC that files federal tariffs for  xunbundled functionalities, as clarified herein, within 45 days of the release date of the instant  X_- xOrder will be eligible to collect the payphone compensation provided by the Payphone  XH- xReclassification Proceeding on April 15, 1997, as long as that LEC has complied with all of the  X1- xother requirements set forth in paragraph 131 (and paragraph 132 for the BOCs) of the Order on  X - x\Reconsideration. EX  yO{-#X\  P6G;qP#эxBecause the industry has elected to bill for and pay out compensation on a quarterly basis, the actual payment for compensation that begins to accrue on April 15, 1997 will not be made until after the requisite federal tariffs become effective within 60 days after the release date of the instant Order. If a LEC fails to file all of the requisite federal tariffs within 45 days, or if  xthe federal tariffs for a particular LEC are not in effect after 60 days from the date of release of  X - x.this Order, the LEC will not be eligible to receive the payphone compensation provided by the  X -Payphone Reclassification Proceeding.  X - px` ` 22. In addition, each individual BOC must also file a written ex parte  X- x/document, by April 10, 1997, advising on the status of intrastate tariffs for the features and  xjfunctions that it has not yet federally tariffed, and stating that it commits to filing federal tariffs  xjfor such features and functions within 45 days of the release date of this Order. Submission of  XK-this ex parte is necessary before the Bureau may act on the BOCs' pending CEI plans.  X- pbx` ` 23. Waiver of Commission rules is appropriate only if special circumstances  X- xwarrant a deviation from the general ruleF yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Northeast Cellular Telephone Company v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990).#x6X@`7QSX@# and such deviation serves the public interest.G`  yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969).#x6X@`7QSX@#  x.Because the Commission is required to review incoming tariffs for the unbundled features and  xfunctions associated with payphone service, which have not been previously filed at the interstate  xlevel, we find that special circumstances exist in this case to grant a limited waiver of brief  xduration to address this responsibility. In addition, for the reasons stated above, our grant of a  x1waiver in this limited circumstance, would not undermine, and is consistent with, the  X|- x. Commission's overall policies in CC Docket No. 96128 to reclassify LEC payphone assets and  xensure fair PSP compensation for all calls originated by payphones. Moreover, our review of the  xinterstate tariffs that are the subject of this limited waiver will enable us to determine whether  xthese tariffs have been filed in accordance with our rules. Accordingly, we grant a limited"7 G0*(("  X- xywaiver, as specified in this Order,H yOy-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#See paras. 2023, above.#x6X@`7QSX@# subject to the filing of federal tariffs for unbundled features  xand functions within 45 days of the release date of this Order. This Order does not waive any  X- xof the other requirements set forth in paragraphs 131132 of the Order on Reconsideration,  X- x^including the requirement that a LEC have "in effect intrastate... tariffs for unbundled  X-functionalities..."IX yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Id. (emphasis added).  X_- 5 IV. CLARIFICATION OF STATE TARIFFING REQUIREMENTS ă  X1-xA.` ` Background  X - p%x ` ` 24. The Commission concluded in the Order on Reconsideration that LECs are  X - xrequired to tariff basic payphone lines (smart, dumb, and inmateJ  yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#The Commission noted in the Order on Reconsideration, at para. 131, that the LECs would also have to  OM<tariff basic services for inmate phone lines.#x6X@`7QSX@# #Xm2PG; 4XP#р) at the state level only.K P yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Id. at paras. 162165.#x6X@`7QSX@##X\  P6G;qP# The Commission provided guidelines pursuant to which the states are to review  yO-the state tariffs subject to the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding. Id. at para. 163.   xiUnbundled features and functions provided to others and taken by a LEC's payphone operations,  X -however, must be tariffed in both the intrastate and interstate jurisdictions.L  yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Id. at paras. 162165.#X\  P6G;qP#  X- pp x` ` 25.  In addition, in the Payphone Order, the Commission required that, pursuant  xjto the mandate of Section 276(b)(1)(B), incumbent LECs must remove from their intrastate rates  Xb- xany charges that recover the costs of payphones. The Payphone Order required that states  xdetermine the intrastate rate elements that must be removed to eliminate any intrastate subsidies.  X4-These revised rates must be effective no later than April 15, 1997.M48  yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эxPayphone Order at para. 186.#Xj\  P6G;߈XP#ѡ  X-xB. ` ` Comments  X-  X- pb x` ` 26. APCC filed a motion that the Commission rule that LECs are ineligible to  xreceive payphone compensation because they have not tariffed their services to PSPs at costbased  X- xZrates, and have not tariffed the "basic payphone line" separately from "coin service" features and  X- xother unbundled functions, as required in paragraphs 162163 of the Order on Reconsideration.N  yO &-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Motion of the American Public Communications Council for a Ruling on the Bell Operating Companies'  yO&-Compliance with the Payphone Orders, CC Docket No. 96128, filed March 26, 1997 at 12 ("APCC Motion").#x6X@`7QSX@#ъ  xAPCC states that it is filing its motion to request that the Commission declare, "if not within the"| N0*((P"  X- x\CEI proceeding then in a separate ruling," that the BOCs must satisfy these requirements.O yOy-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Id.#x6X@`7QSX@#ѯ  X- xAPCC also argues that the BOCs have not complied with the Commission's requirements that all  xservices offered to PSPs be offered at costbased rates complying with the FCC's "new services"  X- xtest.PX yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Id. at 4.#x6X@`7QSX@#ѵ APCC contends that "[a]lthough the FCC stated that it will rely on the states to  X- x=determine... whether statetariffed services comply with the Payphone Orders and Section 276,  xthe Commission made it clear that if a state is unable to review the tariffs, the Commission will  Xv-do so."Qv yO -#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Id. at 45.#x6X@`7QSX@#ѷ  XH- px` ` 27. The RBOC Coalition argues in an ex parte filing that the new services test,  X1- xjas referenced in note 492 of the Order on Reconsideration, applies only to unbundled elements  xof the lines used for "dumb" payphones, which have not been provided to independent PSPs in  X - xkthe past.R x yO,-#X\  P6G;qP#эxEx Parte Letter of Michael Kellogg, Counsel, RBOC Coalition to Mary Beth Richards, Deputy Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, FCC (April 3, 1997). The RBOC Coalition argues further that a contrary reading would (1) require the  xstates to apply a federal test to a purely intrastate service, and (2) require the states to apply the  xinew services test in circumstances where the test does not apply in the federal arena, because the  X -services at issue are not new.aS  yO?-#X\  P6G;qP#эxId.a  X- pa x` ` 28.  In ex parte presentations, both AT&T and MCI argue that some LECs have  xnot acted to eliminate intrastate payphone costs and subsidies from their intrastate payphone  Xb- xtariffs, as required by the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding.TXb`  yOs-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Ex Parte Letter of E.E. Estey, Government Affairs Vice President, AT&T to Regina Keeney, Chief,  yO;-Common Carrier Bureau, FCC (March 28, 1997); Ex Parte Letter of Leonard Sawicki, FCC Affairs Director,  yO-MCI to William Caton, Acting Secretary, FCC (March 20, 1997).#x6X@`7QSX@# AT&T requests that the  xCommission act promptly to enforce these requirements to prevent LECs from claiming  xentitlement to interim payphone compensation before they have complied with the Commission's  X- xrequirements.LU  yON!-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Ex Parte Letter of E.E. Estey, Government Affairs Vice President, AT&T to Regina Keeney, Chief,  yO"-Common Carrier Bureau, FCC (March 28, 1997).#x6X@`7QSX@#L GTE recently made an ex parte presentation on the intrastate tariffs it filed in 29  X- x>jurisdictions, and it noted that the status of these tariffs varies from state to state.V yO$-#X\  P6G;qP#эxEx Parte Letter of Charon J. Harris, Director Policy Matters, GTE to William Caton, Acting Secretary,  yOW%-FCC (April 3, 1997). APCC  xmaintains that the LECs must file intrastate tariffs for payphone services that are costbased,"0V0*(('"  X-consistent with the requirements that certain subsidies be terminated, and nondiscriminatory.AW yOy-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Ex Parte Letter of Albert Kramer, Counsel, APCC to Mary Beth Richards, Deputy Chief, Common  yOA-Carrier Bureau, FCC (March 28, 1997).#x6X@`7QSX@#A  X-xC. ` ` Discussion   X- p x` ` 29. We deny the APCC Motion that requests that the Commission conclude that  X- xthe BOCs are disqualified from receiving interim compensation pursuant to the Payphone  Xv- x-Reclassification Proceeding.Xv  yOG -#X\  P6G;qP#эxAPCC Motion at 1, 45. #Xj\  P6G;߈XP#ї APCC argues that the BOCs have failed both to retariff their basic  xLpayphone services at costbased rates, and to tariff separately from basic payphone lines coin  XH- xservice features and other unbundled features and functions.YH yO -#X\  P6G;qP#э#X\  P6G;qP#x Id.#x6X@`7QSX@#ѵ We have clarified above that the  X1- xPayphone Reclassification Proceeding did not require, by April 15, 1997, the level of unbundling  X - xsought by APCC.Z @ yO -#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#See para. 15, above. LECs, including the BOCs, must comply with the state tariffing requirements  X - xof the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding. In response to APCC's contentions, we conclude  xjthat we do not have a record to determine here whether the BOCs have complied with the state  X - xtariffing requirement for costbased rates. As required by the Order on Reconsideration, however,  xLECs, including the BOCs, must be prepared to certify that they have complied with all the  X - xrequirements of the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding, including those involving intrastate tariffs, subject to the limited waiver provided herein.  Xb- p x` ` 30.  We emphasize that LECs must comply with all of the enumerated  XK- xrequirements established in the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding, except as waived herein,  xbefore the LECs' payphone operations are eligible to receive the payphone compensation  xprovided by that proceeding. Both independent PSPs and IXCs claim that some LECs have not  X- xfiled state tariffs that comply with the requirements set forth in the Order on Reconsideration.  xThese requirements are: (1) that payphone service intrastate tariffs be cost-based, consistent with  X- xSection 276, and nondiscriminatory;[ yOY-#X\  P6G;qP#эxOrder on Reconsideration at para. 163#X\  P6G;qP#. As stated in the Order on Reconsideration, the intrastate tariffs  yO! -are subject to the new services test. Order on Reconsideration at para. 163, n. 492.#Xj\  P6G;߈XP#ы and (2) that the states ensure that payphone costs for  xunregulated equipment and subsidies be removed from the intrastate local exchange service and  X- xexchange access service rates.\(  yO#-#X\  P6G;qP#э#X\  P6G;qP#x Payphone Order at para. 148. LEC intrastate tariffs must comply with these requirements by  xApril 15, 1997 in order for the payphone operations of the LECs to be eligible to receive  X|- xpayphone compensation.]|  yO&-#X\  P6G;qP#эxAny party who believes that a particular LEC's intrastate tariffs fail to meet these requirements has the option of filing a complaint with the Commission. 47 U.S.C.  208. As discussed above,^| yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#See#X\  P6G;qP# paras. 6, 21, 29, above.#x6X@`7QSX@# LECs that have not complied with these"|X^0*((P" requirements will not be entitled to receive compensation.  X- px` ` 31. We disagree with the RBOC Coalition regarding the applicability of the  xfederal guidelines for state tariffing of payphone services. The Commission concluded in the  X- xOrder on Reconsideration that it had jurisdiction over the tariffing of payphone services in order  X- xLto implement Section 276._X yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эxOrder on Reconsideration at para. 162. The plain language of the Order on Reconsideration provides that  xstate tariffs for payphone services must be cost based, consistent with the requirements of Section  X_- x276, nondiscriminatory, and consistent with Computer III guidelines. The footnote referred to  x\by the RBOC Coalition provides references to Commission orders describing the applicable  X1-Computer III guidelines.w`1 yO -#X\  P6G;qP#эxId. at para. 163, n. 492.w  X - p x` ` 32.  The guidelines for state review of intrastate tariffs are essentially the same  X - xas those included in the Payphone Order for federal tariffs. On reconsideration, the Commission  xstated that although it had the authority under Section 276 to require federal tariffs for payphone  X - xLservices, it delegated some of the tariffing requirements to the state jurisdiction. The Order on  X - xReconsideration required that state tariffs for payphone services meet the requirements outlined  X- xabove.rax yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эxSee para. 29, above.r The Order on Reconsideration provides that states that are unable to review these tariffs  Xy-may require the LECs to file the tariffs with the Commission.by yO2-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Order on Reconsideration at para. 163.#x6X@`7QSX@#  XK- p x` `  33.  We clarify that, for purposes of meeting all of the requirements necessary  xto receive payphone compensation, the question of whether a LEC has effective intrastate tariffs  xis to be considered on a statebystate basis. Under this approach, assuming the LEC has  X- xcomplied with all of the other compliance list requirements,c yOO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#See id. at paras. 131132.#x6X@`7QSX@# if a LEC has effective intrastate  xtariffs in State X and has filed tariffs in State Y that are not yet in effect, then the LEC PSP will  xbe able to receive payphone compensation for its payphones in State X but not in State Y. The  xintrastate tariffs for payphone services, including unbundled features, and the state tariffs  xremoving payphone equipment costs and subsidies must be in effect for a LEC to receive compensation in a particular state. '"b  Xe- ' "b  " ( c0*(("Ԍ X- V. CONCLUSION ă  X-   X- pa x` ` !34.  This Order advances the twin goals of Section 276 of the Act by promoting  xiboth competition among payphone service providers ("PSPs") and the widespread deployment of  X- xpayphone services to the benefit of the general public. d O<#X\  P6G;qP#эx47 U.S.C.  276(b)(1)#x6X@`7QSX@#. In this Order, we clarify the  xCommission's interstate tariffing requirements for unbundled features and functions, as set forth  Xv- xin the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding. LECs must comply with these requirements before  xthey are eligible to receive the compensation from IXCs that is mandated in that proceeding.  x{Because some LECs are not in compliance with the Commission's unbundled feature and  X1- xxfunctions federal tariffing requirements under the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding, we grant  x{all LECs a limited waiver of the deadline for filing the federal tariffs for certain unbundled  x-features and functions, to the extent necessary, and grant a limited waiver of the requirement that  X - x{these tariffs be effective before the LECs are eligible to receive payphone compensation.  X - x<Pursuant to this waiver, LECs must file federal tariffs for unbundled features and functions within  X - x45 days of the release date of this order. Each individual BOC must also file a written ex parte  X - xidocument, by April 10, 1997, advising on the status of intrastate tariffs for the unbundled features  xand functions that it has not yet federally tariffed, and stating that it commits to filing federal  x-tariffs for such unbundled features and functions within 45 days of the release date of this Order.  Xb- xkEach of the BOCs must also file a copy of its ex parte in its CEI plan proceeding by April 10,  XK- x1997. We also waive the requirement, for a period of 60 days from the release date of this  X4- xOrder, that these federal tariffs be effective before the LECs are eligible to receive payphone  X- xcompensation. This Order does not waive any of the other requirements with which the LECs  X-must comply before receiving compensation.eh yO-#X\  P6G;qP#эx#X\  P6G;qP#Id.  X- p x` ` "35.  We emphasize that LECs must have effective state tariffs that comply with  X- xthe requirements set forth in the Order on Reconsideration. These requirements are: (1) that  xpayphone services state tariffs must be cost-based, consistent with Section 276,  X- xxnondiscriminatory;f yO<-#X\  P6G;qP#эxId. at para. 163.#Xj\  P6G;߈XP#і and consistent with Computer III tariffing guidelines; and (2) that payphone  xcosts for unregulated equipment and subsidies be removed from the intrastate local exchange  xservice and exchange access service rates. LEC intrastate tariffs must comply with these  xrequirements by April 15, 1997 for the payphone operations of LECs to receive payphone  xycompensation. As discussed above, for LECs that have not complied with these requirements,  X - xtheir payphone operations will not be entitled to compensation pursuant to the Payphone  X -Reclassification Proceeding, in the states in which they do not comply.g  yOB%-#X\  P6G;qP#эxSee paras. 6, 21, 29, above.#Xj\  P6G;߈XP#ѡ  X-x` ` "g0*((J"Ԍ X-ԙ VI. ORDERING CLAUSES ă  X- `  x` ` #36. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i,), 5(c), 201205, 276  xof the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 155(c), 201205, 276, and  xSections 0.91 and 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91 and 0.291, that limited  xwaiver of the Commission's requirements to be eligible to receive the compensation provided by  Xv- xthe Payphone Reclassification Proceeding, CC Docket No. 96128, IS GRANTED to the extent stated herein.  X1- p x` ` $37. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each individual BOC must file an ex  X - xyparte document with the Secretary, by April 10, 1997, advising on the status of intrastate tariffs  xfor the unbundled features and functions that it has not yet federally tariffed, and stating that it  xcommits to filing federal tariffs for such unbundled features and functions within 45 days of the  X -release date of this Order.h  yON-#X\  P6G;qP#э xEach BOC should provide a copy of its ex parte document directly to the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau.  X - pG x` ` %38.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this limited waiver SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release.  Xb- px` ` &39. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion of APCC requesting that the  xCommission conclude that the BOCs are disqualified from receiving interim compensation under  X4-the Payphone Reclassification Proceeding IS DENIED. x` `  hh@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hh@Regina M. Keeney x` `  hh@Chief, Common Carrier Bureau