WPC/ 2BJZ Courier3|j x6X@`7X@HP LaserJet 5SiRM 210HPLAS5SI.PRSx  @\"vX@26 ZFv:3|j HP LaserJet 5SiRM 210HPLAS5SI.PRSC\  P6Q\"vP I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` 2pkRk(a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  2&vtu a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` 2 X   ` 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 2 Q    a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technical2 Ka1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   2GYa3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . 2y32e6a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:%a3Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%F": a4Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%F#E a5Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%F$P   a6Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%F%[   2{!&'(V ) a7Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%F&f  a8Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%F'q a1IndentedLeft-indented text(6n ? I.Xa2IndentedLeft-indented text)?C ? A.` ` 2e$*!+M","-#a3IndentedLeft-indented text*HP ? ` ` 1. a4IndentedLeft-indented text+Qp- ? ` `  a.` 'a5IndentedLeft-indented text,[ܽ ? ` `  '(1) hh-a6IndentedLeft-indented text-dK ? ` `  'hh-(a)42O'.$/[%0s(&1&a7IndentedLeft-indented text.l݇ ? ` `  'hh-4i)h:a8IndentedLeft-indented text/u-b ? ` `  'hh-4:a)ppAa1InterrogatoresStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indent0UZZI.HeadingChapter Heading1J d  ) I. ׃  2)2'3(4p(5q%)Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers2>a݅@  I.   X(# SubheadingSubheading30\ E A.  Document[8]'Eg%Document StyleE O  O g% W4I O g4` ` ` Document[4]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g5  . 2+6e)7e-*8*9p%+Document[6]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g6  Document[5]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g7  Document[2]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g8*    Document[7]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g9  ` ` ` 2-.:+;Y,<,=-Right Par[1]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g:8 @  Right Par[2]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g;A@` ` `  ` ` ` Document[3]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g<0     Right Par[3]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g=J` ` ` @  ` ` ` 2I1>_.? /@/A0Right Par[4]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g>S` ` `  @  Right Par[5]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g?\` ` `  @hhh hhh Right Par[6]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g@e` ` `  hhh@ hhh Right Par[7]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gAn` ` `  hhh@  24B{1CL2D3E3Right Par[8]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gBw` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp Document[1]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gCF    ׃  Technical[5]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gD&!"  . Technical[6]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gE&#$  . 26FB4G4Hs5I6Technical[2]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gF*%&    Technical[3]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gG''(   Technical[4]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gH&)*   Technical[1]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gI4+$,     29J6Kn7L 7M9Technical[7]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gJ&-.  . Technical[8]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gK&/0  . CitatorFormat Secretary's Citator Output FileLW r5-#d6X@`7Ͽ@# XX  X B r5-S  BFormat DownloadFormat Downloaded DocumentMiޛ r5- XX    \ #d6X@`7Ͽ@#2HNv 9OoiFPFQiWGMACNormalN;     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<    #:}D4P XP#T I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)T,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP#     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<    #:}D4P XP#,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP#FootnoteOÍčfootnote tex#P'p #FxX  Pg9CXP#headerQAx 4 <D  #FxX  Pg9CXP# 2MRHS~ITiKU^lLreferenceR;#FxX  Pg9CXP#itemizeX1S&V 8F ` hp xr#FxX  Pg9CXP#header2TI ` hp x`    #FxX  Pg9CXP# heading 3UF` hp x #FxX  Pg9CXP# 2PVOMWpKOXqOYe,Pfooter!V!!#d\  PCP#1t >.x(Dt—Document Style >f.RK+P—!t >f—+bW56` ` ` 2t >/x(Dt—Document Style >f/RK+P—!t >f—+bX7 8 . 3t >0x(Dt—Document Style >f0RK+P—!t >f—+bY 9: 2RZeP[(Q\pQ]+R4t >1x(Dt—Document Style >f1RK+P—!t >f—+bZ ;< 5t >2x(Dt—Document Style >f2RK+P—!t >f—+b[*=>   6t >3x(Dt—Document Style >f3RK+P—!t >f—+b\?@` ` ` 7t >4x(Dt—Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+P—!t >f—+b]8AB@   2pU^R_S`TaT8t >5x(Dt—Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+P—!t >f—+b^ACD@` `  ` ` ` 9t >6x(Dt—Document Style >f6RK+P—!t >f—+b_0E F    10 >7x(Dt—Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+P—!t >f—+b`JGH` ` @  ` `  11 >8x(Dt—Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+P—!t >f—+baSIJ` `  @  2XbUcXVdWeW12 >9x(Dt—Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+P—!t >f—+bb\KL` `  @hh# hhh 13 >:x(Dt—Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+P—!t >f—+bceMN` `  hh#@( hh# 14 >;x(Dt—Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+P—!t >f—+bdnOP` `  hh#(@- ( 15 ><x(Dt—Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+P—!t >f—+bewQR` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 2B[fXgYh!ZiZ16 >=x(Dt—Document Style >f=RK+P—!t >f—+bfFST *  ׃  17 >>x(Dt—Technical Document Style>RK+P—!t >f—+bg&UV  . 18 >?x(Dt—Technical Document Style?RK+P—!t >f—+bh&WX  . 19 >@x(Dt—Technical Document Style@RK+P—!t >f—+bi*YZ    2]jt[k \l\mM]20 >Ax(Dt—Technical Document StyleARK+P—!t >f—+bj'[\   21 >Bx(Dt—Technical Document StyleBRK+P—!t >f—+bk&]^   22 >Cx(Dt—Technical Document StyleCRK+P—!t >f—+bl4_$`     23 >Dx(Dt—Technical Document StyleDRK+P—!t >f—+bm&ab  . 2`n^o^p6_q_24 >Ex(Dt—Technical Document StyleERK+P—!t >f—+bn&cd  . Format DownlDt—Format Downloaded DocumentRK+P—!t >f—+boUgh XX    X\ #d6X@7@#Word222Null(Dt—Word222Null( >fWRK+P—!t >f—+bp1{1|#/x PX##/x PX#Normalx(Dt—Normal!wB( >fYRK+P—!t >f—+bq1}1~#x\  PCXP##/x PX#2kr`skcteuhHEADING 7x(Dt—7!wB( >f[RK+P—!t >f—+br0p Zwp x (#DDDDDD#&n P&P# 4 hp x (##&n P&P# HEADING 6x(Dt—7!wB( >f]RK+P—!t >f—+bs0p Zwp x (#DDDDDD#&n P&P# 4 hp x (##&n P&P# HEADING 5x(Dt—7!wB( >f^RK+P—!t >f—+bt0p Zwp x (#DDDDDD#&n P&P# 4 hp x (##&n P&P# HEADING 4x(Dt—7!wB( >f_RK+P—!t >f—+bu0 Zwp x (#rr#&n P&P# 4 hp x (##&n P&P# 2qpvJkwwlx[oyoNORMAL INDENDt—7!wB( >f`RK+P—!t >f—+bv'4 <DL!T$#&n P&P##&n P&P#enumlev1x(Dt—7!wB( >faRK+P—!t >f—+bw$p  N hp x (#aa#&n P&P#4` hp x (##&n P&P#footnote refDt—footnote reference >fbRK+P—!t >f—+bx>#V\  P UP#Default ParaDt—Default Paragraph Font>fdRK+P—!t >f—+by2szvp{q|q}=rpage number(Dt—page number( >feRK+P—!t >f—+bz26 >fx(Dt—footnote text >ffRK+P—!t >f—+b{* ??USlist>gx(Dt—list7!wB( >fgRK+P—!t >f—+b|*??endnote refeDt—endnote reference >fhRK+P—!t >f—+b}>>#XO\  P!UXP##c P"7P#2v~Cstt]uline number(Dt—line number( >fjRK+P—!t >f—+b~;;#XO\  P#UXP##c P$7P#Highlightx(Dt—Middle Article HighlightlRK+P—!t >f—+b''#G x}'Y##\9> (P(YP#Headlinex(Dt—Headline for newsletterfoRK+P—!t >f—+b''#> p})Y##\9> (P*YP#2nd line HeaDt—2nd line headline >fqRK+P—!t >f—+b''#b> p}+Y##\9> (P,YP#2y5vvw9xGraphics heaDt—Headlines for graphics>frRK+P—!t >f—+b** #o> P}-YP##\9> (P.YP# Graphics bodDt—chart data ( >ftRK+P—!t >f—+b** #Alo> P}/YXP##\9> (P0YP# Article headDt—Headline for new articlevRK+P—!t >f—+b*'#r"zp1C# #\9> (P2YP# endnote textDt—endnote text( >fyRK+P—!t >f—+bE;#X}xP37XP##I2P4QP#2 2Cy2u{2}2toc 1|x(Dt—toc 17!wB( >f|RK+P—!t >f—+b(#`` hp x (#toc 2}x(Dt—toc 27!wB( >f}RK+P—!t >f—+b` (#`` hp x (#toc 3~x(Dt—toc 37!wB( >f~RK+P—!t >f—+b` (#` hp x (#toc 4x(Dt—toc 47!wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b (#` hp x (#2]2=2o2+toc 5x(Dt—toc 57!wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+bh(#` hp x (#toc 6x(Dt—toc 67!wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b(# ` hp x (#toc 7x(Dt—toc 77!wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+btoc 8x(Dt—toc 87!wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b(# ` hp x (#2W2222%toc 9x(Dt—toc 97!wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b(#`` hp x (#index 1x(Dt—index 1wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b` (#` hp x (#index 2x(Dt—index 2wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b` (#`` hp x (#toa heading(Dt—toa heading( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b(#` hp x (#2זa/%captionx(Dt—captionwB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+bE;#X}xP57XP##I2P6QP#_Equation CaDt—_Equation Caption >fRK+P—!t >f—+b;;#X}xP77XP##I2P8QP#27 >x(Dt—Default Paragraph Font>fRK+P—!t >f—+bOO#X}xP97XP##&sxP:7&P#HEADING 9x(Dt— 7!wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b'34 <DL!T$#c P;7P##c P<7P#2 NHEADING 8x(Dt— 7!wB( >fRK+P—!t >f—+b'34 <DL!T$#c P=7P##c P>7P#a129f—+b—!tRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberswH(RK+P8@   a229f—+b—!tRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberswH(RK+PA@` `  ` ` ` a329f—+b—!tRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberswH(RK+PJ` ` @  ` `  2o&a429f—+b—!tRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberswH(RK+PS` `  @  a529f—+b—!tRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberswH(RK+P\` `  @hh# hhh a629f—+b—!tRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberswH(RK+Pe` `  hh#@( hh# a729f—+b—!tRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberswH(RK+Pn` `  hh#(@- ( 2EMl٠a829f—+b—!tRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberswH(RK+Pw` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp NORMAL INDENT ' 4 <DL!T$#&n P&P##&n P&P#footnote referencefootnote reference4#V\  PUP#Default Paragraph FoDefault Paragraph Font 2wŢdfootnote textfootnote text US????USendnote referenceendnote reference44#XO\  PUXP##B\  PUP#_Equation Caption_Equation Caption11#XX2PQXP##I2PQP#HIGHLIGHT 1Italics and Boldldedd+. 2$*1¥1DRAFT ONHeader A Text = DRAFT and Date X =8` (#FDRAFTă r  ` (#=D3 1, 43 12pt (Z)(PC-8))T2Dă  ӟDRAFT OFFTurn Draft Style off@@    LETTER LANDLetter Landscape - 11 x 8.5 3'3'Standard'3'3StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11 ;   LEGAL LANDLegal Landscape - 14 x 8.5f 3'3'Standard'A'AStandardZ K e6VE L"nu;   21V1n&LETTER PORTLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11L 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   TITLETitle of a DocumentK\ * ăBLOCK QUOTESmall, single-spaced, indentedN X 2 d٫j=EƮHIGHLIGHT 2Large and Bold LargeB*d. HIGHLIGHT 3Large, Italicized and Underscored V -qLETTERHEADLetterhead - 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  2{-=8j8ڳMEMORANDUMMemo 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$00INVOICE TOTTotals Invoice for Math Macroz 4p, $0$00INVOICE HEADRHeading Portion of Math Invoice+C`*   4X 99L$0 **(  ӧ XX 2[[[c[SMALLSmall TypestyleFINEFine TypestyleLARGELarge TypestyleEXTRA LARGEExtra Large Typestyle2i[K)ɹVERY LARGEVery Large TypestyleENVELOPEStandard Business Envelope with Header+w ,,EnvelopeZ K e VE L"n,,EnvelopeLarge, Italicized and Under;    ,, 88+  `   Style 14Swiss 8 Pt Without Margins$$D Co> PfQ  )a [ PfQO Style 12Dutch Italics 11.5$$F )^ `> XifQ  )a [ PfQO 2lzStyle 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|@\Style 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 2Style 10oInitial Codes for AdvancedƯ 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 Beginninggǯi )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 Intermediateȭ )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 Moduleɾ )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 2d)lxlqBld/UnderlieBold and Underline Text/  Document 8Document 8 Document 4Document 4  Document 6Document 6 2qll{lSDocument 5Document 5 Document 2Document 2 Document 7Document 7 Right Par 1Right Par 1` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#2il-KRight Par 2Right Par 2` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Document 3Document 3 Right Par 3Right Par 3` hp x (#X` P hp x (#X` P hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 4Right Par 4` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#2Right Par 5Right Par 5` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 6Right Par 6` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 7Right Par 7` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 8Right Par 8` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#2!(E$m$lDocument 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 (#Technical 6Technical 6` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 2Technical 2 2slS$l$OTechnical 3Technical 3 Technical 4Technical 4` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 1Technical 1 Technical 7Technical 7` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#2g$ITechnical 8Technical 8` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#WP Heading 2WP Heading 244#6X@C@##Xv6X@CX@#WP Heading 1WP Heading 144#6X@C@# #Xv6X@CX@#toatoa` hp x (#` hp x (#2}ahead1 #'d#2p}wC@ #para numnumbered indented paragraphs' Y- 1.(i) 1) 1.#Xw P7[hXP# 1. 1.ҲParagraph[1]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B$ab Paragraph[2]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B/cd` ` ` 2LParagraph[3]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B:ef` ` `  Paragraph[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 2 }dParagraph[7]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bfmn Paragraph[8]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bqop 25S&CMC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)CG -2( -Ct )$ 28S&CPC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)Cq -2( -Ct )E` ` `  2  Z   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 32S&CTC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )q 2hZ d# p q 1, 2, 3,?@65NumbersO@/"=(1*1÷$t ?.E1.A, B,t ?@65Uppercase Letters1 ?*1÷$t ?.E .33`O5hT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5h.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>` ` ` 34`O5iT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5i.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  . 2geedp35`O5jT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5j.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  36`O5kT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5k.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  37`O5lT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5l.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>*   38`O5mT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5m.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>` ` ` 2%+KPK39`O5nT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>8@   Times New RomanTimes New Roman Bold"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+999999S9S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN/>/>/>/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+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNg\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>ggg\yyrF\yrgyy>3>j\>\gQgQ>\g3>g3g\ggQF>g\\\QI(I_>0_j>>>0>>>>>>\>g3\\\\\QyQyQyQyQD3D3D3D3g\\\\gggg\\g\\\\pg\\\QQ_QyQyQyQyQ\\\_\gjF3FgF>Fgg__gy3ySy>yIy3ggg\\QQQgFgFgFg_y^y>yjgggggg_yQyQyQgy>ggFy>\0\\=2=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBa\>\\\\\\7>\7>\7>>\\\??n\\nBnnBsgg>\\7"yyyy\nlc\gnn\2(KvK!K $ KW&"i~'^"(22TN"""28"2222222222888,\HBBH>8HH"&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"")>F)))))))))<)C"VV5VYO5O5O5O5^<^<^<^>^<^C^F.".C.).CaC>>^CO"O6O)O0O"VCVVCVC^<^O=O)OFVCVCVCVCVCVCxVV>O5O5O5VCO)VCC.O)V<X<<( (WTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN+HH+@<)<<<<I\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>\>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\nBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\"i~'^ %,77\V%%%7>%7777777777>>>0eOIIOD>OO%*ODaOO>OI>DOOgOOD%%37%07070%777V7777%*77O77055;%;3%%%%%%%%%7%7O0O0O0O0O0aHI0D0D0D0D0%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O0O7O6O7O7O7>7O0O0O0I0I0I;I0OED0D0D0D0O7O7O7O;O7O;O7%%7%%%7M>;;O7DD,D%D%DO7AO7O7O7O7aOI%I%I%>*>*>*>;D.DD3O7O7O7O7O7O7gOO;D0D0D0O7D%O7>*D%O7E77%%WMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN(BB(37%07777j7#TT7!#TT7T!%%007n&&Bn77lBTn(nBB(AZZ>>n%07\n!"IIIITTenn7TnB@;7>lBBn72 K(^+FZ}/"i~'^ %>77n\%%%7>%7777777777%%>>>7gOIOOIDVV*7VIgOVDVO>IOOnOOI%%@7%7>0>0%7>%>\>7>>0*%>7O770,,9%9@%%%%%%%%%7%>O7O7O7O7O7nOO0I0I0I0I0))))O>V7V7V7V7O>O>O>O>O7O7O>U7V7O7O7C>O7O7O7O0O0O9O0OQI0I0I0I0V7V7V7V9V7V>V@**>*%*>Y>99V>II2I%I,IO>OO>O>V7V7mOO0O0O0>*>*>*>9I8I%I@O>O>O>O>O>O>nOO9I0I0I0O>I%O>>*I%O7P77%%WMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN(BB(:7%77777j7!%TT7!%QQ7T!%%777n&&Bn77nBTn(nBB(EZZ>>n%77\n!"IIIITTenn7TnBA;7>lBBn7y.X80,ɒX\  P6G;Py.\80,>\4  pG;7jC:,ynXj\  P6G;XP7nC:,M yOy-ԍ Id. at 12.; Under the plan, ENMR's Nortel DMS10 switches will be upgraded to a Nortel DMS100 host and remote  X-switch network configuration.9?XM yO-ԍ Id. at 2.9 ENMR asserts that the new DMS100 switch will be able to manage future Commission network requirements and to offer advance features to subscribers  X-in its territory.3@M yO= -ԍ Id.3 ENMR argues that, due to technical and economic obstacles, it cannot  X-complete its conversion process by the January 1, 1998 deadline.9AxM yO -ԍ Id. at 1.9 Having originally anticipated being fourdigit CIC compliant by the year 2000, under the sixyear transition  X_-proposed in the CICs NPRM, ENMR accelerated its network upgrade schedule when the  XH-Commission released the CICs Second Report and Order in April 1997, which established a  X1-January 1, 1998 end to the transition.9B1M yO-ԍ Id. at 2.9 ENMR asserts that under the accelerated schedule, it has converted two of its 25 exchanges. It plans to convert eight more exchanges by the end  X -of December 1997, for a total of 10 remotes capable of handling fourdigit CICs.3C M yOL-ԍ Id.3 ENMR asserts, however, that the equipment and installations necessary to meet the January 1, 1998  X -deadline for all of its switches are not available.9D ( M yO-ԍ Id. at 4.9 ENMR asserts that, after consulting with Nortel and Hicks & Ragland, it anticipates that the remaining 15 exchanges cannot all be  X -converted until the end of June 1998.9E M yO-ԍ Id. at 2.9 ENMR asserts that grant of the waiver will allow  X-ENMR to continue its efficient network modernization plan.9FH M yO-ԍ Id. at 5.9 x  Xb-x15.` ` Roome serves one exchange with approximately 798 access lines.DGbM yO -ԍ Roome Petition at 5.D To support fourdigit CICs, Roome must replace its Alcatel E10FIVE switch (using generic software  X4-version 6.1) with a new switch.3H4hM yOM$-ԍ Id.3 Roome asserts that, because of circumstances beyond its"4 H0*%%ZZ" control, Roome was required to change switching vendors for the replacement originally  X-scheduled for the beginning of the fourth quarter of 1997.3IM yOb-ԍ Id.3 Roome asserts that it has begun the process of installing a Siemens EWSD switch and is expeditiously working with the new vendor to complete installation. Roome anticipates installation to be completed by midApril  X-1998.3JXM yO-ԍ Id.3 Roome asserts that it has received assurances that from the manufacturer that testing will be completed in time for Roome to be fourdigit CIC compliant by the end of the  Xv-permissive dialing period.3KvM yO -ԍ Id.3 Roome claims that to comply with the fourdigit CIC requirement, Roome has been forced to expend considerable funds ($944,618) although it could have provided adequate service to its rural customers for as long as the next three to  X1-five years without making these expenditures.9L1xM yOZ-ԍ Id.a t 6.9 Nonetheless, Roome is making plans to comply with the Commission's requirement as soon as possible. Roome argues that grant of its waiver request, which would affect only dialaround calling because the extension would  X -only last until the end of the permissive dialing period, is in the public interest.;M M yO-ԍ Id. at 67.;  X -x16.` ` Northwestern is a small LEC providing equal access in Indiana. Northwestern  X -states that it upgrades switch hardware and reprograms software on an asneeded basis.N M yO- xԍ See Northwestern Petition at 1. Northwestern serves five exchanges with a total of approximately 10,000  yO-access lines. Id. at 3. Northwestern argues that it is technically and economically infeasible for it to comply with the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline, and needs additional time to receive and install new  Xb-switches and software.;Ob M yO-ԍ Id. at 24.; Northwestern asserts that, upon release of the CICs Second Report  XK-and Order in April 1997, it made efforts to assess the steps necessary to meet the January 1,  X4-1998 deadline.;P4 M yOe -ԍ Id. at 23.; Northwestern determined that, to become fourdigit CIC compliant, it would need to upgrade (if possible) the existing operating systems software, and purchase additional  X-equipment, for its Alcatel E105 switches.3QM yO#-ԍ Id.3 Northwestern asserts, however, that Alcatel informed it that it is no longer offering support for Northwestern's switching equipment and" Q0*%%ZZE"  X-software.9RM yOy-ԍ Id. at 3.9 Northwestern decided, therefore, to replace its Alcatel switches with new  X-SiemensStromberg EWSD switches, and has made the necessary arrangements to purchase.3SXM yO-ԍ Id.3  X-Northwestern asserts, however, that installation may take up to six months.3TM yOk-ԍ Id.3 Northwestern asserts that it considered purchasing new switches from other manufacturers, but that none  X-could guarantee installation by January 1, 1998.3UxM yO -ԍ Id.3 Northwestern asserts that grant of their waiver requests is consistent with Commission precedent recognizing the technical and economic burdens imposed on small and rural LECs in implementing software upgrades and  X_-granting waivers when those burdens are demonstrated.YVX_M yO- xԍ Id. at 4, citing Rules and Policies Regarding Calling Number Identification ServiceCaller ID, Order and  yO- xFourth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 91281, 10 FCC Rcd 13796, 13808 (1995) (Caller ID  yO-Order).Y  X1-x17.` ` The Eleven Iowa LECs. The eleven Iowa LECs, on whose behalf GVNW filed  X -its petition, participate in centralized equal access service provided by INS.MW ( M yO-ԍ See GVNW Petition at 4.M All except one of the eleven Iowa LECs (Lehigh Valley) request extensions until June 30, 1998. Leigh  X -Valley requests an extension until March 1, 1998.:X M yOU-ԍ Id. at 14.: GVNW asserts that the INS centralized equal access function provides presubscription and equal access capabilities through a centralized switching system rather than through provisioning in each end office switch. The eleven Iowa LECs invested in digital switching technology before switch manufacturers made fourdigit CICs available. Because they have been providing new services through the INS  Xy-switch, they have not been required to invest in upgrades to their individual end offices.;YyH M yOr-ԍ Id. at 45.; GVNW asserts that, through the INS, the eleven Iowa LECs were able to provide equal access  XK-earlier than other rural LECs, and although they cannot provide dialaroundZKM yO!- xԍ A "dialaround" call is a call made using a particular carrier's CAC to bypass a presubscribed long distance carrier. capabilities to"K 0Z0*%%ZZ" carriers with fourdigit CICs, they are able to provide them with equal access  X-presubscription.f[oM yOy- xԍ Id. The eleven Iowa LECs provide equal access presubscription to carriers with fourdigit CICs by using the  xJtranslations in their switches and the INS switch to convert the fourdigit code to a shorter code for use between the  yO -two switches. Id. at 5.f  X-x18.` ` Based on communications with INS, the eleven Iowa LECs believed that they could become fourdigit CIC compliant through INS, without upgrading or replacing their  X-own switches.\M yO= - xԍ Id. at 56 (referring to an April 4, 1997 INS memo to its members indicating that Nortel DMS switches with a generic of 402.53 or higher would meet the requirement). In early November, 1997, however, the eleven Iowa LECs learned that if  Xv-they did not have SS7 capability, they may not be able to upgrade to fourdigit CICs.9]vWM yO~ -ԍ Id. at 6.9 GVNW asserts that, upon learning of these problems, the eleven Iowa LECs have taken immediate action to become fourdigit CIC compliant as quickly as technically feasible in  X1-order to meet the June 30, 1998 end of the permissive dialing period.B^1M yO-ԍ Id. at 67 and 21.B GVNW asserts that, in the interim, only the relatively small number of dialaround calls using fourdigit CICs will  X -be affected.9_ wM yO+-ԍ Id. at 7.9  X -x19.` ` For each Iowa LEC, GVNW provides specific details regarding serving areas, access lines, switch types, and software. All the eleven Iowa LECs serve a small number of  X -access lines.`@  M yO_- xԍ Breda seeks a waiver for two of its three exchanges, serving a total of 792 (out of Breda's total 1,100)  yO'- x[access lines. Id. at 9. The exchange for which Coon Valley seeks a waiver serves 454 access lines. Id. at 10.  yO- xYDefiance serves one exchange with 252 access lines. Id. at 11. Hawkeye serves one exchange with 485 access lines.  yO- x;Id. at 12. JordanSoldier serves one exchange with 337 access lines. Id. at 13. Lehigh Valley serves four exchanges  yO- xwith a total of 1,894 access lines. Id. at 14. Lone Rock serves one exchange with 288 access lines. Id. at 15.  yOG- xManilla serves one exchange with 571 access lines. Id. at 17. Norway serves one exchange with 653 access lines.  yO- xId. at 18. Prairie seeks a waiver for two out of its three exchanges, serving a total of 628 (out of Prairie's total  yO-1,000) access lines. Id. at 19. Radcliffe serves one exchange with 515 access lines. Id. at 20.  Xy-x20.` ` Coon Valley, Hawkeye, and Radcliffe have decided to pursue software generic  Xb-upgrades to become fourdigit CIC compliant.EabM yO"#-ԍ Id. at 10, 12 and 20.E All these LECs request extension of the switch conversion deadline until June 30, 1998. Coon Valley intends to expedite its plans to upgrade its software (from 14.1 generic to 21 generic, costing approximately $235,000),"4a0*%%ZZf"  X-originally scheduled for the third quarter of 1998.:bM yOy-ԍ Id. at 10.: Hawkeye and Radcliffe both learned  X-recently that their current generic software (402.53) cannot accommodate fourdigit CICs.AcXM yO-ԍ Id. at 12 and 20.A Hawkeye asserts that it is expeditiously working with the manufacturer to estimate the costs  X-and timing of a software upgrade.:dM yOT-ԍ Id. at 12.: Radcliffe had originally planned a software generic upgrade (from 402.53 generic to 410 generic) for the last quarter of 1998. When it learned recently that the 402.53 generic cannot accommodate fourdigit CICs, Radcliffe entered into negotiations with Nortel for an interim software generic upgrade to 406 generic, which will  X_-not impact its planned upgrade to 410 generic.:e_xM yO -ԍ Id. at 20.:  X1-x21.` ` Defiance, Lehigh Valley, and Manilla, are in the process of replacing their  X -switches to become fourdigit CIC compliant.Ef M yO-ԍ Id. at 11, 14 and 17.E Lehigh Valley requests an extension of the  X -switch conversion deadline until March 1, 1998.:g M yOL-ԍ Id. at 14.: Defiance and Manilla request extensions  X -until June 30, 1998.Ah ( M yO-ԍ Id. at 11 and 17.A Leigh asserts that, while it had anticipated having new switches installed and operational by December 1997, as a result of various missed scheduled dates in  X -the installation, the switches will not be complete and operational until February 1, 1998.:i M yO'-ԍ Id. at 14.: Lehigh Valley requests an extension until March 1, 1998, to allow for any further delays in  X-the implementation schedule.3jH M yO-ԍ Id.3 Defiance and Manilla assert that they are currently negotiating with Nortel for switch replacements (costing approximately $250,000) and that they are seeking delivery and installation dates that will meet the Commission's required  XK-effective date for the end of the permissive dialing period.AkKM yO!-ԍ Id. at 11 and 17.A Lone Rock, while it has not  X4-decided to replace its switch, has not precluded that option.:l4hM yOM$-ԍ Id. at 15.: Lone Rock asserts that Nortel"4l0*%%ZZ" informed it of a recent plan to develop an auxiliary upgrade to 402.53 generic, the software generic with which Lone Rock's switches currently are equipped, to provide a means of  X-passing fourdigit CICs and sevendigit CACs.3mM yOK-ԍ Id.3 Lone Rock asserts, however, that, because time frames have not been established for the auxiliary upgrade (with a cost estimate of $5,000$10,000), it has also established contingency plans. The three alternatives Lone Rock is considering are: (1) an upgrade to a higher software generic; (2) switch sharing with a  Xv-neighboring LEC; and (3) switch replacement.3nvXM yO -ԍ Id.3 Lone Rock intends to acquire data regarding the costs and timing for delivery and installation of each of these options in the event the auxiliary upgrade is infeasible, and will pursue all avenues open to it to ensure compliance by  X1-the end of the permissive dialing period.=o1M yO -ԍ Id. at 1516.=  X -x22.` ` Norway is reviewing a proposed network configuration in which Norway would replace its current switch with a remote switch whose host would reside with another  X -telephone company (costing a total of approximately $340,000).:p xM yO-ԍ Id. at 18.: In addition, this configuration would require burying fiber from Norway's exchange to the host switch facility  X -"meet point"(with the fiber construction costing approximately $200,000).3q M yO`-ԍ Id.3 Norway asserts that, if this configuration is not feasible, to ensure compliance with the fourdigit CIC requirement, it is prepared to lease a Nortel DMS 10 switch from another company (costing  Xb-$2,500 per month with an installation cost of $40,000).3rbM yO-ԍ Id.3  X4-x23.` ` Breda, JordanSoldier, and Prairie are pursuing interconnection agreements with other carriers that would act as host switches for various features and functions, to include the  X-fourdigit CIC capability.Ds( M yO-ԍ Id. at 9, 13 and 19.D Breda and Jordan Silver each assert that it has initiated an interconnection agreement, Breda with an affiliated competitive LEC (CLEC), and Jordan X-Soldier with a neighboring LEC.@t M yOA#-ԍ Id. at 9 and 13.@ Prairie asserts that, prior to release of the CICs Second"H t0*%%ZZ"  X-Report and Order, it had plans to reconfigure its network in 1998.:uM yOy-ԍ Id. at 19.: After having initiated contacts in late April 1997, Prairie is currently negotiating an interconnection agreement with  X-neighboring LECs, and will expedite the process as necessary.:vXM yO-ԍ Id. at 19.: Breda, JordanSoldier and Prairie all anticipate interconnection by the end of the permissive dialing period on June 30,  X-1998.DwM yO= -ԍ Id. at 9, 13 and 19.D  Xv-x C.` ` Request for Extension Until July 1, 1998  XH-x24.` ` Vitelco, a rural and insular carrier operating in the United States Virgin Islands, with approximately 60,000 switched access lines spread over multiple islands, requests an  X -extension of the switch conversion deadline until July 1, 1998.Fx xM yOC-ԍ Vitelco Petition at 2.F Vitelco operates three switches, two Alcatel1210s (purchased in 1981) and one Nortel DMS100 (purchased in  X -1988).3y M yO-ԍ Id.3 Vitelco asserts that while it had originally planned on being fourdigit CIC compliant by the year 2000, under the sixyear transition proposed by the Commission in the  X -CICs NPRM, the company was not prepared for an upgrade requirement of January 1,  X -1998.3z M yO-ԍ Id.3 Vitelco asserts that conversion by January 1, 1998, is not technically feasible.9{ ( M yO-ԍ Id. at 6.9 First, Vitelco asserts that its primary equipment vendor, Alcatel, has determined that it cannot  Xy-complete upgrades by that date.3|y M yO-ԍ Id.3 Vitelco asserts that, under existing licensing agreements for its main tandem switch, an Alcatel 1210, only Alcatel can perform work to convert the switch. Despite Vitelco's repeated inquiries, Alcatel is still evaluating Vitelco's request, including preparation of a quotation for the terms of conversion and a reasonable target date  X-for completion.3}H M yO"-ԍ Id.3 Vitelco asserts that it has obtained the necessary information to convert the  X-DMS100 switch which only requires a software upgrade.3~M yO$-ԍ Id.3 Vitelco cautions, however, that"h~0*%%ZZF" conversion of the DMS100 switch alone is insufficient because it would have no effect without conversion of the Alcatel1210 main tandem switch through which all interexchange traffic to and from the islands must pass and which contains, therefore, all the routing and  X-billing codes necessary for all Vitelco traffic.M yO4- xԍ Id. Vitelco states that there is no long distance traffic within the United States Virgin Islands because all  yO-traffic is local exchange traffic. Id. at n. 18. Vitelco asserts that conversion of the Alcatel1210 is complicated because it requires both hardware and software changes, with replacement of the switch's 256 kilobyte memory cards necessary (possibly with the current memory cards individually removed), and may result in the need to offload traffic to other switches because  X_-the switch currently is operating at capacity.;_ M yO0 -ԍ Id. at 67.; Vitelco also asserts that acquisition of new  XH-parts will be difficult because the Alcatel1210 has been discontinued by the manufacturer.9HM yO -ԍ Id. at 7.9  X1- Vitelco asserts that it has considered changing out the switch, but that the process of replacing the main switches and the 16 remote switches without disrupting service would take over one  X -year and cost more than $15 million.< @M yO-ԍ Id. at n.19.< Vitelco argues that grant of its waiver will not harm IXCs or customers, asserting that, in the past four years, only seven IXCs have sought to  X -operate in the Virgin Islands.; M yOV-ԍ Id. at 89.; Vitelco also notes that, while the Commission considered information from Nortel and Lucent in determining whether the hardware and software necessary to upgrade equipment to accept fourdigit CICs had been made available, it failed to  X-consider information about Alcatel.w` M yO-ԍ Id. at 3, citing CICs Order on Reconsideration at para. 21.w  Xb-x D.` ` Request for Extension Until December 1, 1998  X4-x25.` ` Hillsboro, an incumbent LEC serving approximately 1,600 access lines in southwestern Wisconsin, that became an equal access provider in 1990, requests an extension  X-of the switch conversion deadline until December 1, 1998.R M yO -ԍ See Hillsboro Petition at 2.R Hillsboro asserts that it began  X-planning for conversion to fourdigit CICs in 1995, in response to the CICs NPRM which  X-proposed a sixyear transition.3 M yO $-ԍ Id.3 Hillsboro determined that, to achieve fourdigit CIC capability, its Nortel DMS10 switch would need to be retrofitted with numerous hardware"0*%%ZZ" modifications, including a new central processor, memory packs, and network packs, and  X-would require a software upgrade, from 402.53 to at least 405.20.3M yOb-ԍ Id.3 Hillsboro determined that the cost of the central office equipment needed for an overall network modernization plan, including these upgrades, would be approximately $746,000. Because of this substantial cost, in late 1995, Hillsboro initiated the process of obtaining an RUS Hardship Loan. Upon  X-release of the CICs Second Report and Order in April 1997, establishing the January 1, 1998  Xv-conversion deadline, Hillsboro submitted its formal loan proposal to RUS in May 1997.3vXM yO -ԍ Id.3 Hillsboro asserts that, under RUS procedures, prior to installation, Hillsboro must: (1) submit plans and specifications to RUS, and wait for RUS approval (six weeks); (2) solicit proposals, and wait for Nortel and other bidders to respond (six weeks); (3) conduct an engineering review of the proposals in consultation with an RUS field engineer (four weeks); (4) receive approval of the proposals from RUS headquarters in Washington, DC, before Hillsboro can execute a contract (three weeks); and (5) prepare, assemble, and execute contract documents  X -and submit them to RUS to receive approval (two weeks).; M yOn-ԍ Id. at 23.; Hillsboro asserts that it may not place an order with an equipment manufacturer prior to approval of the loan, without  X -jeopardizing approval of the loan request.n xM yO-ԍ Id. at 3, citing 7 C.F.R.  1753.1(b), 1753.3(b).n  Xy-x26.` ` Hillsboro asserts that it is unlikely to receive RUS loan and contract approval  Xb-prior to July 1998, a process which Hillsboro is not able to expedite.;bM yO-ԍ Id. at 45.; Hillsboro asserts that even if it received loan and contract approval as of the filing of Hillsboro's petition on December 10, 1997, the products and installations necessary to complete the upgrade would  X-not be available to Hillsboro prior to April 1998.9M yOf-ԍ Id. at 5.9 Hillsboro asserts that it expects that, based on average Nortel installation times, and because of Nortel's backlog, Hillsboro will complete conversion to fourdigit CIC capability four months after it places a formal order for  X-the equipment.;( M yO!-ԍ Id. at 34.; Hillsboro asserts, therefore, that installation cannot occur prior to December  X-1, 1998.9 M yO*$-ԍ Id. at 3.9 Hillsboro asserts that it contacted Ameritech about the possibility of its performing the changes for Hillsboro, but discovered that Ameritech could not perform the"H 0*%%ZZ" conversion. Ameritech also was unwilling to incur the expense involved in having Ameritech's Madison, Wisconsin tandem switch perform special translations for three to four X-digit CIC conversion for only one switch.3M yOK-ԍ Id.3  X-x27.` ` Hillsboro argues that its situation is different than that of Clarks, Eustis/Home,  X-and Henderson, to whom the Division, in the First CICs Waiver Order, declined to grant extensions until January 1, 2000. Hillsboro argues that Clarks, Eustis/Home, and Henderson, unlike Hillsboro, failed to demonstrate diligence in seeking to comply with the January 1,  XH-1998 conversion deadline.9HXM yOQ -ԍ Id. at 6.9 Hillsboro asserts that it was diligent in immediately taking steps  X1-to implement its upgrade when the Commission released the CICs Second Report and Order  X -accelerating the end to the transition.3 M yO-ԍ Id.3 Hillsboro argues that this diligence, combined with the timing constraints of the RUS process and the burdens Hillsboro would face if required to spend the $746,000 necessary for upgrades without an RUS loan, outweigh the burdens the waiver would have on the IXCs served by Hillsboro, and on the ability of Hillsboro's customers to reach IXCs through CAC dialing for five months beyond the end of the  X -permissive dialing period.3 xM yO-ԍ Id.3  Xy- III. DISCUSSION ă  XK-x28.` ` The Commission may waive any provision of its rules, in whole or in part, if  X4-good cause is shown.G4M yO-ԍ See 47 C.F.R.  1.3.G An applicant for waiver must demonstrate that special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule and that such deviation will serve the public  X-interest.M yOO- xԍ Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990); WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1969). In the First CICs Waiver Order, we stated the factors we weighed in evaluating each petition for waiver: the LEC's diligence in upgrading its switches; the availability from manufacturers of products required to accomplish the upgrade; and the impact of an extension of the conversion deadline on the IXCs served by the LEC's switches and on customers'  X-ability to reach IXCs through CAC dialing. In the Second CICs Waiver Order, and again here, we have weighed these same factors in evaluating each petition before us. "| 0*%%ZZP"Ԍ X-x29.` ` Requests for Extension Ending Before June 30, 1998. M yOy- xԍ We note that Leigh Valley, one of the eleven Iowa LECs on whose behalf GVNW filed its petition, requests  xan extension until March 1, 1998. Because Leigh Valley is similarly situated to the other ten Iowa LECs, all of  xkwhom request extensions until June 30, 1998, we will include a discussion of Leigh Valley's petition in the discussion of petitions of the other ten Iowa LECs. We find that the petitions for waiver filed by Roosevelt, West Texas, Ruthven, and Indianhead demonstrate the special circumstances meriting a waiver of the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline. First, each has demonstrated that it is diligently working to upgrade its switches. For example, Roosevelt asserts that it contacted Nortel about purchasing a new switch in February, 1997, and originally expected completion of installation and conversion by November 15, 1997. West Texas asserts that it began its upgrade process in June 1997, after learning from the  X_-CICs Second Report and Order in April 1997, that the conversion deadline would be earlier than the Commission originally proposed. Ruthven asserts that when the Commission  X1-released the CICs Second Report and Order, it took steps to expedite delivery of a new switch and accelerate the implementation schedule, and asserts that the switch was delivered during the first week of November 1997. Indianhead asserts that it has ordered the hardware and software necessary to enable its network to recognize fourdigit CICs, and expects to receive the equipment during the first quarter of 1998, followed by installation and testing to make the system operational no later than May 31, 1998.  X-x30.` ` Second, based on their petitions, we conclude that Roosevelt, West Texas, Ruthven, and Indianhead have demonstrated that the product needed to accomplish the upgrade to their individual networks is not readily available from switch manufacturers, which has delayed their ability to meet the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline. For example, Roosevelt asserts that, because of unanticipated engineering complexities and Nortel's recent backlog of work, completion of installation and conversion of its new Nortel switch has been delayed from November 15, 1997, until February 28, 1998. The additional costs West Texas asserts it would be forced to expend to comply with the January 1, 1998 deadline make the product necessary for conversion effectively "unavailable" for West Texas' nonconforming end offices. Ruthven asserts that, although its switch was delivered during the first week of November 1997, and is currently being installed, completion of installation may be delayed due to Mitel's holiday closing. The product, therefore, is effectively "unavailable" because installation has not yet been completed. Indianhead asserts that it has not yet received the hardware and software it has ordered to enable its network to recognize fourdigit CICs.  X7-x31.` ` Third, we conclude that the impact of an extension of the conversion deadline on the IXCs served by Roosevelt, West Texas, Ruthven, and Indianhead, and on the ability of those LECs' customers to reach IXCs through CAC dialing, does not outweigh the burden on those LECs that would be imposed by a denial of their petitions for waiver. Roosevelt, West Texas, Ruthven, and Indianhead all serve a limited number of access lines. Roosevelt's"0*%%ZZ"  X-network serves 2,150 access lines.RM yOy-ԍ See Roosevelt Petition at 2.R West Texas serves approximately 1,900 access lines.SXM yO -ԍ See West Texas Petition at 2.S  X-Ruthven serves one exchange with approximately 835 access lines.FM yO-ԍ Ruthven Petition at 4.F Indianhead serves three  X-exchanges with a total of approximately 2,053 access lines.SxM yO-ԍ See Indianhead Petition at 1.S Roosevelt has requested an extension until February 28, 1998, West Texas and Ruthven have requested extensions until March 31, 1998, and Indianhead has requested an extension until May 31, 1998. Accordingly, the grant of their requested waivers will not affect or interfere with the end of the permissive dialing period on June 30, 1998.  XH-x32.` ` Requests for Extension Until June 30, 1998. We find that the petitions for waiver filed by Tatum, Haxtun, Albion, Miller, Schaller, ENMR, Roome, Northwestern, and the eleven Iowa LECs demonstrate the special circumstances meriting a waiver of the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline. First, each has demonstrated that it is diligently working to upgrade or replace its switches. For example, both Tatum and Haxtun assert that, upon  X -learning of the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline set in the CICs Second Report and Order, they contacted StrombergCarlson to discuss network configuration options but that, after StrombergCarlson delayed in responding to them and then offered unacceptable price quotes, they contacted Nortel for a recommendation. Based on Nortel's recommendation, Tatum chose a switch replacement and Haxtun a host/remote network configuration. Albion asserts that, at the end of 1996, it devised a construction plan to upgrade all of its switches to fourdigit CIC capability, and that, at this time, six of Albion's eleven switches are fourdigit CIC compliant. It expects installation and conversion of the remaining switches between April and June 1998. Miller asserts that: (1) on July 11, 1997, it was notified that its RUS loan was approved (a process Miller initiated upon learning of the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline); (2) on November 13, 1997, it received approval from the MOPSC; (3) due to the delay in receiving MOPSC's letter of approval, it was unable to commence the ordering process until November 25, 1997; and (4) it anticipates completing implementation on or before June 30, 1998. Schaller asserts that it has switch replacements planned for the first half of 1998, and that it is in the process of obtaining RUS financing, and expects to have new switches operational before June 30, 1998. ENMR asserts that it is in the final stage of upgrading its network to fourdigit CIC capability, under a network modernization plan it began in February 1996, which ENMR asserts it accelerated when the Commission released  X7-the CICs Second Report and Order in April 1997. Roome asserts that it originally had a switch replacement scheduled for the beginning of the first quarter of 1997, but was required" 0*%%ZZz" to change switching vendors and is expeditiously working with the new vendor to complete installation, which Roome anticipates occurring by midApril 1998. Northwestern asserts that,  X-upon release of the CICs Second Report and Order in April 1997, it made efforts to assess the steps necessary to meet the January 1, 1998 deadline. Northwestern has made arrangements to purchase a new SiemensStromberg switch, after learning that Alcatel would no longer offer support for Northwestern's switching equipment and software. Northwestern asserts that it considered purchasing new switches from other manufacturers, but that none could guarantee installation by January 1, 1998.  X1-x 33.` ` Since they learned recently from INS that they would need to upgrade or replace their individual switches to become fourdigit CIC compliant, the eleven Iowa LECs have demonstrated that they are diligently working to achieve compliance before the end of the permissive dialing period: (1) Coon Valley intends to expedite its software upgrade plans, originally scheduled for the third quarter of 1998; (2) Hawkeye, after learning recently that its software cannot accommodate fourdigit CICs, is expeditiously working with the manufacturer to estimate the costs and timing of a software upgrade; (3) Radcliffe, having originally planned a software generic upgrade for the last quarter of 1998, entered into negotiations with Nortel for an interim software generic upgrade; (4) Leigh anticipated having new switches installed and operational by December 1997, but, due to various missed scheduled dates in the installation, asserts that they will not be complete and operational until February 1, 1998; (5) Defiance is negotiating with Nortel for switch replacements and is seeking delivery and installation dates that allow it to be fourdigit CIC compliant by the end of the permissive dialing period; (6) Manilla also is negotiating with Nortel for switch replacements and is seeking delivery and installation dates that allow it to be fourdigit CIC compliant by the end of the permissive dialing period; (7) Lone Rock, while it is waiting to hear from Nortel about a possible auxiliary upgrade to its current software, has established contingency plans, including an upgrade to a higher software generic, switch sharing with a neighboring LEC, and switch replacement; (8) Norway is reviewing a proposed network configuration to replace its current switch with a remote switch and asserts that it, if the configuration is not possible, it is prepared to lease a switch from another company; (9) Breda asserts that it has initiated an interconnection agreement with an affiliated competitive LEC (CLEC) to act as a host switch for various features and functions to include the fourdigit CIC capability; (10) JordanSoldier asserts that it has initiated an interconnection agreement with a neighboring LEC to act as a host switch; and (11) Prairie asserts that, after having initiated contacts in late April 1997, it currently is negotiating an interconnection agreement with neighboring LECs, and will expedite the process as necessary.  X!-x!34.` ` Second, based on their petitions, we conclude that Tatum, Haxtun, Albion, Miller, Schaller, ENMR, Roome, Northwestern, and the eleven Iowa LECs have demonstrated that the product needed to accomplish the upgrade to their individual networks is not readily available from switch manufacturers, which has delayed their ability to meet the January 1,"h$0*%%ZZ(#" 1998 conversion deadline. For example, both Tatum and Haxtun assert that the switching equipment they ordered from Nortel equipment resellers is in the process of being shipped. Albion asserts that the upgraded remote switches were shipped in November 1997, and installation and conversion will be completed between April and June 1998. The product, therefore, is effectively "unavailable" because the equipment manufacturers are unable to deliver and install the equipment by the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline. Miller asserts that, due a delay in receiving MOPSC's letter of approval for its loan, it did not begin the switch upgrade ordering process until November 25, 1997, and that installation will begin immediately upon delivery of the software. Schaller has not yet ordered its new switches because it is waiting to obtain RUS financing. ENMR asserts the equipment and installations necessary to meet the January 1, 1998 deadline for all of its switches is not available. ENMR asserts that consultations with its switch manufacturer, Nortel (and with an engineering firm) led ENMR to determine that 15 of ENMR's 25 exchanges cannot be converted to fourdigit CICs until the end of June 1998. Roome asserts that it has begun the process of installing a new switch, which was delayed due to circumstances beyond its control, but which Roome anticipates occurring by midApril 1998. Northwestern asserts that Alcatel, its switch manufacturer, informed Northwestern that it is no longer offering support for Northwestern's switching equipment and software. Accordingly, Northwestern has decided to replace its switches, and has made the necessary arrangements to purchase replacement switches. The eleven Iowa LECs did not learn from INS until November 1997 that they would need to upgrade or replace their individual switches to become fourdigit CIC compliant, rather than relying on the centralized, INS switch. Thus, although the product needed to accomplish the upgrades for their individual networks might have been available, because they were unaware of the need for it until November 1997, it is effectively "unavailable" to meet the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline.  X-x"35.` ` Third, we conclude that the impact of an extension of the conversion deadline on the IXCs served by Tatum, Haxtun, Albion, Miller, Schaller, ENMR, Roome, Northwestern, and the eleven Iowa LECs, and on the ability of those LECs' customers to reach IXCs through CAC dialing, does not outweigh the burden on those LECs that would be imposed by a denial of their petitions for waiver. Tatum, Haxtun, Albion, Miller, Schaller, ENMR, Roome, Northwestern, and the eleven Iowa LECs all serve a limited number of  X -access lines. Tatum serves one exchange with approximately 815 access lines.N M yO-ԍ See Tatum Petition at 5.N Haxtun  X -serves three exchanges with a total of 1,874 access lines.E XM yO"-ԍ Haxtun Petition at 5.E Of the eleven exchanges Albion serves, with a total of approximately 4,268 access lines, it requests a waiver for five of those"0*%%ZZ"  X-exchanges, with a total of approximately 1,017 access lines.UM yOy-ԍ See Albion Supplemental Filing.U Miller serves one exchange  X-with approximately 1038 access lines.EXM yO-ԍ Miller Petition at 5.E Schaller serves approximately 1,800 access lines.QM yO-ԍ See Schaller Petition at 2.Q  X-ENMR serves 25 exchanges with a total of 12,000 access lines.UxM yO-ԍ See ENMR Petition at 12.U Roome serves one  X-exchange with approximately 798 access lines.DM yOt -ԍ Roome Petition at 5.D Northwestern serves five exchanges with a  X-total of approximately 10,000 access lines.KM yO -ԍ Northwestern Petition at 3.K Breda seeks a waiver for two out of its three  X-exchanges, serving a total of 792 (out of Breda's total 1,100) access lines.C( M yOf-ԍ GVNW Petition at 9.C The exchange  Xv-for which Coon Valley seeks a waiver serves 454 access lines.:v M yO-ԍ Id. at 10.: Defiance serves one  X_-exchange with 252 access lines.:_H M yOX-ԍ Id. at 11.: Hawkeye serves one exchange with 485 access lines.@_M yO-ԍ Id. at 12.@  XH-JordanSoldier serves one exchange with 337 access lines.:HhM yOa-ԍ Id. at 13.: Lehigh Valley serves four  X1-exchanges with a total of 1,894 access lines.:1M yO-ԍ Id. at 14.: Lone Rock serves one exchange with 288  X -access lines.: M yOS-ԍ Id. at 15.: Manilla serves one exchange with 571 access lines.: M yO-ԍ Id. at 17.: Norway serves one  X -exchange with 653 access lines.: M yO\"-ԍ Id. at 18.: Prairie seeks a waiver for two of its three exchanges,  X -serving a total of 628 (out of Prairie's total 1,000) access lines.: 8M yO$-ԍ Id. at 19.: Radcliffe serves one" 0*%%ZZ "  X-exchange with 515 access lines.:M yOy-ԍ Id. at 20.: Tatum, Haxtun, Albion, Miller, Schaller, ENMR, Roome, Northwestern, and the eleven Iowa LECs do not seek extensions beyond June 30, 1998. Accordingly, the grant of their requested waivers will not affect or interfere with the end of the permissive dialing period on June 30, 1998.  X-x#36.` ` Request for Extension of Vitelco Until July 1, 1998. We find that the petition for waiver filed by Vitelco demonstrates the special circumstances meriting a waiver of the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline. First, Vitelco has demonstrated that it is diligently working upgrade its switches. Vitelco asserts that despite its repeated inquiries to Alcatel, Vitelco's primary equipment vendor, Alcatel is still evaluating Vitelco's upgrade request. Vitelco asserts that it also has obtained the necessary information to convert the Nortel DMS100 switch, which requires only a software upgrade. Vitelco asserts that it has considered changing out the switch, but that the process of replacing the main switches and the 16 remote switches without disrupting service would take over one year and cost more than $15 million. Second, based on its petition, we conclude that Vitelco has demonstrated that the product needed to accomplish the upgrade is not readily available from switch manufacturers, which has delayed Vitelco's ability to meet the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline. Vitelco asserts that Alcatel has determined that it cannot complete upgrades by the January 1, 1998 deadline, and that, under existing licensing agreements for its main tandem switch, only Alcatel can perform work to convert the switch. Vitelco also asserts that acquisition of new parts will be difficult because the Alcatel1210 switch has been discontinued by the manufacturer. Third, we conclude that the impact of an extension of the conversion deadline on the IXCs served by Vitelco, and on the ability of Vitelco's customers to reach IXCs through CAC dialing, does not outweigh the burden on Vitelco that would be imposed by a denial of its petition for waiver. Vitelco asserts that it operates approximately 60,000 switched access lines spread over multiple islands, in the United States Virgin Islands, and that, in the past four years, only  X-seven IXCs have sought to operate in the Virgin Islands.NXM yO-ԍ Vitelco Petition at 2 and 89.N Because the permissive dialing period ends on June 30, 1998, we grant Vitelco's request until that date, rather than until July 1, 1998, to avoid disruption to IXCs and to the public when the permissive dialing period  Xe-ends on June 30, 1998.eM yO- xԍ See Second CICs Waiver Order at para. 22 (granting Hartman Telephone Exchanges Inc. petition for waiver until June 30, 1998, instead of July 1, 1998).  X7-x$37.` ` We recognize that the grant of these extensions will shorten or eliminate the time we provided for IXCs to prepare their networks and to educate their customers, in  X -creating a twostep transition in our Order on Reconsideration. We find, however, that the" @0*%%ZZ[" technical and economic burden on these LECs that would be imposed by a denial of the extensions outweighs the burden to the IXCs and their customers. Each petitioner asserts that, even if it were technically feasible, it would suffer undue economic burden in attempting to meet the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline. Further, the economic burdens imposed by a denial of the extensions would be borne by the LECs' customers. We note, moreover, that only IXCs that have been issued a fourdigit CIC (who cannot currently receive CAC calls originating with the LECs' customers) will be affected by the grant of the waivers. The petitioners' networks can, and will continue to, accept CAC calling for IXCs with threedigit CICs until the transition ends on June 30, 1998. Although we recognize the potential anticompetitive effects of the dialing disparity and seek to minimize them, we believe that those effects are outweighed by the economic and technical burdens likely to be imposed on the LECs by a failure to extend the conversion deadline for them. Thus, on balance, we find that the impact of an extension of the conversion deadline on the IXCs served by Roosevelt, West Texas, Ruthven, Indianhead, Tatum, Haxtun, Albion, Miller, Schaller, ENMR, Roome, Northwestern, the eleven Iowa LECs, and Vitelco, and on the ability of those LECs' customers to reach IXCs through CAC dialing, does not outweigh the burden on the LECs that would be imposed by a denial of the extension requests.  Xb-x%38.` ` We note that the CICs Order on Reconsideration, in addition to requiring fourdigit CIC conversion by equal access LECs as of January 1, 1998, also requires that LECs must offer a standard intercept message beginning on or before June 30, 1998, explaining that a dialing pattern change has occurred and instructing the caller to contact its IXC for further  X-information.dM yO-ԍ See CICs Order on Reconsideration at para. 26.d The Commission requires that, in developing an intercept message, LECs must consult with IXCs and reach agreement on the content of the message and on the period of  X-time during which the message will be provided.=XM yO-ԍ See id.= We emphasize that Roosevelt, West Texas, Ruthven, Indianhead, Tatum, Haxtun, Albion, Miller, Schaller, ENMR, Roome, Northwestern, the eleven Iowa LECs, and Vitelco must comply with the Commission's intercept message requirement.  Xe-x&39.` ` Request for Extension of Hillsboro until December 1, 1998. While we also find that the petition for waiver filed by Hillsboro demonstrates the special circumstances meriting a waiver of the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline, we condition our grant of Hillsboro's requested extension until December 1, 1998, as described below.  X-x'40.` ` We find that Hillsboro warrants an extension of the conversion deadline. First, Hillsboro has demonstrated that it is diligently working to convert to fourdigit CICs. Hillsboro asserts that in late 1995, it initiated the process of obtaining an RUS Hardship Loan," 0*%%ZZ"  X-and, in May 1997, after release of the CICs Second Report and Order establishing the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline, it submitted a formal loan proposal to RUS. Hillsboro asserts that once it submitted a formal loan proposal, it cannot expedite the process. Second, based on its petition, we conclude that Hillsboro has demonstrated that the product needed to accomplish the upgrade to its network is not readily available from switch manufacturers, which has delayed Hillsboro's ability to meet the January 1, 1998 conversion deadline. Hillsboro asserts that even if it received loan and contract approval as of the filing of Hillsboro's petition on December 10, 1997, the products and installations necessary to complete the upgrade would not be available to Hillsboro prior to April 1998. Hillsboro asserts that it expects that, based on average Nortel installation times, and in light of Nortel's backlog, Hillsboro will complete the conversion to accept fourdigit CICs four months after it places a formal order for the equipment. Third, we conclude that the impact of an extension of the conversion deadline on the IXCs served by Hillsboro, and on the ability of Hillsboro's customers to reach IXCs through CAC dialing, does not outweigh the burden on Hillsboro that would be imposed by a denial of its petition for waiver. Hillsboro serves only  X -approximately 1,600 access lines.R M yO -ԍ See Hillsboro Petition at 2.R The effect on sevendigit CAC dialing for this small number of access lines is not outweighed by the burden that would be imposed on Hillsboro by requiring it to spend the $746,000 necessary for upgrades without an RUS loan.  XK-x(41.` ` We cannot ignore, however, the difficulties that the IXCs served by Hillsboro will experience in educating their customers about the forthcoming changes in dialing patterns, and the inability of these IXCs' customers to reach them through CAC dialing after the transition ends on June 30, 1998. We, therefore, condition our grant of Hillsboro's waiver request until December 1, 1998. As of June 30, 1998, IXCs will have converted threedigit CICs to fourdigits and fivedigit CACs to seven digits. IXCs assigned fourdigit CICs will expect their customers to be able to reach them by dialing sevendigit CACs. Their customers will have the same expectation. As we did with Roosevelt, West Texas, Ruthven, Indianhead, Tatum, Haxtun, Albion, Miller, Schaller, ENMR, Roome, Northwestern, the eleven Iowa LECs, and Vitelco, we require that Hillsboro offer an intercept message by June 30, 1998. We modify that requirement, however, for Hillsboro. Specifically, we require that, beginning on June 30, 1998, in its intercept message, Hillsboro indicate that callers will not be able to reach their long distance carriers through access code dialing until December 1, 1998. This intercept messages should help minimize disruption to the IXCs served by Hillsboro, and to those IXCs' customers trying to reach Hillsboro by CAC dialing between June 30, 1998, and the expiration of Hillsboro's waiver on December 1, 1998. We also require that Hillsboro  X-provide the same notification in bill inserts to customers.XM yO#- xԍ See Second CICs Waiver Order at para. 24 (imposing similar conditions on Hager Telecom, Inc. and Silver Star Telephone Company, Inc.)."0*%%ZZ"Ԍ X-ԙx)42.` ` In addition, because we grant Hillsboro an extension significantly beyond the end of the permissive dialing period, we impose an additional requirement on Hillsboro to assist the Bureau in monitoring Hillsboro's diligence in converting to fourdigit CICs by December 1, 1998, the expiration of its waiver. Specifically, Hillsboro must file two reports with the Network Services Division of the Common Carrier Bureau, the first on June, 30 1998 and the second on September 30, 1998, detailing the progress it has made towards installation and operation of its new, fourdigit CIC compliant switch. The reports should contain information concerning, but not limited to, the status of: action on Hillsboro's RUS loan application; Hillsboro's placement of an order with a manufacturer; and installation of any equipment received. We believe such a reporting condition is necessary to ensure that Hillsboro complies with the Commission's fourdigit CIC conversion requirement in a manner consistent with the public interest and to avoid further requests for waiver of the conversion  X -deadline.~ M yOe -ԍ See id. at para. 25 (imposing similar condition on Hager Telecom, Inc.).~  X - IV. ORDERING CLAUSES ă  Xy-x*43.` ` IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition for Limited Waiver of Roosevelt County Rural Telephone Cooperative, Inc., IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until February 28, 1998.  X-x+44.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition for Waiver of West Texas Rural Telephone Cooperative, Inc., IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until March 31, 1998.  X7-x,45.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition of Ruthven Telephone Exchange Company for Waiver of the January 1, 1998 Implementation Date for 4Digit CIC IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until March 31, 1998.  X"-x-46.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's""X0*%%ZZ!" rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Request for Waiver of Indianhead Telephone Company IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until May 31, 1998.  X-x.47.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition of Tatum Telephone Company for Waiver of the January 1, 1998 Implementation Date for 4Digit CIC IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998.  X -x/48.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition of Haxtun Telephone Company for Waiver of the January 1, 1998 Implementation Date for 4Digit CIC IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998.  XK-x049.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition of Albion Telephone Company, Inc., for Waiver of the January 1, 1998 Implementation Date for 4Digit CIC IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998.  X-x150.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition of Miller Telephone Company for Waiver of the January 1, 1998 Implementation Date for 4Digit CIC IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998.  X -x251.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Request for Waiver of Schaller Telephone Company IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998.  X#-x352.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47"h$0*%%ZZ(#" C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition for Limited Waiver of ENMR Telephone Cooperative, Inc., IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998.  X-x453.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition for Waiver of Roome Telecommunications, Inc., for Waiver of the January 1, 1998 Implementation Date for 4Digit CIC IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998.  X -x554.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition for Limited Waiver of Northwestern Indiana Telephone Company, Inc., IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998.  XK-x655.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the GVNW Inc./Management Petition of Eleven (11) Iowa Local Exchange Telephone Companies for Waiver of the January 1, 1998 Implementation Date for 4Digit CIC IS GRANTED by extending for each carrier the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability as follows: for Lehigh Valley Coop Telephone Association until March 1, 1998, and for Breda Telephone Company, Coon Valley Cooperative Telephone Association, Inc., Defiance Telephone Company, Hawkeye Telephone Company, JordanSoldier Telephone Company, Lone Rock Cooperative Telephone Company, Manilla Telephone Company, Norway Rural Telephone Company, Prairie Telephone Company, and Radcliffe Telephone Company, until June 30, 1998.  X -x756.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition of Vitelco for Waiver of the Commission's Rules Regarding Transition to Fourdigit CICs by January 1, 1998, IS GRANTED IN PART, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until June 30, 1998, and DENIED IN PART, to the extent Vitelco requests extension beyond that date.  X-x857.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that the Petition for Limited Waiver of Hillsboro Telephone Company Inc., IS GRANTED, by extending for it the switch conversion deadline for fourdigit CIC capability until December 1, 1998, subject to the conditions stated herein.  X1-Thpp  xx 0(#(#Xx` `  hh@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hh@Geraldine A. Matise x` `  hh@Chief, Network Services Division x` `  hh@Common Carrier Bureau