******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Sprint Local Telephone Companies ) CCB/CPD 98-47 F.C.C. Tariff No. 5 for Provision of ) Transmittal No. 63, Long-Term Number Portability Database ) Tariff F.C.C. No. 1 Related Services ) Memorandum Opinion and Order Adopted: August 14, 1998 Released: August 14, 1998 By the Chief, Competitive Pricing Division: I. Introduction 1. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, we suspend for one day and set for investigation Sprint Local Telephone Companies (Sprint) Tariff F.C.C. No. 1 in Transmittal No. 63, which seeks to establish rates, terms, and conditions for number portability query services. II. Background 2. Section 251(b)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, requires all local exchange carriers "to provide, to the extent technically feasible, number portability in accordance with requirements prescribed by the Commission." Section 251(e)(2) states that "[t]he cost of establishing telecommunications numbering administration arrangements and number portability shall be borne by all telecommunications carriers on a competitively neutral basis as determined by the Commission." Pursuant to section 251(b)(2) and criteria the Commission established in its Report and Order & Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Order & Further Notice) to implement this statutory mandate, carriers will provide long-term number portability through a location routing number (LRN) architecture. Under an LRN architecture, each switch is assigned a unique ten-digit LRN, the first six digits of which identify the location of that switch. Each customer's telephone number is paired with the LRN for the switch that currently serves that telephone number, and the number and the corresponding LRN are stored in one of seven databases, each of which serves an area that corresponds to one of the original Regional Bell Operating Company service territories. Neutral third parties, called local number portability administrators, will administer these regional databases. 3. When a customer changes from one LEC to another, the carrier that wins the customer will "port" the customer's number from the former carrier by electronically transmitting (uploading) the new LRN to the administrator of the relevant regional database. This will pair the customer's original telephone number with the LRN for the switch of the new carrier, allowing the customer to retain the original telephone number. The regional database administrator will then electronically transmit (download) LRN updates to local service management systems operated by carriers or third-parties. This information will then be distributed to service control points (SCPs) that the carriers use to store and process data for providing number portability. 4. For a carrier to route an interswitch telephone call to a location where number portability is available, the carrier must determine the LRN for the switch that serves the terminating telephone number of the call. Carriers will accomplish this by querying an SCP to find the LRN of the terminating telephone number. Rather than perform its own querying, an N-1 carrier may arrange for other carriers or third parties to provide querying and other portability services for them. In the Second Report and Order, the Commission approved the industry's "N minus one" (N-1) querying protocol. Under this protocol, the N-1 carrier will be responsible for the query, "where 'N' is the entity terminating the call to the end user, or a network provider contracted by the entity to provide tandem access." Thus, the N-1 carrier for a local call will usually be the calling customer's LEC; the N-1 carrier for an interexchange call will usually be the calling customer's interexchange carrier. 5. The Commission also determined that if an N-1 carrier arranges with another entity to perform queries on the carrier's behalf, that other entity may charge the N-1 carrier in accordance with requirements to be established in the long-term number portability cost recovery proceeding. The Commission also noted that when an N-1 carrier fails to ensure that a call is queried, the call might be routed by default to the LEC that originally served the telephone number. If the number has been ported, the LEC that originally served the customer incurs costs in redirecting the call. This could happen, for example, if there is a technical failure in the N-1 carrier's ability to query, or if the N-1 carrier fails to ensure that its calls are queried, either through its own query capability or through an arrangement with another carrier or third- party. The Commission determined in the Second Report and Order that if a LEC performs queries on default-routed calls, the LEC may charge the N-1 carrier in accordance with requirements established in a Commission proceeding aimed at implementing section 251(e)(2)'s competitive neutrality requirement with respect to the costs of long-term number portability. 6. The Competitive Pricing Division (Division) of the Common Carrier Bureau issued Memorandum Opinions and Orders on October 30, 1997, December 30, 1997, July 1, 1998, and July 16, 1998 granting petitions by Ameritech Operating Companies (Ameritech), Bell Atlantic Telephone Companies (Bell Atlantic), Southwestern Bell Telephone Company (Southwestern Bell), Pacific Bell Telephone Company (Pacific Bell), U S WEST Communications Inc. (U S WEST), and Sprint to establish new service rate elements to provide long-term number portability query services. The Division required all six carriers, however, to conform their rates, rate structures, regulations, and services offered under these rate elements to any determinations made by the Commission in CC Docket No. 95-116, the number portability docket. The Division further concluded that the tariffs that Ameritech, Bell Atlantic, Southwestern Bell, Pacific Bell and U S WEST filed implementing the rate elements raised substantial questions of lawfulness. Consequently, the Division suspended the tariffs for one day and set them for investigation. The Division also imposed an accounting order for the duration of the investigation. The Commission issued a Tariff Investigation and Termination Order on March 30, 1998, in which it declared unlawful Ameritech tariff revisions, and terminated as moot Bell Atlantic's, Pacific Bell's, and Southwestern Bell's tariff revisions because they had filed superseding tariff revisions. III. Sprint Rate Element Tariffs 7. Sprint's Tariff No. 1 was filed in Transmittal No. 63 on July 31, 1998, with a scheduled effective date of August 15, 1998. AT&T filed a "Petition to Reject or Suspend" Sprint's tariff on August 7, 1998. AT&T requests that the Commission reject or suspend Sprint's tariff due to ongoing issues related to the provision of long-term number portability. AT&T also questions several specific aspects of Sprint's tariff. On August 13, 1998, Sprint filed reply comments to AT&T's petition. Sprint disagrees with each of AT&T's assertions and urges the Commission to approve its tariff as filed. 8. In the Third Report and Order, the Commission concluded that local service providers may query calls for other carriers by arrangement, or may receive unqueried default-routed traffic when the N-1 carrier has not performed the query. The Commission also concluded that carriers shall indicate in the cost support section of their tariffs the portion of their carrier-specific costs directly related to providing number portability attributable to the number portability services they provide end users, and that portion attributable to the number portability query services they provide on behalf of other carriers. After reviewing the record on this tariff, we conclude that Sprint's Tariff No. 1 described in Transmittal No. 63 raises substantial questions of lawfulness warranting suspension and investigation. Sprint has not provided sufficient cost justification and other support to permit a full assessment of the reasonableness of the proposed charges and rate structures, particularly in light of the ongoing proceeding in CC Docket No. 95- 116. We agree with AT&T that Sprint may not include general overhead loading factors in its overhead costs. It is also unclear whether Sprint would charge for queries for calls to NXXs in which number portability was not available. 9. We therefore suspend Tariff No. 1 described in Sprint Transmittal No. 63 for one day and set it for investigation. We also impose an accounting order with respect to the services offered for Tariff No. 1 under Sprint Transmittal No. 63 during the course of the investigation. We will separately issue an order designating issues for investigation in this proceeding. V. ORDERING CLAUSES 10. IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to section 204(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  204(a), and sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91 and 0.291, Tariff F.C.C. No. 1 described in Sprint Local Telephone Companies' Transmittal No. 63 IS SUSPENDED for one day and an investigation IS INSTITUTED. 11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Sprint Local Telephone Companies SHALL FILE a supplement no later than 7 days after release of this Memorandum Opinion and Order reflecting the one day suspension. For these purposes, we waive sections 61.58 and 61.59 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  61.58 and 61.59. Sprint Local Telephone Companies should cite the "DA" number of this Order as its authority for this filing. 12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to section 204(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  204(a), and section 0.291 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, Sprint Local Telephone Companies SHALL KEEP ACCURATE ACCOUNT of all amounts that are associated with the rates that are subject to this investigation. 13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to section 1.773 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.773, AT&T Corp.'s Petition to Reject or Suspend Tariff, filed August 7, 1998, IS GRANTED to the extent indicated herein. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Jane E. Jackson Chief, Competitive Pricing Division Common Carrier Bureau