WPC# 2; BK@ ZCG Times3|D ew Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)"5@^17MSS777S7777SSSSSSSSSS77Jxhr{hbx{7@uh{x_xoYh{xxxl777SSSJSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS>@.SSxSSJJSJSSSSSSESSSxJxJxJxJxJorJhJhJhJhJ7.7.7.7.{SxSxSxSxS{S{S{S{SxSxJ{SxSxSxS{S_SxSxSxSrJrSrShShShSxSxSxxSxS{S{SSSSSSSSuSh.hE{S{SxSxo>oEY@Y@NSSS7JDDSSSSSS:SSS:77VVS++SSf7V7:t7[[ee*S\-wSDDn[Cfx\xWkRx[\[ceIfIs`Wx[rriwhe1111111111111111111111111111111117MSS777S7777SSSSSSSSSS77Jxhr{hbx{7@uh{x_xoYh{xxxl777SSSJSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS>@.SSxSSJJSJS117SVSSSY+111177VVSSSf@+x11x17SSSSSSSSSD7SSS::S\SLS:SDJxxxxxxrhhhh7777{{xxxxxx{{{{x_SJJJJJJoJJJJJ....SSSSSSSSSSSSSSHP LaserJet 5L PCLHPLA5LPC.WRSc PE37,,,&EhP2G  ma- 3'3'Standard'3''Current Windows FormRSc, #Xw P7ZXP#,CG TimesTimes New Roman (TT)^;B\ccBBBcBBBBccccccccccBBDZY}}vBM}rk}BBBcccYcYcYBcc77c7ccccJM7ccccYYcYccc!cccRcccYYYYYY}Y}Y}Y}YB7B7B7B7ccccccccccYcccccrccccYcc}c}c}ccccccccccccccc}7}RcccJRkMkMNcccBYQQccccccFcccFBBggc33cczBgBFtBnnyy2co6cQQnCzohbnonvyXzXshn~|y;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;B\ccBBBcBBBBccccccccccBBDZY}}vBM}rk}BBBcccYcYcYBcc77c7ccccJM7ccccYYcYc;;Bcgccck3;;;;BBggccczM3;;;BcccccccccQBcccFFcoc\cFcQY}}}}BBBBrcYYYYYYYYYYY7777ccccccccccccccCG TimesTimes New Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)CG Times (Bold)Courier 12pt (10cpi)*, /C\  P6QP*y.G8*,uG4  pQty.H81,<pH_ pQ2-y @ L #3|D "5@^*7DTT77T^*7*/TTTTTTTTTT//^^^Jxooxf\xx7Axfxx\xo\fxxxxf7/7NT7JTJTJ7TT//T/TTTT7A/TTxTTJP!PZ*7777BE7TTxJxJxJxJxJooJfJfJfJfJ7/7/7/7/xTxTxTxTxTxTxTxTxTxTxJxTxTxTxTxT\TxTxJxJoJoJoJfJfJfJxTxTxxTxTxTxTBT7T777TAxTf/fExTxTxTxo7oE\A\AN:*KT7JTTTTT.3}}T2T}277JJT77TT7J72t7[[[[^ee*B`^-wSTTn[Cfx`xWkRx[\[ceIfIs`Wx[rriwhe*7DTT77T^*7*/TTTTTTTTTT//^^^Jxooxf\xx7Axfxx\xo\fxxxxf7/7NT7JTJTJ7TT//T/TTTT7A/TTxTTJP!PZT7TJTT7\777JJ:T7A7xx*7TTTT!T7.T^7TB[227`K*723T}}}Jxxxxxxoffff7777xxxxxxx^xxxxxx\TJJJJJJoJJJJJ////TTTTTTT[TTTTTTTCG TimesTimes New Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)CG Times (Bold),,&HXP2@_ vp"5@^*7\TT/77T_*7*/TTTTTTTTTT77___TxoxxofAToxfx\oxxxxo7/7aT7T\J\J7T\/7\/\T\\JA7\TxTTJB%BW*7777BE7T\xTxTxTxTxTxxJoJoJoJoJA/A/A/A/x\TTTTx\x\x\x\xTxTx\TTxTxTf\xTxTxTxJxJxJoJoJoJTTTT\\B\A\A7A\T\o/oEx\x\TxxJxJ\A\AN:*ZT7TTTTTT27}}T2}}T}277TTT77TT7T72t7[[[[_ee*B`_-wSTTn[Cfx`xWkRx[\[ceIfIs`Wx[rriwhe*7\TT/77T_*7*/TTTTTTTTTT77___TxoxxofAToxfx\oxxxxo7/7aT7T\J\J7T\/7\/\T\\JA7\TxTTJB%BWT7TTTT7\777TT:T7A7xx*7TTTT%T7}2T_7}TB[227`Z*727T}}}TxxxxxxxooooAAAAxx_xxxxxf\TTTTTTxJJJJJ////T\TTTTT[T\\\\T\xDa8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . 2kk$v4a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` 24tP  BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  2N f  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# 2P))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 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  2 +9a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   24# f!(""a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . 2)3f#$e()Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:a݅@  I.   X(# SubheadingSubheading"0\ E A.  2.#^W,$d,%-&..FOOTNOTEFootnote - Appearance#PHIGHLIGHT 1Italics and Boldldedd$+. DRAFT ONHeader A Text = DRAFT and Date% X =8` (#FDRAFTă r  ` (#=D3 1, 43 12pt (Z)(PC-8))T2Dă  ӟDRAFT OFFTurn Draft Style off&@@    22'X.(1P/)10*11HEADERHeader A - Appearance'LETTER LANDLetter Landscape - 11 x 8.5( 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   25+13,nF4-X4. 5LEGAL PORTLegal Portrait - 8.5 x 14+ 3'3'StandardA'A'StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 119   TITLETitle of a Document,K\ * ăFOOTERFooter A - Appearanced-BLOCK QUOTESmall, single-spaced, indented.N X 29/i50d(61j626HEADING 33rd Heading Level/| XHIGHLIGHT 2Large and Bold Large0B*d. HIGHLIGHT 3Large, Italicized and Underscored1 V -qLETTERHEADLetterhead - date/margins2u 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   2)>3EG94-:58;68<INVOICE FEETFee Amount for Math Invoice3 ,, $0$0  MEMORANDUMMemo Page Format4D.   ! M E M O R A N D U M ă r  y<N dddy   INVOICE EXPSEExpense Subtotals for Math Invoice5:A ,p, $0$00INVOICE TOTTotals Invoice for Math Macro6z 4p, $0$002 A7[>8X?9[T@:[@INVOICE HEADRHeading Portion of Math Invoice7+C`*   4X 99L$0 **(  ӧ XX NORMALReturn to Normal Typestyle8SMALLSmall Typestyle9FINEFine Typestyle:2C;[MBLARGELarge Typestyle;EXTRA LARGEExtra Large Typestyle<VERY LARGEVery Large Typestyle=ENVELOPEStandard Business Envelope with Header>+w ,,EnvelopeZ K e VE L"n,,EnvelopeLarge, Italicized and Under;    ,, 88+  `   2E?XD@XZDADBREMACNormal?,.1@dfStyle 14Swiss 8 Pt Without MarginsA$$D Co> PfQ  )a [ PfQO Style 12Dutch Italics 11.5B$$F )^ `> XifQ  )a [ PfQO 2MC$FDlKEoLF MStyle 11Initial Codes for Advanced IICJ )a [ PfQK  dddn  #  [ X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 ! )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   x )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   j-n )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  jBX )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 3oDutch Roman 11.5 with Margins/TabsD )a [ PfQO  ddn  # c0*b, oT9 !Style 4 PSwiss 8 Point with MarginsEDq Co> PfQ  dddd  #  Style 1.5Dutch Roman 11.5 FontF4h )a [ PfQO  dddn 2%PG|MHENINJOStyle 2Dutch Italic 11.5G$ )^ `> XifQ Style 5Dutch Bold 18 PointH$RH$L T~> pfQ_  )a [ PfQO Style 7Swiss 11.5I$$V )ao> PfQ ]  )a [ PfQO Style 6Dutch Roman 14 PointJ$$N w [ PfQ   )a [ PfQO 2dKWPL^UMeZNj_Style 10oInitial Codes for AdvancedK 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 BeginninggLi )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 IntermediateM )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 ModuleN )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]fOpdPq"eQeeReeDocument[8]'Eg%Document StyleE O  O g% W4I O gO` ` ` Document[4]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gP  . Document[6]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gQ  Document[5]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gR  2hSfTp"gUgV$hDocument[2]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gS*    Document[7]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gT  ` ` ` Right Par[1]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gU8 @  Right Par[2]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gVA@` ` `  ` ` ` 2kWhXiY*jZjDocument[3]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gW0     Right Par[3]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gXJ` ` ` @  ` ` ` Right Par[4]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gYS` ` `  @  Right Par[5]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gZ\` ` `  @hhh hhh 2n[k\~l]Fm^nRight Par[6]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g[e` ` `  hhh@ hhh Right Par[7]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g\n` ` `  hhh@  Right Par[8]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g]w` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp Document[1]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g^F    ׃  2>q_o`oa pbpTechnical[5]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g_&!"  . Technical[6]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O g`&#$  . Technical[2]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O ga*%&    Technical[3]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gb''(   2scpqdrerf9sTechnical[4]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gc&)*   Technical[1]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gd4+$,     Technical[7]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O ge&-.  . Technical[8]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gf&/0  . 2vg shtiuj=vCitatorFormat Secretary's Citator Output FilegW r5-#d6X@`7Ͽ@# XX  X B r5-S  BFormat DownloadFormat Downloaded Documenthiޛ r5- XX    \ #d6X@`7Ͽ@#footnote tex#i'p #FxX  Pg9CXP#referencej;#FxX  Pg9CXP#2zk~wlixm}ynfzitemizeX1k&V 8F ` hp xr#FxX  Pg9CXP#header2lI ` hp x`    #FxX  Pg9CXP# a1Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%Fm$ a2Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%Fn/ 2}o {p{qQ|r|a3Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%Fo: a4Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%FpE a5Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%FqP   a6Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%Fr[   2%s}t~udivXa7Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%Fsf  a8Paragraph+%X,1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)%8=(%  H*%Ftq 1, 2, 3, 6W6Numbers$1/$=('*'=d Eu .2*ïE[@6Op/2?! =(!8E[*!ïE.Evop2wpWxqǀye8ze3*ïE@6ODocument Style=(!8E*!ïE.Ew` ` ` 4*ïE@6ODocument Style=(!8E*!ïE.Ex  . 5*ïE@6ODocument Style=(!8E*!ïE.Ey  6*ïE@6ODocument Style=(!8E*!ïE.Ez  2d{4|pǂ}7~Ƀ7*ïE@6ODocument Style=(!8E*!ïE.E{*   8*ïE@6ODocument Style=(!8E*!ïE.E|` ` ` 9*ïE@6ORight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*!ïE.E}8@   10ïE@6ORight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*!ïE.E~A@` `  ` ` ` 22+υ|11ïE@6ODocument Style=(!8E*!ïE.E0    12ïE@6ORight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*!ïE.EJ` ` @  ` `  13ïE@6ORight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*!ïE.ES` `  @  14ïE@6ORight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*!ïE.E\` `  @hh# hhh 2vd#15ïE@6ORight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*!ïE.Ee` `  hh#@( hh# 16ïE@6ORight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*!ïE.En` `  hh#(@- ( 17ïE@6ORight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers*!ïE.Ew` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 18ïE@6ODocument Style=(!8E*!ïE.EF DD/  ׃  2-N19ïE@6OTechnical Document StyleE*!ïE.E&  . 20ïE@6OTechnical Document StyleE*!ïE.E&  . 21ïE@6OTechnical Document StyleE*!ïE.E*    22ïE@6OTechnical Document StyleE*!ïE.E'   2cYގ23ïE@6OTechnical Document StyleE*!ïE.E&   24ïE@6OTechnical Document StyleE*!ïE.E4$     25ïE@6OTechnical Document StyleE*!ïE.E&  . 26ïE@6OTechnical Document StyleE*!ïE.E&  . 2BԐoFormat Downl@6OFormat Downloaded DocumentE*!ïE.EU XX    X\ #d6X@]7@#a128.E+!*ïRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers?!=(!*!8@   a228.E+!*ïRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers?!=(!*!A@` `  ` ` ` a328.E+!*ïRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers?!=(!*!J` ` @  ` `  2/Ega428.E+!*ïRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers?!=(!*!S` `  @  a528.E+!*ïRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers?!=(!*!\` `  @hh# hhh a628.E+!*ïRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers?!=(!*!e` `  hh#@( hh# a728.E+!*ïRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers?!=(!*!n` `  hh#(@- ( 27a2a828.E+!*ïRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers?!=(!*!w` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp para numE3`6W_numbered indented paragraphs3:*#8_>/ENE/'0 1.#Xw P7XP# 1.ҲDefault Para`6W_Default Paragraph Font/E:*#8_>/ENE;;#Xw PB7XP##c PC7P#head1/E`6W_b 4 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE'#2pDC #2}in27_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE$ 28_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE/` ` ` 29_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE:` ` `  30_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEE` ` `  2ћz.31_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEP` ` ` hhh 32_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE[ 33_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEf 34_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEq 2222M2toc 1/E`6W_toc 14 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4` hp x (#toc 2/E`6W_toc 24 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4 ` hp x (#toc 3/E`6W_toc 34 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4 ` hp x (#toc 4/E`6W_toc 44 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4 <` hp x (#222G2Ѭtoc 5/E`6W_toc 54 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4<` hp x (#toc 6/E`6W_toc 64 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4` hp x (#toc 7/E`6W_toc 74 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEtoc 8/E`6W_toc 84 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4` hp x (#2252g22˵toc 9/E`6W_toc 94 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4` hp x (#index 1/E`6W_index 14 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4 ` hp x (#index 2/E`6W_index 24 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE4 ` hp x (#toa_>/E`6W_toa 4 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE` hp x (#2?/չcaption/E`6W_caption4 _k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEE;#Xw PE7XP##c PF7P#_Equation Ca`6W__Equation Caption#/E:*#8_>/ENE;;#Xw PG7XP##c PH7P#endnote refe`6W_endnote reference#/E:*#8_>/ENE>>#Xw PI7XP##c PJ7P#footnote ref`6W_footnote reference#/E:*#8_>/ENE>#Xw PK7XP#2?qqeeG35_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE  . 36_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE  37_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE  38_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE*   2pqs39_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE` ` ` 40_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENE8@   41_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEA@` `  ` ` ` 42_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE0     2տy&43_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEJ` ` @  ` `  44_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENES` `  @  45_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENE\` `  @hh# hhh 46_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEe  ` `  hh#@( hh# 2f 47_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEn  ` `  hh#(@- ( 48_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEw ` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 49_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEF D*  ׃  50_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&  . 2!\51_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&  . 52_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE*    53_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE'   54_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&   2S} 55_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE4$     56_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&  . 57_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&   . 58_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE$!" 2Du59_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE/#$` ` ` 60_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE:%&` ` `  61_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEE'(` ` `  62_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEP)*` ` ` hhh 2P63_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE[+, 64_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEf-. 65_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEq/0 66_>/E`6W_Default Paragraph Font/E:*#8_>/ENEO1O2#PLP##PMP#2Q67_>/E`6W__Equation Caption#/E:*#8_>/ENEO3O4#PNP##POP#68_>/E`6W_endnote reference#/E:*#8_>/ENER5R6#PPP##PQP#69_>/E`6W_footnote reference#/E:*#8_>/ENER78#PRP#heading 4`6W_heading 4_k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE9:25 !heading 5`6W_heading 5_k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE;<heading 6`6W_heading 6_k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE=>heading 7`6W_heading 7_k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE?@heading 8`6W_heading 8_k"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEAB2g2d#endnote text`6W_endnote text"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENECDtoa heading`6W_toa heading"*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEGH(#` hp x (#A, B,/E`6W_Uppercase Letters#/E:*#8_>/ENE KL.70_>/E`6W_footnote text*=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEZMPN2fpq+ee71_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEOP` ` ` 72_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEQ R . 73_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE ST 74_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE UV 2p+-75_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE*WX   76_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEYZ` ` ` 77_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENE8[\@   78_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEA]^@` `  ` ` ` 2379_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENE0_ `    80_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEJab` ` @  ` `  81_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEScd` `  @  82_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENE\ef` `  @hh# hhh 2O 83_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEegh` `  hh#@( hh# 84_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEnij` `  hh#(@- ( 85_>/E`6W_Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:*#8_>/ENEwkl` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 86_>/E`6W_Document Style=(#/E:*#8_>/ENEFmn D*  ׃  2G 87_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&op  . 88_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&qr  . 89_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE*st    90_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE'uv   2y B91_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&wx   92_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE4y$z     93_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&{|  . 94_>/E`6W_Technical Document Style/E:*#8_>/ENE&}~  . 2/}v95_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE$ 96_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE/` ` ` 97_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE:` ` `  98_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEE` ` `  2Ga }99_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEP` ` ` hhh 100_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENE[ 101_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEf 102_>/E`6W_1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)E:*#8_>/ENEq 2y@y@z9"5@^17MSS777S7777SSSSSSSSSS77Sxoxxof@Poxfx\oxxxxo777SSSS\J\J:S\.7\.\S\\J@7\SxSSJSSSSSSSSSESS\xSxSxSxSxSxxJoJoJoJoJ@.@.@.@.x\SSSSx\x\x\x\xSxSx\SSxSxSf\xSxSxSxJxSxSoSoSoSSSSS\\S\S\SS@\S\o.oEx\x\S{xJxJ\@\@NSSS7SGGSSSSSS:SSS:77__S++SSf7_7:t7[[ee*S\-wSGGn[Cfx\xWkRx[\[ceIfIs`Wx[rriwhe1111111111111111111111111111111117MSS777S7777SSSSSSSSSS77Sxoxxof@Poxfx\oxxxxo777SSSS\J\J:S\.7\.\S\\J@7\SxSSJSSSS117S_SSS\+111177__SSSf@+{11x17SSSSSSSSSG7SSS::S\SS:SGSxxxxxxxoooo@@@@xxxxxxxf\SSSSSSxJJJJJ....S\SSSSSS\\\\S\"5@^;B\ccBBBcBBBBccccccccccBBDZY}}vBM}rk}BBBcccYcYcYBcc77c7ccccJM7ccccYYcYccc!cccRcccYYYYYY}Y}Y}Y}YB7B7B7B7ccccccccccYcccccrccccYcc}c}c}ccccccccccccccc}7}RcccJRkMkMNcccBYQQccccccFcccFBBggc33cczBgBFtBnnyy2co6cQQnCzohbnonvyXzXshn~|y;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;B\ccBBBcBBBBccccccccccBBDZY}}vBM}rk}BBBcccYcYcYBcc77c7ccccJM7ccccYYcYc;;Bcgccck3;;;;BBggccczM3;;;BcccccccccQBcccFFcoc\cFcQY}}}}BBBBrcYYYYYYYYYYY7777ccccccccccccccCG TimesTimes New Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)CG Times (Bold)Courier 12pt (10cpi)Courier New (Bold) (TT)CG Times (Italic)*y.G8*,uG4  pQt+y.H81,<pH_ pQ6,8RC;,ZXR PE3QXP?xxx,L{Xx6X@JQX@?xxx,aXx `NQX;;;;;;;;B\ccBBBcBBBBccccccccccBBDZY}}vBM}rk}BBBcccYcYcYBcc77c7ccccJM7ccccYYcYc;;Bcgccck3;;;;BBggccczM3;;;BcccccccccQBcccFFcoc\cFcQY}}}}BBBBrcYYYYYYYYYYY7777ccccccccccccccCG TimesTimes New Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)CG Times (Bold)Courier 12pt (10cpi)Courier New (Bold) (TT)ddY`(`l2BB!BBPRBddYYYYYYzYzYzYzYB8B8B8B8ddddddddddYdddddoddYYYYYzYzYzYddddddPdBdBBBdNdz8zRdddBRoNoNNF2ZdBYddddd7>d<d<BBYYdBBddBYBdYzzzzBBBBqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddnddddddd2 @@ @+ @k"5@^2BRdd$BBdq2B28dddddddddd88qqqYzoBNzoozzB8B^dBYdYdYBdd88d8ddddBN8ddddY`(`l2BB!BBPRBddYYYYYYzYzYzYzYB8B8B8B8ddddddddddYdddddoddYYYYYzYzYzYddddddPdBdBBBdNdz8zRdddBRoNoNNF2ZdBYddddd7>d<d<BBYYdBBddBYBdYzzzzBBBBqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddnddddddd"5@^.=K\\!==\h.=.3\\\\\\\\\\33hhhRzzpf=Gpfzfpp=3=V\=R\R\R=\\33\3\\\\=G3\\\\RX%Xc.====IL=\\RRRRRzzRpRpRpRpR=3=3=3=3\\\\\\\\\\R\\\\\f\\RRzRzRzRpRpRpR\\\\\\I\=\===\G\p3pL\\\z=zLfGfGN@.S\=R\\\\\39\7\7==RR\==\\=R=7t=ddddhoo.Iih2[\\ydCpi`vZdfdloPpPi`d}}tro.=K\\!==\h.=.3\\\\\\\\\\33hhhRzzpf=Gpfzfpp=3=V\=R\R\R=\\33\3\\\\=G3\\\\RX%Xc\=\R\\=f===RR@\=G=.=\\\\%\=3\h=\Id77=iS.=79\Rzpppp====hf\RRRRRRzRRRRR3333\\\\\\\d\\\\\\\"5@^2Boddȧ8BBdr2B28ddddddddddBBrrrdzNdzoȐB8BtdBdoYoYBdo8Bo8odooYNBodddYO,Oh2BB!BBPRBdodddddȐYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddoddddzodddYYYYYYddddooPoNoNBNodo8RoodȐYYoNoNNF2ldBdddddd%7777777777>>>1eOIIOC=OO%+OCbOO=OI=COOhOOC%%47%17171%777V7777%+77O77155<%%%%,-%77O1O1O1O1O1bII1C1C1C1C1%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O1O7O7O7O7O7=7O7O1O1I1I1I1C1C1C1O7O7OO7O7O7O7,7%7%%%7+O7CC-O7O7O7bOI%I-=+=+N&27%177777"SS7!TT7S!%%117n%%77ln%1n%!t%<<<<>mCCs,?>[O6Wms[77TTTH_%7777777777>>>1eOIIOC=OO%+OCbOO=OI=COOhOOC%%47%17171%777V7777%+77O77155%T7,OOOOOO=7111111I111117777777<7777777"5@^!.22XM!!!2X!!!!2222222222!!dXd,XH?DJ?;HJ!'F?ZJH9HB5?JH^HHA!!!222,2,2,!222M2222%'22H22,,2,222222)222H,H,H,H,H,XBD,?,?,?,?,!!!!J2H2H2H2H2J2J2J2J2H2H,J2H2H2H2J292H2H2H2D,D2D2?2?2?2H2H2HH2H2J2J22222222F2??)J2J2H2XHB%B)5'5'N222!,))22222XX2#222X#!!442X22=X!4x!#t!X77XXc<<!.22XM!!!2X!!!!2222222222!!dXd,XH?DJ?;HJ!'F?ZJH9HB5?JH^HHA!!!222,2,2,!222M2222%'22H22,,2,2d!24X222x5X!!4422X2='HH!222222222)X!222X##272.2#2)XXX,HHHHHHXD????!!!!JJHHHHHXHJJJJH92,,,,,,B,,,,,2222222X2222222CG TimesTimes New Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)CG Times (Bold)Courier 12pt (10cpi)Courier New (Bold) (TT)CG Times (Italic)Times New Roman (Italic) (TT)"5@^17PSS777S7777SSSSSSSSSS77Sffoxf_xx7Jo\oxfxfS\xff\\777SSSSSJSJ.SS..J.xSSSS@@.SJoJJ@JSJSSSSSSESSSfSfSfSfSfSooJfJfJfJfJ7.7.7.7.oSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxS\JfSxSxSxS\JxSfSfSfSfSoJoSoSfSfSfSxSxSxxSxSxSxSSSSSSSSoJ\.\EoSoSxSof@fES@S@NSSS7SMMSSSSSS:SSS:77SSS..SSf7S7:t7[[ee*S\-wSMMn[Cfx\xWkRx[\[ceIfIs`Wx[rriwhe1111111111111111111111111111111117PSS777S7777SSSSSSSSSS77Sffoxf_xx7Jo\oxfxfS\xff\\777SSSSSJSJ.SS..J.xSSSS@@.SJoJJ@JSJS117SSSSSS.111177SSSSSf@.o11\17SSSSSSSSSM7SSS::S\SLS:SMSffffffoffff7777xoxxxxxxxxxx\fSSSSSSSoJJJJJ....SSSSSSSSSSSSJS2@z6w!"5@^(1<d<d<BBoodBBddBoBddzzzzzzzzzzBBBBozdddddddYYYYY8888dddddddndddddYd02N=.,&N4  pQ&z1P,%, נJ,\  P6QJP6H)!,,) PE3Q,P6(x/D81,D PE3QP z)y.C8*, /C\  P6QP*y.G8*,uG4  pQt+y.H81,<pH_ pQ6,8RC;,ZXR PE3QXP?xxx,L{Xx6X@JQX@?xxx,aXx `NQXz-7PC2, VXP\  P6QXP z.2J=., gE&J\  P6Q&P /7UC2,XU4  pQX02N=.,&N4  pQ&z1P,%, נJ,\  P6QJP62H)!,,) PE3Q,P3z-D81,zrD&_ xQXz4W!0(, ߦh0\  P6QhP4 5PC2,fXP*f9 xQXX2# O4va yO'#C\  P6Q/P#  #D PE3QP#Federal Communications Commission`* (#sDA 99847 #XR PE3QZXP#у   yxxdddy v    #x6X@8;{X@#l #X\  P6G;/P#Before the  yO'  FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ă GWashington, D.C. 20554  Xh4#Xj\  P6G;VXP#  SQ'#&a\  P6G;gE&P#In the Matters of hhCqpp) ` `  hhCqpp) ` `  hhCqpp)  S'Brazos Telecommunications, Inc. hhCqpp)  S'and Brazos Telephone Cooperative, Inc.qpp)  *AAD 9766 ` `  hhCqpp)  Sa'Cap Rock Telephone CooperativehhCqpp)  *AAD 9765 ` `  hhCqpp)  S 'Five Area Telephone Cooperative, Inc.hhCqpp)  S 'and West Plains Telecommunications, Inc.qpp)  *AAD 9767  S '` `  hhCqpp)  * ` `  hhCqpp)  Sq 'Santa Rosa Telephone Cooperative, Inc.qpp)  *AAD 9769 ` `  hhCqpp) ` `  hhCqpp)  S'Petitions for Waiver of hhCqpp)  S'Section 36.611 of the Commission's Rulesqpp)#Xj\  P6G;VXP# ` `  hhCqpp  Xd4  #X\  P6G;/P#MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER #Xj\  P6G;VXP#у  X64Adopted:` ` May 7, 1999 qppReleased:  *May 7, 1999 By the Chief, Accounting Safeguards Division:  X4J: I. INTRODUCTION ă  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)  X41.` ` By this Order, we consolidate our review of four separate petitions from incumbent local exchange carriers ("Petitioners") requesting waiver of Section 36.611 of the  X~4Commission's rules.~y xP'ԍBrazos Telecommunications, Inc. and Brazos Telephone Cooperative, Inc., Petition for Waiver, AAD 9766 (May 9, 1997) ("Brazos"); Cap Rock Telephone Cooperative, Petition for Waiver, AAD 9765 (May 7, 1997) ("Cap Rock"); Five Area Telephone Cooperative, Inc. and West Plains Telecommunications, Inc., Petition for Waiver, AAD 9767 (May 7, 1997) ("Five Area"); and Santa Rosa Telephone Cooperative, Inc., Petition for Waiver, AAD 9769 (May 7, 1997) ("Santa Rosa"). Petitioners' request, if granted, would permit Petitioners to receive high cost loop support for calendar year 1997 calculated differently than specified in our rules. On"gx0*''99Z"  X4June 6, 1997, the Commission released Public Notices soliciting comments on each petition.()  zPy'ԍBrazos Telecommunications, Inc. and Brazos Telephone Cooperative, Inc., Public Notice, 12 FCC Rcd  zPC'7678; Cap Rock Telephone Cooperative, Public Notice, 12 FCC Rcd 7677; Five Area Telephone Cooperative,  zP 'Inc. and West Plains Telecommunications, Inc., Public Notice, 12 FCC Rcd 7679; and Santa Rosa Telephone  zP'Cooperative, Inc., Public Notice, 12 FCC Rcd 7680.   X4In this Order, we consider all the petitions and comments filed in the separate proceedings.X)  xPR'ԍFour parties filed comments in response to the Public Notices: National Telephone Cooperative Association ("NTCA"); National Exchange Carrier Association ("NECA"); ITC, Inc. ("ITC"); and Public Utility Commission of Texas ("Texas PUC"). We have determined that the proceedings are sufficiently similar to justify the resolution of all the issues raised by each Petitioner in one consolidated proceeding. We find that the Petitioners have not shown good cause to warrant a waiver of Section 36.611. For the reasons discussed below, we deny the petitions.  X_4` ` g< II. BACKGROUND ă  X142.` ` In 1984, the Commission established high cost loop support mechanisms to  X 4promote the nationwide availability of telephone service at reasonable rates. )  zP'ԍSee generally, Amendment of Part 67 of the Commission's Rules and Establishment of a Joint Board, CC Docket No. 80286, 96 FCC 2d 781 (1984). These mechanisms provide support by allowing incumbent local exchange carriers ("incumbent LECs") with higher than average local loop costs to allocate an additional portion of those costs to the interstate jurisdiction to be recovered from interstate revenues. This enables the state jurisdictions to establish lower local exchange rates in study areas receiving such  X 4assistance.: 2 )  zP'ԍId.: The amount of support a company receives under our rules is based on the  X4relationship of its average cost per loop to the nationwide average cost per loop.Q )  zP'ԍSee 47 C.F.R.  36.631.Q  Xb43.` ` In accordance with Sections 36.611 and 36.612 of the Commission's rules, on  XK4July 31 each year, incumbent LECs file the preceding year's loop cost data with NECA.QKV )  zPR 'ԍSee 47 C.F.R.  36.611.Q NECA compiles and analyzes these data to determine the average cost per loop for each incumbent LEC as well as the nationwide average cost per loop. Because cost data are not submitted by carriers until seven months after the end of a calendar year, and because NECA requires time to analyze the data and make the necessary nationwide calculations of support, carriers generally do not receive high cost loop support based on these data until the"0*&&99"  X4beginning of the second calendar year after costs are incurred.AX)  xPy'ԍFor example, on July 31, 1996, incumbent LECs submitted cost data for the year ending December 31, 1995 that was used to determine their 1997 high cost loop support. Thus, support was not received until the second calendar year (1997) after the costs are incurred (1995).A This lag period can be reduced  X4if a carrier files quarterly updates of its cost data as provided for in the rules.R )  zP'ԍSee 47 C.F.R.  36.612. R  X44.` ` In the Universal Service Order, &z)  zP 'ԍSee generally Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, Report and  zP 'Order, 12 FCC Rcd 8776 (1997) (Universal Service Order), as corrected by Federal-State Joint Board on  zPz 'Universal Service, Errata, CC Docket No. 96-45, FCC 97-157 (rel. June 4, 1997), appeal pending in Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel v. FCC and USA, No. 97-60421 (5th Cir. 1997). released on May 8, 1997, the Commission established new federal universal service support mechanisms consistent with the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"). When the new rules take effect, the rules for which a waiver is requested in this proceeding will no longer apply. The new rules  Xa4take effect for the Petitioners no earlier than January 1, 2001.q ah )  zPz'ԍUniversal Service Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 894243, para. 308.q  X34 ` `  H III. PETITIONS ă  X 4  X 45.` ` The Petitioners were granted waivers in 1995 that permitted them to alter the boundaries of their Texas study areas to reflect their purchase of exchanges from GTE  X 4Southwest, Incorporated ("GTE").  )  zP'ԍBrazos Telecommunications, Inc. and Brazos Telephone Cooperative, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and  zPL'Order, 11 FCC Rcd 5536, (rel. Aug. 8, 1995); Cap Rock Telephone Cooperative, Memorandum Opinion and  zP'Order, 10 FCC Rcd 7602, (rel. Jul. 10, 1995); Five Area Telephone Cooperative, Inc. and West Plains  zP'Telecommunications, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 13246, (rel. Jun. 30, 1995); and  zP'Santa Rosa Telephone Cooperative, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 3245, (rel. Aug. 7,  zPt'1995) ("Waiver Orders"). The Waiver Orders imposed limitations on the amount of high cost loop support the Petitioners could receive in the future. The study area waivers were granted subject to the condition that the Brazos' annual high cost loop support shall not exceed $598,866; Cap Rock's annual high cost loop support shall not exceed $364,881; Five Area's annual high cost loop support shall not exceed $1,102,682; and Santa  zP'Rosa's annual high cost loop support shall not exceed $469,839. See Waiver Orders. The Petitioners now seek waivers of Section 36.611 of the rules to permit alternative methods for calculating their high cost loop support to adjust for these purchases. Specifically, they request that they be allowed to adjust the 1995 cost data they sent to NECA so that they can receive high cost loop support up to the amount that  X{4they would have been allowed to receive under the Waiver Orders. They state that the current rules will lead to anomalous and counterproductive results that are contrary to the"f 0*&&99Z"  X4public interest.m )  xPy'ԍBrazos at 2; Cap Rock at 1; Five Area at 2; Santa Rosa at 1.m They claim that strict application of the rules will lead to unwarranted penalties on their subscribers, will impose inequitable conditions on their cost allocations and recovery, and will jeopardize their ability to proceed with planned upgrades to the acquired  X4exchanges.:X)  zP'ԍId.:  X46.` ` The Petitioners contend that the Commission's rules create a mismatch between the costs and loop counts used to calculate average loop costs. The mismatch occurs, they argue, because the rules require a company to report its costs for the entire calendar year while it only reports its loop count as of the end of the year. Petitioners argue that a significant increase in loops during the year, such as occurs when exchanges are purchased, could cause a significant decrease in the company's average cost per loop and, thus, a  X 4decrease in high cost loop support.f )  xP'ԍThe Petitioners explain that they purchased exchanges in October 1995 so they only had three months of their own operating expenses to report for 1995. They argue that the rules incorporate an expectation that the expenses associated with a full year of operations will be reported. They further argue that the reporting associated with the acquired exchanges will be inappropriate if the reporting methodology does not reasonably  zP'identify the expenses for the full year.  See Brazos at 3; Cap Rock at 2; Five Area at 3; Santa Rosa at 2.f The Petitioners provided estimates of their 1997 high cost loop support had the acquisitions not occurred and estimates of 1997 high cost loop  X 4support including the acquisitions to show the likely reduction in support:q )  xP"'ԍBrazos at 8, Cap Rock at 67, Five Area at 8, Santa Rosa at 67.q T ddx !ddx  % T  C    "Petitioner _" Petitioners' projected 1997 high cost  loop support without the acquisition <"9Petitioners' projected 1997 high cost loop support with the "acquisitionC q   _  Brazos [_">$618,424 [_"($ 11,301q q  __  Cap Rock _">$364,881 _"'$166,485q q [ __  Five Area =_">$850,000 =_"'$142,000q    _l  Santa Rosa l">$469,834 l"'$348,045  =l To remedy this situation, the Petitioners request that, for 1997 high cost loop support purposes, they be allowed to file historical 1995 data with NECA, including combined seller's and buyer's data whereby the buyer would use its own historical 1995 data to the extent  Xb4available, and use seller's historical 1995 data to fill in any missing portions of the twelve"b, 0*&&99"ԫ X4month reporting period.c/ xPy'ԍBrazos at 5; Cap Rock at 4; Five Area at 5; Santa Rosa at 4. Brazos estimates that its annual high cost loop support under this option would be $406,199. Brazos at 7. Cap Rock estimates that its annual high cost loop support under this option would be $364,881, which is the capped amount imposed by the Division. Cap Rock at 5. Five Area estimates that its annual high cost loop support under this option would be $704,331. Five Area at 7. Santa Rosa estimates that its annual high cost loop support under this option would be $421,029. Santa Rosa at 6.c As an alternative, Brazos and Five Area ask that we consider  X4allowing them to provide NECA with their own annualized expense information for 1995.-X@/ xP'ԍBrazos at 5; Five Area at 5. Brazos estimates that its annual high cost loop support under this option would be $512,547. Brazos at 7. Five Area estimates that its annual high cost loop support under this option would be $1,026,800. Five Area at 7.-  X4 ` ` D IV. DISCUSSION ă  X47.` ` Under Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, we may grant waivers "if good  Xv4cause therefor is shown."Dv` / xP'ԍ47 C.F.R.  1.3.D As interpreted by the courts, this requires a demonstration that "special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule and such a deviation will  XH4serve the public interest."H / zP'ԍNortheast Cellular Tel. Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990); WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418  xP'F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969); 47 C.F.R.  1.3. Further, the waiver must be consistent with the principles  X14underlying the rule for which the waiver is requested.1J / zP,'ԍCity of Angels Broadcasting, Inc., v. FCC, 745 F.2d 656, 662663 (D.C. Cir. 1984). A primary principle underlying Section 36.611 is to promote the goal of universal service for nationwide availability of telephone service at reasonable rates by assisting incumbent LECs operating in high cost areas.  X 48.` ` We have reviewed the record and find that Petitioners have not established the special circumstances that would warrant a waiver of Section 36.611 of the Commission's rules. Nor do we find that application of the rule leads to results that are undesirable or inconsistent with the underlying policy of the rule. The rule contemplates changes in a carrier's level of high cost loop support from year to year. The fact that Petitioners experienced a reduction in their level of high cost loop support due to their purchase of GTE exchanges was anticipated and ascertainable prior to the purchase. Petitioners had the opportunity to address the impact of high cost loop support levels resulting from the purchase during negotiations with GTE. For the reasons discussed below, we deny Petitioners request for a waiver of Section 36.611.  X4"0*&&99"Ԍ X49.` ` We find that Petitioners have failed to demonstrate special circumstances affecting them that were not faced by any of the numerous rural telephone companies that  X4previously received study area waivers to acquire exchanges./ zPK'ԍGenerally, it has been a longstanding policy not to waive Section 36.611. See GVNW Inc./Management for Declaratory Ruling, or Alternatively, a Waiver of Section 36.612(a) of the Commission's  zP'Rules USF Data Collection, Order, 11 FCC Rcd 13915 (1996) and TelAlaska Inc., and TelHawaii Inc., Petition for Waiver of Sections 36.611, 36.612, and 61.41(c)(2) and the Definition of "Study Area" Contained in the  zPo'Part 36 AppendixGlossary of the Commission's Rules, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 10309 (1997). In fact, we have granted waivers of this section only when a requesting carrier proposes to serve or is  zP 'serving previously unserved areas. See Border to Border Communications, Inc., Petition for Waiver of Sections  zP '36.611 and 36.612 of the Commission's Rules, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 5055 (1995)) and South Park Telephone Company, Petition for Waiver of Sections 36.611 and 36.612 of the Commission's  zP] 'Rules, Order, AAD 9741, DA 972730 (rel. Dec. 31, 1997). In this instance, the Petitioners purchased exchanges in areas that were already being served by GTE. Petitioners allege that strict application of the rule will result in substantial reductions in high cost loop support and thus lead to anomalous results that are contrary to the public interest by penalizing subscribers, imposing inequitable cost allocation and recovery conditions, and jeopardizing planned upgrades. In support of these claims, Petitioners provide an estimate of their reduced high cost loop support. We do not believe that Petitioners have sufficiently identified, and provided evidence of, special circumstances that warrant a deviation from the general rule. In particular, we are concerned that Petitioners' general assertions concerning the effect of the rule are too broad and lack the specificity required for a finding that special circumstances exist in their respective cases. For instance, while alleging subscribers will be penalized, Petitioners do not provide any explanation or justification to support this assertion. Nor do Petitioners explain or provide justification as to how, or to what extent, application of the rule creates inequitable cost allocations or jeopardizes planned upgrades. Unsupported assertions of potential effects of a rule are not sufficient for a finding that special circumstances warrant deviation from that rule.  Xb4 10.` ` In addition, we do not believe Petitioners' estimates of reduced high cost loop support are convincing or indicative of something unique about Petitioners' situation. It is inherent in the rules that amounts of universal service support provided to individual carriers will likely change from year to year. The fact that the rules reduced Petitioners' amounts of high cost loop support is not, standing alone, sufficient demonstration of special circumstances that differentiates Petitioners from any other purchaser of exchanges. Moreover, we note that Petitioners' estimates of reduced support were overstated as the estimates did not consider amounts Petitioners could receive as a result of the submissions of quarterly updates to NECA  X4under Section 36.612.X4 / xP#'ԍ47 C.F.R.  36.612. Section 36.612 permits companies to update information submitted to NECA. The Petitioners quarterly updates that were submitted to NECA included the cost data for the period during 1995 in which they owned the new exchanges they acquired from GTE. Such updates ameliorate imprecise costs per"%0*&&%" loop caused by the application of Section 36.611. The table below shows Petitioners' estimate of high cost loop support"X0*&&99" for 1997 and their actual high cost loop support received during 1997. As shown, three Petitioners received substantially more high cost loop support than they projected in the petitions. T !ddx  %  Addx T   Z = c  "yPetitioner _" Petitioners' Estimated 1997  X4  High Cost Loop SupportPXf zP 'ԍSee note 15, supra.P c"Actual 1997 High Cost  X4Loop Support ReceivedJZ xP 'ԍIn response to our request, the Petitioners provided additional information showing actual high cost loop  zPx 'support received during 1997. See Ex Parte letters from Steven E. Watkins, Kraskin, Lesse & Cosson, LLP, to Adrian Wright, FCC (May 11, 1998).JZ q  c_  Brazos o_"H $11,301 o_" ^$228,029q q  __  Cap Rock _"Gp$166,485 _" ^$234,867q q o __  Five Area Q _"Gp$142,000 Q _" ^$411,701q    _l  Santa Rosa  l"Gp$348,045  l" ^$347,993  Q l  X 4 11.` ` Further, even if special circumstances had been shown to support a waiver of the rules, we do not agree that the proposed alternatives submitted by Petitioners are appropriate. Petitioners propose to receive additional high cost loop support either by combining their own historical data with that of the seller's historical data to fill in any missing portions of the twelvemonth reporting period or by increasing their own expense data to reflect the expenses they would have incurred if they had owned the acquired exchanges for the entire year instead of just part of the year. The first alternative, combining the costs of the seller and the buyer, would require a complex costing methodology to be developed to determine what portion of the selling company's costs were attributable to the sold exchanges. Even if the selling company could provide such studies, because of differing operating  X4characteristics of a large telephone company and a small telephone company, / xP'ԍGTE operates 1,322,086 loops in Texas; the Petitioners operate 18,374 loops in total. Universal Service Fund 1998 Submission of 1997 Study Results, National Exchange Carrier Association, October 1, 1998. we do not believe that such studies would produce reliable results. The other alternative, calculating high cost loop support based on annualized data, does not provide a reasonable basis for high cost loop support because it would allow companies to claim substantial amounts of cost that they did not actually incur.  XK4 12.` ` Under either of Petitioners' proposed alternatives, although the results improve"Kd 0*&&994 " Petitioners' situation, they do not provide better results overall. The universal service fund, which is subject to a cap, is disbursed by NECA based on nationwide calculations which  X4NECA performs.P/ zPK'ԍSee para. 3, supra.P Petitioners' proposals are aimed at obtaining high cost loop support payments for 1997 that, under application of the rules, and as administered by NECA, already have been disbursed to incumbent LECs. Although Petitioners may benefit from additional amounts determined under their proposed alternatives, incumbent LECs, having already received high cost loop support, would be required to return amounts to the fund to compensate Petitioners for these additional amounts. We cannot conclude that a waiver of the rule, to implement some other alternative as proposed by Petitioners, better achieves the underlying policy goal of the rule for which the waiver is requested.  X 4 13.` ` Further, we do not agree that application of the rule leads to results that are  X 4undesirable or inconsistent with the underlying policy of the rule.cZ Z/ xP'ԍThe rules also provide carriers the opportunity to update the preceding calendar year data on a quarterly basis to obtain increased high cost loop support to correct for imprecise cost per loop calculations caused by the  zP'application of Section 36.611. See 47 C.F.R.  36.612. c Petitioners do not allege the rule results in no high cost loop support or cost support so inadequate as to render the rule ineffective. They argue that application of the rule reduces the amounts they receive in high cost loop support. We do not find Petitioners' arguments compelling. The objective of the rule is to provide assistance to incumbent LEC's operating in high cost areas. That objective  Xy4is met. Petitioners have received high cost loop support, albeit more moderate, in 1997 than in other years.  X64 14.` ` We note that the rules governing high cost loop support have been in place and  X4unchanged for many years.P|/ zPL'ԍSee para. 2, supra.P The level of high cost loop support provided to Petitioners as a result of the purchase of GTE's exchanges was clearly anticipated and ascertainable prior to the purchase. Under our rules, the Petitioners' high cost loop support in 1997 did drop;  X4however, GTE's support increased./ xP'ԍAlthough application of the rules reduced the high cost loop support for Petitioners, the rules increased the high cost loop support for the seller. Because of the sale of exchanges to the Petitioners, GTE reported approximately 11,000 fewer loops to NECA for yearend 1995, but GTE's costs still included costs associated with those loops. Thus, under the rules, GTE's average cost per loop was increased, yielding higher loop cost support. Petitioners had the opportunity to address these changes in high cost loop support levels resulting from the purchase during negotiations with GTE. In negotiating the purchase price of exchanges, the purchaser takes into consideration the necessary investments and future cash flows related to the transaction. Because high cost" 0*&&99 " loop support receipts may represent an important source of funds for the operation of exchanges with high loop costs, the acquiring company would undoubtedly take into consideration the expected high cost loop support amounts, including support for the year of the acquisition of the exchanges, in negotiating an acceptable purchase price. Because the selling company and the acquiring companies negotiated these transactions with full knowledge of the Commission's high cost loop support rules, we see no reason to waive the rules to compensate the acquiring companies for the effects of the rules.  XH415.` ` We find that, based on the above discussion, Petitioners fail to demonstrate the special circumstances that would support the grant of a waiver of Section 36.611. Consequently, we conclude that the Petitioners' request for waiver of Section 36.611 must be denied. &@h   X 4` ` l) V. ORDERING CLAUSE ă  X 416. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i), 5(c), 201, 202, 205, 218220, and 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i), 155(c), 201, 202, 205, 218220, and 254, and Sections 0.91, 0.291, and 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291, and 1.3 that the petitions of Brazos Telecommunications, Inc. and Brazos Telephone Cooperative, Inc., Cap Rock Telephone Cooperative, Five Area Telephone Cooperative, Inc. and West Plains Telecommunications, Inc., and Santa Rosa Telephone Cooperative, Inc. for Waiver of Section 36.611 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  36.611, ARE DENIED.  ` `  hhC ` ` hhCFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ` `  hhCKenneth P. Moran ` `  hhCChief, Accounting Safeguards Division  X4#Xj\  P6G;VXP#  ?4#x6X@`7{X@#