WPCa 2BJZ Courier3|jx6X@`7X@HP LaserJet 5Si 2100M RM 8409HPLAS5SI.PRSx  @\#lX@20E6{K Z X-#Xj\  P6G;ynXP#3|j"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+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN8HH"&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""   ??       ?  ?          ?     ?   ?   ?            ?? ? ??  ? ?   ?            ?        ??  ?  ?    &  '  '        ?       ?            ??  ??  ? ? ?   ?    ?                        ?   ??   ?   ? ?ǀ   ?ǀ  ? ?À  ? ?À   ?À   ?À   ?         ?         ?  ?  π       ?   ?            ?  À ?        ? ? ?      ?    8?       ? ? ~  ?  ? ?  ? ?  ?    ?  ? ??  ?   ?   ? ??  ?   ?  ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?  ? ?   ?   ?   ?  ?  ? ?? ? ? ??? ~?   ? ? ? ?? ? ??  ? ? ??  ?  ?  ?À? ? ?? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?? ?? ??? ? ?? ?? ? ? ?? ? ?? ??  ??  ???  ?  ?  ? ?? ??  ?  ?  >?  ?  ?? - ?: 9 4ǀ? ?4 4 4? 4 4 4 4 5? 5 4 ?4 ?4 5 5 5 ?1? ?1 ?1 ?1 ?0 1x 1 / /? ?/π / / / .? ??.? ?. <. - - - --,,?,,-?----?+?* ??* ?+,>,,,?,?,?,--.?.?.?.%?À%%%%%%?%%?%?%?%&&'''?'?'?''?'())))x)?)?)?))*+++ǀX? π? ? ??? ##?&#&#? %#0%#x?%#?x%#?|%#?%#?%#?%#?%#%#%#%# ?%# $# ?$#?$# $# ?$# $#$#$#$#$#$#$#$###??####?##?##?#$ ?#$'$?'$'*'*'+'++XC f##t X    ##t  XX  ##t  XX  ddZd  Figure 1  Figure 1 #` 2pPG;9` # U 1  1 y!HHX@Uddfcclogo.wpgHHy$XX%%%%!$\!d ddhd  dB0#I2PG;P#News media information 202 / 4180500 &FaxOnDemand 202 / 4182830 8EInternet: http://www.fcc.gov |lftp.fcc.gov\!PUBLIC NOTICE#Xm2PG;XP# ,%%A!!%,  P*-$*XX!%$X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:*-functions and for interconnection with other switches. FNPRM at para. 47. More than one remote switch may be associated with, and rely upon, a single host switch. Although standalone switches are a standard component of  XV-networks in many areas, the Commission tentatively concluded in the FNPRM that current"Vz ./-/-XX0" deployment patterns suggest that hostremote arrangements are more costeffective than stand X-alone switches in certain cases.C {Ob-ԍ FNPRM at para. 122.C Some commenters supported this tentative conclusion.sZ {O-ԍ See Ameritech comments at 4; Rural Utilities Service comments at 2.s The models should therefore be capable of processing, as inputs, information identifying each individual switch as a host, remote, or standalone. The Bureau recommends that the models be capable of accepting switch classification information from either a separate database or a  X-software module to be developed in the future. yO* -ԍ Such modules could be incorporated into the cost model, but we do not ask the model proponents to develop such software modules at this time.  X_- xB.` ` Switch Costs xEach model currently calculates switching cost per line using a single cost curve that its proponents have developed. Consistent with our recommendation that the models identify switches as host, remote, or standalone, the Bureau recommends that the components of the models that estimate switching investment costs employ separate cost curves for host, remote,  X -and standalone switches.$Z D yO-ԍ The precise nature of each curve, and the differences among the curves, if any, will be determined when  {O-the Commission selects input values for its forwardlooking economic cost mechanism by August 1998. Order at para. 245.$ This flexibility will allow the Commission to prescribe inputs for switching costs according to switch type. Actual cost curves for host, remote, and standalone  X -switches will be determined in the input-selection stage of this proceeding. f  yO-ԍ The Commission announced its intention to select inputs and complete its forward-looking economic cost  {O-mechanism by August 1998. Order at para. 245. xThe Bureau believes that it is important to allocate costs between host switches and remote switches so that the efficiencies generated by the use of host-remote arrangements are shared by all users in the wire centers benefiting from such arrangements. Host switches generally cost more than standalone switches, and remote switches generally cost less than standalone switches. The advantage of using hostremote configurations lies in the cost savings across the several wire centers in which the hostremote arrangement is used, compared to the cost of placing standalone switches in each of those wire centers. The Bureau believes, however, that this cost savings should be allocated among all of the wire centers covered by any hostremote arrangement. We expect that the Commission will determine a specific allocation as part of the inputselection process. We also encourage the proponents to configure their models to be able to accept individual switch cost calculations that are tailored to the specific characteristics of a particular switch, and are generated by a software module to be developed in the future, in the event that the Commission determines that using such individual cost calculations will serve the goals of universal service better than"N 0*((" using cost curves.  X- xC.` ` Capacity Constraints xDifferent switches have different limits on the capacity they are capable of  X-supporting. {O-ԍ See, e.g., Nortel Product Handbook (11th ed., 1995) at 5.1 et seq.; AT&T/MCI comments at 910;  {O-BellSouth et al. comments at att. 1, p. 3; Ameritech comments at 5; RUS comments at 2. The Commission tentatively concluded in the FNPRM that, when capacity constraints indicate that a single switch is insufficient to serve a particular wire center more  Xa-than one switch should be assigned to that wire center.Ca$ {O6 -ԍ FNPRM at para. 124.C Proponents of both models agree  XJ-that three factors are important in determining the capacity of a switch.uJ {O -ԍ AT&T/MCI comments at 910; BellSouth et al. comments at att. 1, p. 3.u Accordingly, the Bureau recommends that the models' algorithms for determining switch size should include switch capacity constraints based on (1) number of lines; (2) number of busyhour call  X -attempts; H yO-ԍ Busyhour call attempts (BHCA) are call attempts that a switch processes during a busy hour. A busy hour is the hour of the day during which the switch carries the most traffic. and (3) busyhour traffic (measured in hundreds of call seconds).  yOV-ԍ A constraint on busyhour traffic is a limit on the total number of call seconds that a switch can handle during a busy hour. The models should be capable of determining whether the busyhour call attempt constraint has been reached by multiplying a value, specified by the model user, for the number of call attempts per busy hour by the number of business and residential lines in the wire center. Similarly, the models should be able to determine whether the busyhour traffic constraint has been reached by multiplying a value, specified by the model user, for the average seconds of use per call by the number of business and residential lines in the wire center. The models should be capable of accepting different inputs for business and residential lines with respect to each of the latter two constraints. For example, the models should be able to process one input for the average seconds of use per business line call, and a separate input for the average seconds of use per residential line call. We anticipate that the line count limitations chosen as inputs will take into account the percentage of lines that must be reserved for additional demand and  X-administrative activities.   yO!-ԍ Bell Atlantic and NYNEX state that the administrative fill factor (AFF), which "reflects the percentage of lines that can be assigned to end users on a given switch while maintaining the ability to meet additional demand and to use lines for testing, administration, etc.," should be no higher than 95%. Joint comments of Bell Atlantic and NYNEX at att. 1, p. 3. "0*(("Ԍ X- xD.` ` Percent of Switch Assigned to Port and to Provision of Universal Service  X-xThe Commission tentatively concluded in the FNPRM that the costs of providing supported services constitute only a portion of the total switch costs estimated by the  X-models.C {O-ԍ FNPRM at para. 137.C The Commission tentatively concluded that all of the lineside port costs and a  X-percentage of usage costs should be assigned to the cost of providing the supported services.CZ {O-ԍ FNPRM at para. 137.C  Xx-Under this approach, trunk port costs should be included when calculating usage costs.Fx {O -ԍ See FNPRM at para. 135.F The models should accommodate this approach to identifying the switch costs that are attributable  XJ-to providing supported services.  X - II.XxInteroffice Trunking, Signaling, and Local Tandem Investment (#  X -  X -x A.` ` Design of the Interoffice Network (#` xThe Bureau recommends that the models' interoffice network modules be capable of accommodating a switching module, as discussed above, that identifies switches as host, remote, or standalone. The models' interoffice modules should therefore be capable of accommodating interoffice facilities that will successfully interconnect the switches as  Xd-assigned by the switching module. As discussed above and in the FNPRM, the accurate computation of switching costs may require the separate identification of host, remote, and  X8-standalone switches.Q8~ {Og-ԍ See FNPRM at paras. 12931.Q As the model proponents have informed us,8 {O-ԍ See Letter from Glenn Brown, US West, to William F. Caton, FCC, dated August 7, 1997; Letter from Chris Frentrup, MCI to William F. Caton, FCC, dated August 7, 1997. this type of switch identification requires that the interoffice network be designed to account for individual switches' identity as a host, remote, or standalone switch. We therefore recommend that the model proponents ensure that their models possess this capability. xTo this end, the models should accommodate an interoffice network that is capable of  X-connecting switches designated as hosts and remotes in a way that is compatible with the capabilities of equipment and technology that is available today and current engineering practices. The model proponents should be able to demonstrate such compatibility. The models should take into account the costs of all necessary equipment, including cable, photonics and electronics, to connect hosts, remotes, and standalone switches in an efficient  X;-manner. This interoffice design should comport with the Commission's conclusion that the";j 0*(("  X-models incorporate the "leastcost, mostefficient" means of providing supported services.P {Oy-ԍ Order at para. 250, criterion 1.P The Bureau recommends, to protect adequately against network failure, that the models ensure that the facilities interconnecting each office with the rest of the interoffice network provide at  X-least one level of redundancy.MZ {O-ԍ See, e.g., RUS Comments at 4.M  X-x B.` ` Interoffice Cost Attributable to Providing Supported Services xBecause interoffice trunking, signaling, and local tandem facilities are integral parts of  XH-the network necessary to provide the supported services, the FNPRM tentatively concluded that the selected mechanism should calculate specific cost estimates for these interoffice  X -elements.C   {O-ԍ FNPRM at para. 141.C Consistent with this tentative conclusion, we recommend that the models be capable of calculating specific cost estimates for the interoffice trunking, signaling, and local tandem facilities that are necessary to provide supported services.  X -xAs noted in the Order, some interoffice trunking, signaling, and local tandem facility costs are attributable to the provision of interexchange service and other nonsupported  X-services.C!~ {O-ԍ FNPRM at para. 139.C As a result, we recommend that the models also permit the insertion of an input, specified by the model user, to determine the proportion of these interoffice costs that should  Xf-be attributed to providing supported services.  X8- III.XxFollowUp Requirements (#  X!- xThe Bureau recognizes that the model proponents may need to make certain changes to their models to bring them into conformity with the guidance provided in this Public Notice. To facilitate that process and the Bureau's review, model proponents should submit, within 10 calendar days from the release date of this Public Notice, a letter providing: (1) a list of the items discussed above with which their model already is in conformity, and a description of how their model is in conformity with those items, and; (2) a listing of the items with which their model is not yet in conformity, and a schedule for delivery of a revised model platform incorporating the above recommendations. xThe model proponents should file an original and three (3) copies of these letters, referencing CC Dockets Nos. 9645 and 97160, with the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 222, Washington, DC 20554. The proponents should also serve seven (7) copies of their letters on Chuck Keller of the Universal Service Branch, 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8918, Washington, D.C. 20554. The"!0*((;" proponents are also directed to serve each other with copies of their letters on the same day the letters are filed with the Commission. xQuestions regarding this Public Notice should be directed to Chuck Keller (ckeller@fcc.gov) 202/4187380; Bob Loube (rloube@fcc.gov) 202/4187379; or Natalie Wales (nwales@fcc.gov) 202/4187389. A FCC Ń