Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version
********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
This document was converted from Microsoft Word.
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
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.
*****************************************************************
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Enforcement Bureau, Investigations and Hearings Division
445 12th Street S.W., Room 3-B443
Washington, D.C. 20554
November 19, 2003
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
and FACSIMILE (202) 408-4805
Michelle Thomas
Executive Director
Federal Regulatory
SBC Communications, Inc.
1401 I Street, N.W., Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
Re: Consolidated Section 271 Compliance Review Programs for
Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin; EB-03-IH-
0415
Dear Ms. Thomas:
As you know, the Commission recently granted SBC
Communications, Inc. (``SBC'') authority to provide in-
region interLATA services in Michigan, Illinois, Indiana,
Ohio, and Wisconsin, pursuant to Section 271 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``the Act'').1 As a
consequence, the Enforcement Bureau (``Bureau'') will now
commence monitoring SBC's ongoing compliance with Section
271 in these states, as described below, pursuant to its
Section 271 Compliance Review Program. This program is
based on a structured and systematic approach to compliance
review and enforcement. The Bureau has assigned a team of
individuals from its Investigations and Hearings Division to
work with SBC through the duration of the review and to
monitor SBC's performance in Michigan, Illinois, Indiana,
Ohio, and Wisconsin. The primary team members responsible
for this review are Gary Schonman, Esq.; and Connie Hellmer
and Larry McKinley, Auditors (the ``Team'').
During the review, the Team will closely review SBC's
performance in subject matter areas that the Commission
identified as areas of concern in its Orders. In this
regard, we have attached a list of the areas about which the
Commission expressed concern in the Orders. Although the
Bureau will focus its review on these areas and relevant
performance measurements, it may also monitor other areas
not specifically identified in the Orders. Generally, the
Team's review will occur in three phases.
Phase 1: Phase 1 will span the initial six-month
period following release of the October 15, 2003 Order.
Within the next few days, a Team representative will contact
SBC to schedule a planning meeting with SBC representatives.
The purpose of this meeting will be to provide SBC with the
opportunity to participate in developing the Review Program
and to assist the Team in selecting the type and format of
information pertaining to SBC's performance that the Team
will review. SBC should be prepared to discuss the areas of
concern identified by the Commission in its Orders and
included in the attachment appended hereto. SBC should also
be prepared to identify knowledgeable employees, applicable
corporate records, and computer systems related to these
areas. In addition, SBC should be prepared to provide the
Team with names and contact information of employees who are
authorized to respond to requests for information on behalf
of the corporation.
Following this meeting, the Team will send a follow-up
letter to SBC memorializing the discussions and describing
the specific information that SBC will be responsible for
submitting to the Team at the conclusion of Phase 1. The
Team will also monitor SBC's performance during Phase 1
through its analysis of monthly carrier-to-carrier
performance reports that the Commission, in its Orders,
directed SBC to submit.
Phase 2: Phase 2 will span the second six-month period
following release of the October 15, 2003 Order. On or
about the commencement of Phase 2, the Team will direct
another request to SBC for specific information. The
information responsive to this request will be due at the
end of Phase 2. At that time, SBC will also be required to
update information previously provided to the Team and to
provide additional information concerning its continuing
performance in Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and
Wisconsin. During Phase 2, the Team will continue to
monitor SBC's performance through its analysis of SBC's
monthly carrier-to-carrier reports. The Team will not limit
its review in Phase 2 to performance data or information
from only the second six-month period; rather, when
evaluating the need for any further action, the Team will
consider all of the post-authorization data and information.
Phase 3: Phase 3 will commence approximately one year
following release of the Orders and may consist of less
formal contacts and inquiries by the Bureau. The nature of
the Team's oversight of SBC's compliance with Section 271
during Phase 3 will be determined by SBC's record of
compliance during Phases 1 and 2.
At any time, the Team may ask SBC to provide additional
information or to attend additional meetings with SBC
employees who have expertise in specific subject matters.
These additional inquiries may supplement existing requests
or may encompass new inquiries.
If you have any general questions concerning the issues
raised in this letter, please feel free to contact me at
(202) 418-1420. You may also contact Trent Harkrader,
Assistant Chief, Investigations & Hearings Division at (202)
418-2955. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
William H. Davenport
Deputy Division Chief
Investigations and Hearings
Division
Enforcement Bureau
Attachment
Compliance Review Subjects for
Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin2
MICHIGAN
I. Checklist Item 2: Unbundled Network Elements
A.Access to Operations Support Systems
I.1. Pre-Ordering
a. Pre-Ordering Interface Availability (See
Order ¶ 62)
b. Loop Qualifications (See Order ¶¶ 63-64)
I.2. Ordering
a. Performance Metrics (See Order ¶ 66)
b. Rejections (See Order ¶ 67)
c. Separate LSR Requirement (See Order ¶ 68)
d. Project Definition (See Order ¶ 69)
e. Other Ordering Issues (See Order ¶¶ 70-77)
I.3. Provisioning
a. Provisioning Timeliness (See Order ¶ 79)
b. Provisioning Quality (See Order ¶ 80)
I.4. Maintenance and Repair (See Order ¶¶ 81-86)
I.5. Billing
a. Wholesale Bills (See Order ¶¶ 88-112)
b. Service Usage Reports (See Order ¶¶ 113-
116)
I.6. Change Management
a. Adequacy of Change Management (See Order
¶¶ 118-119)
b. Adequate Documentation (See Order ¶ 120)
c. Testing Environment (See Order ¶ 121)
d. Adherence to the CMP (See Order ¶¶ 122-
126)
II. Checklist Item 4: Unbundled Local Loops
II.1. xDSL-Capable Loops (See Order ¶¶ 128-131)
II.2. Voice-Grade Loops, Digital Loops, Dark Fiber
and Hot Cuts (See Order ¶ 132)
II.3. Line Sharing and Line Splitting (See Order ¶¶
133-143)
III. Checklist Item 7: Access to 911/E911
III.1. Access to 911/E911 (See Order ¶¶ 144-150)
III.2. Access to Operator Services/Directory
Assistance (¶¶ 151-152)
IV. Public Interest Analysis
IV.1. Other Issues
a. Penalty Waiver Agreement (See Order ¶¶
177-180)
b. Security Deposits (See Order ¶¶ 181-182)
ILLINOIS, INDIANA, OHIO AND WISCONSIN
I. Checklist Item 1: Interconnection (¶¶ 20-33)
II. Checklist Item 2: Unbundled Network Elements
A.Access to Operations Support Systems
II.a.1. Pre-Ordering (See Order ¶¶ 88-95)
a. Pre-Order Interface Availability (See
Order ¶¶ 91-94)
b. Loop Qualifications (See Order ¶ 95)
II.a.2. Ordering (See Order ¶¶ 96-104)
a. Performance Metrics (See Order ¶ 97)
b. Rejections (See Order ¶¶ 98-99)
c. Service Order Completion Notices (See
Order ¶ 100)
d. Other Ordering Issues (See Order ¶¶ 101-
104)
II.a.3. Provisioning (See Order ¶¶ 105-109)
II.a.4. Maintenance and Repair (See Order ¶¶
110-112)
II.a.5. Billing
a. Service Usage Reports (See Order ¶ 114)
b. Wholesale Bills (See Order ¶¶ 115-133)
II.a.6. Change Management
a. Adequacy of Change Management (See Order
¶ 136)
b. Competitive LEC Input (See Order ¶ 137)
c. Testing Environment (See Order ¶ 138)
d. Adherence to the CMP (See Order ¶¶ 139-
140)
III. Checklist Item 4: Unbundled Local Loops
III.a.1. xDSL-Capable Loops (See Order ¶ 143 )
III.a.2. Voice-Grade Loops, Digital Loops, Dark
Fiber and Hot Cuts (See Order ¶ 144)
III.a.3. Line Sharing and Line Splitting (See
Order ¶¶ 145-147)
III.a.4. Facilities Provisioning (See Order ¶¶
148-149)
III.a.5. Unbundled IDLC/NGDLC (See Order ¶ 150)
_________________________
1 See In the Matter of Application by SBC Communications,
Inc., Michigan Bell Telephone Company, and Southwestern Bell
Communications Services, Inc. for Authorization to Provide
In-Region InterLATA Services in Michigan, WC Docket No. 03-
138, FCC 03-228, (rel. September 17, 2003); In the Matter of
Joint Application by SBC Communications Inc., Illinois Bell
Telephone Company, Indiana Bell Telephone Company
Incorporated, the Ohio Bell Telephone Company, Wisconsin
Bell, Inc., and Southwestern Bell Communications Services,
Inc. for Authorization to Provide In-Region InterLATA
Services in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin, WC
Docket No. 03-167, FCC 03-243, (rel. October 15, 2003)
(collectively, ``Orders'').
2 As indicated in the letter to which this attachment is
appended, the Bureau may, for enforcement purposes, monitor
and evaluate SBC's performance in other subject matter areas
and/or with other performance measures not expressly noted
by the Commission in its Orders.