AT&T 9-STATE and Sprint. PCS will accept and provide any of the preceding methods of interconnection. Sprint PCS shall trunk to all AT&T 9-STATE Tandems in each LATA from each MSC where Sprint PCS offers Authorized Services, or in the event Sprint PCS has no MSC in the LATA, from Sprint PCS’s designated POI(s) within the LATA. The Parties shall establish a one-way mobile-to-land or land-to-mobile (or two-way where available) when actual or projected total End Office Switch traffic requires twenty-four (24) or more Trunks, or when AT&T 9-STATE’s End Office Switch is not served by an AT&T 9- STATE Tandem Office Switch. If the Direct End Office Trunk (DEOT) is designed to overflow, the traffic will be alternately routed to the appropriate AT&T 9-STATE Tandem. XXXX’s established as direct finals will not overflow from either direction to any alternate route. Such interconnecting facilities shall conform, at a minimum, to the telecommunications industry standard of DS-1 pursuant to Bellcore Standard No. TR-NWT-00499. Signal transfer point, Signaling System 7 (“SS7”) connectivity is required at each interconnection point after Sprint PCS implements SS7 capability within its own network. AT&T 9- STATE will provide out-of-band signaling using Common Channel Signaling Access Capability where technically and economically feasible, AT&T 9-STATE and Sprint PCS facilities’ shall provide the necessary on- hook, off-hook answer and disconnect supervision and shall hand off calling party number ID when technically feasible. In the event a party interconnects via the purchase of facilities and/or services from the other party, the appropriate intrastate tariff, as amended from time to time will apply. The cost of the interconnection facilities between AT&T 9- STATE and Sprint PCS switches within AT&T 9-STATE’s service area shall be shared on aproportionate basis. Upon mutual agreement by the parties to implement one-way trunking on a state-wide basis, each Party will be responsible for the cost of the one-way interconnection facilities associated with its originating traffic.
AT&T 9-STATE and Sprint. PCS will accept and provide any of the preceding methods of interconnection. AT&T’s language appropriately states Sprint Section 2.3 Sprint does Issue No. Issue Appendix/ Location Issue Description Disputed Contract Language AT&T Position Sprint Position
AT&T 9-STATE and Sprint. PCS will accept and provide any of the preceding methods of interconnection. Sprint PCS shall trunk to all AT&T 9-STATE Tandems in each LATA from each MSC where Sprint PCS offers Authorized Services, or in the event Sprint PCS has no MSC in the LATA, from Sprint PCS’s designated POI(s) within the LATA. The Parties shall establish a one-way mobile-to-land or land- to-mobile (or two-way where available) when actual or projected total End Office Switch traffic requires twenty-four (24) or more Trunks, or when AT&T 9-STATE’s End Office Switch is not served by an AT&T 9-STATE Tandem Office Switch. If the Direct End Office Trunk (DEOT) is designed to overflow, the traffic will be alternately routed to the appropriate AT&T 9-STATE Tandem. XXXX’s established as direct finals will not overflow from either direction to any alternate route. Such interconnecting facilities shall conform, at a minimum, to the telecommunications industry standard of DS-1 pursuant to Bellcore Standard No. TR-NWT-00499. Signal transfer point, Signaling System 7 (“SS7”) connectivity is required at each interconnection point after Sprint PCS implements SS7 capability within its own network. AT&T 9-STATE will provide out-of-band signaling using provide entrance facilities at TELRIC which was recently affirmed by the Sixth Circuit’s February 23, 2010 decision in Michigan Bell Tel. Co. v. Covad Commcn’s (Nos. 07-2469/2473). Sprint’s proposed language is trying to supersede existing arrangements and law and should be rejected. Commission is required to establish the just and reasonable rate for Interconnection Facilities provided by an ILEC such as AT&T pursuant to its 251(c)(2) interconnection obligations. Pursuant to the FCC’s pricing methodology contained in 47 C.F.R. § 51.501 et. seq., the price for Interconnection Facilities is established based upon forward-looking economic costs as defined in 47 C.F.R. § 51.505, which is commonly referred to as TELRIC pricing.
