Common use of STAFF’S POSITION Clause in Contracts

STAFF’S POSITION. Staff reviewed the Amendment in this docket in the context of the Amendments contained in the dockets cited above and in the context of the criteria contained in Section 252(e)(2)(A) of the Act. Under this Section, the Commission may reject an agreement, or any portion thereof, adopted by negotiation under Subsection (a) only if it finds that (i) the agreement, or a portion thereof, discriminates against a telecommunications carrier not a party to the agreement; or (ii) the implementation of such an agreement, or a portion thereof, is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. In the Verified Statements cited in Staff’s Motion, Staff stated that the Amendments meet the standards set forth in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 since they do not discriminate against telecommunications carriers not party to the Amendments, and they are consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. Staff represented that the Amendment in this docket is substantially the same as the Amendments in the dockets cited above and recommended the Commission approve the Amendment in this case for the same reasons. Staff recommended in the Verified Statements that in order to ensure that the Amendment is in the public interest, SBC Illinois should implement the Amendment by filing, within five (5) days of approval by the Commission, a verified statement with the Chief Clerk of the Commission that the approved Amendment is the same as the Amendment filed in this docket with the verified petition. Staff further recommended that that the Chief Clerk place the Amendments on the Commission’s web site under “Interconnection Agreements.” These recommendations are reasonable and should be adopted in this proceeding.

STAFF’S POSITION. Staff reviewed the Amendment in this docket in Agreement based on the context of the Amendments contained in the dockets cited above and in the context of the criteria contained standards set forth in Section 252(e)(2)(A252(e)(2) of the Act. Under this Section, the Commission may only reject an agreement, or any portion thereof, adopted by negotiation under Subsection subsection (a) only if it finds that (i) the agreement, or a any portion thereof, discriminates against a telecommunications carrier not a party to the agreement; or (ii) the implementation of such an agreement, or a portion thereof, is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. In Staff recommended that the Agreement be approved by the Commission, for the reasons set forth in the Verified Statements cited in Staff’s Motion, Staff Statement of Xx. Xxx. Xx. Xxx stated that the Amendments meet Agreement meets the standards set forth in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 since they do and is consistent with the public interest. Staff concluded that the Agreement does not discriminate against a telecommunications carriers carrier that is not a party to the Amendments, Agreement and they are consistent that the implementation of the Agreement would not be inconsistent with the public interest, convenience and or necessity. Staff represented that the Amendment There are no contested issues in this docket docket. No party contended that this Agreement is substantially the same as the Amendments in the dockets cited above and recommended the Commission approve the Amendment in this case for the same reasons. Staff recommended in the Verified Statements that in order discriminatory or contrary to ensure that the Amendment is in the public interest. In addition, SBC Illinois should implement Staff recommends that the Amendment by filingCommission require Ameritech to file, within five (5) days from the date upon which the Agreement is approved, with the Office of approval by the CommissionChief Clerk, a verified statement with the Chief Clerk of the Commission that the approved Amendment agreement is the same as the Amendment Agreement filed in this docket Docket with the verified petitionVerified Petition. Staff further recommended that also recommends that the Chief Clerk place the Amendments Agreement on the Commission’s 's web site under “"Interconnection Agreements.” These " Finally, Staff recommends that Ameritech file, within five (5) days from the date upon which the Agreement is approved, modify its tariffs to reference the negotiated agreement. The following section of Ameritech’s tariffs should reference the Agreement between American and Xxxxxx and Ameritech Illinois: Agreements with Telecommunications Carriers (ICC No. 21, Section 19.15). Staff's recommendations are reasonable and should be adopted in this proceedingadopted.

STAFF’S POSITION. Staff has reviewed the Second Amendment in this docket in to the context of Agreement based on the Amendments contained in the dockets cited above and in the context of the criteria contained standards set forth in Section 252(e)(2)(A252(e)(2) of the Act. Under this Section, the Commission may only reject an agreement, or any portion thereof, adopted by negotiation under Subsection (a) only subsection: if it finds that (i) the agreement, or a any portion thereof, discriminates against a telecommunications carrier not a party to the agreement; or (ii) the implementation of such an agreement, or a portion thereof, is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. In Staff recommended that the Commission approved the Second Amendment to the Agreement, for the reasons set forth in the Verified Statements cited in Staff’s Motion, Staff Statement of Xx. Xxxxxxx. Xx. Xxxxxxx stated that the Amendments meet Second Amendment to the Agreement meets the standards set forth in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and that it is consistent with the public interest. Staff concluded that, since they do similarly- situated carriers can enter into essentially the same contract, the Amendment should not be deemed to be discriminatory. Staff concluded that the Amendment does not discriminate against a telecommunications carriers carrier that is not a party to the Amendments, Agreement and they are consistent that the implementation of the Amendment would not be inconsistent with the public interest, convenience and or necessity. Staff represented There are no contested issues in this docket. No party contended that the Amendment in this docket to the Agreement is substantially the same as the Amendments in the dockets cited above and recommended the Commission approve the Amendment in this case for the same reasons. Staff recommended in the Verified Statements that in order discriminatory or contrary to ensure that the Amendment is in the public interest. In addition, SBC Illinois should implement Staff recommended that the Amendment by filingCommission require Ameritech to file, within five (5) days from the date upon which the Amendment to the Agreement is approved, with the Office of approval by the CommissionChief Clerk, a verified statement with the Chief Clerk of the Commission that the approved Amendment to the Agreement is the same as the Amendment filed in this docket Docket with the verified petitionVerified Petition. Staff further also recommended that that the Chief Clerk place the Amendments Amendment on the Commission’s 's web site under “"Interconnection Agreements.” These " Staff's recommendations are reasonable and they should be adopted in this proceedingadopted.

STAFF’S POSITION. Staff has reviewed the Amendment in this docket in Amendment, based on the context of the Amendments contained in the dockets cited above and in the context of the criteria contained standards set forth in Section 252(e)(2)(A252(e)(2) of the Act. Under this Section, the Commission may only reject an agreement, or any portion thereof, adopted by negotiation under Subsection (a) only subsection: if it finds that (i) the agreement, or a any portion thereof, discriminates against a telecommunications carrier not a party to the agreement; or (ii) the implementation of such an agreement, or a portion thereof, is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. In Staff recommended that the Commission approve the Amendment, for the reasons set forth in the Verified Statements cited in Staff’s Motion, Staff stated Statement of Xx. Xxxxxxx. Xx. Xxxxxxx averred that the Amendments meet Amendment meets the standards set forth in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and that it is consistent with the public interest. Staff concluded that, since they do similarly-situated carriers can enter into essentially the same contract, the Amendment should not be deemed to be discriminatory. Staff concluded that the Amendment does not discriminate against a telecommunications carriers carrier that is not a party to the Amendments, contract and they are consistent that the implementation of the Amendment would not be inconsistent with the public interest, convenience and or necessity. Staff represented that the Amendment in this docket is substantially the same as the Amendments in the dockets cited above and recommended the Commission approve the Amendment in this case for the same reasons. Staff recommended in the Verified Statements that in order to ensure No party contended that the Amendment is in discriminatory or contrary to the public interest, SBC Illinois should implement . Staff also recommended that the Amendment by filingCommission require AT&T Illinois, within five (5) days of approval by from the Commissiondate upon which the Amendment is approved, a verified statement with to modify its tariffs to include the Amendment to the negotiated agreement for each service provided. Also, the Chief Clerk of the Commission that the approved Amendment is the same as should place the Amendment filed in this docket with the verified petition. Staff further recommended that that the Chief Clerk place the Amendments on the Commission’s 's web site under “"Interconnection Agreements.” These " Staff's recommendations are reasonable and they should be adopted in this proceedingadopted.

STAFF’S POSITION. Staff has reviewed the First Amendment in this docket in to the context of Agreement based on the Amendments contained in the dockets cited above and in the context of the criteria contained standards set forth in Section 252(e)(2)(A252(e)(2) of the Act. Under this Section, the Commission may only reject an agreement, or any portion thereof, adopted by negotiation under Subsection (a) only subsection: if it finds that (i) the agreement, or a any portion thereof, discriminates against a telecommunications carrier not a party to the agreement; or (ii) the implementation of such an agreement, or a portion thereof, is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. In Staff recommended that the Commission approve the Amendment to the Agreement, for the reasons set forth in the Verified Statements cited in Staff’s Motion, Staff Statement of Xx Xxx. Xx. Xxx stated that the Amendments meet First Amendment to the Agreement meets the standards set forth in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and that it is consistent with the public interest. Staff concluded that, since they do similarly-situated carriers can enter into essentially the same contract, the Amendment should not be deemed to be discriminatory. Staff concluded that the Amendment does not discriminate against a telecommunications carriers carrier that is not a party to the Amendments, Agreement and they are consistent that the implementation of the Amendment to the Agreement would not be inconsistent with the public interest, convenience and or necessity. Staff represented There are no contested issues in this docket. No party contended that the Amendment in this docket Agreement is substantially the same as the Amendments in the dockets cited above and recommended the Commission approve the Amendment in this case for the same reasons. Staff recommended in the Verified Statements that in order discriminatory or contrary to ensure that the Amendment is in the public interest. In addition, Staff recommended that the Commission require SBC Illinois should implement the Amendment by filingto file, within five (5) days from the date upon which the Amendment to the Agreement is approved, with the Office of approval by the CommissionChief Clerk, a verified statement with the Chief Clerk of the Commission that the approved Amendment to the Agreement is the same as the Amendment Agreement filed in this docket Docket with the verified petitionVerified Petition. Staff further also recommended that that the Chief Clerk place the Amendments Amendment to the Agreement on the Commission’s 's web site under “"Interconnection Agreements.” These " Staff's recommendations are reasonable and they should be adopted in this proceedingadopted.