Current through Register Vol. 48, No. 38, September 20, 2024
Interconnection for the purpose of transmitting and routing of
either exchange or exchange access service shall be in accordance with the
provisions of the Federal Act.
a) Each ILEC
has the duty to provide, for the facilities and equipment of any telecommunications
carrier, interconnection with the ILEC's network:
1) For the transmission and routing of telephone
exchange service and exchange access;
2)
At any technically feasible points within the ILEC's network chosen by the
requesting carrier; however, the ILEC may not require the requesting carrier to
interconnect at more than one technically feasible point within a local access and
transport area (LATA);
3) That is at
least equal in quality to that provided by the ILEC to itself or to any subsidiary,
affiliate, or any other party to which the ILEC provides interconnection;
and
4) On rates, terms, and conditions
that are just, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory, in accordance with the terms and
conditions of an interconnection agreement, the requirements of sections 251 and 252
of the Federal Act, and this Subpart.
b) Methods of obtaining interconnection and access
to unbundled network elements. An ILEC may not deny a telecommunications carrier's
preferred method of interconnection for any reason other than technical feasibility
as defined in this Part and by the FCC in
47 CFR 51.5.
Technically feasible methods of obtaining interconnection or access to unbundled
network elements include, at a minimum:
1) Physical
and virtual collocation at the premises of an ILEC;
2) Adjacent collocation where space is
legitimately exhausted in a particular ILEC premises; and
3) Meet-point interconnection
arrangements.
c) Points of
interconnection. Technically feasible points within the ILEC's network include, at a
minimum:
1) The line-side of a local switch or
remote terminal device;
2) The
trunk-side of a local switch or remote terminal device;
3) The trunk interconnection points for a tandem
switch;
4) Central office cross-connect
point; out-of-band signaling transfer points necessary to exchange traffic at these
points and access call-related databases; and
5) The points of access to unbundled network
elements.
d) Interconnection
of microwave technologies. ILECs shall accommodate interconnection of microwave
technology, on the exterior and interior of ILEC premises, used for interconnection
to, or for access to network elements of, the ILEC or a collocated carrier, unless
the ILEC demonstrates to the Commission that it is not practical due to technical
reasons or space limitations.
e)
Locations of interconnection. Technically feasible locations of interconnection
include, at a minimum:
1) Serving wire
centers;
2) Host and remote end
offices;
3) Tandem offices;
4) Controlled environmental vaults (includes
cabinets and buildings); and
5) Any
point within the ILEC loop plant (e.g., distributor-feeder interface, remote
terminal).
f) Rejection of an
interconnection request. An ILEC may not deny a telecommunications carrier's request
to deploy a technology that is presumed acceptable for deployment unless the ILEC
demonstrates to the Commission, through a petition filed on its own accord pursuant
to 83 Ill. Adm. Code 200 or in a complaint proceeding initiated by the
telecommunications carrier, that deployment of the particular technology is
technically infeasible or will significantly degrade the performance of advanced
services or traditional voice band services.
1)
Upon the ILEC's rejection of a request for interconnection at a particular point, a
particular method of interconnection, or particular collocation arrangement
(collectively "interconnection request"), the telecommunications carrier may file a
complaint with the Commission pursuant to 83 Ill. Adm. Code 200 or 83 Ill. Adm. Code
766, whichever is applicable. If the telecommunications carrier claims that such
interconnection request has been previously successful on another ILEC network, the
telecommunications carrier shall include in its complaint the name of the ILEC that
was able to implement the interconnection request and a description of that
interconnection request. An ILEC denying an interconnection request is not relieved
by this Section of its responsibility to notify the Commission of the dispute and
file for a waiver under Section
790.330(h).
2) If such interconnection request is contested,
an ILEC that denies an interconnection request must prove to the Commission that the
interconnection request is not technically feasible and/or will significantly
degrade the performance of advanced services or traditional voice band services.
Within seven business days after the telecommunications carrier's filing of a
complaint, the ILEC shall file documentation fully supporting its contention that
the interconnection request is not technically feasible and/or will significantly
degrade the performance of advanced services or traditional voice band services.
Other interested parties shall be allowed to intervene in the dispute in accordance
with 83 Ill. Adm. Code 200 or 83 Ill. Adm. Code 766, whichever is applicable. For
complaints filed under 83 Ill. Adm. Code 200, the Commission shall take all
necessary actions to resolve any dispute under this subsection (f)(2) within 90 days
after the filing of the complaint, unless such time period is waived by the
telecommunications carrier. The schedule for the resolution of complaints filed
under 83 Ill. Adm. Code 766 shall be as provided for in that Part.
3) In the course of resolving an interconnection
dispute, the ILEC shall not refuse, on the basis of the pending proceeding, to enter
into an interconnection agreement and/or true-up arrangement with the requesting
telecommunications carrier. If requested by the telecommunications carrier, it and
the ILEC shall enter into an interconnection agreement containing mutually agreeable
language to be implemented during the resolution of the dispute. Upon resolution of
the dispute, the interconnection agreement shall be amended, if necessary,
consistent with the outcome of the dispute.
4) A previously successful interconnection request
on any ILEC's network is substantial evidence that such interconnection request is
technically feasible in the case of substantially similar network points or
locations. A requesting telecommunications carrier seeking a particular collocation
arrangement is entitled to a presumption that such arrangement is technically
feasible if any LEC has deployed such collocation arrangement in any ILEC
premises.
g) Methods of
transport and termination. An interconnecting telecommunications carrier may require
the use of one-way trunks to interconnect and transport unidirectional traffic.
Traffic transported in both directions may be transported over one-way trunks or
two-way trunks as agreed to by the interconnecting carriers in their interconnection
agreement.
