F~L~-D IS K-' LANSING. MICHIGAN

Transcription

1 215 S. WASHNGTON SQUARE, SUTE 200 S K-' LANSNG. MCHGAN TELEPHONE: (51 7) FACSMLE: (51 7) http // corn F~L~-D COUNSELLORS AT LAW September 25,2003 Fi\C\!tG?.;.i Pl!O.-C SEr(\d ;CE COMMSSON Via Hand Delivery Ms. Sandra Schultz Mengel Chief Clerk Michigan Court of Appeals 925 W. Ottawa Street 2nd Floor Lansing, Michigan Re: MPSC Case ~ G! n the matter of SBC1s submission on performance measures, reporting and benchmarks, pursuant to the October 2,1998 order in Case No. U-11654" Dear Ms. Mengel: Enclosed for filing with respect to the above-entitled matter please find the following: 1. A Claim of Appeal, to which is attached: 2. Proof of Service; and (a) A copy of the decisions of the Michigan Public Service Commission fiom which the appeal is taken; (b) Attorney's Statement Regarding Transcript; (c) Docket Entries; and (d) Jurisdictional Statement; 3. Our check in the amount of $ to cover the filing fee. Should you have any questions, please contact me. Very truly yours, JVS/scl Enclosures cc: Robert Kehres, Michigan Public Service Commission (wlclaim of Appeal) Parties or counsel as denoted in the Proof of Service (w1encl) LANSNG C o u n s e l l o r s A t L ~ H

2 N THE COURT OF APPEALS ~:p 25 iog1 SBC MCHGAN, Appellant, Court of Appeals Docket No. MCHGAN PUBLC SERVCE MPSC NO. U COMMSSON, Appellee. n the matter of SBC's submission on performance ) measures, reporting, and benchmarks, pursuant to ) the October 2, 1998 order in Case No. U ) CLAM OF APPEAL SBC Michigan, Appellant, claims an appeal from: A) the Opinion and Order entered on March 26, 2003, in the Michigan Public Service Commission by Laura Chappelle, Chairman, and David A. Svanda and Robert B. Nelson, Commissioners; and B) the Order Denying Rehearing entered on August 26, 2003 in the Michigan Public Service Commission by J. Peter Lark, Chairman, and Robert B. Velson and Laura Chappelle, Commissioners. A copy of the Opinion and Order of the Michigan Public Service Commission dated March 26,2003 is attached as Exhibit 1.

3 A copy of the Order De ying Rehearing of the Michigan Public Service 7 Commission is attached at Exhibit 2. 1 A copy of the Attorney statebent Regarding Transcript is attached as Exhibit 3. A copy of the Docket Entrie is attached as Exhibit 4. A copy of the Jurisdictional tatement is attached as Exhibit 5. Respectfully submitted, SBC Michigan Craig A. Anderson 444 Michigan Avenue, Room 1750 Detroit, Michigan (3 13) DCKNSON WRGHT PLLC Dated: September 25,2003 John M. Dernpsey (P30987) Michael A. Holmes (P24071) Jeffery V. Stuckey (P34648) Business Address: 21 5 S. Washington Square Suite 200 Lansing, M Telephone: (517) LANSNG

4 STATE OF MCHGAN BEFORE THE MCHGAN PUBLC SERVCE COMMSSON n the matter of SBC's submission on performance ) measures, reporting, and benchmarks, pursuant to ) Case No. U the October 2, 1998 order in Case No. U At the March 26,2003 meeting of the Michigan Public Service Commission in Lansing, Michigan. PRESENT: Hon. Laura Chappelle, Chairman Hon. David A. Svanda, Commissioner Hon. Robert B. Nelson, Commissioner OPNON AND ORDER On May 27, 1999, the Commission issued an order adopting an initial set of performance measures and benchmarks to be used in reviewing the compliance of Ameritech Michigan, now known as SBC, with its obligation to provide nondiscriminatory access to its facilities and services to competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs). The Commission subsequently modified those measures and benchmarks on a number of occasions. On April 17,2001, the Commission adopted an enforcement mechanism in the form of "a remedy plan that complies with the [Federal Communications Commission's] standards, adequately compensates the CLECs for Ameritech Michigan's failure to meet the approved performance standards, and sufficiently motivates Ameritech Michigan to end any discriminatory conduct that impedes the development of competition in Michigan." April 17,2001 order, Case No. U-11830, p. 5. On July 25,2001, the Commission modified a portion of the remedy plan, the multiplier that the Commission had

5 STATE OF MCHGAN BEFORE THE MCHGAN PUBLC SERVCE COMMSSON ***** n the matter of SBC AMERTECH MCHGAN'S ) submission on performance measures, reporting, and benchmarks, pursuant to the October 2,1998 ) Case No. U order in Case No. U At the August 26,2003 meeting of the Michigan Public Service Commission in Lansing, Michigan. PRESENT: Hon. J. Peter Lark, Chair Hon. Robert B. Nelson, Commissioner Hon. Laura Chappelle, Commissioner ORDER DENYVG REHEARNG > On May 27, 1999, the Commission issued an order adopting performance measures and benchmarks to be used in reviewing the compliance of Arneritech Michigan, now known as SBC Ameritech Michigan (SBC), with its obligations to provide nondiscriminatory access to its facilities and services to competitive local exchange camers (CLECs). The Commission subsequently modified those measures and benchmarks on a number of occasions. n an order dated April 17,2001, the Commission hrther adopted an enforcement mechanism, which took the form of "a remedy plan that complies with the [Federal Communications Commission's] standards, adequately compensates the CLECs for Arneritech Michigan's failure to meet the approved performance standards, and sufficiently motivates Ameritech Michigan to end any discriminatory conduct that impedes the development of competition in Michigan." Order at 5. The basis for the plan was SBCYs proposal, subject to a number of modifications required by the

6 STATE OF MCHGAN N THE COURT OF APPEALS SBC MCHGAN, v Appellant, Court of Appeals Docket No. MCHGAN PUBLC SERVCE COMMSSON, MPSC NO. U Appellee. 1 n the matter of SBCfs submission on performance ) measures, reporting, and benchmarks, pursuant to ) the October 2, 1998 order in Case No. U ) Case No. U ATTORNEY STATEMENT REGARDNG TRANSCRPT Appellant has claimed an appeal from two decisions entered by the Michigan Public Service Commission on March 26,2003 and August 26,2003. There are no administrative hearings to be transcribed in this docket before the Michigan Public Service Commission. SBC MCHGAN By: John M. Dempsey (P30987) Jeffery V. Stuckey (P34648) Dickinson Wright, PLLC 21 5 S. Washington Square, Suite 200 Lansing, M (517) Dated: September 25,2003 Craig A. Anderson (P28968) SBC Michigan 444 Michigan Avenue, Suite 1700 Detroit, M (313) LANSNG

7 DOCKET TABLE OF CONTENTS AND NDEX DOCKET/TRACKNG# u CASE # PRMARY COMPANY: AMERTECH FLED ON DOC# FLED BY ON BEHALF OF CLASSFCATON DESCRPTON DESCRPTON CONTNUED SUBGROUP ACTON 11/02/ VARTANAN AMERTECH APPLCATON DOCUMENT LOCATON REF. # FLED / / WALLET# /02/ VARTANAN AMERTECH AFFDAVT/TESTMONY - PREPARED Levy; West (With West's revised version of 11/3/98) REF. # FLED / / WALLET# /05/ VARTANAN AMERTECH PROOF OF SERVCE ', RE: ~otice/application REF. # FLED / / WALLET# /12/ BLNN STAFF APPEARANCE REF. # FLED / / WALLET# /12/ LUDWCK BULDNG COMMUNCATONS, NC. REF. # FLED / / WALLET# /23/ MARSH AT&T COMMUNCATONS COMMENTS REF. # FLED / / WALLET# /23/ COY SPRNT RESPONSE TO AMERTECH'S PROPOSAL REF. # FLED / / WALLET# 2.00

8 COMPANY CODE:,AMT AMERTECH FLE DATE: 11/02/1;2~~ ELECTRONC FLE: N DESCRPTON: Submission on performance measurements, reporting, and benchmarks in compliance with the October 2, 1998 Order in - MPSC Case No. U CASE TYPE:, 6.00 Compliance Performance measurements, etc.

9 ) Original - Court of Appeals Legal Software, lnc Approved, SCAO (800) lskpy - Trial CouNTribunal STATE OF MCHGAN CASE NO. JUDCAL CRCLT JLlRlSDlCTlONAL CHECKLST Trial Couflribunal: COLNTY FOR COURT OF APPEALS MPSC: U Michigan Public Service Cmn. Court of Appeals: Pla~ntiff name SBC Michigan Appellant v Defendant name Michigan Public Service Commission Appellant NSTRUCTONS: This checklist must be completed and filed with your claim of appeal. Required Documents (All items,. through 6. must be filed. Check each box as you confirm each document and appropriate filing fee(s) are being filed.) 1. The claim of appeal with original signature and correct lower court number. [MCR 7.204(B)()] (X 2. A filing fee of $ [MCR 7.204(B)(2)] (Where multiple lower court or tribunal numbers are involved, Court policy will dictate whether a multiple fee is required. Appellants will be advised of any insufficiency in the filing fee.) (X 3. A copy of the order you are appealing (the order deciding the merits and not an order denying rehearing or reconsideration). [MCR 7.204(C)()] (X 4. Evidence that the necessary transcript has been ordered (check only one box from a. through e. below). [MCR 7.204(C)(2)] a. The complete transcript has been ordered. [MCR 7.210(B)(l)(a)] X &re are no hearings to be transcribed. b. This appeal is from a probate court proceeding which does not require a complete transcript. [MCR 7.210(B)(l)(b)] c. A motion has been filed in the lower court or tribunal for submission of the appeal on less than the complete transcript. [MCR 7.21 O(B)(l )(c)] d. The parties have stipulated to submission of the appeal on less than the complete transcript. [MCR 7.210(B)(l)(d)] e. The parties have stipulated to a statement of fact. [MCR 7.210(B)()(e)] XJ 5. Proof of service demonstrating that all other parties have been served. Even if a party is not an appellee, they must be served. [MCR 7.204(C)(3)] (X 6. Docket or calendar entries from the lower court or tribunal. [MCR 7.204(C)(5)] Finality of Order Being Appealed (Check the box that demonstrates your claim of appeal is by right. f none apply, you do not have an appeal by right.) The claim of appeal is from a final order which, alone or with other orders already entered, disposes of all claims as to all parties. The claim of appeal is from a post-judgment order which by law is designated as a final order. The statute, court rule, or case law establishing appeal by right as to this order is: (citation to MCR alone is insufficient) The claim of appeal is from an order which is designated by statute, court rule or case law as an order appealable by right to the Court of Appeals. The statute, court rule, or case law establishing appeal by right as to this order is: MCL September 25,2003 Date filed Jeffery V. Stuckey Preparer's name (type or print) Telephone no.