1 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF OHIO 2 - - - 3 In the Matter of the : Petition of Intrado : 4 Communications, Inc., for : Arbitration Pursuant to : Case No. 07-1216-TP-ARB 5 Section 252(b) of the : Telecommunications Act of : 6 1996. : - - - 7 PROCEEDINGS 8 9 before an Arbitration Panel, Mr. Jay S. Agranoff and 10 Mr. James M. Lynn, Attorney Examiners; Ms. Lori 11 Sternisha; Mr. Mick Twiss; and Mr. Christopher 12 Kotting, at the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, 13 180 East Broad Street, Room 11C, Columbus, Ohio, 14 called at 1 p.m. on Tuesday, May 27, 2008. 15 - - - 16 VOLUME I 17 - - - 18 19 20 21 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC. 185 South Fifth Street, Suite 101 22 Columbus, Ohio 43215-5201 (614) 224-9481 - (800) 223-9481 23 Fax - (614) 224-5724 24 - - - ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP By Ms. Cherie R. Kiser 3 and Ms. Angela F. Collins 1990 K Street, N.W., Suite 950 4 Washington, D.C. 20006 5 and 6 Intrado Communications, Inc. By Ms. Rebecca Ballesteros 7 1601 Dry Creek Drive Longmont, Colorado 80503 8 On behalf of the Intrado Communications, 9 Inc. 10 Embarq Corporation By Mr. Joseph Stewart 11 50 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43215 12 and 13 By Ms. Susan S. Masterton 14 1313 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 15 On behalf of the Embarq. 16 - - - 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 3 1 INDEX 2 - - - 3 Witness Page 4 John R. Melcher Direct Examination by Ms. Kiser 17 5 Cross-Examination by Mr. Stewart 27 Redirect Examination by Ms. Kiser 71 6 Recross-Examination by Mr. Stewart 84 Examination by Mr. Twiss 100 7 Examination by Ms. Sternisha 108 Examination by Mr. Kotting 112 8 Further Cross-Examination by Mr. Stewart 119 9 Cynthia Clugy Direct Examination by Ms. Kiser 135 10 Cross-Examination by Mr. Stewart 143 Examination by Mr. Kotting 163 11 Examination by Mr. Twiss 165 Examination by Examiner Lynn 169 12 Further Cross-Examination by Mr. Stewart 176 13 - - - 14 Intrado Exhibit Identified Admitted 15 1 Mr. Melcher's prefiled testimony 20 134 16 2 Ms. Clugy's prefiled testimony 137 180 17 3 Definition of End User 137 -- 18 - - - 19 Embarq Exhibit Identified Admitted 20 1 NENA Standard for Enhanced 9-1-1 (E9-1-1) Default Routing 21 Assignments and Functions 69 134 22 - - - 23 24 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 4 1 Tuesday Afternoon Session, 2 May 27, 2008. 3 - - - 4 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: The Public Utilities 5 Commission of Ohio has assigned for hearing at this 6 time and place Case No. 07-1216-TP-ARB being in the 7 Matter of the Petition of Intrado Communications, 8 Incorporated, for Arbitration Pursuant to Section 9 252(b) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. 10 My name is Jay Agranoff. Seated next to 11 me is Jim Lynn. And we are Attorney Examiners 12 assigned to hear this particular case. Along with us 13 are the Commission Staff Chris Kotting, Lori 14 Sternisha, and Mick Twiss. They will be assisting 15 Mr. Lynn and I for the purpose of asking questions to 16 clarify the record in this matter. 17 At this point in time we will take the 18 appearances in this proceeding. If I can please have 19 the appearances on Intrado. 20 MS. KISER: Cherie Kiser and Angela 21 Collins, Cahill Gordon & Reindel, on behalf of 22 Intrado and Ms. Rebecca Ballesteros, in-house counsel 23 for Intrado. 24 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. On behalf of ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 5 1 Emparq. 2 MR. STEWART: Joseph Stewart, 50 West 3 Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio, on behalf of Emparq. 4 MS. MASTERTON: Susan Masterton, 1313 5 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, Florida, also on 6 behalf of Emparq. 7 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Thank you. 8 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, I should have 9 mentioned this earlier, but I believe the motion for 10 Ms. Masterton's admission pro hac vice is pending but 11 not ruled on. 12 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: That's correct. 13 MR. STEWART: Okay. 14 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: This hearing is 15 scheduled for currently three days, two and a half 16 days. It is our expectation that we would be able to 17 complete this by the end of Thursday, and we would 18 also request that the parties try to ask their 19 questions in such a manner so we can finish each day 20 at approximately 5 o'clock. 21 The schedule that I have received with 22 respect to the order of witnesses, and please correct 23 me if I am wrong and also please correct me if I 24 mispronounce somebody's last name, Intrado we are ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 6 1 going to have Mr. Melcher, then Ms. Clugy, then 2 Mr. Hicks, and finally Ms. Spence-Lenss, and when we 3 are done with Intrado's witnesses, we would have 4 Emparq, Mr. Maples and Mr. Hart. 5 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, we switched 6 Mr. Hart and Mr. Maples because Mr. Hart handles many 7 fewer issues in the hope we might be able to send him 8 home sooner. There was an e-mail to that effect last 9 week sometime. 10 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. Not a problem. 11 Just so everybody is aware as to how we are going to 12 be proceeding, we'll have first the prefiled direct 13 testimony that will be moved into admission, then we 14 will have cross-examination, then redirect, then 15 recross, and at that point in time then the panel 16 will have the opportunity to ask any additional 17 questions they believe are necessary for purposes of 18 clarifying the record. 19 Subsequent to the panel asking their 20 questions if counsel for either of the parties feel 21 the need to ask any further questions limited in 22 scope to the questions that were asked by the panel, 23 we would certainly entertain that at that time. I 24 would also ask that the parties make sure that they ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 7 1 limit their cross-examination of witnesses to one 2 counsel per witness so we don't end up tag teaming 3 with respect to cross-examination. 4 I'm not sure whether or not there is any 5 confidential information that is contained within the 6 testimonies. I did not see any from my review. To 7 the extent there is, then certainly we would have to 8 go redacted and unredacted versions and somehow be 9 creative in terms of our questioning of the witnesses 10 to not reveal such information but if that's not an 11 issue, then we won't need to worry about that. 12 To the extent there are motions to strike 13 relative to any of the testimonies that have been 14 prefiled, I would ask that you wait until such time 15 that the witness is tendered for cross-examination, 16 and we can deal with those motions at that time. 17 Just so that we are on the same page the 18 briefing schedule with respect to this matter initial 19 briefs are due on June 11, reply briefs would be due 20 on June 20, and the tentative scheduled award date 21 from the Commission would be August 7. 22 Now, I do know that, as Mr. Stewart 23 mentioned, there is at least one outstanding motion 24 that has not been ruled upon yet, the motion for pro ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 8 1 hoc vice with respect to co-counsel for Emparq. Are 2 there any objections to the granting of that motion? 3 MS. KISER: There are none. 4 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: There being none the 5 motion shall be granted. Now, I do know that we 6 still had one lingering discovery issue that had not 7 been rectified as of last Friday. Just so that I can 8 get caught up to speed it was my understanding based 9 on a prehearing conference that we had last week that 10 the parties were going to endeavor to prioritize 11 those discovery requests which they felt were higher 12 importance and that Emparq would attempt to respond 13 to those particular requests. From something I saw 14 on Friday I started to get the impression we may not 15 be heading in that direction. 16 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, we served 17 responses to a number of Intrado's first set of 18 interrogatories electronically this morning. If you 19 would like, I can tell you which numbers they are, 20 but I don't think that's necessary. 21 MS. KISER: And based upon what the 22 parties resolved between themselves in preparation of 23 those responses we withdraw our motion with Intrado's 24 withdrawing its motion. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 9 1 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I appreciate that. 2 Okay. The next issue that I have deals 3 with the matrixes that were submitted identifying the 4 issues that are in need of resolution in this 5 proceeding. Both parties submitted versions of those 6 issues and the first question that I have is more of 7 a generic one and that is it appears as though some 8 of the issues there's two different interpretations 9 as to what the issue is. And I am not exactly sure 10 why we don't have agreement as to what it is that the 11 Commission is being asked to resolve for each of the 12 issues. And whoever wants to go first, feel free. 13 MR. STEWART: Well, your Honor, I am not 14 sure I have an all encompassing explanation, but I 15 think from the inception of the case and once there 16 was an additional matrix filed that was agreed upon, 17 there have been a lot more negotiations, a lot of 18 issues have been resolved. And I think some -- on 19 some of the issues the language proposed to resolve 20 the issue has -- has changed within the last week to 21 10 days, I think some of Intrado's proposed language 22 has changed, so as a consequence, our proposed 23 language -- the Intrado proposed language showed on 24 the Embarq matrix does not always match up with ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 10 1 Intrado's proposed language because of that recent 2 change. There were a number of issues that were 3 resolved and it might be worthwhile to mention which 4 ones those are so -- and to find out whether everyone 5 has the same issues currently resolved. 6 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Right. 7 MR. STEWART: Believes they are resolved. 8 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I agree that would be 9 a worthwhile endeavoring. First, I am just trying to 10 find out why -- let's take issue 1, for example. 11 There are two different questions that appear under 12 that issue. One is the issue as framed by Intrado, 13 one as framed by Emparq, and I am not sure why it is 14 we are not in agreement as to what it is that's in 15 dispute that needs to be resolved. 16 MS. KISER: As you know, Intrado 17 Communications filed a petition for arbitration 18 pursuant to 252 and pursuant to the rules -- or to 19 the statute the petitioner identifies the issues to 20 be arbitrated and Intrado identified those issues. 21 Some of those issues have come off the table. In an 22 effort to accommodate the Commission and its 23 requirement for matrix, Intrado maintained its -- the 24 list of issues that it presented in its initial ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 11 1 petition, Emparq did not necessarily agree with the 2 characterization of the issues, and so we ended up 3 putting the issues on the matrix as defined by 4 Intrado pursuant to its petition and then stated as 5 Emparq appeared to state them as in the same column. 6 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: You said you believe 7 the parties of this agree the essence of those issues 8 are the same? 9 MS. KISER: I would -- I would believe 10 that we agree on that. 11 MR. STEWART: I think so. I think the 12 underlying issues -- the parties agree the essence of 13 the underlying issues are the same. Well, as you 14 have noted, the language that describes -- describes 15 them is slightly different. 16 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: The next question 17 that I would have pertains to some e-mails that were 18 sent on Friday attempting to compare and contrast the 19 matrixes between the parties, and I'm unclear as to 20 whether or not the differences that were identified 21 now result in additional disputes that were not 22 previously framed for the Commission's resolution. 23 MR. STEWART: I don't think any new 24 issues were raised. I think it is just an attempt to ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 12 1 point out the differences between the two matrixes. 2 MS. KISER: I would characterize it 3 slightly different. During the negotiations and as 4 part of the arbitration, issues are on the list of 5 issues identified by the Petitioner Intrado. As we 6 moved towards trying to negotiate the contract which 7 this proceeding is all about is hopefully ending up 8 with a contract between Emparq and Intrado, proposals 9 were made to resolve issues. 10 As part of the testimony submitted in 11 this proceeding, Mr. Maples, I believe, proposed 12 Section 2.2 as a way of resolving an issue in this 13 proceeding involving whether the extent of Intrado's 14 rights under the contract based upon the entry 15 regarding its certification. So this was an exchange 16 regarding that proposed language. I think it's 17 probably at this point -- it's related to the 18 proceeding. It wasn't something that was necessarily 19 identified per se as an issue by the Petitioner 20 Intrado in the arbitration, but it is a natural 21 result of the parties trying to reach resolution and 22 an agreement. I don't think that at this point it's 23 our position we are moving to strike the language. 24 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Let's take, for ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 13 1 example, Issue 13.2 or 13-2. There was reference to 2 the fact that Emparq's matrix had outdated language 3 and Intrado was now replacing the language with new 4 language. As a result of that change, are we 5 establishing new issues in dispute that were not 6 previously identified? 7 MS. KISER: No. It would be Intrado's 8 position that language that was originally proposed 9 as part of the contract is as rejected by Emparq and 10 Intrado has proposed other language to replace the 11 original language proposed and rejected by Emparq. 12 It's the natural flow of any negotiations under a 13 contract and this is a result of that. 14 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, the reason we 15 raised an issue with respect to new language that was 16 only proposed recently is that in preparing the 17 testimony for the hearing the Emparq witnesses were 18 focused on the language that was originally proposed, 19 so it creates a potential problem if Intrado proposes 20 new language very close to the hearing if the 21 witnesses aren't analyzed and incorporated into their 22 testimony. 23 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: To the extent that 24 there is such scenarios has the Emparq witnesses been ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 14 1 able to now incorporate within their testimony the 2 new language, or was their testimony premised on the 3 old language? 4 MR. STEWART: I think it's true all 5 testimony was premised on the original language, but 6 I would have to ask the witnesses if that's correct. 7 The issues remain the same, I believe. 8 MS. KISER: Your Honor, I would -- 9 subject to check the witness has specifically 10 addressed the language -- Mr. Maples has specifically 11 addressed the language that Intrado has proposed at 12 55.4.2. I do not believe -- I mean, Emparq has 13 specifically addressed it. I do not believe that 14 Emparq is prejudiced by the proposed language that's 15 been part of the back and forth of negotiations which 16 is in the ordinary course of trying to negotiate any 17 contract, even in a regular commercial arrangement 18 without the assistance of statutory provisions. 19 MR. STEWART: To the extent a witness of 20 ours addressed the new language we have no objection. 21 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: To the extent there 22 is an issue with a witness would like to supplement 23 or amend their testimony based on new language, we 24 would deal with it at that point in time to the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 15 1 extent they feel the need to bring that up. 2 MR. STEWART: Fair enough. 3 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. Now, why don't 4 we get to what, Mr. Stewart, I believe you were 5 hoping we would do which is go back to the scorecard 6 and find out what's still out there and what may have 7 come off the table. 8 MR. STEWART: I think based on all the 9 e-mails I've seen the parties have resolved the 10 following issues -- and I won't address when they 11 were resolved. Some of them were resolved 12 considerably earlier than others, I believe. But the 13 ones I think are resolved are the following: Nos. 5, 14 7, 10-2, 11, 12, 16, 18-1, 18-2, 18-11, and 20. Is 15 that consistent? 16 MS. KISER: No. The only discrepancy 17 Intrado has is 8, Issue No. 8. 18 MR. STEWART: Let me see where -- 19 MS. KISER: I believe Mr. Maples is 20 agreeing that is resolved? 21 MR. STEWART: Oh, I didn't mention 8. 22 I'm sorry. Okay. 23 MS. KISER: Thank you. 24 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Just so that I am ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 16 1 clear is this the list of resolved issues in its 2 entirety or is this just an update from that which 3 was previously filed with the Commission? 4 MS. KISER: It's an update. 5 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. 6 MS. KISER: Could I also supplement all 7 of these issues on the matrix are represented as 8 resolved except for No. 11? 9 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: And with respect to 10 11? 11 MS. KISER: It is resolved. You are 12 looking at a matrix it may not say 11 resolved. You 13 can just write that in now just to make it easier. 14 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Thank you. Okay. Is 15 there anything else that needs to be dealt with 16 before we call the first witness? 17 If not, Ms. Kiser, please call your first 18 witness. 19 MS. KISER: Mr. Melcher. 20 - - - 21 22 23 24 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 17 1 JOHN R. MELCHER 2 being first duly sworn, as prescribed by law, was 3 examined and testified as follows: 4 DIRECT EXAMINATION 5 By Ms. Kiser: 6 Q. Mr. Melcher, did you -- please state your 7 name and position for the record. 8 A. I am John Melcher. I am the president of 9 the Melcher Group, a consulting firm based out of the 10 Houston area. 11 Q. And did you cause to have prepared or 12 prepared on your own behalf testimony in connection 13 with this proceeding today? 14 A. I did. 15 Q. And do you have any corrections to that 16 testimony? 17 A. I have one. 18 Q. Would you, please. 19 A. Testimony on page 9, the question "Do 911 20 providers use line attribute routing in the industry 21 today" and the following question on page 10, line 22 19, "Why should incumbent 911 providers be required 23 to utilize line attribute routing," I need to draw 24 the distinction between 911 service providers and ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 18 1 local exchange carriers. It is a carry-over from the 2 Bell operating company days that the local exchange 3 carrier was also the 911 service provider. That is 4 no longer true in a competitive environment so I just 5 want to clarify that's in the 911 service provision 6 role, not necessarily in the local exchange service 7 provider role. 8 Q. And do you have any other corrections to 9 your testimony at this time? 10 A. No, ma'am. 11 Q. Do you have any additions or supplements 12 to your testimony? 13 A. No, ma'am. 14 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, if I might, my 15 belief is customarily if a witness wants to correct 16 or change their testimony, they provide some specific 17 language which would be inserted on a particular page 18 and line, and I think it would be appropriate in this 19 instance for Mr. Melcher to do that. 20 Q. Do you have your testimony in front of 21 you, Mr. Melcher? 22 A. I do. 23 Q. Could you please go to where you want the 24 correction. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 19 1 A. The first correction, I suppose, would be 2 in the line 15, the answer. 3 Q. Page 10? 4 A. Page 9, line 15, the question is line 13, 5 the question is "Do 911 providers use line attribute 6 routing in the industry today." The correction would 7 be my answer on line 15 from "Yes," if the 911 8 service provider is also the local exchange carrier. 9 Additionally on page 10, I would make the same 10 distinction between the 911 service provider. 11 Q. Which line, please? 12 A. It would have to be page 10, the language 13 starts at line 21. You want me to specifically read 14 through this and insert -- 15 Q. Yes, please. 16 A. Okay. After the first sentence, "It is 17 my understanding that there is an obligation on all 18 telecommunications providers in Ohio to deliver 911 19 calls to the appropriate PSAP," I would insert the 20 911 service provider acting as the local exchange 21 carrier in this instance would also qualify. 22 MS. KISER: Thank you. 23 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Ms. Kiser, anything 24 further? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 20 1 Q. (By Ms. Kiser) Mr. Melcher, any other 2 corrections, additions, or supplements to your 3 testimony? 4 A. Specifically to the testimony, no. 5 MS. KISER: Mr. Melcher is available for 6 cross. 7 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Before we proceed 8 with cross-examination just so the record is clear we 9 will have Mr. Melcher's testimony identified as 10 Intrado Exhibit 1. 11 MS. KISER: Intrado Exhibit 1. I didn't 12 know if you wanted me to move it now or move it at 13 the end. 14 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: So we have it 15 identified. 16 (EXHIBIT MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.) 17 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Stewart. 18 MR. STEWART: Thank you, your Honor. 19 Before I start with questions I have several motions 20 to strike and to expedite matters I'll say that I 21 believe each of the motions is based on my view that 22 the testimony is addressing matters that are not at 23 issue in this proceeding, for example, whether there 24 should be competition in the provision of 911 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 21 1 emergency services. That's simply not at issue. 2 Another area that the testimony addresses where there 3 is no issue related to this proceeding is general 4 statements about the importance of next generation 5 911 services. The quality or whether we ought to 6 proceed to next generation and, if so, what the 7 advantages might be, those aren't issues in this 8 proceeding, so the testimony is irrelevant. 9 To be more specific starting on page 3 10 the sentence that begins on line 9 with the words 11 "Among the ILECs' portfolio of services" and then 12 through the middle of line 15 where the sentence ends 13 with the words "current technologies," those -- that 14 testimony addresses matters that aren't at issue. 15 In addition the reference to "The 911 16 Industry Alliance's recent affirmation in Exhibit 2" 17 are rank hearsay which should not be -- should not be 18 admitted. 19 Do you want me to go through them all or 20 wait on each one for a response and your ruling? 21 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Could you just 22 delineate again for me which lines you are -- pages? 23 MR. STEWART: Sure. Page 3, sentence 24 begins on line 9 through the middle of line 15 on ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 22 1 page 3 at the end of the sentence there with the word 2 "technologies." 3 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Would you care to 4 respond to Mr. Stewart? 5 MS. KISER: Yes, I would. Taking them 6 from the general objection of whether there should be 7 competition and whether next generation, the 8 submission that those are not issues in this 9 proceeding we strenuously object. Mr. Maples has 10 numerous pages in his testimony that address next 11 generation and that it's not here and that it's a 12 long way off. 13 He also addresses whether there are 14 standards established for next generation and there 15 are numerous pages on whether Intrado should be 16 allowed to provide a competitive 911 service in this 17 state pursuant to 251. Mr. Melcher has been -- is an 18 experienced expert in the area of 911 services. He 19 has been in this business for 29 years. He's served 20 on many standard bodies. He is an expert that's been 21 tendered to speak directly on these issues of 22 competition and what the state of next generation is, 23 and I think that his testimony is valuable to the 24 Commission and the Staff in rendering a decision in ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 23 1 this arbitration. 2 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. With respect 3 to Mr. Stewart your objections on page 3, line 9 4 through the middle of 15, I am going to deny that 5 objection, and the Commission will afford the 6 appropriate weight to those statements. 7 MR. STEWART: The next area commences on 8 page 4, line 1, where the sentence starts with "There 9 are" through the conclusion of that answer on page 4, 10 line 13. Again, these are general comments unrelated 11 to issues here. The testimony refers to what 12 consumers assume, what consumers' rights are. These 13 are simply not issues here. 14 MS. KISER: Intrado would renew its 15 objection with respect to Mr. Melcher's 29 years of 16 experience in helping to set the stage and the 17 context for this proceeding and what consumers are 18 looking for and need as callers as well as providers 19 of first response in emergency situations. 20 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, I would point 21 out we are not questioning Mr. Melcher's credentials 22 at all. 23 MS. KISER: Intrado would restate that 24 Emparq's witnesses, however, are questioning whether ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 24 1 Intrado is entitled to be a competitor in this state 2 pursuant to 251 and what is the state of provision of 3 911 throughout the country in challenging next 4 generation. Mr. Melcher's testimony goes directly to 5 both those points. Emparq is not prejudiced by 6 Mr. Melcher's testimony, and I think that the 7 Commission Staff and the Hearing Examiners benefit 8 from more information, especially from experts like 9 Mr. Melcher in the field. 10 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Can Intrado 11 specifically tie these sections of Mr. Melcher's 12 testimony back to particular provisions in the 13 proposed interconnection agreements? 14 MS. KISER: I'm sure we could. 15 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: And to the extent 16 that is what we are ultimately attempting to 17 accomplish in this proceeding, I would just like to 18 know how this ties back to those particular sections 19 in the proposed language. 20 MS. KISER: And I guess I would say it 21 ties back to the physical interconnection and what's 22 the point of interconnection, physical 23 interconnection, of the agreement. One of the core 24 threshold issues in this proceeding that Emparq has ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 25 1 presented is whether Intrado is entitled to 2 251(c)(2), physical interconnection, physical 3 interconnection between two networks so that there's 4 mutually beneficial and exchanging traffic is 5 necessary so that all callers that are trying to 6 reach a PSAP can reach the appropriate PSAP if it's a 7 competitive interconnection. If Intrado weren't 8 interconnected with Emparq and Emparq callers were in 9 an area that Intrado serves the PSAP, they would not 10 be able to reach that PSAP. I think his testimony is 11 directly on point. 12 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I'm sorry? 13 MS. KISER: I was talking to my witness. 14 I thought he was going to interject. 15 MR. STEWART: If you look at the language 16 in the section that I just moved to strike, it simply 17 doesn't address the issues that counsel just 18 articulated. And there's no discussion of why 251 19 (c)(2) is appropriate. Emparq is not refusing to 20 interconnect generally with Intrado and, furthermore, 21 this testimony that is the subject of the current 22 motion isn't even talking about interconnection. 23 It's talking about generalities and what customers 24 might expect, what the type of 911 service they ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 26 1 expect, those aren't germane to what we are arguing 2 about here. 3 MS. KISER: I guess Intrado would respond 4 that the type of interconnection is germane to what 5 we are talking about here because competition and 6 interconnection are critical to insure all the 7 technologies being used by consumers today and 8 Mr. Melcher is talking about the technologies in this 9 section that are being used by consumers today and 10 the need for those technologies to be able to be used 11 to reach public service answering points. It goes 12 directly to this case. Everything that is in the 13 testimony, some general, some specific, is directly 14 related to the issues that are at arbitration in this 15 proceeding. 16 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: At this point in time 17 I am going to deny your motion again, Mr. Stewart. 18 The Commission is certainly capable of ascertaining 19 the extent to which the representations will have 20 assistance in resolving the issues that are in 21 dispute before the Commission. 22 MR. STEWART: If you will give me a 23 minute, I may forego some of my other motions. 24 No more motions to strike, your Honor. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 27 1 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Thank you. If you 2 could please proceed with your cross. 3 MR. STEWART: Thank you. 4 - - - 5 CROSS-EXAMINATION 6 By Mr. Stewart: 7 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Melcher. My name is 8 Joe Stewart. I am a lawyer for Embarq. If I ask you 9 a question that's unclear, please let me know and I 10 will try to make it clearer. 11 A. Certainly. 12 Q. If you would, turn to page 4 of your 13 testimony. Looking at the sentence that begins on 14 line 4 starting with the words "As a result," do you 15 see that? 16 A. Yes, sir. 17 Q. You claim that "Consumers dangerously 18 assume" certain things in that answer. On what do 19 you base your claim that consumers in Ohio make these 20 dangerous assumptions? 21 A. I can give you specific examples. Most 22 of the new telecommunications services that consumers 23 just see as a new offering, they don't really know 24 the differences between the type of company or the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 28 1 technology behind the service. They just see it as 2 the equivalent to telecommunications or, if you will, 3 dial tone service. The most common example of recent 4 is voice over internet protocol and when voice over 5 internet protocol was first introduced, which was 6 getting to the other part of that testimony, the 7 voice over internet service providers, the ISPs, 911 8 was an after thought. They didn't think to include 9 911, especially enhanced 911. They were giving 10 access to 7 digit or 11 digit phone numbers which 11 would come in on an administrative line. Consumers 12 did not know that. They had no idea that the new 13 quote-unquote phone company they were using were 14 actually using a different technology that restricted 15 them from access to the enhanced 911 system so that's 16 a direct response to consumer expectation. 17 Q. You have not talked to or surveyed any 18 Ohio consumers with respect to this point, have you? 19 A. Actually I have talked to many Ohio 20 consumers. 21 Q. Where did you do that? 22 A. The Ohio NENA and APSCO conventions, the 23 National Emergency Number Association and Associated 24 Public Safety Communications Officials, those ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 29 1 meetings and other meetings that have been held here 2 in Ohio. 3 Q. Were you talking to Ohio consumers or 4 NENA members who were attending those meetings? 5 A. Both. I have had dinner in the homes of 6 consumers that were not affiliated with the public 7 safety industry at all and have discussed these 8 issues at length. 9 Q. And you are saying they made the 10 assumption that if they signed up for voice over 11 internet protocol phone service, that they did have 12 access to 911? 13 A. Every -- everyone that I have spoken to, 14 not just in Ohio but especially in Ohio as far as 15 today is concerned, automatically assumed their 16 service was the exact same service they had when they 17 were with one of the regular, you know, incumbent 18 exchange carriers and they were shocked to learn that 19 access to 911 was either limited or restricted. 20 Q. Are you aware of whether there are any 21 requirements on VoIP providers to inform their 22 customers with respect to any 911 restrictions or 23 limitations? 24 A. Intimately aware of those requirements. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 30 1 Q. What are they? 2 A. At first there was no requirement until 3 issues came before the Federal Communications 4 Commission a couple of years ago where consumers had 5 very bad experiences because they were unable to 6 access 911. Then the Commission passed a series of 7 rules over the course of, I believe, two specific 8 proceedings where customer notification was part of 9 those rulings but not the total part -- not the total 10 ruling. 11 Q. And when did those rulings first come 12 out? 13 A. Giving you dates specific it would have 14 been early in 2005, I believe, when the docket was 15 ongoing. I can't remember when the docket was filed, 16 and I do recall the first meeting of the new -- the 17 new chairman of the Commission, Kevin Martin, his 18 first meeting as chairman, the first part of those 19 rules were adopted in that meeting and that was, I 20 believe, in May of -- May of '05, I believe. 21 MS. KISER: Your Honor, subject to check 22 that's a matter of public record and we can provide 23 that cite if you would like. 24 Q. Are you aware -- I'm sorry. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 31 1 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Permitted. 2 Q. What did the FCC require the VoIP 3 providers tell their customers with respect to 911 in 4 the order you just referred to? 5 A. Well, paraphrasing initially they said 6 that the ISPs that were provided voice communication 7 services had to notify their customers of the 8 restrictions, inabilities, or lack of ability to 9 connect to traditional 911 services, especially 10 enhanced 911 services, but then further orders stated 11 they had to comply at some point and there were some 12 issues around jurisdictions and where internet 13 service providers were only affecting a very low 14 percentage of the population and what penetration 15 rates were and those kinds of things, but initially 16 the consumer information issues that were first 17 addressed were to let your consumers know they have 18 limited or no access to enhanced 911. 19 Q. So then since 2005 or whenever the VoIP 20 providers started complying with this order, it would 21 not be reasonable for consumers to make these 22 assumptions that you referred to on page 4? 23 A. I am not sure I understand the question. 24 Q. What don't you understand? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 32 1 A. You said prior to the ruling it would not 2 be reasonable for them to assume that they had 3 access? 4 Q. Well, I intended to say subsequent to the 5 ruling and after the VoIP providers complied with the 6 order that you described and made the consumers aware 7 of limitations, at that point it would no longer be 8 reasonable for these consumers to make these 9 dangerous assumptions that you refer to on page 4? 10 A. I would not agree with that statement. I 11 can explain. 12 Q. That's okay. Are you aware of the 13 procedure in Ohio for the adoption of 911 plans? 14 A. I am familiar with several of the 15 individual plans in different counties as well as 16 some of the efforts that are going on with the PUC. 17 Q. So I take it you are aware that counties 18 propose and create 911 plans, right? 19 A. In Ohio it is at the county level is my 20 understanding. 21 Q. Are you aware of whether this Commission 22 has determined that, whether VoIP -- voice over 23 internet protocol is a telecommunications service? 24 A. Whether the Ohio Public Utilities ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 33 1 Commission has determined that, I am not aware of 2 that. I know that that's still an issue at the FCC. 3 Q. Please turn to page 7. In your answer 4 that's on line 3 there you make a reference to two 5 Ohio counties that you say don't have 911 service. 6 Now, I take it you are not blaming the ILECs for that 7 in general or Emparq specifically? 8 A. No. It's my understanding that in Ohio 9 just like most every other state in the union the 10 election to provide either basic or enhanced 911 11 service is at the local government jurisdictional 12 level. 13 Q. Please turn to page 9. On lines 1 and 2 14 you refer to some -- some mandates. What 15 specifically are you referring to? 16 A. Most states in the union, if not all, the 17 U.S. Congress and FCC have passed various rulings 18 that mandate access to 911 service where the local 19 government or the governmental entity of authority 20 has requested it and is able to in most states pay 21 for it. There is -- there are various pieces of 22 legislation we have assisted with over the last 15 23 years, probably almost 20 years, at the state and 24 federal level that address things like policy and ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 34 1 funding. Specifically the Federal Communications 2 Commission has mandated access. As a matter of fact, 3 I think it's at the FCC and at state utility 4 commission levels that define the expectation for 5 public access which gets back to my previous 6 testimony about the VoIP service providers being an 7 example of that type of new access. It's not next 8 generation. As a matter of fact, I would take great 9 exception to that. It's current state-of-the-art. 10 Anyone can get on the web today and sign up for an 11 ISP and get voice service from a VSP/ISP provider. 12 Anyone can walk into any store or get on the web and 13 order any kind of wireless device they use. 14 Certainly they can sign up for traditional dial tone 15 in the same manner. And it's about access to 16 enhanced 911 services if they are from within a 17 jurisdiction that offers those services. 18 So the mandates that I am referring to 19 here are all about access, nothing to do with next 20 gen or whether we can send a photo of a fleeing 21 suspect or anything like that. It's current 22 telecommunications services. 23 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Just so the record 24 was clear I know it's hard to not use the acronyms ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 35 1 because it's part of the vernacular. If you would 2 define VSP. 3 THE WITNESS: Voice service provider, VSP 4 would be a voice service provider providing voice 5 services through an ISP, internet service provider, 6 IPN, internet protocol network. Almost 30 years in 7 the industry it's hard. 8 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I understand. 9 Q. So are you referring to the mandates by 10 the FCC that callers using, for example, a wireless 11 phone be provided with location identification? 12 A. That would be one example. 13 Q. Okay. What other specific mandates do 14 you have in mind? 15 A. Well, as you may know, the FCC has 16 mandated 911 -- enhanced 911 in two phases, Phase 1 17 and Phase 2. Phase 1 was cell and sector 18 information. Phase 2 was some better local 19 granularity of latitude, longitude to provide to the 20 public safety answering point. Depending on the type 21 of technology the wireless carrier was using, there 22 were different requirements how granular those lat, 23 long fixes had to be. There were various time 24 elements that were involved in the rollout of that ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 36 1 technology. There was questions surrounding funding 2 at some point which were resolved. Then you had the 3 internet service provider issues that came up as VoIP 4 or voice over internet protocol began. Those are two 5 of the most recent primary examples that I have the 6 most intimacy with as being deeply involved in the 7 FCC docket that was opened 94-102 which addressed 8 wireless and subsequent rulings and then, of course, 9 the ISP and the VoIP-type rules came subsequent to 10 that. 11 Q. I take it you don't contend that Emparq 12 is doing anything to deny wireless callers the level 13 of 911 service that you've just described the FCC 14 mandated? 15 A. That would not be my contention, no. 16 Q. And if I ask you the same question with 17 respect to VoIP callers, would your answer be the 18 same? 19 A. Certainly not to my knowledge that you 20 have any issues with that. 21 Q. Please turn to page 9 of your testimony. 22 In the questions that start on line 6 you talk about 23 class marking. How do you define a split wire 24 center? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 37 1 A. In -- a split wire center in what 2 context, Mr. Stewart? 3 Q. Well, you use the term on line 8 of your 4 testimony so in that context. 5 A. Okay. Class marking is a term that I 6 personally abhor because it is used in too many 7 different instances to make sense to the average 8 person on the street. Split wire centers are wire 9 centers that feed traffic to more than one 10 destination, if you will. That can be a destination 11 for long distance or interexchange carrier traffic. 12 It can be a destination for 911 or emergency services 13 traffic. It can be a destination for other types of 14 traffic that would be in other N11 types of services 15 even with vanity dialing systems, especially in a 16 default route where we have trunk failure or end 17 office failure or selective router failure or other 18 network-type failures depending on whether they are 19 CAMA trunked or SS7. 20 So the term class marking is not one of 21 my favorites. I came up with line attribute routing 22 because using pieces of data from the subscriber 23 record is a fundamental practice when it comes to 24 what you are referring to as class marking, but it ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 38 1 depends on the context in which it's used. If it's 2 for tax code like a municipal franchise fee or a 3 county tax, then it's one meaning. If it's for 4 default routing or trunking to a 911 selected router, 5 it has another meaning -- meaning. Those are two 6 examples. 7 Q. I take it what you are saying is 8 different people use class marking in different ways, 9 but one of the ways in which people use it is to 10 refer to information that's used to route a call in a 11 particular way. 12 A. I would agree with that, yes. 13 Q. But you prefer the phrase line attribute 14 routing which as I read your testimony is also a 15 mechanism that's used to route a call in a particular 16 fashion. 17 A. It's -- routing is a term that you are 18 using if that simple office is routing based on that 19 line attribute, and I use it in the context 20 especially in like long distance or in 911 where the 21 call is leaving that wire center on a particular 22 trunk group based on the line attribute. The example 23 I like to use in public forums where we don't have a 24 lot of Telco-type people is that when you sign up for ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 39 1 service from the local exchange carrier, you are 2 asked to choose your long distance service provider. 3 And so in your subscriber record the telephone 4 company dial tone provider knows your long distance 5 carrier of choice, so when you dial 1 plus, your call 6 is placed on either the AT&T interchange carrier or 7 MCI or whoever the long distance provider is of your 8 choice. From that wire center it goes out on a 9 particular trunk route that is fed to that 10 interchange carrier or tandem or switch, if you will. 11 Same with 911 in a split wire center where you have 12 multiple PSAP, public safety answering point, 13 jurisdictions, then the term class marking or line 14 attribute routing certainly would qualify not only 15 for placing the 911 caller in a particular trunk 16 route group in normal operations but especially in 17 default operations where you have some type of 18 network trunk failure where that call would have to 19 end up without any other type of automation. 20 Q. Are you -- excuse me. Are you familiar 21 with the term CIC code, C-I-C, and how that's used? 22 A. CIC is not a term that I'm familiar with 23 in Texas unless it's used in what we call the TAR 24 code or tax area -- tax area or region and they go by ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 40 1 several different names, but they are used for 2 identifying municipality or political -- geopolitical 3 jurisdiction. 4 Q. So you are not familiar with the acronym 5 CIC that refers to carrier identification code that's 6 used for routing toll calls? 7 A. I know the term. I am not sure how you 8 are applying it though. Carrier identification -- 9 carrier identification code is a common term. 10 Q. Okay. Aren't 1 plus calls routed using 11 the C-I-C or CIC code? 12 A. In most cases, yes, that I am familiar 13 with. 14 Q. And is it also true that the CIC is not 15 part of the line attributes but instead is a feature 16 assigned to that line? 17 A. I would challenge the definition of that. 18 By the way we -- the phrase we used in Texas was CIC 19 code, different pronunciation. And I am not a 20 telephone engineer and do not represent myself as 21 one, but I can tell you that line attributes the way 22 I use the term is it is a data element that describes 23 how that line is supposed to act based on the 24 consumer's information that is gathered at the time ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 41 1 they order service and subsequent processing of that 2 order. It's -- a lot of people refer to it as SOI 3 records, service order information. There's all 4 kinds of different acronyms that are used. But in 5 the process, and this is different from a carrier 6 that uses, say, a regular Lucent or Nortel dial tone 7 switch, it changes to wireless carriers when they use 8 mobile switches, it changes to the ISPs when they use 9 softswitches, but there are elements that attribute 10 the characteristics of that subscriber line that are 11 based on the customer subscriber record so their tax 12 code would be used from that customer subscriber 13 record. You would have to go to a map and find that 14 this subscriber line is terminated in this taxable 15 jurisdiction. 16 The same with 911, you would go to the 17 master street address guide and say this subscriber 18 is getting service in this particular emergency 19 service zone, therefore, it needs to go to this 20 public safety agency the same as you would attribute 21 how to route a 1 plus long distance call. 22 Q. On your next question and answer on 23 line -- I'm sorry, page 9, line 13, you made a 24 modification to your answer earlier, and I believe ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 42 1 you said after "Yes," your answer should say if the 2 911 service provider is also the local exchange 3 carrier. Did I get that right? 4 A. I believe so. I did it off the top of my 5 head. I didn't write it down. 6 MS. KISER: Excuse me. Could we have the 7 court reporter read that back if that's not too much 8 trouble? 9 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Read back what was 10 the originally clarified? 11 MS. KISER: Read back his clarification, 12 yes, please. 13 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: If you can please do 14 that. 15 (Answer read.) 16 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Thank you. 17 MS. KISER: Thank you. 18 Q. By that do you mean to suggest that those 19 are the only 911 providers that use line attribute 20 routing? 21 A. No, sir. I would -- I would at this 22 point have to delineate between the role of a 911 23 service provider versus the role of a local exchange 24 carrier that is doing whatever, line attribute, class ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 43 1 marking, whatever you want to call it on the 2 subscriber line. If you look at it in context, that 3 question follows onto the one we just covered about 4 class marking. So in context the local exchange 5 carrier providing the dial tone or equivalent thereof 6 to the subscriber may or may not be the 911 service 7 provider, so in that case the 911 service provider 8 would not be the one doing the line attribute or 9 class marking. 10 Q. I see. So you are trying to distinguish 11 a situation where, for example, Intrado is providing 12 911 service to the PSAP? 13 A. Intrado or anyone. 14 Q. Other than -- 15 A. Traditionally the ILECs have been the 16 service provider and then when competition was 17 introduced, you had CLECs that came in so the CLEC in 18 this case would be the provider of dial tone having 19 to do the class marking or line attribution where 20 the -- in this case perhaps Emparq might be the 911 21 service provider that takes it from the selective 22 router to the PSAP. 23 Q. So you are distinguishing basically 24 between the dial tone provider to the end user and ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 44 1 the entity that might be providing the 911 service? 2 A. That would be correct. 3 Q. Do you know which local exchange carriers 4 in Ohio utilize line attribute routing for 911 calls? 5 A. Specifically the -- to address all of the 6 local exchange carriers and how do they do line 7 attribution, no, I don't know that. 8 Q. You have a question that starts at the 9 bottom of page 9, the answer starts at the top of 10 page 10, and the question refers to processes -- 11 other processes which I take it to mean processes 12 other than line attribute routing; is that correct? 13 A. In context, again, I had to go by the way 14 the question was posed, "What other process" -- "What 15 other process" singular "can be used to route 911 16 calls when there are multiple 911 providers." Again, 17 multiple 911 service providers in this case would be 18 where the serving wire center because -- again, in 19 context we were talking about line attribution or 20 class marking and how this should be trunked to the 21 911 service provider. The only process that I know 22 of in a wire center to route two different service 23 providers where one wire center is serving multiple 24 911 service providers would be some type of line ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 45 1 attribution -- 2 Q. Well -- 3 A. -- without secondary processing. 4 Q. -- you refer to other process. Other 5 besides what? 6 A. Other besides some type of line 7 attribution, would be some type of secondary process. 8 Q. And what do you mean by secondary 9 processing? Selective router? 10 A. Selective router is a primary, yes. 11 Q. So in your answer to that question which 12 commences on line 1, page 10, you don't mention 13 selective routers but that could have or should have 14 been part of your answer, shouldn't it? 15 A. It certainly could have been part of the 16 answer. However, if you will notice, I did try to 17 address other processes by the last sentence of that 18 answer which is "The fewer points of failure 19 introduced into call set-up and delivery, the more 20 accurate the call delivery will be." It is a very, 21 very -- again, coming from my background being the 22 person who was responsible for all the service 23 providers and the -- all the competitive carriers and 24 everybody in the wireless ISPs and everybody else ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 46 1 that was in the business all had to integrate into 2 our incumbent 911 network, we were very concerned 3 about multiple things with competition, but one of 4 the first from a technological standpoint was initial 5 points of failure. Second, of course, was cost and 6 how it impacted, you know, our ability to deliver 7 service. 8 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, I move to 9 strike that answer as nonresponsive to the question. 10 MS. KISER: I would object. That was 11 directly responsive to the question and to his 12 testimony at page 10 at the top to which you are 13 directing your questions. 14 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: The first question 15 that I have with respect to the response you 16 reference something to the extent of "our incumbent 17 network." In what capacity were you referring to? 18 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. In my days as 19 the chief operating officer and chief executive 20 officer of the Greater Harris County 911 system. As 21 background, the Greater Harris County served about 4 22 and a half million businesses in the Greater Houston 23 metropolitan area, consisted of 170 plus responding 24 agencies, 48 municipalities, and 2 plus -- 2 plus and ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 47 1 fractional additional counties and we had certainly 2 the incumbent local exchange carrier selective 3 routing services, but we also had additional -- many, 4 many additional competitive local exchange carriers 5 as well as ISP, internet service providers, in 6 providing dial tone equivalency, multiple wireless 7 carriers, you know, pretty much you name it in 8 technology we have it. 9 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I am going to allow 10 the response, Mr. Stewart. You can ask any follow-up 11 questions. 12 Q. (By Mr. Stewart) As part of your -- one 13 of your answers, you said something to the point you 14 needed to respond to this question. I take it you 15 didn't write the question? 16 A. I'm sorry? The question that you are -- 17 Q. On line 21, page 9. 18 A. I didn't write the question specifically. 19 Q. So the question asked for other -- 20 another process other than line attribute routing. 21 When you answer, nowhere do you describe any other 22 process. You don't mention selective routers or any 23 other process that I can see. 24 A. Specifically I did not mention selective ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 48 1 routers or other processes, but I did allude to other 2 processes in the last sentence. 3 Q. Well, actually the last sentence you 4 didn't refer to any process. You just referred to a 5 principle that you advocate about fewer points of 6 failure but there is no process described there, is 7 there? 8 A. Specifically in that answer no other 9 processes were described but I would not -- 10 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, I move to 11 strike everything after "but." 12 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Ms. Kiser, let 13 Mr. Stewart finish. 14 MS. KISER: Sorry. 15 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Stewart. 16 MR. STEWART: I move to strike anything 17 he says after the "but." He has answered the 18 question. Now, he is going on to say heaven knows 19 what. 20 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: At this point in time 21 I will grant the motion to strike. 22 And, Ms. Kiser, you can certainly on 23 redirect ask any additional questions you feel 24 necessary. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 49 1 MS. KISER: That's fine. Thank you. 2 MR. STEWART: Thank you, your Honor. 3 MS. KISER: Could I seek some 4 clarification? You are just describing the last 5 statement he just made in response to the follow-up 6 question that Mr. Stewart asked; is that correct? 7 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Correct. 8 MS. KISER: Thank you. 9 Q. (By Mr. Stewart) I take it from your 10 testimony that you would prefer to use line attribute 11 routing to avoid the use of a selective router; is 12 that correct? 13 A. That is correct. 14 Q. And you believe that selective routers 15 introduce another potential point of failure and, 16 therefore, are undesirable? 17 A. I think I need to clarify my intention 18 here, if that's what you are seeking as 19 clarification. 20 Q. I am just seeking an answer to that 21 question. 22 A. Where any process other than direct 23 trunking of a 911 call to a 911 service provider 24 facilities would introduce additional points of ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 50 1 failure or additional financial burden to the 911 2 entity or any other negative connotation that could 3 be derived from additional processing that cannot be 4 overcome with some type of robustness or redundancy 5 or something that would -- would be more benefit than 6 detriment, then I would say any additional 7 processing, any additional facilities, any additional 8 hardware, software, lump them all into potential 9 points of failure are -- I would deem them to not be 10 desirable in a 911 call delivery system. 11 Q. Would the use of line attribute routing 12 enable a call to go directly from a central office to 13 a PSAP? 14 A. Only if that PSAP were directly trunked 15 from that central office. If that PSAP was served by 16 a selective router, then no. 17 Q. If you look at your answer that starts on 18 page 10, line 11, please, I take it there you are 19 saying that it's feasible for a local exchange 20 carrier who gets a new service order for a customer 21 to -- as part of taking that order put in this line 22 attribute information; is that correct? 23 A. Well, and, again, in context, 24 Mr. Stewart, the answer is directly related to the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 51 1 question before that wherein I state "We try to avoid 2 multiple links, multiple hops, and the creation of 3 multiple points of failures." If I find options such 4 as line attribute routing at call set-up, we mitigate 5 potential and then I go on to answer that using an -- 6 and I should clarify my intent here. As I have said 7 before in this proceeding, using attributes to a 8 subscriber line that are derived from that customer's 9 service order, you can facilitate provisioning of 10 that customer's line to directly route that call. 11 It's done every day, and the three examples I gave 12 before were tax code attribution, long distance 13 interchange carrier of choice attribution, and 911 14 service provider attribution. 15 And so there is a difference in the 16 service order process that you just asked the 17 question and the provision of the circuit so 18 sometimes there is data that has to be checked before 19 the circuit can be provisioned and that data comes 20 from the service order and the three exam -- three of 21 the examples I just gave are in cases where 22 information derived from that service order would 23 cause you to take that information directly or refer 24 to another data entity and attribute the line at the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 52 1 point of provision. 2 Q. You are wanting ILECs such as Emparq to 3 create the line attribute routing information that 4 would facilitate the routing of the 911 call, aren't 5 you? 6 A. I would say, no, you are not creating 7 that; you already have that information. 8 Q. So it's your testimony that ILECs such as 9 Emparq have for each of their customers the necessary 10 information encoded to permit the direct routing of 11 911 calls without doing anything else on the part of 12 the ILEC? 13 A. My answer is, yes, you do possess that 14 information. Unless you are an exception to the rule 15 of the country you would possess that information. I 16 can answer that more specifically if you would like. 17 Q. If we assume that an ILEC such as Emparq 18 has the information -- and I take it crucial 19 information here would be the serving the PSAP for 20 that customer, right? 21 A. If you are talking about using line 22 attribute routing for placing that 911 call on the 23 appropriate trunk which would eventually get it to 24 the appropriate PSAP, then yes. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 53 1 Q. So is there anything necessary other than 2 having that information to implement this way of 3 routing the call? 4 A. Well, again, you could be talking 5 multiple instances. You may have not -- you may not 6 possess the facilities directly from that wire center 7 that would go directly to, say, the 911 selective 8 router point of presence on the network so you may 9 have to route that call on different facilities, you 10 know, a different cable path down a different street 11 that would end up being concentrated in another wire 12 center that would be put on a DACS, an electronic 13 amalgamator of circuits, and shipped off to the 911 14 service provider point of presence. But the ability 15 to put it on direct trunk even though it may have to 16 go through a couple of hops to get there, there is no 17 secondary switching involved so, yes, using the 18 information from the MSAG just like you would for the 19 tax code, you referred to the CIC code earlier, the 20 customer gives you the long distance provider of 21 choice by name, but they don't give the CIC code. 22 The customer would not know what the CIC code is. 23 You would have to go to another data point to find 24 out that CIC code. The same as the tax code, the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 54 1 customer won't known his tax code. You would have to 2 go to another data source to get that. The customer 3 wouldn't know his ESN or his emergency service zone 4 area for 911 routing. You'd have to go to an MSAG or 5 another point of data to get that so all of those 6 elements that can be attributed to that customer's 7 subscriber line that would allow for the appropriate 8 trunking of the 911 call. 9 Q. Do you know what a LEC would need to do 10 with respect to switch programming to enable the 11 route out to line translations? 12 A. It's different depending on what kind of 13 switch they have. 14 Q. Do you know the answer for any particular 15 switch? 16 A. As far as line translations, no, I 17 haven't done line translations or been present when 18 line translations were done in a long time, and the 19 switch technology has certainly evolved over the 20 years, but it is a standard course of business. It's 21 done for tax codes, and it's done for long distance 22 delivery. Doing it for 911 is really nothing more 23 than that. It's incumbent. It's built into every 24 dial tone service providing type of switch whether ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 55 1 it's an old stepswitch or new softswitch. 2 Q. So you are saying the switch is capable 3 of doing it, but you don't know what actions the LEC 4 would need to take to program the switch and create 5 the necessary tables in the switch, right? 6 A. I am familiar with that workload, and I 7 do know that it's really not much -- it's not 8 different than doing the long distance or the tax 9 code provision for doing that circuit provision. I 10 know this because we had to pay for these services, 11 and we certainly scrutinized everything that we were 12 billed for. We wanted to know the work involved. We 13 certainly wanted -- again, in my capacity as 911 14 director, we wanted to know what level of effort went 15 into it because it was only fair to compensate the 16 providers for doing that level of work. 17 Q. Now, is Intrado willing to compensate 18 Emparq in Ohio for doing this work? 19 A. That's not a question I could answer for 20 you. 21 Q. Looking at your answer that starts on 22 line 21, page 10, in the first line there you refer 23 to an obligation. To your knowledge has Emparq 24 denied that it's obliged to deliver 911 calls to the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 56 1 appropriate PSAP? 2 A. I don't know of any instance where Emparq 3 has denied ability to deliver 911 calls, no. 4 Q. And, in fact, Embarq has agreed to 5 deliver 911 calls to Intrado's selective router when 6 Intrado provides the 911 service, haven't they? 7 A. It is my understanding that Emparq has 8 agreed to provide the call delivery through Emparq's 9 own selective router first and then to the 911 10 service provider. That could be Intrado or anybody 11 else. 12 Q. But in the case when Intrado is the 911 13 provider, it would go through Intrado's selective 14 router, wouldn't it? 15 A. That would be my understanding, that 16 would be the point of termination for Embarq's 17 traffic would be the 911 selective router provided by 18 Intrado. 19 Q. Please turn to page 11 and your answer on 20 lines 11 and 12. In line 11 is it this Commission 21 that you are referring to? 22 A. I have to read the context of that 23 answer. 24 Q. Sure. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 57 1 A. I believe I am referring to the Ohio 2 Commission as in all other state commissions that 3 were responsible for rule making in the competitive 4 process when it came to, you know, introducing 5 competition into 911. If you will notice, I talk 6 about best practices and policies and information in 7 processing consumer orders and subsequent processing 8 of the provisioning of those circuits have to adopt 9 certain best practices. The fact that Emparq in Ohio 10 has that process already in place because they have a 11 master street address guide that is driving the ESN 12 table for the 911 selective router certainly 13 indicates that you have the wherewithal and the 14 facilities to do the type of line attribute routing 15 we were discussing earlier so. 16 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: ESN? 17 THE WITNESS: ESN is emergency service 18 number which represents an emergency service zone 19 which would -- I apologize for the complexity of 20 this, but it's the way 911 was built. That emergency 21 service number basically is the trunk identification 22 information that relates to a certain PSAP. So if 23 you are in, an example, the city of Cincinnati versus 24 county of Hamilton would be across jurisdictional ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 58 1 lines, the city of Cincinnati's PSAP would have a 2 different ESN based on its service provider's law, 3 fire, and EMS, law enforcement, fire supression, and 4 emergency medical services. So the rest of that 5 answer is the Commission that I was referring to 6 would be Ohio just like most of the other states that 7 have had to address competition. 8 Q. What exactly is it that you are referring 9 to that was acceptable for toll competition? Are you 10 referring to some sort of best practices that you 11 believe this Commission mandated? 12 A. No. I don't -- I don't know exactly what 13 practices this Commission mandated for toll services. 14 I know that they did mandate certain ways that toll 15 service was to be provided in the face of 16 competition. 17 However, what I am referring to here is 18 best practices and policies within 911. The crux of 19 my intention here is to show that existing policies, 20 and this is not the fault of Ohio PUC or any other 21 PUC, it's just telecommunications services were 22 always a franchised service. There was only one 23 entity providing dial tone and all of the other 24 services in an area. Now, that has changed. And ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 59 1 it's not just another fact that other companies can 2 come in and provide dial tone whether it's in the 3 form of reselling incumbent services or they provide 4 their own facilities, their facilities base, but it's 5 different technologies. It's not just the local 6 central office that's down the street from you. It's 7 a mobile switch or it's a voice service provider on 8 an ISP that could be in another state. So best 9 practices have got to be updated and it's -- this is 10 why this kind of hearing is so important because it's 11 these kinds of practices that are limiting the 12 ability of 911 service provision based on the choice 13 that the 911 authorities are trying to make. 14 Q. I take it from your answer that you don't 15 know whether this Commission required local exchange 16 companies to deliver traffic to interexchange 17 carriers in any particular manner? 18 A. Any particular manner, I do not. 19 Q. And do you know whether interexchange 20 carriers are required to pay for direct and office 21 trunks if they switch to connect that way to a LEC in 22 Ohio? 23 A. With respect to Ohio I can't tell you 24 what -- what that means in Ohio. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 60 1 Q. Earlier in that answer you made reference 2 to denying current state-of-the-art technologies to 3 public safety. Would that be the counties that are 4 denying this? 5 A. No, sir. 6 Q. Don't the counties adopt the plans for 7 the kind of 911 service they want? 8 A. Yes, sir, but it is my own experience as 9 well as the experience of many of my colleagues that 10 I visit with on a regular basis that they are not 11 able to implement products and services that are 12 brought about by competition because of certain 13 barriers to that competition. Again, that's not 14 trying to demonize any particular entity. I truly 15 believe that everybody in this room, whether it's the 16 regulators or the service providers, the citizens, 17 you know, that are represented here, all want our 911 18 system to be the best that it can possibly be. It's 19 getting down to the how we connect those dots in 20 hearings just like this that are now clarifying in a 21 new era of competition, something we have not seen 22 before, in a new era of multiple providers, multiple 23 companies, multiple technologies, something we have 24 never seen before, especially in 911. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 61 1 It's that type of activity that has to be 2 clarified so that 911 can enjoy competition just like 3 the rest of the world, and it has really nothing to 4 do with next gen or future. That's all kind of 5 confusing to everyone. It is what is offered today. 6 If I can get out on the web and subscribe to some 7 kind of internet service provider, then the way I 8 access 911 should be equivalent to the way I access 9 911 in the company I just left and, you know, 10 terminated their services and started somebody new. 11 And unfortunately policies in all -- every state have 12 not been created. They did not envision this type of 13 competition. That's why we are -- have these kinds 14 of hearings because it's a new world. 15 Q. Let's go back for a moment to line 16 attribute routing. Each line for each customer has 17 to be designed for this to work for that customer, 18 right? 19 A. I didn't -- each line has to be what? 20 Q. Assigned. 21 A. Assigned, okay. And by assigned do you 22 mean provisioned? 23 Q. It has to be -- 24 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: One moment, ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 62 1 Mr. Stewart. 2 MS. KISER: Excuse me, Mr. Stewart. Are 3 you referring to a particular part of Mr. Melcher's 4 testimony? 5 MR. STEWART: Yeah, wherever he talks 6 about line attribute routing. It's all over the 7 place. Do you need a page? 8 MS. KISER: Could you refer him to? 9 Q. Mr. Melcher, can you find anywhere where 10 you refer to line attribute routing? 11 A. Just in front of me is page 10, line 6. 12 The question is "Why is line attribute routing a 13 superior method." 14 Q. Okay. 15 A. My answer to that. 16 Q. For each line that will utilize line 17 attribute routing, something has to be done with 18 respect to that line or the switch that serves that 19 line for it to work; is that right? 20 A. It depends on the technology again and, 21 again, I am not a telephone company engineer, but I 22 do know depending on the technology sometimes that is 23 a two-part process. There's a service order part 24 that says let me collect all the billing and the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 63 1 termination data from the subscriber and in 2 traditional switches, not the softswitches, but 3 traditional switches that may or may not have some 4 additional automation on them, a technician either 5 through keyboard or through punch device has to 6 provision that line, actually set up that circuit 7 that terminates to that subscriber's premise. And so 8 sometimes that's a two-part job. Sometimes in the 9 case of internet provider or others, when their 10 switches are modern, the software that runs them is 11 more modern, that might be a multiple part process, 12 but it's all part of the service order process, and 13 it's not necessarily split up into two or three 14 pieces. 15 Q. But in any event work has to be done, 16 things have to be done for this to happen. 17 A. Correct. 18 Q. Now, you talked about service orders, and 19 service orders involve new customers, right? 20 A. Or change customers, yes. 21 Q. Fair enough. Intrado would want this to 22 apply to better basic customers also, wouldn't it? 23 A. If -- well, in the instance like the 24 county just switched to 911 service provider Intrado? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 64 1 Q. Well, let's talk about a customer who has 2 the existing service from Emparq. They are not a new 3 customer. They are not changing their service. For 4 that sort of customer Intrado wants line attribute 5 routing so that customer's call can be routed in the 6 way Intrado likes. 7 A. I am not sure I know the answer. You 8 would have to ask Intrado, but I believe in the case 9 wherein Intrado would become the 911 service provider 10 and they want the call delivered to them for routing, 11 I believe that you would be correct, yes. 12 Q. Do you know how many lines -- embedded 13 lines Emparq has in Ohio, approximately? 14 A. No, sir. 15 Q. Would you accept subject to check that 16 it's approximately 400,000? 17 A. I would accept that. 18 Q. And I think you said earlier that you 19 don't know how long it would take to do the work for 20 each line to implement line attribute routing? 21 A. Well, when you say do the work, again, it 22 depends on your type of switches, but you already 23 have that information. The work has already been 24 done. If your calls are going from anybody's wire ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 65 1 center, whether it's your own or a competitive 2 carrier, into your selective router, you already have 3 done all that work. The MSAG assignment is done. 4 The ESN, emergency service number, that identifies 5 the emergency service zone has already been done, and 6 you do that already for tax code assignment and long 7 distance carrier assignment so whether it has already 8 been provisioned in that particular switch or not, I 9 could not answer that, but I can tell you the work 10 has already been done. The work product would exist 11 within Emparq. 12 Q. So you are saying Emparq wouldn't have to 13 do anything else to implement line routing? 14 A. I can't answer that because I don't know 15 what kind of switches you are using. So whether or 16 not you have the ability to do that line attribute or 17 class marking as you are referring to would depend on 18 the switches that these 400 something thousand 19 subscribers are being served by, so I cannot answer 20 that, but I can tell you that if you are selectively 21 routing 911 calls today, then that work product 22 already exists. You already have that data source 23 that I referred to earlier that would allow you to do 24 that line attribution. It's not something that would ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 66 1 have to be created. It's something that already 2 exists in your company. 3 Q. There is a difference, isn't there, 4 between having the data source or information that 5 enables one to do something and actually doing that 6 something. 7 A. I would say in the practicality of it if 8 in an area of competition if you are providing the 9 equivalent of dial tone and you have to deliver your 10 calls to a 911 service provider, whether it's 11 yourself or to another service provider, there are 12 certain things you have to do. The municipalities 13 can't assess their franchise taxes unless you do 14 something. 911 calls can't be routed correctly 15 unless you do something. That work product is 16 different depending on your technology, your 17 software, your hardware, but in an area of 18 competition where you may or may not be the selective 19 router, you would have to do something to -- in order 20 to get those calls to route, you know, the 99.99 21 percent of the time that public safety is looking 22 for. So I don't know what difference the work 23 product would be, but I know in a competitive 24 environment it's the same for everybody. Every CLEC ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 67 1 has to do that today, and you would have to do that 2 in a competitive world where you were delivering 911 3 traffic to somebody else. 4 Q. A minute ago I understood you to say you 5 are not -- you didn't know what work would be 6 required because it would depend on the switch. So 7 are you saying that no work needs to be done or work 8 needs to be done; you are just not sure what it is or 9 how -- and how much? 10 A. I don't know what specific work Emparq 11 would have to do. I can't answer that question 12 because I don't know what type of line attribute 13 mechanisms you are using today. 14 Q. Okay. Now, you have a lot of experience 15 with NENA; is that correct? 16 A. Yes, sir. 17 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Stewart, just so 18 that we have the record reflect the first usage of 19 the term NENA? 20 MR. STEWART: Yes. By NENA I am 21 referring to the National Emergency Number 22 Association. 23 Q. Is that the acronym -- 24 A. Yes, sir. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 68 1 Q. -- definition that you are using? 2 A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. Thanks. Now, have you seen the NENA 4 standards for enhanced 911 and E911 default routing 5 assignments and functions? 6 A. Which iteration? I have served on most 7 all of those technical committees, and I am sure I 8 have seen it in some iteration or another. I don't 9 know specifically the latest update that you might be 10 referring to. 11 Q. You think there has been more than one 12 iteration? 13 A. I am sure there has been more than one 14 iteration. I think most all of the negotiations in a 15 committee work continues as technology progresses, 16 works in progress, and it has been a few years since 17 I have served on those committees directly. Once I 18 joined the board of officers I couldn't serve any 19 more on those working committees, but I have served 20 many years on them. 21 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, I would propose 22 to mark a document as Emparq Cross-examination 23 Exhibit 1, but I am not sure what convention your 24 Honor would like to use for marking this sort of ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 69 1 exhibit. 2 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I think very 3 simplistic, call it Emparq Exhibit 1. 4 (EXHIBIT MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.) 5 Q. Mr. Melcher, I am going to give you 6 what's been marked as Emparq Exhibit 1. Please take 7 a minute to look it over. 8 A. Thank you, Mr. Stewart. 9 MS. KISER: For the record could we 10 clarify this appears to be a draft? It's not 11 currently in effect. 12 A. I don't know that this has been adopted 13 by the board of officers. 14 MS. KISER: The back of mine says draft. 15 Maybe it's just with respect to page 23, although 16 page 22 says draft as well. 17 A. Mr. Stewart, do you want me to read this 18 in its entirety? 19 Q. Not necessarily but if you wish to. We 20 could probably take a break. 21 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Is there a particular 22 section or sections that you would prefer that he 23 focus his attention to? 24 MR. STEWART: Give me one second here. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 70 1 Q. The question I have for you is whether 2 this document ever uses the term line attribute 3 routing which I suppose to confirm you need to look 4 through it all. I will represent to you that it 5 doesn't, but I wouldn't expect you to accept my 6 representation necessarily. 7 A. I would certainly stipulate it doesn't 8 use that term. As I mentioned when we first started 9 my testimony, that was a term I came up with because 10 class marking was too confusing, so I would stipulate 11 that. 12 MS. KISER: Excuse me, your Honor. It 13 appears -- oh, never mind. 14 MR. STEWART: I have no further 15 questions. Thank you, sir. 16 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Mr. Stewart. 17 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Why don't we go off 18 the record for a minute. 19 (Recess taken.) 20 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Why don't we go back 21 on the record at this time. And, Ms. Kiser, if you 22 are ready for redirect. 23 MS. KISER: Thank you. 24 - - - ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 71 1 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 2 By Ms. Kiser: 3 Q. Mr. Melcher, there was discussion during 4 your cross-examination regarding processing page 10, 5 line 2 of your testimony you state, "It is optimal 6 that the line attribute data is established prior to 7 call set-up, rather than through secondary processing 8 or switching systems." Could you please explain. 9 A. Yes, ma'am. In order to understand that 10 switching mechanism and selective routing you have to 11 understand the elements that go into how a 911 call 12 is routed. And the most basic element of that is 13 where I live and who provides me with my law 14 enforcement, fire suppression, and emergency medical 15 services. And so I may live in Columbus and most 16 areas of Columbus, and I am using this theoretically, 17 most areas -- most citizens of the city -- within the 18 city limits of Columbus may be served by the Columbus 19 Police Department, the Columbus Fire Department, and 20 the Columbus Fire Department EMS Division. So if I 21 am having a heart attack, it's going to be somebody 22 that gets a paycheck from the city of Columbus that's 23 going to come, respond. There are maybe areas that 24 are within the city of Columbus but they were ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 72 1 recently incorporated, wherefore, whatever 2 arrangements that were -- seemed reliable at the time 3 the city of Columbus leaves, say, fire suppression to 4 the existing volunteer fire department or the 5 existing volunteer EMS responder. And so when I live 6 in that, I am a citizen of -- within the city limits 7 of Columbus but two of my service providers have 8 changed. 9 When you make up the 911 master street 10 address guide, those elements are very, very critical 11 in how your call gets routed. The reason I say that 12 is because I don't know about Columbus's dispatch 13 center but a lot of cities have combined dispatch 14 centers, so if my 911 call is for a crime in 15 progress, fire at my home, or heart attack, it's 16 going to go to the same building or the same room 17 even in some cases, but if I live an area that's 18 recently annexed and it's a volunteer service that's 19 giving me that provision, my call is initially going 20 to go to Columbus because law -- most 911 calls are 21 law enforcement calls, will go there, and they will 22 say, oh, you are having a heart attack, stay on the 23 line, we'll transfer you. So, now, I go to a 24 volunteer, my neighborhood EMS, and their answering ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 73 1 point and all of that data, my street address and all 2 the data that's on the 911 caller's screen, has to 3 transfer with that voice call. So, now, you have the 4 secondary answering point which would be the EMS 5 provider that has my voice and has my associated 6 data. 7 All of that stuff goes into the master 8 street address guide and you have fire departments, 9 especially in the volunteer world, where a new chief 10 gets elected and they have resolved some turf issues 11 between the two departments because the politics are 12 better and so some boundary lines change. That 13 happens dynamically. You have new concrete that's 14 poured, new homes that are built, very dynamic 15 changes, new subdivisions. Jurisdictions change all 16 the time for all kinds of political reasons. It's an 17 ongoing process so that master street address guide 18 is the crux of the data element for 911 call routing. 19 Secondary switching is really a 20 multi-task effort. 911 call routing and 911 call 21 delivery are truly a team effort. It's not just the 22 local exchange carrier. It's not just the 911 23 service provider. Often those are the same. Many 24 times they are not. It also is the governmental ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 74 1 entities that subscribe to that 911 service and pay 2 for that 911 service but also don't just write checks 3 at the end of every month. They actually sit down 4 every day and go over this street has been added 5 because this new subdivision is there and that is 6 covered by this law enforcement agent, this fire 7 suppression agency, and that emergency medical 8 service. This chief changed so, therefore, the 9 jurisdictional lines changed. We annexed a new area. 10 All of these kinds of things that go into every 11 single day changes to that 911 call routing data. 12 That's why it's truly a team effort. It's a 13 government responsibility as much as it is a service 14 provider responsibility. 15 Processing that call in a selective 16 routing environment if you are going to do it once, 17 that's necessary. If you are going to do it twice, 18 I -- as someone who subscribes to and paid for these 19 services and certainly scrutinized these services, I 20 necessarily would not have a problem with the double 21 switching unless it added some elements that were 22 unacceptable to the call delivery process, A, from a 23 technical perspective it added more facilities, more 24 physical points of failure as in hops, we call them ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 75 1 hops, if you have to go from one central office to 2 another central office to another central office, 3 then that's making a couple of hops. If it added 4 more equipment like DACS, you know, concentrators 5 that were maybe not necessary but were certainly not 6 redundant, then that would add an element of concern 7 for me as a -- as a 911 authority. 8 If it went to another level of technology 9 as in the switching, if it went through a whole other 10 switch which was driven by a whole other database 11 which should mirror the original database but may 12 not, that's something else that has to be daily 13 synchronized, and really if you are going to do it 14 right, it should be synchronized dynamically, up to 15 the minute synchronization. 16 So that if in -- let's say in this 17 example because this is what we are talking about 18 Emparq says we want to take all of our 911 traffic, 19 run it through our selective rider, and provide it on 20 one pipe to Intrado, you know, it sounds wonderful. 21 It's probably an excellent way to do it except for 22 running it through that selective router means their 23 master street address guide and the ESN, the 24 emergency service number, database that drives that ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 76 1 switch has to be in constant synchronization with the 2 911 authority's selection of 911 service provider. 3 So in this case if Hamilton County says I award the 4 contract to Intrado or anybody else to be my 911 5 service provider, then from that selective router to 6 the PSAP, they have the ultimate responsibility to 7 deliver those calls appropriately, but it's a team 8 effort. It's more than just that. It requires 9 Hamilton County and their data people who understand 10 the maps and streets and the geoplans and the 11 geopolitical jurisdictions and fire department 12 boundaries and EMS boundaries and all those kinds of 13 things, they have to work in tandem with the 911 14 service provider to make that MSAG stay up to date. 15 And sometime it's a by the minute process. Sometimes 16 you can make up to the minute changes that are 17 effective immediately. So when a caller moves into a 18 new home on a new street, by the time the dial tone 19 is provisioned they already have the right 911 20 service that they need. 21 If you have secondary switching, it adds 22 additional elements of technical failure that are 23 possible. It also adds potential elements of 24 electronic or automation failure where their MSAG may ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 77 1 only be updated once a day as opposed to, you know, 2 dynamically or maybe they don't synchronize those 3 databases more than once a day or once a week or once 4 a month or whatever is in the agreement they may 5 have, so the concern for not only the consumer that's 6 using whatever service they are getting to get dial 7 tone equivalency but the concern of the person who is 8 responsible, the government person that's responsible 9 for paying the service and auditing the service and 10 making sure the service is providing everything he 11 needs, is it laying -- is it adding layers of 12 complexity and additional points of failure and is it 13 increasing the cost burden because there's additional 14 which could be reviewed as redundant work that is not 15 redundant in a public safety robust capacity as in 16 redundant routing, but it's just an additional layer 17 of processing that is costing money that we don't 18 need to do. 19 In this case if the service provider that 20 is providing dial tone to the consumer is doing a 21 selective routing function, they possess the data 22 that is necessary to do what we've talked about here 23 which is that line attribute routing. Now, whether 24 they physically have to take that data point and go ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 78 1 do something to a switch may or may not exist but it 2 is -- it is certainly within the wherewithal of any 3 dial tone provider to address several, but I am more 4 concerned with the three basic things. Long distance 5 provider has to be attributed to that subscriber 6 line. 911 service provider has to be attributed to 7 that subscriber line, the tax codes, so you have all 8 the franchise fees and all that kind of stuff has to 9 be attached to that subscriber line. 10 Those are data elements that exist and 11 reside with any local exchange service provider or 12 someone that is acting like a local exchange service 13 provider if they are the facilities based provider 14 that are physically providing that dial tone or its 15 equivalent to the consumer. 16 And so when we talk about double 17 switching and double trunking and all this other kind 18 of stuff, you have to look at how many hops are we 19 making, how many times are we processing this 20 information, how many points of failure, whether it's 21 human failure, automation failure, or facilities -- 22 technical facilities failure are we introducing into 23 the mix, and is there a way to mitigate that? If so, 24 is that mitigation worth, you know, the negatives or ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 79 1 the positives outweighing the negatives, and does 2 that address any additional financial burden to the 3 end customer who is writing the checks to all of 4 these people to pay for these services? 5 That's what I mean by it is optimal that 6 the line and the data be established prior to the 7 call set-up rather than secondary classes or 8 switching systems is important because the most 9 fundamental way that I'm familiar with, I am sure 10 there are other ways, but the most fundamental way 11 that I am familiar with is when that serving central 12 office says, oh, this is a 911 call, do not pass go, 13 do not collect $200, this has to go with special 14 handling, it goes on this trunk group, and the 15 calling party number is fed along with that call so 16 that number can be looked up in a database and routed 17 appropriately to the appropriate PSAP. Anything 18 introduced into that mix must have extenuating 19 circumstances that would be worthy of introducing 20 those circumstances. 21 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: In that situation you 22 just described isn't Emparq serving in the capacity 23 of emergency service provider in doing the selective 24 routing component? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 80 1 THE WITNESS: If they are the 911 service 2 provider of choice, then they are doing that 3 function. 4 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Right. Now, where 5 would Intrado fit into that scenario if Emparq is 6 already doing those things? 7 THE WITNESS: Well, keep in mind if I am 8 the governmental official that says, okay, I -- for 9 whatever reason I put this out to bid or whatever 10 reason I have decided I am not going to use company 11 A, I am going to use company B to do my 911 12 provision, I have to look at several things. I have 13 to look at the technologies in use and be comfortable 14 with that because at the end of the day I am going to 15 be on the news at 6 o'clock because I made a 16 decision. I have to look at the technology they are 17 providing, what the rate structures are, you know, 18 how much this is going to cost, and how it balances 19 within my current budgets, and does it do everything 20 I need it to do? And does it address my concerns of 21 voice over internet? Does it address my concerns 22 with wireless? Does it address my concerns how often 23 they update their database? Do the customer service 24 records get updated into the MSAG on a dynamic, ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 81 1 daily, weekly, or monthly basis? All of those things 2 go into those decisions. If I choose to change 3 companies to Intrado or anybody else, that selective 4 routing function now moves to the new company, and 5 then Emparq in this case would be just another 6 service provider, albeit an incumbent and a good one, 7 but they at this point become just another provider 8 of telephone 911 traffic to the 911 service provider. 9 So they look at that point just like a competitive 10 local exchange carrier or an ISP, internet service 11 provider, or, you know, any other type of consumer 12 interacting service provider, dial tone equivalent 13 provider, that would be trafficking and trunking 14 their calls to the 911 point of designated authority. 15 So I as the government person am going to designate 16 this new service provider, they are the authority, so 17 everybody now has to home -- the industry term is to 18 home their central offices or home their softswitches 19 to this new provider of service. 20 In this case it's my understanding, I 21 don't believe I am wrong, but it's my understanding 22 that Emparq chooses to say we already run this stuff 23 through their selective router, let us just take a 24 trunk group from our subprovider and feed it to the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 82 1 Intrado box wherever it may exist and let us keep on 2 doing what we are doing. 3 If it -- it is now a -- a double switched 4 function. What Emparq is doing is no longer 5 necessary to do. As a matter of fact, it introduces 6 points of failure. Again, if they can make an 7 argument to Intrado or ultimately if they can make 8 the argument to the one whose authorizing the service 9 and paying for the service that that's okay, then 10 it's certainly up to that decision maker, that 11 government employee decision maker, that is 12 responsible for that service. 13 But in my opinion and in my experience 14 you will find that most government decision makers do 15 not want double switching to occur because it 16 introduces those mechanical potential points of 17 failure, the human element potential points of 18 failure, as well as the automation potential points 19 of failure and all of the facilities and processes 20 that are around that. And that should be the choice 21 of the governmental entity selecting the service, not 22 the fa -- not the dial tone providers. The dial tone 23 providers are -- should be and are in most cases 24 required just to deliver the 911 traffic along with ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 83 1 the right technology so that they get calling party 2 ID and they are supposed to work with their exchange 3 areas to work with the governmental entities on the 4 master street address guide and all those things that 5 go along with 911 service. 6 It's a complex team effort, but it is a 7 team effort, and so at that point they -- they become 8 just like every other phone company that is feeding 9 911 calls for service into the 911 service provider. 10 And it should be the customer's choice, the 11 government -- the governmental authority that's 12 paying for this, it should be their choice as to 13 how -- how they are getting service provided and how 14 they are paying for that service, you know, within -- 15 within acceptable parameters. 16 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Ms. Kiser? 17 MS. KISER: I have no further redirect. 18 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Based on that limited 19 redirect, Mr. Stewart. 20 MR. STEWART: Can I have that answer read 21 back? 22 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Which part? 23 MR. STEWART: I think that's a record 24 answer, but we will put that aside. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 84 1 - - - 2 RECROSS-EXAMINATION 3 By Mr. Stewart: 4 Q. Cutting through that lengthy answer, I 5 take it what you are saying is it's important when 6 someone makes a 911 call that it gets delivered to 7 the PSAP with the necessary information for the PSAP 8 to engage the appropriate emergency responder, right? 9 A. It's important for that function to work 10 properly, yes. 11 Q. Thank you. Now, one can accomplish that 12 using selective router, right? 13 A. One can accomplish that using the router. 14 Q. And one can update a selective router as 15 frequently as one wishes, right? 16 A. Correct. 17 Q. Now, as I understand your testimony, one 18 can also accomplish that using line attribute routing 19 which is your preference, right? 20 A. Correct. 21 Q. Now, to make this system work as 22 efficiently as it could, then you are saying one 23 would similarly have to update the line attribute 24 routing information on a dynamic basis so that the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 85 1 emergency caller gets the right service, right? 2 A. You are putting words in my mouth. No. 3 Q. They wouldn't have to update it 4 regularly? 5 A. That is -- at the point of provision you 6 can't provision the circuit without doing those -- 7 those line attributes. 8 Q. Okay. 9 A. If -- and so we are not talking about 10 something that is updated unless it's a move, an add, 11 or a change, and you are talking about adding 12 multiple layers of redundancy that introduce multiple 13 points of failures, so you are confusing when you are 14 saying an MSAG has to be updated regularly with line 15 attribute being updated regularly. Those are two 16 different issues. 17 Q. Well, if an existing customer starts 18 getting served by a different EMS provider in one of 19 those scenarios you described, the serving ILEC, the 20 dial tone provider, would need to update their 21 selective router if they were delivering the traffic 22 to either the PSAP directly or to Intrado through 23 that selective router, right? 24 A. If the emergency medical service provider ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 86 1 changed, then, yes, they would have to update 2 their -- their selective router. 3 Q. And similarly if the emergency service 4 provider changed and an existing customer were 5 being -- were having their traffic routed using line 6 attribute routing from the Emparq central's office to 7 the Intrado selective router, there would need to be 8 a change made by Emparq with respect to the line 9 attribute routing, correct? 10 A. Not necessarily. In the case you just 11 cited where the EMS provider changed, that doesn't 12 change the line attribute routing because we are 13 talking about primary service delivery of a 911 call 14 based on line attribute routing as opposed to 15 transfer or redirect of a 911 call which is a 16 selective router, not an end office function, so the 17 serving central office that is giving that consumer 18 dial tone, that doesn't really care about secondary 19 services because they have nothing to do with the 20 call at that point. They have passed off the call to 21 the appropriate selective router which is responsible 22 for that secondary change. So in this case your -- 23 you certainly are introducing a level of complexity 24 and certainly an additional point of failure because ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 87 1 the 911 selective router that's responsible for 2 transferring that call to the new EMS is not your 3 selective router. It's the service provider's 4 selective router of choice that the government entity 5 chose. 6 Secondly, the -- the routing databases 7 you are right could be updated as often as possible, 8 and if you were going to introduce that secondary 9 switching, you certainly would want those routing 10 databases to be synchronized realtime if you could 11 get it and that's certainly possible today so that -- 12 that any changes made in one database would be 13 reflected in the other database, but it still doesn't 14 take away from the -- the subject at hand which is 15 secondary switching introduces additional points of 16 failure and additional opportunities for that call to 17 be misrouted or not routed at all. 18 Now, again, a selective router can be 19 used as a point of concentration. There are many 20 carriers that amalgamate their 911 traffic from all 21 of their service COs concentrated at one point and 22 deliver it to a selective router just on one big 23 pipe, if you will, multiple T1s, if you will. That 24 doesn't -- that is industry practice. I have no ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 88 1 problem with that as long as you know that multiple 2 hop situation is mitigated and especially in the SS7 3 environment, diverse routing its -- SS7 being signal 4 system 7 which is a standard protocol in the industry 5 today where switch-to-switch communications and call 6 direction of traffic pass off, hand off. But the -- 7 I'm sorry, identified the term and lost my train of 8 thought. As long as the other situations were 9 mitigated, you certainly don't want to introduce 10 additional points of failure that can't be overcome 11 and especially if they introduce technical 12 possibility for failure or somehow additional 13 financial burden to the 911 entity. 14 Q. If Intrado is the 911 service provider 15 and we are talking about an existing customer and for 16 whatever reason that customer's emergency service 17 provider changes, isn't it Intrado's selective router 18 that needs to know the appropriate information 19 regarding the change because it's going to route that 20 call to the right PSAP? 21 A. I'm sorry. In the first part of your 22 question Intrado was the service provider, and then 23 it changes from Intrado? 24 Q. No. Intrado is the 911 service provider. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 89 1 There is an existing customer of, say, Emparq who is 2 the dial tone provider. That particular customer's 3 emergency service provider changes in one of those 4 scenarios you described. 5 A. The first responder agents. 6 Q. Yes. 7 A. Okay. 8 Q. EMS technician for heart attack, when 9 that call however it gets there gets to Intrado's 10 selective router, Intrado needs to know and have 11 updated its selective router in order to get that 12 call to the newly appropriate PSAP if the PSAP has 13 changed for EMS provider, right? 14 A. Well, first, they are not EMS technicians 15 there, EMTs or paramedics. As a paramedic, we kind 16 of like to make sure everybody understands that. It 17 is a different level of service. Secondly, if the 18 EMS provider changed, they are a secondary PSAP, not 19 a primary PSAP in many cases, so if Intrado was the 20 service provider that had to route the initial call, 21 if the initial call is answered by the police and has 22 to be transferred to EMS, then it's Intrado's 23 database that would have to understand that the EMS 24 provider of yesterday is no longer the EMS provider ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 90 1 and it's the new EMS provider of today that that call 2 gets transferred to. 3 Q. So what I said is right, Intrado has got 4 to update its systems to reflect the new heart attack 5 provider. 6 A. Absolutely. And as the entity that is 7 hired by the 911 agency, the 911 authority, the 8 governmental entity, they are the ones working with 9 the provider of the MSAG, in this case the 911 10 service provider is Intrado, so they would be the 11 ones who would daily be working with Intrado on those 12 MSAG changes, so when the EMS company, and this 13 happens in a lot of private sector or contractor, EMS 14 companies go out of business, new EMS companies come 15 in, so the point of answering the phone calls 16 changes, and so Intrado would have to be the one 17 working with the governmental authority that says we 18 lost EMS provider A, we have gone to EMS provider B, 19 please make these data changes. 20 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Is there a 21 distinction between the emergency medical service 22 provider and the PSAP? 23 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. In many cases an 24 EMS is probably one of the best examples throughout ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 91 1 the country. EMS, its origins in this industry were 2 basically really based at the funeral home, so you 3 had the funeral industry was providing EMS until the 4 Department of Transportation stepped in with some 5 incentives. So EMS kind of tends to be the poor 6 children of first responders, if you will. And so a 7 lot of municipalities and a lot of counties 8 contracted to private services. Now, many large 9 cities have taken that under the fire department or 10 it's a separate division under the governmental 11 entity. But in so many cases throughout the country 12 it's a contracted out business, so his example is 13 actually a very good one where that information 14 changes on a pretty regular basis. 15 Q. (By Mr. Stewart) In this scenario we just 16 talked about where Intrado is the service provider 17 and the end user's emergency service technician has 18 changed, when Emparq routes that call to Intrado's 19 selective router through Emparq's selective router, 20 it's not necessary for Embarq to update information 21 in its selective router, is it? 22 A. If the answering point that changes is a 23 secondary answering point and not a primary answering 24 point, then no. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 92 1 Q. From what you said in one of your answers 2 it sounds as though you are of the view the 911 3 authority ought to have the ability to dictate the 4 network arrangements that the dial tone provider uses 5 to get the call to the PSAP. Did I understand you 6 correctly to be claiming that? 7 A. I would characterize that as the 911 8 authority, the governmental authority, should not be 9 taken to Oz and told not to look behind the curtain. 10 You cannot -- you cannot be a responsible 11 governmental official and just buy blindly. You have 12 to look at what -- the service that you are getting 13 and you have to look at how robust and redundant it 14 is. 15 I will give you a great example. When 16 competition first came to the Houston area in Texas, 17 we knew that our incumbent local exchange carrier had 18 because we had gone from the CAMA -- and that's such 19 an old term, it's centralized automated mechanized 20 accounting or something like that. I apologize for 21 having been -- I have slept since then. When we 22 moved from CAMA trunking which was the old -- that's 23 how they signaled the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa 24 Maria, but when we moved from that to SS7, we asked ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 93 1 our service provider, and this is something we were 2 able to work out in our financial arrangements with 3 them, we wanted two things. We wanted a new digital 4 class 5 selective routing switch, and they provided 5 us with a 5E Lucent product. The other thing we 6 wanted was diverse routing from all central offices 7 to that selective router. So that when a consumer 8 dialed 911, just because a backhoe was active in 9 their area -- and you have to remember in those days 10 construction in Houston was phenomenal -- Lord, send 11 us another boom -- the trunking, we were always 12 having trunking outages because of backhoes. So when 13 we went to SS7, we had the ability to say we want all 14 of our central offices to not be single threaded 15 meaning just one facility between central office and 16 selective routing tandem. They were able to provide 17 us that so that every single office, I think all but 18 one, were able to do diverse routing to get that 19 traffic to the tandem. 20 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Who is they? 21 THE WITNESS: The 911 service provider 22 who also happened to be the local exchange provider 23 in the Houston metropolitan area with the exception 24 of some Verizon, it used to be GTE, traffic. When ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 94 1 competition came to us, the Texas PUC, of course, had 2 to enact certain rules and one of the rules that they 3 allowed us to -- to fall back on was if you were a 4 new local exchange carrier in an area, then you had 5 to live up to the same standards as the incumbent 6 local exchange carrier. In our case the big thing 7 was if your switch served more than X customers, you 8 had to have battery backup and you had to have 9 generator backup for that central office so your CO 10 wouldn't go down and fail to provide dial tone. And 11 being on the Gulf Coast hurricanes and floods were a 12 big concern of ours. 13 The second thing was you couldn't come in 14 and just hook up one trunk to the 911 selective 15 routing tandem. You had to have diverse routing, and 16 it had to be SS7. Well, there were some carriers 17 that came in and said you say in here in the 18 agreement -- and they made -- PUC made these new 19 local exchange carriers sign agreements with the 911 20 authorities that they would do certain things. And 21 so in our spec we said, you know, if your switch 22 serves more than so many subscribers, you have to 23 have this battery backup and generator backup you 24 have to the SS7, and you have to have diverse ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 95 1 trunking to get there among some other things but 2 those were the big ones. And we got a lot of 3 pushback because that costs money to do that. 4 Mr. Stewart is asking shouldn't the 911 5 authority just kind of trust us? We have been in the 6 telephone business forever. We know what we are 7 doing. If we decide to selective route before we 8 give it to the new provider, that should not be your 9 concern. I am not trying to put words in his mouth, 10 but I am saying it's been my experience that when we 11 get into these kinds of competitive conversations, 12 the 911 authorities are always stuck with these types 13 of issues that say it's going to cost me more when it 14 shouldn't or we are going to introduce multiple 15 points of failure in my network that did not exist 16 before. So before it was the subscriber had a CO or 17 equivalent of a central office that gave a dial tone, 18 it went to some type of routing switching mechanism 19 that said I know where you are and I know who your 20 service provider is, so I will send you to the PSAP. 21 Those were kind of the three legs of the stool. And 22 we said that's good. And there was a lot of detail 23 that goes behind that. I am just giving you the 24 50,000 foot level. But, now, because of competition ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 96 1 the 911 authority, the governmental person 2 responsible for making those decisions, should not be 3 told we are going to introduce all of these elements 4 into -- into your 911 network that you are writing 5 the checks for by the way, but you can't tell us that 6 we can or cannot do it. 7 I am not saying they should be able to do 8 some type of weird veto power, but I am saying the 9 911 customer has to be involved in those types of 10 decisions because they impact the way the network 11 performs and they impact the money that is spent on 12 keeping these networks up to date. And this is 13 before we get into next generation 911. This is 14 before the witness to the bank robbery can take a 15 picture of the suspect's vehicle as it's fleeing and 16 send it to 911 which we can't do today. We're 17 talking about regular plain old services people are 18 subscribing for as we speak sitting in this room. 19 So I believe in the direct answer to your 20 question, and I know you hate my long answers, the 21 direct answer to your question is the 911 authority, 22 the governmental entity responsible for paying for 23 those services, should have input and should have 24 some direction in the way those services are ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 97 1 provided. 2 Q. So if we agree the governmental authority 3 should have input and wants to have the dial tone 4 provider reconfigure its network, maybe eliminate a 5 selective router and use line attribute routing or 6 some -- whatever other mechanism they deem the most 7 appropriate, then you agree with me, I take it, the 8 governmental authority has to pay for that? 9 A. If the change is one that puts you in the 10 exact same situation as all of your competitors, then 11 no. Unless you have to provide new data, unless you 12 have to do some kind of process that brings you data 13 elements that you don't already possess, then, no, 14 because you just -- you have become just like every 15 other local exchange dial tone provider or its 16 equivalent in the serving area. 17 You already possess the data that's 18 required, everything we talked about, especially in 19 my testimony today, you already possess that data. 20 You have every piece of information that you need to 21 become just like all of your competitors and feed 22 those telephone calls directly to the 911 service 23 provider, and I don't care who it is. If you are 24 selling softswitch equivalent of dial tone or some ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 98 1 kind of Dionne Warwick telepathic dial tone, it 2 doesn't matter. You now become just like every other 3 service provider out there, every other competitive 4 service provider, and you have the ability to trunk 5 your calls, to attribute those lines so that those 6 calls are trunked directly, especially in times of 7 default or some type of failure in the network or one 8 of the elements in the network, without adding 9 complexity. 10 And it would also appear to me, and if I 11 were the one writing the checks and signing up for 12 this service, I would say you are running a selective 13 routing database, and you are running a selective 14 routing switch. I don't know what your costs are 15 there, but it would seem to me that doing line 16 attribution is a lot cheaper than maintaining a 17 selective router and hooking up circuits for six 18 synchronized databases and those circuits are live 24 19 by 7 so they can synchronize 24 by 7 would be 20 dynamic. Again, I don't know your cost structure, 21 but I would say it really doesn't matter. You are 22 adding complexity to the network I am responsible 23 for. You are adding costs to the network I am 24 responsible for. And all you have to do is do the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 99 1 same thing that everybody else is doing and has been 2 forced to do since competition came around. That's 3 all we are asking. I would think if I were the guy 4 that were making that decision, that's all I would be 5 asking. 6 Q. So you are saying everybody else is doing 7 line attribute routing? 8 A. I would say to the -- and, again, I don't 9 think you should confuse my term line attribute 10 routing with the successful delivery of 911 calls 11 based on how the circuit is provisioned to the end 12 user that is getting the dial tone and that circuit 13 should be provisioned such that it directs that call 14 to the 911 service provider who has to selectively 15 route it and deliver it to the PSAP in the most 16 efficient, the least costly, the most robust manner 17 without adding complexities, points of failure, or 18 additional costs to me, the one that's going to have 19 to pay for it. 20 Obviously we are not in a goal 21 competitive environment and government services 22 cannot afford, you know, all the bells and whistles, 23 but if you are just -- if you now are a competitive 24 provider just like everybody else, that's -- that's ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 100 1 how you need to deliver those calls. And as somebody 2 who paid for that for many years, that's what we did 3 in my history and that's what so many of my 4 colleagues throughout the country are demanding. 5 Q. So you are not saying everybody does line 6 attribute routing now, right? 7 A. That would be a global statement that 8 would be ridiculous for me to make so I am not making 9 that. 10 Q. Do you know if that's what the preferred 11 method used in Ohio is being a little less global? 12 A. I don't know that there is anything 13 published in Ohio that says here is our preferred 14 method. I don't know. 15 Q. So you don't know whether anybody in Ohio 16 uses line attribute routing? 17 A. I don't know. 18 MR. STEWART: It's all yours. 19 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. Questions, 20 Mr. Twiss? 21 - - - 22 EXAMINATION 23 By Mr. Twiss: 24 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Melcher. Could you ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 101 1 please turn to page 9 of your testimony. 2 A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. In your amended answer, question and 4 answer, starting at 13 the 911 provider you describe 5 here, are those the entities serving the PSAP? In 6 other words, the 911 providers, are they E911 network 7 providers? 8 A. The term wireline is probably a valid 9 term, but they would be the service provider that 10 would take all of the traffic from everybody whose 11 providing service whether it's wireline or wireless 12 and brings it together, selectively routes, and 13 delivers it to the PSAP. 14 Q. Okay. And so would it be actually the 15 911 providers that are utilizing the attribute 16 routing or would it be the -- it would be the local 17 exchange carriers, would it not? 18 A. Local exchange carriers or equivalent 19 thereof that would be sending those calls to the 911 20 service provider for routing. 21 Q. So they are the ones that actually 22 utilize the attribute -- 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. -- line attribute routing rather than the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 102 1 911 provider which looks like your question there 2 asks -- it looks like it ascribes that the 911 3 providers are actually the ones using the line 4 attribute routing. 5 A. The line attribute routing would be at 6 whoever serves the consumers and provides them with 7 their dial tone or equivalent thereof. 8 Q. So would your answer be better, yes, if 9 the local exchange provider is the one providing 911 10 service as opposed to -- 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. We got it flipped. 13 A. We could interpret it that way, I guess, 14 and I am always up for better suggestions. If the 15 local exchange provider was also the 911 service 16 provider, then yes. 17 Q. Just to clarify is it your opinion that 18 class marking as described by Emparq and as they 19 utilize it to deliver traffic from their end office 20 to their collective routers, is that synonymous with 21 line attribute routing as you describe it? 22 A. Their term of class marking? 23 Q. Right, as a -- how they -- how they 24 define class marking and how they actually use it in ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 103 1 their network to -- 2 A. I would believe so. Again, I don't know 3 that I can answer that with perfect certainty because 4 it was a little confusing reviewing Mr. Maples' 5 testimony, but I do know that class marking is a term 6 that is used for a lot of things, in 911 is often 7 used for line attribute -- what I would call a data 8 element that would give an attribute to a line that 9 would dictate how that call is trunked. 10 Q. Okay. Now, I know that one of your 11 contentions with the select router -- selective 12 router routing is introduction of multiple points of 13 failure but could you tell me what data would be 14 missing if Emparq routed 911 traffic through their 15 selective router to Intrado's selective router rather 16 than routing line attribute routing? Would there be 17 any data missing from that call once it got to the 18 selective router, Intrado's selective router? 19 A. Well, it depends on, again, the 20 facilities in place but default routing the call 21 wouldn't go to the Intrado 911 service provider. In 22 many cases in a default router scenario the call 23 wouldn't be delivered or a best case the call would 24 be delivered to the wrong public safety agency where ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 104 1 if it were directly trunked to the 911 service 2 provider's router as opposed to being, you know, 3 secondarily switched, that call would be delivered 4 more successfully. That's one of the ones that 5 stands out. 6 Call delivery, if their facilities 7 failure -- if the facilities between their selective 8 router and the Intrado selective router lost calling 9 party number identification, you would have a default 10 routed call again. No ANI information would be 11 delivered, therefore, the routing could be wrong and 12 no ALI information or the location address stuff 13 would show up on the call taker's screen. 14 Q. Okay. You mentioned in that scenario 15 there would be complexities added to Intrado's 16 network ability you stated? 17 A. I think the complexities are more on the 18 side of the entity delivering the calls to Intrado, 19 so you are introducing those complexities and the 20 related points of failure and points of -- you know, 21 the extra layers, all of which have risk. Once the 22 call gets to the 911 selective router, if all of the 23 information is appropriate that's delivered with it, 24 then it's routed and moved on so there is no ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 105 1 additional complexity there except for what goes on 2 behind the scenes. If there is a need to synchronize 3 the two MSAGs or two separate running databases, 4 then, yes, you have additional complexities to the 5 new 911 service provider, in this case Intrado, that 6 they normally wouldn't have to deal with because, 7 now, they are synchronizing with others. 8 You have also added complexity on the 9 side of Embarq because they now have to synchronize 10 with somebody they have never synchronized with 11 before and do a process that is not common in their 12 practice today. 13 Q. Please turn to the next page. Let's see, 14 at -- starting at line 11 you mention "Internet 15 service providers use this process today." What do 16 you mean there by "internet service provider"? 17 A. Let me go right above that to make sure I 18 know what we are talking about. Okay. Internet 19 service providers that are providing voice over 20 internet services, the common term VSP or voice 21 service provider as it relates to an internet service 22 provider. 23 Q. And would that be all internet service 24 providers or just ones that are connected to the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 106 1 PSTN? 2 A. Well, those that would be connected to 3 the PSTN for delivery of 911 calls. 4 Q. Okay. Going further down the page there 5 at 21 and 22, lines 21 and 22, you state that "It is 6 my understanding that there is an obligation on all 7 telecommunications providers in Ohio to deliver 911 8 calls to the appropriate PSAP." Is that -- are they 9 indeed obligated to do that or just to the -- to the 10 PSAP's wireline E911 provider or do you consider them 11 synonomous? 12 A. Again, always open to better wording, 13 probably it should be obligation on all providers in 14 Ohio to deliver or cause to be delivered 911 calls to 15 the appropriate PSAP because if you are not the 16 one -- if you are not the one who is the 911 service 17 provider, if you are a different local exchange 18 carrier or the equivalent thereof that is just 19 handing calls off to be trunked and routed to the 20 appropriate PSAP, then you are causing to be routed 21 by delivering the call with the appropriate data 22 elements that are needed. Does that answer your 23 question? 24 Q. Sort of. So in a situation where Emparq ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 107 1 is the voice provider and Intrado is the E911 2 provider, is Emparq obligated to get that call all 3 the way to the PSAP or -- 4 A. No. 5 Q. -- if Intrado for some reason fails to 6 get it to the PSAP, is that they failed in their 7 obligation? 8 A. If you are talking from a liability 9 concern, I would rather not address that, I am not an 10 attorney, but just from call delivery my 11 understanding, and I was talking with counsel, that 12 just as every other state a competitive carrier has 13 an obligation to deliver 911 calls appropriately to 14 the serving 911 service provider. And, again, most 15 competitive carriers because this is something new 16 were not the 911 service provider because they were 17 new in the business and most of them just barely 18 wanted to take on dial tone service, they certainly 19 didn't want to take on 911, so the rules were put 20 into place they had to effectively deliver that 21 traffic along with the associated appropriate data 22 which would be the calling party number and the like 23 have to match it up against the MSAGs over to the 24 appropriate trunk group to the appropriate selective ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 108 1 router, but they would either cause or -- cause to be 2 delivered that 911 traffic to the appropriate entity 3 that would be responsible for its eventual selective 4 routing and delivery to the PSAP. 5 MR. TWISS: That's all I have. 6 - - - 7 EXAMINATION 8 By Ms. Sternisha: 9 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Melcher. Just a few 10 questions I wanted to clarify. I wanted to hear 11 about the cost discussion. So are you saying that 12 there would be no costs for Embarq to implement line 13 attribute routing in its network? 14 A. Whether or not they incur costs to 15 implement it I cannot answer and what those costs 16 would be and what the level of effort involved in 17 that I cannot answer. 18 What I would say is that, again, this is 19 my personal experience in Texas and the experience of 20 most of my colleagues that are moving to new 21 providers of 911 services, that in a competitive 22 environment all of those who are delivering 911 23 traffic to the service provider, whether it's the 24 incumbent that's been doing it for the last 20 years ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 109 1 or whether it's somebody totally new, the choice was 2 made by the guys who write the checks to have this 3 provider provide the service, so everybody has to 4 deliver their calls to that provider. If the method 5 for delivering that call was something that came from 6 traditional 911 call routing when the incumbent 7 thought they would be that provider of service 8 forever so they just did it the way they saw best to 9 do it and, now, they become just another carrier that 10 is delivering 911 calls to the new entity selective 11 router, the effort has to be the same. I don't know 12 how one could justify to the governmental entity that 13 because of competition I have had to do a lot of 14 other things. I have had to change the way I 15 attribute those lines to go to the long distance 16 carrier because since Judge Green ruled years ago we 17 now have new long distance providers so, now, I have 18 got to trunk them to different interchange carrier 19 tandems. I have to do line attributes for that 20 subscriber line because of the way the tax codes work 21 and, you know, the municipal franchise fees and the 22 way that works and I have to deliver the 911 calls 23 appropriately as well. So that is something that 24 everybody has to do and because the incumbent did it ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 110 1 a different way and they are no longer the 911 2 service provider, they are just passing on traffic, I 3 don't think the governmental entity should be forced 4 to absorb any costs that make them basically the same 5 as every other provider out there. 6 I know that we refused to pay those costs 7 in Texas and, you know, we didn't -- we weren't 8 forced to do that because in the spirit of 9 competition they are now just everybody else, you 10 know, sending 911 traffic to a tandem just like long 11 distance to a tandem. 12 Q. But they already had an incumbent network 13 in place, whereas, a new entrant carrier, CLEC, could 14 start out in that method with a line attribute 15 routing, but they would obviously have to make some 16 changes. 17 A. The networks are much the same. What we 18 are talking about is a decision, an operational 19 decision, and I am not challenging that, I am just 20 saying it is what it is. They made an operational 21 decision that when they were the only phone company 22 in town, they handled long distance, they handled 23 everything, this is the way we set up our 24 provisioning for our subscribers. Then long distance ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 111 1 competition came along, and they had to change the 2 way they provisioned those lines so there were 3 attributes that needed to be added to those lines to 4 change that. Competition in 911 comes along, it's 5 exactly the same thing. 6 Q. So bottom line is you think it's the cost 7 of doing business in a competitive market and there 8 should be no compensation to Emparq for that 9 function? 10 A. I would -- I would reference, and I 11 believe I am correct, and, again, I was very young 12 when this happened, but I don't believe MCI had to 13 pay in our area Southwestern Bell to change those 14 line attributes to trunk those calls to me, MCI, the 15 new long distance provider in town. They just had to 16 send us the traffic that the subscriber says I want 17 my 1 plus calls to be to MCI, those calls had to come 18 to them. They, of course, had to pay for their 19 trunks, they had to pay for their ports, but they 20 didn't have to pay for that line attribute routing 21 just because there was a new competitive provider in 22 town. I believe that to be the same. It's been my 23 observation -- as a matter of fact, I don't know of a 24 case in the United States where switching -- again, ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 112 1 this new 911 selective routing provision is 2 relatively new, but I don't know of a case in the 3 country where the 911 customer, the governmental 4 entity, had to absorb those costs. 5 MS. STERNISHA: Thank you. 6 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Kotting. 7 - - - 8 EXAMINATION 9 By Mr. Kotting: 10 Q. Good afternoon. I just want to make sure 11 I understand a couple of things about the database 12 and database synchronization you talk about, so I am 13 going to set up a hypothetical and have you kind of 14 walk me through some of the database functions. I'm 15 a county PSAP coordinator, and I choose George to be 16 my E911 service provider to avoid picking any 17 particular name. 18 A. Can the county guy be Bill? Bill picks 19 George? 20 Q. Sure. If you would like, that's fine. 21 Who holds the MSAG, the master street address guide? 22 A. The MSAG is actually held -- the 23 repository, the disc drives on which that data spins, 24 is held at the 911 service provider level. However, ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 113 1 input into that MSAG, as a matter of fact, daily 2 input like, you know, internet connectivity to that 3 MSAG with some scrubbing because of all the passwords 4 and securities that goes along but access to that 5 MSAG now is held by the government -- Bill, the 6 government guy, his employees, they have access to 7 that MSAG to say we have added these new streets 8 because a new subdivision, you know, was built or we 9 changed this jurisdictional boundary because this EMS 10 provider lost its contract, it is going to a new EMS 11 provider, and they have a new answering point with 12 different, you know, numbers, so Bill has access to 13 George's copy of the MSAG, if you will. 14 Q. Okay. Now, you just mentioned copy of 15 the MSAG. Isn't there only one MSAG? 16 A. There is -- there is only one valid MSAG. 17 However, copies of that MSAG are distributed 18 regularly to every competitive dial tone. And when I 19 say dial tone, I am only saying dial tone or 20 equivalent thereof provider because it could be a 21 Vonage that's nationwide with one switch out of New 22 York, that kind of thing. 23 Q. Right. 24 A. So every dial tone provider in that ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 114 1 jurisdictional area gets a copy of the MSAG because 2 they have to know, just like Emparq routing its 3 traffic, they have to know how to deliver that 4 traffic, which selective router to send it to and 5 which data elements need to go along with it so the 6 call is delivered appropriately. 7 Q. So the MSAG right now that George holds 8 that Bill keeps updating is already synchronized to 9 all of the various CLECs? 10 A. That is a major challenge in the industry 11 today. Technically that's the way it's supposed to 12 work. George is the gatekeeper, if you will. He is 13 responsible for MSAG and his employees look at it 14 every single day. You know, they scrub it. Every 15 time there is a routing error they go in and try to 16 figure out what the error was and they fix it. They 17 call up Bill's employees and say, hey, Bill, this is 18 what we found. It looks like this fire department 19 changed and somebody forgot to tell us and Bill will 20 say, oops, you know, yes, that's correct. And then 21 as those changes are made, copies of that MSAG have 22 to go to everybody who is participating in sending 23 calls to the 911 selective router. Is that a perfect 24 science? The answer in this country is, no, it's not ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 115 1 a perfect science because a lot of these competitive 2 providers do it different -- let's just say they have 3 difference levels of success in maintaining that on a 4 daily basis, much less a dynamic by the minute basis, 5 which is one of the great concerns to Bill when he 6 says I want to make my 911 service provider George. 7 He and his team seem to be really good at this. I 8 want him to do it. Now, we have another carrier or 9 carriers say, well, we want to keep our MSAG 10 selective router. We want to selectively route 11 before you selectively route. I immediately once I 12 catch my breath again and my pulse starts I have to 13 say why are we doing this because this introduces 14 complexities that I don't think I want in my network. 15 Can you justify these to me from a technical basis? 16 Q. Okay. Now, each provider updates their 17 ANI based upon changes to the MSAG; is that correct? 18 A. The ones that are selling the dial tone 19 to the subscriber are responsible for ANI. 20 Q. Right. And they each update their 21 databases, their ANI databases, based upon the MSAG 22 or they're supposed to. 23 A. Well, ANI would change like if you 24 changed your home phone number so, yes, that ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 116 1 information would have to flow through the system 2 MSAG and everything so that, now, we had the new 3 phone number assigned to that correct DSM. 4 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Just clarify the ANI. 5 THE WITNESS: Automatic number 6 information or calling party identification. 7 Q. Thank you. The selective router 8 database, how is that kept current? 9 A. Again, it's a combination of effort. 10 It's a team effort. The selective routing database 11 basically is the ESN database, if you will, the 12 emergency services number. The emergency services 13 number reflects an identification of emergency 14 service zone that has common service providers, three 15 common service providers, so if you are all getting 16 the same fire, the same police, the same EMS, and the 17 same geopolitical, geographic area, you are going to 18 have a common emergency service zone, therefore, a 19 common emergency ESN and that database is what 20 resides either outboard of the switch if it's where 21 the switch goes outboard and makes a dip into an 22 outboard database not residing in the switch, or it's 23 a table that is kept up inside the switch, or if it's 24 softswitch, it's kind of all in one big umbrella. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 117 1 Q. Okay. Let me run my question by you 2 again. 3 A. Okay. Sorry. 4 Q. How is that database updated? 5 A. Okay. When a jurisdictional -- there are 6 several ways, but I will give you the standard 7 methodology. Bill knows when a fire department 8 boundary line changes or when a new subdivision is 9 added, so Bill works with George's folks, and they 10 update that database to include the new information 11 that would be in the MSAG. So it could be that Main 12 Street only ran out to the 2000 block, but somebody 13 came in and extended Main Street because there is a 14 whole new shopping center or whatever, so, now, Main 15 Street goes from -- used to end at 1999, now, it goes 16 from 2000 to 2199 so that has to be entered into the 17 MSAG. So we know the street exists and then their 18 attributes, which emergency service zone number, is 19 it the same law, fire, and EMS that was at 1999? 20 Well, that account now has the same ESN or is 21 included in that ESN. 22 Another example would be, 911, what is 23 your emergency? Hi. I am at 1401 Main Street, and I 24 need an ambulance. Well, ma'am, we don't serve 1401 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 118 1 Main Street. That's not our jurisdiction. That's 2 the neighboring jurisdiction. Oh, well, then. But 3 we will transfer you. Hang on. So they do a manual 4 transfer to the neighboring jurisdiction. That shows 5 up as a database error so the dispatcher would say I 6 got a call I wasn't supposed to get. That goes 7 through the system as well. It would initially go to 8 George's people who would collaborate with Bill's 9 people who would say why did 1499 come up as an ESN2 10 when it should have been ESN3, and they figure out 11 what happened. Could have been something in the 12 service order process that was wrong. It could have 13 been an MSAG addition or change that just didn't get 14 updated for whatever reason. But that's another way 15 that that database is maintained. 16 Q. So, in other words, the SRDB, the 17 selective data router database, is also updated off 18 of the MSAG. 19 A. Yes, sir. The SRDB is a product of the 20 MSAG. 21 MR. KOTTING: Thank you. 22 THE WITNESS: Certainly. 23 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Based on the 24 questions of the panel are there any other questions? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 119 1 MS. KISER: No further questions. 2 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Stewart? 3 MR. STEWART: Yes, I have some. 4 - - - 5 FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION 6 By Mr. Stewart: 7 Q. Mr. Melcher, you were asked I think by 8 Mr. Twiss whether there was any data lost in the 9 segment where the call went from the Emparq selective 10 router to the Intrado selective router. Do you 11 recall that? 12 A. If there was any data lost, is that how 13 that question was posed? 14 Q. I thought that's what it had to do with, 15 data information. I can't quote it but do you 16 remember that question? 17 A. I remember discussing potential failures 18 on transferring a call from one tandem to another 19 tandem. 20 Q. From what? 21 A. From one selective router to another 22 selective router, I remember addressing a question of 23 that nature. 24 Q. Well, your answer included a lot of ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 120 1 things that weren't really responsive to his 2 question. 3 MS. KISER: Objection. 4 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Stewart, try to 5 limit it to what it is you are looking for. 6 Q. What is your answer to that question 7 then, what, if anything, is lost between selective 8 routers? 9 A. Under normal function nothing is lost. 10 But the addition of the second selective router of 11 data processing, if you will, the potential for loss 12 certainly exists. And I have answered that several 13 times. I can do it again if you would like. 14 Q. Under normal circumstances nothing is 15 lost. 16 A. Under normal circumstances when 17 everything is working as it should, there is not a 18 loss of data that I can think of off the top of my 19 head where a call would be transferred from one 20 tandem selective routing entity to another selective 21 routing entity. 22 Q. Now, in the context of that answer you 23 referred to default routed calls. Do you recall 24 that? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 121 1 A. I may have in that context. I am not 2 sure. 3 Q. What is a default routed call? 4 A. Well, there is an additional point of 5 potential default when you add secondary switching. 6 Initially in the incumbent design that Emparq is 7 working on today, it's my understanding if it's like 8 everybody else in the country, which I am sure that 9 it is, a central office can default route the call if 10 the selective router fails. So basically it's 11 similar in the CAMA network to an SS7 network, we 12 have used those terms before, that the central office 13 basically winks, it winks at the selective router, 14 the selective router says, yeah, lay it on me. The 15 central office delivers it along with the calling 16 party ANI or calling party telephone number in the 17 case where the selective router fails to acknowledge 18 the wink as a default routing call. So that call 19 would be trunked appropriately based on financial 20 attribute, if you will, some type of data element to 21 the subscriber data line in a manner that would be 22 consistent with whatever the default routing 23 practices are for that network. 24 If you -- to answer your question ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 122 1 specifically now that I have given you the 2 background, in a secondary selective router process 3 if, again, something failed between the serving 4 entities, whether it's the serving central office or 5 the initial serving selective router to the final 6 selective router, again, any of those scenarios could 7 introduce a situation where the calling party number 8 would not be transferred or somehow the information 9 to route that thing is not delivered, and so you 10 could have secondary defaults, if you will, other 11 points of failure for default. 12 Q. That's a fairly rare occurrence, isn't 13 it? 14 A. Not in a CAMA network, in an SS7 network 15 there are mitigating operating procedures and 16 technologies that do mitigate that a lot, but you 17 have got to remember it's not just the technology 18 that delivers the calling party number that we are 19 talking about that causes a default route. A default 20 route can also be failure of the automation of the 21 selective routing database, maintaining of the 22 selective routing database, human error so, again, 23 you are introducing a second point of failure. Where 24 the calling party number is delivered, you're right, ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 123 1 failure to deliver CPI or ANI is rare in an SS7 2 network electronic because there is ways to say, hey, 3 I didn't get it, would you send it back to me again 4 as opposed to the old mechanical one, but SRDB, MSAG, 5 all of those could be not updated or, you know, not 6 initialized at all or have bad information in them 7 and that call would wrongly route. 8 Q. Do you know anything about Emparq's Ohio 9 network and whether it's SS7? 10 A. Whether Emparq is using SS7s between 11 their service COs and the 911 selective router tandem 12 or not, I don't know specifically. It is -- it has 13 become the de facto industry practice. 14 Q. Okay. Did you look at Emparq's responses 15 to Intrado's data requests? 16 A. I looked at a lot of Embarq's testimony, 17 but I don't know if it was specific to their data 18 requests. 19 Q. Okay. So you don't know how many default 20 routed calls Emparq had in the year 2007, do you? 21 A. I don't know personally. I could also 22 tell you it is common throughout the industry that 23 maybe the ILEC doesn't know how many default routed 24 calls they had either. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 124 1 MR. STEWART: I move to strike every part 2 of the answer after I don't know how many Emparq had. 3 The gratuitous insult should be stricken. 4 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: The motion to strike 5 is granted. 6 THE WITNESS: It wasn't intended as such. 7 Q. Now, you talked about MSAG failure in 8 your answer, didn't you? MSAG might not be updated, 9 something wrong with the MSAG. Now, if there is 10 something wrong with an MSAG, then even if a line 11 attribute routing is used, there is a problem, isn't 12 there? 13 A. As a matter of fact, your example is -- 14 is very timely based on the exchange. The ILEC would 15 not know that a call was wrongly routed if the MSAG 16 was -- had information and the call was successfully 17 delivered which hence my answer before, they wouldn't 18 know that they had a misrouted call unless the PSAP 19 or, you know, some other entity told them this call 20 was misrouted. That's what I was trying to answer 21 for you before. 22 MSAG synchronization is key in this part 23 because you are initially routing a call that is 24 already going to be routed by a party that is ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 125 1 responsible for the MSAG, not a copy of it but is 2 responsible for the MSAG, that is working with the 3 911 customer, Bill in our previous example, that is 4 responsible for working with him, that knows all of 5 the geopolitical jurisdictional issues, that is 6 familiar, that has ultimate responsibility for the 7 information in the MSAG. So if your -- if the 8 initial switch that is selective routing, if it's 9 MSAG and ultimately it's SRDB, the selective routing 10 database, are not completely synchronized dynamically 11 especially, then the possibility for misrouted calls 12 exists and the serving selective routing tandem in 13 this case because it's the preswitching tandem, if 14 you will, would not even know there was an error. 15 Q. If Emparq is selectively routing a call 16 to Intrado's selective router when Intrado is the 911 17 service provider, doesn't Intrado utilize the MSAG to 18 deliver the call to the appropriate PSAP? 19 A. Intrado is responsible for that MSAG, 20 yes. 21 Q. So problems with the MSAG are independent 22 of whether Emparq uses a selective router or line 23 attribute routing to get the call to Intrado, right? 24 A. Absolutely not. If Emparq were using ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 126 1 the -- their selective routing to trunk calls into 2 Intrado and there were mistakes in their selective 3 routing database or in that MSAG, then absolutely 4 not. It would not be independent of that. 5 Q. Why -- why do you claim that assuming 6 that Emparq gets the call from its selective router 7 to Intrado's selective router with the ANI and ALI? 8 A. If you're selectively routing, then you 9 are saying I'm going to send calls to Intrado for 10 this area and I am going to selectively route my own 11 for this area and there may be an Intrado version B 12 in another area and you will selectively route to 13 them. If your MSAG is not correct, then you won't 14 get the call to Intrado or the Intrado B version if 15 it's not correct. If your MSAG was incorrect but you 16 still got the call to them and they were able to use 17 the updated MSAG information to -- to redirect that 18 call, then they have caught what initially would be 19 your mistake and corrected it and delivered it 20 appropriately. But if your initial MSAG error did 21 not get it on the appropriate trunk route or did not 22 get it on the appropriate trunk route to get it to 23 Intrado in the first place, then that would be a 24 misrouted call and may or may not be recoverable by ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 127 1 being transferred from PSAP to PSAP. 2 Q. So the key is you have got to update MSAG 3 appropriately, right? 4 A. Updating the MSAG is a key element in an 5 area where you have secondary switching and all of 6 the issues that go along with secondary switching. 7 Q. You also talked about facility failure 8 between the Emparq selective router and the Intrado 9 selective router. Do you recall that? 10 A. Yes, sir. 11 Q. And what did you mean by facility 12 failure, the actual T1 or whatever the trunking is? 13 A. Or any of the termination points that 14 those T1s -- you know, whatever electronics are 15 involved and facilities are involved from getting the 16 call from point A to point B are additional points of 17 failure just like in any facilities. 18 Q. Okay. The potential for facilities 19 failure, electronics, exists even if the call goes 20 from Emparq's CO to Intrado's selective router, 21 doesn't it? 22 A. Potential for facilities failure always 23 exists. 24 Q. Now, you said you were pretty young when ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 128 1 the IXC competition started, and you thought the IXCs 2 didn't pay for the cost of shall we call it equal 3 access. Are you familiar with that term? 4 A. Well, yes, I am familiar with the term. 5 What they paid for and what they didn't pay for as 6 far as port allocations and, you know, trunk 7 terminations, charges, and all those kinds of things 8 I know was a point of debate for many years. I can't 9 answer specifically what they paid for, what they 10 didn't pay for, but I do know that when competition 11 was introduced, it changed the way a lot of incumbent 12 local exchange carriers had to operate their 13 networks. They just had to do things differently. 14 If they had to do new things and things that they 15 didn't have at their disposal were needed, new tools 16 were required, oftentimes they were allowed and, 17 again, I can't quote you any specifics, but I do know 18 that there were allowances made for cost recovery on 19 those. I am very familiar with cost recovery when it 20 pertains to wireless and 911, so I understand the 21 whole cost recovery theory and mechanisms but 22 doing -- trying to get cost recovery for changing 23 from one procedure to another procedure where an 24 incumbent local exchange carrier was the selective ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 129 1 routing provider and is no longer the selective 2 routing provider, I know that I fought and did fight 3 and would never have allowed our governmental entity 4 to pay for those costs to change because it is what 5 is required to level the playing field for 6 competition. 7 MR. STEWART: The question had to do with 8 IXCs and LECs' cost recovery for routing calls to 9 IXCs with the advent of competition. Accordingly the 10 last several sentences were nonresponsive, 11 Mr. Melcher's discussion of his fight with paying for 12 ILEC changes for selective routing. And accordingly 13 I move to strike it. 14 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I will grant that 15 motion to strike. 16 Q. You are familiar -- are you familiar with 17 originating access charges? 18 A. The term as it is used from a serving 19 central office to facilities at like an interexchange 20 carrier office? 21 Q. Well, are you familiar with the fact that 22 interexchange carriers pay originating access charges 23 to local exchange carriers when a customer of the 24 local exchange carrier originates a toll or long ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 130 1 distance calling? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. But based on what you said a minute ago, 4 I take it you don't know whether those access charges 5 now or ever did reimburse the local exchange carriers 6 for the cost of reconfiguring their networks to 7 deliver toll calls to more than one area exchange 8 carrier; is that right? 9 A. How those funds were allocated is not 10 within my -- my area of expertise. 11 Q. So because you don't know that you can't 12 draw an analogy between cost recovery in the long 13 distance competition market on behalf of ILECs and 14 cost recovery for local exchange companies in the 15 competitive 911 context? 16 MS. KISER: I am going to object to this 17 line of questioning. Counsel appears to be 18 testifying. The witness has said that he doesn't 19 understand that area and can't testify with respect 20 to access charges. 21 MR. STEWART: Well, your Honor, may I 22 respond? 23 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Yes, Mr. Stewart. 24 MR. STEWART: The witness tries to equate ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 131 1 competitive 911 service charges with competitive toll 2 service, and for just one example if you look at the 3 answer on page 11, it says "The Commission 4 appropriately determined it was acceptable for toll 5 competition," therefore, they should do it for 911. 6 He is drawing the analogies, and I am showing or 7 attempting to show that the analogy doesn't hold 8 because he can't say that certain important facts are 9 the same. 10 MS. KISER: I am going to renew my 11 objection. I'm sorry. 12 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I understand, 13 Mr. Stewart. At this juncture we are supposed to be 14 limiting your questioning to those questions that 15 were asked by the panel. Can you tie it back to 16 questions that were asked by one of the panel 17 members? 18 MR. STEWART: Well, certainly. I forget 19 the exact question, actually I forget who asked it, 20 but it was the question had to do with IXCs and 21 competition, and Mr. Melcher said, well, I was really 22 young and 100 other things, but it definitely was 23 asked by one of the panel members. Ms. Sternisha is 24 nodding. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 132 1 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I'll allow the 2 question. 3 MR. STEWART: Okay. Thank you. 4 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: If you could repeat 5 it for the witness. 6 MR. STEWART: May I have it read back? 7 (Question read.) 8 A. Okay. As I understand the question, I am 9 being asked were the ILECs able to recover costs 10 because of competition by introducing interexchange 11 carrier competition. What those charges were, that 12 happened before I was, you know, in telecom 13 administration or was paying for those kinds of 14 things, so directly for an interexchange carrier was 15 before my time, but wireless cost recovery certainly 16 was not before my time. VSP, voice service provider 17 over internet, certainly not before my time, and so I 18 can address what was recoverable in a competitive 19 environment. Does that answer? 20 Q. Not all. The analogy you attempted to 21 draw was between competitive 911 and competitive toll 22 competition, didn't have anything to do with wireless 23 or VoIP. You admitted you don't know whether LECs 24 received a cost recovery for the steps they had to ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 133 1 take to implement routing that made toll competition 2 possible. So, thus, you can't fit that analogy to 3 the one you are trying to make to 911 competition 4 where you are saying, no, ILECs shouldn't get this 5 toll -- shouldn't get cost compensation for 6 reconfiguring the networks, very simple point. 7 A. I am not sure I know how to answer that. 8 I am -- if you are talking about a specific analogy 9 for interexchange carriers, I am less conversant in 10 that than I am in wireless and VSP and other -- and 11 CLECs. I am conversant in that cost recovery. 12 Interexchange carrier was earlier. 13 MR. STEWART: No further questions. 14 Thanks. 15 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Thank you. 16 Thank you, Mr. Melcher. 17 At this point in time would Intrado like 18 to move for Exhibit No. 1 to be admitted into the 19 record? 20 MS. KISER: Intrado so moves for the 21 Exhibit 1, Mr. Melcher's testimony, be moved into 22 evidence. 23 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Any objection, 24 Ms. Stewart? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 134 1 MR. STEWART: No, your Honor. 2 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: There being none 3 Intrado Exhibit 1 shall be admitted as part of the 4 record at this time. 5 (EXHIBIT ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE.) 6 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: And, Mr. Stewart, 7 would you care to move Emparq Exhibit 1 as part of 8 the record? 9 MR. STEWART: Yes, your Honor. 10 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Any objections? 11 MS. KISER: Moving in Exhibit No. 1 of 12 Emparq, no. 13 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: There being none 14 Emparq Exhibit No. 1 shall be admitted as part of the 15 record at this time. 16 (EXHIBIT ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE.) 17 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: And if Intrado could 18 please call their next witness. 19 MS. KISER: Ms. Clugy. 20 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Please come forward. 21 - - - 22 23 24 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 135 1 2 CYNTHIA CLUGY 3 being first duly sworn, as prescribed by law, was 4 examined and testified as follows: 5 DIRECT EXAMINATION 6 By Ms. Kiser: 7 Q. Ms. Clugy, could you please state your 8 name and title for the record. 9 A. My name is Cynthia Clugy. I am a 10 consultant for Intrado, Inc., assisting in 251 11 interconnection. 12 Q. And do you have -- did you cause to have 13 prepared today the testimony of Cynthia Clugy on 14 behalf of Intrado Communications? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. And do you have any additions, 17 corrections, or supplemental -- supplements to that 18 testimony? 19 A. Yes, I do. My testimony deals with end 20 user and some issues surrounding that, and in the 21 testimony of Mr. Maples he did offer an alternative 22 definition to end user for our consideration. We 23 have looked at that, and we are submitting for 24 Embarq's review that definition as proposed by ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 136 1 Mr. Maples with some changes. If I may read that 2 definition. 3 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Certainly. If you 4 could please tell us where it is that you will be 5 adding. 6 MS. KISER: To assist people in the room 7 I have a copy of it that I would like to have marked 8 as Exhibit Intrado Exhibit 2. 9 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. Well, why 10 don't we call that Exhibit 3. 11 MS. KISER: Exhibit 3. 12 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: And 2 will be 13 Ms. Clugy's actual testimony. 14 MS. KISER: Okay. Very good. 15 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Because I assume 16 that's an addendum? 17 MS. KISER: Yes. 18 THE WITNESS: Yes, and I do believe the 19 actual -- well, the definition that was originally 20 proposed from Emparq that I am addressing is not in 21 my testimony. It's in Mr. Maples' testimony. 22 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. But what is 23 being passed around by counsel is -- 24 MS. KISER: Is Mr. Maples' proposed -- ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 137 1 THE WITNESS: Definition. 2 MS. KISER: -- definition of end user in 3 response to the party's negotiations. 4 THE WITNESS: Correct. 5 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. We have edits 6 that Intrado is offering. 7 THE WITNESS: Correct. 8 MS. KISER: Looked at it and as proposed. 9 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: We will mark 10 Ms. Clugy's direct testimony as Intrado Exhibit 2 and 11 as Intrado Exhibit 3 shall be the amended -- proposed 12 amended definition of end user. 13 (EXHIBITS MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.) 14 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, I didn't hear 15 some of that. But is Intrado saying this is 16 Mr. Maples' definition as modified with the strikeout 17 by Intrado? 18 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: That's my 19 understanding. 20 MR. STEWART: Okay. Thanks. 21 Your Honor, what I would suggest in the 22 hopes it will eliminate cross-examination on this 23 particular issue is that we be allowed a few minutes 24 to look at this and converse because Intrado is ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 138 1 essentially proposing a new definition, and I don't 2 know whether it's going to be agreeable to us, but if 3 it is, then it will change and reduce cross so if we 4 might have a short break. 5 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Certainly. 6 MR. STEWART: I think that might be good. 7 Thank you. 8 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I think that would be 9 an efficient use of time. 10 MR. STEWART: I hope. 11 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Take about 5 minutes. 12 (Recess taken.) 13 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Why don't we go back 14 on the record at this time and, Mr. Stewart. 15 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, we looked at 16 this proposed new definition, and we cannot agree to 17 it. It's unclear to me, well, where we left off and 18 whether Ms. Clugy was adding this to her testimony or 19 wanted to add it to her testimony or was just 20 throwing it out as a possible settlement offer, but 21 if it's the former -- well, if the intent is to 22 insert this into the testimony as the new proposed 23 definition, I object. And my understanding of 24 changes and corrections to testimony don't include ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 139 1 completely new substance. Typographical errors, 2 minor things like that rather than introducing a new 3 concept or a new definition. It would be unfair to 4 expect us to -- to respond via cross-examination or 5 anything else to new testimony that's introduced to 6 when the witness gets on the stand. So I don't think 7 this fits within the accepted do you have any changes 8 or corrections to your testimony. 9 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Ms. Kiser. 10 MS. KISER: First of all, it's common 11 practice for individuals who are testifying to make 12 corrections, additions, or supplement their 13 testimony. In addition on page 68 of Mr. Maples' 14 testimony Emparq provided to us a proposal to review 15 the definition for end user. We have reviewed that 16 proposal that was placed in his testimony at page 68, 17 line 11, and offered -- Ms. Clugy is here to respond 18 to end user issues -- a response to that proposal. 19 If Emparq is not interested in the 20 proposed modification to what they have put on the 21 table, we certainly understand that, but I do not 22 believe there is any grounds for striking that 23 proposed offer and response to the offer made by 24 Mr. Maples at 68. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 140 1 MR. STEWART: Well, I take it what you 2 are referring to in Mr. Maples' testimony was in his 3 testimony as filed so that's a significant difference 4 between Mr. Maples' testimony and what you are 5 attempting to do with Ms. Clugy's testimony. We are 6 not changing Mr. Maples' testimony the second he gets 7 on the stand, and it's certainly not customary for 8 that to be done, not in Ohio in my experience. 9 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: The question I have 10 for Intrado is this intended to be in lieu of 11 components of what has been marked as Intrado Exhibit 12 2 or is this basically supplementation to say this is 13 an alternative to what is contained in Exhibit 2? 14 THE WITNESS: My testimony is it's a 15 supplement. 16 MS. KISER: It would be a supplemental to 17 her testimony in response to the latest proposal by 18 Emparq. 19 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Why wasn't this 20 included within Ms. Clugy's original testimony? 21 MS. KISER: Because the testimonies were 22 filed at the same time and we didn't have the 23 proposal at the time the testimony was filed. And 24 the parties have been -- Intrado has been evaluating ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 141 1 for the last several days closely Emparq's testimony 2 and in looking at what Mr. Maples proposed made an 3 effort to reach resolution of the end user with the 4 acceptance of their language with modification. 5 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Where is the initial 6 definition of end user contained within Ms. Clugy's 7 testimony? 8 THE WITNESS: It is not within my 9 testimony. 10 MS. KISER: It's at issue in her 11 testimony. 12 THE WITNESS: Yes. 13 MS. KISER: The issue of what should the 14 definition of end user be is throughout her 15 testimony. 16 MS. COLLINS: The bottom of page 3, your 17 Honor. 18 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. At this point 19 in time I don't need to deal with any admissibility 20 issues since we haven't moved for the admissibility 21 of anything. The documents speak for themselves, and 22 we can go forward and cross-examine. Mr. Stewart can 23 certainly choose to cross-examine on Exhibit 3 or not 24 cross-examine on Exhibit 3. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 142 1 MR. STEWART: Well, your Honor, it sounds 2 like rebuttal testimony to me and that's why I object 3 and counsel says they are responding to Mr. Maples' 4 testimony. That's what rebuttal testimony does. We 5 don't have rebuttal testimony, so it strikes me as 6 completely inappropriate to say here is some more 7 testimony on our side because we are responding to 8 the other side. 9 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: I understand what you 10 are saying, Mr. Stewart. If we want, we could deal 11 with the admissibility issue now, or we could deal 12 with it on the back end. That's all I am saying. If 13 it assists you in your cross-examination to know 14 whether or not we are going to admit this, at this 15 point in time, I'm going to say that, yes, this is, 16 in essence, rebuttal testimony and should not be 17 before us at this moment. Certainly at a later point 18 in time if we entertain rebuttal testimony, we can 19 deal with it then. So if that helps in terms of you 20 orchestrating your cross-examination, you have your 21 answer. 22 MR. STEWART: Yes. I object or move to 23 strike it's addition to her testimony. 24 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. Now, if we can ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 143 1 continue on the re -- or on the direct testimony. 2 Q. (By Ms. Kiser) Do you have any other 3 changes or corrections to your testimony, Ms. Clugy? 4 A. No. That would be it. 5 MS. KISER: Ms. Clugy is available for 6 cross. 7 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Stewart. 8 MR. STEWART: Thank you. 9 - - - 10 CROSS-EXAMINATION 11 By Mr. Stewart: 12 Q. Good afternoon, Ms. Clugy. 13 A. Good afternoon. 14 Q. Let's talk about end users for a moment. 15 When is an entity that is purchasing service from 16 Intrado an end user of Intrado? 17 A. When is an entity purchasing services an 18 end user of Intrado? 19 Q. When is purchasing service from Intrado. 20 A. It would be -- in the context of our 21 existing tariff in Ohio it would be a public safety 22 answering point would be an end user. 23 Q. And if an entity is purchasing a service 24 from Intrado, when does Intrado view that entity as a ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 144 1 carrier as opposed to viewing it as an end user? 2 A. Well, if Intrado marketed services toward 3 carriers, then I assume that would be an end user as 4 well. 5 Q. So you don't draw a distinction between 6 an end user and a carrier? 7 A. I believe that an end user is someone 8 that contracts to buy a tariff service whether it be 9 a carrier, a public safety answering point, a 10 corporation, a governmental entity. 11 Q. Does it matter what the service is? 12 A. I don't believe that the use of the 13 service would dictate what an end user is. I think 14 that the -- the type of service being purchased is 15 probably going to dictate who the end user is but. 16 Q. Go ahead. 17 A. An end user is an end user. It's 18 something, a government, a corporation, an individual 19 that purchases services. 20 Q. In your view does it matter what the 21 purchaser uses the service for? 22 A. Well, I know what the services are 23 marketed for. What they are used for I can't 24 dictate. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 145 1 Q. Will Intrado purchase any -- will Intrado 2 provide any wholesale services to any entities? 3 A. Intrado Comm is not providing wholesale 4 services currently in their Ohio tariffs. 5 Q. Are there any retail services Intrado 6 will sell to carriers? 7 A. In current -- in the current Ohio 8 tariffs, no. 9 Q. Does Intrado expect to file a tariff to 10 sell retail service to carriers? 11 A. I can't speculate on that. I am not part 12 of the decision team. 13 Q. Does Intrado sell retail service to 14 carriers in other -- 15 A. Intrado Comm, no. 16 Q. Can you identify all the retail services 17 Intrado will be providing in Ohio? 18 A. I can only identify the ones that Intrado 19 has filed a tariff for now, that is, their services 20 that they will be marketing to public safety 21 answering points. I cannot speak to what they intend 22 on offering in the immediate or distant future. 23 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: The PSAPs are 24 considered to be retail service customers? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 146 1 THE WITNESS: I believe them to be, yes. 2 Q. Does whether you characterize an entity 3 as an end user, is that governed by whether they 4 purchased the service at retail? 5 A. No. 6 Q. So if they purchased it at wholesale, 7 they would still be an end user? 8 A. They are a consumer of service, yes, end 9 user of service. 10 Q. Please turn to page 5 of your testimony. 11 There you start a discussion of audits. You have 12 attached various exhibits to your testimony. Do you 13 know if the language in any of those exhibits is 14 currently in an interconnection agreement approved in 15 Ohio? 16 A. Since I am not -- Intrado is not party to 17 any of those interconnection agreements approved in 18 Ohio, I can't say with any certainty. I can tell 19 you, however, that this language has been submitted 20 as template language with some of the carriers that 21 do operate in Ohio, so I can only assume that if that 22 template was used for some of those approved 23 interconnection agreements, that language is probably 24 within that ratified agreement. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 147 1 Q. Now, looking at your Exhibit CC-1, you 2 have an AT&T wholesale agreement. I think that's the 3 second example. Do you know if that's the AT&T ILEC 4 template or the AT&T CLEC template? 5 A. AT&T CLEC template. 6 MS. KISER: No. 7 A. It's not? Isn't that from the 8 interconnection agreement that we got? I was under 9 the impression -- I apologize. I was under the 10 impression this was coming from the interconnection 11 template that we received from AT&T. 12 MR. STEWART: Your Honor, I have got to 13 object. The witness answers the question, and then 14 counsel says, oh, that's wrong. 15 A. No. I am telling you my impression. My 16 impression was it was under the interconnection 17 agreement from the CLEC one. That is my impression. 18 If I'm mistaken, then. 19 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Can we go off the 20 record for a minute? 21 (Discussion off the record.) 22 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Let's go back on the 23 record. 24 MR. STEWART: Okay. Thanks. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 148 1 A. With the case of the AT&T I was mistaken. 2 The Qwest and Verizon are the CLEC interconnection 3 agreements which probably contributed to my 4 confusion. 5 Q. Is Qwest the CLEC or ILEC? 6 A. I would say that that would be, the 7 Qwest, ILEC. 8 Q. And I take it because you have attached 9 these exhibits Intrado would accept the language that 10 these exhibits contain instead of Emparq's proposed 11 language? 12 A. With regards to third-party audits they 13 were included as an example of industry usage of 14 third-party audits in an interconnection agreement. 15 Q. So does that mean the language in those 16 agreements is acceptable to you or is not? 17 A. It is acceptable to me with its reference 18 to third-party audits, yes. 19 Q. What do you mean with reference to 20 third-party audits? Just those sections? 21 A. That they -- again, they are submitted as 22 an example where contracting parties agree to use 23 third parties for the purposes of audits. And in 24 that regard I find the language acceptable. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 149 1 Q. Okay. Now, your testimony indicates that 2 one of your concerns with audits that aren't mandated 3 to be done by independent auditors is that there's 4 potential for abuse. 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Is this abuse something that Intrado has 7 experienced with respect to some particular ILEC in 8 Ohio or elsewhere? 9 A. Not that I am aware of. It introduces 10 the potential for abuse. 11 Q. So it hasn't happened, but it could 12 happen. 13 A. I don't know. 14 Q. You don't know whether Intrado has had 15 problems with this? 16 A. I cannot address that, no. I'm only 17 addressing the potential for abuse. 18 Q. Now, you talk about different bargaining 19 positions, size of the parties, Intrado and Emparq, 20 what -- are you familiar with the size of the Intrado 21 corporate entity in financial terms, any financial 22 terms? Intrado Comm. 23 A. Intrado Comm? I'm familiar with the size 24 of Intrado Comm, yes. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 150 1 Q. How large an entity is it? 2 A. It is not a huge entity. 3 Q. What do you mean by not huge? 4 A. It's not as big as Emparq. 5 Q. How big is it? 6 A. Smaller than Emparq. 7 Q. Well, do you know any financial matrix? 8 A. No, I do not have direct knowledge of any 9 financial matrix. 10 Q. Then how do you know it's smaller than 11 Emparq? 12 A. Because I'm familiar with the resources 13 that are supporting Intrado Comm. I understand its 14 structure within its organization, and I understand 15 the resources that are allocated to it. 16 Q. And you know all those things about 17 Emparq also? 18 A. Not directly but I know based on what 19 I've seen on the Emparq website the magnitude of 20 resources that are supporting your endeavors for 21 interconnection. I've looked at your service areas, 22 and I make educated generalizations to the employee 23 size that has to support what you depict on your 24 website. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 151 1 Q. Do you know whether Intrado Comm is a 2 part of the larger corporate structure? 3 A. It is a subsidiary of Intrado, Inc. 4 Q. Do you have any knowledge regarding 5 financial size of Intrado, Inc.? 6 A. Not direct knowledge, no. 7 Q. What indirect knowledge do you have? 8 A. I know that it's a part of the West 9 Corporation and that's about the extent of what I 10 know of its corporate structure. I don't know the 11 financials. 12 Q. Do you know anything about the size, 13 number of employees, net income, capitalization, any 14 of those things? 15 A. Would an educated guess of number of 16 employees be acceptable to you or would you like a 17 precise number? 18 Q. Oh, whatever you know is acceptable to 19 me. 20 A. An educated guess the number of employees 21 of Intrado, Inc., neighborhood of 5 to 7 hundred. 22 Q. And did you say Intrado, Inc., is a sub 23 of West Corporation? 24 A. Yes. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 152 1 Q. And what does West Corporation do? 2 A. They are in the call center business. I 3 don't have specifics about it and that's not what my 4 primary function is. 5 Q. Is it a publicly-traded company? 6 A. I am not a financial expert. 7 Q. Well, I don't think one has to be a 8 financial expert to know if a company is publicly 9 traded. 10 A. I haven't looked it up recently. I could 11 ask my stock manager. 12 Q. So you don't know if it's publicly 13 traded? 14 A. Frankly financial things I'm not 15 interested in them personally. 16 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: A simple yes. 17 Q. You don't know if it's publicly traded. 18 A. I don't know. 19 Q. Okay. Has Intrado Comm ever been audited 20 by anyone? 21 A. I don't know. 22 Q. Has Intrado Comm ever had an examination 23 conducted by a party with whom it interconnects? 24 A. I do not believe so. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 153 1 Q. You seem to suggest at the bottom of page 2 5 in your testimony that Emparq doesn't need to worry 3 about audits because they can do examinations; is 4 that a fair characterization? 5 A. That is correct, yes. 6 Q. Now, Emparq does an examination. That 7 examination would -- would require Intrado to spend 8 some time and utilize some resources to respond to 9 the examination, wouldn't it? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. And since you have never had one I guess 12 you can't say what sort of resource commitment or 13 time commitment would be involved, right? 14 A. I think a lot of it would depend on the 15 extent of the inquiry of the examination. 16 Q. I agree. It could be significant, or it 17 could be small, right? 18 A. That is correct. It could run the gamut 19 of size. 20 Q. Now, when you said earlier you weren't, I 21 guess, the financial expert, are you familiar with 22 what goes on in an audit or an examination? Have you 23 been a part of those? 24 A. I have done auditing and examination of ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 154 1 telephone bills but an accounting audit, no. 2 Q. So when you say you have done some 3 examination of telephone bills, what sorts of bills 4 are you referring to? 5 A. Where you audit telephone bills submitted 6 by the telephone company against what services are 7 actually being provided to the end user. 8 Q. Now, that could run the gamut from 9 personal entities to a business end user. What was 10 your experience related to? 11 A. I've done corporate and I've done 12 government. 13 Q. So you've looked at the bills. Have you 14 then made inquiries of the service provider to try to 15 verify the bill when there have been questions? 16 A. I work for the service provider to answer 17 the questions by the company performing the audit. 18 Q. So the company you work for, the customer 19 who was buying services from your company had 20 questions about the bill? 21 A. And they hired a third-party auditor. 22 Q. And you worked with that third-party 23 auditor to verify the bill? 24 A. Correct. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 155 1 Q. Do you recall what particular services 2 were at issue? 3 A. Yes. It was general business services, 4 PBX, complex business services, private line 5 circuits. 6 Q. Now, in your experience with those -- 7 with those audits was the relationship between 8 certain services and the bills for those and what the 9 appropriate bill was for a related service? 10 A. I'm sorry. I don't understand your 11 question, Mr. Stewart. Are you talking about 12 something in a multiple billing environment where an 13 end user had multiple bills? I'm not sure. 14 Q. Well, end user has multiple services. 15 A. Okay. 16 Q. And if the bill for one service were 17 inaccurate, that would tie to or spill over to a 18 different service. Are you familiar with that 19 notion? 20 A. When I was doing the audits, you could 21 have multiple bills for the same customer at 22 different addresses or the same address and they 23 would be for different services so I don't see the 24 interdependency. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 156 1 Q. Well, let's focus on one particular 2 service then. If the customer wanted to verify they 3 were being billed accurately for that service, is 4 it -- is it fair to say that there would be different 5 types of records that run through the system that 6 ultimately generate the bill the customer gets that 7 one would need to look at in order to conduct the 8 audit? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. And you distinguish between an audit 11 which you describe as comprehensive and examination 12 which is a specific inquiry. If a bill contained 13 charges for three different services, then I take it 14 the customer could say I want to do an examination 15 for service A, service B, and service C, right? 16 A. I don't really envision it that way. May 17 I give you my perspective of it? 18 Q. Sure. Go ahead. 19 A. I would say that an end user receives a 20 bill and there is something that doesn't compute on 21 that bill, something looks out of sorts, it doesn't 22 look right, they may have known that they made some 23 recent changes in services, or they feel that they 24 are not getting some services. They tried to use ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 157 1 something, and it wasn't there. So they initiate an 2 inquiry wanting to get some information about a 3 specific charge on a bill. Based on the result of 4 that inquiry, whether it be one or two charges, and 5 the results of that specific incident inquiry, it may 6 lead that person to question, well, if they have got 7 this one wrong, maybe I need to go back a little bit 8 further and find out if this has happened before. 9 And if another examination of previous billing 10 discrepancies shows the same sort of disparity there, 11 then that would sort of get one to think I need to 12 look a little bit more closely here. 13 I believe in the terms and the conditions 14 of the Emparq contract the examination served that 15 exact purpose. If there are billing discrepancies 16 that arise from that, there is a formalized dispute 17 resolution process which can be addressed to look at 18 those disparities and billing discrepancies. If 19 after that review which is escalated still does not 20 result in a satisfactory response, I believe it's 21 time you then get a third party involved to conduct 22 an audit to make sure that all parties are fairly 23 represented. And that's how I sort of envisioned 24 this particular provision of your interconnection ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 158 1 agreement to play out. I don't see audits to be sort 2 of knee jerk reactions to you overbilled me $3.95 3 this month. 4 Q. Well, you don't have any reason to think 5 Emparq looks at audits that way, do you? 6 A. I would say that based on the concerns of 7 not wanting to have an objective third party in there 8 because of the costs associated with it, yes, I 9 inferred that was your objection, one of them. 10 Q. Go ahead. 11 A. Of course, the obvious one I infer was 12 the cost associated with it, but, again, hopefully 13 the parties' abilities to resolve them through the 14 examination and escalation process, the need for an 15 audit would be extremely rare. So, therefore, cost 16 should not be an issue. 17 Q. Well, you don't disagree, do you, that 18 hiring an independent auditor, a CPA firm, can be an 19 expensive proposition? 20 A. For professional services, quality 21 professional service, yes, there are costs associated 22 with, but you generally get a better quality product. 23 Q. If the cost of the audit was likely to be 24 greater than the amount in dispute, then a party who ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 159 1 is required to retain an outside auditor just 2 wouldn't do it, would they? 3 A. I believe what you are asking for is a 4 specific circumstance, and it would be unreasonable 5 to assume that I knew the story leading up to that. 6 I would think that in the process of formally laid 7 out dispute resolution, that fact would come to 8 light. And the parties would probably negotiate some 9 sort of settlement given the cost of the amount in 10 dispute absent having to go to an -- the expense of a 11 third-party auditor. 12 Q. In your review of the examination would 13 that enable Emparq to have exposure to source 14 documents that backed up a bill that Emparq had 15 received from Intrado? 16 A. I'm sorry. Could you say that again. 17 Q. Sure. As you envision the way an 18 examination would work, if Emparq had a disagreement 19 with a bill it had received and Emparq could do an 20 examination as opposed to the audit, would Emparq be 21 able to look at source documents that supported the 22 bill that Intrado rendered? 23 A. I think depending on what the charge 24 would be, that would make sense. In my experience ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 160 1 doing those sort of billing true-ups so to speak, 2 there were some source documents that would be 3 originated out of the telephone company's service 4 provisioning system that served as the system for 5 generating out a legible bill that a consumer can 6 read and, of course, pulling out that source document 7 with the appropriate run dates to compare them to the 8 bill that was rendered to the consumer would, of 9 course, be a natural thing that you would have to 10 show to substantiate your case in an examination. So 11 answering your question for most instances I believe 12 that access to those source documents for that 13 particular instance would probably be appropriate. 14 But, again, I'm making a generalization not knowing 15 what the specific matter was in dispute. 16 Q. Ms. Clugy, you described some of your 17 experience with resolving customer questions over 18 bills. 19 A. Correct. 20 Q. In what you described would that fit 21 within your definition of examination as opposed to 22 audit -- 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. -- in your testimony? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 161 1 A. I would say if it's initiated by the 2 customer, it would fall within the bounds of 3 examination. It was more an audit when a third party 4 was brought in, and although it was not a CPA firm, 5 it was a company that was familiar with doing 6 telephone service audits. I am sure you are quite 7 familiar that there are companies out there that go 8 out there and market a service to businesses to make 9 sure that the phone company is billing them 10 appropriately. So in that regard it's equivalent to 11 perhaps an accounting audit but not the same thing. 12 I mean, it's targeted more at billing discrepancies, 13 so in those instances I did both the examination when 14 the request came from the customer that I was 15 rendering the bill as well as from a third party who 16 was trying to determine that the phone company was 17 properly billing a client. 18 Q. If Emparq is being billed by Intrado 19 and -- well, I guess it doesn't matter what service 20 we are talking about, some particular service that 21 Intrado provides and they bill Emparq for. If Emparq 22 has questions about that service, I read your 23 testimony to say Emparq will be able to conduct an 24 examination and obtain information that would ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 162 1 substantiate that the bill is accurate. 2 A. Correct. If they received a bill and 3 they were questioning the charges on there and they 4 wanted to understand why they were being billed the 5 rates they were, then that would be an examination, 6 and Intrado would answer those questions on what 7 constituted the rate elements of that bill. 8 Q. And that doesn't require an independent 9 third-party audit? 10 A. No, not at all. 11 MR. STEWART: Okay. I have no other 12 questions. Thank you. 13 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: You can have 14 redirect. 15 MS. KISER: No redirect. 16 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: That makes recross so 17 much easier. 18 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry? 19 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: It makes your recross 20 so much easier. 21 MR. STEWART: I have some questions. 22 THE WITNESS: Well, I have some 23 questions. 24 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Kotting. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 163 1 - - - 2 EXAMINATION 3 By Mr. Kotting: 4 Q. Good afternoon. 5 A. Good afternoon. 6 Q. I have got a couple of questions. If you 7 go to page 11 of your testimony, there's some -- 8 there's a question and answer there regarding issues 9 18-3 through 18-10. 10 A. Yes, sir. I'm familiar with them, yes, 11 sir. 12 Q. Okay. Is it your understanding that 13 aside from the question of whether it belongs in this 14 interconnection agreement, is it your understanding 15 that those issues are resolved aside from the 16 question of whether it belongs in this 17 interconnection agreement? 18 A. Yes. I am under the impression that the 19 submitted language, there's no dispute regarding 20 that. The issue here is whether they belong in the 21 agreement as a 252(c) agreement. 22 Q. Okay. You indicated you had some 23 understanding of the corporate structure of Intrado 24 and its affiliates. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 164 1 A. Some, a high level, yes. 2 Q. What's the relationship between Intrado 3 Comm and Intrado, Incorporated? 4 A. It's a subsidiary -- Intrado Comm is a 5 subsidiary of Intrado, Inc. 6 Q. Okay. Does Intrado Comm have access to 7 the databases that are used and maintained by 8 Intrado, Inc., in terms of the 911 databases? 9 A. I would say no, but I really would -- I'm 10 a consultant with Intrado. My expertise is 11 interconnection 251. I know on a high level. If you 12 do have a specific question about how the two 13 companies interoperate, I would like to defer that 14 testimony to Ms. Spence-Lenss. 15 Q. Well, then that certainly shortens up my 16 list of questions. 17 A. I am not the right person to be asking 18 those questions. 19 Q. Fair enough. Looking at your testimony 20 with regard to ordering processes, are you familiar 21 with the Ohio Commission's rules, generally the Ohio 22 Administrative Code? 23 A. Am I familiar with Ohio Administrative 24 Code? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 165 1 Q. Correct. 2 A. No, not directly familiar with it. I am 3 sure it exists, but I don't know the particulars. 4 Q. Okay. So you wouldn't necessarily be 5 familiar with 4901:1-7 which is also known as the 6 carrier rules? 7 A. No, I am not. 8 MR. KOTTING: Okay. That very much 9 shortens my questions. I'm done. 10 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Based on 11 Mr. Kotting's testimony -- oh, I'm sorry Mick. 12 - - - 13 EXAMINATION 14 By Mr. Twiss: 15 Q. Good afternoon, Ms. Clugy. I just have 16 one question. If you turn to page 9 of your 17 testimony, line 4, you state that "Emparq's concern 18 with the use of Intrado Comm's proposed language 19 regarding one-way trunks and the local exchange 20 interconnection section of the interconnection 21 agreement is based on Emparq's mistaken assumption 22 that interconnection competing local exchange 911 23 networks should be under the auspices of commercial 24 agreements and not Section 251 of the Act." If there ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 166 1 was a scenario where there is another competing 911 2 service provider such as Intrado that is not owned by 3 the ILEC, is it your position that Intrado would be 4 entitled to 251(c) interconnection with that entity? 5 A. With a -- another competitive local 6 exchange carrier having the same. 7 Q. Such as Intrado? 8 A. The same certification. 9 Q. That is not owned by the ILEC. 10 A. I believe that they could negotiate an 11 agreement under 251(a) and (b) because by your own 12 admission they are not an incumbent local exchange 13 carrier and I believe 251(c) does apply to the 14 obligations of the incumbent local exchange carrier 15 but that doesn't mean they are exempted from 251(a) 16 or (b) and 251 is a 251. 17 MR. TWISS: Thank you. That's all I 18 have. 19 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Ms. Sternisha? 20 MS. STERNISHA: Yes, thank you. 21 - - - 22 EXAMINATION 23 By Ms. Sternisha: 24 Q. Ms. Clugy, I want to go back to your ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 167 1 discussion of end user which I think is at page 3 and 2 4 of your testimony. I believe in response to 3 Mr. Stewart you stated that Intrado is not providing 4 wholesale services in its Ohio tariff. 5 A. Intrado Comm. 6 Q. Do you know if Intrado plans on using its 7 definition of end user to obtain UNE or other 8 services from Emparq to provide to other carriers 9 through its interconnection agreement? 10 A. While I am not the product manager and I 11 am not even going to define what's in their mind, 12 based on my understanding today that I know of the 13 Intrado product, they will not be using UNEs to 14 provide services to carrier-type end users. 15 Q. Are there any other services they obtain 16 through interconnection agreement to serve other 17 carriers? 18 A. Not that I am aware of. 19 Q. Turning to page 10 really briefly about 20 the ordering processes, you say that at the bottom of 21 page 10 that it's appropriate in a 251(c) 22 interconnection agreement to have the obligation for 23 Embarq to use Intrado's ordering processes; is that 24 correct? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 168 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Where do you find that requirement in 3 251(c) since that is additional obligations of an 4 incumbent local exchange carrier? 5 A. I am looking more globally at the 251, 6 purposes of 251, which is for two competing local 7 exchange networks to interconnect their networks for 8 the mutual exchange of traffic. In the case of E911 9 services which I firmly believe are local exchange 10 services in this arena, competing local exchange 11 services, there will be a need for Embarq as having 12 end users of traditional dial tone services to have 13 to interconnect and exchange that traffic with 14 Intrado where Intrado is designated as the 911 15 provider in order for them to effect that 16 interconnection and be able to exchange that traffic 17 with Intrado, they will need to order services for 18 termination of that traffic on the Intrado selective 19 router. 20 The traditional way of placing orders for 21 services is via the ASR request. Since this is for 22 the mutual exchange of traffic and the 251 23 interconnection agreement governs that, it just seems 24 totally appropriate that you put the terms and ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 169 1 conditions or put the knowledge in there that this is 2 the process you go through to order services to 3 terminate that traffic. It belongs on the 251 4 agreement. 5 MS. STERNISHA: Thank you. 6 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Just so that we can 7 clarify, ASR. 8 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, access service 9 request. I apologize. 10 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: That's okay. 11 Anything else from the panel? 12 Mr. Lynn? 13 EXAMINER LYNN: Yes, thank you, 14 Mr. Agranoff. 15 - - - 16 EXAMINATION 17 By Examiner Lynn: 18 Q. A couple of questions on both your 19 testimony on Issue 4 and Issue 6. 20 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry. I can't hear 21 you. 22 Q. A couple of questions on your testimony 23 both for Issues 4 and Issues 6. 24 A. Okay. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 170 1 Q. On Issue 4 you were mentioning that 2 Intrado's definition of end user includes entities of 3 purchasers, this is from the parties, and these like 4 governmental entities that purchase 911 or E911 and 5 then you mentioned other entities. By other 6 entities -- other entities did you mean carriers or 7 was there something in addition to carriers? 8 A. No. The main reason why Intrado proposed 9 the change in the definition as you are very aware 10 that competition in the 911 arena is new. And we 11 were using template language. The template language 12 merely envisions the interconnection of the more 13 traditional dial tone networks, and so consequently 14 the term end user pretty much implied throughout the 15 agreement it was the person that picked up the phone 16 and got dial tone in their ear. And since Intrado is 17 interconnecting the competing 911 network and the end 18 users that are marketed to are public safety 19 answering points which are not in the traditional 20 sense picking up the phone and getting dial tone, we 21 wanted to expand that to include public safety 22 answering points and make it more clear than the 23 implied usage throughout the document. 24 Unfortunately it seems to me that this is ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 171 1 sort of snowballed and there is an implication that 2 Intrado is trying to surreptitiously get in an 3 opportunity to include carriers. That was never the 4 intent. It was merely to acknowledge that in a 5 competitive 911 arena end users are also public 6 safety answering points and not end users in the 7 traditional sense that's implied in a standard 8 interconnection agreement template language. 9 Q. But in your testimony you do mention, if 10 I understand it correctly, that carriers could be 11 included among end users. 12 A. Based on my interpretation of the term 13 end user it can include carriers if the service that 14 is being marketed is a wholesale service. I believe 15 the distinguishing factor is going to be the type of 16 service and not so much the category of who is 17 consuming it. End user is an end user. 18 Q. And then other entities you use, you felt 19 it was basically necessary to have that term in there 20 to include other or what to be anticipated possible 21 end users, ones that we don't even necessarily know 22 what they will be yet. 23 A. Absolutely, absolutely. 24 Q. And did you -- regarding Issue 4 did ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 172 1 you -- were you able to review any of the comments 2 made by Emparq's witness having agreed to that -- 3 excuse me, Emparq had emphasized that Intrado is 4 using a different definition for end user than what 5 was in its Ohio tariff. And I wondered what comments 6 or thoughts you might have on that. 7 A. Yeah. I would like to put a comment on 8 that. When you are talking about end user in the 9 context of an interconnection agreement and 10 specifically when you are addressing the parties' 11 responsibilities as a 911 service provider versus 12 their responsibilities as a local exchange provider, 13 having end users that can place 911 phone calls, it 14 really is important to distinguish between the end 15 user that originates a 911 phone call in the 16 traditional sense of somebody that uses dial tone 17 services and an end user of E911 services who is a 18 public safety answering point. 19 And I think that's probably why you have 20 these differences because when you talk about an 21 interconnection agreement as opposed to a tariff and 22 you are setting forth the roles and responsibilities 23 of each party, you need to discern between the end 24 user making the 911 call and the end user receiving ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 173 1 the 911 call. 2 Q. And also again referring to some of the 3 arguments made by Emparq's witness Mr. Maples, 4 Emparq -- Mr. Maples has some discussion about if end 5 user is defined to include carrier, then Emparq would 6 have to provide local loop elements at cost. This 7 would be applying the federal regulations and a way 8 to gain cost price advantage. Did you have any 9 thoughts or response to that? 10 A. Well, I'm not an attorney, but my 11 understanding of everything that's out there now is 12 the term end user makes no differentiation between a 13 carrier or a retail. End user is an end user. I 14 believe the concerns addressed of the appropriate use 15 of UNEs are more appropriately addressed in the terms 16 and conditions of the interconnection agreements and 17 the federal statutes saying what you can use for UNEs 18 than hinging on, you know, trying to subdivide a 19 broad context of end users. 20 Q. Thank you. And on Issue 6, this was a 21 similar question on Issue 4, were you able to review 22 the comments made by Mr. -- Emparq's witness 23 Mr. Hart? 24 A. Yes. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 174 1 Q. And this concerns the audits by third 2 parties. Emparq was contending that there might be 3 some difficulty in the parties, the two carriers, 4 agreeing to terms under which to engage in a 5 third-party auditing firm or also Emparq was 6 expressing concern about -- you might have already 7 touched upon this in some of the earlier questions. 8 Emparq was concerned about agreeing upon a firm that 9 would actually do such an audit. Well, you had 10 mentioned earlier there are apparently such firms 11 that will do that kind of a thing other than CPA 12 firms or something. But what about the concern 13 expressed by Emparq that parties might have 14 difficulty agreeing to terms under which to engage in 15 auditing? 16 A. I'm sorry. You wanted the concerns about 17 the terms under which to invoke the audit process? 18 Q. Right, yes. And do you have any comments 19 to add beyond those you have already made in some of 20 the other questions? 21 A. I believe what I have said to this point 22 pretty much addresses it. There is no way that you 23 can read into the future and be able to make 24 contingencies for every sort of possible dispute out ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 175 1 there. What you do is you set forth contractual 2 language that anticipates the vast majority of those 3 and I believe that the Emparq template language is 4 very thorough in that regard and that it allows for 5 the discrete examinations when it happens with a 6 particular instance if there are issues that come 7 from the examination, you have a very formal dispute 8 resolution process which is escalated through various 9 ranks within the company for review and oversight. 10 If after the exhaustion of all those 11 avenues you still haven't received resolution, only 12 speculating on what the cause could be, perhaps it is 13 more appropriate to have the third party to come in 14 and look at it. And I really think that there's 15 enough built in between getting the bill and going to 16 a third party that the parties can arrive at some 17 mutual resolution that won't invoke a third party, 18 but if perchance that doesn't happen, there should 19 always be the option of having the audit and 20 appropriately it should be done by a disinterested 21 third party. 22 Q. If I understood some of the your comments 23 in response to our earlier questioning, you are 24 stating that the process as you envision it would ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 176 1 first be an examination. 2 A. Correct. 3 Q. Then I think you said dispute resolution 4 and then to the outside auditing firm, if necessary. 5 A. Absolutely. 6 EXAMINER LYNN: Okay. All right. I have 7 no further questions. 8 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Now, are there any 9 questions of counsel based on the questions of the 10 panel? 11 MS. KISER: I have no redirect. 12 - - - 13 FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION 14 By Mr. Stewart: 15 Q. Just a couple. In some of the examples 16 that are attached to your testimony I believe there 17 were terms that indicated that if an audit uncovered 18 a discrepancy of a certain magnitude, then the entity 19 that was audited was required to pay for the cost of 20 the audit. Do you recall those terms? Or we can 21 look. 22 A. No. 23 Q. No? Well, let's -- before we do that 24 let's go to the end user thing for a moment. Emparq ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 177 1 has agreed to define the PSAP as an end user, 2 correct? 3 A. Correct. 4 Q. So how does that not address your concern 5 for defining end user? 6 A. Well, I think that gets back to the 7 attachment -- I mean the amendment that you objected 8 to. 9 Q. Well, let's not get back to that. 10 A. I don't want to reintroduce that. 11 Q. Certainly not. 12 A. Because we agree for the most part with 13 slight modification to that inclusion of end user but 14 given your strenuous objection to what we submitted I 15 don't know whether I -- I mean, I would just be 16 addressing that by answering your question. 17 Q. Well, I don't want you to do that. 18 A. I didn't think you did. 19 Q. Let's look at your Exhibit CC-1. If you 20 look at the AT&T template and at the bottom of page 21 229 of 398, the sentence that starts at the bottom, 22 the very end, "If, as a result of an audit, 23 customer," et cetera, "is found to have overstated" 24 blah, blah, blah, "by 20 percent points or more, the ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 178 1 customer shall reimburse AT&T for the cost of the 2 audit." Do you see that? 3 A. I'm sorry. Could you give me the numeric 4 of the paragraph you are looking at? 5 Q. Sure. It's Section -- well, first, it's 6 the AT&T template. It's the very first page at the 7 bottom. It's Section 8.3.5. 8 A. Okay. 9 Q. The very last sentence that starts there, 10 "If, as a result of an audit," at the very end of the 11 last line. 12 A. Okay. Audit requests, you said 229, 13 correct? 14 Q. Yeah. I fear that you may still not be 15 where I am thinking. The very last line on page 229, 16 "If, as a result of an audit," then it -- 17 A. It goes on to the next page, I see. It 18 goes on to the next page, yes, I see that. 19 Q. So in this instance if an audit uncovers 20 a discrepancy of a certain magnitude, the party who 21 is audited is required to pay for the cost of the 22 audit. 23 A. I see that. 24 Q. Is Intrado amenable to that type of ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 179 1 provision if Intrado is successful in its argument 2 that Emparq is required to use a third-party auditor? 3 MS. KISER: I am going to have to object 4 here if that's a request for a negotiated resolution 5 of this. This is a consultant for the company and 6 she's not in a position to respond to a 7 counterproposal from Emparq. 8 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: If the witness 9 doesn't feel that -- 10 A. No, that's absolutely correct. I am not 11 in a position. I wanted to say that I submitted this 12 exhibit just to substantiate that the use of 13 third-party auditors is not uncommon. If you are 14 proffering that in regards to a negotiation point, I 15 am not the appropriate person to respond to that 16 question. 17 Q. But do you think it's fair? 18 A. Are you asking my personal opinion? 19 Q. Personal or professional, both. 20 A. You know, I would have to think about 21 that. I am not going to give you an answer off the 22 top of my head. 23 MR. STEWART: Okay. No other questions. 24 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Thank you. At this ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 180 1 time would Intrado like to move for the admission of 2 Intrado Exhibit 2? 3 MS. KISER: Yes. We move the testimony 4 of Ms. Clugy with all of its attachments into 5 evidence as Exhibit 2, please. 6 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Mr. Stewart. 7 MR. STEWART: No objection. 8 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: There being none 9 Intrado Exhibit 2 shall be admitted as part of the 10 record at this time. 11 (EXHIBIT ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE.) 12 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: And with that why 13 don't we recess until tomorrow morning at 9 a.m. 14 That was agreeable to everybody? 15 MR. STEWART: Yes. 16 EXAMINER AGRANOFF: Okay. See you 17 tomorrow morning. 18 (Thereupon, the hearing was adjourned at 19 5:24 p.m.) 20 - - - 21 22 23 24 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481 181 1 CERTIFICATE 2 I do hereby certify that the foregoing is 3 a true and correct transcript of the proceedings 4 taken by me in this matter on Tuesday, May 27, 2008, 5 and carefully compared with my original stenographic 6 notes. 7 8 _______________________________ Karen Sue Gibson, Registered 9 Merit Reporter. 10 (KSG-4905) 11 - - - 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614) 224-9481