Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Section 1: 9-1-1 SERVICES I STRATEGIC PLANNING <br /> <br />S 1.01 <br />Subject: <br /> <br />Allocation agreements <br /> <br />Reference: ACSEC policy <br /> <br />Source: <br /> <br />Policy: <br /> <br />S 1.02 <br />Subject: <br /> <br />November 20,1998 memo <br /> <br />It was stated that the Fiscal Year 1999 Allocation Agreements were not <br />distributed to be executed due to pending review of the Memorandum of <br />Understanding (MOU) by the Texas Association of Regional Councils <br />(TARC). ACSEC refrained from providing any equalization surcharge <br />unless there was an immediate, legitimate need for reimbursement. <br />This need was required to be submitted to the ACSEC in writing for <br />consideration. In such cases, ACSEC addressed the request on a case <br />by case basis. <br /> <br />On the subject of CLECs that are submitting fees but do not have a <br />reseller or facilities based agreement in place <br /> <br />Reference: ACSEC Policy <br /> <br />Source: <br /> <br />Policy: <br /> <br />S 1.03 <br />Subject: <br /> <br />July 27, 1998 internal e-mail from ACSEC attorney <br /> <br />There is nothing that specifically relates to a requirement that CLECs <br />must sign agreements with regional councils. However, in each PUC <br />certification order for any CLEC, there is a generic requirement for the <br />CLEC to work in good faith with the appHcable 9-1-1 entity to provide the <br />appropriate level of 9-1-1 service. In addition, at least for facilities- <br />based providers, the PUC's interconnection rule requires a CTU to be <br />responsible for developing a disaster recovery/service restoration plan <br />with "input from the tocal 9-1-1 entity and ACSEC.' <br /> <br />Carrying budget authority forward from year to year <br /> <br />Reference: ACSEC policy <br /> <br />Source: <br /> <br />July 22, 1998 memo to regional councils <br /> <br />ACSEC Policies and Procedures <br />February 1999 <br /> <br />Page 1 <br />