Findings of Fact

1. AT&T is authorized to do business in California as an ILEC.

2. XO is authorized to do business in California as a CLEC.

3. AT&T and XO have an ICA pursuant to which XO maintains physical collocation in several AT&T wire centers.

4. AT&T provides XO with connections called cross-connects to allow XO to interconnect its collocated equipment with other CLECs' collocated equipment within an AT&T wire center.

5. One type of cross-connect is cabling between XO's termination on AT&T's MDF to another CLEC's termination on AT&T's MDF.

6. XO originally obtained such cross-connects via the MDF by ordering them out of AT&T's federal special access tariff.

7. The federal special access tariff does not contain terms or rates that apply to cross-connects via the MDF.

8. In 2007, XO requested that AT&T convert its pricing for cross-connects via the MDF to TELRIC prices under the parties' ICA.

9. AT&T converted its prices to TELRIC for cross-connects via the MDF in wire centers deemed "impaired" for UNE transport (i.e., in non-competitive wire centers).

10. AT&T refused to provide cross-connects via the MDF at TELRIC rates in its "unimpaired" (i.e., competitive) wire centers.

11. AT&T and XO have tried, but failed, to agree on a rate for cross-connects via the MDF.

12. The ICA addresses AT&T's provision of collocation, including cross-connects between XO and other collocated CLECs.

13. Nothing in the ICA expressly excludes the right to any particular type of collocation, including cross-connects via the MDF.

14. Section XI.A of the ICA provides that, except as modified by Section XI.A, the rates for collocation and cross-connects are set by AT&T's state tariff, Schedule Cal. P.U.C. Tariff 175-T, which is incorporated by reference into the ICA.

15. Neither State Tariff 175-T nor the modifications set forth in Section XI.A of the ICA specify a rate for cross-connects via the MDF.

16. AT&T is currently providing XO with cross-connects via the MDF in impaired wire centers at a TELRIC rate for a "DS3 EISCC" as set forth in a 2005 amendment to the ICA.

17. The 2005 ICA rate sheet on which AT&T relies does not, on its face, identify or limit how XO is able to use an EISCC, i.e., for interconnection with AT&T, for access to AT&T's UNEs, or to connect with another collocated CLEC.

18. The ICA's Appendix Pricing Attachment A does not, on its face, identify or limit how XO is able to use an EISCC, i.e., for interconnection with AT&T, for access to AT&T's UNEs, or to connect with another collocated CLEC.