20071102Decision memo.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER REDFORD
CO MMISSI 0 NER SMITH
COMMISSIONER KEMPTON
COMMISSION SECRETARY
COMMISSION STAFF
LEGAL
FROM:CAROLEE HALL
DATE:NOVEMBER 2, 2007
RE:APPLICATION OF CENTURYTEL OF IDAHO ("CENTURYTEL") AND 360
NETWORKS (USA) INc., ("360 NETWORKS") FOR APPROVAL OF A
NEGOTIATED LOCAL INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT. CASE NO.
CEN-07-01.
BACKGROUND
Under the provision ofthe federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, interconnection
agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.C. ~ 252(e)(I). The
Commission may reject an agreement adopted by negotiations only if it finds that the agreement:
(1) discriminates against a telecommunications carrier not a party to the agreement; or (2)
implementation of the agreement is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and
necessity. 47 U.C. ~ 252(e)(2)(A). As the Commission noted in Order No. 28427, companies
voluntarily entering into interconnection agreements "may negotiate terms, prices and conditions
that do not comply with either the FCC rules or with the provision of Section 251 (b) or ( c)." Order
No. 28427 at 11 (emphasis in original). This comports with the FCC's statement that "a state
commission shall have authority to approve an interconnection agreement adopted by negotiation
even if the terms of the agreement do not comply with the requirements of (Part 51)." 47 C.R. ~
51.3.
CURRENT APPLICATION
CenturyTel ofIdaho and 360networks (USA) inc., filed Case No. CEN-07-1 on October
2007. The Application states that the parties have mutually agreed, through voluntary
negotiations, to interconnect their networks thereby providing customers with increased choices
DECISION MEMORANDUM - 1 -NOVEMBER 2, 2007
among 10cal telecommunications services. The Agreement sets forth the terms, conditions and
pricing under which CenturyTel will offer and provide to 360networks, interconnection facilities for
the purpose of delivering telecommunication services to customers. The Application further states
that CenturyTel is a "rural telephone company" as that term is defined in the Act, 47 U.153.
Pursuant to Section 251 (f)(l) of the Act. CenturyTel goes on to indicate that it is exempt from
Section 251 (c ) of the Act. and, that notwithstanding, the companies have entered into and accepted
this Agreement for purposes of exchanging local traffic. CenturyTel further states that "execution
of the Agreement does not in any way constitute a waiver or limitation of Century Tel's rights under
Section 251 (f)(l) or 251 (f)(2) ofthe Act" and that the Company, "expressly reserves the right to
assert its right to an exemption or waiver and modification of Section 251 (c ) of the Act, in
response to other requests for interconnection by CLEC or any other carriers.
STAFF ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed the Application and CenturyTel's statements regarding its claim of rural
exemptions pursuant to Section 251 (f)(l) or 251 (f)(2) of the Act. Staff does not consider this
statement binding or establishing precedence. Such a determination will be made when this is a
claim for a rural exemption in accordance with Section 251 (f) of the Act. However, Staff's review
of the interconnection agreement between the parties does not find any terms or conditions that it
considers to be discriminatory or contrary to the public interest.
Staff believes that the Agreement between CenturyTel of Idaho and 360networks (USA)
inc., is consistent with the public interest as identified in the pro-competitive policies of this
Commission, the Idaho Legislature, and the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. Accordingly,
Staff believes that the Agreement merits the Commission s approval.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission wish to accept and approve this Interconnection Agreement?
i:udmemos/interconnection agreements/CEN-O7-1 CENTURYTEL AND 360NETWORKS INC.
DECISION MEMORANDUM - 2 -NOVEMBER 2, 2007