20090821Decision Memo.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER KEMPTON
CO MMISSI 0 NER SMITH
COMMISSIONER REDFORD
COMMISSION SECRETARY
LEGAL
WORKING FILE
FROM:CAROLEE HALL
DATE:AUGUST 19,2009
RE:APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CUSTER TELEPHONE COOPERATIVE, INC. ("CUSTER"
AND VERIZON WIRELESS (V A W) LLC D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS;
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS; CELLULAR
INc., FINANCIAL CORPORATION D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS;
IDAHO RSA 2 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS;
IDAHO RSA 3 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS;
IDAHO 6-CLARK LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON
WIRELESS; RCC MINNESOTA, INc. D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS
(COLLECTIVELY, "VERIZON"
).
CASE NO. CUS-09-03.
BACKGROUND
Under the provision of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, interconnection
agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.C. 9252(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. 9252(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 "
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. 9 51.3.
DECISION MEMORANDUM - 1 -AUGUST 20, 2009
CURRENT APPLICATION
The Agreement between Custer and Verizon in Case No. CUS-09-03 was filed August
2009, and states that it was jointly entered into by the parties through voluntary negotiations.
This Agreement sets out rates, terms and conditions pertaining to traffic exchange and reciprocal
compensation arrangements between the parties.
STAFF ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed the Application and does not find any terms or conditions that it
considers to be discriminatory or contrary to the public interest. Staff believes that the
Agreement 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/CUS-O9-03 CUSTER TELEPHONE COOPERATIVE, INC AND VERIZON WIRELESS
DECISION MEMORANDUM - 2 -AUGUST 20, 2009