20070328order_no_30286.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
March 28, 2007
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF EDGE)
WIRELESS, LLC FOR DESIGNATION AS AN
ELIGIBLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CARRIER UNDER 47 D.c. ~ 214(e)(2)
CASE NO. EDG- T -07-
ORDER NO. 30286
On January 22, 2007, Edge Wireless LLC ("Edge" or "Company ) filed an
Application for designation as an eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) for service areas in
Idaho that are currently serviced by other carriers. See Idaho Code ~ 61-61OA and Order No.
29841. Also see 47 u.S.C. ~ 214(e)(2). The Application requests that it be designated as eligible
to receive all available support from the federal Universal Service Fund ("USF") and that it be
approved to participate in the Lifeline program.
On February 6, 2007, WWC Holding, Inc. dba Alltel filed a Petition to Intervene
which was granted on March 7, 2007. Order No. 30265. On February 16, 2007, the Idaho
Telephone Association (ITA) filed a Petition to Intervene, which was also granted on March 7
2007. Order No. 30264. On February 12, 2007, the Commission issued a Notice of Application
and Modified Procedure and solicited comments from interested parties. Order No. 30240. Staff
timely filed its comments. On March 13, 2007, the ITA filed a Protest and Comments.
THE APPLICATION
According to the Application, Edge is a commercial mobile radio service ("CMRS"
carrier providing "mobile service" as defined in 47 U.C. ~ 153(27). Through its cellular
authorizations, it provides service to the following counties in Idaho: Bannock, Bear Lake
Blaine, Bingham, Bonneville, Butte, Camas, Caribou, Cassia, Clark, Custer, Franklin, Fremont
Gooding, Jefferson, Jerome, Lemhi, Lincoln, Madison, Minidoka, Oneida, Power, Teton, and
Twin Falls. Edge also operates in northern California, southeastern Oregon, and northwestern
Wyoming. Edge is seeking ETC designation in certain rural and non-rural wire centers. These
wire centers are set forth in Exhibit C to the Application.
The Application contains certain information related to the Company s local usage
plans, customer service and ability to provide service, particularly in emergencies. The
Company provides several pricing options for its customers, and also intends to invest funds in
upgrading its infrastructure.
ORDER NO. 30286
THE PROTEST
The IT A asserted that the Application inaccurately states the law. IT A Protest and
Comments at 1-2. It further asserted that nothing in the Application demonstrated that Edge
service will be ubiquitous in the wire centers or that it will not engage in cream skimming of the
incumbent rural telephone companies' most profitable areas. Id. at 3. Lastly, it argued that
because Edge filed its two-year plan as a confidential document, ITA is unable to assess whether
that two-year plan meets the Commission s requirements. Id. at 3-4. IT A asserted that Modified
Procedure is not appropriate for this matter and requested a hearing. Id. at 4.
In its reply, Edge asserted that IT A mischaracterized its Application, and that ITA
ignored Edge s discussion regarding the public interest standard. Edge Reply Comments at 2.
Edge also stated that IT A errs in its argument that the Commission must grant Edge ETC status
throughout its entire service area. Id. It also stated that, contrary to IT A's assertion, it has met
the requirement for demonstrating a commitment to provide service to customers in the relevant
rural ILEC study areas. Id. at 3.
Lastly, Edge argued that the Commission should reject ITA's request for a hearing.
Id. at 4. Edge stated that ITA never requested a copy of any of the confidential exhibits to the
Application or otherwise sought to review the information IT A alleges it must see in order to
make any conclusion as to whether the Application is complete. Id.
D ISCUSSI
We find it reasonable for ITA to have the opportunity to review Edge s two-year plan
and conduct any other discovery. We direct the parties to discuss an arrangement that will allow
counsel and an expert (or experts) for ITA to review the Company s two-year network plan with
execution of an appropriate confidentiality agreement. We will allow twenty-eight (28) days
after the service date of this Order for this review to occur. We further direct the Company and
IT A to inform us after the review whether each believes a hearing is necessary or if the matter
may continue to be considered by Modified Procedure.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Edge Wireless, LLC and the Idaho Telephone
Association shall discuss the details of an arrangement to allow ITA to review the two-year
network plan of the Company. Such review is to be conducted and completed within twenty-
eight (28) days of the service date of this Order.
ORDER NO. 30286
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-eight (28) days of the service date of
this Order Edge and IT A shall each inform the Commission as to whether it believes a hearing is
necessary in this matter or if the matter may continue to be processed by Modified Procedure.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this 6).$j'fA\.
day of March 2007.
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
" \
. A
,-..
J..-J~
'---
MACK A. REDFORD, COM SSI NER
ATTEST:
w&jJe D. Jewell
Commission Secretary
O:EDG-O7-cg2
ORDER NO. 30286