20040326Final Order No 29452.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
March 26, 2004
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF
IDAHO TELEPHONE ASSOCIATION FOR
SUSPENSION OF NUMBER PORTABILITY
REQ UIREMENTS.ORDER NO. 29452
CASE NO. GNR- T -04-
On February 5 , 2004, the Idaho Telephone Association (ITA) filed a Petition
behalf of sixteen of its members requesting a six-month suspension of the requirement that the
companies provide local number portability (LNP) from wireline-to-wireless carriers.l In an
order issued November 10, 2003, the Federal Communications Commission requires that
incumbent local exchange carriers in rural areas implement LNP no later than May 24, 2004.
Local exchange carriers with fewer than 2% of the nation s subscriber lines, however, may
petition a state commission for modification or suspension of the portability requirements. ITA'
petition states that the member companies are pursuing an economical and technically feasible
way to provide LNP, but that a system upgrade is required. Specifically, the companies plan to
provide number portability through shared equipment and services provided by Syringa
Networks, LLC, but that Syringa needs to convert its switch to a tandem switch. The petition
states that the conversion is underway but that it cannot be completed prior to the May 24, 2004
deadline.
On February 20, 2004, the Commission issued a Notice of Petition and Notice
Modified Procedure to process ITA's petition, which established a written comment period.
Written comments were filed by the Commission Staff and WWC Holding Company, Inc., doing
business in Idaho as Cellular One, which is commonly referred to as Western Wireless. In its
comments, the Staff generally supports ITA's petition for a six-month suspension. Staff noted
that the plan to have a third party enable the companies to provide LNP is unique, and Staff
expressed concern that the number portability provided by Syringa be the same as if each ITA
1 The 16 comparIies are Albion Telephone Company, Cambridge Telephone ComparIY, Custer Telephone
Cooperative, Inc., Farmers Mutual Telephone Company, Filer Mutual Telephone Company, Midvale Telephone
ComparIY, Mud Lake Telephone Cooperative Association, Project Mutual Telephone Cooperative Association
Direct Communications-RocklarId Rural Telephone Company, Silver Star Telephone Company, Columbine
Telephone ComparIY, Inc., Oregon-Idaho Utilities, Rural Network Services, Inc., CTC Telecom, Inc., Fretel
Communications, Inc., arid Fremont Telecom.
ORDER NO. 29452
member provided LNP itself.Staff recommended IT A submit a written update to the
Commission no later than August 24, 2004, regarding the progress to implement number
portability for its member companies.
In its comments, Western Wireless "commends ITA members for considering an
innovative approach to cost effectively implementing LNP.Western Wireless nonetheless
expressed concern about the delay in implementing LNP by the IT A member companies, noting
that the FCC has concluded that suspension is only appropriate under unique and compelling
circumstances. Western Wireless conditionally supports approval of ITA's petition
recommending the Commission condition approval on specific requirements, including that the
IT A members file monthly updates on the progress toward implementing wireline-to-wireless
LNP, that ITA members agree to implement LNP consistent with North American Numbering
Council recommendations and all applicable rules, and that the ITA members establish porting
processes and procedures no later than August 30, 2004 and file the processes and procedures
with the Commission.
DISCUSSION
Section 251(f)(2) of the 1996 Telecommunications Act allows a local exchange
carrier with fewer than 2% of the nation s subscriber lines to petition a state commission for
suspension of the LNP requirements. The section provides that the state commission "shall grant
such petition to the extent that, and for such duration as, the state commission determines that
such suspension or modification (A) is necessary (i) to avoid a significant adverse economic
impact on users of telecommunication service generally; (ii) to avoid imposing a requirement
that is unduly economically burdensome; or (iii) to avoid imposing a requirement that is
technically infeasible; and (B) is consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity.
47 US.C. ~ 25 1 (f)(2). ITA states in its application that the costs for the individual member
companies to upgrade their switches to accommodate LNP range from $30 000 to approximately
$147 000 for hardware and software upgrades. In addition, each company would be obligated to
pay approximately $2 500 per month for continuing maintenance. If LNP is provided through
Syringa s network, the ITA application states that the ITA members will save on initial upgrade
costs plus the cost of ongoing maintenance in the amount of $2 500 per company per month.
The Petition also asserts that it is not technically feasible for the companies to provide LNP by
the May 24, 2004 deadline. According to the Petition, the switch conversion for Syringa is
ORDER NO. 29452
already underway, but it cannot be completed by the May 24, 2004, implementation date. In the
comments filed by Staff and Western Wireless, neither party disputed the assertions made by
IT A on the economic cost and technical feasibility of implementing LNP by May 24, 2004.
On the record presented, the Commission finds that it is appropriate to approve ITA'
Petition to suspend the LNP requirement for six months, to no later than November 24, 2004.
The costs incurred by each individual company to implement LNP could have a significant
adverse economic impact on their customers, and the individual costs of upgrading facilities to
provide LNP could be unduly economically burdensome. In addition, the record is undisputed
that it is not technically feasible for the companies to implement the LNP by the May 24, 2004
deadline. Under these circumstances, the Commission finds that granting the Petition is
consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity.
To ensure deployment of LNP as smoothly and efficiently as possible, however, the
Commission also finds that its approval of the suspension should be conditioned, and we accept
some of the recommendations made by Staff and Western Wireless. Specifically, the
Commission requires IT A, on behalf of the sixteen individual companies, to provide two written
reports to the Commission by July 23, 2004 and by September 24, 2004, apprising the
Commission and interested parties of the progress the companies are making to implement LNP.
In addition, the individual companies should establish porting processes and procedures no later
than August 30, 2004, and file the processes and procedures with the Commission. Finally, the
ITA members must implement wireline-to-wireless LNP consistent with North American
Numbering Council recommendations, and all applicable rules.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petition of IT A on behalf of sixteen local
exchange carriers to suspend their requirement to implement local number portability for six
months, from May 24, 2004, is approved. ITA is required to file written reports with the
Commission on July 23 and September 24, 2004, apprising the Commission and interested
parties of the status of implementing LNP. The IT A member companies must file their porting
procedures with the Commission by August 30 2004, and implement LNP consistent with North
American Numbering Council recommendations, and all applicable rules.
ORDER NO. 29452
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. Any person interested in this Order (or in issues finally
decided by this Order) or in interlocutory Orders previously issued in this Case No. GNR-04-
may petition for reconsideration within twenty-one (21) days of the service date of this Order
with regard to any matter decided in this Order or in interlocutory Orders previously issued in
this Case No. GNR-04-Within seven (7) days after any person has petitioned for
reconsideration, any other person may cross-petition for reconsideration. See Idaho Code ~ 61-
626.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this ~t..,
""'"
day of March 2004.
~L&~
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
bls/O:GNRT0401 ws2
ORDER NO. 29452