20020619Order No 29055.doc

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF POTLATCH TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC.
AND SPRINT PCS FOR APPROVAL OF AN
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. POT-T-02-1

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION OF SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P.
AND QWEST CORPORATION FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO AN EXISTING
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. SPR-T-01-1
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF VERIZON NORTHWEST INCORPORATED
AND AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES, INC. FOR
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO AN
EXISTING INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NOS. GTE-T-97-7

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF VERIZON NORTHWEST INCORPORATED
AND SPRINT SPECTRUM, L.P. FOR APPROVAL
OF AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. GTE-T-97-6
SPS-T-97-2

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND NEXTEL WEST
FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO AN
EXISTING INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e). )
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. USW-T-99-4

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND NPCR/NEXTEL
PARTNERS FOR APPROVAL OF AN
AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. USW-T-99-22

ORDER NO. 29055

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF VERIZON NORTHWEST INCORPORATED
AND DSLNET COMMUNICATIONS LLC FOR
APPROVAL OF AN INTERCONNECTION
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. VZN-T-02-3

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION OF VERIZON NORTHWEST INCORPORATED
AND DMJ COMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR
APPROVAL OF AN INTERCONNECTION
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e). )
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. VZN-T-02-5

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION OF POTLATCH TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC.
AND VERIZON WIRELESS FOR APPROVAL OF
AN INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. POT-T-02-2

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND CELLCO
PARTNERSHIP DBA VERIZON WIRELESS FOR
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO AN
EXISTING INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. USW-T-97-11
USW-T-97-15

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND ESCHELON
TELECOM, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF AN
AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
))
CASE NO. QWE-T-00-13

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND ICG TELECOM
GROUP, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF AN
AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
))
CASE NO. QWE-T-02-3

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND KMC
TELECOM V, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF AN
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. QWE-T-02-5

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND PREMIERE
NETWORK SERVICES, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF
AN INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. QWE-T-02-7

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND CENTEL
COMMINICATIONS, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF
AN INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. QWE-T-02-9

In these cases the Commission is asked to approve new interconnection agreements and amendments to previously approved interconnection agreements.
BACKGROUND
Under the provisions of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, interconnection agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.S.C. § 252(e)(1). The Commission may reject an agreement adopted by negotiations only if it finds that the agreement: (1) discriminates against telecommunications carriers not a party to the agreement; or (2) implementation of the agreement is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. 47 U.S.C. § 252(e)(2)(A). As the Commission recently 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 provisions with Section 251(b) or (c).” Order No. 28427 at 11 (emphasis 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.F.R. § 51.3.
THE CURRENT APPLICATIONS
As discussed above the Commission has been asked to approve new interconnection agreements and amendments to existing interconnection agreements. These items are discussed in greater detail below.
1. Potlatch Telephone Company, Inc. (TDS Telecommunications Corporation) and Sprint PCS (Case No. POT-T-02-1). This is a new wireless interconnection agreement. It is similar to other wireless interconnection agreements the Commission has approved.
2. Sprint Communications Company, L.P. and Qwest Corporation (Case No. SPR-T-01-1). Two Applications, both dated April 22, 2002, requested approval of amendments to this agreement. One Application included an amendment addressing the DC Power Reduction Procedure, while the other included amendments addressing Advice Adoption, Amendment Language, Collocation Cancellation and Collocation Decommissioning issues.
3. Verizon and Sprint Spectrum L.P. (Case Nos. GTE-T-97-6 and SPS-T-97-2); Verizon and AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. (Case No. GTE-T-97-7); Qwest and Nextel West (Case No. USW-T-99-4); and, Qwest and NPCR/Nextel Partners (Case No. USW-T-99-22). These four Applications involve an amendment implementing the Federal Communications Commission’s decision on reciprocal compensation (FCC 01-131).
4. Verizon and DSLnet Communications LLC (Case No. VZN-T-02-3); Verizon and DMJ Communications, Inc. (Case No. VZN-T-02-5). These two cases seek approval of new wireline interconnection agreements. The agreements contain terms and conditions similar to those in other Verizon agreements previously approved by this Commission.
5. Potlatch Telephone Company, Inc. (TDS Telecommunications Corporation) and Verizon Wireless (Case No. POT-T-02-2). This is a new wireless interconnection agreement. It is similar to other wireless interconnection agreements previously approved by this Commission.
6. Qwest and Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless (Case Nos. USW-T-97-11 and USW-T-97-15). (Verizon Wireless is also the successor to New Vector/Airtouch.) This is an amendment to two existing Type 2 wireless interconnection agreements adding terms for single point of presence.
7. Qwest and Eschelon Telecom, Inc. (Case No. QWE-T-00-13). This is an amendment to an existing wireline interconnection agreement adding terms for collocation decommissioning.
8. Qwest and ICG Telecom Group, Inc. (Case No. QWE-T-02-3). This is an amendment to an existing wireline interconnection agreement adding terms for single point of presence.
9. Qwest and KMC Telecom V, Inc. (Case No. QWE-T-02-5); Qwest and Premiere Network Services, Inc. (Case No. QWE-T-02-7); and, Qwest and Centel Communications, Inc. (Case No. QWE-T-02-9). These three cases seek approval of new interconnection agreements based upon Qwest’s Statement of Generally Available Terms and Conditions (SGAT).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Staff has reviewed these Applications and did not find any terms and conditions to be discriminatory or contrary to the public interest. Staff believes that these new agreements and amendments to interconnection agreements are consistent with the pro-competitive policies of this Commission, the Idaho Legislature, and the federal Telecommunications Act. Accordingly, Staff believes that the Applications merit the Commission’s approval.
COMMISSION DECISION
Under the terms of the Telecommunications Act, interconnection agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.S.C. § 252 (e)(1). The Commission’s review is limited, however. The Commission may reject an agreement adopted by negotiation only if it finds that the agreement discriminates against a telecommunications carrier not a party to the agreement or implementation of the agreement is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. Id. Based upon our review of the Applications, the Staff’s recommendation and on the fact no other person commented on these Applications, the Commission finds that the new interconnection agreements and amendments to previously approved interconnection agreements are consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity and do not discriminate. Therefore, the Commission finds that these Applications should be approved. However, approval of these new agreements and amendments to existing agreements does not negate the responsibility of any of the parties to these agreements to obtain a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity if they are offering local exchange services or complying with Idaho Code §§ 62-604 and 62-606 if they are providing other non-basic local telecommunications services as defined by Idaho Code § 62-603.
O R D E R
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the new interconnection agreements and amendments to interconnection agreements discussed above are approved. Terms of the agreements that are not already in effect shall be effective as of the date of this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Potlatch Telephone Company, Inc. and Sprint PCS, Case No. POT-T-02-1, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the two Applications each requesting amendments to the interconnection agreement between Sprint Communications Company, L.P. and Qwest Corporation, Case No. SPR-T-01-1, are approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement between Verizon Northwest Incorporated and Sprint Spectrum L.P., Case Nos. GTE-T-97-6 and SPS-T-97-2, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement between Verizon Northwest Incorporated and AT&T Wireless Services, Inc., Case No. GTE-T-97-7, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and Nextel West, Case No. USW-T-99-4, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and NPCR/Nextel Partners, Case No. USW-T-99-22, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Verizon Northwest Incorporated and DSLnet Communications LLC, Case No. VZN-T-02-3, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Verizon Northwest Incorporated and DMJ Communications, Inc., Case No. VZN-T-02-5, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Potlatch Telephone Company, Inc. and Verizon Wireless, Case No. POT-T-02-2, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless, Case Nos. USW-T-97-11 and USW-T-97-15, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and Eschelon Telecom, Inc., Case No. QWE-T-00-13, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and ICG Telecom Group, Inc., QWE-T-02-3, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and KMC Telecom V, Inc., Case No. QWE-T-02-5, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and Premiere Network Services, Inc., Case No. QWE-T-02-7, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and Centel Communications, Inc., Case No. QWE-T-02-9, is approved.
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 these Case Nos. POT-T-02-1, SPR-T-01-1, GTE-T-97-6, SPS-T-97-2, GTE-T-97-7, USW-T-99-4, USW-T-99-22, VZN-T-02-3, VZN-T-02-5, POT-T-02-2, USW-T-97-11, USW-T-97-15, QWE-T-00-13, QWE-T-02-3 QWE-T-02-5, QWE-T-02-7 and QWE-T-02-9 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 these cases. Within seven (7) days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration, any other person may cross-petition for reconsideration. See Idaho Code §§ 61-626 and 62-619.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho, this
day of June 2002.

PAUL KJELLANDER, PRESIDENT

MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER

DENNIS S. HANSEN, COMMISSIONER

ATTEST:

Jean D. Jewell
Commission Secretary

O:POTT0201_SPRT0101_GTET9707_etal_jh

ORDER NO. 29055 1

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
June 19, 2002