20040708Final Order No 29544.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
July 8, 2004
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND SILVER STAR
TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. FOR APPROVAL
OF AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING
WIRELINE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
PURSUANT TO 47 U.C. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND IDACOMM,
INC. FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
AN EXISTING WIRELINE INTERCONNECTION
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.C. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND ORBITCOM,
INC. FOR APPROVAL OF THE ADOPTION OF
THE SGAT AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47
C. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND COVISTA
INC. FOR APPROVAL OF THE ADOPTION OF
THE SGA T AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47
C. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
QWEST CORPORATION FOR APPROVAL OF
THE OPERATOR SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH CTC TELECOM, INC.
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
QWEST CORPORATION FOR APPROVAL OF
THE OPERATOR SERVICES AGREEMENT AND
DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
WITH IONEX COMMUNICATIONS NORTH
INC.
CASE NO. QWE-OO-
CASE NO. QWE-03-
CASE NO. QWE-04-
CASE NO. QWE-04-
CASE NO. QWE- T -04-
CASE NO. QWE-04-
ORDER NO. 29544
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.C. ~ 252(e)(1). The
ORDER NO. 29544
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 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 of Section 251 (b)
or (c)." Order No. 28427 at 11 (emphasis original). This is consistent 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.
THE CURRENT APPLICATIONS
The Commission has been asked to approve four new interconnection agreements and
two amendments to existing interconnection agreements, as identified below.
1. Qwest Corporation and Silver Star Telephone Company. Inc. (Case No. QWE-
00-11 ). In this Application the parties request that the Commission approve an amendment to an
existing wireline interconnection agreement. With this filing, Silver Star adopts Exhibit A of
Qwest's Statement of Generally Available Terms (SGAT).
2. Qwest Corporation and IDACOMM. Inc. (Case No. QWE-03-18). This is an
amendment to an existing wire line interconnection agreement adding terms and conditions for
collocation available inventory.
3. Qwest Corporation and OrbitCom. Inc. (Case No. QWE-04-13)This
Application is for an interconnection agreement adopting the terms of Qwest's SGAT and
Exhibits A through M.
4. Qwest Corporation and Covista. Inc. (Case No. QWE-04-14). This Application
is for an interconnection agreement adopting the terms of Qwest' s SGA T and Exhibits A through
5. Qwest Corporation and CTC Telecom. Inc. (Case No. QWE-04-15)This
Application requests approval of an agreement relating to operator services.
6. Qwest Corporation and Ionex Communications North. Inc. (Case No. QWE- T -04-
17)This Application requests approval of an agreement relating to operator services and
directory assistance.
ORDER NO. 29544
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Staff reviewed these Applications and did not find any terms and conditions to be
discriminatory or contrary to the public interest. Staff believes that the 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 recommended the Commission approve all six applications.
COMMISSION DECISION
Based upon our review of the Applications, the Staff s recommendation and the fact
no other person or entity commented on the Applications, the Commission finds that the new
agreements and amendments to previously approved interconnection agreements are consistent
with the public interest, convenience and necessity and do not discriminate against other carriers.
Therefore, the Commission finds that these Applications should be approved. Approval of the
new agreements and amendments to previously approved 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 from 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.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement
between Qwest Corporation and Silver Star Telephone Company, Case No. QWE- T -00-, is
approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the interconnection agreement
between Qwest Corporation and IDACOMM, Inc., Case No. QWE- T -03-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the new interconnection agreement between Qwest
Corporation and OrbitCom, Inc., Case No. QWE-04-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the new interconnection agreement between Qwest
Corporation and Covista, Inc., Case No. QWE-04-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the new interconnection agreement between Qwest
Corporation and CTC Telecom, Inc., Case No. QWE-04-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the new interconnection agreement between Qwest
Corporation and Ionex Communications North, Inc., Case No. QWE-04-, is approved.
ORDER NO. 29544
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. QWE- T-
00-, QWE-03-, QWE-04-, QWE-04-, QWE-04-15 and QWE-0417 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 gf""'-
day of July 2004.
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
bls/O:QWETOOll- QWET0318 QWET0413- QWET0414- QWETO415 - QWET0417 _intrcntcs
ORDER NO. 29544