Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060421Decision memo.pdfDECISION MEMORANDUM TO:COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER COMMISSIONER SMITH CO MMISSI 0 NER HANSEN COMMISSION SECRETARY LEGAL WORKING FILE FROM:GRACE SEAMAN DATE:APRIL 19,2006 RE:STAFF REVIEW OF INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS: CASE NOS. QWE-04-4; QWE-06-07 AND CTC-06-01. BACKGROUND Under the provisions of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, interconnection agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.C. 9252(e)(1). 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). THE CURRENT APPLI CA TI 0 NS The Commission has been asked to approve two Applications for approval of inter- connection agreements and one amendment to an existing agreement. The Applications are discussed in greater detail below. 1. Owest Corporation and BridgeBand Communications. Inc. (Case No. OWE- T -04-4). this filing, the parties request to amend an existing agreement approved by the Commission on March 31 2004. The amendment incorporates the Triennial Review Order (TRO) and Triennial Review Remand Order (TRRO). 2. Owest Corporation and Mountainland Communications. Inc. (Case No. OWE-06-07). In this case, the parties request Commission approval for an Application for approval of inter- connection agreement. This agreement includes terms and conditions for one-way, DECISION MEMORANDUM - I - intraLATAJintrastate, land-to-pager trunks from Qwest's end users to Mountainland' interconnection point. 3. Citizens Telecommunications Company ofldaho and Granite Telecommunications. LLc. (Case No. CTC-06-01 ).In this Application, the parties request Commission approval for a local interconnection agreement that includes terms and agreements, ancillary services, resale of local services and pricing. STAFF ANALYSIS Staffhas reviewed the Applications and does not find that any terms or conditions are discriminatory or contrary to the public interest. Staff believes that the Applications are consistent with the FCC orders and pro-competitive policies of this Commission, the Idaho Legislature, and the federal Telecommunications Act. Accordingly, Staff recommends Commission approval ofthe Applications. COMMISSION DECISION Does the Commission wish to approve these Applications? &J fG.~ Grace Seaman i:udmemos/qwetO4.4 etc dec IDem DECISION MEMORANDUM - 2 -