20070412order_no_30297.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
April 12 2007
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE
MOUNTAIN STATES, INc.,CASE NO. QWE-06-
COMPLAINANT,
vs.
QWEST CORPORATION,
ORDER NO. 30297
RESPONDENT.
On August 21 , 2006 AT&T Communications of the Mountain States filed a
complaint against Qwest Corporation, alleging that Qwest entered into "secret" interconnection
agreements with Eschelon Telecom and McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services. The
complaint alleged a single claim of breach of contract, stating that Qwest violated unspecified
terms of an interconnection agreement between AT&T and Qwest (the "Interconnection
Agreement") by not disclosing these "secret" agreements. Complaint at 7-
On September 6, 2006, the Commission issued a summons to Qwest to answer the
complaint. The Commission also granted the Motions for Limited Admission filed by AT&T's
out-of-state counsel. Order No. 30125. Qwest timely filed its answer to the complaint as a
Motion to Dismiss on September 27, 2006. AT &T then filed a response to Qwest's Motion to
Dismiss on October 26, 2006.
On November 7, 2006, Qwest filed a Motion for Oral Argument with respect to the
issues presented in the Motion to Dismiss. AT&T filed its response joining in Qwest's request.
The Commission granted the Motion, and set the oral argument for January 24, 2007. Order No.
30195. The Commission also directed the parties to file briefs addressing certain issues about
which the Commission required further information. ld.
After considering the arguments presented and the information supplied in the
parties' attendant briefs , the Commission denied Qwest's Motion to Dismiss at that time. Order
No. 30247. Instead, the Commission ordered AT&T to amend its complaint to supply more
detail with regards to its claim and ordered each party to file a brief answering the following
questions:
ORDER NO. 30297
1. When did AT&T have notice of the "secret" agreements such that the
Idaho statute of limitations would start to run?
2. Three statutes of limitations have been proposed by the parties as
potentially applying to this matter: (1) a two-year statute of limitations
provided by 47 D.C. 9 415; (2) a four-year statute of limitations
provided by 28 D.C. 9 1658(a); and (3) a five-year statute of limitations
provided by Idaho Code 9 5-216. Which statute of limitations applies to
this matter?
ld. The parties timely filed their responses (Qwest requested and was granted a slight extension
of time to file its brief).
DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
We direct the parties to convene a telephonic prehearing conference within
twenty-eight (28) days of the service date of this Order with the Staff Attorney assigned to this
matter for the purpose of developing a schedule to process this case.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall convene a telephonic prehearing
conference within twenty-eight (28) days of the service date of this Order for the purpose of
developing a schedule to process this case as set forth above.
ORDER NO. 30297
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this / J.. f4\
day of April 2007.
ATTEST:
Je D. Jewell
Commission Secretary
O:QWE-06-cg5
ORDER NO. 30297
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER