20021218Qwest's Response to PageData's Petition.pdf

Mary HobLson(ISB #2142)
101 South Capitol Boulevard -Suite 1900
Boise,ID 83702 UTILII ES CUNHíSSION
Telephone:[phone]
Facsimile:[phone]
mshobson stoel.com
Adam Sherr
Qwest
1600 7th Avenue -Room 3206
Seattle,WA 98191
Telephone:[phone]
Facsimile:[phone]
[e-mail]
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
QWEST CORPORATION AND MCLEODUSA
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES,INC.
FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO AN CASE NO.QWE-T-02-17
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT FOR
THE STATE OF IDAHO PURSUANT TO 47
U.S.C.§252(e).(PRIOR CASE NO.QWE-T-
00-7)
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
QWEST CORPORATION AND ESCELON
TELECOM,INC.FOR APPROVAL OF AN
AMENDMENT TO AN INTERCONNECTION QWEST'S RESPONSE TO PAGEDATA'sAGREEMENTFORTHESTATEOFIDAHO
PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C.§252(e).(PRIOR PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
CASE NO.QWE-T-00-13)
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
QWEST CORPORATION AND COVAD
COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY FOR
APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO AN
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT FOR
THE STATE OF IDAHO PURSUANT TO 47
U.S.C.§252(e).(PRIOR CASE NO.USW-T-
99-3)
QWEST'S RESPONSE TO PAGEDATA's PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION-Page l
Boise-150907.1 0029164-00033
Qwest Corporation (Qwest)by and through its attorneys submits the followingresponse
in opposition to the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Joseph B.McNeal,dba PageData
(PageData).
BACKGROUND
PageData seeks reconsideration of this Commission's Order No.29154 (the Order),
which approved seven amendments to CLEC agreements under the terms of 47 U.S.C.§252.
The Order further denied the requests made by PageData in its previously filed written
comments,"without prejudice".'Nevertheless,PageData requests that the Commission
reconsider its Order,not because it disagrees with the decision to approve the agreement
amendments,but because it wants the Commission to take up the issues raised in its written
comments in the present docket.
DISCUSSION
1.The Commission was correct in limiting the scope of the present docket to approval
of the subject agreements.
PageData offers no evidence or argument that the Commission should not approve the
agreement amendments that are the subject of this docket.The Commission is correct that "the
sole purpose of this proceeding [is]whether to approve these agreements under the terms of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996."2
Ironically,by attempting to broaden the scope of this docket and by advocating that the
Commission launch an extensive investigation,PageData runs the risk of frustrating the purpose
of the Telecommunications Act's provision relating to the approval of interconnection
agreements.The Commission may reject agreements adopted through the negotiations of the
parties only if those agreements discriminate against other telecommunications carriers who are
*Order,p.9.
2 Id..
QWEST'S RESPONSE TO PAGEDATA's PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION -Page 2
Boise-150907.1 0029164-00033
not party to the agreements or where the implementation of the agreements is not consistent with
the public interest,convenience and necessity.'Where those conditions do not exist,the
agreements should be approved and made available for adoption by other companies if they so
choose.Delaying approval only keeps the terms of those agreements from being available to
others.Logically,that cannot be PageData's objective since it otherwise complains (on a generic
and unspeci-fied basis)that Qwest has not made all terms in interconnection agreements available
to Idaho competitors.
2.Qwest has filed all relevant agreements.
The thrust of PageData's argument that the Commission should expand this docket is the
unsupportedclaim that Qwest is withholding CLEC agreements that pertain to Idaho.That is not
the case.Qwest has filed all Idaho agreements with CLECs that contain provisions pertaining to
services provided under 47 U.S.C.251(b)or (c)and that reflect current or ongoing Qwest
obligations.Qwest's actions conform with the standard articulated by the Federal
Communications Commission's Memorandum Opinion and Order4 iSsued in Qwest's
declaratory judgment action directly addressing the scope of its duty to file contracts with the
state regulatorycommissions.
PageData offers no specific evidence that Qwest has not complied with the applicable
standards in Idaho.The claims that other state commissions have received additional agreements
pertaining to their states or have ordered review of other contracts in connection with their
investigations,do not demonstrate that Qwest has failed to comply with its duties under the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 in Idaho.Further investigation of PageData's unsupported
3 47 U.S.C.§252(e)(2).
4 NÏemorandumDecision and Order,In the Matter of'Qwest Communications
International Inc.Petition for DeclaratoryRulingon the Scope of the Duty to File and Obtain
Prior ApprovalofNegotiated Contractual Arrangements under Section 252(a)(l,)WC Docket
No.02-89,issued October 4,2002.
QWEST'S RESPONSE TO PAGEDATA's PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION-Page 3
Boise-150907.1 0029164-00033
allegations,while not precluded by the Order in this case,is not relevant to the question of
approval of agreements that have been filed here.
CONCLUSION
The Commission appropriately concluded that the scope of this docket is limited to the
approval of the agreement amendments filed by Qwest.PageData offers no reason for
reconsideration of that decision.PageData's claim that Qwest has withheld other relevant
agreements is unfounded and,in any event,does not warrant expansion of the scope of the
current docket.
Respectfullysubmitted this 18'"day of December,2002.
Qwest Corporation
Mary S.Ho n
Stoel Rives LLP
Attorneys for Qwest
QWEST'S RESPONSE TO PAGEDATA's PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION-Page 4
Boise-150907.1 0029164-00033
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 18th day of December,2002,I served QWEST'S
RESPONSE TO PAGEDATA's PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION as follows:
Jean Jewell,Secretary [X ]Hand Delivery
Idaho Public Utilities Commission f 1 U.S.Mail
472 West Washington Street [L Overnight Delivery
P.O.Box 83720 Ï 1 Facsimile
Boise,Idaho 83720-0074 Ï 1 Email
jjewell@ptic.štate.id.us
John Hammond [X ]Hand Delivery
Idaho Public Utilities Commission Ï 1 U.S.Mail
472 West Washington Street []Overnight Delivery
P.O.Box 83720 Facsimile
Boise,Idaho 83720-0074 []Email
Dennis Ahlers,Senior Attorney []Hand Delivery
Eschelon Telecom,Inc.[_X_]U.S.Mail
730 Second Avenue South-Suite 1200 f 1 Overnight Delivery
Minneapolis,MN 55402 Ï 1 Facsimile
[e-mail] f 1 Email
Lauraine Harding Hand Delivery
Senior Manager,Interconnect Negotiation [X ]U.S.Mail
McLeodUSA Ï 1 Overnight Delivery
6400 C Street SW -Box 3177 Q Facsimile
Cedar Rapids,IA 52406-3177 Ï 1 Email
[e-mail]
Brad Sonnenberg [1 Hand Delivery
Covad Communications Company [_X_)U.S.Mail
3420 Central Expressway []Overnight Delivery
Santa Clara,CA 95051 [L Facsimile
[e-mail] f 1 Email
Joseph B.McNeal Ï 1 Hand Delivery
PageData [_X_]U.S.Mail
P.O.Box 15509 Ï 1 Overnight Delivery
Boise,ID 83715 Ï 1 Facsimile
Ï 1 Email -
Brandi L.Gearhart,PLS
Legal Secretaryto Mary S.Hobson
Stoel Rives LLP
QWEST'S RESPONSE TO PAGEDATA's PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION-Page 5
Boise-150907.1 0029164-00033