4201-0101_DecMemo_dh.doc

DECISION MEMORANDUM

TO: COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
COMMISSIONER SMITH
COMMISSIONER HANSEN
JEAN JEWELL
RON LAW
LOU ANN WESTERFIELD
LYNN ANDERSON
RANDY LOBB
JOE CUSICK
TONYA CLARK
BEV BARKER
GENE FADNESS
WORKING FILE
FROM:
DATE:
AUGUST 29, 2001 RE: REPEAL OF THE COMMISSION’S ACCESS AND INTERCONNECTION STANDARDS IN NEW TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVELOPMENT AREAS (THE FACILITIES-BASED CLEC RULES), CASE NO. 31-4201-0101

In August 1998, the Commission promulgated temporary and proposed rules governing the standards for access and interconnection between telephone companies in previously unserved areas of Idaho. More specifically, the Commission rules adopted standards for interconnection and access in areas served solely by a non-incumbent, facilities-based telephone corporation. As the Commission may remember, the impetus for these rules was CTC Telecom, Inc.’s proposal to provide basic local exchange service to a large planned community called Hidden Springs located within Qwest’s certificated study area in Ada County. At the time, CTC had an exclusive contract with the developer to be the sole provider of local exchange service for this planned “community” (when fully developed) of approximately 900 residents and a undetermined number of small businesses.
CTC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Cambridge Telephone Company. CTC was granted a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to provide local telecommunications service in Hidden Springs development. Because CTC did not offer telecommunication services prior to February 8, 1996, it is a non-incumbent local exchange company (LEC) and it is exempt from the Commission’s rate regulation. Idaho Code §§ 61-603(6) and 62-622(2). CTC’s service contract with Hidden Spring expired April 7, 2001.
At the time the rules were promulgated, the Commission was concerned that other facilities-based competitive local exchange companies (CLECs) could enter into exclusive service agreements with real estate developers. The Commission was concerned that such an arrangement would have the practical effect of creating a non-priced regulated monopoly. General Order No. 198 at 2. Consequently, the Commission promulgated rules to be applicable to all similarly situated CLECs rather than simply condition Certificates on a case-by-case basis. Order No. 27673 at 4-5.
Since the Commission promulgated its rules, the Staff is unaware of any other real estate development that has entered exclusive contracts for the delivery of telecommunication services with a CLEC. Moreover, the anticipated build out of Hidden Springs’ 900 customers has not been completed. During this time period, the Commission Staff has received only one complaint against CTC regarding an unrelated issue. Consequently, the Staff believes that it is appropriate for the Commission to consider repealing its Rules 401 through 411 from its Title 62 rules, IDAPA 31.42.01.401-411. The Rules are attached for your review.
Commission Decision
Does the Commission wish to repeal its Rules 401-411?

vld/M:31-4201-01-01_dh

DECISION MEMORANDUM 2