20030515Order No 29239.pdf

Office ofthe Secretary
Service Date
May 15 2003
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND TIME
WARNER TELECOM OF IDAHO LLC FOR
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED INTERCONNECTION
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.c. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND UNITED
STATES CELLULAR MOBILE TELEPHONE
NETWORK FOR APPROVAL OF AN
AMENDMENT TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.c. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND MCLEODUSA
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INc. FOR
APPROVAL OF THREE AMENDMENTS TO A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED INTERCONNECTION
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.c. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND DIECA
COMMUNICATIONS, INC DBA COY
COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY FOR
APPROVAL OF TWO AMENDMENTS TO A
PREVIOULSY APPROVED INTERCONNECTION
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.C. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF VERIZON NORTHWEST, INc. AND
AL TICOMM, INc. FOR APPROVAL OF AN
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.C. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND TOPP COMM
INc. FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.C. ~ 252(e).
ORDER NO. 29239
) CASE NO. USW-OO-
) CASE NO. USW-97-
) CASE NO. QWE-OO-
) CASE NO. USW-99-
) CASE NO. VZN-O3-
) CASE NO. USW - T -99-
) ORDER NO. 29239
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
QWEST CORPORATION AND W A VESENT LLC
FOR APPROVAL OF AN INTERCONNECTION
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.c. ~ 252(e).
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
QWEST CORPORATION AND TW WIRELESS
LLC FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.c. ~ 252(e).
CASE NO. QWE- T -03-
CASE NO. USW-99-
In these cases, the Commission is asked to approve both new interconnection
agreements and amendments to agreements that were previously approved by the Commission.
BACKGROUND
Under the provisions ofthe federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, interconnection
agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.C. ~ 252(e)(1). The
Commission may reject an agreement adopted by negotiations only ifit finds that the agreement:
(1) discriminates against 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 comports 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 these interconnection agreements and
amendments to existing interconnection agreements. These agreements are discussed in greater
detail below.
1. Owest Corporation and Time Warner Telecom of Idaho, LLC (Case No. USW-
00-14). In this Application, the parties request that the Commission approve an amendment to
ORDER NO. 29239
an existing interconnection agreement. This amendment adds terms and conditions for Single
Point of Presence (SPOP) in a LATA.
2. Owest Corporation and United States Cellular Mobile Telephone Network (Case
No. USW-97-8).In this Application, the parties request that the Commission approve an
amendment to an existing interconnection agreement. This amendment adds terms and
conditions for Bill and Keep arrangements.
3. Owest Corporation and McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc. (Case
No. OWE- T -00- 7).In this case, the Commission is asked to approve three amendments to an
existing interconnection agreement. The first amendment adds terms and conditions regarding
Performance Assurance Plan (PAP). The second amendment addresses rates and terms for
Unbundled Network Elements (UNE). The third amendment addresses terms and conditions
related to Collocation Available Inventory.
4. Qwest Corporation and DIECA Communications, Inc. dba Covad
Communications Company (Case No. USW-99-3).In this case, the parties request that the
Commission approve two amendments to an existing interconnection agreement. The first
amendment adds terms and conditions for Joint Testing at the Interconnection Collocation
Distribution Frame (ICDF). The second amendment adds terms and conditions for DC Power
Reduction Procedure.
5. Verizon Northwest, Inc. and Alticomm, Inc. (Case No. VZN-03-3).In this
Application, the parties request that the Commission approve an interconnection agreement. The
terms, rates, and conditions are similar to interconnection agreements approved by this
Commission.
6. Qwest Corporation and Topp Comm, Inc. (Case No. USW-99-1).In this
Application, the parties request that the Commission approve an amendment to an existing
interconnection agreement. This amendment terminates the expired agreement approved by the
Commission in March 1999. This agreement originally expired on March 15 2001 and has been
extended on a month-to-month basis until now.
7. Owest Corporation and Wavesent LLC (Case No. OWE-03-9).In this
Application, the parties request that the Commission approve an interconnection agreement.
Wavesent has requested to "Pick and Choose" in its entirety the terms of the Wireless
Interconnection Agreement between Verizon fka U S WEST New Vector Boise City MSA
ORDER NO. 29239
Idaho RSA No., Idaho RSA No.3 and Qwest Corporation fka U S WEST Communications
Inc. that was approved by the Commission in August 1997.
8. Qwest Corporation and TW Wireless LLC (Case No. USW-99-31).In this
Application, the parties request that the Commission approve an amendment to an existing
interconnection agreement. This amendment adds terms and conditions for Single Point of
Presence (SPOP).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Staff has reviewed these Applications and did not find any terms and conditions
to be discriminatory or contrary to the public interest. Staff believes that the interconnection
agreements and the amendments to interconnection agreements are consistent with the pro-
competitive policies of this Commission the Idaho Legislature and the federal
Telecommunications Act.Accordingly, Staff believes that the Applications merit the
Commission s approval.
COMMISSION DECISION
Under the terms of the Telecommunications Act, interconnection agreements must be
submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.c. ~ 252 (e)(1). The Commission s review is
limited, however. The Commission may reject an agreement adopted by negotiation only if it
finds that the agreement discriminates against a telecommunication carrier not a party to the
agreement or implementation of the agreement is not consistent with the public interest
convenience and necessity.Id.Based upon our review of the Applications, the Staff
recommendation and the fact that no other person commented on these Applications, the
Commission finds that the above interconnection agreements and amendments to previously
approved interconnection agreements are consistent with the public interest, convenience and
necessity and do not discriminate. Therefore, the Commission finds that these Applications
should be approved. However, approval of these agreements and amendments to agreements
does not negate the companies' responsibility to obtain a Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity if they are offering local exchange services or from complying with Idaho Code ~9 62-
604 and 62-606 if they are providing other non-basic local exchange telecommunications
services as defined by Idaho Code ~ 62-603.
ORDER NO. 29239
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the interconnection agreements and amendments to
interconnection agreements discussed above are approved. Terms of the agreements that are not
already in effect shall be effective as of the date of this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to an existing interconnection
agreement between Qwest Corporation and Time Warner Telecom of Idaho LLC, in Case No.
USW-00-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the existing interconnection
agreement between Qwest Corporation and United States Cellular Mobile Telephone Network
in Case No. USW-97-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the three amendments to the previously approved
interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and McLeodUSA Telecommunications
Services, Inc., in Case No. QWE-00-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the two amendments to the previously approved
interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and DIECA Communications, Inc. dba
Covad Communications Company, in Case No. USW-99-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Verizon
Northwest, Inc. and Alticomm, Inc., in Case No. VZN-03-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the previously approved
interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and Topp Comm, Inc., in Case No.
USW-99-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the interconnection agreement between Qwest
Corporation and Wavesent LLC, in Case No. QWE-03-, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amendment to the previously approved
interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and TW Wireless LLC, in Case No.
USW-99-, is approved.
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. USW - T-
00-14 USW-97-WE-00-7 USW-99-3 VZN-03-3 USW-99-WE-03-9 and
USW - T -99-31 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
ORDER NO. 29239
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 /3;+'
day of May 2003.
PAULKJE L
tf &Jv
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
O:USWTOO14- USWT978- QWETOO7 - USWT993- VZNTO33- USWT991- QWETO39 _USWT9931jh
ORDER NO. 29239