28790.doc

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND FRETEL
COMMUNICATIONS, LLC FOR APPROVAL OF
AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING WIRELINE
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT PURSUANT
TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. USW-T-99-14

IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION AND Z-TEL
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF
A WIRELINE INTERCONNECTION
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. QWE-T-01-12 IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT APPLICATION
OF VERIZON NORTHWEST, INC. AND NOS
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF A
WIRELINE INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT
PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C. § 252(e).
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. VZN-T-01-10

ORDER NO. 28790

In these cases, the Commission has been asked to approve two new interconnection agreements and an amendment to an agreement that was previously approved by the Commission.
BACKGROUND
Under the provisions of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, interconnection agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.S.C. § 252(e)(1). The Commission may reject an agreement adopted by negotiations only if it 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.S.C. § 252(e)(2)(A). As the Commission 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 with 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.F.R. § 51.3.
THE CURRENT APPLICATIONS
The Commission has been asked to approve these interconnection agreements and an amendment to an existing interconnection agreement. These agreements are discussed in greater detail below.
Qwest Corporation and Fretel Communications, LLC. Case No. USW-T-99-14. In this case, the parties have requested the Commission approve the second amendment to a previously approved wireline interconnection agreement. The original interconnection agreement was approved by the Commission on September 1, 1999. Order No. 28133. On April 25, 2001, the Commission approved the parties’ first amendment to this interconnection agreement. Order No. 28716. The present filing by the parties amends the interconnection agreement between them by adding terms, conditions and rates for Unbundled Network Elements.
Qwest Corporation and Z-Tel Communications, Inc. Case No. QWE-T-01-12.
In this Application the parties request that the Commission approve a wireline interconnection agreement. Z-Tel has obtained a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity from the Commission for the state of Idaho. Case No. GNR-T-00-39, Order No. 28766.
Verizon Northwest, Inc. and NOS Communications, Inc. Case No. VZN-T-01-10. In this Application the parties request that the Commission approve a wireline interconnection agreement. Currently, NOS Communications does not have a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the state of Idaho, but has filed an Application with the Commission requesting one. Case No. GNR-T-01-6.
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 amendment to an interconnection agreement 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.S.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, Staff’s recommendation and on the fact no other person commented on these Applications, the Commission finds that the above interconnection agreements and the amendment to a previously approved interconnection agreement 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 the Verizon, NOS Agreement does not negate NOS’s responsibility to obtain a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity if it is offering local exchange services, nor its compliance with Idaho Code §§ 62-604 and 62-606, if it is providing other non-basic local exchange services telecommunications services as defined by Idaho Code § 62-603.

O R D E R
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the interconnection agreements and the amendment to a previously approve interconnection agreement 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 second amendment to a previously approved interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and Fretel Communications LLC, in Case No. USW-T-99-14, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the wireline interconnection agreement between Qwest Corporation and Z-Tel Communications, Inc., in Case No. QWE-T-01-12, is approved.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the wireline interconnection agreement between Verizon Northwest, Inc. and NOS Communications, Inc., in Case No. VZN-T-01-10, 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-99-14, QWE-T-01-12 and VZN-T-01-10 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 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
day of July 2001.

PAUL KJELLANDER, PRESIDENT

MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER

DENNIS S. HANSEN, COMMISSIONER

ATTEST:

Jean D. Jewell
Commission Secretary

O:uswt9914_qwet0112_vznt0110_jh

ORDER NO. 28790 1

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
July 25, 2001