20180911final_order_no_34143.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
September 11,2018
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )OF FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS )CASE NO.VZN-T-02-04
NORTHWEST INC.AND LEVEL 3 )COMMUNICATIONS,LLC FOR APPROVAL )
OF AMENDMENT NO.3 TO THE )ORDER NO.34143
ORIGINAL INTERCONNECTION )
AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO 47 U.S.C.§)
252(e).)
On August 17,2018,Frontier Communications Northwest Inc.("Frontier")and Level
3 Telecommunications,LLC ("Level 3")applied to the Commission for an Order approving
Amendment No.3 to their interconnection agreement ("Agreement").The original Agreement
sets out rates,terms and conditions between the companies.Amendment No.3 represents a
Federal Communications Commission ("FCC")compliance filing.Effective November 18,
2011,the Federal Communications Commission released its USF/ICC Transformation Order.
See 76 F.R.73860;and FCC l1-161.In that order,the FCC determined that the default
intercarrier compensation methodology for all non-access telecommunications traffic exchanged
between carriers and competitive Local Exchange Carriers will transition to bill and keep over
the next six years from July2013.The Application includes Exhibit A and B to Amendment No.
3 and addresses all affiliates associated with Frontier and Level 3.With this Order,the
Commission approves the Agreement.
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 a 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 n_ot comply with either the FCC rules or with the provision of Section 251(b)or (c)."
Order No.28427 at 11 (emphasis in original).This comports with the FCC's regulation that "a
state commission shall have authority to approve an interconnection agreement adopted by
ORDER NO.34143 1
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 APPLICATION
The Application stated that Amendment No.3 to the Agreement was reached through
voluntarynegotiation without resort to mediation or arbitration and was submitted for approval
pursuant to Section 252(e)of the Communications Act of 1934,as amended by the
Telecommunications Act of 1996.In FCC 11-161,the FCC determined the default intercarrier
compensation methodology for all non-access telecommunications traffic exchanged between
carriers and competitive Local Exchange Carriers will transition to bill and keep over six years
from July 2013 Application at 2;and Exhibit A to Amendment No.3.VoIP traffic exchanged
pursuant to the applicable Interconnection Agreements will also be governed by the USF/ICC
Transformation Order,making interexchange VoIP-originated traffic terminated to either party
subject to interstate access charges,and local VoIP-originated traffic terminated to either party
subject to the reciprocal compensation provisions of Amendment No.3.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff reviewed Amendment No.3 and Exhibit A and B thereto,of the Agreement
between Frontier and Level 3 and found it compatible with federal and state guidelines.
Moreover,Staff believes that this filing is consistent with the pro-competitive policies of this
Commission,the Idaho Legislature,and the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Accordingly,Staff recommends 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)(l).The Commission's review is
limited.The Commission may reject an agreement adopted by negotiation only if it finds that
the agreement discriminates against a telecommunications 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 Application and Staff's recommendation,the
Commission finds that Amendment No.3 to the Agreement,along with Exhibits A and B
thereto,are consistent with the public interest,convenience and necessity and do not
discriminate.Therefore,the Commission finds that the Application should be approved.Our
ORDER NO.34143 2
approval of the Application does not negate either party's responsibility to obtain a Certificate of
Public Convenience and Necessity if they offer local exchange services,or to comply with Idaho
Code §§62-604 and 62-606 if they provide other non-basic local telecommunications services as
defined by Idaho Code §62-603.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Amendment No.3 to the Interconnection Agreement
between Frontier Communications Northwest Inc.and Level 3 Telecommunications,LLC,in
Case No.VZN-T-02-04,as discussed above,is approved.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER.Any person interested in this Order 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.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 Ñ
day of September 2018.
PAUL KJËLLA DER,PRESIDENT
KRISTINE RA ER,C IS NER
ERIC ANDERSON,COMMISSIONER
A TEST
Diane M.Hanian
Commission Secretary
VZNT0204 se amend ic
NO.34143 3