20041130Application.pdf

GTe Service Carpor.ioft
17933 NW Evergreen Pa\1(wa~
O. Box 1100
Beaverton, OR 97075
Juiy 20, 2000
Ms. Myrna Walters
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W. Washington
Boise, Idaho 83720
Re: Adoption orNe\\' Edge NetWork, Inc. d/b/a New Edge N~tworks fGTE Interconnection
Agreement by American Fiber Nelwork, Inc.
Dear Ms. Walters:
Enclosed for filing with the Commission under Section 252(0 of the Telecommunications Act
of 1996 are the original and seven copies of American Fiber NetWork.. Inc.'s adoption of the
arbitrated Interconnection Agreement between GTE Nonhwest, Inc. (GTE") and New Edge
Network, Inc. d/b/a New Edge Networks r.Tenns ). The enclosure includes an adoption
letter signed by both GTE and American Fiber Network, Inc. which is self-explanatory. :and
which sets fonh the manner in which the Terms will be applied in American Fiber Net\\ork
Inc.s case.
As the enclosed letter exp)ains~ GTE is not voluntarily entering the Terms with :\merican
Fiber Nctwork. Inc. and does not v.'ah'e any rights and remedies it has concerning its position
as to the illegality or unreasonableness of the Tenns. GTE contends that certain pro\risions of
the Terms may be void or unenforceable as a result oflhe United States Eighth Circuit court
of Appeals July and October, 1997 decisions. the Supreme Coun of the United States
decision of January 25, 1999 and the remand ofrhe pricing rules 10 the United States Eighth
Circuit Court of Appeals. Any modification 10 the underlying Terms shaH automatically
apply to American Fiber Network. (nc. GTE is prescr.ing 'IS legal positions in ever)' respect
as to the Terms in the hands of American fther Set\IJ'ork.lnc. 35 well as in the hands of ~ew
Edge Network. Inc. d/b/a New Edge Network,s.
A pllf1 of GT! Corporation
Ms. Walters
July 20, 2000
Page 2
All parties to Cause are being served with a copy of this letter. If they would like a copy of
the adoption agreement, they should contact Renee Winer at 503,645..7909.
ed Logan
Director-Regulatory & Go\'en\mental Affairs
Robert E. Heath American Fiber Network.. Inc.
Scott Miles.. GTE
SI."." J. Plner18
Director-Negotiation.
Whale.alB Marklrs GTE N.twerkSente..
HQEO3861
lOa Hidd8n Ridge
O eo. 1$2OQ2
InMg. TX 75038
972/7'1-'333
FAX [phone]
June 23,2000
Mr. Robert E. Heath
Executive Vice President
American Fiber Network~ Inc.
9401 Indian Creek Parkway, Suite: 140
Overland Park, KS 66210
Dear Mr. Heath;
GTE has received your letter stating that, under Section 252(i) of the Telecommunications Act of
1996 (the UAct ), American Fiber NetWork. Inc. C-AFNn) wishes 10 adopt the terms afme
Interconnection Agreement between New Edge NetWor~ Inc. dlb/a New E.dge Networks C'New
Edge ) and GTE that was approved by the Commission as an effective agreement in the State of
Idaho in Docket No. 28332 (the '-Terms ). I understand you have a copy of the Terms. Piease
note the following with respect to your adoption oCthe Tenns.
By your countersignature on this letter, you hereby represent and C:Qm~it to the
following three points:
(A)AFN adopts the Terms of the New Edge agreement for interconneclion with GTE
and in applying the Terms. agrees that AFN shall be substitUted in place of New
Edge in the rems wherever appropriate.
(8)AFN requests that nolice to AFN as may be required under the Tenns shall be
provided as follows:
To:American Fiber Nctwork. Inc.
Anenlion: Mr. Roben E. Heath
9401 Indian Creek Parkway. Suite t
Overland Park. KS 66210
Telephone number: 913/338..2658
FAX number: 913/661-0538
(C)AFN represents and warrants that it is a ccnified provider of local
telecommunications ICrvic:e in the Slate of Idaho, and that itS adoption or the
Tenns will cover services in the Slate of Idaho only.
. -- - --- . --- ---
Mr. Robert E. Heath
June 23~ 2000
Page 2
AFN's adoption of the New Edge T~rms shall become effective upon GTE's filing of this
letter with (he Idaho Public Utilities Commission and remain in effect no longer than the
date the New Edge Tenns are tenninated. The New Edge agreement is cunently
scheduled to expire on December 31, 2002.
As the Terms are being adopted by you pursuant to your statUtory rights under section
2S2(i).. GTE does not provide the Terms 10 you as either a voluntary or negotiated
agreement The filing and performance by GTE of the T ennt does not in any way
constitute a waiver by GTE of any position as to the Tenns or a portion thereof~ nor does
it constitute a waiver by GTE of all rights and remedies it may have 10 seek review of the
Terms, or to seek review in any \Way of any provisions included in these Terms as a resuh
of AFN'2S2(i) election.
On January 25, 1999, the Supreme COUr1 of the United States (".Coun ) issued its decision
on the appeals of the Eighth Circuit's decision in Iowa Utilities Board. Specifical1y, the
Supreme Coun modified several of\he FCC's and the Eighth Circ:uifs rulings regarding
unbundled network elements and pricing requirements under the Act AT&T Corp. 10\HI
Ulililies Boa,d. No. 97-826, 1999 U.S. tEXIS 903 (1999). Cenain provisions of the
Tenns may be void or unenforccab1e as a resuh of the Coun s decision of January 25 , 199()
and the remand or the pricing roles to the United States Eighth Circuil Coun of Appeals.
Moreover, nothing herein shan be construed as or is intended to be a concession or
admission by either GTE or AFN that any provision in the Terms complies with the rights
and duties imposed by the ACI, the decision of the FCC and the Commissions, the
decisions of the couns. or other law, and both GTE and Am expressly reserve their full
right to assen and pursue claims arising from or related to the Terms.
GTE reserves the right to deny AFN's adoption andJor application oflhe Tenns, in ~'hole
or in pan. at any time:
(3)when the costs of providing the Tenns to AFN arc pealer than the costs ofprovidina it to New Edge;
,rthe provision of the Tenns to AFN is not technically feasible; and/or
to the extent AFN already has an existing interconnection agreement (or existing
2S2(i) adoption) with GTE and the Terms were approved before the date
approval oCthe existing interconnection agreement (or !he effective date of theexisting 252(i) adoption).
(b)
(c)
Mr. Robert E. Heath
June 23, 2000
Page 3
As noted above. pursuant to Rule 809, the FCC gave ILECs the ability to deny 252(
adoptions in those instances where (he cost of providing the service to the requesting
canier is higher than that incurred to serve the initial carrier or there is a technical
incompatibility issue. The issue of reciprocal compensation for traffic destined for the
Internet falls within this exception. GTE never inlended for Internet traffic: passing
through a telecommunications carrier 10 be included within the definition of local (raffle
and subject to the corresponding obligation of reciprocal compensation. Despite the
foregoing, some forums have required reciprocal compensation 10 be paid. This produces
the situation where the cost of providing the service is not cost based. \\'ilh this in mind,
GTE opposes, and reserves the right to deny, the adoption and/or the application of the
provisions oflhe Terms that mighl be interpreted to characterize traffic destined for
Internet as Jocal traffic or requiring the paymenl ofreciproc:al compensation.
Should AFN attempt to apply the Tcnns .n a maMer that conflicts with paragraphs 3-
above, GTE reserves its rights 10 seek appropriate legal andJor equitable reHef.
Please sign this letter on the space provided below and return it (0 the undersigned.
Sincerely,
E Northwest Incorporated GTE Northwest Incorporated
Connie Nicholas
Assistant Vice President
Wholesale Markets-lntcrcD
Steven J Itterle
Dirac tor-Helot 1at ians
Wholesale Markets
Reviewed and countersigned as to points A, B, and C of paragraph 1:
American Fiber Network, Inc.
i!oiICiP;'" flJlU:,
IPIII,.' """"f.1
R. Ragsdale - GTE