20071022Complaint.pdf

GRAHAM &DUNN
October 16, 2007
JUDITH A. ENDEJAN
206.340.9694
j endejan(g)grahamd unn. com
Via FedEx lIZIJ
--
(-'"~cll--
I'-.-
Jean D. Jewell, Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 West Washington Street
O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83702
Re:Verizon Northwest, Inc. et. al v. Level 3 Communications, LLC
r""
;:::;-;-
rn::.:.r,:,-_
$:;:~::;;:::;::::
0'10
--I ;'0
-.J
,,--
::Po'-io-
Dear Ms. Jewell:
,,"0
;:-"
Enclosed is an original and seven (7) copies of a Summons and Complaint. Please file and serve the
Summons and Complaint, as Commission Secretary, upon the respondent, Level 3 Communications
LLC, pursuant to IDAP A 31.01.01.016.02 and 054.05. Also enclosed for filing and service is an original
and seven (7) copies of Petitioner s Motion for Limited Admission of Judith A. Endejan and Petitioner
Motion for Limited Admission of Chris Oatway.
Enclosed is a self-addressed stamped envelope. Please stamp date received and the case number on the
face sheet (enclosed herein) for each ofthe pleadings referenced above. We would also appreciate you
providing us with a copy of your proof of service of the Summons, Complaint and Motions on Level 3.
Another self-addressed envelope is enclosed for this purpose.
Please contact the undersigned if you have further questions. Thank you.
Very truly yours
GRAHAM & DUNN
JAE/kac
Enclosure
cc: Chris Oatway, Esq. (wi ends.
m37815.950450.doc
Pier 70
2801 Alaskan Way - Suite 300
Seattle WA 98121-1128
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.grahamdunn.com
SEATTLE - PORTLAND
Counsel for Verizon
David M. Byers
Judith A. Endejan
Law Firm: Graham & Dunn, P.
Mailing Address: 2801 Alaskan Way Suite 300
Seattle, Washington 98121-1128
Email: i endei an~grahamdunn.com
dbvers~grahamdunn.com
kacutting~graham dunn. com
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
R:ECE!'J
2007 OCT j 7 MJ 9: 4 7
it)i\HC j)UF:j i(~
i i'~:Q "'f\!
,(;j' --
""v v'JJ\U'i';:;;:; d
Chris Oatway
Mailing Address: 1515 N. Courthouse Rd., Suite 400
Arlington, V A 22201
Email: christopher.oatway~verizon.com
Business Phone: [phone]
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
VERIZON NORTHWEST INe., VERIZON
SELECT SERVICES, INe., MCI
COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INe. dlb/a
VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES , MCI
METRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION
SERVICES, LLC dlb/a VERIZON ACCESS
TRANSMISSION
Complainants
vs.
LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
) CASE NO. VL.-N-l-O7--oi
) COMPLAINT
Respondents.
Verizon Northwest, Inc., Verizon Select Services, Inc., MCI Communications Services
Inc. dlb/a Verizon Business Services, and MCI metro Access Transmission Services, LLC dIb/a
Verizon Access Transmission (collectively, "Verizon ) ask the Commission to reverse the
revisions to the Idaho PUC Tariff No. 2 ("Tariff Revisions ) that Level Communications, LLC
Level 3") filed on September 20, 2007. As discussed below, Level3's new charges are unjust
and unreasonable, contrary to Idaho Code 962-602( 1), because Level 3' s descriptions of its new
services are vague, ambiguous, or nonexistent.
COMPLAINT -- 1
m3781 S-950459.doc
OR\G\NAL
Level3's tariff filing in Idaho is part of a multi-state effort to add new services to its existing
tariffs, and similar or identical filings in other states have raised substantial concerns. As a result
a number of public utility commissions, including those of Alabama, Connecticut, Mississippi
Pennsylvania, Ohio , and Tennessee, have suspended similar or identical tariff revisions by Level 3
or its affiliates. 1 In other states, including California, Kentucky, Massachusetts, and New York
Level 3 has re-filed its proposed tariffs, extended their effective dates, and/or withdrawn its tariffs
in order to attempt to address concerns expressed by Verizon, commission staff, and other parties.
DISCUSSION
The Tariff Revisions include four new services: Originating Switched Access, Toll
Free Data Base Access, Toll Free Transit Traffic, and Pay Telephone Compensation. See First
Revised Page 59.
The descriptions of how and in what circumstances Level 3 intends to apply
charges for its new services are vague, ambiguous, or nonexistent. As a result, it is unclear who
will have to pay Level 3' s proposed new charges, and under which circumstances they will be
assessed. This uncertainty raises the specter of customers possibly being required to pay the same
charges twice.
For example, it appears (although it is unclear) that Level3's new charge for
Originating Switched Access is associated with Level3's new Toll Free Data Base Access
Service, which "utilizes originating trunk side Switched Access Service.See First Revised
1 The Alabama Public Service Commission suspended a virtually identical Level 3 tariff during its regular meeting of
October 9 2007, and the Tennessee Regulatory Authority suspended a virtually identical Level 3 tariff in its regular
meeting of October 8, 2007. Other commissions entered suspension orders. See In re, Notice of Level
Communications, LLC of its Tariff Filing Which Proposes to Add Toll Free Data Base Access Service; Toll Free
Transit Traffic Service; and Rates for Originating Switched access and Pay Telephone Compensation Docket No.
2007-UN-420, Suspension Order (Miss. Pub. Servo Comm n. Oct. 3 2007); In the Matter of the Application of Level
Communications, LLC to Resell Telecommunications Services Case No. 07-895-TP-ATA, Entry (Ohio Pub. Util.
Comm n. Aug. 31 2007); Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission v. Telcove of Pennsylvania, et a!.Docket No. R-
00072442, Order (Penn. Pub. Util. Comm n. July 25 , 2007).
COMPLAINT -- 2
m37815-950459.doc
Page 52. But the tariff does not describe the traffic to which Originating Switched Access charges
will apply. Level 3 states that its other new service, Toll Free Transit Traffic Service, involves
traffic originated by a third party that is not a Level 3 end user and does not involve local
switching. See Original Page 52.1. Because the company will not provide local switching as part
of Toll Free Transit Traffic Service, it should not be permitted to bill other carriers an "originating
switched access" charge for any associated traffic, and the tariff should be modified to make this
clear.
Level3's description of its new Toll Free Transit Traffic Service is also vague and
ambiguous in at least two ways. First, the circumstance under which a carrier becomes a customer
for that service is not clear. Second, while stating that the proposed new service "provides for the
use of common terminating, common switching and switched transport facilities (see Original
Page 52.1), Level 3 does not explain how such rate elements will apply. Among other
modifications, Level 3 should clarify that Toll Free Transit Traffic Service will only involve
tandem elements, given that the use of the Level3's facilities "does not include local switching.
Id.
There is even more uncertainty regarding what the Pay Telephone Compensation
service is, and who will have to pay the associated charge. For example, the description of this
service is internally inconsistent with respect to a key term: the word "surcharge" is used both to
describe the money paid (apparently by Level 3) to Payphone Service Providers ("PSPs ) and to
the charge that Level 3 intends to collect from its customer in order to pay the FCC-mandated
compensation due the PSPs. See Original Page 52.1. It is also unclear who the "customer" is in
the context of this new service - for example, whether it is a completing carrier, an intermediate
carrier, an end user, or the owner of a toll free number. As a result, it is unclear how another
carrier (or other entity) becomes a "customer" of Level 3 with respect to this new service. That is
important because under FCC regulations and orders, completing carriers are responsible for
paying FCC-mandated compensation to PSPs, and have the option of either paying such
COMPLAINT -- 3
m37815-950459,doc
compensation directly or paying intermediate carriers a surcharge to be passed on to the PSPs.
Level3's proposed Pay Telephone Compensation service is potentially problematic to the extent it
eliminates a completing carrier s option to pay such charges directly, and at worst could result in
completing carriers' double-paying the FCC-mandated compensation to PSPs.
Without clear descriptions of Level 3' s proposed new services and how Level 3 will
apply the associated charges, it is impossible to determine whether the revised tariff is appropriate
or reasonable.
II.PARTIES
Each of the Complainants is authorized to provide telecommunication services in
the state of Idaho. Verizon, as a purchaser of switched access services, is substantially affected by
Level 3' s tariff filing.
The attorneys representing Verizon in this matter are:
David M. Byers
Judith A. Endejan Pro Hac Vice
Graham & Dunn PC
Pier 70, Suite 300
2801 Alaskan Way
Seattle, W A 98121-1128
Emai1: iendeian~grahamdunn.com
dbyers~grahamdunn.com
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Chris Oatway, Pro Hac Vice
1515 N. Courthouse Rd., Suite 400
Arlington, VA 22201
Email: christopher.oatway~verizon.com
Business Phone: [phone]
Level 3 is a competitive local exchange carrier authorized to provide
telecommunication services in Idaho.
COMPLAINT -- 4
m37815-950459,doc
10.Level3's General Counsel is:
Thomas e. Stortz
Group Vice President & General Counsel
Level 3 Communications, LLC
1025 Eldorado Boulevard
Broomfield, Colorado 80021
Tel. [phone]
Thomas.stortz~leve13 .com
III.PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Verizon respectfully requests that this Commission, consistent with its
obligations to protect against anticompetitive abuses and enforce Idaho law requiring just and
reasonable rates, reverse Level3's revisions to its Idaho PUC Tariff No. 2.
Respectfully submitted, this l.b-th day of October, 2007
Christopher D. Oatway, Pro Hac Vice
Verizon
1515 North Court House Road, Suite 500
Arlington, VA 22201-2909
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
clnistopher. d. oatway~v erizon. com
COMPLAINT -- 5
m37815-950459,doc
Gregory M. Romano
General Counsel
Verizon Northwest, Inc.
1800 41 st Street, Fifth Floor
Everett, W A 98201
Tel. [phone]
gregory.romano~one. verizon.com
Attorneys for Verizon
COMPLAINT -- 6
rn37815-950459.doc