200311261st Response of Verizon Wireless.pdf

HECEIVED
F!LED
(1)
GRAHAM &DUNN
ZO03 NO\! 2(; At1 9: 53
JUDITH A. ENDEJAN
[phone]
j endej an(0grahamdunn. comNovember 25 , 2003 iurc;id l'tJuL!C
UTILITIES Cm'i~1ISSI0N
Mr. Weldon B. Stutzman
Deputy Attorney General
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W. Washington
Boise, Idaho 83702-5983
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Re:Case No. GNR-O3-
(Triennial Review Proceeding)
Dear Mr. Stutzman:
Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless ("VZW"), on behalf of its affiliates licensed in Idaho, 1
hereby responds to the production request you issued on November 12, 2003 ("Data Request"
The Data Request is part of the above-referenced proceeding implementing the Federal
Communications Commission s ("FCC'Triennial Review Order ('TRO") and seeks
information fTom wireless carriers such as VZW.
VZW objects to the production request in its entirety but provides certain limited responses to
Request Nos. 1 and 8, subject to its following request for confidentiality.
VZW Is Not Subject To Regulation By the IPUC, Which Has No Jurisdiction To Compel
Discovery Responses
As a threshold matter, VZW is not subject to the requirements of Title 61 and Chapter 6, Title
, Idaho Code. I.C. ~~ 61-121(1); 62-603(14). The IPUC has provided no new source of
authority for issuing the Data Request. VZW therefore objects to responding to the production
request of November 12, 2003.
The Information Requested Is Not Relevant To The State Determination Of Whether
There is Impairment for Mass Market Switching
This includes Sioux City MSA Limited Partnership, Boise City MSA Limited Partnership, Idaho RSA No.
1 Limited Partnership, Idaho RSA No.2 Limited Partnership, Idaho RSA 3 Limited Partnership, Verizon Wireless
(VA W) LLC, CornmNet Cellular License Holding LLC, and Idaho 6-Clark Limited Partnership.
r) C) , h hi jj, ,,;i\!Vit'IJf
Pier 70
2801 Alaskan Way ~ Suite 300
Seattle WA 98121-1128
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.grahamdunn.com
GRAHAM & DUNN
Mr. Weldon B. Stutzman
November 25, 2003
Page 2
Data regarding CMRS networks and services is not relevant to the impairment analysis to be
conducted by the Commission in this proceeding. In the TRO, the FCC considered intermodal
alternatives in its analysis of impairment at the national level. The FCC concluded that only
three to five percent of CMRS subscribers use their service as a replacement for primary fixed
voice wireline services, which indicates that wireless switches do not yet act broadly as an
intermodal replacement for traditional wire line circuit switches. Accordingly, the FCC stated
that it did "not expect state commissions to consider CMRS providers in their application of the
triggers" since "CMRS does not yet equal traditional incumbent LEC services in its quality, its
ability to handle data traffic, its ubiquity, and its ability to provide broadband services to the
mass market. . .. Thus, just as CMRS deployment does not persuade us to reject our
nationwide finding of impairment
, ...
, at this time we do not expect state commissions to
consider CMRS providers in their application of the triggers (Emphasis added) Review of the
Section 251 Unbundling Obligations of Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers CC Docket No. 01-
338; Implementation of the Local Competitive Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of
1996, CC Docket No. 96-98; and Deployment of Wireline Services Offering Advanced
Telecommunications Capability, CC Docket No. 98-147, FCC 03-36 (released August 21 , 2003)
at fn 1549.
Accordingly, because the information sought is not necessary, or even relevant, to this
proceeding, VZW objects to providing it.
VZW Produces Information About Its Switches Subject to the Commission s Procedures
for Protecting Confidential Information
Despite its objections and without waiver of the same, VZW submits certain limited information
in response to Request Nos. 1 and 8 , and requests confidential treatment ofthe information
pursuant to the Commission s standard procedures for proprietary information. IDAP
31.01.01.233.
This information constitutes trade secret data protected under I.C. ~ 48-801(5)(a)(b). No entity
other than Staff should be granted access to this trade secret data. No copy of it will be served
on other parties. Considered in the context of a competitive market, disclosure of the trade secret
data would cause VZW to suffer unfair economic damage. The information provided relates to
the location and cost ofVZW's switches and it would be very valuable to its competitors. VZW
has expended significant amounts of dollars to develop and implement marketing plans
including analyses of appropriate levels of capital investment in various geographic areas.
Failure to protect that valuable information would confer an undue economic advantage on
VZW's competitors by allowing them to obtain data that they otherwise would have had to incur
substantial costs to acquire. Permitting disclosure of the trade secret data would thus provide
competitors or potential competitors with knowledge that would be valuable to them and
concomitantly, would cause VZW serious economic harm. Access to data regarding switches
that VZW has or has not installed at a particular location would allow competitors to consider the
GRAHAM & DUNN
Mr. Weldon B. Stutzman
November 25, 2003
Page 3
information (i) when assessing the relative merits of entering the market in one or more areas
currently served by VZW or (ii) when deciding which particular services it should offer or how.
Trade secret status for the enclosed information is reasonable and appropriate.
Not only should the competitively sensitive information provided in response to Request Nos.
and 8 be designated as a trade secret, it should be protected as confidential because of its
sensitivity in the context of system security. In the wrong hands, information about VZW'
switches could be used to cripple VZW's system and the customers it serves. The locations of
switches and the description of specific equipment at each location would provide a convenient
road map for anyone interested in disrupting the delivery of wireless service in VZW's service
areas. To preserve the security and integrity ofVZW/w inftastructure, the Commission should
designate the trade secret data as confidential and protect it ftom disclosure to any entity other
than Staff.
Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned should you have any questions regarding this
submission.
Very truly yours
GRAHAM & DUNN
Judith A. Endejan
JAE/sbjcc: C. Phillips
m29423-460448.doc
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 25th of November 2003, I caused to be served by the
methodes) indicated below, the foregoing document upon:
Chuck Carrathers
Vice President & General Counsel
Verizon Communications
O. Box 152092
HQEO2H20
Irving, TX 75015-2092
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: chuck.carrathers~verizon.com
'I-u.S. Mail, Postage Prepaid
Hand Delivered
Overnight Mail
Facsimile TransmissIOn
Marlin Ard
178 S. Elm Street, Suite 205
O. Box 2190
Sisters, OR 97759
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: maratty~bendcable.com
u.S. Mail, Postage Prepaid
Hand Delivered
Overnight Mail
Facsimile Transrmssion
Mary B. Tribby
Letty S.D. Friesen
AT&T Law Department
1875 Lawrence Street, 15th Floor
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: lsftiesen~att.com
u.S. Mail, Postage Prepaid
Hand Delivered
Overnight Mail
Facsimile Transrmssion
Robert M. Pomeroy, Jr.
Holland & Hart
8390 East Crescent Parkway, Suite 400
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
omero v(Ci),h 0 llandhart. com
u.S. Mail, Postage Prepaid
Hand Delivered
Overnight Mail
Facsimile Transrmssion
Mary S. Hobson
Stoel Rives LLP
101 So. Capitol Blvd., Suite 1900
Boise, ID 83702
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
mshobson(Ci),stoel.com
Dean J. Miller
McDevitt & Miller LLP
420 West Bannock St.
Boise, ill 83702
u.S. Mail, Postage Prepaid
Hand Delivered
Overnight Mail
Facsimile Transrmssion
-L u.S. Mail, Postage Prepaid
Hand Delivered
Overnight Mail
1- Facsimile Transmission
~2.
Nancy E DIe rson
CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS
WERE IN CL un ED IN TillS FILING