200312051st Response of ATT Wireless.pdf

12/05/03 FRI 13: 22 FAX [phone] AT&T SERVICES INC I4J 002:. ,:
ATsi.TWireless
...,.-,.--....,-.."..,.,..."....."""'" """""""""",.,,,, ",.." .",,, ". " "."""""""""
Cindy Manheim
8cm;or Regulatory Coun~~)1
Le~al & ExTern"!l AffCJlr~
/')// H:;~lh 1\,,;;
I:!uil,rin!~ 1
RIoJdmond, WA 98052
,1;", :,fin.;, I 1:1.
FAX 4:~5 S8(.I-;:;6~.12
1;lndy,I"I;jlll'l.;;in1~'\llw~,CQln
December 5. 2003
Jean D. Je\vdl
onic~ or the Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W WashingtOn
Boise, ID 83702-59!:!3
Rc: First Production I~cqucst of thc COl1nuission Sh1ff to Wireless
Comp.mics in the Matter of TPUe Rc~ponsc to FCC Ordcr on Rcview of
Section 251 lInbundling Obligations of Incumbent L(H~~al E:\:I.~hi:1n~(' Carriers
(CC DOcJict No. 01-338).
Dear Ms. Jewell:
This letter is in response to the above referenci:d docket. While in the
spirit of coop(:nltion with tht Commission, AT&T Wir~kss C-A WS") has
attempted to provide responses to the qucstions I() thc n::kvant switching
quesli()n~: h()\.vever" A WS ha$ global cnncern$ regarding the reque:;:;t as a whole
and sp(;citic conccrns with rcsp(;ct to individWtl qll~stions. ThC$(: conCerns ,;m~
dis(.:usscd in more clctai.l below.
A WS re~pectfl.llly believes it is not legally obligated to respond to this
In IlJrlllation Request. Fir~L A WS is currently nOl a party in the above
reJcrenced proceeding. In addition, the Idaho Cock explicitly exempts wireless
carriers from regulation by the Commission. Scc Idaho Cock ~61-121-2(ii) and
*62-603-13(ii). The Comm.ission thus cannot require a response from AWS in
this proceeding. Furthermore, as di~cl.lssed in m(1n:~ delail below. the Federal
Communications Commission ("FCC") could nol h,:w\.: been ckarcr that
col1llm::rcial mobik radio scrvice.:: (CMRS) switchin~ is not rdr.::vant to the.:: state
determination of whether there is impairmcnt for mass marker switching.
Nevcl1heless, ckspite this objection, in order to be re.':'p(m~ive to the
Commissi.$ in.'-1UiI'Y, A WS provides the following.
A..The FCC Clearly Deternlined that ('/I.,JR.'" Switching is No! A 5iuilahle
SUbsliwle j(J/' I LEC Switching
~FO 236J;;lvl :!(':\'I(I-
;:!~
~ C",.",.I",coI D,~"M
12/05/03 FRI 13: 23 FAX [phone] AT&T SERVICES INC I4J 003
11 the Triennial Review Oreler ('TRO"), the FCC considered intermodal
. .' .
a ternattves 111 Its ana. YS1S 0 LIl1pamncnt on a natwna ~ve. n c I::ten1l11l1Ilg. tlC
signi Iicance or eviJ~ncc or intermodal nlLernative::,. the FCC consider~d "to wh,.Ll
~xt(:nt services provid\::d over thl::s\:: intermodal alternatives arl:: comparabh:: in
cost quality. and m~tturity to incumb(;nt LEC s(;rvic(;s."~ Th..: FCC sp(;ci1icHlly
considered evidence of the availability of intermodal switching in the mass
market and determined that it did not warrant a finding of no impairment/ In
considering. the evidence related to CMI~S service, the FCC ~tated:
We also find that despite evidence demonstrating
na.rrowbancllocal services are widely (Ivai klble
through CM RS provider$, wirele$$ is not yet a
$llitable sub~titute ror local circuit switching.
particular. only three to five pcrCCIll of CMRS
subscribers use their service as a replacement ror
primary fixed voice wirdinl:: services. which
indical~S that win::k~s switches do not, )'(:t act
broadly as an irnermodoJ replacement for
traditional wireline circuit switches. Lastly. the
rec.ord demonstrates that \vireless CMRS
c()nn~ctions in gt:nt;;ral do not yt:l tqualtraditiolwl
landlinc facilitics in their quality and ability to
handle data tI"Zlffic.
In addition to determining thal on a national kvcl CMRS switching is
not a suitablt: ::;ubstitUk (lH"ILEC switching, thc FCC concluded in the context
()("
discu~5ing the triggers analysis that a state commi:::sion must per('(mll fl.)r
mass market switching that: (1) CMRS service is nor comparable in quality to
ILEC service and (2) that it does not expect stales to !.:ol1sidt::r CMRS
dcploym.ent in the context ()I"the triggers analysis. Spccij~call)'. the TRO states:
For example, w~ nole that CMRS dot::\ nOt yct
equal tri.tditional incllmbcnr LEC scrvicc$ in it$
quality. itS ability to handle data tra'ftic- it
ubiquity, and its ability to provide broadb~lI1d
services to the mass mm-J.:.~L. ".. ThLls...i LIst
CMRS deploymcnl docs not pcrslIZick us to reject
our nationwide finding of impairmcnt ... at this
time. we do not cxp~ct state commissions \0
I TRO" 97.
2 Id.
:; TR.O '1443 ("We deter111in~ thaI, although the existence 0.1' interl11odal
switching is a ntdor to consider ill establishing our unbundling requirements,
~Llrrcnt evidence of deployment does not prest:l1tly warrant i.'I tinding of no
impairment with regard to local circuit switching,'I IRO ~ 44)"
12/05/03 FRI 13: 23 FAX [phone] AT&T SERVICES INC 141004
consider CMRS providers in theIr application of
the l1'i,?i.!er~.~ (Emphasis added.
Thus, the TRO could not b~ clearer th~lt data regarding CMItS switching is not
relevant to the :,;tate ddcrmination of' whdher thert~ is' impairment: 'I~)I" mass
markd switching ~l11d lh~ data that the Commission is fon:ing CMRS providers
to supply is lik..::ly to hav(~ link probativ(: valu(~
Many Questions ilskfhr Data That Is ~'Ilirdinc L);Jccftic LInd is Not
Appl kaMe ./hr CA4 RS &~JTi(.'(~
Because the (,luestions ..1re based on a wireline model of service, which is
simply not appli(:abk to CMRS $ervi(;e. A \\is cannot anSWi::r I'nany of the
switching questions.
!v1RS .(~/Ti(:e !\4ay Not Be Qi.wlW.;ing Service
A qualifying s~rvice is ddined as a s~rvicl;; that compd~s with a sl;;rvicc
that has been traditionally th~ exclusive or primary domain ofthe incumbent
LECs.() Given thaT. as discussed above, the FCC concluded that CMRS was not
yet a substitute for ILFC service and lhat only thr(;;e to Ii\!I;; pl.::r(:(;nt orCMRS
customers use their servic(; as a replacement for prim(!.ry nxed voice wil'eline
services, it: is qLHzsrionan1c wh~~t.hcr CMRS service is 1n direct wmpetit1nn to
lLEC wirdine voi((:; scrvicl::s.
Concerns wilh lndiridual Questions
Request No.: As stated above, it is not clear that CMRS carriers
provide a (flwl(tjiing servh'e. Ntv(:rthdcss. WS provides the following
information with r(;sp(;ct to the switch it utilizes to provide commerciallllobile
radio service in the state of Idaho,
Idaho Switch 619 N. Bannock Street: - Boise City, YO 83702
Request. No.A WS does not track switch (~()\(~ragc area by wire
centers. CMRS service is generally provid~d l)!1 MTi\ or MSA wide basis.
With .its IdallO switch (or in c(11l1hinatioll with switches located outside of
Idaho), A \\is i=, ahlr:: to provide CMRS switching services for its enlire licensed
area in. which it has opt:ration$. Accordingly. A WS cannot answer this question.
:; Yd.
47 C.R. ~ 51.5.
12/05/03 FRI 13: 24 FAX [phone] AT&T SERVICES INC 141 005
Rem1cst No.There arc a scycral problems with this question. Unlike
a wireline end oftice. mobile switching. C~nl~r$ do not have access lincs that
etjLlat~ lo the DSO level. In addi.tion , unlike wireline service where the number of
cll~t()mers served by a switch is tixec.:L CMRS cl.1sl:omer$ are not tied to an
individual mobik switching center. Bt:caus~ of the mobile nature or CMRS
service. /\. WS' customers may he strvl;:d by any numner or switChes at ~l1'1y given
time. thus making it impossible to gtatc that there arc: X number of voice
customers scrwcl by the switch.
R~tIucst No.See responst:. to n::quesl No.3 above.
Request No.A \VS titles Iwt olli:.~r businl;:Ss or r(;.~sidential s~rvic~ lik~
an ILEC. It olTtrs Illobilt:: service which l.:ustomio:rS can use 1'01" any purposc.
A WS cannot provide answcrs to these qucstions.
Request No.A WS docs not' 1c"sc any capacity from another carrier in
response to ,Requcst: No.
Request No.7: See response to reql1e~t No.3 and Request No.5 aboYt:.
RCCllIcst No.This qucstion is 110t applicable to wirel.es$ cJ.rriers as
A WS provides commercial m,obik: radio service.
Request No.This qlle::;tion is nol applil:able loA WS. A \\is provicks
commercial mobik radio $ervil.~e" In addition. ;)S stated above. A WS does nol:
obtain switching on a wholesa1c. leasc Or' r~::-:ale basi$:
Requc:st No. 10:This qucstion is not applicable to AWS. A WS prnvides
commercial mobile radio service. A WS d()e~ serve some CMRS resdkrs in
Idaho. However. A WS only provides r~sale as a bundled p~lckagc. /\. \VS docs
not sell access to only its mobile switl:hing ccntccs as a wholesale product.
(equest Nos. 11. 12. and 13:A WS is a commercial mobi.lc radio scrvicc
providt'L These questions appear to bl: directed at CLECs.
Rel.!uest No. 14:See n::sponsc to Rcqucst No.3 and 5.
Request Nos. 15. 16. 17. 1 R. 19 and 20:Thcse questions arc not
applicable to A WS , a provider of commcrcial mobile radio servil.:e in thl;:
state of Idaho.
Efficient LooD Mh!ration:
These questions are not ilPplicabk Lo wird::ss carriers as they concern
changing from an ILF.C switch to CLEC t~tcilities"
12/05/03 FRI 13: 24 FAX [phone] AT&T SERVICES INC 141 006
If you have any questions or require further clal'i:fJ.cation. please feel free
to contact Kimberly Nielsen at 425-580-4740.
Sincerely,
~~\!-j \
ffC~'
Cindy J. Mallh~i~1 --
,--,,
cc: Wddon B. Stlltzman