20050209_1091.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
COMMISSIONER SMITH
CO MMISSI 0 NER HANSEN
COMMISSION SECRETARY
COMMISSION STAFF
LEGAL
WORKING FILE
FROM:WAYNE HART
DATE:FEBRUARY 9, 2005
RE:ST AFF REVIEW OF INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS AND
AMENDMENTS: CASE NOS. QWE-04-1; QWE-04-19; QWE-OS-02;
VZN-Ol-ll and VZN-04-03.
BACKGROUND
Under the provisions of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, interconnection
agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 V.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 V.C. ~ 252(e)(2)(A).
THE CURRENT APPLICATIONS
1. Qwest and Sprint Communications Company L. P.(Case No. QWE-04-1) This is
an amendment to an existing agreement that provides terms and conditions for phasing out line
sharing in accordance with the TRO.
2. Qwest and Light year Network Solutions LLC (Case No. QWE-04-19) This is an
amendment to an existing interconnection agreement providing terms for the elimination of
UNE-P and the implementation of batch hot cut processes and discounts in accordance with the
TRO.
DECISION MEMORANDUM - 1 -FEBRUARY 9, 2004
3. Qwest and New Rochelle Telephone Corp. fka Peconic Telco. Inc.(Case No.
QWE- T -05-02). This application seeks approval to adopt a previously approved interconnection
agreement and two amendments to that adopted agreement. New Rochelle seeks to adopt the
existing and previously approved agreement between Qwest and Covista. The amendments
provide terms for elimination ofUNE-P and the implementation of batch hot cut processes and
discounts in accordance with the TRO, and the TRO/USTA II amendment, which addresses
other changes that were included in the TRO.
4. Verizon Northwest and AT&T (Case No. VZN- T-01-11) This is an amendment to
an existing agreement dealing with terms for exchanging traffic.
5. Verizon Northwest and XO Idaho. Inc.(Case No. VZN-04-3) This is an
amendment to an existing agreement dealing with terms for exchanging traffic.
STAFF ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed all of these Applications and did not find any terms and conditions
that it considers to be discriminatory or contrary to the public interest. Staff believes that these
Amendments are consistent with the pro-competitive policies of this Commission, the Idaho
Telecommunications Act, and the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. Accordingly, Staff
believes that these Amendments to previously approved interconnection agreements merit the
Commission s approval.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission wish to approve the Applications for Approval of the
Interconnection Agreements and Amendments listed above?
i :udmemos/intc dm02 9
DECISION MEMORANDUM - 2 -FEBRUARY 9 2004