20150120_4571.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
COMMISSIONER REDFORD
COMMISSIONER SMITH
COMMISSION SECRETARY
LEGAL
WORKING FILE
FROM:CAROLEE HALL
DATE:JANUARY 12,2015
RE:APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO AMEND THE
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN QVEST
CORPORATION D/B/A CENTURYLINK QC (“CENTURYLINK”)F/K/A
U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS,INC.,AND CRICKET
COMMUNICATIONS,INC.(“CRICKET”);CASE NO.QWE-T-00-20.
BACKGROUND
Under the provision of the federal TeLecommunications Act of 1996,interconnection
agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval.47 U.S.C.§252(e)(1).The
commission may reject an agreement adopted by negotiations only if it finds that the agreement:
(I)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 U.S.C.§252(e)(2)(A).As the Commission noted in Order No.28427,companies
voluntarily entering into interconnection agreements “may negotiate terms,prices and conditions
that do not comply with either the FCC rules or with the provision of Section 251(b)or (c).”
Order No.28427 at 11 (emphasis in original).This comports with the FCC’s statement that
“a state commission shall have authority to approve an interconnection agreement adopted by
negotiation even if the terms of the agreement do not comply with the requirements of [Part 511.”
47 C.F.R.§51.3.
CURRENT APPLICATION
CenturyLink and Cricket submitted an amended Interconnection Agreement between the
parties in Case No.QWE-T-0O-20.According to the Company,the original Agreement was
approved by this Commission on January 26,2001.See Order No.28618.This amendment is to
DECISION MEMORANDUM -I -JANUARY 12,2014
provide for the changes that came about with the FCC’s issuance of its Triennial Review Order
and Triennial Review Remand Order (“TRO/TRRO”).The revisions are reflected in Attachment
I to this interconnection agreement amendment.
STAFF ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed the Application and does not find any terms or conditions that it
considers to be discriminatory or contrary to the public interest.Staff believes that the
Agreement is consistent with the public interest as identified in the pro-competitive policies of
this Commission,the Idaho Legislature,and the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Accordingly,Staff believes that the Agreement merits the Commission’s approval.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission agree?
udmemos/InLerconnectiort/wirelcss and pacinEIQWE-T-OO-20 CENTURYLENK and Cricket TRO and TRRO amendments
DECISION MEMORANDUM -2-JANUARY 12,2014