20040913_944.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
COMMISSIONER SMITH
CO MMISSI 0 NER HANSEN
COMMISSION SECRETARY
COMMISSION STAFF
LEGAL
WORKING FILE
FROM:WAYNE HART
DATE:SEPTEMBER 10, 2004
RE:ST AFF REVIEW OF INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS AND
AMENDMENTS: CASE NOS. USW-99-3; QWE-01-27; QWE-03-27;
QWE- T -04-
BACKGROUND
Under the provisions of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, interconnection
agreements must be submitted to the Commission for approval. 47 U.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 U.C. ~ 252(e)(2)(A).
THE CURRENT APPLICATIONS
1. Qwest and Covad Communications Company (Case No. USW-99-. This is an
Amendment to an existing agreement that provides terms and conditions for Line Sharing
provided on a commercial basis. This is essentially the same Amendment approved by the
Commission in Order No. 29530, but this version now includes an additional attachment
including provisions to include line sharing under the Performance Assurance Plan.
2. Qwest and T-Mobile USA (Case No. QWE-01-27). This is an amendment to an
existing agreement (T-Mobile USA fka Voicestream Wireless Corporation) adding terms for a
Single Point of Presence (SPOP).
DECISION MEMORANDUM - 1 -SEPTEMBER 10, 2004
3. Qwest and Robert Ryder dba Radio Paging Service (Case No. QWE-03-27). This
is an amendment to an existing interconnection agreement providing terms for Transit traffic.
The agreement appears to be consistent with Order No. 29555 , issued by the Commission in the
pager cases (SUP- T -02-01).
4. Qwest Corporation and Granite Telecommunications LLC (Case No. QWE- T -04-
This application seeks approval of an amendment to an existing interconnection agreement. The
Amendment adds terms for the implementation of a batch hot cut procedure and eliminates the
UNE-P product, in accordance with the DC Circuit Court's decision in USTA v. FCC, 359 F.
554.
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
Legislature, and the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. Accordingly, Staff believes that
these Amendments to previously approved interconnection agreements merit the Commission
approval.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission wish to approve the Applications for Approval of the
Interconn ecti on Agreement Amendments listed abo
~~~
i//
Wa
i:udmemos/intc dm09 10 04
DECISION MEMORANDUM - 2-SEPTEMBER 10, 2004