BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. David C. Boyd J. Dennis O Brien Commissioner

Transcription

1 BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION David C. Boyd Chair J. Dennis O Brien Thomas Pugh Phyllis A. Reha Betsy Wergin In the Matter of the Complaint by Wikstrom Telephone Company Against Qwest Corporation Pursuant to the Parties Interconnection Agreement ISSUE DATE: October 19, 2010 DOCKET NO. P-421/C ORDER FINDING JURISDICTION, GROUNDS TO INVESTIGATE, AND REQUIRING ANSWER PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 17, 2010, Wikstrom Telephone Company (Wikstrom) filed a complaint against Qwest Corporation (Qwest). The complaint alleges that Qwest is violating the terms of the parties interconnection agreement by refusing to provide interconnection with Wikstrom in Thief River Falls. On October 14, 2010, the complaint came before the Commission. I. The Issues FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Under Commission rules, respondents do not have to answer complaints until the Commission finds that it has jurisdiction over them and that there are reasonable grounds to investigate. Minn. Rules, part , subp. 1. If the Commission makes those two findings, it serves the complaint on the respondent, requires an answer, and handles the case under the formal complaint procedures of Minn. Rules, part et seq. The threshold issues are therefore whether the Commission has jurisdiction over this complaint, and if so, whether the allegations in the complaint merit investigation. II. Commission Action The Commission clearly has jurisdiction over this matter Wikstrom seeks relief under the terms of a Commission-approved interconnection agreement. The Commission also finds that there are 1

2 reasonable ground to investigate the complaint s allegations. If these allegations are true, Commission action may be appropriate to enforce the terms of the interconnection agreement. The Commission will therefore serve the complaint on Qwest and require an answer. The case will then proceed as a formal complaint under the procedural framework established at Minn. Rules, parts through ORDER 1. The Commission finds that it has jurisdiction over this matter. 2. The Commission finds that there are reasonable grounds to investigate the matter. 3. The Commission hereby serves the attached complaint on Qwest and orders the company to file an answer to the complaint within 20 days of the service date of the Commission Order. 4. Initial comments by interested parties shall be filed within 30 days of this Order. 5. Any person wishing to file reply comments shall do so within 10 days of the expiration of the initial comment period. 6. This Order shall become effective immediately. BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION Burl W. Haar Executive Secretary This document can be made available in alternative formats (i.e., large print or audio tape) by calling (voice). Persons with hearing or speech disabilities may call us through Minnesota Relay at or by dialing

3 Wikstrom Complaint Attachment 1 The following is provided as required by the Commission Rules: In support of Subpart 1: The parties to the complaint : Complainant: Respondent: Wikstrom Telephone Telephone, Inc. Curtiss Wikstrom 212 South Main St Karlstad, MN Qwest Communications Jason Topp 200 South 5 th St. Room 395 Minneapolis, MN The violation: Qwest has violated Section 1.3 of the interconnection agreement ( Agreement ) approved by the Commission by refusing to process Wikstrom s interconnection requests. Section 1.3 states: This Agreement sets forth the terms, conditions and pricing under which Qwest will provide to CLEC network Interconnection, and, ancillary services, within the geographical areas in which Qwest is providing local Exchange Service at that time, and for which Qwest is the incumbent Local Exchange Carrier within the State of Minnesota, for purposes of providing local Telecommunications Services. Qwest states its procedures for establishing billing account numbers require a North Dakota interconnection agreement in order to bill Wikstrom for interconnection at a ND switch, at ND rates, even though the exchanges served are wholly within Minnesota and subject to the Commission. Further, Qwest violated Section 7.4 (Ordering) of the Agreement by refusing to provide Wikstrom with the Carrier Facility Assignment (CFA) identification needed so Wikstrom might place the order for Local Interconnection Service trunks. Qwest processes require Wikstrom to identify the CFA of the facilities to be used. Wikstrom has done so. Qwest processes further require when an ILEC meet point facility is used, a new CFA is created (T1UZ CFA) and used as the CFA. Qwest has refused to provide the T1UZ CFA. Since Qwest ordering systems validate the CFA (see Section ), Wikstrom cannot place complete the ASR for LIS trunks. Attachment 2 depicts the requested network interconnection.

4 Wikstrom Complaint Attachment 2 Network Interconnection Requested Qwest and Wikstrom (ILEC) networks are interconnected at a fiber splice meet point in Thief River Falls, MN. The Wikstrom Karlstad host switch (KRLSMNXXKDS0) serves the Holt MN exchange (and others). Qwest serves the Thief River Falls exchange (and others) from a switch located in Grand Forks, ND (GDFRNDBC77G). Holt-Thief River Falls EAS traffic is exchanged over an EAS group between these switches. A second group connects Karlstad to the toll partition GDFRNDBC12T of the switch. Qwest has refused to replicate this arrangement as LIS trunks for Wikstrom pursuant to the Agreement.

5 Wikstrom Complaint Attachment 2 Network Interconnection Requested The above diagram depicts the requested interconnection. Qwest, Wikstrom, CLECs, and wireless carriers serve the Thief River Falls exchange. Wikstrom will establish one group for exchange of Thief River Falls Qwest traffic (LIS Local) and a second group for exchange of traffic with wireless carriers, CLECs, and terminating intralata toll traffic (LIS Toll). The LIS Toll group will also serve other Minnesota exchanges which subtend the Grand Forks access tandem.