Company: U S WEST Communications, Inc.

Staff:  Glenn Blackmon, Assistant Director-Telecommunications
  Jing Roth, Regulatory Consultant

Recommendation

1. Approve the petition in part, by granting U S WEST's request that it be 
relieved of its "carrier of last resort" and "designated toll carrier" 
obligation to provide intraLATA toll service in areas where it is not the 
incumbent local exchange company, subject to the conditions recommended in this 
staff memo; 
2. Dismiss the part of the petition in which U S WEST seeks to be relieved of 
its obligation to provide private line service in areas where it is not the 
incumbent local exchange company; and
3. Direct staff to file with the Code Reviser a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(CR-101) on possible rules to establish a competitively-neutral obligation to 
provide toll service.
Discussion
At the Commission's September 8, 1999 open meeting, Staff made the 
recommendations listed above regarding a petition by U S WEST to end its 
"carrier of last resort" and "designated toll carrier" obligations in areas 
where the incumbent local exchange company is an independent company.  The 
Washington Independent Telephone Association and various independent companies 
raised concerns about that proposal.  Their issues included:  (1) whether U S 
WEST would continue to have an obligation to provide access services used by 
the long-distance companies doing business in independent company areas; (2) 
whether U S WEST would continue to serve as the clearinghouse for charges made 
to customers' calling cards; (3) who would bear the costs of implementing the 
change of customers to a new long-distance company; and (4) whether U S WEST 
should be required to serve all existing customers, so that its obligation to 
serve would be relieved only with respect to new customers.
Staff and the various companies have discussed these issues at length since the 
September 8 meeting.  Staff believes that some ambiguities in U S WEST's 
petition have been resolved.  In particular, it is clear that the petition asks 
only for relief from the obligations imposed in Docket U-85-23.  Any 
obligations that result from U S WEST's access tariff or any billing and 
collection agreements would be governed by the relevant tariff or contract.
These discussions have not resulted in an agreement as to who should bear the 
cost of switching customers to a new long-distance company when U S WEST exits 
the market. Staff continues to believe that U S WEST has the responsibility to 
notify customers of its exit from the market and to provide customers with 
education materials to assist them in making a choice of replacement service.  
Beyond that, however, it is not clear that U S WEST should bear other 
transition or implementation costs.
Staff does not believe that the issue of cost responsibility needs to be 
resolved before the petition is acted upon.  U S WEST and the small companies 
should continue to negotiate a fair division of costs and, if they are unable 
to reach agreement, bring that dispute to the Commission for resolution.
Conclusion
Staff recommends that the Commission grant the petition in part, with 
conditions, as described in Staff's September 8, 1999 memorandum.