Agenda Date:   February 23, 2000
Item Number:   
        
Docket:   UT-993013
Company Name:  GTE Northwest Incorporated,
  New Edge Network, Inc., d/b/a New Edge Network

Staff:    Tre Hendricks, Adminstrative Law Division
    Jacob Wexler, Telecommunications Policy Specialist


Recommendation

Approve the negotiated agreement for interconnection and resale of service 
between GTE Northwest Incorporated and New Edge Network, Inc., d/b/a New Edge 
Networks filed in Docket UT-993013, with the imposition of an additional state 
requirement that GTE’s proposed language for Article III, Section 2.2, replace 
that section as it is currently filed.

Background

On November 23, 1999, GTE Northwest Incorporated (GTE) and New Edge Network, 
Inc., d/b/a New Edge Networks (New Edge) filed a request to adopt an arbitrated 
interconnection agreement. The agreement consisted in its entirety of 
arrangements previously approved by the Commission on May 26, 1999, in Docket 
UT-990341 between GTE and Covad Communications Company.

After reviewing the agreement Staff concluded that post termination language in 
Article III, Section 2.2 is not consistent with the Telecommunications Act of 
1996, 47 U.S.C. §252(b)(1).  The Act requires that parties negotiate for 
between 135 and 160 days before a party can request arbitration. 47 U.S.C. 
§252(b)(1).  Section 2.2 of the New Edge agreement provides that a party must 
give notice 90 days prior to the expiration date if it wishes to terminate the 
agreement.  As a result, the agreement may terminate while the parties are 
negotiating, but before their right to request arbitration under the Act has 
ripened.  Thus, in the time period after the agreement terminates, but before 
the right to arbitration ripens, the Commission may not be able to settle 
disputes or grant relief.

Staff has discussed this issue with GTE, and in a January 26, 2000 letter, GTE 
proposed language that satisfies staff’s concerns (see attached letter).  In 
that letter, GTE agreed to use their proposed language in interconnection 
agreements it files with the Commission in the future, and expressed its 
ability to change language in agreements already filed with the Commission, but 
not yet approved. GTE has failed to submit the proposed language to replace 
Section 2.2 in the their agreement with New Edge.  Staff believes that the 
proposed language is appropriate to include in the GTE - New Edge Agreement.

Staff recommends that the Commission expressly approve this agreement, and 
impose the additional requirement that GTE’s proposed language for Article III, 
Section 2.2, replace that section as it was originally filed.