Commission Agendas | previous page
Please see Addendum to this Agenda
South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Meeting
Tuesday, June 17, 2003 at 9:30 A.M.
State Capitol Building, Room 412
Pierre, South Dakota
NOTE: If you wish to join this meeting by conference call, please contact the Commission at 605-773-3201 by 5:00 p.m. on June 16, 2003.
NOTE: Notice is further given to persons with disabilities that this Commission meeting is being held in a physically accessible place. If you have special needs, please notify the Commission and we will make all necessary arrangements.
AGENDA OF THE COMMISSION MEETING
Administration
1. Approval of the Minutes of the Ad Hoc Meeting Held on May 27, 2003 and the Commission Meeting Held on June 3, 2003. (Staff: Tina Douglas.)
Consumer Issues
1. Status Report on Consumer Utility Inquiries and Complaints Received by the Commission. (Consumer Affairs: Jim Mehlhaff.)
Christopher Cutler states that in March 2002, Complainant entered into an agreement with AT&T to receive Fragmented T1 service. On more than one occasion, the AT&T representative assured the Complainant that AT&T could provide this service. Complainant has now been informed that AT&T cannot provide the Fragmented T1 service. Complainant states that they have invested more than $150,000.00 in their business to utilize the Fragmented T1 service. Complainant requests that AT&T provide the Fragmented T1 service stated it could provide. If the service cannot be provided, Complainant would be willing to negotiate a settlement with AT&T for the expenses the Complainant has incurred. Complainant feels that AT&T should put forth some form of effort to resolve this complaint. On October 24, 2002, AT&T filed a Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment. On December 9, 2002, AT&T filed a Motion for Continuance because of a change of counsel in the case. The Motion for Continuance was heard on December 17, 2002, and the Motion to Dismiss was continued until January 2, 2003. On January 2, 2003, the Commission heard the arguments of the parties on the Motion to Dismiss and deferred action to enable counsel to provide additional legal authority. The Commission issued a Notice of Intent to Treat Motion in Part as Motion for Summary Judgment and an Order for and Notice of Hearing on February 21, 2003. A hearing in the matter was held on March 14, 2003.
TODAY, what is the Commission's decision on the pending Motion to Dismiss considered as a Motion for Summary Judgment?
Telecommunications
1. In the Matter of Dismissing Dockets TC03-002, TC03-003, TC03-004, TC03-005, TC03-006, TC03-008, TC03-009, TC03-010, TC03-011, TC03-012, TC03-013, TC03-014, TC03-015, TC03- 016, TC03-017, and TC03-018.
TC03-010 In the Matter of a Subject to Rule of Evidence 408, Confidential Amendment to Confidential Billing Settlement Agreement between Qwest Corporation and McLeodUSA Incorporated. (Staff Attorney: Kelly Frazier)
The above Agreements were filed with the Commission on 06/13/02, as a confidential exhibit to the Affidavit of Todd Lundy in Docket TC01-165. On 11/22/02, in the Order Regarding the Public Interest, the Commission ruled that the issue of whether these Agreements were a mandatory filing should be considered separate from the TC01-165 docket. Pursuant to that Order, these dockets were opened for the purpose of receiving a Commission ruling on whether these Agreements should have been filed pursuant to the mandatory filing requirements of section 252(e)(1) of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Qwest has requested confidential treatment of the contents of these Agreements pursuant to ARSD chapter 20:10:01.
TODAY, shall the Commission close these dockets with a determination that none of these agreements qualify as mandatory filings under section 252(a)(1), in that none are settlement agreements that contain ongoing obligations relating to section 251(b) or (c)?
2. In the Matter of Dismissing and Closing Dockets TC03-007, TC03-019, and TC03-021.
The above Agreement was filed with the Commission on 06/13/02, as a confidential exhibit to the Affidavit of Todd Lundy in Docket TC01-165. On 11/22/02, in the Order Regarding the Public Interest, the Commission ruled that the issue of whether this Agreement was a mandatory filing should be considered separate from the TC01-165 docket. Pursuant to that Order, this docket was opened for the purpose of receiving a Commission ruling on whether this Agreement should have been filed pursuant to the mandatory filing requirements of section 252(e)(1) of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Qwest has requested confidential treatment of the contents of this Agreement pursuant to ARSD chapter 20:10:01.
This Agreement was filed with the Commission on 06/13/02, as a confidential exhibit to the Affidavit of Todd Lundy in Docket TC01-165. On 11/22/02, in the Order Regarding the Public Interest, the Commission ruled that the issue of whether this Agreement was a mandatory filing should be considered separate from the TC01-165 docket. Pursuant to that Order, this docket was opened for the purpose of receiving a Commission ruling on whether this agreement should have been filed pursuant to the mandatory filing requirements of section 252(e)(1) of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. According to the Agreement, Qwest f/k/a U S WEST, agreed to make demonstrable improvements to its provisioning service performance on unbundled loops, in order to reach service quality standards as set forth in the Agreement. Covad agreed to withdraw its opposition to the U S WEST/Qwest merger in return.
This Agreement was filed with the Commission on 06/13/02, as a confidential exhibit to the Affidavit of Todd Lundy in Docket TC01-165. On 11/22/02, in the Order Regarding the Public Interest, the Commission ruled that the issue of whether this Agreement was a mandatory filing should be considered separate from the TC01-165 docket. Pursuant to that Order, this docket was opened for the purpose of receiving a Commission ruling on whether this agreement should have been filed pursuant to the mandatory filing requirements of section 252(e)(1) of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. According the Agreement, the parties agreed to (1) develop an implementation plan by which the parties agree to implement their interconnection agreements, (2) arrange quarterly meetings to address unresolved and/or anticipated business issues, and (3) establish and follow escalation procedures to facilitate and expedite business-to-business dispute resolutions as set forth in the Agreement.
TODAY, shall the Commission close these dockets on the basis that these agreements were previously filed in Docket TC01-165 and have already been approved by the Commission?
This Agreement was filed with the Commission on 06/13/02, as a confidential exhibit to the Affidavit of Todd Lundy in Docket TC01-165. On 11/22/02, in the Order Regarding the Public Interest, the Commission ruled that the issue of whether this Agreement was a mandatory filing should be considered separate from the TC01-165 docket. Pursuant to that Order, this docket was opened for the purpose of receiving a Commission ruling on whether this agreement should have been filed pursuant to the mandatory filing requirements of section 252(e)(1) of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. According to the Agreement, in consideration for McLeodUSA's withdrawal from the dockets related to the U S WEST/Qwest merger, Qwest f/k/a U S WEST agreed to pay McLeodUSA a fixed sum for the settlement of disputes involving nonblocked Centrex service, subscriber list information and miscellaneous billing disputes.
TODAY, shall the Commission dismiss this docket on the basis that this is agreement has already been filed in Docket TC03-006?
US LEC Communications Inc. has filed an application for a Certificate of Authority to provide resold interexchange telecommunications services in South Dakota.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Certificate of Authority for US LEC
Communications, Inc.?
5. In the Matter of the Filing for Approval of Amendments to Agreements in TC03-082, TC03-083, and TC03-086.
On May 9, 2003, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Amendment to an Interconnection Agreement between Midcontinent Communications, Inc. and Qwest Corporation. According to the parties, the amendment is made in order to add to the agreement the Performance Assurance Plan as approved by the Commission and the Performance Indicator Definitions, as set forth in Attachments 1 and 2 to the amendment. The original agreement was approved by the Commission on May 5, 1999, in Docket No. TC99-023.
On May 9, 2003, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Amendment to an Interconnection Agreement between McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc. and Qwest Corporation. According to the parties, the amendment is made in order to add the terms, conditions and rates for Unbundled Loops, as set forth in Attachment 1 and Exhibits A and B to the amendment. The original agreement was approved by the Commission on July 23, 1999, in Docket No. TC99-057.
On May 12, 2003, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Amendment to an Interconnection Agreement between Sprint Communications Company L.P. and Qwest Corporation. According to the parties, the agreement is amended by adding terms and conditions for Collocation Available Inventory, as set forth in Attachment 1 and Exhibit A to the amendment. The original agreement was approved by the Commission on November 13, 2001, in Docket No. TC01-151.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the proposed Amendments to Agreements?
6. TC03-085 In the Matter of the Application of Covista, Inc. for a Certificate of Authority to Provide Local Exchange Services in South Dakota. (Staff Analyst: Bonnie Bjork, Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer)
Covista, Inc. has filed an application for a Certificate of Authority to provide resold and facilities based/UNE-P local exchange services in South Dakota.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant a Certificate of Authority to Covista, Inc?
West River Telecommunications Cooperative and Qwest Communications have filed a joint petition for Commission approval of an exchange boundary change between West River's McLaughlin Exchange and Qwest's Timber Lake Exchange. Two customers have requested the boundary change in order to be served by West River.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Boundary Change between West River Telecommunications Cooperative and Qwest Corporation?
On May 22, 2003, Qwest Corporation filed revisions to its South Dakota Exchange and Network Services Tariff. These revisions introduce PAL-specific fraud protection service offerings.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Revision to Qwest Corporation's Exchange and Network Services Tariff?
Announcements
1. The next regularly scheduled Commission meeting will be held July 1, 2003, at 9:30 a.m., in Room 412 of the Capitol Building.
2. A hearing in docket NG02-011 is scheduled for June 24, 2003, at 8:00 a.m. in Room 412, June 25, 2003, at 1:00 p.m. in Room 413, and June 26, 2003, at 8:00 a.m. in Room 412 of the Capitol Building.
3. Commission meetings are scheduled for July 15 and August 5, 2003.
4. The proposed rules for the South Dakota Do Not Call Register have been filed with the Legislative Research Council. The Commission will accept written comments and a public hearing has been set for July 1, 2003.
5. A hearing in docket CT02-017 is scheduled for July 8, 2003, at 10:00 a.m. in Rapid City, South Dakota at the Holiday Inn Conference Room.
6. A hearing in docket TC02-174 is scheduled for August 6, 2003, at 10:00 a.m. in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
7. A hearing in docket TC03-057 is scheduled for August 12, 13, 14, and 15, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. in Room 412 of the Capitol Building.
8. A hearing in docket TC01-098 is scheduled for September 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26, 2003, at 1:30 p.m. in Room 412 of the Capitol Building.
______________________
Heather K. Forney
Deputy Executive Director
heather.forney@state.sd.us
June 12, 2003
