|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
Kansas 2004
Order
Order Opening Docket
Order on Remand
Order Initiating Investigation and Assessing Costs
Order Approving Stipulation and Agreement
2003
Order Opening Docket and Assessing Cost
Order Closing Docket
2001
Order Denying Application
Order Approving Stipulation and Agreement
Order Opening Docket
Order
2000
Order Regardign Non-Recurring Charges for Unbundled Network Elements
In February, 1999, the Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC) issued an order which set recurring and non-recurring rates for interconnection and unbundled network elements (UNEs). This order was followed by another in September, 1999 calling for a reconsideration of the rates previously established. Despite the lack of compliance on the part of Southwestern Bell (SWBT) and AT&T to this September order, the KCC proceeded to refine their previously-approved non-recurring rates in the immediate order. The most significant of these rates are those for labor. In its order, the KCC concluded that SWBT had overstated these costs in its cost studies while AT&T had understated them due to an overreliance on the mechanized processing of customer orders and change orders. The KCC mandated that labor rates be set at the low end of the possible range for rates. The KCC next affirmed its use of a 5% fall-out factor in computing non-recurring rates. This requires that incumbent providers like SWBT ensure a 95% sucess rate in provisioning UNEs to competing providers. The KCC found that SWBT had attempted to evade this high sucess rate by applying the 5% factor to each step in the provisioning process. As a result, the assumed sucess rate was cumulatively much less than the inteded 5%. Manual processing of customer orders is inherently more costly than electronic processing. As a result, the KCC granted SWBT the ability to use a $10 surcharge as compensation for those orders submitted to it by fax, telephone, or mail. Further, the KCC concluded that TBO and TIRKS expenses should, in all cases, be excluded from the calculation of non-recurring rates. The fact that they were, in some cases, included by SWBT and AT&T gave the KCC greater leeway in setting UNEs prices low. Lastly, the KCC affirmed its use of 100% DIP and 80% DOP factors in the calculation of non-recurring rates and concluded, "SWBT shall immediately implement and incorporate the rates established in this order into all existing interconnection agreements that have established rates subject to determinations in this docket."
As illuded to above, SWBT and AT&T had not fully complied with prior KCC directives at the time this order was issued. Therefore, the KCC was forced to rely on previously submitted cost study data and modify it based on similar orders from other states and a consideration of technological advancements.
Order Implementing Rate Rebalancing
Order Opening Docket, Establishing Procedral Schedule and Assessing Costs
1999 Order on Reconsideration
On February 19,1999, the Commission issued an order establishing prices for UNEs. Charts containing approved monthly charges and non-recurring charges were attached to the Order. AT&T'S Petition for Clarification and/or Reconsideration: On March 8, 1999, AT&T filed a Petition for Clarification and/or Reconsideration of the February 19,1999 Order. AT&T requests the Commission require SWBT to produce a price list based on the cost study results. According to AT&T, the list of costs cannot be translated into final prices that can be incorporated into interconnection agreements. AT&T contends that some of the elements addressed in AT&T and SWBT's interconnection agreement may not have been addressed in the Order.
The Commission set UNE prices after reconsideration, and ordered SWBT to refile non-recurring cost studies after making certain input changes to the Company's cost models.
In the Matter of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company Filing Their 1998 Depreciation Rate Study (Which was Filed With the FCC on December 19, 1997), for the State of Kansas.
Commission Order on Reconsideration Dismissing Petition
On January 27, 1999, MCI filed its Petition for Arbitration requesting the Commission to arbitrate the Directory Assistance (DA) listings and DA database issues associated therewith due to the inability of MCI and Southwestern Bell Telephone Company (SWBT) to successfully negotiate these matters. SWBT responded to MCI's Petition, claiming that MCI never invoked the negotiations and arbitration rights of 0 252 of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 (FTA). Commission ordered MCI and SWBT to appear before the arbitrators to answer questions regarding whether MCI had requested negotiations under the FTA. The Commission agrees with the arbitrators, and finds and concludes, that an interconnection agreement is an extensive document, arrived at through negotiation, mediation or arbitration, that establishes the many aspects of the relationship between the requesting carrier and the incumbent local exchange company. The Commission, therefore, finds and concludes that, in order to invoke the arbitration rights and duties under 0 252(b) of the FTA, the requesting telecommunications carrier must submit to the incumbent a request for negotiation for an interconnection agreement, or for the amendment of an existing interconnection agreement. IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COMMISSION ORDERED THAT: Southwestern Bell Telephone Company's Petition for Reconsideration, as it pertains to the Commission's jurisdiction in this docket, is granted and the Petition for Arbitration of MCI is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Order 16: Determining the Kansas-Specific Inputs to the FCC Cost Proxy Model to Establish a Cost-Based Kansas Universal Service Fund
1998
Order Setting Inputs for Cost Studies
Sprint Communication Company, L.P., United Telephone Company of Kansas, United Telephone Company of Eastern Kansas, United Telephone Company of South Central Kansas, and United Telephone Company of Southeastern Kansas (collectively referred to herein as Sprint) filed a motion requesting the Commission initiate this docket to review Southwestern Bell Telephone Company's costs, establish prices for unbundled network elements (UNEs) and interconnection pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 252(d)(1) and establish the resale discount. On November 8, 1996, the Commission issued an order initiating the docket.
1997
Order on Reconsideration
Energy Orders 
|
|
| Copyright ©1996-2008 Ben Johnson Associates, Inc.® All Rights Reserved |
