Qwest’s conception of which of its contracts with CLECs have to b...

on file with state regulators, asked FCC for guidance. Commission said states generally had authority to determine which ILEC- CLEC contracts were considered interconnection agreements and thus eligible for filing under Sec. 252 of Telecom Act. State commissions are best positioned “to decide on a case- by-case basis whether a particular agreement is required to be filed as an ‘interconnection agreement'” and if “competition-affecting inconsistences in state decisions arise, those could be brought to our attention,” FCC said. “Therefore we decline to establish an exhaustive, all- encompassing ‘interconnection agreement’ standard.” However, it said that as general rule: “We find that an agreement that creates an ongoing obligation pertaining to resale, number portability, dialing parity, access to rights-of-way, reciprocal compensation, interconnection, unbundled network elements or colocation is an interconnection agreement that must be filed pursuant to Sec. 252(a)(1).” Agency said it disagreed with Qwest “that the content of interconnection agreements should be limited to the schedule of itemized charges and associated descriptions of the services to which the charges apply.” Sec. 252(a)(1) can’t be given “the cramped reading that Qwest proposes,” FCC said. In addition, it said it wasn’t “persuaded by Qwest that dispute resolution and escalation provisions are per se outside the scope” of Sec. 252. On other questions, agency said: (1) It disagreed with Qwest that settlement agreements resolving disputes between ILECs and CLECs over billing or other matters weren’t interconnection agreements: “We find that a settlement agreement that contains an ongoing obligation relating to Sec. 251(b) or (c) must be filed… Merely inserting the term ’settlement agreement’ in a document does not excuse carriers of their filing obligation… or prevent a state commission from approving or rejecting the agreement.” FCC said it agreed with Qwest that “those settlement agreements that simply provide for ‘backward-looking consideration’ [such as] the settlement of a dispute in consideration for a cash payment or the cancellation of an unpaid bill need not be filed.” In other words, agency said, “settlement contracts that do not affect an incumbent LEC’s ongoing obligations relating to Sec. 251 need not be filed.” (2) It agreed with Qwest that forms used by CLECs to request service didn’t need to be filed for state commission approval. (3) It also agreed that “agreements with bankrupt competitors that are entered into at the direction of a bankruptcy court or trustee and do not otherwise change the terms and conditions of the underlying interconnection agreement” don’t have to be filed. FCC said it wasn’t aware of any carrier’s submitting such agreements to state commissions for approval. Directing carriers to do so could raise “difficult jurisdictional issues between the bankruptcy court and regulators.”