**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

)

In the Matter of )

)

Qwest Petition for ) WC Docket No. 03-59

Limited Modification of LATA )

Boundaries to Provide Expanded Local )

Calling Service (ELCS) )

**MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER**

**Adopted:** September 26, 2003 **Released:** September 26**,** 2003

By the Chief, Competition Policy Division:

**I. INTRODUCTION**

1\. On February 20, 2003, Qwest Corporation (Qwest), pursuant to section
3(25) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act),[^1] filed
a petition (Qwest Petition) to provide two-way, non-optional, expanded
local calling service (ELCS) between various exchanges in Minnesota.[^2]
Qwest's petition requests limited modification of numerous local access
and transport area (LATA) boundaries to provide ELCS between the
Lonsdale Telephone Company's Lonsdale, Minnesota exchange and certain
Qwest exchanges in Minnesota, as required by the Minnesota Public
Utilities Commission (Minnesota Commission).[^3] For the reasons stated
below, we grant Qwest's petition.

# II. BACKGROUND

2\. Requests for new ELCS routes are generally initiated by local
subscribers.[^4] Although intraLATA ELCS routes can be ordered by a
state commission,[^5] under section 3(25)(B) of the Act,

requests for interLATA ELCS routes fall within the Federal
Communications Commission's (Commission) exclusive jurisdiction.[^6]
Applying a two-part test, the Commission will grant a request for a LATA
modification where: (1) the applicant proves that the requested LATA
modification would provide a significant public benefit; and (2)
granting the petition would not remove a BOC's incentives to fulfill its
section 271 obligations.[^7]

3\. The Qwest Petition proposes to establish two-way, non-optional ELCS,
and is accompanied by an order issued by the Minnesota Commission
approving the ELCS request on the basis that sufficient communities of
interest exist to warrant such service,[^8] a statement that only
traditional local service is proposed, poll results demonstrating that
communities of interest exist between the respective exchanges,[^9]
traffic data,[^10] and a statement of the number of access lines
involved.[^11]

**III. DISCUSSION**

4.  We conclude that Qwest's petition satisfies our two-part test.
    Applying the first prong of the two-part test, we find that Qwest
    has shown that a public benefit would result from the ELCS because a
    sufficient community of interest exists among the affected exchanges
    to justify their being treated as a local calling area.[^12] First,
    we note that Qwest proposes to offer traditional, two-way,
    non-optional local service in the ELCS, which the Commission has
    determined to be an indicator of a community of interest among the
    affected exchanges.[^13] Further, the Minnesota Commission conducted
    an extensive community of interest analysis prior to approving the
    ELCS.[^14] We find it a persuasive indicator of a community of
    interest that Qwest's petition satisfies all of the Minnesota
    Commission's community of interest criteria, including customer
    polling data demonstrating that over 60 percent of Lonsdale
    residents favored ELCS and traffic data indicating that over 50
    percent of Lonsdale residents made three or more calls per month to
    the Qwest exchanges.[^15] We also note that no party filed any
    opposing comments to the Qwest Petition. We find, therefore, that
    the petition is based on a significant community of interest, and
    thus satisfies the first prong of our two-part test.

5.  Qwest also satisfies the second prong of the two-part test because
    Qwest has already opened its market to competition in Minnesota and,
    accordingly, has been granted authority under section 271 to offer
    long distance service in that state.[^16] Moreover, we conclude that
    the LATA boundary modifications would have a minimal effect upon
    competition because modification of any of the individual LATA
    boundaries would affect only a small number of access lines.[^17] As
    a result, we believe that granting Qwest's petition serves the
    public interest by permitting minor LATA modifications where such
    modifications are necessary to meet the needs of local subscribers.
    Accordingly, we approve Qwest's petition for limited LATA boundary
    modifications.

6.  We grant this relief solely for the limited purpose of allowing
    Qwest to provide ELCS between the specific exchanges or geographic
    areas identified in this request. The LATAs are not modified to
    permit Qwest to offer any other type of service, including calls
    that originate or terminate outside the specified areas. Thus,
    two-way, non-optional ELCS between the specified exchanges will be
    treated as intraLATA service.[^18]

**IV. ORDERING CLAUSE**

7\. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 3(25) and 4(i) of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 153(25),
154(i), and authority delegated by sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, that the request of Qwest
for LATA boundary modifications for the limited purpose of providing
two-way, traditional, non-optional ELCS at specific locations in
Minnesota, identified in WC Docket No. 03-59, IS APPROVED.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Michelle M. Carey

> Chief, Competition Policy Division
>
> Wireline Competition Division

[^1]: ^?^ *See* 47 U.S.C. § 153(25). Section 3(25) of the Act defines
    LATAs as those areas established prior to enactment of the
    Telecommunications Act of 1996 by a Bell Operating Company (BOC), as
    permitted under the AT&T Consent Decree, or "established or modified
    by a BOC after such date of enactment, and approved by the
    Commission." *Id.*

[^2]: ^?^ *See* Request by Qwest Corporation for Limited Modification of
    LATA Boundaries to Provide ELCS Between 49 Exchanges, WC Docket No.
    03-59 (filed Feb. 20, 2003) (Qwest Petition). *See* *Comment Sought
    on Qwest Corporation Request for Limited Modification of LATA
    Boundaries to Provide Expanded Local Calling Service Between its
    Exchanges in the Minneapolis/St.Paul Metropolitan Calling Area and
    Lonsdale Telephone Company's Lonsdale Exchange in Minnesota*, WC
    Docket No. 03-59, Public Notice, DA No. 03-637 (rel. Mar. 6, 2003).
    We note that all of the exchanges are in Minnesota.

[^3]: ^?^ *See* Qwest Petition at 1.

[^4]: ^?^ The Qwest Petition was initiated by Lonsdale Telephone Company
    subscribers. *See* Qwest Petition at 2*.*

[^5]: ^?^ *United States v. Western Electric Company, Inc.*, 569 F.
    Supp. 990, 995 (D.D.C. 1983). "The distance at which a local call
    becomes a long distance toll call has been, and will continue to be,
    determined exclusively by the various state regulatory bodies."
    *Id*.

[^6]: ^?^ *Application for Review and Petition for Reconsideration or
    Clarification of Declaratory Ruling Regarding US WEST Petitions to
    Consolidate LATAs in Minnesota and Arizona*, NSD-L-97-6, Memorandum
    Opinion and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 14392-99 (1999).

[^7]: ^?^ *See Deployment of Wireline Services Offering Advanced
    Telecommunications Capability, Request by Bell Atlantic-West
    Virginia for Interim Relief Under Section 706, or, in the
    Alternative, a LATA Boundary Modification*, CC Docket No. 98-147,
    Fourth Report & Order & Memorandum Opinion & Order, 15 FCC Rcd 3089,
    3097-3100 (2000) (*Advanced Services LATA Order*) (denying Verizon
    request to transport high-speed data from Morgantown, West Virginia
    LATA to the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania LATA); *see also* *Petitions
    for Limited Modification of LATA Boundaries to Provide Expanded
    Local Calling Service (ELCS) at Various Locations*, CC Docket
    96-159, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 10646, 10649-50
    (1997) *(July 1997 LATA Order)*. In this order, the Commission also
    delegated authority to the Common Carrier Bureau (now the Wireline
    Competition Bureau) to resolve petitions to modify LATA boundaries
    to provide ELCS. *July 1997 LATA Order*, 12 FCC Rcd at 10657-58.

[^8]: ^?^ Qwest Petition at Exhibit A.

[^9]: ^?^ Nearly 70% of the subscribers in the Lonsdale exchange
    participated in the poll with 66% voting in favor of ELCS. Qwest
    Petition at 4.

[^10]: ^?^ The Qwest Petition states that over 50% of subscribers in the
    Lonsdale exchange made three or more calls per month to the
    Minneapolis/St. Paul area. Qwest Petition at 3.

[^11]: ^?^ The majority of calls are expected to originate from the
    Lonsdale exchange, which has approximately 1,700 access lines. Qwest
    Petition at 3.

[^12]: ^?^ *See July 1997 LATA Order*, 12 FCC Rcd at 10649-50 (public
    interest is served by communities being able to obtain local
    calling).

[^13]: ^?^ Qwest Petition at 2. Although Qwest proposes to offer
    measured rate service in addition to flat-rated service, that does
    not alter our conclusion that a sufficient community of interest
    exists among the affected exchanges to justify the ELCS. The
    services that Qwest proposes to offer in the expanded local calling
    area are identical to the service options (measured or flat-rate)
    that were available prior to the implementation of ELCS. *Id.*
    Although the Commission has traditionally favored flat-rated service
    as the best indicator that a community of interest exists among the
    affected exchanges, the Commission has granted LATA boundary
    modifications for measured rate ELCS where the service offered in
    the proposed ELCS is identical to that offered prior to the
    application. *See Bell-Atlantic-Virginia, Inc. Petitions for Limited
    Modification of LATA Boundaries to Provide Expanded Local Calling
    service (ELCS) at Various Locations*, Memorandum and Order, File No.
    NSD-L-97-45 (rel. April 21, 1998) (*April 1998 LATA Order*)
    (granting ELCS petition where proposed service was the same as that
    existing prior to the application); *Bell Atlantic-Virginia Petition
    for Limited Modification of LATA Boundary to Provide Expanded Local
    Calling Service (ELCS)*, File No. NSD-98-143, Memorandum and Order,
    14 FCC Rcd 4371 (1999) (granting ELCS petition where proposed
    service was the same as that existing prior to the application).

[^14]: *See* Qwest Petition at Exhibit A.

[^15]: ^?^ Qwest Petition at 2.

[^16]: ^?^ *Application by Qwest Communications International Inc., for
    Authorization to Provide In-Region, InterLATA Services in
    Minnesota*, WC Docket No. 03-90, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 18
    FCC Rcd 13323 (2003).

[^17]: ^?^ For the purposes of ELCS petitions, we generally consider the
    access lines from customers in the exchange who seek to reach
    businesses, services, etc. in the other exchange (this exchange
    usually generates the majority of calls between the two exchanges).
    *See* *Southwestern Bell Petitions for Limited Modifications of LATA
    Boundaries to Provide Expanded Local Calling Service (ELCS)*, WC
    Docket No. 02-134, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 25540
    (2002). Therefore, for the purposes of reviewing these
    modifications, we will consider the 1,700 access lines in the
    Lonsdale exchange, a number within Commission precedent. *See*
    *April 1998 LATA Order*, *supra* n.13 (granting an ELCS petition
    affecting over 30,000 access lines). *See* Qwest Petition at Exhibit
    C for a complete list of all affected exchanges.

[^18]: ^?^ Other types of service between the specified exchanges will
    remain interLATA, and the provisions of the Act governing interLATA
    service will apply. *See*, *e.g*., 47 U.S.C. § 272(f)(1) (stating
    that a BOC is required to provide interLATA services through a
    separate affiliate for three years after the date on which it is
    authorized to provide in-region, interLATA telecommunications
    services).