Opinion ID: 781586
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: cpuc arbitration of the pacific bell/pac west agreement

Text: 20 Before their existing agreement expired in June 1998, Pacific Bell and Pac-West entered into negotiations over the terms of a new interconnection agreement. Because they could not agree whether reciprocal payments would be required for ISP traffic, Pacific Bell requested arbitration before the CPUC pursuant to § 252. The arbitrator recommended that the new agreement's reciprocal payment obligations apply to ISP traffic and rejected Pacific Bell's proposed alternative payment schemes for this type of traffic. The arbitrated agreement also provided for lower reciprocal compensation rates than the prior agreement. On June 24, 1999, a divided CPUC adopted the final arbitrator's report. Decision No. 99-06-088 (June 24, 1999) (the Pac-West Order). 21 Pacific Bell filed for rehearing, claiming, inter alia, that the CPUC's decision was improperly influenced by public and political clamor and that the decision was based on extra-record material. The CPUC rejected this argument, and on December 2, 1999, denied Pacific Bell's application for rehearing.