XO Communications 2009 Annual Report Download - page 18

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 18 of the 2009 XO Communications annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 89

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89

New Jersey, XOCS’ motion for consolidation is still pending. In New Jersey, XOCS’ motion for consolidation
is still pending. If granted, hearings in this matter would be held in July 2010. No schedule has been set for
the XOCS complaint proceeding should the BPU deny XOCS’ motion for consolidation. The outcomes of the
XOCS complaint proceedings are not known at this time.
Qwest Complaints Against XO. On June 24, 2008, Qwest Communications Corporation (“QCC”) filed a
formal complaint against XOCS and numerous other telecommunications providers before the Public Utilities
Commission of the State of Colorado. On August 1, 2008, QCC filed a formal complaint against XOCS and
numerous other telecommunications providers before the Public Utilities Commission for the State of
California. On July 2, 2009, QCC filed a formal complaint against XOCS and numerous other telecommuni-
cations providers before the Public Service Commission for the State of New York. On December 11, 2009,
QCC filed a formal complaint against XOCS and numerous other telecommunications providers before the
Public Service Commission of the State of Florida. In the complaints, QCC claimed that XOCS and the other
telecommunications providers violated state statutes and regulations and, in certain cases the provider’s
respective tariffs, subjecting QCC to unjust and unreasonable rate discrimination in connection with the
provision of intrastate access services. On August 1, 2008, September 22, 2008, August 27, 2009 and
January 29, 2010, XOCS filed its answers to the Colorado, California, New York and Florida complaints,
respectively, denying QCC’s claims and setting forth affirmative defenses. The likely outcomes of these
proceedings are not known at this time.
14