4. The Settlement Agreement
As noted in the Factual Background above, the Application was protested, and all the parties to the proceeding were able to reach a settlement modifying the transaction to include certain guarantees for customers, workers, and the local community. In the Joint Motion, the settling parties summarize the key terms and commitments in the Settlement Agreement as follows:
1. Maintenance of walk-in service centers in Roseville, Sacramento and Elk Grove for at least two years.21
2. A two-year rate freeze for specified services, with limited exceptions for exogenous events.22
3. A two-year commitment to invest $3 million per year in capital expenditures on the SureWest network, along with an annual report to DRA and TURN.23
4. Quarterly service quality reports and a commitment to meet or exceed specified General Order 133-C service quality standards. Failure to meet quality standards will, depending on the number of failures, result in a continuation of the rate freeze for one or two additional quarters.24
5. A commitment to the SureWest Foundation and its work for at least one year.25
6. A continuing of SureWest's commitment to broadband services of high quality at reasonable prices.26
7. A commitment to continuing current benefit arrangements for continuing employees for at least one year from the closing date of the transaction, as well as specified provisions concerning retirement health benefits, the defined pension plan and the retirement service benefit award.27
8. A waiver of early termination fees for business customers in the Frontier incumbent local exchange carrier study area with any contract bundle of services (as specified) for 60-day period following notification. Frontier agrees to not use Consolidated's name in marketing to SureWest customers before or during the 60-day waiver period.28
All parties agree that the Settlement Agreement:
... represents a compromise of the disputed positions of the Protesters and the Joint Applicants and is fundamentally fair, reasonable in the light of the whole record, consistent with the law, and in the public interest.29
Parties continue to disagree on the acceptability of the original application and on how certain criteria in §§ 854(a) and (b) should be utilized in the public interest assessment conducted pursuant to § 854. Nevertheless, "Joint Applicants and the Protesters agree ... , that irrespective of the disputed legal issues, Joint Applicants have provided enough information and the Transaction, subject to the conditions specified in the Settlement Agreement, provides enough customer benefit to ensure it is in the public interest, consistent with Section 854, and is fair and reasonable in light of the whole record."30
21 Settlement Agreement at 3.
22 Id.
23 Id.
24 Id. at 4.
25 Id.
26 Id. at 5.
27 Id.
28 Id. at 6.
29 Id.
30 Id. at 6.
