Federal Communications Commission FCC 11-170
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C.  20554
In the Matter of
Sprint Communications Company L.P.,
Complainant,
v.
Northern Valley Communications, LLC, 
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No. EB-11-MD-003
ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION
Adopted:  November 10, 2011 Released:  November 14, 2011
By the Commission:
1. In this Order on Reconsideration, we dismiss on procedural grounds, and alternatively 
deny on the merits, the Petition for Reconsideration of Northern Valley Communications, LLC 
(“Northern Valley”)1 filed under section 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (“Act”), 
and section 1.106 of the Commission’s rules.2 Northern Valley challenges the Commission’s 
Memorandum Opinion and Order3 granting in part a formal complaint filed by Sprint Communications 
Company L.P. against Northern Valley4 under section 208 of the Act.5  
2. At issue in the Sprint Order was the legality of Northern Valley’s interstate switched 
exchange access services tariff filed on July 8, 2010 (“Tariff”), which purported to impose access charges 
on interexchange carriers for calls to or from entities to whom Northern Valley offered free 
telecommunications.6 The Commission addressed the same issue and made the same findings in a 
separate, earlier challenge to the Northern Valley Tariff brought by Qwest Communications Company, 
  
1 Petition for Reconsideration of Northern Valley Communications, LLC, File No. EB-11-MD-003 (filed Aug. 17, 
2011) (“Petition”).
2 47 U.S.C. § 405; 47 C.F.R. § 1.106.  
3 Sprint Communications Company L.P. v. Northern Valley Communications, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, 26 FCC Rcd 10780 (2011) (“Sprint Order”). 
4 See Formal Complaint of Sprint Communications Company L.P., File No. EB-11-MD-003 (filed Feb. 18, 2011).
5 47 U.S.C. § 208. 
6 Sprint Order, 26 FCC Rcd at 10781, ¶ 3, 10783, ¶ 6.  
Federal Communications Commission FCC 11-170
2
LLC.7 The Commission recently denied Northern Valley’s Petition for Reconsideration of Qwest v. 
Northern Valley.8 For the same reasons set forth in Qwest v. Northern Valley and the Qwest 
Reconsideration Order, we likewise deny Northern Valley’s instant Petition and incorporate by reference 
our holdings and discussion in those orders.9  
III.  ORDERING CLAUSE
3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201, 208, and 405 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154(i), 154(j), 201, 208, and 405, and 
sections 1.106 and 61.26 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.106 and 61.26, that the Petition for 
Reconsideration filed by Northern Valley is DISMISSED to the extent indicated and is otherwise 
DENIED.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
 Marlene H. Dortch
 Secretary
  
7  See Qwest Communications Co., LLC v. Northern Valley Communications, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, 26 FCC Rcd 8332, 8341, ¶ 15 (2011), petition for recon. dismissed and, in the alternative, denied (“Qwest 
v. Northern Valley”).
8 See Qwest Communications Co., LLC v. Northern Valley Communications, LLC, Order on Reconsideration, 2011 
WL 4600858 (2011) (“Qwest Reconsideration Order”).
9 See Qwest Reconsideration Order, 2011 WL 4600858 at *2-5, ¶¶ 5-15.