|
Public Notice CRTC 2001-69
|
|
Ottawa, 14 June 2001 |
|
Implementation of competition in the local exchange and local
payphone markets in the territories of Télébec and
TELUS (Québec)
|
|
Reference: 8622-C12-14/01 |
|
The Commission initiates a proceeding to establish the rates in
the territories of Télébec and TELUS (Québec), for local
interconnection and network component unbundling, and for local
payphone access. |
1. |
In Telecom Decision CRTC 97-8, Local competition, dated 1
May 1997, the Commission allowed former Stentor member companies to
classify the local loops of incumbent local exchange carriers
(ILECs) by "rate band". Those bands are the basis for the
calculation of costs used to support the rate that a competitive
local exchange carrier (CLEC) pays to an ILEC for using its local
loop. |
2. |
The Commission opted for the bill and keep method to compensate
for the exchange of traffic between two local exchange carriers
(LECs) within the exchange of a specific ILEC. However, the
Commission was of the opinion that in cases where it could be
demonstrated that traffic between LECs was not balanced for a
significant period of time, mutual compensation should be
implemented and directed the ILECs to file rates to that effect. |
3. |
The Commission noted that in the event that two interconnecting
LECs serve different serving areas, bill and keep would be
inappropriate. However, the Commission considered it reasonable that
CLECs assume the cost for traffic interexchanged in one exchange and
terminated in another. The Commission required the ILECs to provide
for delivery of such traffic, by receiving the traffic from the
originating CLEC and switching it to the ILEC customer in the
terminating exchange, and directed them to file rates to that
effect. |
4. |
The Commission also determined in that decision that ILECs must
provide transiting services and therefore directed them to file
rates for transiting traffic and CCS7 messages CLEC to CLEC, CLEC to
wireless service providers and CLEC to long-distance carrier. |
5. |
Finally, the Commission established a portable subsidy mechanism
in which contribution would be provided to any LEC that serves a
subsidized customer. The allocation of the subsidy for each band was
based on the number of local residential customers of all LECs, and
on the cost of providing local residential service plus the related
optional services, minus the ILEC's revenues. |
6. |
In Telecom Decision CRTC 98-8, Local pay telephone competition,
dated 30 June 1998, the Commission ordered ILECs to file
proposed pay telephone access tariffs incorporating unique
requirements such as the inclusion of the pay telephone number in
the billed number screening database, associated with the provision
of pay telephone service, together with a standard service
agreement. The tariffs were to refer to service agreements that
include, as part of the terms of service, the mandated consumer
safeguards established in that decision. |
7. |
In Telecom Decision, CRTC 98-22, Final rates for unbundled
local network components, dated 30 November 1998, the
Commission established final rates for unbundled local network
components that were approved on an interim basis in Decision 97-8.
The decision reflected several incurred cost adjustments to remove
certain cost inconsistencies among ILECs, and modifications to
certain cost methods and assumptions to determine the ILECs'
unbundled loop costs by rate band. |
8. |
In Telecom Decision CRTC 99-16, Telephone service to high-cost
serving areas, dated 19 October 1999, the Commission stated
that it would provide ILECs with an opportunity to restructure their
rate bands to better identify high-cost areas. |
9. |
In Decision CRTC 2001-238, Restructured bands, revised loop
rates and related issues, dated 27 April 2001, the
Commission approved revised rates for ILECs' unbundled local loops.
The decision also addressed the costs to be used for establishing
the subsidy required under the national subsidy mechanism approved
by the Commission in Decision CRTC 2000-745, Changes to the
contribution regime, dated 30 November 2000. |
10. |
In Decision 2001-238, the Commission adopted a uniform approach
to identify high-cost serving areas in the ex-Stentor member
companies' territories, and a more consistent set of costing
methodologies by which those carriers will determine the costs for
the loop and residential primary exchange services. |
11. |
In Telecom Decision CRTC 96-5, Regulatory framework for
Québec-Téléphone and Télébec ltée, dated 7 August
1996, the Commission expressed the preliminary view that local
competition should be allowed in the territories of
Québec-Téléphone and Télébec. In that decision, the Commission
stated its intention to issue a public notice to determine the
applicability, in the territories of Québec-Téléphone and
Télébec, of the terms and conditions for local competition
established for Stentor member telephone companies. |
12. |
In Public Notice CRTC 2001-24, Competition in the local
exchange and local payphone markets in the territories of
Québec-Téléphone and Télébec ltée, dated 9 February 2001,
the Commission determined that it is in the public interest to
implement competition in the local exchange service and local
payphone markets in the territories of Québec-Téléphone and
Télébec. The Commission expressed its preliminary view that such
competition should begin in 2002. |
13. |
In PN 2001-24, the Commission invited Québec-Téléphone and
Télébec to comment on the relevance and applicability, in their
respective service territory, of the terms approved by Commission
letters, orders and decisions to implement competition in the local
exchange and local payphone markets in the territories of the former
Stentor member companies. |
14. |
In their evidence, filed in this proceeding, dated 23 March
2001, Télébec and TELUS (Québec) stated that they agreed in
principle that the terms established to implement local competition
in the territories of the former Stentor member companies should
apply to them. |
15. |
In Decision 99-16, the Commission also noted the concern of
various parties that it costs more to provide single-line business
service in high-cost areas than other regions. Commenting parties
proposed that a "high-cost subsidy" be provided for those
lines. |
|
Procedure and further details |
16. |
Accordingly, the Commission initiates this proceeding to examine
issues relating to the implementation of local competition and
related issues. The Commission invites interested parties to
participate in this proceeding following the procedure set out
below.
|
17. |
Télébec and TELUS (Québec) are made parties to this
proceeding. |
18. |
Other parties wishing to participate in this proceeding must
notify the Commission of their intention to do so by 16 July 2001
to the Secretary General, by mail at CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N2; by fax at (819) 953-0795 or by email at procedure@crtc.gc.ca. They are to indicate in the notice their email
address, where available. If parties do not have access to the
Internet, they are to indicate in their notice whether they wish to
receive disk versions or hard copy filings. The Commission will
issue, as soon as possible after the registration date, a complete
list of interested parties and their mailing address (including
their email address, if available), identifying those parties who
wish to receive disk versions. |
19. |
Télébec and TELUS (Québec) are directed to file submissions,
with detailed supporting assumptions and calculations, with the
Commission by 12 September 2001, serving copies on all
interested parties. |
20. |
These submissions are to contain: |
|
a) their proposals concerning rate band
structure, taking into account the need to identify high-cost
serving areas in their respective territories in view of the
Commission's conclusions in Decision 2001-238; |
|
b) their proposed local loop rates per
band with supporting cost studies for local loops and local
residential service per band. Those studies should be consistent
with all methods approved by the Commission in Decision 2001-238; |
|
c) if either carrier chooses to also file
costs developed using methods other than those approved in Decision 2001-238, it must also provide detailed explanations of the
assumptions used and state why those methods should be used; |
|
d) their calculations of the per line
subsidy requirements, based on the current local service rates,
using the formula set forth by the Commission in Decision 2000-745; |
|
e) their proposed rates, with supporting
cost studies for the following services: |
|
i) other local network components to be unbundled pursuant to
decisions 97-8 and 98-22;
|
|
ii) the delivery of traffic from one CLEC to a customer of the
carrier located within the same exchange;
|
|
iii) the delivery of traffic from one CLEC to a customer of the
carrier located in another exchange, but within the toll-free
calling area of the originating exchange;
|
|
iv) transit services, for traffic and for signalling, CLEC to
CLEC, CLEC to wireless service providers, and CLEC to
long-distance service providers; and
|
|
v) access lines to payphone services, and a standard service
agreement. The tariffs are to make reference to service agreements
which include as part of the terms of service, the mandated
consumer safeguards established in Decision 98-8;
|
|
f) their proposed quality of service
indicators for high-cost serving areas as set out in Decision 99-16;
and |
|
g) their position on the potential
extension of subsidies to single-line business service in high-cost
serving areas, including the number of business single lines within
each proposed band, supporting cost studies and potential per line
subsidy requirement calculations, and their proposal for the
allocation of contribution. |
21. |
The Commission will address interrogatories to Télébec and
TELUS (Québec) by 11 October 2001. |
22. |
Interested parties may also address interrogatories to Télébec
and TELUS (Québec), filing a copy with the Commission, by 11
October 2001. |
23. |
Responses to those interrogatories are to be filed with the
Commission and served on all parties by 27 November 2001. |
24. |
Requests by interested parties for further responses to their
interrogatories, specifying in each case why a further response is
both relevant and necessary, and requests for public disclosure of
information for which confidentiality has been claimed, setting out
in each case the reasons for disclosure, must be filed with the
Commission and served on Télébec and TELUS (Québec) by 4 December 2001. |
25. |
Télébec and TELUS (Québec) may file written responses to
requests for further responses to interrogatories and requests for
public disclosure, serving copies on all parties requesting further
responses to interrogatories and public disclosure by 11 December
2001. |
26. |
The requests for further information and for public disclosure
will be disposed of as soon as possible. Information to be provided
must be filed with the Commission and served on all parties by 15 January
2002. |
27. |
The Commission will address interrogatories to Télébec and
TELUS (Québec) by 4 February 2002. |
28. |
Responses to interrogatories must be filed with the Commission
and served on all parties by 7 March 2002. |
29. |
All parties may file comments with the Commission, serving a copy
on all other parties, by 8 April 2002. |
30. |
All parties may file comments in response with the Commission,
serving copies on all other parties, by 8 May 2002. |
31. |
Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the
document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date. |
32. |
Parties wishing to file electronic versions of their comments can
do so by email at the address shown above, or on diskette. |
33. |
The electronic version should be in the HTML format. As an
alternative, those making submissions may use "Microsoft
Word" for text and "Microsoft Excel" for
spreadsheets.
|
34. |
Please number each paragraph of your submission. In addition,
please enter the line ***End of document*** following the last
paragraph. This will help the Commission verify that the document
has not been damaged during transmission.
|
35. |
The Commission will make submissions filed in electronic form
available on its web site at www.crtc.gc.ca
in the official
language and format in which they are submitted. This will make it
easier for members of the public to consult the documents. |
36. |
The Commission also encourages interested parties to monitor the
public examination file (and/or the Commission's web site) for
additional information that they may find useful when preparing
their submissions. |
37. |
Submissions may be examined or will be made available promptly
upon request at the CRTC offices during normal business hours: |
|
Central Building
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
1 Promenade du Portage, Room G-5
Hull, Quebec K1A 0N2
Tel: (819) 997-2429 - TDD: 994-0423
Fax: (819) 994-0218 |
|
405 de Maisonneuve Blvd. East
2nd Floor, Suite B2300
Montréal, Quebec H2L 4J5
Tel: (514) 283-6607 - TDD: 283-8316
Fax: (514) 283-3689 |
|
Secretary General
|
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request and
may also be examined at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca |