|
Telecom Order CRTC 2005-241
|
|
Ottawa, 22 June 2005 |
|
Call-Net Communications Inc.
|
|
Reference: Tariff Notices 23
and 23A |
|
Diagnostic Maintenance Charge
|
|
The Commission denies Call-Net
Communications Inc.'s proposal to introduce Diagnostic Maintenance
Charge, applicable when the company performs a diagnostic test on an
unbundled local loop, that tests as non-functional, following a
completion notice by the incumbent local exchange carrier. |
|
The application
|
1. |
The Commission received an application by
Call-Net Communications Inc. (CNCI), dated 15 March 2005 and amended on
25 April 2005, proposing revisions to its General Tariff, to introduce
Item 602, Diagnostic Maintenance Charge (DMC). |
2. |
CNCI noted that the incumbent local
exchange carrier (ILEC) was responsible for the complete installation
and repair of an unbundled local loop service order, including the
completion notice. CNCI further noted that when an unbundled loop was
tested by the company and found to be incomplete or otherwise
non-functional after the completion notice was received, the company
would contact the ILEC to correct the trouble. |
3. |
CNCI proposed to apply the DMC for each
diagnostic test made in response to a completion notice when the
facility would test as non-functional. CNCI added that "if the trouble
is proven to the Company, no charge will apply." |
4. |
CNCI proposed the following DMC: $65.95 for
the first 15 minutes or fraction thereof, and $16.75 for each additional
15 minutes or fraction thereof. In its amended application, CNCI
proposed that the above rates would apply for multi-line services and
that a flat rate of $65.95 would apply for single line services. |
|
Process
|
5. |
On 15 April 2005, Bell Canada filed
comments, opposing the approval of CNCI's application. CNCI filed reply
comments, along with an amended application, on 25 April 2005. On
11 May 2005, Bell Canada filed comments on CNCI's amended application.
|
|
Positions of parties
|
|
Bell Canada's comments
|
6. |
Bell Canada noted that CNCI's General
Tariff Item 601, Service Charge for Trouble Identification on ILEC
Unbundled Local Loops, already applied service charges of $65.95 for the
first 15 minutes (or fraction thereof) and $16.75 for each additional 15
minutes (or fraction thereof) for cases where CNCI dispatched a
technician to perform a co-operative test on an ILEC unbundled loop
after confirmation from the ILEC that the loop was functional and the
trouble was found to be in the ILEC's facilities. Bell Canada submitted
that CNCI's proposed Item 602 sought to establish rates for the same
activities already covered by Item 601 and that the proposed tariff was
therefore redundant. |
7. |
Bell Canada noted that the proposed tariff
stated that the DMC would apply when a facility tested as
"non-functional," and argued that this was not a standard term in the
industry, and was not defined in the proposed tariff. |
8. |
Bell Canada further noted that the proposed
tariff stated that if the trouble was proven to CNCI, no charge would
apply. Bell Canada submitted that this contrasted with wording in CNCI's
existing Item 601, which stated that no charge would apply if the
co-operative test indicated no trouble in the ILEC's facilities. Bell
Canada submitted that CNCI's proposed tariff was poorly worded and would
give rise to disputes, and argued that it would leave the ILECs
vulnerable when the trouble was not with their facilities, but with
CNCI's end-customer equipment or inside wire. |
9. |
Finally, Bell Canada submitted that CNCI's
proposed rates were punitively high for single line customers, since
CNCI had not differentiated between troubles for single line residence
and business customers versus multi-line customers. Bell Canada noted
that its own DMC reflected a flat rate fee of $65.95 for single line
residence and business customers, with charges based on 15-minute
increments only applying in instances of multi-line customers. |
|
CNCI's reply comments
|
10. |
CNCI refuted Bell Canada's submission that
the proposed tariff was redundant, noting that the charge in Item 601
was for situations involving a co-operative test and that the proposed
Item 602 was to apply to situations where co-operative tests were not
performed. CNCI noted that the DMC (Item 602) would largely apply to
loop transfers involving residential customers where co-operative tests
were typically not employed. CNCI stated that charge was meant to apply
where CNCI found trouble on the loop after the ILEC provided a
completion notice, which indicated that a functioning loop had been
transferred. |
11. |
With respect to Bell Canada's objection
regarding CNCI's use of the term "non-functional," CNCI stated that it
was using the term in its plain English meaning, i.e., the loop was not
working and could not be used in its current condition. |
12. |
In response to Bell Canada's submission
that the proposed charges were excessive and did not differentiate
between single and multi-line customers, CNCI submitted an amended
application, which proposed a flat rate of $65.95 for single line
services. |
|
Bell Canada's additional comments
|
13. |
Bell Canada restated its view regarding the
use of the term "non-functional," submitting that CNCI's claim that it
was using the term "in its plain English meaning" added no clarity.
Bell Canada also reiterated its similar concerns with respect to the
wording "if the trouble is proven to [CNCI], no charge will apply." |
|
Commission's analysis and determination
|
14. |
The Commission notes that CNCI's existing
General Tariff Item 601, Service Charge for Trouble Identification on
ILEC Unbundled Local Loops, applies when the company dispatches a
service technician to perform a co-operative test on an ILEC's unbundled
local loop after confirmation from the ILEC that the loop is functional.
The Commission notes that, by contrast, the DMC would largely apply to
loop transfers involving residential customers, when the loop is not
functional after the receipt of the completion notice. |
15. |
In Finalization of quality of service
rate rebate plan for competitors, Telecom Decision CRTC 2005-20,
31 March 2005 (Decision 2005-20),
the Commission finalized a quality of service (Q of S) rate rebate
plan (RRP) whereby rebates are provided to a competitor by an ILEC,
when the ILEC fails to meet a Q of S performance standard. In that
Decision, the Commission established competition-related Q of S indicator
2.12 to monitor service failures and/or degradation within the first
30 days of delivery for competitor services, including unbundled
loops. The Commission stated that it would monitor indicator 2.12
for a period of one year, beginning from the quarterly filing that
commences the final RRP, in order to assess the effectiveness of and
the continued need for the indicator. |
16. |
The Commission notes that if Q of S
indicator 2.12 is, after the one-year monitoring period, included in the
RRP for competitors, CNCI could receive a rebate in the case of service
failures and/or degradation within the first 30 days of delivery of ILEC
unbundled loops. The Commission is concerned that if CNCI's application
were approved and if Q of S indicator 2.12 were included in the RRP, the
company may receive double compensation (i.e., under the DMC tariff
provision and under Q of S indicator 2.12) for non-functional loops.
|
17. |
The Commission therefore considers that it
would be premature to approve CNCI's application before making a
determination, following the one-year monitoring period, on whether or
not Q of S indicator 2.12 warrants inclusion in the RRP for competitors. |
18. |
Accordingly, the Commission denies
CNCI's application. |
|
Secretary General |
|
This document is available in alternative
format upon request, and may also be examined in PDF
format or in HTML at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca
|