|
Telecom Costs Order CRTC 2006-5
|
|
Ottawa,
1 June 2006 |
|
Public Interest Advocacy Centre – Application for costs – Telecom
Public Notice CRTC 2005-7
|
|
Reference: 8665-C12-20057212
and 4754-263 |
1. |
By letter
dated 6 February 2006, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC)
applied for costs with respect to its participation in the proceeding
initiated by Access to information contained in the incumbent local
exchange carriers' Emergency 9-1-1 databases for the purpose of providing
a Community Notification Service, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2005-7,
22 June 2005 (the PN 2005-7
proceeding). |
2. |
On 16
February 2006, Bell Canada on behalf of itself, Aliant Telecom Inc.
(Aliant Telecom), NorthernTel, Limited Partnership (NorthernTel),
Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel) and Société en commandite
Télébec (Télébec), (collectively the Companies) filed comments in answer
to PIAC's application. PIAC did not file reply comments. |
|
The application
|
3. |
PIAC submitted
that it had met the criteria for an award of costs set out in subsection
44(1) of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the
Rules) as it represents a group of subscribers that had an interest
in the outcome of the PN 2005-7
proceeding, had participated responsibly, and had contributed to a
better understanding of the issues by the Commission through their
participation in the PN 2005-7
proceeding. |
4. |
In particular,
PIAC submitted that it had provided public interest arguments on the
nature and scope of emergencies that might involve a system such as
that proposed and further illustrated the telecom and privacy law
factors applicable to such a system. PIAC also noted that it was not
making a claim for costs in relation to its work on the Strathcona
Part VII application which precipitated the PN 2005-7
proceeding. |
5. |
PIAC
requested that the Commission fix its costs at $10,164.73 for legal
fees. PIAC's claim included the Federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) on
fees less the rebate to which PIAC is entitled in connection with GST.
PIAC filed a bill of costs with its application. |
6. |
PIAC claimed
42.7 hours at a rate of $230 per hour for legal fees for John Lawford. |
7. |
PIAC submitted
that the appropriate respondents in this case were all parties listed
in PN 2005-7. However,
PIAC was concerned with the ability of the applicants in the 2005-7
proceeding, namely County of Strathcona, the City of Fort Saskatchewan,
the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the City
of Brandon, the New Brunswick - Department of Safety, Emergency Management
Alberta, Emergency Management Ontario, the County of Essex and the
City of Niagara Falls, as well as the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
to support a costs award in addition to their own expenses and accordingly
submitted that it would be reasonable to allocate two-thirds of any
cost award to the incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) and competitive
local exchange carriers (CLECs) in proportion to their telecommunications
operating revenues (TORs) and the remaining one third borne by the
remaining parties in whatever proportion the Commission saw fit. |
|
Answer
|
8. |
In answer to
the application, the Companies stated that they did not object to
the amount claimed in PIAC's application. However, the Companies did
question the appropriateness of awarding any costs in this matter.
In particular, they submitted that the PN 2005-7
proceeding was not one that directly engaged significant commercial
interests of the Companies or one where the interests of the consumers
would have gone unrepresented but for the participation of PIAC. |
9. |
The Companies
submitted that, should the Commission determine that a costs award is
appropriate, the costs should be apportioned as suggested by PIAC. |
|
Commission analysis and determination
|
10. |
The
Commission finds that PIAC has satisfied the criteria for an award of
costs set out in subsection 44(1) of the Rules. Specifically, the
Commission finds that PIAC is representative of a group or class of
subscribers that has an interest in the outcome of the proceeding, has
participated in a responsible way, and has contributed to a better
understanding of the issues by the Commission. |
11. |
The
Commission notes that the rates claimed in respect of legal fees are in
accordance with the rates set out in the Legal Directorate's
Guidelines for the Taxation of Costs, revised as of 15 May 1998. The
Commission also finds that the total amount claimed by PIAC was
necessarily and reasonably incurred and should be allowed. |
12. |
The Commission
is of the view that this is an appropriate case in which to fix the
costs and dispense with taxation, in accordance with the streamlined
procedure set out in New procedure for Telecom costs awards,
Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2002-5,
7 November 2002. |
13. |
In determining
the appropriate respondents to an award of costs, the Commission has
generally looked at which parties are affected by the issues and have
actively participated in the proceeding. The Commission has, however,
also considered the potential administrative burden on applicants
if they were required to collect small amounts from many respondents.
Given the small size of the costs award in this case, the Commission
finds that it would impose an unnecessary administrative burden on
PIAC to require the collection of small amounts from the numerous
parties who participated in the PN 2005-7
proceeding. |
14. |
On this
basis, and given that the issue in this proceeding relates to the ILEC's
own 9-1-1 databases, the Commission concludes that the appropriate
respondents to PIAC's costs application are the major ILECs who
participated in the proceeding, namely, Bell Canada, Aliant Telecom,
SaskTel, TELUS Communications Company (TCC) and MTS Allstream Inc.
(MTS Allstream). |
15. |
The
Commission notes that it has, in previous decisions, allocated the
responsibility for the payment of costs among respondents on the basis
of the respondents' TORs, as an indicator of the relative size and
interest of the parties involved in the proceeding. The Commission is of
the view that, in the present circumstances, it is appropriate to
apportion the costs among the respondents in proportion to their TORs,
as reported in their most recent audited financial statements.
Accordingly, the Commission finds that the responsibility for the
payment of costs should be allocated as follows: |
|
|
Bell Canada |
48% |
|
|
TCC |
33% |
|
|
Aliant Telecom |
7% |
|
|
MTS Allstream |
8% |
|
|
SaskTel |
4% |
|
Direction as to costs
|
16. |
The Commission
approves the application by PIAC for costs with respect to
its participation in the PN 2005-7
proceeding. |
17. |
Pursuant to
subsection 56(1) of the Telecommunications Act, the Commission
fixes the costs to be paid to PIAC at $10,164.73. |
18. |
The
Commission directs that the award of costs to PIAC be paid forthwith by
the ILECs according to the proportions set out in paragraph 15. |
|
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
|