Telecom Decision CRTC 2015-499
Ottawa, 9 November 2015
File number: 8638-S1-01/98
Forbearance from the regulation of high-capacity / digital data services interexchange private line services on certain additional routes
The Commission forbears, with some conditions, from regulating high-capacity / digital data services interexchange private line services on 24 additional routes.
In Telecom Decision 97-20, pursuant to section 34 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act) and in accordance with the framework set out in Telecom Decision 94-19, the Commission forbore in large part from regulating the high-capacity / digital data services interexchange private line (IXPL) services (IXPL services) provided by the former Stentor-member companiesFootnote 1 on certain routes. The Commission expanded the scope of forbearance for forborne IXPL services provided by TELUS Communications Company (TCC) in Telecom Decision 2003-77, and for those provided by Aliant Telecom Inc. (now part of Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership), Bell Canada, MTS Allstream Inc., and Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel) in Telecom Decision 2004-80.
In Telecom Order 99-434, the Commission directed the competitors of several incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) to file a semi-annual report identifying the IXPL routes on which the competitors provided or offered IXPL services to at least one customer, at the equivalent of DS-3 or greater bandwidth, using terrestrial facilities from a company other than the ILEC or an affiliate of the ILEC.Footnote 2
Also in that order, the Commission stated that upon being satisfied that one or more competitors met this criterion, it would proceed to forbear from the regulation of IXPL services on those particular routes without further process. The reports are due on 1 April and 1 October each year.
In October 2015, the Commission received filings from the following competitors: Allstream Inc.; Axia SuperNet Ltd.; Bell Canada, on behalf of itself, DMTS, and NorthernTel, Limited Partnership; Bragg Communications Incorporated, on behalf of its direct and indirect subsidiaries; Greater Sudbury Telecommunications Inc., operating as Agilis Networks; Hydro One Telecom Inc.; Manitoba Hydro Telecom; O.N.Tel Inc., operating as Ontera; Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of its affiliate Videotron G.P.; Rogers Communications Partnership; SaskTel; Shaw Telecom G.P.; TBayTel; Teliphone Navigata-Westel Communication Inc.; and TCC.
Commission’s analysis and determinations
The Commission has reviewed the competitors’ reports filed pursuant to Telecom Order 99-434 and finds that the above-noted forbearance criterion is met for 24 additional routes, which are in territories served by Bell Canada and TCC. These additional routes are listed in the Appendix.
Pursuant to subsection 34(1) of the Act, the Commission finds as a question of fact that to refrain from exercising its powers and performing its duties, to the extent specified in this decision, in relation to the regulation of IXPL services on the routes listed in the Appendix, would be consistent with the policy objectives set out in section 7 of the Act.
Pursuant to subsection 34(2) of the Act, the Commission finds as a question of fact that the IXPL services on the routes listed in the Appendix are subject to a level of competition sufficient to protect the interests of users of these services and that, to the extent specified in this decision, it is appropriate to refrain from regulating the IXPL services provided on these routes.
Pursuant to subsection 34(3) of the Act, the Commission finds as a question of fact that to refrain from regulating the IXPL services on the routes listed in the Appendix, to the extent specified in this decision, would be unlikely to unduly impair the continuance of a competitive market for these services.
In light of the above and pursuant to subsection 34(4) of the Act, the Commission declares that the following sections of the Act, with some exceptions as noted, do not apply to the affected ILECs’ IXPL services on the routes identified in the Appendix:
section 24, except that the Commission directs the ILECs whose territories include one or more of the IXPL routes listed in the Appendix (the affected ILECs) to incorporate into all contracts and any other arrangements for the IXPL services forborne from regulation in this decision, where appropriate and on a going-forward basis, the existing conditions regarding the disclosure of confidential customer information to third parties. It is also appropriate for the Commission to retain sufficient powers under section 24 of the Act to specify possible future conditions upon the forborne services provided by the affected ILECs, where circumstances warrant;
section 27, except with respect to subsection 27(3) of the Act in relation to compliance with powers and duties not forborne from in this decision;
section 29; and
The Commission directs the affected ILECs to issue, within 45 days of the date of this decision, tariff pages removing the tariffs for the IXPL services on the routes identified in the Appendix, effective on the date of issuance of the tariff pages.Footnote 3
Aliant Telecom, Bell Canada, MTS Allstream and SaskTel - Forbearance from section 29 of the Act for agreements related to forborne domestic toll services and forborne interexchange private line services, Telecom Decision CRTC 2004-80, 9 December 2004
TELUS’ application for forbearance from section 29 of the Telecommunications Act with respect to forborne interexchange private line and long distance services, Telecom Decision CRTC 2003-77, 19 November 2003
Telecom Order CRTC 99-905, 17 September 1999
Follow-up Proceeding to Telecom Decision CRTC 97-20: Establishment of criterion and process for considering further forbearance for High Capacity/DDS interexchange private line services, Telecom Order CRTC 99-434, 12 May 1999
Stentor Resource Centre Inc. - Forbearance from regulation of interexchange private line services, Telecom Decision CRTC 97-20, 18 December 1997
Review of regulatory framework, Telecom Decision CRTC 94-19, 16 September 1994
Appendix to Telecom Decision 2015-499
Additional IXPL routes that qualify for forbearance based on the October 2015 reports from competitors, pursuant to Telecom Order 99-434
|ILEC A||Exchange A||Exchange B||ILEC B|
|Bell Canada||Richmond Hill, ON||Thornhill, ON||Bell Canada|
|TCC||Acadia Valley, AB||Calgary, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Bassano, AB||Calgary, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Calgary, AB||Carbon, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Calgary, AB||Glenwood, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Calgary, AB||Hardisty, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Calgary, AB||Lougheed, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Calgary, AB||New Norway, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Calgary, AB||Sunchild O'Chiese, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Calgary, AB||Trochu, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Calgary, AB||Vauxhall, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Fort Chipewyan, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Fort Saskatchewan, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Grouard, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Heinsburg, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Keg River, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Kinuso, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Little Buffalo Lake, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||New Sarepta, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Peace River AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Peerless Lake, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Rycroft, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Sangudo, AB||TCC|
|TCC||Edmonton, AB||Tofield, AB||TCC|
- Footnote 1
The Stentor-member companies consisted of BC TEL; Bell Canada; The Island Telephone Company Limited; MTS NetCom Inc.; Maritime Tel & Tel Limited; The New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited; NewTel Communications Inc.; and TELUS Communications Inc.
- Footnote 2
- Footnote 3
Revised tariff pages can be submitted to the Commission without a description page or a request for approval; a tariff application is not required.
- Date modified: