|
Telecom Public Notice
|
|
Ottawa, 19 February 1986
|
|
Telecom Public Notice CRTC 1986-16
|
|
CELLULAR RADIO
|
In Cellular Radio Service, CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1984-55, 25 October 1984 (Public Notice 1984-55), the Commission determined that Cantel Inc. (Cantel) or any federally regulated telephone company affiliate providing cellular radio service, need not file tariffs for the provision of cellular service to the public. In the case of telephone company affiliates, this conclusion was conditional on there being adequate safeguards in place to ensure that cellular activities are conducted at arm's-length from regulated telephone company activities.
|
|
In letters to the Commission, Bell Canada (Bell) on 28 June 1985, and British Columbia Telephone Company (B.C. Tel) on 25 October 1985, advised of organizational changes intended to ensure the provision of cellular radio service through arm's-length affiliates. Bell advised that a division of Bell Communications Systems Inc. was to have provided cellular service, but that this service would instead be provided by Bell Cellular Inc. (Bell Cellular), a subsidiary of Bell Canada Management Corporation, which is itself a subsidiary of Bell.
|
|
B.C. Tel advised that B.C. Cellular would operate as a division of Cantel Leasing Ltd. (Cantel Leasing), a subsidiary of Canadian Telephone and Supplies Ltd. (CT&S) which is itself a B.C. Tel subsidiary. Organizational changes would involve the purchase by North-West Telephone Company, a holding company which is also a B.C. Tel subsidiary, of all Cantel Leasing common shares from CT&S. B.C. Tel also advised that there would be an arm's-length relationship between its Portable Communications Division and B.C. Cellular.
|
|
On 22 November 1985, Cantel advised the Commission that it had serious concerns about both of these corporate arrangements. In particular, it was concerned about intercorporate transactions, whether relationships are truly at arm's-length, the assignment of cellular start-up costs, and access by these subsidiaries to the parents' mobile customer lists. Cantel requested that the Commission institute a proceeding to inquire into these arrangements, and to establish adequate safeguards consistent with section 321 of the Railway Act.
|
|
As a follow-up to its decision to forbear from regulating rates charged for cellular service by cellular service providers, the Commission has addressed the following series of interrogatories to Bell and B.C. Tel on their relationship with their cellular affiliates: Bell(CRTC) 22May85-IT, Bell(CRTC)26July85-IT and B.C.Tel(CRTC)22Nov85-IT. These interrogatories deal with matters such as financing of the affiliates, start-up costs and the degree of separation between the regulated telephone companies' activities and those of their cellular affiliates.
|
Taking into account the regulatory approach adopted in Public Notice 1984-55, the Commission considers that interested persons should be afforded an opportunity to make submissions concerning the relationship between Bell and B.C. Tel and their respective cellular affiliates and to comment on the adequacy of the safeguards now in place. Interested persons are also invited to comment on the issues raised by Cantel and on the responses to the CRTC interrogatories noted above.
|
|
Procedure
|
|
The procedure to be followed in connection with this proceeding is as follows:
|
|
(1) Bell and B.C. Tel (the carriers) and Cantel will be considered parties to this proceeding.
|
|
(2) Other persons wishing to participate in this proceeding must notify the Commission of their
intention to do so by writing to the Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, by
19 March 1986.
|
|
(3) The Commission will issue a list of parties by 4 April 1986.
|
|
(4) All parties may address interrogatories to the carriers, with a copy to the Commission, by 4
April 1986.
|
|
(5) The carriers shall file responses to these interrogatories, serving a copy on all other parties by
2 May 1986.
|
|
(6) Parties other than the carriers may file comments with the Commission regarding the record
and issues raised in this proceeding, serving a copy on all other parties by 30 May 1986.
|
|
(7) The carriers may reply to these comments by 13 June 1986.
|
|
(8) The 22 November 1985 submission of Cantel, the 28 June 1985 and 25 October 1985 letters
of the carriers and the responses to CRTC interrogatories, cited above, may be examined at
the respective companies' business offices or at the offices of the CRTC, Room 561, Central
Building, Les Terrasses de la Chaudière, 1 Promenade du Portage, Hull, Quebec, or
Complexe Guy Favreau, East Tower, 200 Dorchester Blvd. West, 6th floor, Montreal,
Quebec, or 700 West Georgia Street, Suite 1130, Vancouver, British Columbia. A copy of
documents filed by Bell, B.C. Tel and Cantel may be obtained by any person upon request
directed to the appropriate companies at the following addresses:
|
|
Mr. E.E. Saunders, Q.C.
c/o Mr. Peter J. Knowlton
Assistant General Counsel
Bell Canada
25 Eddy Street, 4th floor
Hull, Quebec
J8Y 6N4
|
|
Mr. K.D.A. Morrison
Secretary
British Columbia Telephone Company
3777 Kingsway
Burnaby, British Columbia
V5H 3Z7
|
|
Mr. Charles M. Dalfen
Secretary
Cantel Inc.
1500-275 Slater Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 5H9
|
|
Fernand Bélisle
Secretary General
|
|
|