|
Telecom Public Notice
|
|
Ottawa, 16 July 1990
|
|
Telecom Public Notice CRTC 1990-64
|
|
ALTERNATE OPERATOR SERVICES
|
The Commission has received an application from British Columbia Telephone Company (B.C. Tel), dated 2 May 1990, for approval of tariff revisions with respect to the provision of alternate operator services (AOS). B.C. Tel stated that the liberalization of the resale and sharing rules as a result of Resale and Sharing of Private Line Services, Telecom Decision CRTC 90-3, 1 March 1990 (Decision 90-3), has provided an opportunity for parties other than the telephone companies to enter the market for the provision of operator-handled long distance services. B.C. Tel stated that experience in the United States indicates that safeguards are needed in order to protect the public from certain negative practices in the provision of AOS.
|
|
B.C. Tel noted that, in the United States, an establishment such as a hotel will enter into an agreement with an AOS provider, whereby the latter will handle all calls placed by guests requiring operator assistance. The guests pay the AOS provider's rates, which are usually higher than those of interexchange carriers, and often a telecommunications surcharge levied by the hotel. The AOS provider pays the hotel a commission on all calls handled. Often the guest has no choice but to deal with the AOS provider selected by the hotel.
|
|
B.C. Tel also described another AOS practice in the United States, referred to as "splashing". B.C. Tel stated that splashing occurs when an AOS provider transfers a call to another carrier at the caller's request. In such cases, the AOS provider transfers the call to an interexchange carrier in the city where its switching centre is located. If the location of the switching centre differs from that of the caller, the call may be billed from the location of the centre, rather than from the location where the call originated. As a result, the bill may confuse the customer or be higher than the caller expected.
|
|
In its application, B.C. Tel suggests several measures for protecting callers from practices such as those described above. First, B.C. Tel proposes to modify General Tariff Item 24, which governs the use of the company's services for resale and sharing, to prohibit the blocking of access to its operator-handled long distance services. B.C. Tel's proposed revision would also specify that access to its operator-handled long distance services must be provided in a manner comparable to that afforded calls placed over the local exchange network.
|
|
In addition, B.C. Tel has asked the Commission to consider measures requiring that every AOS provider:
|
|
(1) identify itself at the beginning of the call to the caller and to any party accepting charges for a collect call;
|
|
(2) provide rate information upon the caller's request;
|
|
(3) post information in close proximity to each telephone served, identifying itself and providing rate information; and
|
|
(4) eliminate any billing discrepancies resulting from call splashing.
|
|
Further, B.C. Tel submitted that it would be appropriate for resellers to notify the Commission of their intention to provide competitive operator-assisted long distance services. B.C. Tel stated that this could be accomplished pursuant to the regime established in Decision 90-3 for the registration of resellers of private lines for joint use.
|
|
In a letter to the Commission dated 18 May 1990, Bell Canada (Bell) stated that it shares B.C. Tel's concerns. Bell suggested that the Commission initiate a public proceeding with respect to the provision of AOS.
|
|
The Commission hereby invites comment on the issues raised by B.C. Tel's application. In particular, comments are requested with respect to:
|
|
(1) whether or not the telephone companies' General Tariffs should be modified to deal with the provision of AOS, and
|
|
(2) if so, what modifications would be appropriate.
|
Those who comment may also wish to address the likely extent of future AOS activity in Canada and the impact on AOS of the Commission's prohibition of competition in the provision of pay telephone service, set out in Resale to Provide Primary Exchange Voice Services, Telecom Decision CRTC 87-1, 12 February 1987.
|
|
Since Decision 90-3 liberalized the rules governing resale and sharing for both B.C. Tel and Bell, any concerns with respect to the provision of AOS are equally relevant to both companies. The Commission therefore considers it appropriate that Bell participate in this proceeding. The Commission has not as yet considered the question of resale and sharing in the operating territories of the Atlantic telephone companies. Therefore, issues with respect to the provision of AOS are not of immediate concern to those companies. Nonetheless, the Commission wishes to have their views before it in making any policy determinations that may eventually prove relevant to them. Similarly, although Decision 90-3 did not alter the rules governing resale and sharing in the territory of Northwestel Inc. (Northwestel), the Commission wishes to hear that company's views with respect to the provision of AOS. Accordingly, the procedures set out below provide for the participation of Northwestel and the Atlantic telephone companies.
|
|
1. Bell, The Island Telephone Company Limited, Maritime Telegraph and Telephone Company, Limited, The New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited, Newfoundland Telephone Company Limited and Northwestel are joined as parties to this proceeding.
|
|
2. The documents referred to in this Public Notice may be examined at any of B.C. Tel's business offices or at the offices of the CRTC in the following locations:
|
|
Room 201
Central Building
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
1 Promenade du Portage
Hull, Quebec
|
|
Suite 1500
800 Burrard Street
Vancouver, British Columbia
|
|
Complex Guy-Favreau
East Tower
200 René-Lévesque Blvd. West
6th Floor
Montréal, Quebec
|
|
Suite 1007
Bank of Commerce Building
1809 Barrington Street
Halifax, Nova Scotia
|
|
A copy of these documents may be obtained by writing to B.C. Tel at the address shown below.
|
|
3. The mailing addresses to be used in this proceeding are:
|
|
Alain-F. Desfossés
Secretary General
CRTC
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N2
|
|
Dorothy E. Byrne
Vice-President - Legal & Regulatory Matters
British Columbia Telephone Company
3777 Kingsway
Burnaby, British Columbia
V5H 3Z7
|
|
4. Anyone wishing to participate in this proceeding (interveners) may do so by notifying the Commission at the address noted in paragraph 3 by 13 August 1990. The Commission will issue a complete list of parties and their mailing addresses.
|
|
5. The companies noted in paragraph 1 may file comments with respect to the issues raised by B.C. Tel's application by 27 August 1990. The companies are to serve copies on inter-veners, on B.C. Tel and on each other by the same date.
|
|
6. Interveners may file comments with the Commission, serving copies on B.C. Tel and on the companies noted in paragraph 1, by 17 September 1990.
|
|
7. B.C. Tel and the companies noted in paragraph 1 may file reply comments with the Commission, serving copies on the interveners and on each other, by 1 October 1990.
|
|
8. Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely mailed, by that date.
|
|
Alain-F. Desfossés
Secretary General
|
|
|