|
Telecom Public Notice
|
|
Ottawa, 19 November 1992
|
|
Telecom Public Notice CRTC 92-66
|
|
RESALE AND SHARING IN THE TERRITORY OF AGT LIMITED
|
On 7 January 1992, Cam-Net Communications Inc. (Cam-Net) filed an application seeking orders requiring AGT Limited (AGT) to amend its tariffs to permit the resale and sharing of telecommunications services and facilities in accordance with the rules set out in the Appendix to Resale and Sharing of Private Line Services, Telecom Decision CRTC 90-3, 1 March 1990 (Decision 90-3).
|
On 24 June 1992, following the issuing of Competition in the Provision of Public Long Distance Voice Services and Related Resale And Sharing Issues, Telecom Decision CRTC 92-12, 12 June 1992 (Decision 92-12), Cam-Net filed an amended application seeking orders requiring AGT to amend its tariffs to permit the resale and sharing of telecommunications services and facilities in accordance with the terms set out in Appendix II of that Decision.
|
Since AGT was not a respondent in either of the above-noted proceedings, the Commission's findings in Decision 90-3 and Decision 92-12 do not apply to it. Furthermore, the specific circumstances of the company and the particular characteristics of its operating territory were not examined in either proceeding.
|
In its application, Cam-Net submitted that, absent special circumstances, the benefits of resale described in Decisions 90-3 and 92-12 should also be achievable in Alberta, and that the Commission's findings in Decision 92-12 regarding the ability to control the negative impact of resale in Atlantic Canada should apply in AGT's operating territory.
|
AGT submitted that, in the absence of an appropriate regulatory process with respect to AGT, the Commission should deny Cam-Net's amended application on the grounds that it is made by reference to rules established for other carriers. AGT also submitted that the application of the rules governing resale and sharing set out in Decision 92-12 should not be considered apart from the question of interconnection for the purpose of providing public long distance service in Alberta.
|
AGT noted that its view as to an appropriate liberalization of the rules governing resale and sharing in its territory were filed with the Commission on 8 June 1992 under Tariff Notice 186. AGT stated that Tariff Notice 186 differs substantially from both the Appendix to Decision 90-3 and Appendix II to Decision 92-12.
|
|
Cam-Net submitted that the filing of Tariff Notice 186 demonstrates that AGT has implicitly acknowledged that the extension of liberalized resale and sharing to its operating territory is in the public interest; consequently, the only matter at issue is the determination of an appropriate contribution charge.
|
|
The Commission notes that Tariff Notice 186 and a related application filed under Tariff Notice 213 were denied in Telecom Order CRTC 92-1546, 17 November 1992, on the basis that certain of the terms proposed would confer an undue preference on AGT.
|
When establishing the scope of the proceeding leading to Decision 92-12 (see CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1990-73, 3 August 1990), the Commission had before it an application by Unitel Communications Inc. requesting interconnection to provide public long distance voice services and permission to resell WATS, as well as an application by Call-Net Telecommunications Inc. for orders permitting the resale and sharing of telecommunications services in the Atlantic provinces under the terms established in Decision 90-3. The Commission concluded that these applications raised related issues and that they should therefore be considered together in the same proceeding.
|
|
At present, the Commission has before it an application to permit the resale and sharing of AGT's telecommunications services, but not an application for interconnection to provide public long distance voice services in the territory of AGT. Moreover, the Commission does not know when, in the foreseeable future, such an application for interconnection might be filed. However, while these types of applications raise similar issues, the Commission does not consider it necessary or appropriate to delay an examination of the issues raised by Cam-Net's application until an application for interconnection is also before it.
|
In light of the above, the Commission initiates a proceeding to consider allowing the resale and sharing of the telecommunications services of AGT under the same terms and conditions as those established in Appendix II to Decision 92-12.
|
|
|
|
Procedure
|
|
1. The mailing addresses to be used in connection with this proceeding are:
|
|
Mr. Allan Darling
Secretary General
CRTC
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N2
Fax: (819) 953-0795
|
|
Mr. James H. Pratt
Vice President,
Regulatory Affairs
AGT Limited
Floor 32-G, 10020 - 100 Street
Edmonton, Alberta
T5J 0N5
Fax: (403) 493-5645
|
|
2. Cam-Net and AGT are made parties to this proceeding, Other persons wishing to participate must notify the Commission at the address noted above by 21 December 1992. The Commission will issue a complete list of parties and their mailing addresses.
|
|
3. The Commission has addressed interrogatories to AGT by letter dated 19 November 1992. AGT is directed to file responses to these interrogatories with the Commission, serving copies on other parties, by 11 January 1993.
|
In addition, AGT is to file evidence on the impact of allowing resale and sharing in its territory under the terms and conditions set out in Appendix II to Decision 92-12. In this context, the Commission invites AGT to comment, particularly in light of its filing of Tariff Notice 186, on why the benefits of resale and sharing identified in Decision 92-12 may not be expected to arise in its operating territory and on the extent to which any negative effects could be minimized. AGT's evidence is to be filed with the Commission and served on other parties by 11 January 1993.
|
|
4. Parties may address interrogatories to AGT. Any such interrogatories must be filed with the Commission and served on AGT by 8 February 1993.
|
|
5. AGT is to file responses to any interrogatories, serving copies on other parties, by 8 March 1993.
|
|
6. Requests by parties for further responses to their interrogatories, specifying in each case why a further response is both relevant and necessary, and requests for public disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed, setting out the reasons for disclosure, must be filed with the Commission and served on AGT by 15 March 1993.
|
|
7. AGT's replies to requests for further responses to interrogatories and requests for public disclosure of information must be filed with the Commission and served on other parties by 22 March 1993.
|
|
8. The Commission will rule on requests for disclosure and for further responses by 29 March 1993.
|
|
9. Parties are to file their comments with the Commission, serving copies on all other parties, by 19 April 1993.
|
|
10. Parties are to file their reply comments with the Commission, serving copies on all other parties, by 10 May 1993.
|
|
11. 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.
|
|
Allan J. Darling
Secretary General
|
|
|