ARCHIVED -  Telecom Costs Order CRTC 93-9

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Telecom Costs Order

Ottawa, 24 August 1993
Telecom Costs Order CRTC 93-9
In re: Bell Canada - Revisions to Directory Assistance Charges, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 93-14: Application for Costs by the National Anti-Poverty Organization
Application for costs by the National Anti-Poverty Organization (NAPO).
On 5 April 1993, NAPO applied, pursuant to s. 44 of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the Rules) for its costs of participation in Bell Canada - Revisions to Directory Assistance Charges, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 93-14, 29 January 1993, (Public Notice 93-14). NAPO noted that, as invited by the public notice in question, NAPO had submitted detailed comments on the proposal of Bell Canada (Bell). NAPO indicated that these comments were the result of consultations with a wide range of its constituents.
NAPO submitted that it was a national non-profit organization, whose constituents have a direct interest in the pricing of Bell's directory assistance service. NAPO also submitted that it had participated responsibly and had contributed to a better understanding of the issues by the Commission, as required by subsection 44(1) of the Rules.
In its answer, Bell submitted that insofar as NAPO's application for costs was made pursuant to section 44 of the Rules, the application should be refused since the discretion afforded to the Commission to award costs under that section pertains strictly to applications for general rate increases. In the alternative, the company submitted that the awarding of costs for participation in the proceeding in question would not be justified, since there was no oral hearing, no witnesses heard or cross-examined and generally very limited, if any, expenditure for NAPO.
In reply, NAPO noted that while the Rules provide for cost awards only in the context of general rate applications, this does not constrain the Commission from exercising its statutory power to award costs in other circumstances, pursuant to subsection 76(1) of the National Telecommunications Powers and Procedures Act (the Act). NAPO acknowledged that its participation did not involve large expenditures, but submitted that Bell's application was important, arguing that it was, in essence, an application for basic rate increases.
DIRECTION AS TO COSTS
1. The Commission considers that it has the authority, pursuant to section 76 of the Act to make an award of costs in the present case. Further, the Commission considers that the criteria set out in subsection 44(1) of the Rules provide an appropriate test for eligibility.
2. The Commission notes that the proceeding in question merely sought public comment on a proposal to revise certain terms and charges associated with Bell's directory assistance service. There was no hearing, intervener interrogatories or intervener evidence; nor were the issues either numerous or complex. The Commission notes that, in addition to NAPO's comments, the Commission received comments on the filing in question from over 400 individuals and organizations, many of whom could be characterized as within NAPO's constituency.
3. In the circumstances, the Commission is of the view that NAPO's comments did not add significantly to the record of the proceeding. As a result, the Commission finds that NAPO did not contribute to a better understanding of the issues by the Commission, as required by paragraph 44(1)(c) of the Rules.
4. Accordingly, the application for costs by NAPO is denied.
Allan J. Darling
Secretary General

Date modified: