ARCHIVED -  Telecom Order CRTC 97-931

Telecom Order

Ottawa, 4 July 1997

Telecom Order CRTC 97-931

On 21 March 1997, (4 April 1997 for NewTel Communications Inc.) the federally regulated Stentor carriers (the companies) filed proposed revisions to their tariffs reflecting the introduction of Dialed Number Transport Capability (DNTC). DNTC is an access service that transports the toll-free number that was dialed by a caller to a toll competitor's subscriber. These filings were filed pursuant to the Commission's directives in Telecom Order CRTC 97-233 dated 21 February 1997 (Order 97-233).

File Nos.: BC TEL Tariff Notice (TN) 3604, Bell TN 5972, Island Tel TN 453, MT&T TN 650, MTS TN 257, NBTel TN 621, NewTel TN 512 and TCI TN 895

1. In Order 97-233, the Commission directed the companies to file proposed tariffs for DNTC with, among other things, rates developed using an "all-carriers" approach.

2. AT&T Canada Long Distance Services Company (AT&T Canada LDS) filed comments on 21 April 1997.

3. Stentor Resource Centre Inc. (Stentor) submitted a response on behalf of the companies on 2 May 1997.

4. AT&T Canada LDS stated that it expected the individual DNTC rates filed by the companies to be more or less uniform; however, an examination of the tariff notices revealed dramatic differences in these rates. AT&T Canada LDS noted that no justification was provided for the wide variations in DNTC rates among the companies.

5. AT&T Canada LDS submitted that the Commission should require the companies to file imputation test results on both an individual company basis and a Stentor-wide basis, to show that their retail rates for the Dialed Number Identifier (DNI) feature cover the cost of the underlying DNTC feature and all other relevant costs. AT&T Canada LDS also submitted that the companies should be required to include the DNTC rates in all future imputation tests performed for the Advantage Toll-Free service.

6. AT&T Canada LDS requested that the companies be required to state on the public record all assumptions that are used in their analyses.

7. Stentor noted that the use of an all-carriers approach means that a Stentor Operating Company should be subject to the same rates as its competitors, and does not alter the fact that there are differences between the companies. Stentor stated that the differences in the companies' monthly equivalent cost estimates per DNTC line terminations are due to the variations between the development costs of each company and the expected demand in each company's territory over the study period. For example, the cost per unit of demand could vary significantly based on whether or not software upgrades to a company's switches were required in order to permit DNTC implementation.

8. With respect to the assumptions used in the companies' analyses, Stentor stated that disclosure of demand and cost information would provide current and potential competitors with valuable service-specific information associated with the offering of DNTC service functionality, permitting them to establish more effective business and marketing strategies, thereby prejudicing the companies' competitive positions and causing specific direct harm to the companies.

9. With respect to the imputation test, Stentor noted that Telecom Decision CRTC 94-19 prescribed that an imputation test is required for each service. According to Stentor, as DNI is a feature within the Advantage Toll-Free service, there is no requirement to file an imputation test specific to DNI as suggested by AT&T Canada LDS. Stentor noted, that once the DNTC component is approved, it would be included in future imputation tests, if causal to the service in question.

10. In considering requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed, the Commission is governed by the provisions of sections 38 and 39 of the Telecommunications Act and section 19 of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure. In applying these provisions to the requests in question, the Commission has endeavoured to be consistent with its general philosophy governing requests for disclosure as it has evolved out of past CRTC decisions. In each case, the Commission has weighed the public interest in disclosure against the specific direct harm, if any, likely to result from disclosure.

11. Generally, the Commission's policy is not to require the release of service-specific costs and revenues for competitive services. While in the present case, DNTC is a Utility Segment service, the information in question relates to competitive service demand, the release of which would be harmful to the telephone companies.

12. The Commission considers, consistent with previous determinations, that the specific direct harm related to the release of the requested DNTC service specific information outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

13. The Commission has reviewed the economic studies filed by the companies and is satisfied that the rates were developed appropriately under an all carriers approach. The Commission further notes that the proposed DNTC rates are applied to both the companies and the competitors.

14. The Commission also agrees with Stentor that the DNTC rate component is appropriately included in an imputation test applied at the service level and not for the DNI feature.

15. In light of the foregoing, the Commission approves the companies' applications, effective 5 August 1997.

16. The request of AT&T Canada LDS for disclosure of economic information related to the tariff filings is denied.

Laura M. Talbot-Allan
Secretary General

This document is available in alternative format upon request.