ARCHIVED -  Telecom Public Notice CRTC 97-6

Telecom Public Notice

Ottawa, 19 February 1997

Telecom Public Notice CRTC 97-6

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR ABITIBI-PRICE INC. AND COCHRANE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

I INTRODUCTION

On 26 April 1994, as a result of the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Attorney-General of Quebec et al. v. Téléphone Guèvremont Inc., the independent telephone companies in Canada were brought under the Commission's jurisdiction.

In Regulatory Framework for the Independent Telephone Companies in Quebec and Ontario (Except Ontario Northland Transportation Commission, Québec-Téléphone and Télébec ltée), Telecom Decision CRTC 96-6, 7 August 1996 (Decision 96-6), the Commission recognized the unique circumstances facing Abitibi-Price Inc. (Abitibi-Price) and Cochrane Public Utilities Commission (Cochrane), and accepted the continuation of the current method of regulation for Abitibi-Price and Cochrane i.e., the traditional settlement agreement between those companies and Ontario Northland Transportation Commission (the telecommunications operating division of which is now known as O.N. Tel).

The Commission is of the preliminary view that enough time has elapsed since the issuance of Decision 96-6 in order for Abitibi-Price and Cochrane to have separated telephone company accounting records from their separate divisions. The Commission is also of the preliminary view that the regulatory framework established for the Ontario independent telephone companies in Decision 96-6 could apply to Abitibi-Price and Cochrane as of 1 January 1998 (including a $2.00 increase in local rates effective 1 January 1998 and 1999 respectively).

The Commission hereby initiates a proceeding to deal with the regulatory framework for Abitibi-Price and Cochrane (referred to hereafter as the companies).

The Commission, as it stated in Regulatory Framework for the Independent Telephone Companies in Quebec and Ontario (Except Ontario Northland Transportation Commission), Telecom Public Notice CRTC 95-15, 23 March 1995, is mindful of the workload that regulation may impose on smaller independents. In seeking an appropriate regulatory framework for the companies, it is guided by the desire to impose the minimum burden necessary while properly fulfilling its mandate under the Telecommunications Act (the Act).

II PROCEDURE

1. O.N. Tel is made party to this proceeding.

2. Parties wishing to participate in this proceeding must notify the Commission of their intention to do so identifying which company's process they wish to participate in by writing to Mr. Allan J. Darling, Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, fax: (819) 953-0795, by 21 March 1997. The Commission will issue a complete list of parties and their mailing addresses shortly thereafter.

3. Parties wishing to comment in this proceeding, but who do not wish to participate otherwise, may do so by writing to the Commission by 21 April 1997. Copies of any such letters will be placed on the public record.

4. By letter to be issued by 21 February 1997, the Commission has addressed interrogatories to the respective companies. The companies are directed to file responses with the Commission serving copies on respective interested parties by 21 April 1997.

5. The companies are directed to indicate by 21 April 1997 why any part of the framework set out in Decision 96-6 should not apply to them. If there are particular variations from the recommended framework that may be more appropriate, each respective company should identify them, provide reasons for its choices and describe how the variations would be applied. The companies are to serve copies on respective interested parties.

6. Interested parties proposing models other than that outlined in Decision 96-6 are to explain by 21 April 1997 what unique circumstances would justify these differences, and, how their model would be consistent with the Commission's mandate under the Act serving copies on respective interested parties.

7. Interested parties may address interrogatories to either or both of the companies or to any parties submitting a model under step 6 above. Any such interrogatories must be filed with the Commission and served on the respective company by 20 May 1997. The companies are directed to file responses with the Commission serving copies on respective interested parties by 19 June 1997.

8. Requests by interested 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 the respective company by 26 June 1997.

9. Written responses by the companies to requests for further responses and for public disclosure must be filed with the Commission and served on the interested party making the request by 3 July 1997.

10. The Commission will issue a determination with respect to requests for further responses and for disclosure as soon as possible.

11. Interested parties may file comments with the Commission, serving copies on all other parties, by 24 July 1997.

12. Interested parties may file replies with the Commission to any comments, serving copies on all other parties, by 5 August 1997.

13. 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. In addition to hard copy filings, parties are encouraged to file with the Commission electronic versions of their submissions in accordance with the Commission's Interim Telecom Guidelines for the Handling of Machine-Readable Files, dated 30 November 1995. The Commission's Internet email address for electronically filed documents is public.telecom@crtc.gc.ca. Electronically filed documents can be accessed at the Commission's Internet site at http://www.crtc.gc.ca.

Allan J. Darling
Secretary General

AVI97-6_0