|
|
|
Ottawa, 19 October 1998
|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 98-1034
|
|
On 24 June 1998, Metronet Communications Group Inc. (Metronet) filed an application under Tariff Notice (TN) 3 for approval of various revisions to its General Tariff. On 10 July 1998, Metronet filed an application under TN 4 for approval of tariff revisions pertaining to its proposed entry in the Manitoba and Edmonton markets and for interconnection with interexchange carriers (IXCs).
|
|
File Nos.: Tariff Notices 3 and 4
|
1.In TN 3, Metronet sought to respond to comments made by parties regarding TNs 1 and 2 and to comply with Telecom Order CRTC 97-1964 and the Commission's letter dated 3 June 1998 regarding Vidéotron Télécom ltée - TN 3. Metronet also proposed to correct several typographical errors, remove irrelevant definitions, and reflect rates that had been approved by the Commission.
|
|
2.Comments were received from Stentor Resource Centre Inc. (Stentor) on 24 July 1998 regarding TN 3 and on 26 August 1998 regarding TN 4. Metronet filed reply comments on 1 September 1998.
|
|
3.The Commission notes that while Metronet objected to the lateness of Stentor's comments, it nevertheless indicated that it was generally prepared to make changes, if the Commission saw fit.
|
|
4.In TN 3, Metronet proposed to add a provision to its General Terms and Conditions indicating that the rates and charges contained in its General Tariff represent the maximum amount payable.
|
5.The Commission considers that this provision is unacceptable in that it would apply to all rates in Metronet's General Tariff, including contribution rates. The Commission notes that in Local Competition, Telecom Decision CRTC 97-8, 1 May 1997 (Decision 97-8), it concluded that the contribution rates would be frozen for all the Stentor companies, except TELUS Communications Inc., at the going-in rates, effective 1 January 1998, for the price cap period. Competitive local exchange carriers (CLECS) are required to charge contribution rates which are the same as those charged by the Stentor companies.
|
|
6.Accordingly, the Commission considers that the provision indicating that the rates and charges contained in Metronet's General Tariff represent the maximum amount payable should be removed from its General Tariff.
|
|
7.The Commission agrees with Stentor that Metronet's 9-1-1 tariff ascribes to itself responsibilities that are properly those of an incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC).
|
|
8.The Commission also agrees with Stentor that the definition of the Street Address Guide in Metronet's 9-1-1 tariff should mirror that which is included in the 9-1-1 interconnection agreement.
|
|
9.Metronet proposed to classify Canada-U.S. Circuits and Overseas Access Circuits under Interconnecting Circuits.
|
|
10.The Commission agrees with Stentor that Canada-U.S. Circuits and Overseas Access Circuits do not qualify as interconnecting circuits as per the definition in Item 101 of Metronet's General Tariff.
|
|
11.Metronet's proposed tariff states that the company will not be responsible for the remission of contribution on Overseas Access Circuits located in its operating territory, used by a Stentor operating company.
|
12.The Commission considers that this statement should be deleted as it conflicts with its determinations regarding the collection of contribution on international traffic set out in Regulatory Regime for the Provision of International Telecommunications Services, Telecom Decision CRTC 98-17, 1 October 1998 (Decision 98-17).
|
|
13.With regard to contribution charges on Canada-U.S. Circuits, Metronet's proposed wording mirrors that of the ILECs' tariffs.
|
|
14.The Commission notes that the Central Fund Administration Agreement sets out the responsibilities of both the ILECs and CLECs with respect to the collection of contribution.
|
|
15.The Commission considers that Metronet's proposed wording with regard to contribution charges on Canada-U.S. Circuits incorrectly implies that Metronet is the default party to whom IXCs must report contribution-eligible Canada-U.S. Circuits and remit associated contribution amounts.
|
|
16.The Commission considers that Metronet should adopt wording consistent with the terms of the Central Fund Administration Agreement.
|
|
17.Metronet's proposed tariff states that the company will not be responsible for the collection or remission of contribution on the Stentor operating company's Canada-U.S. circuits which use a border crossing point located in its operating territory.
|
|
18.The Commission considers that this statement should be deleted as it also conflicts with its determinations regarding the collection and remission of contribution on international traffic set out in Decision 98-17.
|
|
19.The Commission notes that the monthly contribution charges for each Canada-U.S. circuit provided for Manitoba in Metronet's tariff should be corrected as they do not correspond to those approved for MTS Communications Inc.
|
|
20.The Commission agrees with Stentor that Metronet's tariff as it pertains to contribution exemptions fails to reflect that different contribution exemptions apply to interconnecting circuits, Canada-U.S. circuits and overseas access circuits.
|
|
21.The Commission is of the view that Metronet's tariff should reflect the different contribution exemption rules that apply to interconnecting circuits, Canada-U.S. circuits and overseas access circuits.
|
|
22.In reply to Stentor's comments that Metronet's tariff should be amended as the company does not offer line-side access, Metronet proposed to remove any restrictions on line-side access by IXCs.
|
|
23.Metronet indicated that it was prepared to adopt the wording in the ILECs' Carrier Access Tariffs with respect to contribution on line-side access circuits.
|
|
24.The Commission considers that Metronet's tariff should include terms and conditions, with regard to contribution on line-side access circuits that are equivalent to those in the ILECs' tariffs.
|
|
25.Stentor noted that Metronet's proposed tariff does not address the terms and conditions of interconnection with resellers that provide long distance services.
|
|
26.The Commission notes that in Decision 97-8, it required that CLECs provide equal access to all interexchange providers at terms and conditions that are equivalent to the terms and conditions in the ILECs' tariffs.
|
27.The Commission also notes that in Trunk-Side Access by Resellers to the Public Switched Telephone Network, Telecom Decision CRTC 93-8, 23 July 1993, it determined that resellers may use trunk-side access facilities.
|
|
28.The Commission accordingly finds that CLECs must provide trunk-side equal access facilities to resellers that request them.
|
|
29.The Commission is of the view that Metronet's tariff should allow resellers that provide long distance service access to trunk-side interconnection facilities.
|
|
30.In light of the foregoing, the Commission orders that Metronet TN 3 and TN 4 are granted interim approval with the following modifications:
|
|
(1) (a) Item 102 (f) is to be deleted;
|
|
(b) remove the word "Metronet," from Items 503.4.1.3, 504.4.1 (c), and 505.4.1 (b);
|
|
(c) replace the definition of the Street Address Guide given in Item 504.1 by the following "A list that contains street names, number ranges, and extended municipality name within Metronet's 9-1-1 serving area.";
|
|
(d) remove Overseas Access Circuits, Canada-U.S. Circuits and Contribution Exemptions from the heading "Interconnecting Circuits with Trunk-Side Access" (Item 301);
|
|
(e) in Item 301.3 (b), delete the statement "Metronet will not be responsible for the remission of contribution on Overseas Access Circuits located in the Company's operating territory, used by a Stentor Operating company.";
|
|
(f) replace the wording in Items 301.3 (c) and (d) with the following: "If the IXC is affiliated with a LEC, or has a preferred IXC relationship with a LEC as defined in the Central Fund Administration Agreement, the IXC may transact its contribution obligations for its Canada-U.S. circuits with that LEC instead of with the Stentor Operating Company(ies). In such cases, advice of such election must be provided in writing to the Company and to the applicable Stentor Operating Company(ies). When the IXC elects to transact its contribution obligations for its Canada-U.S. circuits with the Company, the IXC will advise the Company, on a monthly basis, of the number of Canada-U.S. circuits and remit the applicable contribution payment to the Company. For each of the IXC's Canada-U.S. circuits which uses a border crossing point located in the following provinces, the monthly contribution charge specified below applies.";
|
|
(g) the contribution charge, on each Canada-U.S. circuit, effective 1 January 1998 and 1 July 1998 are to be shown as $67.00 and $158.00, respectively; and
|
|
(h) Tariff Item 301.3 (e) is to accurately reflect the different contribution exemption rules that apply to interconnecting circuits with trunk-side access, overseas access circuits and Canada-U.S. circuits.
|
|
(2) The General Tariff is to include terms and conditions related to the provision of interconnecting circuits associated with line-side access to IXCs that are equivalent to those in the ILECs' tariffs. (This is to include terms and conditions with respect to contribution exemptions for line-side access).
|
|
(3) The General Tariff is to include terms and conditions related to the provision of trunk-side interconnection to long distance resellers that are equivalent to those in the ILECs' tariffs.
|
|
(4) Metronet is to issue revised tariff pages within 10 days of the date of this Order incorporating the changes set out above.
|
|
Secretary General
|
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request.
|
|
|