ARCHIVED - Telecom Order CRTC 99-254
This page has been archived on the Web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 Order |
|
|
Ottawa, 19 March 1999 |
|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 99-254 |
|
|
On 13 October 1998, Bell Canada (Bell) filed Tariff Notice (TN) 6294 proposing to introduce Customer Direct Information Delivery (CDID) service (Item B-824(a) in the company's Special Facilities Tariff). TN 6294 was filed in response to Telecom Order CRTC 98-853 (Order 98-853), issued 26 August 1998. London Telecom Network Inc. (London Telecom) and Distributel Communications Limited (Distributel) intervened. CDID is a real-time network management system that Bell had offered, to large customers of its network, free of charge on a non-tariffed basis. In Order 98-853, the Commission concluded that CDID is a telecommunications service, and must be offered on a tariffed basis to avoid the potential for unjust discrimination or undue preference. |
|
|
File No.: TN 6294 |
|
|
1.Bell proposed to charge all customers for this service on a going-forward basis. Bell also indicated that it intends to waive the proposed service charge for a period of sixty days from the date of approval of the tariff, for both existing customers of this service who elect to continue the service under the new proposal, and new customers to this service. Bell further stated that this service was not year 2000 compatible, and would therefore not be offered beyond 31 December 1999. |
|
|
2.London Telecom's intervention raised a number of concerns about Bell's methodology of setting the proposed rates and stated that the pricing of the service should be cost-based. |
|
|
3.In its submissions, Distributel also questioned the rate proposed by Bell. Distributel also submitted that, since Bell had been providing CDID service free to a number of customers, and since the Commission found this to be a breach of the Telecommunications Act in Order 98-853, Bell should be required to waive the proposed monthly rate for CDID service to Distributel. |
|
|
4.Bell replied that existing customers of CDID service were able to assist the company in diagnostics and correction of network difficulties, resulting in significant cost savings to the company. No such savings would be realized by Bell if CDID were used by customers to assist in managing a competitor's network. |
|
|
5.The Commission notes that in Order 98-853, Bell was directed to file tariffs for CDID service. The Commission further notes that the proposed rates in TN 6294 are supported by a cost study. |
|
|
6.The Commission considers that the proposed rates are reasonable for an optional service in the uncapped category of services. |
|
|
7.In view of the above, the Commission approves Bell's application effective the date of this Order. |
|
|
Secretary General |
|
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request and may also be viewed at the following Internet site: www.crtc.gc.ca |
|
|
|
- Date modified: