ARCHIVED - Telecom - Commission Letter - 8622-C12-10/00 - Public Notices CRTC2000-107 & 2000-107-1 - O.N.Tel - Implementation of toll competition andrelated matters - Requests for disclosure

Letter

Ottawa, 15 February 2001

BY TELECOPIER

To: Interested Parties

Re: Public Notices CRTC 2000-107 & 2000-107-1 - O.N.Tel - Implementation of toll competition and related matters - Requests for disclosure

This letter deals with requests for further responses to interrogatories and for disclosure of information filed under claim of confidence by a number of parties to the above-noted proceeding.

Requests were filed by Bell Canada (Bell), and by Northern Telephone Limited and the Cochrane Public Utilities Commission (collectively "The Companies").

Responses to requests were received from O.N.Telecom.

Requests for public disclosure are addressed in Part I below and in Attachment 1 to this letter, while requests for further responses are addressed in Part II and Attachment 2.

Unless otherwise expressly indicated in Attachments 1 or 2, relevant parties are to file with the Commission all information to be provided pursuant to this letter by Monday, 19 February 2001, serving copies on all interested parties by the same date. This material should be received, and not merely sent, by that date.

This letter reflects the Commission's objective of ensuring that all parties have the benefit of the maximum amount of information placed on the public record at the earliest appropriate stage, in order to facilitate a more efficient and effective proceeding.

Part I - Requests for Public Disclosure

Requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed are assessed in light of sections 38 and 39 of the Telecommunications Act and section 19 of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the Rules). In the case of each request, the public interest in disclosure is weighed against the specific direct harm, if any, likely to result from disclosure. In doing so, a number of factors are taken into account, including the following.

The degree of competition that exists in a particular market is an important consideration in assessing requests for disclosure. All things being equal, the greater the degree of competition in a particular market, the greater the specific harm that could be expected to result from disclosure.

Another factor in assessing the extent of harm is the expected usefulness of the information at issue to parties in furthering their competitive position. In this regard, an important consideration is the degree to which the information at issue is disaggregated. Generally speaking, the more aggregated the information, the less the likelihood that harm will flow from its disclosure.

The expectation that specific direct harm might result from disclosure is not, by itself, sufficient to justify maintaining a claim of confidentiality. In certain circumstances, substantial harm from disclosure may still be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure.

Finally, the treatment of confidentiality requests should not be taken as an indication of the manner in which such matters would be dealt with in the future, in different circumstances.

Having regard to the considerations set out above, the information subject to a claim of confidence in the interrogatories listed in Attachment 1 is to be placed on the public record of this proceeding. In each case where full or partial disclosure is to occur, it is considered that the specific direct harm likely to be caused by disclosure would not outweigh the public interest in disclosure.

Accordingly, the party in question is to place on the public record all of the information listed in Attachment 1 that was subject to a claim of confidentiality.

Part II - Requests for Further Responses

With regard to requests for further responses, the requirements of subsection 18(2) of the Rules apply. The general principles enunciated by the Commission in past proceedings include the following:

The major consideration is the relevance of the information requested to the matter at issue.

The availability of the information requested is also a factor, which is balanced against the relevance of the information. If the provision of the information sought would require an effort disproportionate to the probative value of the information itself, further responses will not be required.

Another factor considered is the extent to which an interrogatory answer is responsive to the interrogatory as it was originally asked.

Generally, parties are not required to provide further responses to requests for further information from a party that did not ask the original interrogatory. In the present case, some information that is needed for dealing with the questions in issue in the proceeding has not been provided in response to Commission interrogatories; it is this information that is addressed in Attachment 2.

Having regard to all of the above considerations, the parties in question are to provide further responses to the extent set out in Attachment 2 to this letter.

This letter will be posted on the CRTC's web site in both official languages.

Yours sincerely,

Shirley Soehn
Executive Director
Telcommunications

Attachments

Attachment 1

CONFIDENTIALITIES

(Information to be filed and served by 19 February 2001)

O.N.Telcom's submission, Figure 2

Disclose Figure 2.

O.N.Telcom's submission, Figure 3

Disclose Figure 3.

O.N.Telcom's Submission Appendix 1, Table 1

Disclose the % toll voice costs assigned to the Utility SWAG BSC for 2002.

O.N.Telcom's Submission Appendix 1, Table 2

Disclose the Company ROR (%) and the Competitive ROR (%) for each scenario for the years 2001 and 2002.

O.N.Telcom(CRTC)30Nov00-200

Disclose total contribution payments paid or forecast to be paid for 1999 to 2002 as well as the estimate of total contribution to be paid in 2002 based on the CCM decision.

O.N.Telcom(CRTC)30Nov00-400 a)

Disclose response for all scenarios for the years 1999 to 2002.

O.N.Telcom(CRTC)30Nov00-401 b)

Disclose the number of minutes, gross payments, CAT flowthrough and O.N.Telcom's net settlement in total by year for each of the years 1999 to 2001.

O.N.Telcom(CRTC)30Nov00-401 c)

Disclose the revenues associated with the transport charge for the traffic transiting the North Bay/Timmins corridor.

O.N.Telcom(CRTC)30Nov00-403c) Attachment 2

Disclose Attachment 2 of the response (with the exception of the Description).

Attachment 2

DEFICIENCIES

(Information to be filed and served by 19 February 2001)

O.N.Telcom

O.N.Telcom(CRTC)30Nov00-400

Provide the response to part a) i) of this interrogatory;

Provide the response to parts a) ii) through v) for the following scenarios:

For 2001 - without rate increases;

For 2002 - with rate increases, without SWAG in access

- without rate increases, with SWAG in access

- without rate increses, without SWAG in access;

(As indicated in Attachment 1, the information to be provided under part a) to this interrogatory should be placed on the public file.) and

Provide the response to part b) of this interrogatory.

O.N.Telcom(CRTC)30Nov00-406

File a copy of the unapproved Annual Report for 1999. For the year 2000, provide the unapproved Annual Report when available.

O.N.Telcom(CRTC)30Nov00-501

Provide copies of the agreements referred to in the company's response.

Northern Telephone Limited and Cochrane Public Utilities Commission - collectively "The Companies"

The Companies(CRTC)30Nov00-501

Provide copies of the agreements referred to in The Companies' response.