ARCHIVED - Public Notice CRTC 2001-69

Public Notice CRTC 2001-69

Ottawa, 14 June 2001

Implementation of competition in the local exchange and local payphone markets in the territories of Télébec and TELUS (Québec)

Reference: 8622-C12-14/01

The Commission initiates a proceeding to establish the rates in the territories of Télébec and TELUS (Québec), for local interconnection and network component unbundling, and for local payphone access.

1.

In Telecom Decision CRTC 97-8, Local competition, dated 1 May 1997, the Commission allowed former Stentor member companies to classify the local loops of incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) by "rate band". Those bands are the basis for the calculation of costs used to support the rate that a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) pays to an ILEC for using its local loop.

2.

The Commission opted for the bill and keep method to compensate for the exchange of traffic between two local exchange carriers (LECs) within the exchange of a specific ILEC. However, the Commission was of the opinion that in cases where it could be demonstrated that traffic between LECs was not balanced for a significant period of time, mutual compensation should be implemented and directed the ILECs to file rates to that effect.

3.

The Commission noted that in the event that two interconnecting LECs serve different serving areas, bill and keep would be inappropriate. However, the Commission considered it reasonable that CLECs assume the cost for traffic interexchanged in one exchange and terminated in another. The Commission required the ILECs to provide for delivery of such traffic, by receiving the traffic from the originating CLEC and switching it to the ILEC customer in the terminating exchange, and directed them to file rates to that effect.

4.

The Commission also determined in that decision that ILECs must provide transiting services and therefore directed them to file rates for transiting traffic and CCS7 messages CLEC to CLEC, CLEC to wireless service providers and CLEC to long-distance carrier.

5.

Finally, the Commission established a portable subsidy mechanism in which contribution would be provided to any LEC that serves a subsidized customer. The allocation of the subsidy for each band was based on the number of local residential customers of all LECs, and on the cost of providing local residential service plus the related optional services, minus the ILEC's revenues.

6.

In Telecom Decision CRTC 98-8, Local pay telephone competition, dated 30 June 1998, the Commission ordered ILECs to file proposed pay telephone access tariffs incorporating unique requirements such as the inclusion of the pay telephone number in the billed number screening database, associated with the provision of pay telephone service, together with a standard service agreement. The tariffs were to refer to service agreements that include, as part of the terms of service, the mandated consumer safeguards established in that decision.

7.

In Telecom Decision, CRTC 98-22, Final rates for unbundled local network components, dated 30 November 1998, the Commission established final rates for unbundled local network components that were approved on an interim basis in Decision 97-8. The decision reflected several incurred cost adjustments to remove certain cost inconsistencies among ILECs, and modifications to certain cost methods and assumptions to determine the ILECs' unbundled loop costs by rate band.

8.

In Telecom Decision CRTC 99-16, Telephone service to high-cost serving areas, dated 19 October 1999, the Commission stated that it would provide ILECs with an opportunity to restructure their rate bands to better identify high-cost areas.

9.

In Decision CRTC 2001-238, Restructured bands, revised loop rates and related issues, dated 27 April 2001, the Commission approved revised rates for ILECs' unbundled local loops. The decision also addressed the costs to be used for establishing the subsidy required under the national subsidy mechanism approved by the Commission in Decision CRTC 2000-745, Changes to the contribution regime, dated 30 November 2000.

10.

In Decision 2001-238, the Commission adopted a uniform approach to identify high-cost serving areas in the ex-Stentor member companies' territories, and a more consistent set of costing methodologies by which those carriers will determine the costs for the loop and residential primary exchange services.

11.

In Telecom Decision CRTC 96-5, Regulatory framework for Québec-Téléphone and Télébec ltée, dated 7 August 1996, the Commission expressed the preliminary view that local competition should be allowed in the territories of Québec-Téléphone and Télébec. In that decision, the Commission stated its intention to issue a public notice to determine the applicability, in the territories of Québec-Téléphone and Télébec, of the terms and conditions for local competition established for Stentor member telephone companies.

12.

In Public Notice CRTC 2001-24, Competition in the local exchange and local payphone markets in the territories of Québec-Téléphone and Télébec ltée, dated 9 February 2001, the Commission determined that it is in the public interest to implement competition in the local exchange service and local payphone markets in the territories of Québec-Téléphone and Télébec. The Commission expressed its preliminary view that such competition should begin in 2002.

13.

In PN 2001-24, the Commission invited Québec-Téléphone and Télébec to comment on the relevance and applicability, in their respective service territory, of the terms approved by Commission letters, orders and decisions to implement competition in the local exchange and local payphone markets in the territories of the former Stentor member companies.

14.

In their evidence, filed in this proceeding, dated 23 March 2001, Télébec and TELUS (Québec) stated that they agreed in principle that the terms established to implement local competition in the territories of the former Stentor member companies should apply to them.

15.

In Decision 99-16, the Commission also noted the concern of various parties that it costs more to provide single-line business service in high-cost areas than other regions. Commenting parties proposed that a "high-cost subsidy" be provided for those lines.

Procedure and further details

16.

Accordingly, the Commission initiates this proceeding to examine issues relating to the implementation of local competition and related issues. The Commission invites interested parties to participate in this proceeding following the procedure set out below.

17.

Télébec and TELUS (Québec) are made parties to this proceeding.

18.

Other parties wishing to participate in this proceeding must notify the Commission of their intention to do so by 16 July 2001 to the Secretary General, by mail at CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2; by fax at (819) 953-0795 or by email at procedure@crtc.gc.ca. They are to indicate in the notice their email address, where available. If parties do not have access to the Internet, they are to indicate in their notice whether they wish to receive disk versions or hard copy filings. The Commission will issue, as soon as possible after the registration date, a complete list of interested parties and their mailing address (including their email address, if available), identifying those parties who wish to receive disk versions.

19.

Télébec and TELUS (Québec) are directed to file submissions, with detailed supporting assumptions and calculations, with the Commission by 12 September 2001, serving copies on all interested parties.

20.

These submissions are to contain:

i) other local network components to be unbundled pursuant to decisions 97-8 and 98-22;

ii) the delivery of traffic from one CLEC to a customer of the carrier located within the same exchange;

iii) the delivery of traffic from one CLEC to a customer of the carrier located in another exchange, but within the toll-free calling area of the originating exchange;

iv) transit services, for traffic and for signalling, CLEC to CLEC, CLEC to wireless service providers, and CLEC to long-distance service providers; and

v) access lines to payphone services, and a standard service agreement. The tariffs are to make reference to service agreements which include as part of the terms of service, the mandated consumer safeguards established in Decision 98-8;

21.

The Commission will address interrogatories to Télébec and TELUS (Québec) by 11 October 2001.

22.

Interested parties may also address interrogatories to Télébec and TELUS (Québec), filing a copy with the Commission, by 11 October 2001.

23.

Responses to those interrogatories are to be filed with the Commission and served on all parties by 27 November 2001.

24.

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 in each case the reasons for disclosure, must be filed with the Commission and served on Télébec and TELUS (Québec) by 4 December 2001.

25.

Télébec and TELUS (Québec) may file written responses to requests for further responses to interrogatories and requests for public disclosure, serving copies on all parties requesting further responses to interrogatories and public disclosure by 11 December 2001.

26.

The requests for further information and for public disclosure will be disposed of as soon as possible. Information to be provided must be filed with the Commission and served on all parties by 15 January 2002.

27.

The Commission will address interrogatories to Télébec and TELUS (Québec) by 4 February 2002.

28.

Responses to interrogatories must be filed with the Commission and served on all parties by 7 March 2002.

29.

All parties may file comments with the Commission, serving a copy on all other parties, by 8 April 2002.

30.

All parties may file comments in response with the Commission, serving copies on all other parties, by 8 May 2002.

31.

Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.

32.

Parties wishing to file electronic versions of their comments can do so by email at the address shown above, or on diskette.

33.

The electronic version should be in the HTML format. As an alternative, those making submissions may use "Microsoft Word" for text and "Microsoft Excel" for spreadsheets.

34.

Please number each paragraph of your submission. In addition, please enter the line ***End of document*** following the last paragraph. This will help the Commission verify that the document has not been damaged during transmission.

35.

The Commission will make submissions filed in electronic form available on its web site at www.crtc.gc.ca in the official language and format in which they are submitted. This will make it easier for members of the public to consult the documents.

36.

The Commission also encourages interested parties to monitor the public examination file (and/or the Commission's web site) for additional information that they may find useful when preparing their submissions.

37.

Submissions may be examined or will be made available promptly upon request at the CRTC offices during normal business hours:

Central Building
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
1 Promenade du Portage, Room G-5
Hull, Quebec K1A 0N2
Tel: (819) 997-2429 - TDD: 994-0423
Fax: (819) 994-0218

405 de Maisonneuve Blvd. East
2^nd Floor, Suite B2300
Montréal, Quebec H2L 4J5
Tel: (514) 283-6607 - TDD: 283-8316
Fax: (514) 283-3689

Secretary General

This document is available in alternative format upon request and may also be examined at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca