ARCHIVED - Telecom - Commission Letter - 8740-C6-007/01 - 8740-R4-011/01 -8740-S9-004/01 - 8740-V3-008/01 - Cable Third Party Access - Point ofInterconnection tariffs - Cogeco TN 7, Rogers TN 11, Shaw TN 4, Vidéotron TN8 - Requests for disclosure and for further
This page has been archived on the Web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.
|
Ottawa, 16 January 2002
Files Nos: 8740-C6-0007/01 By Telecopier To: Distribution List (attached) Re: Cable Third Party Access - Point of Interconnection tariffs - Cogeco TN 7, Rogers TN 11, Shaw TN 4, Vidéotron TN 8 - Requests for disclosure and for further responses to interrogatories and revised procedure dates This letter deals with requests for further responses to interrogatories and for disclosure of information filed under claim of confidence by parties to the above-noted proceeding. Requests for disclosure or for further responses to interrogatories were received from the Coalition for Better Third Party Access (CBTPA) and the Independent Members of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers (IMCAIP). Responses to these requests were received from the Canadian Cable Television Association on behalf of Rogers Communications Inc., Shaw Cablesystems GP, and Cogeco Cable Inc., as well as from Vidéotron ltée. 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, relevant parties are to file with the Commission all information to be provided pursuant to this letter by 6 February 2002, 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 direct 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, unless otherwise expressly indicated in Attachment 1, 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 considerations. 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. 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. These include Cogeco(CRTC)7Sept01 - 114(c) and (d) which was not the subject of a specific request but in respect of which it is considered a full response would assist the Commission. Unless otherwise indicated, these responses are to be provided on the public record. Commission Interrogatories In order to complete the record, Commission staff have today issued supplementary interrogatories to the cable companies. The cable companies are to file with the Commission their responses to the supplementary Commission staff interrogatories, serving copies on interveners, by 6 February 2002. Revised Procedure Dates Set out below is the process addressing the remainder of this proceeding. Interveners may file comments, serving a copy on the cable companies, by 27 February 2002. The cable companies may file replies, serving a copy on the interveners, by 11 March 2002. Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be received, not merely sent, by that date. Yours sincerely,
Shirley Soehn Attachments
c.c.: Michael Walker, CRTC, (819) 994-4716 Distribution List
Christian Jolivet
Édouard Trépanier
Dale Butler
Ken Engelhart DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Cogeco(IMCAIP)7Sept01-02
Cogeco(CBTPA)7Sept01 - 47, 48,49
Videotron(CBTPA)07Sept01-119
Rogers(CRTC)7Sept01 - 106
FURTHER RESPONSES TO Interrogatories
Cogeco(CBTPA)7Sept01 - 66
Cogeco(CRTC)7Sept01 - 107(a)
Cogeco(CRTC)7Sept01 - 114(c)and (d) |
- Date modified: