ARCHIVED - Telecom - Commission Letter - 8661-C12-08/01 - CRTC to review revisedloop and primary exchange service cost filings Public Notice CRTC 2001-119 -Disclosure of Confidential Information

File No: 2001.8661.C12.08

Ottawa, 23 August 2002

BY TELECOPIER

To: Interested Parties to PN 2001-119

Re: CRTC to review revised loop and primary exchange service cost filings Public Notice CRTC 2001-119 - Disclosure of Confidential Information

This letter deals with requests for the disclosure of information that was submitted under claim of confidence by Aliant Telecom Inc. (Aliant), Bell Canada, and MTS Communications Inc. (MTS) (collectively, the Companies), Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel), and TELUS Communications Inc. (TCI) in their submissions filed on 28 June 2002 pursuant to CRTC to review revised loop and primary exchange service cost filings, Public Notice CRTC 2001-119, 30 November 2001 (PN 2001-119).

On 18 July 2002, AT&T Canada Corp on behalf of itself and AT&T Canada Telecom Services Company, Call-Net Enterprises Inc., Rogers Wireless Inc. and Canadian Cable Television Association (collectively, the Competitors) filed requests for disclosure of certain information submitted in confidence by the Companies, SaskTel, and TCI. By letter dated 19 July 2002, the Consumers' Association of Canada, the National Anti-Poverty Organization, and l'Union des consommateurs supported the requests made by the Competitors.

The Companies, TCI, and SaskTel provided their replies in letters dated 2 August 2002.

Parties are to file with the Commission all information to be provided pursuant to this letter by Thursday, 5 September 2002, serving copies on 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 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.

Requests for Public Disclosure

Overall arguments opposing further disclosure

The ILECs noted that the level of information disclosure provided in their initial submissions was in most cases consistent with that provided in the proceeding initiated by Restructured Bands, revised local loop rates and related issues, Public Notice CRTC 2000-27, 18 February 2000 (PN 2000-27).

TCI further submitted that the scope of competition has grown rather than diminished since PN 2000-27, so that public release of the information at issue would result in a potentially greater benefit to the competitors and accordingly, a potentially greater harm to the ILECs.

SaskTel submitted that the information regarding its bands A and B would represent very distinct and readily identifiable locations, the Regina and Saskatoon exchange areas.

Factors in the assessment of 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.

Further, 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.

Conclusion

The information sought pursuant to the requests for disclosure by the Competitors is relevant to the issue of the appropriate levels of loop and PES costs, the key issues being examined in this processing. As the Competitors noted, the cost information filed in this proceeding would lead to significant increases in the loop prices and would cause the current revenue percent charge to more than double. It is critical to this proceeding that the cost justification filed be properly examined and tested. The disclosure of the information to be provided pursuant to this letter will afford parties a meaningful opportunity to examine the ILECs' proposals in this proceeding and will ensure that a full and complete record is produced. Further, it is noted that certain detailed cost inputs in respect of which disclosure was sought is comparable to cost information that was recently filed on the public record by Télébec ltée in the proceeding initiated by Implementation of competition in the local exchange and local payphone markets in the territories of Télébec and TELUS (Québec) Public Notice CRTC 2001-69, 14 June 2001.

Having regard to the considerations set out above, the information subject to a claim of confidence listed in the enclosed Attachment 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.

Yours sincerely,

Shirley Soehn
Executive Director,
Telecommunications

Attachment

c.c. Yvan Davidson, CRTC, (819) 953-5414

The Companies

1. The Companies, with reference to the following Appendices, provided to the Commission in confidence:

Bell Canada - Appendix 1 - Attachments 1-3, 5-8, 10-12;
Aliant - Appendix 2.1 - Attachments 1-8;
Aliant - Appendix 2.2 - Attachments 1-8;
Aliant - Appendix 2.3 - Attachments 1-8;
Aliant - Appendix 2.4 - Attachments 1-8;
MTS - Appendix 3 - Attachments 1-10; and
The Companies - Appendix 4 - Attachments 1-2.

  a.  For residential primary exchange service (PES) for bands E, F, and G disclose the following line items:

Capital causal to demand:
- Total Capital causal to demand;
- Outside Plant Equipment; and
- Land, Building & Other.

Expenses causal to demand:
- Total Expenses causal to demand;
- Maintenance; and
- Operating Expenses.

Present Worth of End of Study Value

  b.  For Loop Type A and Loop Type B, for each band disclose the following line items:

Capital causal to demand:
- Outside Plant Equipment; and
- Land, Building & Other.

Expenses causal to demand:
- Maintenance; and
- Operating Expenses.

2. Bell Canada, disclose the derived percentage and dollar impacts, as applicable, associated with Outside Plant Equipment and Maintenance, provided to the Commission in confidence, to be found in paragraphs 3-52 to 3-54 and 3-57.
   
3. Bell Canada, disclose all ILEC-only demand information, provided to the Commission in confidence, for residential primary exchange service for bands E, F, and G, for all years, to be found in Tables 3.2.5-1 and 3.2.5-2.
   
4. Bell Canada, disclose all ILEC-only demand information, provided to the Commission in confidence, for all years, for each band pertaining to Loop Type A to be found in Tables 3.2.5-3 and 3.2.5-4.
   
5. The Companies, disclose all ILEC-only demand information, provided to the Commission in confidence, for each band, for all years, pertaining to Loop Type A and Loop Type B, as applicable, to be found in Appendix 4 - Attachment 4 - Pages 2 of 4 and 4 of 4.
   
6. The Companies, disclose all loop characteristic information, provided to the Commission in confidence, for each band pertaining to Loop Type A and Loop Type B to be found in Appendix 4 - Attachment 5 - Pages 1 to 6.
   
7. The Companies, disclose all installed material cost per metre information, provided to the Commission in confidence, to be found in Appendix 6, Attachments 1 to 5.

   TCI

8. TCI, for residential primary exchange service (PES), for bands E, F, and G, disclose the following line items, provided to the Commission in confidence, to be found in Attachment 4, Pages 1 and 2:

Total Cost per NAS per Month:

- Total Cost per NAS per Month;

Capital:
- Total Capital; and
- Access;

Expenses:
- Total Expenses;
- Maintenance;

Total PWAC ($K):

- Total PWAC;

Capital:
- Total Capital; and
- Access;

Expenses:
- Total Expenses;
- Maintenance;
- Functional Operating Expenses; and
- Other

Present Worth of Demand:

Present Worth of End of Study Value:

Total Cost per NAS per Month:

Access Capital:
- Distribution Equipment;
- Feeder (Non-IDLC) Equipment;
- Feeder (ILEC's IDLC Equipment);
- Feeder (CLEC's IDLC Overlay); and
- Other

Total PWAC ($K):

Access Capital:
- Distribution Equipment;
- Feeder (Non-IDLC) Equipment;
- Feeder (ILEC's IDLC Equipment);
- Feeder (CLEC's IDLC Overlay); and
- Other

Present Worth of Demand:
- ILEC demand
- CLEC demand

• Average impact (percent) of updating the economic and cost increase factors for Alberta and British Columbia (B.C.) - paragraph 39 and footnote 14;
• Impact (dollars) of updated property tax factors on unbundled loop costs in Alberta and B.C. - paragraph 40;
• Impact (percent) of adjustment to B.C. loop costs by using Alberta data - paragraph 47;
• Impact (dollars) of changing MDF cost inclusion - paragraph 58;
• Impact (dollars) of updating estimates for drop costs - paragraph 61;
• Impact (percent) of updated switching equipment costs - paragraph 80;
• Impact (percent) of changing the methodology for calculating Structural Cost Factors ratios - paragraph 51.

  12.  TCI, disclose all ILEC-only demand information, provided to the Commission in confidence, for: 1) each band pertaining to Loop Type A and Loop Type B, and 2) for residential NAS demand information, for bands E, F, and G, to be found in Attachment 2, Pages 1 and 2.

  13.  TCI, disclose all information, provided to the Commission in confidence, for bands E, F, G, and Average to be found in Table 4 - Comparison of Residential PES Costs ($/Month).

  14.  TCI, disclose all loop characteristic information, provided to the Commission in confidence, for each band and the total, pertaining to Loop Type A and Loop Type B to be found in Attachment 1, Pages 1 and 2.

  15.  TCI, disclose all loop characteristic information, provided to the Commission in confidence, for bands E, F and G pertaining to Residential PES service to be found in Attachment 1, Pages 3 and 4.

  16.  TCI, disclose all installed material cost per metre information, provided to the Commission in confidence, to be found in Attachments 5 and 6.

  17.  TCI Attachment 7 - Disclose all Total Subsidy Requirement related information, provided to the Commission in confidence, to be found in the column labelled "2002 Phase II Res. Costs* 1.15 ($/Line/Yr.)" for Bands A, B, C, and D for both AB Band and BC Band.

Capital causal to demand:
- Outside Plant Equipment;
- Land, Building & Other;
- Service Wire and Protection; and
- Decision 2001-238 Adjustment.

Expenses causal to demand:
- Maintenance;
- FOEs; and
- Contribution Revenue Charge.

  19.  SaskTel, for residence primary exchange service (PES) for bands E, F, and G, disclose the following line items, provided to the Commission in confidence in Appendix 3 - Attachment 2 and Appendix 5 - Attachment 1:

Capital causal to demand:
- Total Capital causal to demand;
- Outside Plant Equipment;
- Land, Building & Other;
- Service Wire and Protection; and
- Decision 2001-238 Adjustment.

Expenses causal to demand:
- Total Expenses causal to demand;
- Maintenance; and
- FOEs.

  21.  SaskTel, disclose all demand information, by year, for each band, pertaining to Loop Type A and Loop Type B, provided to the Commission in confidence, to be found in Appendix 4, Attachment 4, Page 2 of 4 and Page 4 of 4.

  22.  SaskTel, disclose all loop characteristic information and loop cost data, as applicable, provided to the Commission in confidence, for each band pertaining to Loop Type A and Loop Type B, to be found in the following:

• Table 4;
• Paragraphs 80, 86, 87, 88, 99;
• Appendix 3, Table 3;
• Appendix 3, Table 10;
• Appendix 4, Tables in paragraphs 28 and 29; and
• Appendix 4, Attachment 5.

• Appendix 3, Table 3;
• Appendix 3, Table 9; and
• Appendix 4, Tables in paragraphs 28 and 29.

  25.  SaskTel, disclose the Price per metre, provided to the Commission in confidence, for all cable identified, under the Cable Description heading, in Appendix 2, Table 3 - Buried Copper Cable Material Costs per Metre.

  26.  SaskTel, disclose all Installed Material Cost per Metre, provided to the Commission in confidence, to be found in the following:

• Appendix 6 - Page 1 of 4 - Fibre Cable;
• Appendix 6 - Page 2 of 4 - Aerial Copper Cable;
• Appendix 6 - Page 3 of 4 - Buried Copper Cable; and
• Appendix 6 - Page 4 of 4 - Underground Copper Cable.