|
Letter
Our file: 8661-C12-200310087
Ottawa, 10 November 2003
BY FAX & EMAIL
To: Distribution List
Subject: Bell Canada Tariff Notice (TN) 6747; TELUS Communications Inc. TN 111 - Requests for disclosure of confidential information and further responses
Pursuant to the procedures set out in a staff letter dated 19 August 2003, Call-Net Enterprises Inc. (Call-Net) and Allstream Inc. (Allstream), by letters dated
14 October 2003, requested the disclosure of certain information filed under claim of confidence and further responses to certain interrogatories. Responses to these requests were received on 21 October 2003 from Bell Canada and TELUS Communications Inc. (TELUS).
Part I - Requests for disclosure of information
Requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed are assessed in light of sections 38 and 39 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act) and section 19 of the CRTC Rules of Procedure (the Rules). In the case of each request, the public interest in disclosing 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 those set out below.
The degree of competition that exists in a particular market is an important consideration in the assessment of 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 is assessing the extent of harm is the expected usefulness of the information 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, the more aggregated the information, the less likelihood is that harm would 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, under different circumstances.
Having regard to the considerations set out above, the information subject to a claim of confidentiality listed in Attachment 1 to this letter is to be placed on the public record of this process. In each case where full or partial disclosure is to occur, it is considered that specific direct harm likely to be caused by disclosure would not outweigh the public interest in disclosure.
Bell Canada and TELUS are to file with the Commission all information set out in Attachment 1 to this letter by 28 November 2003, serving copies on all parties by the same date. This material should be received, not merely sent, by that date.
Part II - Requests for further responses to interrogatories
The Commission, in past proceedings, has looked at a number of different considerations regarding requests for further responses to interrogatories.
A major consideration is the relevance of the requested information to the matter at issue. The availability of the requested information is also a factor that 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.
Having regard to the considerations set out above, Bell Canada and TELUS are to provide, by 28 November 2003, further responses to interrogatories as set out in Attachment 2 of this letter serving copies on all parties by the same date. This material should be received, not merely sent, by that date.
Part III - Revised process dates
In light of the above-noted change to the filing date for information provided pursuant to the determinations contained in this letter, Commission staff hereby issues the following revised process dates:
1. Comments may be filed, serving copies on all other parties, by 9 December 2003.
2. Parties may file replies to comments, serving copies on all parties who filed comments, by 19 December 2003.
Yours sincerely,
Original signed by
Scott Hutton
(Acting) Director General
Competition, Costing and Tariffs
Telecommunications
Attachments
Distribution list:
Ms. Theresa Griffin-Muir, Allstream Inc.
Mr. David Palmer, Bell Canada
Mr. Don Bowles, Call-Net Enterprises Inc.
Mr. Terry Novak, Canada Payphones Corporation
Mr. Geoff Francis, Primus Telecommunications Canada Inc.
Mr. Willie Grieve, TELUS Communications Inc.
Interested Parties
ATTACHMENT 1
REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
Bell Canada
1. With reference to the response to interrogatory Bell(CRTC)7Aug03-5, Bell Canada is to disclose the 2003 competitor-specific toll-free calls, provided to the Commission in confidence in part a) iv) of the response.
2. With reference to the response to interrogatory Bell(CRTC)7Aug03-5, Bell Canada is to disclose the annual change in number of payphone calls of all types and the annual change in number of toll-free calls provided to the Commission in confidence in part d) of the response.
TELUS
1. With reference to the response to interrogatory TELUS(Call-Net)24Jul03-104, TELUS is to disclose the average annual change in demand for toll-free calls and for payphones provided to the Commission in confidence in the response.
2. With reference to the response to interrogatory TELUS(CRTC)7Aug03-6, TELUS is to disclose the 2003 competitor-specific toll-free calls, provided to the Commission in confidence in part a) iv) of the response.
ATTACHMENT 2
REQUESTS FOR FURTHER RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES
Bell Canada
1. With reference to interrogatory Bell(Call-Net)11Jul03-100 a) ii), Bell Canada is to provide the revised Average Cost Per Payphone Call in Table 6-3 of Bell Canada's submission based on the current capital cost approach (cost of payphones/outside wire new) using the Average Service Life (ASL) for payphone assets (15 years) and the outside wire ASL from Decision 98-2.
2. With reference to interrogatory Bell(Call-Net)11Jul03-104, Bell Canada is to provide the following information:
a) the annual change in maintenance costs associated with the NCC computer facilities from 1998 to 2002 (assume 2002 = 100); and
b) the percentage decrease assumed for maintenance costs as a result of the new investment in the NCC and identify the year in which this decrease is assumed to occur.
3. With reference to interrogatory Bell(Call-Net)11Jul03-105, Bell Canada is to provide the annual change in maintenance costs (costs of removals and other repair maintenance associated with payphone sets and booths) from 1998 to 2002 (assume 2002 = 100).
4. With reference to interrogatory Bell(Call-Net)11Jul03-100, Bell Canada is to provide, for each of the years 2000 and 2001, the following information regarding the payphone asset account: the capital balance, net book value, retirements and additions.
TELUS
1. With reference to interrogatory TELUS(Call-Net)24Jul03-100 a) ii), TELUS is to provide the revised Average Cost Per Payphone Call in Table 6-3 of TELUS' submission based on the current capital cost approach (cost of payphones/outside wire new) using the Average Service Life (ASL) for payphone assets (15 years) and the outside wire ASL from Decision 98-2.
2. With reference to interrogatory TELUS(Call-Net)24Jul03-100 a) i), TELUS is to provide a response to the referenced interrogatory [TELUS(CRTC)7Aug03-2 c)], as posed by Call-Net.
3. With reference to interrogatory TELUS(Call-Net)24Jul03-100, TELUS is to provide, for each of the years 2000 and 2001, the following information regarding the payphone asset account: the depreciation life characteristics, capital balance, net book value, retirements and additions.
Date Modified: 2003-11-10
|