ARCHIVED - Telecom Order CRTC 2003-434

This page has been archived on the Web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.


Telecom Order CRTC 2003-434

  Ottawa, 28 October 2003

Bell Canada

  Reference: Tariff Notice 6758

KeyPak High Speed service


The Commission received an application by Bell Canada, dated 4 July 2003, to revise General Tariff item 685, KeyPak, to reduce the monthly rates for KeyPak High Speed 3.0 Mbps service by $20.00. Bell Canada also proposed to eliminate the $100.00 migration charge for customers who migrate from KeyPak High Speed 1.5 Mbps service to KeyPak High Speed 3.0 Mbps service, or vice versa, and to eliminate the $100.00 activation charge for customers who migrate from KeyPak Dial to a KeyPak High Speed bundle.


Bell Canada filed an imputation test in support of its application.


The Commission received comments from François D. Ménard dated 3 August 2003. Bell Canada replied on 18 August 2003. Comments were received from Ralph Doncaster on 29 August 2003.

Positions of parties


Mr. Ménard stated that Bell Canada's application should be denied. Mr. Ménard submitted that Bell Canada's proposal was anti-competitive and that its imputation test was deficient. Mr. Ménard stated that the service offering was anti-competitive because Bell Canada does not offer the services that a competitor needs to provide digital subscriber line (DSL) services similar to those Bell Canada uses to offer service. With respect to the imputation test, Mr. Ménard submitted that Bell Canada should impute tariff rates for the services that make up the bundle.


Mr. Ménard further submitted that the proposal to eliminate the migration and activation charges was a promotion and should be disallowed until the Commission disposes of the issues raised in Review of promotions, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2003-1-1, 13 March 2003.


Bell Canada replied that the issues raised by Mr. Ménard are before the Commission in Tariff Notices 6622 and 6767 and that Mr. Ménard's comments made in this proceeding regarding such competitive issues should be dismissed.


Bell Canada indicated that since its application is a General Tariff service offering, it had applied Phase II costing methodology consistent with its Phase II costing manual.


Bell Canada submitted that in this application, it proposed to permanently eliminate the migration and activation charges, and therefore, the proposed service was not in the nature of a promotion.


Ralph Doncaster submitted that Bell Canada's proposal to eliminate the activation charge should only be approved if the activation charge in Bell Canada Tariff Notice 6767 was also removed.

Commission analysis and determination


The Commission notes that the competitive issue raised by Mr. Ménard in regard to the provision of wholesale services to enable competitors to provide competitive DSL services is being considered in Bell Canada Tariff Notices 6622 and 6767 and is therefore not part of this application.


In regard to Mr. Ménard's submission that Bell Canada's application was a promotion, the Commission considers that, since the proposed elimination of the migration and activation charges will be a permanent feature of the KeyPak High Speed service, Bell Canada's proposed service is not a promotion.


The Commission notes that for a new service or a rate decrease, the proposed rates must be supported by and satisfy an imputation test. The Commission further notes that the imputation test is the accepted method, under the current regulatory regime, of determining whether the proposed rates would be anti-competitive. The Commission finds that the imputation test filed in support of this application is met.


In regard to the service charge referred to by Mr. Doncaster, the Commission notes that the service charge in Bell Canada Tariff Notice 6767 and this application are not related.


In light of the above, the Commission approves Bell Canada's application. The revisions take effect as of the date of this order.
  Secretary General
  This document is available in alternative format upon request and may also be examined at the following Internet site:

Date Modified: 2003-10-28

Date modified: