|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 2003-503
|
|
|
Ottawa, 11 December 2003
|
|
|
Bell Canada
|
|
|
Reference: Tariff Notice 6764
|
|
|
Local network interconnection and component unbundling
|
|
|
In this order, the Commission approves Bell Canada's application for proposed tariff revisions relating to local network interconnection and component unbundling, subject to one modification.
|
|
1.
|
The Commission received an application by Bell Canada, dated 30 July 2003, to revise item 105, Local Network Interconnection and Component Unbundling, of its Access Services Tariff. Bell Canada stated that it filed these tariff revisions pursuant to Provision of telecommunications services to customers in multi-dwelling units, Telecom Decision CRTC 2003-45, 30 June 2003 (Decision 2003-45), paragraphs 198 and 199.
|
|
2.
|
The Commission received comments from Call-Net Enterprises Inc. (Call-Net) dated 8 August 2003, and from Allstream Inc. (Allstream) dated 29 August 2003, and reply comments from Bell Canada dated 8 September 2003.
|
|
|
Background
|
|
3.
|
In Decision 2003-45, the Commission determined that loop providers must provide local exchange carriers (LECs) the option of terminating leased unbundled loops either at the service provider demarcation point or at the customer demarcation point, at current tariff rates. In Decision 2003-45, the Commission also determined that LECs that have responsibility and control of copper in-building wire in a multi-dwelling unit (MDU) must permit other LECs to connect to and use the in-building wire at no charge. The Commission directed LECs to file, for the Commission's approval, within 30 days of the date of that Decision, proposed tariff pages reflecting the Commission's determinations.
|
|
|
The application
|
|
4.
|
Bell Canada proposed to include the following paragraphs in its revised tariff pages:
|
|
|
Item 105.3 (h), Connection to in-building wire
|
|
|
Where the Company has responsibility and control of copper in-building wire in a multi-dwelling unit (MDU), it will permit CLECs to connect to and use the Company's copper in-building wire at no-charge. At the time of connection by a CLEC to the Company's copper in-building wire, the CLEC takes responsibility and control for its customer's end-to-end service.
|
|
|
Item 105.4 (b), Unbundled Network Components, (1) Local Loops, b.
|
|
|
An unbundled loop provided in a multi-dwelling unit (MDU) may be terminated at either the service provider demarcation point or at the customer demarcation point within the MDU. It is the responsibility of the CLEC ordering the unbundled loop to specify the required demarcation point at the time the order is placed with the Company.
|
|
5.
|
Bell Canada requested that its application be approved by 30 August 2003 and that the changes take effect by 30 September 2003.
|
|
|
Comments of Allstream and Call-Net
|
|
6.
|
Allstream and Call-Net raised concerns with respect to Bell Canada's proposal in item 105.4 (b) (1) (b) that competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs) be responsible for specifying the loop demarcation at the time of each order placed with the company. They suggested that it would be simpler if CLECs could specify a default option (for example, Call-Net could specify that, unless advised otherwise, its orders were to be terminated at the customer demarcation point). Allstream and Call-Net further submitted that this detail should be bilaterally negotiated, rather than unilaterally imposed.
|
|
7.
|
Allstream and Call-Net also argued that the last sentence of item 105.3 (h) of Bell Canada's proposed tariff was misleading. Both parties maintained that a CLEC would only take responsibility for a customer's end-to-end service once the leased unbundled loop had been successfully provisioned at both ends and not only at the customer-end. Call-Net stated that the central office connecting link at the point of interconnection interface must also be completed and copper continuity confirmed before the responsibility for any end-to-end service could be transferred from the current service provider to the new service provider. Call-Net noted that, while the end-to-end responsibility would become the CLEC's, responsibility for the unbundled loop, including the in-building wire, remains the loop provider's. Allstream and Call-Net argued that the last sentence of item 105.3 (h) of Bell Canada's proposed tariff should be removed.
|
|
8.
|
Allstream and Call-Net concluded that the application of Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel) to revise its Competitor Access Tariff item 610.18, filed 28 July 2003 pursuant to Decision 2003-45, should be the standard model for all incumbent local exchange carriers and that Bell Canada should be directed to incorporate only the changes proposed in SaskTel's application.
|
|
9.
|
Call-Net also argued that the effective date of 30 days from the date of the Commission's decision proposed by Bell Canada was too distant. Call-Net submitted that Bell Canada could begin to provide a customer demarcation option by simply notifying its field technicians of the request as soon as a decision regarding this tariff notice has been rendered.
|
|
|
Bell Canada's reply
|
|
10.
|
In reply to Allstream's and Call-Net's concern regarding the procedure for ordering a loop, Bell Canada submitted that methods and procedures for placing loop orders were best dealt with in the CRTC Interconnection Steering Committee (CISC). Bell Canada submitted that it was important that the tariff specify who is responsible for identifying where an unbundled loop should terminate. Bell Canada stated that it was an active participant in CISC discussions aimed at refining detailed industry ordering procedures in the Canadian Local Ordering Guidelines (C-LOG) to address a CLEC's choice of demarcation point, including the consideration of Call-Net's suggested default option. Bell Canada noted that should the participants in the CISC C-LOG discussions adopt the default process suggested by Call-Net, this would not conflict with the language in the tariff.
|
|
11.
|
Bell Canada noted that Allstream and Call-Net objected to the last sentence in item 105.3 (h). The company stated that this sentence was not related to leased unbundled loops. The company indicated that, rather, this sentence related to situations where a LEC provided its own facilities to the main terminal room of an MDU and sought to use the in-building wire owned by the company to complete the service to its customer. Bell Canada stated that, to remove any perceived ambiguity, it was prepared to change the last sentence of item 105.3 (h) of the proposed tariff pages to read as follows:
|
|
|
Where the Company has responsibility and control of copper in-building wire in a multi-dwelling unit (MDU), and where a CLEC that provides its own facilities to the main terminal room (MTR) of an MDU wants to use the in-building wire that is owned by the Company to complete the service to the LEC's customer, the Company will permit the CLEC to connect to and use the Company's copper in-building wire at no charge. At the time of connection by the CLEC to the Company's copper in-building wire, the CLEC takes responsibility and control for its customer's end-to-end service.
|
|
12.
|
With respect to Call-Net's concern about the proposed effective date of the tariff changes, Bell Canada stated that it had requested an implementation period of 30 days following a Commission decision to allow for the modifications required to its order entry system and preparation and delivery of training material to all business units involved in the provisioning of unbundled loops. Bell Canada further stated that it was proceeding with the necessary implementation procedures to allow for the CLECs to advise the company of where the demarcation points for unbundled local loops provided in MDUs are to be located.
|
|
13.
|
Bell Canada requested that the Commission approve its application and, if the Commission requires it, the clarification to the tariff wording set out in its reply comments.
|
|
|
Commission analysis and determination
|
|
14.
|
The Commission notes the concerns of Allstream and Call-Net regarding Bell Canada's proposed tariff revisions stating that CLECs are responsible for specifying the loop demarcation at the time that each order is placed with the company. The Commission also notes that SaskTel's approved tariff does not contain a similar provision. The Commission acknowledges that when a CLEC orders an unbundled loop from Bell Canada it is the CLEC ordering the loop, not Bell Canada, which ought to be responsible for determining whether the loop is to terminate at the service provider demarcation point or at the customer demarcation point.
|
|
15.
|
The Commission also notes that should it in the future approve a process whereby LECs may specify a default demarcation point, such a process would not conflict with the language in the second sentence of item 105.4 (b) (1) ( b) of the proposed tariff. The Commission is of the view that having specified a default demarcation point, a CLEC would have met its responsibility as set out in the second sentence of item 105.4 (b) (1) (b) of the proposed tariff.
|
|
16.
|
Accordingly, the Commission considers that the language in second sentence of item 105.4 (b) (1) (b) of the proposed tariff stipulating that CLECs ordering the unbundled loop will have to specify the required demarcation point at the time of the order is reasonable. The Commission further considers that the language in the whole of item 105.4 (b) (1) (b) is appropriate.
|
|
17.
|
The Commission notes that SaskTel's tariff does not contain the sentence concerning a CLEC's responsibility for and control of its customer's end-to-end service that Allstream and Call-Net requested be deleted from Bell Canada's tariff. The Commission notes the comments of Allstream and Call-Net that this sentence was misleading as, in their view, a CLEC would only take responsibility for the customer's service once the leased unbundled loop has been provisioned at both ends and not simply at the customer end. While the Commission agrees that this sentence would be correct if it applied in situations where a CLEC is leasing unbundled loops, the Commission finds that the proposed sentence only addresses situations in which CLECs bring their facilities to an MDU and connect to the in-building wire to access customers in that MDU. Thus, a LEC that brings its facilities to an MDU and connects to the in-building wire would have responsibility for and control of its customer's end-to-end service. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the last sentence of item 105.3 (h) of Bell Canada's proposed tariff is reasonable.
|
|
18.
|
The Commission notes that Bell Canada, in its reply comments, stated that it was prepared to change the language of the first sentence of item 105.3 (h) in order to remove any perceived ambiguity. The Commission considers that the change proposed by Bell Canada would clarify that the paragraph pertains to situations where a CLEC is providing its own facilities and connecting to the in-building wire that is owned by Bell Canada in an MDU to complete the service to that CLEC's customer.
|
|
19.
|
The Commission further notes that Bell Canada requested an effective date 30 days from the date of approval of its application. Given that Bell Canada stated in its reply comments that it was implementing the necessary procedures, the Commission considers that it is reasonable to set the effective date 10 days from the date of the order.
|
|
20.
|
In light of the above, the Commission approves Bell Canada's application subject to one modification. Bell Canada is to replace item 105.3 (h) as originally proposed in its application with the following:
|
|
|
Where the Company has responsibility and control of copper in-building wire in a multi-dwelling unit (MDU), and where a CLEC that provides its own facilities to the main terminal room (MTR) of an MDU wants to use the in-building wire that is owned by the Company to complete the service to the CLEC's customer, the Company will permit the CLEC to connect to and use the Company's copper in-building wire at no charge. At the time of connection by the CLEC to the Company's copper in-building wire, the CLEC takes responsibility and control for its customer's end-to-end service.
|
|
21.
|
The Commission directs Bell Canada to issue revised tariff pages forthwith reflecting the above changes.
|
|
22.
|
The revisions take effect 10 days from 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: http://www.crtc.gc.ca
|
Date Modified: 2003-12-11