|
Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2003-3
|
|
Ottawa, 27 March 2003
|
|
Retail quality of service rate adjustment plan and related issues
|
|
Reference: 8678-C12-11/01, 8660-C12-05/00, 8660-C12-06/01 and 8660-C12-200303751
|
|
With this public notice, the Commission invites comments regarding the retail quality of service rate adjustment plan for residential and business customers and related issues. In addition, the Commission is soliciting input on the appropriate methodology for an audit process to ensure that the incumbent local exchange carriers are reporting quality of service and rate adjustment results in a consistent and accurate manner.
|
|
Introduction
|
|
1.
|
The Commission has been monitoring the quality of telecommunications services delivered to Canadians for several years to ensure that customers receive an appropriate level of service for the rates charged by Aliant Telecom Inc. (Aliant Telecom), Bell Canada, MTS Communications Inc. (MTS), TELUS Communications Inc. (TCI), TELUS Communications (Québec) Inc. (TELUS Québec) and Société en commandite Télébec (Télébec) (collectively the incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs)). Over this period, the Commission has released a number of decisions relating to quality of service indicators and standards.
|
|
2.
|
The Commission established an interim retail quality of service rate adjustment plan (the rate adjustment plan) in Regulatory framework for second price cap period, Telecom Decision CRTC 2002-34, 30 May 2002 (Decision 2002-34); Erratum: Telecom Decision CRTC 2002-34 - Appendix 3, Telecom Decision CRTC 2002-34-1, 15 July 2002 (Decision 2002-34-1); and Implementation of price regulation for Télébec and TELUS Québec, Telecom Decision CRTC 2002-43, 31 July 2002 (collectively, the price cap decisions).
|
|
3.
|
In the price cap decisions, the Commission concluded that competitive pressures were not sufficient to ensure that ILECs would meet the approved service quality standards and it was necessary to modify the current quality of service regime by establishing incentives to ensure ILEC compliance. The Commission considered, however, that further exploration of certain aspects of a rate adjustment mechanism was required and that the new regime would be implemented on an interim basis until a final determination could be rendered.
|
|
4.
|
In Saskatchewan Telecommunications - Transitions to federal regulation - Reporting quality of service, Telecom Decision CRTC 2002-53, 30 August 2002, the Commission concluded that it was appropriate for Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel) to be subject to the quality of service standards and reporting requirements imposed on the other ILECs. Furthermore, the Commission directed SaskTel to show cause why it should not be subject to the interim rate adjustment plan established in Decision 2002-34 and Decision 2002-34-1. The Commission expects to render its decision in this regard shortly in the second quarter of 2003.
|
|
Call for comments
|
|
5.
|
The Commission hereby initiates a proceeding to establish a final rate adjustment plan for retail customers, implement an audit process for the retail quality of service regime, and address any other related matters.
|
|
Rate adjustment plan for retail customers
|
|
6.
|
The Commission invites parties to provide their views, with supporting rationale, on:
|
|
a) what changes to the interim plan, if any, the Commission should consider in establishing a final retail rate adjustment plan;
|
|
b) how the current retail quality of serviceindicators should be weighted for the purpose of calculating the rate adjustment; and
|
|
c) whether the final retail rate adjustment plan should include a weighting element to ensure that customers are appropriately compensated when one or more indicators are repeatedly below the service quality standards.
|
|
Reporting of rate adjustment plan results
|
|
7.
|
The Commission notes that, under the current quality of service regime, the ILECs are required to file quarterly reports on their performance with respect to the approved retail quality of service indicators. If the performance for any of the indicators has not met the standards, the ILECs have been required to file a report indicating the reason(s) why the performance is below standard and to provide a plan of action to correct the situation.
|
|
8.
|
The Commission invites parties to provide their views, with supporting rationale, on:
|
|
a) whether the ILECs should be required to report to their retail customers the results of their performance with respect to retail quality of service and the rate adjustment plan;
|
|
b) the appropriate information and level of detail to be included in such reports;
|
|
c) the appropriate frequency for issuing these reports; and
|
|
d) the appropriate method of distributing them to retail customers.
|
|
Rate adjustment payment to retail customers
|
|
9.
|
The Commission notes that the rate adjustment payment is to be received by retail customers when a company delivers sub-standard quality of service as measured by the retail quality of service indicators and retail service quality standards.
|
|
10.
|
The Commission invites parties to provide their views, with supporting rationale, on:
|
|
a) an appropriate mechanism for distributing rate adjustment payments to retail customers (e.g. rebates, credits or some other mechanism); and
|
|
b) how to accommodate retail customers who discontinue service with a company prior to the determination of the value of the rate adjustment payment.
|
|
Possible exclusions from the final rate adjustment plan
|
|
11.
|
The Commission recognizes that there may be unforeseen circumstances or events beyond the reasonable control of an ILEC, that could lead to a failure by an ILEC to meet certain standards for retail quality of service. The Commission intends to explore whether it would be appropriate to exclude the results for such standards from the calculation of the annual rate adjustment.
|
|
12.
|
The Commission invites parties to provide their views, with supporting rationale, on:
|
|
a) the circumstances or events, if any, that should be considered to be beyond the reasonable control of an ILEC;
|
|
b) the process and method the Commission might utilize to exclude particular retail quality of service results from the final rate adjustment plan; and
|
|
c) whether if the Commission does exclude certain events or circumstances, certain standards should still have to be met and, if so, which ones.
|
|
Audit process for the retail quality of service regime
|
|
13.
|
The Commission notes that in Decision 2002-34, it determined that periodic audits of quality of service results would enhance the effectiveness of the rate adjustment plan. The Commission further noted that it would explore the methodology of an audit process in the proceeding to establish a final retail quality of service regime.
|
|
14.
|
The Commission invites parties to provide their views, with supporting rationale, on:
|
|
a) the appropriate audit process to ensure that the ILECs report on retail quality of service and rate adjustment results and distribute rate adjustment payments in a consistent and accurate manner;
|
|
b) remedial measures that could be used in cases where non-compliance is identified during an audit; and
|
|
c) whether the results of an audit, in whole or in part, should be made public.
|
|
Procedure
|
|
15.
|
Aliant Telecom, Bell Canada, MTS, SaskTel, TCI, TELUS Québec and Télébec are made parties to this proceeding.
|
|
16.
|
Other parties wishing to participate in this proceeding must notify the Commission of their intention to do so, by 10 April 2003.These parties should contactthe Secretary General by mail at CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2; by fax at (819) 953-0795; or by email at procedure@crtc.gc.ca. They are to indicate in the notice their email address, where available. If parties do not have access to the Internet, they are to indicate in their notice whether they wish to receive disk versions of hard copy filings.
|
|
17.
|
The Commission will issue, as soon as possible after the registration date, a complete list of parties and their mailing address (including their email address, if available), identifying those parties who wish to receive disk versions.
|
|
18.
|
Any members of the public who only wish to file written comments, without receiving copies of the various submissions, may do so by submitting their comments in writing to the Commission, at the address noted in paragraph 16, by 16 May 2003.
|
|
19.
|
Parties may file with the Commission, serving copies on all other parties, their evidence on all matters within the scope of this proceeding, by 16 May 2003.
|
|
20.
|
By letter dated 20 June 2003, the Commission will issue interrogatories.
|
|
21.
|
Parties may also address interrogatories to parties that provided evidence. Any such interrogatories must be filed with the Commission and served on the party or parties in question, by 20 June 2003.
|
|
22.
|
Responses to interrogatories are to be filed with the Commission and served on all parties, by 5 August 2003.
|
|
23.
|
Requests by parties for further responses to their interrogatories, specifying in each case why a further response is both relevant and necessary, and requests for public disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed, setting out in each case the reasons for disclosure, must be filed with the Commission and served on the party or parties in question, by 18 August 2003.
|
|
24.
|
Written responses to requests for further responses to interrogatories and for public disclosure must be filed with the Commission and served on the party or parties making the request by 2 September 2003.
|
|
25.
|
A determination will be issued with respect to requests for further information and public disclosure as soon as possible. Any information to be provided pursuant to that determination will be required to be filed with the Commission and served on all parties by 30 September 2003.
|
|
26.
|
Parties may file argument with the Commission on any matters within the scope of this proceeding, serving a copy on all other parties by 14 October 2003.
|
|
27.
|
Parties may file reply arguments with the Commission, serving a copy on all other parties by 28 October 2003.
|
|
28.
|
Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.
|
|
29.
|
Parties can file their submissions electronically or on paper. Submissions longer than five pages should include a summary.
|
|
30.
|
Where the submission is filed by electronic means, the line ***End of document*** should be entered following the last paragraph of the document, as an indication that the document has not been damaged during electronic transmission.
|
|
31.
|
Please note that only those submissions electronically filed will be available on the Commission's web site and only in the official language and format in which they are submitted.
|
|
32.
|
Each paragraph of your submission should be numbered.
|
|
33.
|
The Commission also encourages parties to monitor the public record of this proceeding (and/or the Commission's web site) for additional information that they may find useful when preparing their submissions.
|
|
Location of CRTC offices
|
|
34.
|
Submissions may be examined or will be made available promptly upon request at the Commission offices during normal business hours:
|
|
Central Building
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
1 Promenade du Portage, Room G-5
Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0N2
Tel: (819) 997-2429 - TDD: 994-0423
Fax: (819) 994-0218
|
|
Metropolitan Place
99 Wyse Road, Suite 1410
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia B3A 4S5
Tel: (902) 426-7997 - TDD: 426-6997
Fax: (902) 426-2721
|
|
405 de Maisonneuve Blvd. East
2nd Floor, Suite B2300
Montréal, Quebec H2L 4J5
Tel: (514) 283-6607 - TDD: 283-8316
Fax: (514) 283-3689
|
|
55 St. Clair Avenue East, Suite 624
Toronto, Ontario M4T 1M2
Tel: (416) 952-9096
Fax: (416) 954-6343
|
|
Kensington Building
275 Portage Avenue, Suite 1810
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2B3
Tel: (204) 983-6306 - TDD: 983-8274
Fax: (204) 983-6317
|
|
Cornwall Professional Building
2125 - 11th Avenue, Room 103
Regina, Saskatchewan S4P 3X3
Tel: (306) 780-3422
Fax: (306) 780-3319
|
|
10405 Jasper Avenue, Suite 520
Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3N4
Tel: (780) 495-3224
Fax: (780) 495-3214
|
|
530-580 Hornby Street
Vancouver, British Columbia V6C 3B6
Tel: (604) 666-2111 - TDD: 666-0778
Fax: (604) 666-8322
|
|
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: 2003-03-27