ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8662-B2-200405911 - Bell Canada's Application to Review and Vary Telecom Order CRTC 2004-143: Requests for public disclosure by MTS Allstream

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Letter

Our file: 8662-B2-200405911

Ottawa, 25 August 2004

Send by:   FAX/Email

Mr. Mirko Bibic
Chief, Regulatory Affairs
Bell Canada
105, rue Hôtel-de-Ville, Floor 5
Gatineau, Quebec
J8X 4H7

Dear Mr. Bibic:

RE:   Bell Canada 's Application to Review and Vary Telecom Order CRTC 2004-143: Requests for public disclosure by MTS Allstream.

By letter dated 14 July 2004, as part of its comments with respect to Bell Canada's application, dated 14 June 2004, requesting that the Commission, pursuant to section 62 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act) and Part VII of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the Rules), review and vary Telecom Order CRTC 2004-143, dated 3 May 2004 (Order 2004-143), MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream) requested public disclosure of the Commission's confidential letter to Bell Canada , dated 18 July 2003 .   In addition, MTS Allstream submitted that, at a minimum, Bell Canada should be ordered to file, for each Bell Canada Customer Specific Arrangement (CSA), a template of the imputation test that was filed in confidence.   Allstream submitted that release of this information would be in the public interest.

Bell Canada did not provide comments with respect to MTS Allstream's disclosure requests.

It is noted that the Commission's letter of 18 July 2003 to Bell Canada was not a document in respect of which confidentiality was claimed by the company.    Nonetheless, it is considered appropriate, in disposing of MTS Allstream's disclosure request with respect to the letter, to apply the same test that is applied with respect to requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed, as set out below.  

Request for Public Disclosure

Requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed are assessed in light of ections 38 and 39 of the Act and section 19 of 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 direct 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.   In particular, in this proceeding, parties' responses to various interrogatories have been considered from the point of view of whether they could be aggregated so as to provide meaningful information that would not compromise the confidentiality of any individual party's response.

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, in different circumstances.

With respect to the information requested by MTS Allstream, as noted above, it is considered that any specific direct harm likely to result from disclosure, as set out below, would not outweigh the public interest in its disclosure.

Bell Canada is to place on the public record the following information:

  •  An abridged copy of the Commission's letter to Bell Canada dated 18 July 2003 releasing all information except the customer names in attachment 3; and,

  •  An abridged copy of each imputation test template, as filed with the Commission, for Tariff Notices 756 and 805.

Bell Canada is to file with the Commission the above material by 8 September 2004, serving copies on all interested parties by the same date.   This material should be received, and not merely sent, by that date.  

Yours sincerely,

Scott Hutton
Director General
Competition, Costing and Tariffs
Telecommunications

c.c.:   Interested Parties List
          Senior Analyst, Pamela Cormier, CRTC (819) 953-9675

Date modified: 2004-08-25

Date modified: