|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 2005-157
|
|
|
Ottawa, 26 April 2005
|
|
|
Bell Canada
|
|
|
Reference: Tariff Notices 841 and 841A (National Services Tariff)
|
|
|
Customer specific arrangement
|
|
1.
|
The Commission received an application by Bell Canada on 19 October 2004, and amended on 11 February 2005, requesting approval of National Services Tariff item 730.4, related to services provided under Customer Specific Arrangement (CSA) contract number P3-148. This filing replaced Tariff Notice 761 (TN 761), which had been filed pursuant to Regulatory safeguards with respect to incumbent affiliates, bundling by Bell Canada and related matters, Telecom Decision CRTC 2002-76, 12 December 2002.
|
|
2.
|
The CSA filed under TN 841 is a Type 2 CSA consisting of a bundle of Digital Local Access service, a General Tariff service, and Bandwidth Select service, a forborne service. The minimum contract period for this CSA is one year.
|
|
3.
|
On 8 December 2004, MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream) filed comments with respect to Bell Canada Tariff Notices 817 to 843 and requested, among other things, that the Commission deny these Tariff Notices.
|
|
4.
|
MTS Allstream submitted that Bell Canada's Tariff Notices related to arrangements (or renegotiated versions thereof) that were subject to a pending application, filed by Allstream Corp.1 (Allstream) and Call-Net Enterprises Inc. (Call-Net) on 23 January 2004. MTS Allstream submitted that, absent a ruling on the Part VII application that sought, among other things, denial of the backlog of the Bell Nexxia Inc.'s (Bell Nexxia's) Type 2 CSAs, these Tariff Notices should not be approved.
|
|
5.
|
MTS Allstream submitted that many of the proposed rates, terms and conditions were either inconsistent with the Commission's criteria for just and reasonable rates, or were otherwise unjustly discriminatory or granted Bell Canada an undue preference.
|
|
6.
|
MTS Allstream noted that Bell Canada's appeal of Review of Bell Canada's customer-specific arrangements filed pursuant to Telecom Decision 2002-76, Telecom Decision CRTC 2003-63, 23 September 2003 (Decision 2003-63) was dismissed by the Federal Court of Appeal, and the stay previously granted by the Court was lifted. MTS Allstream submitted that, despite these developments, the company had not disclosed the full rates, terms and conditions of a large number of the Bell Nexxia CSAs on the public record, contrary to the requirements of Decision 2003-63. MTS Allstream claimed that this allowed Bell Canada to continue to conceal the details of these arrangements until it had renegotiated them to the company's satisfaction.
|
|
7.
|
MTS Allstream submitted that allowing Bell Canada to renegotiate such arrangements while they were subject to the Commission's consideration prevented a new supplier from competing for the customer's business.
|
|
8.
|
With respect to TN 841, MTS Allstream submitted that Bell Canada had relied on the imputation test filed with TN 761, rather than filing a new imputation test. MTS Allstream further submitted that services in TN 841 have been narrowed down to Digital Local Access and Bandwidth Select services from a list of many possible bundles offered in TN 761. In addition, MTS Allstream noted that the one-year contract period offered under TN 841 was the same as the contract period offered under TN 761, presumably on a renewal basis.
|
|
9.
|
In reply on 20 December 2004, Bell Canada stated that it had provided all the requested documentation to the Commission and had fully disclosed the details of its outstanding CSAs. Bell Canada submitted that the imputation test for TN 761 had been submitted in accordance with the Commission's requirements and a revised imputation test for this CSA was not required by the Commission.
|
|
10.
|
With respect to MTS Allstream's comments that services had been changed, Bell Canada commented that the proposed tariff associated with TN 841 had defined the arrangement consistently with the contract and added that the arrangement had not been altered since having filed under TN 761.
|
|
11.
|
With respect to MTS Allstream's submission that the CSA filed under TN 841 had been renewed, Bell Canada confirmed that the contract had been renewed for another one-year term.
|
|
Commission's analysis and determinations
|
|
12.
|
The Commission notes that in Part VII application by Allstream Corp. and Call-Net Enterprises Inc. regarding Bell Canada Type 2 CSAs,Telecom Decision CRTC 2005-22, 7 April 2005 (Decision 2005-22), it denied the Part VII application filed by Allstream and Call-Net on the basis that a blanket denial of all the Bell Nexxia CSAs would not be appropriate, and that each CSA should be considered individually to determine whether Bell Canada had complied with the requirements set out in Decision 2003-63. In Decision 2005-22, the Commission also noted that since the dismissal of its appeal of Decision 2003-63 by the Federal Court of Appeal, Bell Canada had refiled proposed tariff pages for the Bell Nexxia CSAs under new TN numbers, consistent with the tariff requirements set out in Decision 2003-63.
|
|
13.
|
With respect to this application, the Commission has reviewed the services provided in this CSA bundle, and is satisfied that the services, rates, terms and conditions provided are properly identified in the proposed tariff pages and meet the requirements specified in Decision 2003-63. The Commission is also of the view that MTS Allstream's concerns with respect to the level of public disclosure of the rates, terms and conditions applicable to TN 841 have been adequately addressed.
|
|
14.
|
With respect to MTS Allstream's comment that Bell Canada had relied on the imputation test in connection with TN 761, rather than filing a new imputation test for TN 841, the Commission notes that if the costing adjustments specified in Decision 2003-63 were applied, this CSA would pass the imputation test. The Commission further notes that there have been no changes to the services provided under this CSA arrangement since the filing of TN 761. Accordingly, the Commission is satisfied that TN 841 satisfies the imputation test.
|
|
15.
|
In light of the above, the Commission approves on a final basis the application by Bell Canada.
|
|
|
Secretary General
|
|
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request, and may also be examined in PDF format or in HTML at the following Internet site: www.crtc.gc.ca
|
___________________________
1 Allstream Corp. is now a division of MTS Allstream Inc.
Date Modified: 2005-04-26