|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 2006-237
|
|
|
Ottawa, 8 September 2006
|
|
|
TELUS Communications Company
|
|
|
Reference: Tariff Notice 4253
|
|
|
Destandardization of Data Access System service
|
|
|
In this Order, the Commission approves TELUS Communications Company's application to destandardize TCBC General Tariff item 370, Data Access System service, in British Columbia.
|
|
1.
|
The Commission received an application by TELUS Communications Company (TCC), dated 9 June 2006, proposing to destandardize TCBC General Tariff item 370, Data Access System service (item 370 or the service).
|
|
2.
|
TCC noted that the service was a multi-point, four-wire analogue private line system used exclusively for data transmission between a customer's remote terminals and the customer's central location. TCC also noted that the service was only offered in British Columbia and that the company does not have any similar offering in Alberta. TCC further noted that it proposed to destandardize the service because of the small customer base and declining revenues associated with it.
|
|
|
Background
|
|
3.
|
In New procedures for disposition of applications dealing with the destandardization and/or withdrawal of tariffed services, Telecom Circular CRTC 2005-7, 30 May 2005 (Circular 2005-7), the Commission indicated that in order for it to properly assess a proposal for the destandardization and/or withdrawal of a tariffed service, the applicant must file an application containing the following information:
|
|
|
a) service proposed to be destandardized and/or withdrawn;
|
|
|
b) proposed date for destandardization;
|
|
|
c) proposed date for ultimate withdrawal of service;
|
|
|
d) type of destandardization;
|
|
|
e) rationale for the application;
|
|
|
f) availability of a substitute, with rationale as to why it was reasonable in terms of equivalent functionality, availability in the same geographical area, and cost (including the initial outlay and ongoing costs to the customer);
|
|
|
g) the transition plan;
|
|
|
h) relevant information concerning existing customers, such as the number of customers affected;
|
|
|
i) a copy of the notice to affected customers; and
|
|
|
j) any other information the applicant believed was relevant.
|
|
4.
|
The Commission further indicated in Circular 2005-7 that if the applicant considered that certain criteria did not apply to a particular application, the applicant was expected to provide submissions on why it believed those criteria should not apply.
|
|
5.
|
The Commission noted in Circular 2005-7 that the applicant had to provide notice to each customer affected by its application to destandardize and/or withdraw a particular service, and that the notices should be sent to affected customers on the date the application was filed. In the notice, the applicant had to include items a) to g) set out in paragraph 3 above, as well as clear and detailed information as to how an affected customer could participate in the Commission's process, including the date when comments must be received by the Commission. Further, the Commission noted in Circular 2005-7 that interested parties should be allowed 45 calendar days to comment on an applicant's destandardization and/or withdrawal application.
|
|
|
TCC's application
|
|
6.
|
TCC submitted that its application was consistent with the criteria established in Circular 2005-7 as follows:
|
|
|
a) service proposed to be destandardized and/or withdrawn:
|
|
|
TCC proposed to destandardize TCBC General Tariff item 370, Data Access System.
|
|
|
b) proposed date for destandardization:
|
|
|
TCC requested that the Commission grant approval of the proposed destandardization of item 370 with an effective date of 21 August 2006.
|
|
|
c) proposed date for ultimate withdrawal of service:
|
|
|
Not applicable - TCC indicated that it had no plans at present to withdraw item 370 with respect to those customers already receiving the service as of the proposed effective date for destandardization.
|
|
|
d) type of destandardization:
|
|
|
TCC proposed that the service would no longer be offered to new customers. TCC submitted that new customers would be directed towards other company service offerings, such as the TCC General Tariff item 522, Analogue Private Line Services (item 522) or other service solutions.
|
|
|
TCC submitted that customers currently receiving the service would continue to do so at current tariffed rates and that the service would no longer be available if a customer requested to move, add, or change a particular circuit. TCC further submitted that, to accommodate any moves and changes, circuits formerly provided under item 370 would be provided under the rates and conditions specified in item 522 unless the customer requested another service solution. TCC added that requests by a customer to move, add, or change a particular circuit would not affect other circuits provided by the company to the customer as part of the service, which would continue to be provided under item 370.
|
|
|
e) rationale for the application:
|
|
|
TCC proposed to destandardize item 370 because of the small customer base and declining revenues associated with the service. TCC submitted that customers in Alberta seeking a service similar to item 370 would be directed to item 522. Given this, and the fact that a substitute was readily available (as noted below), TCC was of the view that destandardizing the service would allow the company to streamline and align service offerings between Alberta and British Columbia and realize operational efficiencies with minimal impact on customers.
|
|
|
f) availability of a substitute, with rationale as to why it was reasonable in terms of equivalent functionality, availability in the same geographical area, and cost (including the initial outlay and ongoing costs to the customer):
|
|
|
TCC submitted that item 370 was functionally the same as item 522, with the only difference being how the two services were rated. TCC submitted that depending on the circuit configuration and distances involved, item 522 could be a more cost-effective solution than item 370. Furthermore, TCC indicated that item 522 was widely available in British Columbia.
|
|
|
g) the transition plan:
|
|
|
TCC submitted, as noted above, that it had no plans at present to withdraw the service from those customers currently receiving the service as of the proposed effective date for destandardization. TCC also submitted that it did not have any plans to proactively migrate existing customers from item 370 to other company offerings. TCC submitted that it intended to maintain and support the service for existing customers for as long as those customers chose to retain the service. TCC further submitted that any future proposal by the company to withdraw the service would be driven by the pace by which existing customers migrated off of item 370 at their discretion.
|
|
|
h) relevant information concerning existing customers, such as the number of customers affected:
|
|
|
TCC provided the number of customers and revenues associated with item 370 in confidence.
|
|
|
i) a copy of the notice to affected customers:
|
|
|
TCC submitted that it had notified existing subscribers of its application by way of a letter that was sent at the same time that its application was filed. TCC provided a copy of the customer notification letter with its application, providing its customers a comment period of 45 calendar days, as required in Circular 2005-7.
|
|
|
j) any other information the applicant believed was relevant:
|
|
|
No additional information was filed.
|
|
7.
|
The Commission received no comments on this application.
|
|
|
Commission's analysis and determinations
|
|
8.
|
The Commission finds that TCC has fulfilled the customer notification and evidentiary requirements of Circular 2005-7, and considers TCC's application to destandardize TCBC General Tariff item 370 to be reasonable.
|
|
9.
|
In light of the above, the Commission approves TCC's application, effective the date of this Order.
|
|
|
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
|
Date Modified: 2006-09-08