ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8663-C12-200614439

Letter

File Number:   8663-C12-200614439

Ottawa, 6 September 2007

By Electronic mail

To:   Interested Parties List - PN 2006-14

Re: Review of regulatory framework for wholesale services and definition of essential service - Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2006-14

This letter addresses requests for disclosure of information filed in confidence with the Commission and for further responses to interrogatories to interested parties filed in the above noted proceeding.

On 16 August 2007, the Commission received requests for further responses to interrogatories and for disclosure of information filed in confidence from Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership (Bell Aliant), Bell Canada, Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel) and Télébec, société en commandite (Télébec) (collectively, Bell et al.), the Competition Bureau, Distributel Communications Limited (Distributel), MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream), Rogers Communications Inc. (Rogers), TELUS Communications Company (TCC), and Télécommunications Xittel inc. (Xittel).

On 22 August 2007, responses to the 16 August 2007 requests were received from Bell et al., Cogeco Cable Inc. (Cogeco), the Competition Bureau, Cybersurf Corp. (Cybersurf), MTS Allstream, Primus Telecommunications Canada Inc. (Primus), Rogers, Shaw Communications Inc. (Shaw), and TCC.

Requests for public disclosure are addressed in Part I, below, and in Attachment 1 to this letter, while requests for further responses are addressed in Part II and in Attachment 2 to this letter.

Unless otherwise expressly indicated, parties are to file with the Commission all information to be provided pursuant to this letter by 10 September 2007 , serving a copy on all interested parties by the same date.   These submissions must be received, not merely sent, by that date.

As well, in responding to requests for disclosure of information and further responses to interrogatories, some parties undertook to provide further information for the purposes of this proceeding.   Those parties are expected to fulfill such undertakings and file the information with the Commission by 10 September 2007 , serving a copy on all interested parties by the same date.   These submissions must be received, not merely sent, by that date.   For that reason, where undertakings were made they are not specifically addressed in the Attachments.

Part I - Requests for Disclosure

Requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed are addressed in light of sections 38 and 39 of the Telecommunications Act and section 19 of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the Rules).   In evaluating a request, an assessment is made as to whether there is any specific harm likely to result from the disclosure of the information in question.   Further, in order to justify a claim of confidence, any such harm must be sufficient as to outweigh the public interest in disclosure.   In making this evaluation, a number of factors are taken into consideration, including the following:

The degree of competition that exists in a particular market or that is expected to occur is an important consideration in assessing requests for disclosure.   All things being equal, the greater the degree of actual or expected competition, the greater the specific 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 likelihood that harm will flow from its disclosure.

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.

Having regard to the considerations set out above, the information filed under a claim of confidentiality in response to the interrogatories listed in Attachment 1 is, to the extent set out in that Attachment, to be placed on the public record of this proceeding.   In each case where full or partial disclosure is to occur, it is considered that the specific direct harm, if any, likely to be caused by disclosure would not outweigh the public interest in disclosure.

Part II - Requests for Further Responses

With regard to requests for further responses, the requirements of subsection 18(2) of the Rules apply.   The general principles enunciated by the Commission in past proceedings include the following considerations:

The major consideration is the relevance of the information requested to the matter at issue, and the merits of arguments made by requesting parties.

The availability of the information requested is also a factor, which is balanced against the relevance of the information.   If the provision of the information sought would require an effort disproportionate to the probative value of the information itself, further responses will not be required.

Another factor considered is the extent to which an interrogatory answer is responsive to the interrogatory as it was originally asked.   Generally, parties are not required to provide further information to a party that did not ask the original interrogatory.

Having regard to all of the above considerations, the parties in question are to provide further responses to the extent set out in Attachment 2 to this letter.

Yours sincerely,

(Original signed by)

Robert G. Martin
Senior Manager, Essential Services
Telecommunications
Tel:          819-953-3361
email:       robert.martin@crtc.gc.ca

Attachments

Attachment 1

Disclosure of Confidential Information

Parties are to disclose the information filed with the Commission in confidence, as set out below:

BellCanada(Rogers)19Jul07-101    Bell Canada is to file on the public record the contents of the attachment to its interrogatory response abridged in order to remove the competitors' names and to aggregate competitors' market shares.

Attachment 2

Further Responses to Interrogatories:

Parties are to provide further responses as set out below.

Cybersurf(TELUS)19Jul07-1    Cybersurf is to file, in confidence with the Commission, a complete response to this interrogatory with an abridged version for the public record with an explanation for why the claim for confidentiality has been made.

Cybersurf(TELUS)19Jul07-13    Cybersurf is to file, in confidence with the Commission, a complete response to this interrogatory with an abridged version for the public record with an explanation for why the claim for confidentiality has been made.

TELUS(MTS Allstream)19Jul07-301    TCC is to file a complete response to part d) of this interrogatory.

TELUS(Rogers)19Jul07-109    TCC is to file a complete response to part b) of this interrogatory that details the limitations, if any, placed on the availability of unbundled mass market loops in Omaha, Nebraska and Anchorage, Alaska