| |
Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-107 |
| |
Ottawa, 19 November 2008 |
| |
TELUS Communications Company - Application for forbearance from the regulation of business local exchange services |
| |
Reference: 8640-T66-200810160 |
| |
In this Decision, the Commission approves TCC's request for forbearance from the regulation of business local exchange services in 10 exchanges in Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec. The Commission denies TCC's request for forbearance in 52 other exchanges in these provinces. |
| |
Introduction |
1. |
The Commission received an application by TELUS Communications Company (TCC), dated 23 July 2008, in which the company requested forbearance from the regulation of business local exchange services1 in 62 exchanges in Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec. A list of these 62 exchanges is set out in Appendix 1 of this Decision. |
2. |
The Commission received submissions and/or data regarding TCC's application from Bell Canada, Cogeco Cable Inc. (Cogeco), MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream), Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of its affiliate Videotron Ltd. (Videotron), Rogers Communications Inc., and Shaw Cablesystems Ltd. (Shaw). The public record of this proceeding, which closed on 15 September 2008, is available on the Commission's website at www.crtc.gc.ca under "Public Proceedings." |
| |
Commission's analysis and determinations |
3. |
The Commission has assessed TCC's application based on the local forbearance test set out in Telecom Decision 2006-15, as amended by the Governor in Council's Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 2006-15, P.C. 2007-532, 4 April 2007 (modified Telecom Decision 2006-15), by examining the four criteria set out below. |
| |
a) Product market |
4. |
The Commission received no comments with respect to TCC's proposed list of business local exchange services. |
5. |
The Commission notes that TCC is seeking forbearance for 51 tariffed business local exchange services in Alberta and British Columbia. The Commission also notes that in Telecom Decision 2008-67 it found 50 of these services to be appropriate for forbearance. The other service, Centrex Services, is a recent consolidation of Centrex services previously approved in Telecom Decision 2008-67. |
6. |
The Commission further notes that TCC is also seeking forbearance for 19 tariffed business local exchange services in Quebec. Of these, the Commission found 17 to be appropriate for forbearance in Telecom Decision 2007-92. The Commission finds that the other two services, Telephone service to Senior Citizens' Club and Basic service - Business, fall within the definition of local exchange services as set out in Telecom Public Notice 2005-2. The list of approved services is set out in Appendix 2 of this Decision. |
| |
b) Competitor presence test |
7. |
The Commission notes that for the exchanges of Canmore, Alberta; Aldergrove, Cloverdale, Mission, Duncan, Parksville, Qualicum, and Whistler, British Columbia; and St-Antoine-de-Tilly and St-Roch-des-Aulnaies, Quebec, information provided by parties confirms that there is, in addition to TCC, at least one independent, facilities-based, fixed-line telecommunications service provider2 that offers local exchange services in the market and is capable of serving at least 75 percent of the number of business local exchange service lines that TCC is capable of serving in each exchange. |
8. |
The Commission notes that in the remaining exchanges listed in Appendix 3 where Bell Canada is identified as a competitor, Bell Canada offers wholesale services, but does not offer retail business local exchange services. Accordingly, the Commission determines that these exchanges do not meet the competitor presence test. |
9. |
With regards to the remaining exchanges listed in Appendix 3 where Cogeco is identified as a competitor, the Commission is of the view that the information on the record is not sufficient to establish that Cogeco is capable of serving at least 75 percent of the number of business local exchange service lines that TCC is capable of serving. Accordingly, the Commission determines that these exchanges do not meet the competitor presence test. |
10. |
In the remaining exchanges in Alberta and British Columbia listed in Appendix 3 where Shaw is identified as a competitor, the Commission notes that Shaw is not capable of serving at least 75 percent of the number of business local exchange service lines that TCC is capable of serving. Accordingly, the Commission determines that these exchanges do not meet the competitor presence test. |
11. |
The Commission notes that TCC identified Videotron as the competitor in the exchange of St-Tite, Quebec; however, in this exchange, Videotron offers only wholesale services and does not offer retail business local exchange services. As for the remaining exchanges listed in Appendix 3 where Videotron is identified as a competitor, the Commission notes that Videotron is not capable of serving 75 percent of the number of business local exchange service lines that TCC is capable of serving in these exchanges. Accordingly, the Commission determines that these exchanges do not meet the competitor presence test. |
12. |
In light of the above, the Commission determines that the remaining 52 exchanges listed in Appendix 3 do not meet the competitor presence test. |
| |
c) Competitor quality of service (Q of S) results |
13. |
The Commission notes that TCC submitted competitor Q of S results for the period of December 2007 to May 2008. |
14. |
MTS Allstream submitted that TCC provided it with consistently below-standard service. The Commission notes that in Telecom Decision 2007-65, it considered that in order to make a determination that an incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) has provided consistently below-standard service to any one competitor, the Commission would, as a general guideline, have to find that an ILEC has provided below-standard service to that competitor for at least two-thirds of the individually reported numbers, where each reported number is one indicator's result for one month. |
15. |
The Commission has reviewed TCC's competitor Q of S results and finds that the company has demonstrated that during this six-month period it |
| |
i) met, on average, the Q of S standard for each indicator set out in Appendix B of modified Telecom Decision 2006-15, as defined in Telecom Decision 2005-20, with respect to the services provided to competitors in its territory; and
|
| |
ii) did not consistently provide any of those competitors with services that were below those Q of S standards.
|
16. |
Accordingly, the Commission determines that TCC meets the competitor Q of S criterion for this period. |
| |
d) Communications plan |
17. |
The Commission has reviewed TCC's revised draft communications plan and is satisfied that it meets the information requirements set out in modified Telecom Decision 2006-15. |
18. |
The Commission approves the proposed communications plan and directs TCC to provide the resulting communications materials to its customers in both official languages, where appropriate. |
| |
Conclusion |
19. |
The Commission determines that TCC's application regarding Canmore, Alberta; Aldergrove, Cloverdale, Mission, Duncan, Parksville, Qualicum, and Whistler, British Columbia; and St-Antoine-de-Tilly and St-Roch-des-Aulnaies, Quebec, meets all the local forbearance criteria set out in modified Telecom Decision 2006-15. |
20. |
Pursuant to subsection 34(1) of the Telecommunications Act (the Act), the Commission finds as a question of fact that to refrain from exercising its powers and performing its duties, to the extent specified in modified Telecom Decision 2006-15, in relation to the provision by TCC of business local exchange services listed in Appendix 2 and future services that fall within the definition of local exchange services set out in Telecom Public Notice 2005-2 as they pertain to business customers only, in these 10 exchanges, would be consistent with the Canadian telecommunications policy objectives set out in section 7 of the Act. |
21. |
Pursuant to subsection 34(2) of the Act, the Commission finds as a question of fact that these business local exchange services are subject to a level of competition in these exchanges sufficient to protect the interests of users of these services. |
22. |
Pursuant to subsection 34(3) of the Act, the Commission finds as a question of fact that to refrain from exercising its powers and performing its duties, to the extent specified in modified Telecom Decision 2006-15, in relation to the provision by TCC of these business local exchange services would be unlikely to impair unduly the continuance of a competitive market for these services in these exchanges. |
23. |
In light of the above, the Commission approves TCC's application for forbearance from the regulation of the local exchange services listed in Appendix 2 and future services that fall within the definition of local exchange services set out in Telecom Public Notice 2005-2, as they pertain to business customers only, in Canmore, Alberta; Aldergrove, Cloverdale, Mission, Duncan, Parksville, Qualicum, and Whistler, British Columbia; and St-Antoine-de-Tilly and St-Roch-des-Aulnaies, Quebec, subject to the powers and duties that the Commission has retained as set out in modified Telecom Decision 2006-15. This determination takes effect as of the date of this Decision. The Commission directs TCC to file revised tariff pages with the Commission within 30 days of the date of this Decision. |
24. |
The Commission determines that TCC's application does not meet all the local forbearance criteria set out in modified Telecom Decision 2006-15 for the 52 remaining exchanges, as listed in Appendix 3, in Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec. Accordingly, the Commission denies TCC's application for forbearance from the regulation of the business local exchange services in these exchanges. |
| |
Secretary General |
| |
Related documents |
| |
- TELUS Communications Company - Application for forbearance from the regulation of business local exchange services, Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-67, 28 July 2008
|
| |
- TELUS Communications Company - Application for forbearance from the regulation of business local exchange services, Telecom Decision CRTC 2007-92, 27 September 2007, as amended by Telecom Decision CRTC 2007-92-1, 3 October 2007, and Telecom Decision CRTC 2007-92-2, 29 November 2007
|
| |
- Bell Canada - Applications for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services, Telecom Decision CRTC 2007-65, 3 August 2007
|
| |
- Forbearance from the regulation of retail local exchange services, Telecom Decision CRTC 2006-15, 6 April 2006, as amended by Order in Council P.C. 2007-532, 4 April 2007
|
| |
- Forbearance from regulation of local exchange services, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2005-2, 28 April 2005
|
| |
- Finalization of quality of service rate rebate plan for competitors, Telecom Decision CRTC 2005-20, 31 March 2005
|
|
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 |
| |
Footnotes:
1 In this Decision, "business local exchange services" refers to local exchange services used by business customers to access the public switched telephone network and any associated service charges, features, and ancillary services.
2 These telecommunications service providers are Bell Canada, Shaw, and/or Videotron. |
| |
Appendix 1 |
| |
Alberta and British Columbia |
|
Tariff |
Item |
List of services |
|
1005 |
25 |
Exchange Classification and Rates |
|
1005 |
26 |
Business and Residence service |
|
1005 |
27 |
Base Rate Areas |
|
1005 |
32 |
Exchange Rates |
|
1005 |
122 |
Foreign Central Office Service - Voice |
|
1005 |
122A |
Foreign Central Office Service - Data |
|
1005 |
126 |
Direct-In-Dial |
|
1005 |
132 |
Service to Ships and Trains |
|
1005 |
138 |
Intelliroute |
|
1005 |
150 |
Reserve Telephone Number Service |
|
1005 |
153 |
Optional Hunting Arrangement |
|
1005 |
157 |
Suspension of Service |
|
1005 |
161 |
Call Guardian |
|
1005 |
164 |
Dual Tone Multi-Frequency |
|
1005 |
168C |
Voice Messaging Options Service |
|
1005 |
169 |
Universal Messaging Options Service |
|
1005 |
200 |
Terminal Attachment Program |
|
1005 |
405 |
Internet Call Director |
|
1005 |
465 |
ISDN-BRI (formerly Microlink) |
|
1005 |
470 |
ISDN-PRI (formerly Megalink) |
|
1005 |
470A |
ISDN-PRI (non-contracted) Access |
|
1005 |
490 |
Datadial |
|
1005 |
495 |
Digital Exchange Access |
|
18001 |
165 |
Digital Exchange Access (DEA) |
|
18001 |
170 |
Direct-In-Dial Service (DID) |
|
18001 |
215 |
Dataline |
|
18001 |
230 |
Voice Messaging Options Service |
|
18001 |
235 |
Calling Features |
|
18001 |
240 |
Extended Area Service (Centrex) |
|
18001 |
250 |
Intelliroute |
|
18001 |
295 |
Inbound Data Access |
|
18001 |
305 |
Denial Service |
|
18001 |
310 |
Toll Restrict |
|
18001 |
380 |
Temporary Disconnect |
|
18001 |
425 |
Exchange Service |
|
18001 |
430 |
Deductions - Churches, Community centres and Senior Citizen Drop-in centres |
|
18001 |
485 |
ISDN-BRI (formerly Microlink) |
|
18001 |
495 |
ISDN-PRI (formerly Megalink) |
|
18001 |
505 |
Switched 56 Digital Service |
|
18001 |
520 |
Universal Messaging |
|
21461 |
129 |
Directory Listings |
|
21461 |
202 |
Individual Line Service |
|
21461 |
209 |
Local Calling Area Expansion |
|
21461 |
213 |
Centrex Services |
|
21461 |
300 |
Call Management Services |
|
21461 |
301 |
Voice Mail Services (VMS) |
|
21461 |
307 |
Special Number Search |
|
21461 |
311 |
Dual Line Call Manager |
|
21461 |
314 |
Remote Call Forwarding |
|
21461 |
316 |
900 Blocking |
|
21461 |
1000 |
Chargeable Call Intercept Service |