ARCHIVED - Telecom Decision CRTC 2010-698

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Archived

This page has been archived on the Web.

PDF version

Ottawa, 21 September 2010

TELUS Communications Company - Application for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services

File number: 8640-T66-200904765

In this decision, the Commission approves TCC’s request for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services in the exchanges of Hartway, Peachland, Prince George, Quesnel, Vanway, and Williams Lake, British Columbia.

Introduction

1.      The Commission received an application by TELUS Communications Company (TCC), dated 10 March 2009, in which the company requested forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services[1] in the exchanges of Hartway, Peachland, Prince George, Quesnel, Vanway, and Williams Lake, British Columbia.

2.      The Commission received submissions and/or data regarding TCC’s application from Bell Mobility Inc. (Bell Mobility), MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream), Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI), and Shaw Cablesystems Ltd. (Shaw). The application was completed on 23 July 2010 with the receipt of revised competitor quality of service (Q of S) results from TCC. The Commission received no further submissions from the parties. The public record of this proceeding is available on the Commission’s website at www.crtc.gc.ca under “Public Proceedings? or by using the file number provided above.

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 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 residential local exchange services.

5.      The Commission notes that TCC is seeking forbearance from the regulation of 29 tariffed residential local exchange services. The Commission also notes that in Telecom Decision 2008-55, it found all of these services to be eligible for forbearance. A list of the 29 approved services is set out in the Appendix to this decision.

b)    Competitor presence test

6.      The Commission notes that for the exchanges of Hartway, Peachland, Prince George, Quesnel, Vanway, and Williams Lake, information provided by parties confirms that there are, in addition to TCC, at least two independent facilities-based telecommunications service providers, including providers of mobile wireless services.[2] Each of these service providers offers local exchange services in the market and is capable of serving at least 75 percent of the number of residential local exchange service lines that TCC is capable of serving, and at least one, in addition to TCC, is a facilities-based, fixed-line telecommunications service provider.

7.      Accordingly, the Commission determines that the exchanges of Hartway, Peachland, Prince George, Quesnel, Vanway, and Williams Lake, British Columbia meet the competitor presence test.

c)    Competitor Q of S results

8.        The Commission notes that in November 2008, within the file associated with another TCC forbearance application,^[3] MTS Allstream and Shaw indicated that the competitor Q of S results submitted by TCC did not reflect the actual level of service delivered by TCC during the period in question. The Commission also notes that at that time it was unable to conclude whether the competitor Q of S results that TCC had submitted for indicator 1.19 met the Q of S standards set out in Appendix B of Telecom Decision 2006-15, as defined in Telecom Decision 2005-20, with respect to the services TCC provided to competitors in its territory.

9.        Accordingly, the Commission initiated a proceeding and informed interested parties that it would not dispose of existing and future forbearance applications that rely on Q of S indicator 1.19 performance results until it had made a determination on the issue of meeting Q of S standards. Following that proceeding, in Telecom Decision 2009-514, the Commission determined that it would not take any further action to dispose of pending forbearance applications until the applicants had submitted revised results or an explanation, to the Commission’s satisfaction, as to why revised results were not required.

10.  The Commission notes that TCC submitted revised competitor Q of S results, dated 23 July 2010, for the period of December 2009 to May 2010. The Commission has reviewed these results and finds that TCC has demonstrated that during this six-month period it

i)        met, on average, the Q of S standards for each indicator set out in Appendix B of 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.

11.  Accordingly, the Commission determines that TCC meets the competitor Q of S criterion for this period.

d)    Communications plan

12.  The Commission notes that in lieu of filing a communications plan, TCC submitted that its plan specific to the exchanges in the present application would conform to the Commission’s requirements as set out in Telecom Decision 2007-64.

13.  The Commission approves, for the purpose of the current application, the use of the communications plan that TCC submitted in the proceeding leading to Telecom Decision 2007-64, subject to TCC’s compliance with the revisions outlined in that decision. The Commission directs TCC to provide the resulting communications materials to its customers, in both official languages where appropriate.

Conclusion

14.  The Commission determines that TCC’s application regarding the exchanges of Hartway, Peachland, Prince George, Quesnel, Vanway, and Williams Lake, British Columbia, meets all the local forbearance criteria set out in Telecom Decision 2006-15.

15.  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 Telecom Decision 2006-15, in relation to the provision by TCC of the residential local exchange services listed in the Appendix and future services that fall within the definition of local exchange services set out in Telecom Public Notice 2005-2 as they pertain to residential customers only, in these exchanges, would be consistent with the Canadian telecommunications policy objectives set out in section 7 of the Act.

16.  Pursuant to subsection 34(2) of the Act, the Commission finds as a question of fact that these residential local exchange services are subject to a level of competition in these exchanges sufficient to protect the interests of users of these services.

17.  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 Telecom Decision 2006-15, in relation to the provision by TCC of these residential local exchange services in these exchanges would be unlikely to impair unduly the continuance of a competitive market for these services.

18.  In light of the above, the Commission approves TCC’s application for forbearance from the regulation of the local exchange services listed in the Appendix and future services that fall within the definition of local exchange services set out in Telecom Public Notice 2005-2, as they pertain to residential customers only, in the exchanges of Hartway, Peachland, Prince George, Quesnel, Vanway, and Williams Lake, British Columbia, subject to the powers and duties that the Commission has retained as set out in 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 this decision.

Secretary General

Related documents

• MTS Allstream Inc. - Application concerning provisioning of competitor digital network services in accordance with competitor quality of service standards, Telecom Decision CRTC 2009-514, 21 August 2009
• TELUS Communications Company - Application for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services, Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-55, 12 June 2008
• TELUS Communications Company - Applications for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services, Telecom Decision CRTC 2007-64, 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

 

---