ARCHIVED - Letter

Ottawa, 15 April 2010

Reference No.:  8690-C12-200910408

BY E-MAIL

Parties to Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2009-432

Subject: Call for comments - Review of the large incumbent local exchange carriers’ support structure service rates, Telecom Notice of Consultation
CRTC 2009-432, 21 July 2009 - Request for disclosure of costing information filed in confidence

Dear Madams and Sirs:

This letter addresses requests for disclosure of information for which a claim of confidentiality has been made in the proceeding initiated by Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2009-432, Call for comments – Review of the large incumbent local exchange carriers' support structure service rates, 21 July 2009.

On 31 March 2010 and 1 April 2010, the following parties filed requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality had been claimed: Bragg Communications Inc., the Canadian Cable Systems Alliance, Cogeco Cable Inc., Rogers Communications Inc., Shaw Communications Inc., and Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of its affiliate
Videotron Ltd (collectively, the Cable Carriers), TekSavvy Solutions Inc., and
Xittel Telecommunications Inc.

On 9 April 2010, Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership (Bell Aliant) (Ontario/Quebec) and Bell Canada (collectively, the Companies), MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream), and TELUS Communications Company (TELUS) filed with the Commission their responses to the above requests.

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 direct 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; and
• Finally, the treatment of confidentiality requests should not be taken as an indication of the maùnner in which such matters would be dealt with in the future in different circumstances.

In addition, the fact that certain companies disclosed the information in question in the proceeding was considered in assessing the validity of a claim of harm by other companies.

Having regard to all of the considerations set out above, the information filed under a claim of confidentiality in response to the interrogatories and cost studies 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.

The information to be disclosed by MTS Allstream and TELUS, as set out in Attachment 1, is to be filed with the Commission and served on all interested parties, by 19 April 2010.  The above material must be received, not merely sent, by this date.

Yours sincerely,

Original signed by

Yvan Davidson for /
Lynne Fancy
Director General
Competition, Costing and Tariffs
Telecommunications

Attachments (2)

Attachment 1

Disclosure of Confidential Information

Each party is to disclose the information that it filed with the Commission under a claim of confidentiality in response to the interrogatories identified below, to the extent set out below:

MTS Allstream

MTS(CRTC)1Mar10-6(c),(d),(e)

All information for which confidentiality was claimed.

MTS(CRTC)1Mar10-6, Attachment 1

Tables on page 1 of 2, to the following extent:

• all headings and labels;
• 2nd table - data in the following columns: number of terminals per kilometer, number of facility splices per kilometer, number of straight splices per kilometer, number of branch splices per kilometer, and number of clear and cap splices per kilometer;
• 3rd table - data in the column labelled number of terminals per kilometer; and,
• 4th table - data in the column labelled % strand costs to total installed costs.

Page 2 of 2: 

All information for which confidentiality was claimed.

MTS(CRTC)1Mar10-7(a),(b)

All information for which confidentiality was claimed.

MTS(CRTC)1Mar10-8(c),(d)

All information for which confidentiality was claimed.

MTS(CRTC)1Mar10-11

Page 2 of 2 - The total number of conduit spans in MTS Allstream’s network.

TELUS

TELUS(CRTC)1 Mar10-4(a.ii)(a.iii),(c),(e)

All information filed under a claim of confidence.

TELUS(CRTC)1 Mar10-6

All information filed under a claim of confidence on pages 3 of 5 and 4 of 5.

TELUS(CRTC)1 Mar10-7(a),(b),(c),(e),(f),(g)

All information filed under a claim of confidence.

TELUS(CRTC)1 Mar10-7 (j)

j) Rental pole information on lines labelled (a), (b), (g), (h), (k), (l), (m), (n).

TELUS(CRTC)1 Mar10-7 Attachment 1:

Tables 1 and 2 on page 8: Values in the Column labelled “% Mark-up”.

Table 3 on page 9:  All information filed under a claim of confidence.

Tables 5a-5c on pages 11-13: All information filed under a claim of confidence.

TELUS(CRTC)1 Mar10-8(a)(b)(c)(g)

All information filed under a claim of confidence.

TELUS(CRTC)1Mar10-9(a)(b)(c)

All information filed under a claim of confidence.

TELUS(CRTC)1Mar10-10 (a)(b)(c),(e),(f),(h)

All information filed under a claim of confidence.

TELUS(CRTC)1Mar10-11(a),(b),(c)

All information filed under a claim of confidence.

TELUS(CRTC)1Mar10-12(a),(b),(c)

All information filed under a claim of confidence.

Attachment 2

List of Parties

ACTQ: sdesy@actq.qc.ca
AGBriggs Consulting:  abriggs@cogeco.ca
Bell Aliant:  regulatory@bell.aliant.ca
Bell Canada:  bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Bragg:  regulatory.matters@corp.eastlink.ca
CCSA:  cedwards@ccsa.cable.ca
Cogeco:  michel.messier@cogeco.com
CS de la Moyenne-Côte-Nord:  marius-richard@csmcn.qc.ca
CS du Pays-des-Bleuets: bilodeaust@cspaysbleuets.qc.ca
Distributel Communications Limited:  regulatory@distributel.ca
Giganomics Consulting Inc.:  blackwell@giganomics.ca
Maskatel and Drummond:  gcordeau@maskatel.qc.ca
Ministère de la Culture et des communications:  andre.labrie@mcccf.gouv.qc.ca
MTO Telecom:  kfischer@mtotelecom.com
MTS Allstream:  iworkstation@mtsallstream.com
O.N. Tel: tracy.cant@ontera.ca
OTA:  jonathan.holmes@ota.on.ca
RCI:  hslawner@rci.rogers.com
david.watt@rci.rogers.com
Shaw:  Regulatory@sjrb.ca
Télébec:  reglementa@telebec.com
TELUS:  regulatory.affairs@telus.com
Tacit, Christian:  ctacit@tacitlaw.com
TBayTel:  rob.olenick@tbaytel.com
David.Wilkie@tbaytel.com
TekSavvy: regulatory@teksavvy.com
Vidéotron:  regaffairs@quebecor.com
View Communications:  dmckeown@viewcom.ca
Wall Communications Inc.:  lefebvre@rogers.com
Xittel:  reglementation@xittel.net 

Date modified:

2010-04-15