Telecom Decision CRTC 2012-255
Ottawa, 27 April 2012
Bell Canada – Application for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services
File number: 8640-B2-200817447
In this decision, the Commission approves Bell Canada’s request for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services provided in the exchange of St-Jacques, Quebec.
Introduction
1. The Commission received an application by Bell Canada, dated 23 December 2008, in which the company requested forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services1 in the exchange of St-Jacques, Quebec.
2. The Commission received submissions and data regarding Bell Canada’s application from Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI); TELUS Communications Company (TCC); and Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of its affiliate Videotron Ltd. (Videotron). The application was completed on 15 February 2012 with the submission of revised competitor quality of service results from Bell Canada. The Commission received no further submissions from the parties regarding Bell Canada’s application. 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 Bell Canada’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 notes that Bell Canada is seeking forbearance from the regulation of 19 tariffed residential local exchange services. The Commission also notes that in Telecom Decision 2007-65, it found all of these services to be eligible for forbearance. However, the Commission notes that in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2010-777, it forbore conditionally from regulating two of these services, Integrated Voice Messaging Service and Universal Messaging. Pursuant to Telecom Regulatory Policy 2010-777, forbearance from the regulation of these services will take effect on the date that Bell Canada issues revised tariff pages for the services. The Commission also notes that, since Bell Canada filed its application, it has withdrawn the last service, Simply One Service.
5. The Commission received no comments with respect to Bell Canada’s proposed list of residential local exchange services.
6. The Commission therefore determines that the 16 services listed in the Appendix to this decision are eligible for forbearance.
b) Competitor presence test
7. The Commission notes that information provided by parties confirms that there are, in addition to Bell Canada, at least two independent, facilities-based telecommunications service providers operating in the exchange of St-Jacques, 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 Bell Canada is capable of serving, and at least one, in addition to Bell Canada, is a facilities-based, fixed-line telecommunications service provider.
8. Accordingly, the Commission determines that the exchange of St-Jacques meets the competitor presence test.
c) Competitor quality of service (Q of S) results
9. The Commission notes that Bell Canada submitted competitor Q of S results, dated 15 February 2012, for the period of July to December 2011.3 The Commission has reviewed Bell Canada’s competitor Q of S results and finds that the company did not meet the Q of S standards for certain competitors. However, the Commission notes that in each case, there were few data points for the six-month period. The Commission also notes that in Telecom Decision 2007-58, it considered that where there are only a few data points during a six-month period, there is insufficient data to make a finding that a company has consistently provided below-standard Q of S.
10. The Commission therefore notes that Bell Canada has demonstrated that during the 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 Bell Canada meets the competitor Q of S criterion for this period.
d) Communications plan
12. The Commission has reviewed Bell Canada’s proposed communications plan and is satisfied that it meets the information requirements set out in Telecom Decision 2006-15. However, the Commission considers that the company should change the city, province, and postal code information in the mailing address for the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, as set out in the plan, to “Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2.”
13. The Commission approves the proposed communications plan with the revision outlined above and directs Bell Canada to provide the resulting communications materials to its customers, in both official languages where appropriate.
Conclusion
14. The Commission determines that Bell Canada’s application regarding the exchange of St-Jacques, Quebec, 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 Bell Canada 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 the exchange of St-Jacques, Quebec, 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 this exchange 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 Bell Canada of these residential local exchange services in this exchange would be unlikely to impair unduly the continuance of a competitive market for these services.
18. In light of the above, the Commission approves Bell Canada’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 exchange of St-Jacques, Quebec, 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 Bell Canada to file revised tariff pages with the Commission within 30 days of the date of this decision.
19. In Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-291, the Commission determined that the large incumbent local exchange carriers would no longer receive subsidies for residential network access services (NAS) in high-cost exchanges for which the Commission has granted forbearance from regulation. Therefore, in accordance with the directions in Appendix B to Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-291, Bell Canada is to stop reporting to the Central Fund Administrator any high-cost residential NAS associated with the exchange of St-Jacques, effective the date of this decision.
Secretary General
Related documents
- Obligation to serve and other matters, Telecom Regulatory Policy
CRTC 2011-291, 3 May 2011, as amended by Telecom Regulatory
Policy CRTC 2011-291-1, 12 May 2011 - Forbearance from the regulation of retail voice mail services provided by the incumbent local exchange carriers, Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2010-777, 20 October 2010
- 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
- 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 residential local exchange services in Fort McMurray, Alberta, Telecom Decision CRTC 2007-58, 25 July 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
Appendix
| Tariff | Item | List of services |
|---|---|---|
| 6716 | 29 | Telephone Set Loss Charge |
| 6716 | 70 | Rate Schedules for Primary Exchange (Local) Services |
| 6716 | 72 | Reference of Calls |
| 6716 | 73 | Telephone Number Services |
| 6716 | 82 | Toll Restriction |
| 6716 | 86 | Call Display Blocking |
| 6716 | 220 | Extra Listings - Omission of a Primary Exchange Listing |
| 6716 | 1060 | Service on Stationary Boats, Ships, Trailers and Trains |
| 6716 | 1130 | Suspension of Service |
| 6716 | 2150 | Push-Button Dialling (Touch-Tone) |
| 6716 | 2165 | Calling Features |
| 6716 | 2185 | Single Number Reach |
| 6716 | 2200 | Call Blocking Service |
| 6716 | 2300 | Telephone Station Equipment |
| 6716 | 4699 | Internet Call Display Service |
| 6716 | 7031 | Bell Digital Voice |
Footnotes:
[1] In this decision, “residential local exchange services” refers to local exchange services used by residential customers to access the public switched telephone network and any associated service charges, features, and ancillary services.
[2] These competitors are RCI, TCC, and Videotron.
[3] The Commission notes that Bell Canada originally submitted competitor Q of S results for the period of May to October 2008. However, 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.
- Date modified: