ARCHIVED - Letter
This page has been archived on the Web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.
Ottawa, 13 July 2012
Our Reference: 8662-C182-201202324
BY E-MAIL
Mr. Philippe Gauvin
Bell Canada
Senior Counsel - Regulatory Law & Policy
Floor 19
160 Elgin Street
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2C4
bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Mr. Denis E. Henry
Bell Aliant
Vice-President - Regulatory, Government Affairs and Public Law
Floor 19
160 Elgin Street
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2C4
regulatory@bell.aliant.ca
Mr. Ted Woodhead
Vice-President - Telecom Policy & Regulatory Affairs
TELUS
215 Slater Street, 8th floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 0A6
regulatory.affairs@telus.com
Mr. Robert Hersche
Director of Regulatory Affairs
2121 Saskatchewan Drive
Regina, Saskatchewan S4P 3Y2
document.control@sasktel.com
Dear Sirs:
RE: File # 8662-C182-201202324 - Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc.
Part 1 Application to Review and Vary Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-703 and Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-704 - Request for disclosure of costing information filed in confidence
This letter addresses requests for disclosure of information for which a claim of confidentiality has been made in the context of the process relating to Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. Part 1 application.
On 5 July 2012, Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. (CNOC) filed requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality had been claimed by TELUS Communications Company (TELUS), Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel) and Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership's and Bell Canada (the Companies) in their responses to Commission staff’s 6 June 2012 interrogatories concerning the calculation of the CBB capacity rate as it applies to large incumbent local exchange carriers. On the same date, MTS Inc. and Allstream Inc. (collectively, MTS Allstream) filed requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality had been claimed by TELUS.
On 10 July 2010, TELUS, SaskTel, and the Companies 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
It should be noted that 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 all of the considerations set out above, the information filed under a claim of confidentiality in response to the requests for information 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.
Filing Requirement
The information to be provided on the public record is set out in Attachment 1 - Disclosure of information designated as confidential. This information is to be filed with the Commission, and served on all parties, by 20 July 2012.
In Attachment 2, Commission staff is posing additional interrogatories seeking clarification of previous information filed by parties in response to Commission interrogatories and additional information that it considers necessary to develop the record. This information is to be filed with the Commission, and served on all parties, by 3 August 2012. The level of disclosure of information in the responses should reflect disclosure rulings to date.
In light of Commission staff’s interrogatories, the remaining process dates as set out in the
6 June 2012 Commission staff letter are revised as follows:
All parties may file additional written comments with the Commission solely in relation to matters that are the subject of Commission staff’s interrogatories dated 6 June 2012 and
13 July 2012, serving copies on all other parties, by 13 August 2012. Parties wishing to comment may file reply comments with the Commission, serving copies on all other parties, by 20 August 2012.
The above material must be received, not merely sent, by this date. Copies of the documents should also be sent to yvan.davidson@crtc.gc.ca.
Yours sincerely,
‘Original signed by Y. Davidson’
Yvan Davidson
Director, Competitor Services and Costing
Telecommunications Directorate
c.c.: Interested Parties to Telecom Notice of Consultation 2011-77
Chris Seidl, CRTC, chris.seidl@crtc.gc.ca
Lynne Fancy, CRTC, lynne.fancy@crtc.gc.ca
Doug Thurston, CRTC, doug.thurston@crtc.gc.ca
Attach. (2)
Interested Parties to Telecom Notice of Consultation 2011-77
pkgdonovan2@gmail.com; regulatory@vianet.ca; lefebvre@rogers.com; constantly@rogers.com; lainwired@gmail.com; jim-johnston@cogeco.ca; tracy.cant@ontera.ca; linda_maljan@gov.nt.ca; kevanst.john@gmail.com; Regulatory@sjrb.ca; tom.copeland@caip.ca ; lisagoetz@globalive.com; vince.valentini@tdsecurities.com; crtcubb@douville.org; douglas216@shaw.ca; cataylor@cyberus.ca; jkolyn@ikano.com; angusoliver320@gmail.com; bcampbell@skywaywest.com; martina.emard@lethbridgecollege.ca; babramson@mccarthy.ca; regulatory@telnetcommunications.com; bell.regulatory@bell.ca ; regulatory@bell.aliant.ca; regulatory@execulink.com; jcarter@surenet.net; mike.manvell@switchworks.com; ghariton@sympatico.ca; ctacit@tacitlaw.com; crtcmail@gmail.com; scott@beamdog.com; mmallani@yahoo.ca; d.olafson@shaw.ca; wally@ciaccess.com; jared.mcateer@istockphoto.com; thepga@gmail.com; dirkalgera@gmail.com; tfarrelly@bryston.ca; al@purepages.ca; rubenstein.mark@gmail.com; jamiea@storm.ca; glenrfarrell@gmail.com; dr.wilson@wilson-research.ca; jacqueslee917@gmail.com; catherine.middleton@ryerson.ca; apilon@acninc.com; deschec@ircm.qc.ca; jebouchard@phdvideo.com; ian_fraser@nomorecrtcspam.ca; spaesani@gmail.com; dmckeown@viewcom.ca; peterdasilva@yahoo.ca; abriggs@cogeco.ca; rwadsworth@sandvine.com; document.control@sasktel.com; sidneirohr@hotmail.com; ivan@vibrantprints.ca; jae@c-art.com; rem00126@hotmail.com; cmich@rogers.com; tzaritsa1000@hotmail.com; chad.cunningham@cwct.ca; renaonlinenow@gmail.com; tisrael@cippic.ca; jfleger@jflegerlaw.com; andyb@teksavvy.com; samsonmi@tlb.sympatico.ca; andre.labrie@mcccf.gouv.qc.ca; regulatory@primustel.ca; amanevich@heenan.ca; brian@colenet.ca; Regulatory.Matters@corp.eastlink.ca; adena.dinn@calliougroup.com; anlakenews@gmail.com; regulatory@bcba.ca; satkepa@rogers.com; lukejwohlgemut@hotmail.com; Smartyjones@sympatico.ca; ricka@zing-net.ca; kirsten.embree@fmc-law.com; hemond@consommateur.qc.ca; grayden@graydenlaing.com; john.temprile@vivosonic.com; yuandme@gmail.com; broxx@shaw.ca; syscool77@hotmail.com; duarte@aetoronto.ca; eric.leclerc@iaah.ca; jroots@cad.ca; jonathan.holmes@ota.on.ca; mike@mikeaudet.com; mena_samuel@hotmail.com; iworkstation@mtsallstream.com; dennis@iplink.net; rob.olenick@tbaytel.com ; shannonbgroves@yahoo.com; t_wardman@hotmail.com; jfmezei@vaxination.ca; scott@zip.ca; ml.auer@sympatico.ca; cbachalo@juniper.net; mdrobac@netflix.com; andrewoca@gmail.com; hannon@rogers.com; hijbji@gmail.com; blackwell@giganomics.ca; erik.waddell@ic.gc.ca; david.watt@rci.rogers.com; regulatory.affairs@telus.com; Andreea.Todoran@ic.gc.ca; cjprudham@barrettxplore.com; regulatory@teksavvy.com; crtc@mhgoldberg.com; piac@piac.ca; telecom.regulatory@cogeco.com; regaffairs@quebecor.com; regulatory@distributel.ca; marc@teksavvy.com; munly@worldbroadbandfoundation.org; henault_claude@hotmail.com; regulatory@cnoc.ca
- Date modified: