ARCHIVED - Telecom Order CRTC 2013-580
This page has been archived on the Web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, 31 October 2013
Videotron Ltd. – Introduction of new wholesale third-party Internet access service speed
File number: Tariff Notice 44
1. The Commission received an ex parte application from Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of its affiliate Videotron Ltd. (Videotron), dated 7 May 2012, in which Videotron proposed to introduce a 200-megabit-per-second (Mbps) wholesale third-party Internet access service speed (the Ultimate Speed 200 Mbps service).
2. Videotron proposed a monthly rate of $54.88 for its new service and filed a supporting cost study.
3. The Commission approved Videotron’s application on an interim basis in Telecom Order 2012-299.
4. The Commission received comments regarding Videotron’s application from the Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. (CNOC). The public record of this proceeding, which closed on 16 July 2012, is available on the Commission’s website at www.crtc.gc.ca under “Public Proceedings” or by using the file number provided above.
5. CNOC requested that the Commission, among other things, ensure that the methodology that Videotron used to derive the proposed rate complies fully with the Commission’s determinations in Telecom Decision 2006-77, Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-703, and other applicable decisions.
6. Following a request for information, Videotron submitted a revised monthly rate of $53.15 to reflect a change in the cost study’s start date from 1 July 2011 to 1 January 2012.
Commission’s analysis and determinations
7. The Commission notes that in Telecom Decision 2013-75, it denied an application from Videotron to review and vary the methodology used to calculate the company’s monthly capacity rates for wholesale high-speed access services set out in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-703, which could have been relevant to the Ultimate Speed 200 Mbps service that is the subject of the present application. The Commission found that the approach set out in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-703 appropriately compensates carriers for their costs while allowing for competition in the market. The Commission also notes that Videotron’s revised proposed monthly rate for the Ultimate Speed 200 Mbps service is consistent with its determinations in that decision.
8. Accordingly, the Commission considers that no adjustments are required to the revised proposed rate for the Ultimate Speed 200 Mbps service as a result of Videotron’s review and vary application.
9. In light of the above, the Commission approves on a final basis the revised monthly rate of $53.15 for Videotron’s Ultimate Speed 200 Mbps service speed, effective 17 May 2012, and directs Videotron to issue revised tariff pages within 10 days of the date of this order.
- Quebecor Media Inc. and Videotron G.P. – Application to review and vary the approach used to establish capacity rates in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-703, Telecom Decision CRTC 2013-75, 21 February 2013
- Videotron Ltd. – Ex parte application, Telecom Order CRTC 2012-299, 17 May 2012
- Billing practices for wholesale residential high-speed access services, Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-703, 15 November 2011, as amended by Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-703-1, 22 December 2011
- Cogeco, Rogers, Shaw, and Videotron – Third-party Internet access service rates, Telecom Decision CRTC 2006-77, 21 December 2006
 Revised tariff pages can be submitted to the Commission without a description page or a request for approval; a tariff application is not required.
- Date modified: