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This page has been archived on the Web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, 21 October 2013
Our Reference: 8640-O2-201309815
BY EMAIL
To: Distribution list
RE: Interrogatories with respect to the request for forbearance from the regulation of retail directory assistance services
The Commission received an application, dated 5 July 2013, from l’Association des compagnies de Téléphone du Québec (ACTQ) on behalf of the companies it represents; DMTS; the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association (ITPA) on behalf of the companies it represents; KMTS; and NorthernTel, Limited Partnership (Northern Tel) [collectively referred to as a group of small incumbent local exchange carriers (small ILECs)].
This group of small ILECs requested, pursuant to section 34 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act), that the Commission make a determination to refrain from exercising its powers and performing its duties under sections 25, 27, 29, and 31 of the Act in relation to the retail directory assistance (DA) services that they currently provide and to services of the same class that they may offer in the future.
The group of small ILECs noted that in order to determine whether a telecommunications service is, or will be, subject to competition sufficient to protect the interests of users, the Commission has established a framework in Review of regulatory framework, Telecom Decision CRTC 94-19, 16 September 1994 (Telecom Decision 94-19).
Commission staff has reviewed the application and considers that additional information is required in order for the Commission to consider the application under the Telecom Decision 94-19 framework. The ACTQ on behalf of each of the companies it represents; DMTS; the ITPA on behalf of each of the companies it represents; KMTS; and NorthernTel are requested to provide comprehensive answers, including any supporting information, to the attached interrogatories.
Amtelecom Limited Partnership (Ametelecom) and People’s Tel Limited Partnership (People’s Tel), both operating as EastLink, as well as TBayTel, were not part of the group of small ILECs that filed the 5 July 2013 application.
Since it would be beneficial to consider forbearance from the regulation of retail DA services provided by all of the small ILECs in one proceeding, applications from EastLink (for Amtelecom and People’s Tel) and TBayTel for forbearance from the regulation of their retail DA services, received by 12 November 2013 will be considered at the same time as the 5 July 2013 application. If EastLink (for Amtelecom and People’s) and TBayTel file applications for forbearance, they are to provide comprehensive answers, including any supporting information, to the attached interrogatories.
Responses to these interrogatories are to be filed with the Commission, and served on all parties to this proceeding, by 13 November 2013.
Written arguments may be filed with the Commission with respect to the forbearance applications and the responses to the interrogatories, serving copies on all other parties by
22 November 2013.
All applicants may file reply arguments with the Commission, serving copies on all other parties, by 29 November 2013.
Yours sincerely
Original signed by
Mario Bertrand
Director, Dispute Resolution
Telecommunications
Interrogatories
1. Provide a copy of the company’s tariffs for Directory Assistance (DA) service.
2. Describe what type of information could be provided to a caller who has contacted DA service requesting a telephone number.
3. With respect to the DA services that the company now offers, provide a discussion on the services of the same class that the company may offer in the future.
4. With respect to alternative directory information (DI) and directory assistance (DA) services, provide an estimate of the percentage of local exchange service subscribers, in the company’s operating territory, who must obtain DA service directly from the company (i.e. that do not have access to cell phone or Internet access services).
5. Identify and describe any reasonable alternatives to the company’s DA services, and indicate whether each of the alternatives is available to customers that do not have access to cell phone or Internet access services.
6. Provide for each of the years from 2009 to 2012:
(a) the number of business local exchange service subscribers and the number of residential local exchange subscribers, using DA, who paid charges for that service; and
(b) the number of local exchange service subscribers who received DA at no charge pursuant to one of the charge exemptions identified in the company’s tariffs.
7. For each of the years 2009 to 2012, provide the number of DA calls to the company made by:
(a) residential local exchange subscribers; and
(b) business local exchange subscribers.
8. With respect to long distance and overseas directory information:
(a) Identify any alternative sources that provide these services.
(b) Provide a discussion on the potential barriers to local exchange service subscribers gaining access to these alternative sources, identified in response to (a).
9. For each of the years 2009 to 2012, provide the number of DA calls made to the company for long distance and overseas directory information made by
(a) residential local exchange subscribers; and
(b) business local exchange subscribers.
10. Indicate whether the company provides DA to obtain telephone numbers in the following areas:
(a) Local;
(b) Canada;
(c) United States of America;
(d) International.
If DA is provided, indicate the rate for these services and the tariff by which the services are provided.
11. Provide evidence, with supporting rationale, as to whether there are barriers to entry in the provision of telephone number inquiry services, such as DI and DA services in the company’s operating territory.
12. Indicate whether the company is requesting forbearance for what are commonly known as Alternate Billed Directory Assistance (ABDA) charges, which are billed to a calling card, a third number, or a credit card. If so, identify the tariff for the ABDA service.
13. Indicate whether the company provides Automatic Directory Assistance Call Completion (ADACC)[1] service. If so, indicate the tariff under which the service is provided and whether ADACC service is part of the application for forbearance from regulation.
Distribution list:
Serge Desy, ACTQ, sdesy@actq.qc.ca
Jonathan Holmes, ITPA, jonathan.holmes@itpa.ca
Michel Gilbert, Northern Tel, DMTS and KMTS, mgilbert@telebec.com
Lori MacLean, Eastlink (Amtelecom and People’s), lori.maclean@corp.Eastlink.ca
Robert Olenick, TBayTel, rob.olenick@tbaytel.com
cc: Public Interest Advocacy Centre as counsel for Consumers’ Association of Canada and National Anti-Poverty Organization, piac@piac.ca
Union des consommateurs, union@consommateur.qc.ca
Danny Moreau, CRTC, danny.moreau@crtc.gc.ca
[1] ADACC service permits the service provider to complete a call following a DA service inquiry.
- Date modified: