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This page has been archived on the Web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, February 25, 2014
Our reference: 8663-C12-201313601
BY EMAIL
Distribution
RE: Review of wholesale services and associated policies, Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2013-551 – Requests for disclosure of information designated as confidential
Dear Madams/Sirs:
This letter addresses requests for disclosure of information designated as confidential made in proceeding initiated by Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2013-551, as amended.[1]
On 20 December 2013, the Commissioner of Competition (the Competition Bureau), the Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. and Primus Telecommunications Canada Inc. filed requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality had been claimed in connection with the Commission’s information requests dated 15 October 2013. Further, the Competition Bureau requested that information designated by parties as confidential be put on the public record, or be disclosed to the Competition Bureau only.[2]
On 17 January 2014, Bell Aliant and Bell Canada, Cogeco Cable Inc. (Cogeco), MTS Inc., Quebecor Media inc. (Videotron), Rogers Communications Partnership (RCP), Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel), Shaw Cablesystems G.P.(Shaw), and TELUS Communications Company (TCC) responded to the above requests.
The Competition Bureau’s request for selective disclosure is addressed in Part I, below, while requests for disclosure to the public are addressed in Part II and in Attachment 1 to this letter.
Part I - Selective disclosure to the Competition Bureau
Commission staff considers that it is necessary to consider whether such disclosure is, in the circumstances of this case, fair to other parties. One of the essential principles of procedural fairness is that the parties affected by a potential decision or action must know the case to be met and have a fair opportunity to respond to evidence and submissions alleged in opposition to their interests.
While the Competition Bureau itself is not adverse in interest to any of the other parties to the proceeding, its submissions will likely be inconsistent to the positions and interests of at least some of the parties to the proceeding. In the circumstances of this case, Commission staff considers that it would not be fair to other parties, and hence, would be inconsistent with the rules of procedural fairness to allow selective disclosure to the Competition Bureau. Given this, the Competition Bureau's request for selective disclosure is denied.[3]
Part II - Public requests for disclosure
Requests for disclosure of information designated as confidential are addressed in light of sections 38 and 39 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act) and sections 30 and following of the CRTC Rules of Practice and Procedure (the Rules of Procedure). In evaluating a request, an assessment is made as to whether the information falls into a category of information that can be designated confidential pursuant to section 39 of the Act. An assessment is then made as to whether there is any specific direct harm likely to result from the disclosure of the information in question and whether any such harm outweighs the public interest in disclosure. In making this evaluation, a number of factors are taken into consideration, including the degree of competition and the importance of the information for the purpose of obtaining a fuller record. The factors considered are discussed in more detail in Procedures for filing confidential information and requesting its disclosure in Commission proceedings, Broadcasting and Telecom Information Bulletin CRTC 2010-961, 23 December 2010, as amended by Broadcasting and Telecom Information Bulletin CRTC 2010-961-1, 26 October 2012.
Having regard to all the considerations set out above, unless otherwise expressly indicated, parties are to file with the Commission all information to be provided pursuant to this letter as set out in Attachment 1 by 14 March 2014.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
Lyne Renaud
Director, Competitor Services and Costing
Telecommunications Sector
c.c.: Philippe Kent, CRTC, 819 953-4057, philippe.kent@crtc.gc.ca
Attach (1)
Distribution List
james.e.dingwell@yahoo.com; nels2510@telus.net; robin.winsor@cybera.ca; steve@openmedia.ca; reza.rajabiun@ryerson.ca; darrellkrahn@shaw.ca; chall2k5@gmail.com; heather.b.gold@ftthcouncil.org; ron.murch@haskayne.ucalgary.ca; regulatory@fibernetics.ca; jeff_mcnamee@sympatico.ca; harry.sharma@canarie.ca; cedwards@ccsa.cable.ca; regulatory@ssimicro.com; egulatory.matters@corp.eastlink.ca; rs@summer.com; corinne.pohlmann@cfib.ca; john.pecman@cb-bc.gc.ca; jpanter@auroracollege.nt.ca; regulatory@sjrb.ca; radams@coquitlam.ca; slambert-racine@uniondesconsommateurs.ca; regulatory@bcba.ca; george.burger@vmedia.ca; ctacit@tacitlaw.com; david.watt@rci.rogers.com; bell.regulatory@bell.ca; iworkstation@mtsallstream.com; regulatory.affairs@telus.com; rob.olenick@tbaytel.com; jfleger@piac.ca; dennis.beland@quebecor.com; jonathan.holmes@itpa.ca; regulatory@distributel.ca; michel.messier@cogeco.com; document.control@sasktel.com; bell.regulatory@bell.ca; regulatory@primustel.ca; benjamin.sanders@gov.yk.ca; maryanne.bendfled@calgary.ca
Attachment 1
DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL
CRTC 15OCT13-101
No further disclosure is required by any party.
However, the Commission will make available, as soon as possible, an aggregated list of telecommunications service providers that purchase wholesale services from (a) the large incumbent local exchange carriers (telcos) and (b) the large cable companies (cablecos).
CRTC 15OCT13-103
Videotron is to disclose on the public record a complete list of the wholesale services provided by the company.
In addition, the Commission will also make available, as soon as possible, an aggregated list of the total wholesale revenues for each broad category of wholesale service for (a) large telcos and (b) large cablecos.
CRTC 15OCT13-104
Bell Aliant and Bell Canada, Cogeco, MTS Inc., Videotron, RCP, SaskTel, Shaw and TCC are to disclose on the public record their respective total wholesale service revenues broken down by regulated and forborne wholesale services for each of the designated years.
CRTC 15OCT13-106
TCC and Videotron are to disclose on the public record their responses at a level of disclosure comparable to that of the responses filed by other large incumbent carriers.
CRTC 15OCT13-201
No further disclosure is required by any party.
However, the Commission will make available, as soon as possible, the aggregated total capital expenditures and homes passed associated with fibre to the premises (FTTP) for the large telcos over the identified time period. Commission staff considers that, given the data collected and the associated network architectures, it cannot make available meaningful equivalent aggregated numbers for the large cablecos.
CRTC 15OCT13-202
TCC is to disclose on the public record their responses at a level of disclosure comparable to that of the responses filed by other large incumbent carriers.
In addition, the Commission will make available, as soon as possible, the aggregated total capital expenditures and homes passed associated with FTTP for the large telcos over the identified time period. Commission staff considers that, given the data collected and the associated network architectures, it cannot make available meaningful equivalent aggregated numbers for the large cablecos.
CRTC 15OCT13-203
Rogers is to disclose on the public record their responses at a level of disclosure comparable to that of the responses filed by other large incumbent carriers.
[1] Review of wholesale services and associated policies, Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2013-551, 15 October 2013, as amended by Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2013-551-1, 8 November 2013.
[2] On 28 January 2014, the Competition Bureau made an additional request to amend the associated process in order to be provided another opportunity to comment. On 21 February 2014, the Competition Bureau submitted additional comments regarding their request for selective disclosure.
[3] Commission staff notes that a similar request was made by the Competition Bureau during the proceeding that led to Revised regulatory framework for wholesale services and definition of essential service, Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-17, 3 March 2008, which was also subsequently denied.
- Date modified: