ARCHIVED - Letter

Ottawa, April 10, 2014

Our reference: 8740-C6-201209180

BY EMAIL

Mr. William Sandiford
Chair of the Board and President
Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc.
107-85 Curlew Drive
Toronto, Ontario M3A 2P8
regulatory@cnoc.ca

Mr. Michel Messier
Director, Regulatory Affairs, Telecommunications
Cogeco Cable Inc.
5 Place Ville Marie, Suite 1700
Montréal, Québec H3B 0B3
telecom.regulatory@cogeco.com

RE: Cogeco Cable Inc. Tariff Notices 37 and 37A – Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc.’s request for disclosure

Dear Sirs:

This letter addresses request for disclosure of information for which a claim of confidentiality has been made in the context of the cost study filed in support of Cogeco Cable Inc. (Cogeco) Tariff Notices 37 and 37A.

On 10 February 2014, the Commission received a letter from the Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. (CNOC) requesting, among other things, that Cogeco disclose costing information associated with Tariff Notices 37 and 37A. Specifically, CNOC requested that certain information filed in confidence by Cogeco in the cost study in support of its application (filed on 12 December 2013), including the average distance between the net new nodes to the fibre backbone, be added to the public record.

On 28 March 2014, the Commission received Cogeco’s response to CNOC’s request for disclosure. Cogeco submitted that the data associated with its cost study, including the average distance between the net new nodes and the fibre backbone, was significantly outdated and required to be revised. Cogeco indicated that it was planning to file a revised cost study in support of its application related to Tariff Notice 37A at the same time it files its cost study in support of its application related to Tariff Notice 42A. Cogeco has identified that it intends to file the Tariff Notice 42A cost study support by the end of April 2014, in accordance with Commission staff’s letter dated 17 February 2014[1].

Commission staff considers that the cost study information associated with Tariff Notices 37 and 37A placed on the public record fulfills the requirements set out in the Commission staff letter dated 13 September 2013[2] and in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2012-592[3].

With respect to the average distance between the new nodes and the fibre backbone filed in Tariff Notice 37A, CNOC indicated that public disclosure of this figure would assist interveners in assessing the reasonableness of the node segmentation cost component, which is an important factor in the cost study. CNOC added that this figure was meaningless beyond the context of the cost study and that there was no competitive value to it. In response, Cogeco submitted that disclosure of this information would provide competitors with specific information related to Cogeco’s network infrastructure that would not be available otherwise, and that Cogeco consistently treats this information confidentially.

Disclosure

Commission staff notes that the Commission addresses requests for the disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed in light of sections 38 and 39 of the Telecommunications Act, and sections 30 and following of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure (the Rules). To address this type of request, the Commission must assess whether any specific direct harm is likely to result from the disclosure of the information in question. To justify a confidentiality claim, any such harm must be sufficient as to outweigh the public interest in the disclosure. To make this assessment, the Commission must consider a number of factors, including the following:

• the degree of competition that exists in a particular market or that is expected to occur. 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;

• 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

• 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.

Filing Requirement

After assessing the above-mentioned factors, Commission staff considers that the average distance between the new nodes and the fibre backbone, which was filed under a claim of confidentiality as part of Cogeco’s application related to Tariff Notice 37A, is to be placed on the public record of this proceeding as the specific direct harm, if any, likely to be caused by disclosure would not outweigh the public interest in the disclosure.

Commission staff notes that in its letter dated 17 February 2014, it set the process date for the filing of interventions related to Tariff Notice 42A to be no later than 30 May 2014 or within 30 days following the date on which Cogeco files its cost study. Commission staff considers it appropriate to apply the same process date for Tariff Notice 37A.

In light of the above, the process dates regarding Cogeco’s application related to Tariff Notice 37A are amended as follows:

1) Cogeco is to file a revised cost study no later than 30 April 2014, making available on the public record of this proceeding the disclosure of information consistent with previous disclosure rulings to date;

2) All parties may file interventions no later than 30 May 2014 or within 30 days following the date on which Cogeco files its cost study; and

3) Cogeco may file reply comments no later than 10 days following the date of receipt of such interventions.

Commission staff is continuing its analysis of the application and expects to require Cogeco to file additional information.

Sincerely,

Original signed by

Lyne Renaud
Director, Competitor Services and Costing
Telecommunications Sector

c. c. Ramin Adim, Senior Analyst, CRTC, 819-997-4298, ramin.adim@crtc.gc.ca
Martin Brazeau, Senior Analyst, CRTC, 819-997-1028, martin.brazeau@crtc.gc.ca

[1] Cogeco Cable Inc. Tariff Notices 42 and 42A – Request to file cost study, Letter, 17 February 2014

[2] Information to be provided in support of wholesale service tariff applications, Letter, 13 September 2013

[3] Confidentiality of information used to establish wholesale service rates, Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2012-592, 26 October 2012

Date modified:

2014-04-15