Telecom Commission Letter Addressed to Bragg Communications Inc.
Ottawa, 19 November 2018
Our reference: 1011-NOC2018-0214
Ms. Natalie MacDonald
Vice President, Regulatory
Bragg Communications Inc.
6080 Young Street
Halifax, NS B3K 5M3
Re: Review of the price cap and local forbearance regimes, Telecom Notice of Consultation 2018-214 Footnote1 – Requests for information
Dear Ms. MacDonald:
Pursuant to paragraph 39 of Telecom Notice of Consultation 2018-214, attached are requests for information from the Commission.
Responses to these requests for information are to be filed with the Commission by 19 December 2018. The responses must be received, not merely sent, by that date.
Original signed by
Director, Policy Framework
c.c.: Christine Brock, CRTC, (873) 353-5852, firstname.lastname@example.org
Request for information addressed to Bragg Communications Inc., carrying on business as Eastlink (Eastlink)
- Refer to paragraphs 22 to 28 of Bell Canada et al.’sFootnote2intervention where they proposed to increase regulated rates for residential primary exchange services (PES) to the highest approved rate of $38.34. These increases would be phased in over time with annual increases limited to the lesser of i) 1/3 of the difference between the existing rate and the regulated target price or ii) $2.50 for the large incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) and $4.00 for the small ILECs. Bell Canada et al. also proposed that following a three-year transition period, the rate element constraint would be either i) inflation for those rates that would be at the proposed price ceiling or ii) $2.50 (large ILECs) and $4.00 (small ILECs) for the rates that would require a longer transition period, until all regulated rates are aligned at the price ceiling.
Assume that Bell Canada et al.’s proposal above is adopted with the following changes:
- the price ceiling is set at $35.00 rather than $38.34;
- the maximum allowable increase per year is $1.50 for all ILECs; and
- the rate element constraint for rates at $35.00 and over is inflation.
- Provide, with supporting rationale, Eastlink's views on this approach.
- Provide Eastlink's views on whether the price ceiling for stand-alone PES in forborne areas should be allowed to increase in the same manner to $35.00.
- Based on this approach, reproduce tables similar to Tables 6 and 7 of Bell Canada et al.'s intervention, with supporting calculations and assumptions.
- Date modified: