[ BC/AT&T ]
I'm not sure if John Hunt has posted this yet.....
Subject: Bell Canada Tariff Notice No. 6077
Bell Canada ("the Company") is in receipt of a letter from AT&T Canada Long Distance Services Company (AT&T Canada LDS), dated and received 97 08 22, regarding Bell Canada's proposed Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) Access service, Tariff Notice No. 6077. Bell Canada submits the following reply pursuant to section 33 of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure.
Bell Canada generally denies all allegations and submissions made by AT&T Canada LDS which are inconsistent with the Company's stated positions. Failure to address any specific comment made by AT&T Canada LDS should not be taken as agreement or concurrence with such comment, where such agreement or concurrence would be contrary to the Company's interests.
In its letter, AT&T Canada LDS requests the Commission to initiate a public process to review the Company's proposed ADSL Access service tariff and recommends the disclosure of certain cost and revenue data which the Company has provided in confidence to the Commission.
By way of general comment in response to the issues raised by AT&T Canada LDS, the Company submits that the public process requested by AT&T Canada LDS would not be justified, nor in the public interest, and should be rejected by the Commission. With regard to the request for disclosure of certain
confidential cost and revenue information, the Company notes that the proposed ADSL Access is a service for which there are currently competitive alternatives, unlike the card swipe payphone access arrangement referred to in the AT&T Canada LDS reference to Stentor Tariff Notice No. 409 (TN 409) which the Commission deemed to be essential. As a competitive service offering, release by the Company of confidential cost and revenue data relating to ADSL Access service could seriously jeopardize the viability of the service and the Company's ability to compete in the marketplace for high-speed Internet access. Further elaboration is provided below.
A Longer Public Process Would Delay the Introduction of Bell Canada's High-speed Internet Access Service to Consumers
High-speed data-to-the-home capability primarily for Internet access applications, has been available exclusively from the cable companies for almost a year. Subjecting the Company's ADSL filing to a further regulatory proceeding would unnecessarily delay the availability to consumers of a competitive alternative to the cable companies' high-speed access services.
The Company also notes that the cable companies' coaxial cable Internet access service tariffs - Videotron Tariff Notice No. 1A, Cogeco Cable Canada Inc. Tariff Notice No. 1, and Rogers Cablesystems Tariff Notice No. 1. - were granted approval by the Commission without a public process such as the one proposed by AT&T Canada LDS.
AT&T Canada LDS Request for a More Complete Public Process
While AT&T submits that the ADSL Access service filing should be subjected to a more complete public process, the Company notes that, in accordance with the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure, interested parties have already had ample opportunity to submit comments. While potential intervenors have had 30 days to comment, it is particularly significant that the only intervention received is that from AT&T Canada LDS. No Internet Service Providers ("ISPs"), competitive providers of high-speed Internet access or end-user consumers have intervened or requested any additional public process. As AT&T Canada LDS pointed out in its submission, "Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are expected to form the main user group of the ADSL service..". The Company submits that the fact that no interventions have been received from the ISP community or from competitors for the provision of high-speed Internet access which comprise many well informed and vocal participants in the regulatory process, at a bare minimum, indicates that AT&T Canada LDS' assertion regarding the need for a lengthier regulatory proceeding is not shared by other industry participants and is unwarranted.
Efforts by the Company to Address the needs of ISPs
In response to AT&T Canada LDS' concern that ADSL Access service may not address the concerns and interests of the ISPs, the Company submits, as mentioned above, that the absence of interventions from the ISP community suggests that AT&T Canada LDS' concern is misplaced. The Company further notes that, in developing its ADSL Access service, it investigated the marketplace for high-speed Internet access and is confident that its proposed service offering meets a market need. In any event, Bell Canada's ADSL Access service will be competing against the cable companies' high-speed Internet access offerings and the Company submits that the marketplace, rather than AT&T Canada LDS should determine whether the service meets the needs of the marketplace.
Request for Disclosure of Certain Cost and Revenue Information
In its letter, AT&T Canada LDS asserts that Stentor TN 409 represents a relevant precedent to justify its claims for disclosure of confidential Company information.
In response, the Company notes that the Commission's directive to Stentor with respect to TN 409 on card swipe access, to disclose certain confidential cost information, was based on the view expressed by the Commission that there was no existing competition in the payphone market and that the functionality contemplated in that tariff filing was considered essential by the Commission.
The situation with ADSL is quite different. Significant competition now exists in the high speed Internet access market from the cable companies' high-speed Internet services. This position is supported by the Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP) in their 7 February 1997 comments pursuant to CRTC Public Notice 96-36. In particular, CAIP stated that the cable companies will initially have 100% of the high-speed Internet access market. The Company's ADSL Access service will provide ISPs the means to offer consumers alternatives to the cable companies' high-speed Internet access services and must, therefore, be considered as a competitive service.
Disclosure of the Company's confidential economic study information to actual and potential competitors could seriously affect the viability of the proposed ADSL Access service in the competitive high-speed Internet access market and the Company's ability to compete in that market. Accordingly cost and revenue details specific to the competitive service components must remain confidential.
With regard to the provision of more detailed costs and revenues for the ADSL Loop Administration and Support service component, the Company submits the following specific comments.
ADSL Loop Administration and Support has been unbundled from the ADSL Access service to provide competitors access to the Company's individual, primary exchange service lines for service providers wishing to provide a competitive alternative to the Company's ADSL Access service. This is the same utility functionality employed by the Company in the provision of its ADSL Access service. The Company is proposing to provide this functionality to others in a manner consistent with mandatory unbundling of essential local loops in bands C & D and the modified treatment of non-essential local loops in bands A & B identified in paragraphs 82 and 85 respectively of Telecom Decision CRTC 97-8. The ADSL Loop Administration and Support service component has been filed in accordance with all Commission requirements for new services. The imputation test for ADSL Access employed the tariff rate for ADSL Loop Administration and Support. The tariff rate for this item was determined based on its Phase II cost plus a 25% mark-up, consistent with the rating principles for essential facilities.
Bell Canada further notes in this respect, that its proposed tariff, by specifying and unbundling elements required for third party access, goes considerably further in ensuring that competitors may offer their own competitive services to the Company's ADSL high-speed Internet access service, than the representations made by the cable companies to provide third party access to their distribution networks which the Commission accepted in a number of Telecom Orders.
For all of the above reasons and in light of the relative small magnitude of the ADSL Loop Administration and Support component rate ($5.05 per month) in comparison with the overall ADSL Access service rate, the Company respectfully submits that the provision of more detailed cost and revenue information for this service component is unnecessary.
In light of the foregoing, the Company submits that the request of AT&T Canada LDS for a public process is not justified and should be rejected by the Commission. Further, AT&T Canada LDS makes no compelling argument for the provision of more detailed economic study information. However, should the Commission consider such a public process to be appropriate or the provision of more economic support data to be required, the Company respectfully requests interim approval of its proposed ADSL Access tariff, thereby enabling service providers to make high-speed data-to-the-home services available to consumers without further delay.
Yours truly,
Director - Regulatory Matters
c.c.: AT&T Canada LDS
crtc.gc.ca |
