Eliminate Billed Number Screening fees in one case, reduce it in other: Call-Net

Call-Net Enterprises is asking the CRTC to stop Bell Canada from charging it Billed Number Screening (BNS) fees when it migrates telephone numbers to its service. BNS fees charged by Bell Canada have cost the CLEC millions of dollars in the past six years, Call-Net states in a Part VII application filed on March 14. The filing not only asks the CRTC to order Bell Canada to cease charging BNS fees for each telephone number that it migrates to its service, but also to lower the charges that the ILEC applies when it adds, deletes or changes the screening status of Call-Net’s customers’ local telephone numbers in the BNS database, known as the Line Identification Database (LIDB). Call-Net specifically is asking the CRTC to reduce the markup to 15% and update the corresponding tariff for BNS transaction fees whenever the CLEC submits a request to Bell Canada to make an addition, deletion or change in the screening status of numbers in the BNS database. Call-Net tells the CRTC that Bell Canada currently automatically bills $3.16 whenever Call-Net has migrated a telephone number to its network. Call-Net argues that the BNS fee associated with porting numbers should be eliminated since the phone number is already in the database. Call-Net states BNS fees should only apply if its customers decide to change the status of a telephone number in the database. "If an end-customer chooses to migrate from Bell Canada to Call-Net, it is very unlikely that they would also wish to change the BNS status of their telephone number and, therefore, Bell Canada should leave the number and its status unchanged during migration," it states in its application. "Call-Net has reluctantly paid the transaction fees for LNP (local number portability) ports historically, but submits that this practice was never approved by the commission and the time has come for the CRTC’s ruling on this practice," reads the Part VII application. The LIDB is a database of all numbers that enables operators to confirm that customers can make or accept bill-to-third party calls (C/BTT) regardless of who their local service provider and originating carrier is. Call-Net notes in its application that whenever a calling party uses an operator to complete a call with the billing to be paid by the called party of the third party, the operator will locate the telephone number in the LIDB and check to see if it is screened or blocked from that type of billing. If the number can be billed, the call is completed by the operator. The BNS system essentially allows a local exchange carrier to turn the screening on or off for its customers. Call-Net submits that it is overcharged by Bell is when the CLEC adds new local numbers or changes the status of customers’ numbers in the LIDB. Therefore, it tells the CRTC that it is time to re-evaluate the costs of the LIDB, particularly since the last time the issue was examined was back in July 1998. Call-Net points out that the charges appear to be out-of-date since IT systems have been updated and the process is more automated. Call-Net has chosen the 15% markup as the benchmark because it states the BNS service is categorized as a Category I in a 2003 commission decision, and those kinds of services can only be hiked by 15%. Call-Net tells the CRTC that the transaction cost being charged by Bell for changes is "exorbitant when compared to other similar services offered as near essential or commercial offering…" For example, the phone company points out that the Category I rate for a Basic Listening Interchange File (BLIF) is only about 52 cents per record. "While Call-Net acknowledges that this service provides a record from a database as opposed to providing for input to a database, the labour input for this task should be very similar," the company notes in its complaint. Call-Net is asking for new more recent cost studies. A Bell Canada spokesperson tells Network Letter only that the incumbent is looking at undertaking a revised cost study of the BNS service. Call-Net stresses that the BNS service should be considered essential, which is different from the view advocated by now-defunct Stentor back in July 1998. Stentor said it was not essential and thus should not be rated using essential or near essential pricing principles. The CRTC did not provide Stentor’s BNS tariff until September 2000, when it granted an interim approval. Call-Net maintains that the regulator did not determine whether BNS was essential or not, and that the CRTC’s preliminary view was that, in light of the Stentor breakup, the arrangement at that time and the rate structure might no longer apply. Call-Net submits that while the CRTC did not undertake any specific procedure on the BNS tariff, it did in 2003 conclude in Telecom Decision 2003-11 that the BNS service should be priced at Category I rates." Citing competitive reasons, Call-Net filed in confidence the amount of money that it expects to spend on the BNS fees. All that is on the public record is that Call-Net has spent millions on the service over the past six years, and that one-third of the costs are due to additions or changes to the LIDB, and two-thirds result from migrating numbers.

Eliminate Billed Number Screening fees in one case, reduce it in other: Call-Net

News | 03/31/2005 5:00 am EST

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us