Telnet loses fight to get lower wholesale access rates

Telnet Communications has failed to convince the CRTC to lower rates for facilities provided to it and other digital subscriber line service providers (DSLSPs) by incumbent carriers such as Bell Canada for the provision of high-speed Internet services (Telecom Decision 2006-67). In 2000, the commission approved rates charged by Bell and other incumbent telephone companies for the provision of local access facilities to DSLSPs. At the time, the CRTC stated that given the incumbent carriers were providing essentially the same facilities to DSLSPs as they were providing to competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs), the rates of the facilities charged to DSLSPs would be the same as those charged to CLECs. However, in 2005 the commission approved rate changes for customers using the Bell Canada gateway access service (GAS) and high speed access (HSA) service which cut the rate for these facilities to 50% of what was charged to CLECs. Telnet filed its application with the intent of obtaining the same rates as Bell’s GAS and HSA customers. Its principal argument was that the reduction in rates for GAS and HSA customers placed DSLSPs at a competitive disadvantage because of the higher rate they were required to pay for essentially the same service. Further, Telnet argued that the rate they paid for unbundled loops was in part designed to recover costs associated with equipment they did not use or take advantage of as they only used the copper loop facility when providing DSL services to their end customers and not the associated equipment designed to process voice communications. The commission noted in its decision to cut the tariff for GAS and HSA customers that the portion of the local access facility associated with voice processing equipment was already included as part of the GAS and HSA tariff. Further, the commission stated that if the full rate was charged when GAS or HSA service was provided over a dry loop (a local access facility used for the provision of Internet services only), the incumbent would actually recover its costs for the voice communications processing equipment twice – once under the unbundled loop tariff and again under the GSA and HSA tariffs. The commission also stated that service providers like Telnet make use of what’s called Type A unbundled loops – the facility between the end-customer premises and the wire centre. As such, the commission stated that there was no issue regarding over-recovery of costs when such loops are provided to DSLSPs at their current rates. Within the comments submitted in response to Telnet’s application, some interveners raised issues that were outside the scope of the proceeding. The CRTC has noted that some of these issues will come back before the commission again in the coming weeks. For example, the commission stated that issues related to access to remote loops would be considered in another proceeding currently before the commission in relation to Bell Canada tariff notice 6622.

Telnet loses fight to get lower wholesale access rates

News | 10/27/2006 4:00 am EDT

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us