CRTC denies Bell bid to share area code costs with other local telephone providers

A push by Bell Canada to share the costs of new area codes with other telephony providers was dealt a blow last week when the CRTC denied an application on the issue. But previous area code relief decisions show the commission is moving in the right direction with providing more preparation time and leaning towards lower-cost solutions to area code relief. The commission ruled last Thursday that the current method in which area costs are calculated is still valid. In its decision, the CRTC noted that while competitors and new entrants have place increasing demand on numbering resources, incumbent telephone companies remain major contributors and therefore should bear the brunt of the costs. Telecom Decision 2009-707 stems from a Part VII application filed by Bell in February asking the commission to change the way it calculates costs to local telephone providers when opening new area codes and implementing 10-digit dialing in existing area codes. Bell said the current methodology doesn’t encourage industry players to opt for the lowest cost solution for area code relief projects and argued that a “shared-cost approach for funding of current and future area code relief projects is more appropriate and more equitable than the current model whereby each carrier is responsible for its own costs of implementing area code relief.” While Bell wouldn’t publicly disclose its costs for area code relief, it said it pays significantly more in its incumbent territory than it does in the BC and Alberta regions where it’s considered a competitive carrier. It pointed to Telus Corp.’s costs in its incumbent territories for illustrative purposes noting that BC, Alberta and Quebec, the costs were $3,440,000, $4,162,000 and $2,912,000 respectively. As a result, Bell said the commission should consider the broader industry costs in area code relief projects before it can determine the least-cost solution. The CRTC disagreed. “The commission considers that although there is a cost discrepancy between Bell Canada and other carriers with respect to relief implementation planning, this discrepancy is justifiable given the disparity in network size and age, customer base, and overall consumption of numbering resources,” stated the CRTC in Telecom Decision 2009-707. That Bell’s application was denied isn’t that much of a concern because the commission has shown a willingness to explore lower-cost alternatives in previous area code relief projects such as the 450 and 705 decisions. These previous rulings lay the foundation for significant IT cost savings as a result of greater lead times and overall improved preparation. Perry Hoffman is an Ottawa-based freelance writer. He can be reached at perry@messagingmechanics.com.

CRTC denies Bell bid to share area code costs with other local telephone providers

News | 11/23/2009 7:15 pm 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