Distributel’s claims for revised interim rates for disagg regime are unfounded: Rogers, Quebecor

Distributel Ltd.’s request to revise interim access rates for disaggregated wholesale high-speed access (HSA) services “is another piecemeal attempt by resellers to upend the commission’s determinations and policy objectives” established in the CRTC’s 2015 regime, according to an intervention from Rogers Communications Inc. The intervention, published by the commission Thursday, is in response to the Part 1 application filed by Distributel in March in which the company argued it is unreasonable to pay for access to disaggregated fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) services – at the same speeds and offered over the same last mile access facilities as FTTN in the aggregated regime – for a higher price. Rogers said Distributel failed to meet any one of three criteria – identify any serious issues, irreparable harm or the balance of convenience – required to introduce interim relief. “This application is part of a history of continuous patchwork Part 1 applications by resellers on the disaggregated regime in an attempt to erode the policy and objectives set in . Even if unsuccessful, these applications create uncertainty and disrupt the industry simply through the constant proceedings surrounding the regime,” Rogers argued in its intervention. Quebecor Inc.’s comments echoed those of Rogers, claiming that Distributel's arguments for the changes were “unfounded” and “rather reflect yet another attempt” by resellers to disrupt the process of implementing the regime. “The cost differences between the bundled plan and the unbundled plan are much more complex than Distributel claims,” Quebecor wrote in its intervention. “Indeed, the access speed rates, both for the unbundled regime and for the bundled regime, are based on several network cost elements. Of course, some cost elements may exist in one regime and not exist in the other, even at the level of last mile HSA installations," Quebecor wrote. The CRTC announced the disaggregated regime in 2015; though initially supported by the Competitive Network Operators of Canada (of which Distributel is a member), the group sounded the alarm that the system had turned out to be “unworkable” in 2017, and asked the regulator to reconsider aspects of the regime. The CRTC then acknowledged that the level of disaggregation may need to be reconsidered, initiating a consultation in June and suspending its proceeding to set final rates for the regime. In October of 2020, CNOC argued to the regulator that the level of disaggregation must be reduced significantly for there to be any chance of wholesale-based ISPs accessing the model. That month, CNOC also asked the CRTC to make incumbents disclose more information about their disaggregated configurations. Incumbents objected, but the CRTC ultimately granted the request in August. Now Distributel would like the regulator to set interim rates for the disaggregated regime for Rogers, BCE Inc., and Videotron. at the same level as the older aggregated regime in certain situations. CNOC wrote in an intervention that it agreed with Distributel's requests, and argued that "Granting Distributel’s requested relief is one of several important steps toward a workable disaggregated access regime. "There are no policy reasons that otherwise require or justify differential aggregated and disaggregated HSA rates for the same access components," CNOC wrote, adding that the discrepancy therefore violates section 27(1) of the Telecommunications Act, which stipulates that rates be "just and reasonable." Rogers argued the company failed to identify serious issues because “the underlying question of should the aggregated and disaggregated WHSA rates be identical ignores the fact that Phase 2 based wholesale rates comprised of similar underlying facilities can produce different rates due to the timing of the cost study.” “As is the case here, the aggregated and disaggregated cost studies were submitted at different points in time and thus result in different rates. In its own intervention, Bell wrote that “conceptually” it does not oppose the Distributel request as it would apply to the incumbent. Essentially Distributel asked that the current access rates for disaggregated broadband service – fibre-to-the-node (DBS-FTTN) set on an interim basis at a rate of $25.62 per month be reduced on an interim basis to the level of the current final access rates for gateway access service (GAS-FTTN) for the same speeds of $23.79. “Harmonizing the access rates for GAS-FTTN and DBS-FTTN services should not raise public policy concerns,” Bell wrote. Saskatchewan Telecommunications Holding Corp. did not comment on every aspect of the request, however, it “strongly objected” to Distributel’s recommendation to “state a general expectation that when disaggregated HSA services not currently offered become available from HSA service providers, the access rates for disaggregated HSA services offered by each will, at a minimum, not be higher than their respective aggregated HSA access rates that are in the same tariffed speed band and offered over the same access facilities.” Sasktel argued that should the CRTC approve the request, it would put itself in a position to prejudge services that have not yet been defined along with the regulatory environment that may exist at the time a future disaggregated HSA service is created. The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) supported the proposal and said Distributel’s request was “only a drop in the bucket” in what needs to be done to help competitors overcome what PIAC sees as larger business issues in the marketplace. “Competitors are falling further and further behind in the deployment of next generation technologies that provide the faster and more reliable internet services that Canadians want. In the absence of retail rate regulation, there needs to be a robust competitive market improving the availability, accessibility, and affordability of these services,” PIAC wrote in its intervention. The advocacy group argued that prolonged procedures and what it called “policy missteps limiting mandated aggregated access” have harmed the competition and the development and use of technology. “Competitors need any help they can get as they continue to wait for the Commission’s decisions on: the disaggregated network configuration; final disaggregated rates; and the appropriateness of Phase 2 costing and the essentiality test in setting wholesale rates,” PIAC wrote. – Reporting by Jenna Cocullo at jcocullo@thewirereport.ca and editing by Michael Lee-Murphy at mleemurphy@thewirereport.ca

Distributel’s claims for revised interim rates for disagg regime are unfounded: Rogers, Quebecor

News | May 5, 2022

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Distributel’s claims for revised interim rates for disagg regime are unfounded: Rogers, Quebecor

News | May 5, 2022

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Bell accuses Telus of misleading CRTC regarding Manitoba outage

Amazon Prime ‘not anything like’ a BDU, CRTC panel told; union disagrees

CPAC, CBC want prominence, support from online streaming platforms

CRTC told to remember local programming, feature films in new broadcast regime

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us