SaskTel - Comments On Scope

Robert Hersche 2121 Saskatchewan Drive
Director of Regina, Saskatchewan

Regulatory Affairs S4P 3Y2
Telephone: (306) 777-5346

Fax: (306) 565-6216 Electronic Fax: (306) 791-1457
Internet: document.control@sasktel.sk.ca
22 February 2011
Filed Electronically
File No. 8661-C12-201102350
Mr. Robert A. Morin

Secretary General
Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N2
Dear Mr. Morin:
Re: Associated with Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2011-77, Review of billing
practices for wholesale residential high-speed access services
1. Saskatchewan Telecommunication (SaskTel) is in receipt of letters from the Public

Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) on its own behalf and as counsel to the
Consumers' Association of Canada (CAC) and from the Canadian Network
Operators Consortium Inc (CNOC) seeking drastic changes in scope in the
above-noted proceeding. SaskTel is also in receipt of the Commission’s letter of
15 February 2011, setting out process for replying to the above-noted letters.
The following is filed in accordance with the Commission’s letter.
2. The Commission launched Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2011-77

Review of billing practices for wholesale residential high-speed access services,
(TNC 2011-77 or “the NC”) on 8 February 2011. The Commission’s stated intent,
in launching the NC is to conduct “a review of its regulatory approach with regard
to the terms upon which large incumbent telephone and cable carriers provide
Mr. Robert A. Morin
22 February 2011
Page 2 of 5
their services to wholesalers, who, in turn, provide high-speed Internet access to

retail residential customers”. The Commission went on, in the NC, to define the
scope of its review and certain principles which the Commission felt were
fundamental considerations in this review. The Commission also described a
procedural outline which would allow the NC to be conducted in a timely manner,
so as to include its impact on the implementation of certain wholesale billing
changes which have already been approved by the Commission but which have
been delayed pending the results of this review.
3. Both PIAC and CNOC frame their interventions as requests to amend the scope of
the NC. However these requests, although individually unique, would each take
this proceeding far beyond the Commission’s stated intent in launching the NC
and would necessarily consume a much greater time period and involve many
more parties than the original NC.
4. PIAC, as stated in its letter of 10 February 2011, seeks to expand the NC beyond
a review of the Commission’s most recent decision - which was solely related to
wholesale DSL services offered by ILECs and allowed ILECs to bill wholesale
customers for data usage beyond a threshold amount - into a review of “all
instances of usage-based billing, including those practiced by large ISPs
(incumbents telcos or cablecos) upon their own customers”.
5. The PIAC request represents far more than a simple ‘expansion of scope’. Rather,
this is effectively a request to review and potentially vary a number of
Commission decisions.
6. Decisions that would have to be reviewed include:
 Telecom Decision CRTC 2011-44, Usage-based billing for Gateway

Access Services and third-party Internet access services (D2011-44) - the
immediate cause of the latest uproar;
 Telecom Decision CRTC 2010-255, Bell Aliant Regional
Communications, Limited Partnership and Bell Canada – Applications to
introduce usage-based billing and other changes to Gateway Access
Services (D2010-255) as varied by Telecom Decision CRTC 2010-802,
Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership and Bell
Canada – Application to review and vary Telecom Decision 2010-255
concerning usage-based billing for Gateway Access Services (D2010-
Mr. Robert A. Morin
22 February 2011
Page 3 of 5
802) – in which the Commission previously approved the concept of

Usage Based Billing (UBB) for wholesale customers;
 Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-657, Review of the Internet traffic
management practices of Internet service providers (TRP2009-657) – in
which the Commission set out its determinations regarding Internet Traffic
Management Practices (ITMPs) in which the Commission approved the
concept of applying economic ITMPs, subject to disclosure requirements
and the ITMPs in question being judged non-discriminatory. SaskTel
notes that, in the framework described in paragraph 43 of this decision,
economic ITMPs are clearly seen as preferable to technical ITMPs, with
the onus put on an ISP deploying technical ITMPs to demonstrate “why,
… network investment or economic approaches alone would not
reasonably address the need and effectively achieve the same purpose”;
and
 Repeated findings that the retail internet services market is competitive,
as listed in paragraph 5 of Telecom Order CRTC 99-592, Forbearance
From Retail Internet Services (O99-592) – in which the Commission
forbore from regulating retail end-user Internet services provided by all
Canadian carriers that were not already subject to a forbearance decision
at that time.
7. As noted in paragraph 24 of O99-592, “The Commission has on numerous
occasions found the retail IS market to be sufficiently competitive to protect the
interests of users”. The Commission has maintained that finding to the current
day. Of course, the Commission has the right, should it choose to do so, to
revisit the question of internet forbearance. However, in SaskTel’s view, the
current proceeding is not the appropriate forum to do so. Revoking forbearance
of retail internet services would be of monumental impact and, in SaskTel’s
opinion, would be contrary to the Policy Direction and the progress the
Commission has made in recent years towards reducing regulation where
possible.
8. CNOC’s letter of 11 February 2011 also requests a new proceeding to review what
it terms “the broadband platform that competitors need to offer almost all
telecommunications and broadcasting services to consumers”1 also under the
guise of an expansion of scope of the proceeding.
9. CNOC justifies this request with an analysis of the competitive nature of retail
internet services (which conclusions SaskTel disagrees with) and their place in a
bundling strategy aimed at residential customers.
1
CNOC 11 February letter, paragraph 9
Mr. Robert A. Morin
22 February 2011
Page 4 of 5
10. CNOC then attempts to leverage this perceived failing in the retail internet market
into a review of what appears to be every ruling the Commission has made
regarding Wholesale High Speed Access services, with a view to providing “a
broadband platform that can support many types of Internet and non-Internet-
based services”2. In effect, while CNOC uses the analogy of deckchairs on the
Titanic to explain why such a widespread review should be undertaken, its own
justification seems to be based on its interpretation of a snapshot of the sundeck.
11. Again, SaskTel submits that the review requested by CNOC would entail a very
large proceeding with higher time commitments and additional participants
compared to the more focused review envisaged by the Commission.
12. SaskTel’s understanding of the review requested by CNOC would be that such an
undertaking would resemble that which led to Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-17,
Revised regulatory framework for wholesale services and definition of essential
service (D2008-17), only with a focus on any potential service which could be
conceptually linked to a broadband platform and with, from CNOC’s perspective,
exactly opposite ends.
13. The proceeding which led to D2008-17 was launched, under Telecom Public
Notice CRTC 2006-14, partially in response to the Government of Canada’s
Policy Direction that the Commission should:
Conduct a review of its regulatory framework regarding mandated access

to wholesale services, in order to determine the extent to which mandated
access to wholesale services that are not essential services should be
phased out and the appropriate pricing of mandated services to
encourage investment and innovation in network infrastructure3
(emphasis added)
14. CNOC appears to envisage a process which would rather review the extent to
which mandated access to wholesale high speed services should be phased in.
In SaskTel’s view, such a proceeding is not required and would contravene the
policy direction. In any event, SaskTel submits that such a review would entail
far more than a simple tweaking of the Commission’s intended scope.
2
Ibid, paragraph 18
3
Order Issuing a Direction to the CRTC on Implementing the Canadian Telecommunications
Policy Objectives, P.C. 2006-1534, 14 December 2006 (“Policy Direction”), 1(c)(ii)
Mr. Robert A. Morin
22 February 2011
Page 5 of 5
15. In short, SaskTel submits that the requests of both PIAC and CNOC represent
unjustified expansions of the NC and should be rejected.
16. Lastly, SaskTel notes letters dated: 16 February 2011 from the Samuelson‐
Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC), on behalf
of, OpenMedia.ca (OM); and 17 February 2011 from Vaxination Informatique
which request similar (in terms of scope) wide-ranging reviews and potential re-
evaluations of the entire Commission regulation and/or forbearance framework
for the wholesale and retail internet sectors. SaskTel submits that, as with the
requests of PIAC and CNOC, such reviews are not required at this time. Indeed,
if the Commission should decide such a review is required, the breadth of opinion
on what the issues actually are is such that the Commission should likely first
launch a proceeding to determine and, clearly identify to all participants, what the
scope of that review would be.
Sincerely,
Robert Hersche
Director of Regulatory Affairs
/mr
c.c.: Distribution List as per CRTC letter of 15 February 2011
***End of Document***

SaskTel - Comments On Scope

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SaskTel - Comments On Scope

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Robert Hersche 2121 Saskatchewan Drive

Director of Regina, Saskatchewan

Telephone: (306) 777-5346

File No. 8661-C12-201102350

Mr. Robert A. Morin

Dear Mr. Morin:

1. Saskatchewan Telecommunication (SaskTel) is in receipt of letters from the Public

2. The Commission launched Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2011-77

their services to wholesalers, who, in turn, provide high-speed Internet access to

6. Decisions that would have to be reviewed include:

 Telecom Decision CRTC 2011-44, Usage-based billing for Gateway

802) – in which the Commission previously approved the concept of

Conduct a review of its regulatory framework regarding mandated access

c.c.: Distribution List as per CRTC letter of 15 February 2011

You might also like