Explanatory Statement

Telecommunications Act 1997

Carrier Licence Conditions (Telstra Corporation Limited) Declaration 1997

(Amendment No. 2 of 2003)

Issued by the authority of the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts.

OVERVIEW

The Carrier Licence Conditions (Telstra Corporation Limited) Declaration 1997 (Amendment No. 2 of 2003) (the Amending Declaration) amends the Carrier Licence Conditions (Telstra Corporation Limited) Declaration 1997 (the 1997 Declaration).  The Amending Declaration inserts Clause 31 into the 1997 Declaration, thereby establishing requirements on the licensee, Telstra, in relation to the performance of dial-up Internet connections over Telstra’s network.

Legislative basis

Subsection 63(3) of the Telecommunications Act 1997 (Cth) (the Act) enables licence conditions to be imposed on a particular licence prior to its grant and to come into force upon that grant.  The 1997 Declaration (the original Telstra licence conditions) was made on 24 June 1997 under this provision and came into force on 1 July 1997.  The original Telstra licence conditions have since been varied by a number of declarations.

The Amending Declaration has been made under subsection 63(5) of the Act.  Subsection 63(5) of the Act enables the Minister, by written instrument, to vary an instrument under subsection 63(3) of the Act.  Subsection 63(13) of the Act provides that an instrument under subsection 63(5) is a disallowable instrument for the purposes of section 46A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth).

Section 68 of the Act provides that a carrier must not contravene a condition of its carrier licence.  In the event of a contravention of a carrier’s licence conditions:

(a)                section 69 of the Act enables the Australian Communications Authority (ACA) to give a carrier a remedial direction aimed at ensuring that the carrier does not contravene its licence conditions in future;
 

(b)               section 70 of the Act enables the ACA to issue a formal warning to a carrier in relation to the contravention; and
 

(c)                Part 31 of the Act enables the Minister or the ACA to institute proceedings in the Federal Court for the recovery of a pecuniary penalty of up to $10 million for each contravention.
 

Section 64 of the Telecommunications Act 1997 (Cth) provides that before making an instrument under subsection 63(5) the Minister must arrange for a draft version of the instrument to be provided to the licence holder and invite the holder to make a submission to the Minister on the draft.  Telstra has made a submission on the draft which has been considered.  A number of the matters raised by Telstra in its submission have been addressed in finalising the Amending Declaration.

Policy background

In 2002 the Regional Telecommunication Inquiry (RTI) investigated the quality and accessibility of a range of telecommunication services in regional and rural Australia.  In examining the provision of dial-up Internet to regional customers, the RTI assessed the performance of the Internet Assistance Program (IAP), a joint Commonwealth-Telstra initiative established to address concerns about slow dial-up data rates available to regional Australians. 

The IAP was set up in September 2001 following the Telecommunications Service Inquiry (TSI) to assist most users achieve faster and better-quality Internet browsing and email experience over Telstra’s fixed line network.  The program’s aim has been to enable customers serviced by Telstra’s telephony network, either directly or indirectly via resellers, to access a minimum equivalent throughput of at least 19.2 kbps, and otherwise improve the performance of their dial-up connections where possible.  A minimal equivalent throughput of at least 19.2 kbps was identified as providing reasonable Internet browsing and email usage and could be provided at a reasonable cost to the community.

The IAP does not apply in Telstra’s Outer Extended Zones (OEZs), covering the remotest 80% of Australia.  The OEZs are covered by separate arrangements under the Extended Zones Agreement (EZA) between the Australian Government and Telstra, which includes, amongst other things, a minimum dial-up data speed of 14.4 kbps.

The RTI concluded that the IAP was a worthwhile initiative and concluded that ‘the benefits provided by the Internet Assistance Program for users of dial-up Internet services should be guaranteed into the future’.  Accordingly, the RTI recommended in Recommendation 4.1 that:

A licence condition should be placed on Telstra that would require all Australians to be guaranteed dial-up Internet speeds, or equivalent throughput, over the Telstra fixed network of at least 19.2 kbps.  As part of the licence condition Telstra should be required to report on its compliance with the requirement, and more generally on the data speed performance of its regional network, which should be maintained at least at current levels.[1]

The RTI identified Recommendation 4.1 along with Recommendation 2.9 ‑ relating to the Network Reliability Framework –as key recommendations that needed to be addressed promptly.  The Government accepted Recommendation 4.1 in its June 2003 response to the RTI and decided to impose on Telstra a licence condition meeting the requirements of the recommendation. 

The licence condition addresses Recommendation 4.1 by locking‑in and extending geographically the current arrangements under the IAP.  A minimum equivalent throughput of at least 19.2 kbps will be therefore be available to Australians, including customers in the OEZs, upon request.  Telstra will also need to report to the Australian Communications Authority (ACA) on its compliance with the licence condition. 

The third part of Recommendation 4.1, the monitoring of data speed performance of Telstra’s regional network generally is to be addressed through the ACA’s general responsibility for performance monitoring and reporting. 

NOTES ON CLAUSES

Clause 1 – Name of Declaration

Clause 1 provides for the citation of the Carrier Licence Conditions (Telstra Corporation Limited) Declaration 1997 (Amendment No. 2 of 2003).

Clause 2 – Commencement

Clause 2 provides that the Amending Declaration commences on gazettal.

Clause 3 – Variation

Clause 3 provides that the Carrier Licence Conditions (Telstra Corporation Limited) Declaration 1997 is varied as set out in Schedule 1 of the Amending Declaration.

Schedule 1 – Amendments

Schedule 1 provides that a new clause, ‘Internet assistance program for dial-up Internet access’, be inserted after clause 30 of the Carrier Licence Conditions (Telstra Corporation Limited) Declaration 1997.

Key terms used in the clause, such as ‘Internet assistance program’, ‘minimum equivalent throughput’, ‘On-Line Help Service’ and ‘Technical Support Service’ are defined in proposed subclause 31(15).

Clause 31 – Internet assistance program for dial-up Internet access

Internet assistance program

Subclause 31(1) requires that Telstra make available upon request to a customer in an eligible service area the Internet assistance program for providing the minimum equivalent throughput (discussed below).

Subclause 31(1) effectively continues and extends the current Internet Assistance Program (IAP) arrangements, which were put in place following the TSI to enable customers throughout Australia to access a minimum equivalent throughput of at least 19.2 kbps and improve the performance of their dial-up connections. 

The ‘Internet assistance program’ concept is fundamental to the operation of the clause and is defined in subclause 31(16).  Conceptually, the Internet assistance program has two dimensions:

• certain processes in the form of an On-Line Help Service and a Technical Support Service, to achieve the minimum throughput outcome; and
• the outcome those processes are to achieve, the minimum equivalent throughput. 

Telstra’s obligation, therefore, is to provide both the processes to achieve the minimum equivalent throughput and the outcome itself.

The definition of ‘Internet assistance program’ also makes it clear that it relates to ‘dial-up’ Internet services, that is customer access to the Internet using a customer’s standard telephone service access line that is part of Telstra’s public switched telephone network.  While the Internet assistance program is inherently linked to Telstra’s telephony network, a customer may be using an access line as either a Telstra customer or as a customer of a Telstra competitor that is reselling Telstra services.  The customer will have the benefit of the Internet assistance program in both these situations.

In practice the On-Line Help Service will seek to improve a customer’s Internet throughput by information provided on a dedicated website and through a phone-in help desk.  Where the On-Line Help Service is unable to deliver the minimum equivalent throughput, the customer will be referred to the Technical Support Service which will investigate the customer’s problem and the most appropriate solution.  Solutions may include improvements to Telstra’s customer access network (ie. the line between the customer’s premises and the customer’s exchange), the use of compression software and, if necessary, appropriate alternative technologies (eg. satellite).

‘Minimum equivalent throughput’ is another concept fundamental to the operation of the clause and is defined in subclause 31(16).  Importantly, ‘minimum equivalent throughput’ is not intended to refer to the actual speed at which a customer's line operates, known as line rate.  Rather it refers to the throughput experience of the customer, essentially the download to the customer’s computer of a specified data set within a specified time.  This experience may need to be provided using compression technology.  The throughput is ‘equivalent’ is that it is equivalent to the experience the customer would have under the optimal circumstances described in the definition.

Importantly the Internet assistance program is to be implemented on request by a customer.  That is, the minimum equivalent throughput need only be provided where it is sought by a customer, and it does not have to be provided to all customers as a matter of course.  As explained in the associated Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) this is a far more cost-effective way of providing the minimum equivalent throughput to dial-up customers than upgrading the entire telephone network to this level.  Amongst other things, a network upgrade would be potentially wasteful as not all customers may want Internet access or may not all want dial-up Internet access.

Subclause 31(2) provides that the Internet assistance program is to be made available in an impartial and competitively neutral manner. 

While dial-up users may be using Telstra’s underlying public switched telephone network to access the Internet, they may be customers of Telstra or customers of carriers and/or Internet service providers (ISPs) other than Telstra, who are reselling Telstra services.  Providing customers are using Telstra’s underlying network, it is intended that they have the benefit of the Internet assistance program regardless of their immediate service providers.  Conversely, it is intended that Telstra not administer the Internet assistance program in a manner that would competitively disadvantage its carrier and ISP competitors. 

In this context, it is intended that Telstra, in handling requests for assistance, undertaking investigations and providing the minimum equivalent throughput solutions, not discriminate between customers on the basis they are the retail customers of competing carriers or ISPs.  Subclause 31(2) is not intended to imply, however, that Telstra must go to competitive tender in relation to upgrades to its network.

Telstra is also expected to work in good faith with other carriers, carriage service providers and ISPs to ensure the delivery of the minimum equivalent throughput to customers of other service providers and ISPs.

Under the IAP Telstra provides other ISPs with access to compression software that can be used to provide the minimum equivalent throughput.  It is envisaged this arrangement will continue under the licence condition.

Subclause 31(3) provides for an exemption from delivering the minimum equivalent throughput as provided for under subclause 31(1) where Telstra’s non-compliance with the subclause is a result of circumstances beyond the control of Telstra.  These may include use by a customer of an operating system that is not in common use, lack of cooperation from a customer, a carriage service provider, or another third party, or other circumstances.

Importantly, the exemption relates specifically to the minimum equivalent throughput component of the Internet assistance program, not the On-Line Help Service and Technical Support Service.  The intention is that these services generally be available to customers and not be subject to the exemption.  This will mean customers can assess the performance of their service and use the available services to the extent possible to improve that performance.  However, it is recognised that circumstances beyond Telstra’s control may in some limited situations prevent the minimum equivalent throughput outcome being delivered.

The nature of the Internet and dial-up technology is such that throughput can be affected by a wide range of factors and the responsibility for the quality of service provided may be shared by a number of parties, some of them outside of the purview of Telstra as the provider of customers' access lines. Experience under the IAP has demonstrated that many of the data speed problems reported by customers are resolved through adjustments to customers’ computing equipment.  Incorrect modem set-ups and software configurations, as well as interference from customers’ electronic equipment, are common causes of compromised dial-up throughput.   In this context, it would be unreasonable to expect Telstra to provide a minimum throughput solution when the cause is beyond its control.

The use of a computer operating system that is not commonly used can also be a circumstance beyond Telstra’s control that would exempt it from its general obligation.  The concern here is that it would be unreasonable to expect Telstra to be able to support every possible operating systems in use, now or into the future, or to support systems that have long become obsolete.  Operating systems considered now to be in common use are (but are not necessarily limited to) Windows and Macintosh.  In event of a dispute between Telstra and a customer or another party (eg. a software supplier) as to whether an operating systems was in common use, it is envisaged the ACA would determine the matter.

Technical Support Service

Subclauses 31(4) to 31(10) set out timeframes for the completion of different activities under the Technical Support Service with a view to providing a clear end-to-end timeframe for the delivery of the minimum equivalent throughput where technical intervention is required.

Subclause 31(4) specifies that Telstra must provide assistance to a customer who is referred to the Technical Support Service at the time of contact or, if reasonably unanticipated demand for the service prevents this, at a time agreed with the customer.  (The Technical Support Service is the second, assisted stage of the Internet assistance program; a detailed definition of the Technical Support Service is provided in the notes for the subclause 31(16).)  This is to ensure that Telstra provides customers of the IAP program with advice and technical assistance on a timely, as‑needed basis. The reference to ‘reasonably unanticipated demand’ is intended to ensure Telstra resources the Technical Support Service to meet a level of demand that can be reasonably anticipated.  In the event of a dispute over resourcing, the ACA would be expected to exercise its judgement.

Subclause 31(5) imposes an explicit timeframe within which Telstra must offer a time for a consultation between Telstra and a customer, as provided for in subclause 31(4).  It specifies that Telstra must offer such a consultation time within 5 working days after the day of the customer’s first contact.  Alternatively, if the customer expresses a preference for another more convenient time after the elapse of the 5 working days after the first contact, Telstra is obliged to contact the customer at such a later time.

Subclause 31(6) imposes an explicit timeframe on the completion of any consultation between Telstra and a customer, as provided for in subclauses 31(4) and (5).  It specifies that Telstra must complete such a consultation within 5 working days after the day of the customer’s first contact.  If the customer expresses a preference for another more convenient time after the elapse of the 5 working days after the first contact, Telstra is obliged to complete the consultation at such a later date.  Whereas subclause 31(5) specifies the timeframe within which a consultation must be offered, subclause 31(6) specifies the timeframe for the actual completion of that consultation.

Subclause 31(7) imposes an explicit timeframe on the completion of any testing and other activities necessary to determine the appropriate way of providing the minimum equivalent throughput to a customer for whom use of the On-line Help Service has not resulted in the minimum equivalent throughput and has accessed the Technical Support Service.  

The subclause provides that Telstra must complete all testing activities undertaken towards the goal of providing a customer with the minimum equivalent throughput within 3 working days of their commencement.  This timeframe is a maximum and is intended to allow for extraordinary circumstances.  Such testing under the IAP has generally been completed in a shorter period, commonly 24 hours.

Subclause 31(8) imposes an explicit timeframe on Telstra’s decision on whether field activities are necessary to provide the outcome provided for under the licence condition to a customer for whom use of the On-Line Help Service has not resulted in the minimum equivalent throughput, and whose connection has been tested in accordance with subclause 31(7). 

The subclause specifies that Telstra must make a decision in relation to any such field activities within 2 working days after the conclusion of all testing and other necessary activities undertaken with the cooperation of a customer.

Subclause 31(9) imposes an explicit timeframe on completion of any field activities undertaken by Telstra in order to provide a customer with the minimum equivalent throughput provided for under the licence condition.  Under normal circumstances, Telstra must complete all such activities within 90 working days after the day on which it is obliged to make its decision with respect to field activities.  An exception is provided where Telstra is prevented from meeting this timeframe due to circumstances beyond Telstra’s control.

This timeframe does not apply to a customer in the Outer Extended Zones until the digital radio concentrator systems (DRCS) by which such a customer’s services is provided is upgraded in accordance with the Extended Zones Agreement.  A timetable for the upgrade of DRCSs in the Outer Extended Zones is set out in the Extended Zones Agreement. 

This approach has been taken because Telstra is already being funded to provide a uniform basic data rate of 14.4 kbps under the Extended Zones Agreement and to require Telstra to provide the minimum equivalent throughput before this base service level is put in place may complicate the delivery of both the 14.4 and 19.2 kbps requirements.  For example, resources involved in the 14.4 kbps upgrade may need to be directed to provide the 19.2 kbps throughput.  Moreover, once the network is upgraded to 14.4 kbps, Telstra may be able to provide the minimum equivalent throughput more cost-effectively (eg. using compression software) than it may before the upgrade (eg. it may need to use satellite).

Importantly, however, the modified requirement relating to these Outer Extended Zones customers only applies to field activities, not other technical solutions.  If the minimum equivalent throughput can be provided though other technical solutions like the use of compression software or line conditioning, Telstra would still be required to undertake these solutions, and under the timeframe provided for in subclause (10).

Subclause 31(10) imposes an explicit timeframe on completion of other Technical Support Service activities to be undertaken by Telstra in order to provide a customer with the minimum equivalent throughput provided for under the licence condition. As such it complements subclause (9). Under normal circumstances, Telstra must complete all such activities within 10 working days after the day on which it is obliged to make its decision with respect the necessary and appropriate activities.

This timeframe applies to all customers that access the Technical Support Service and the licensee determines activities other than field activities are necessary and appropriate in the circumstances to deliver the minimum equivalent throughput. This includes, amongst other things, the provision of compression software and line conditioning as set out in paragraphs (c) and (d) of the definition of ‘Technical Support Service’ in subclause (16).

Cost recovery by the licensee

Subclause 31(11) specifies the circumstances in which a customer can be charged by Telstra for goods and services it provides in providing a minimum equivalent throughput solution.  The subclause states that a customer can only be charged for costs incurred by Telstra in connection to the acquisition of necessary customer equipment or necessary changes to the customer’s equipment.  In order for Telstra to charge such costs, the customer must be advised of, and agree to, these charges in advance.

It is intended that Telstra generally meet the costs of upgrading its facilities or providing an alternative technological solution (eg. a satellite connection) to provide the minimum equivalent throughput to a customer.  The costs of upgrading the facilities or equipment of the customer or another interested parties (eg. other service providers or ISPs), however, are generally to be met by those persons.

Where Telstra considers that data compression software is the most appropriate means of providing the guaranteed minimum throughput, Telstra will not be able to charge a customer for the cost of this software. 

It is not intended that subclause 31(11) affect any relevant standard commercial arrangement (eg. connection, equipment or ongoing subscription charges) entered into by a customer with his or her service provider.  These costs would continue to be borne by the customer.  For example, the need for an upgrade so a customer can be provided with the minimum equivalent throughput is not intended to exempt them from payment of line rental or ISP charges.

Promotion of the Internet assistance program

Subclause 31(12) requires Telstra to take reasonable steps to publish and distribute information relating to the requirements of the clause and its activities in fulfilment of those requirements. 

Apart from the obvious need for the Internet assistance program to be promoted so consumers can take advantage of it, subclause 31(12) has been included in response to the finding of the RTI that the IAP could be better promoted.  The Inquiry concluded that a large number of customers, especially in rural and remote areas of Australia, were unaware of the services available through the IAP. 

Under the subclause, Telstra has considerable flexibility as to how it promotes its obligation and activities in fulfilment of it.  As the service provider, Telstra is, prima facie, best placed to make these decisions.  It is envisaged Telstra would have regard to promotional activities previously undertaken under the IAP (eg. information online, brochures, posters, press and radio advertisements) and the relative success of these activities.  Information on the activities of the program is to be made available online, as well as in a more traditional format.

As the regulator, the ACA would ultimately need to be satisfied that Telstra was taking reasonable steps to promote the Internet assistance program.  To minimise the likelihood of disagreement in this area, it is envisaged that Telstra and the ACA would discuss and potentially agree in advance, on appropriate promotional activities.  In determining whether promotional ‘steps’ are ‘reasonable’, it is envisaged regard would be had to the cost of promotional activities relative to their effectiveness and benefit to consumers.  Regard would also be had to past expenditure on promotion under the IAP.

Reporting of the licensee’s compliance with this clause

Subclause 31(13) specifies that Telstra must provide the ACA with written reports on its compliance with the requirements of clause 31.  Amongst other things, this requirement specifically responds to the RTI’s view in Recommendation 4.1 that ‘as part of the licence condition Telstra should be required to report on its compliance with the requirement’.  Again the subclause gives Telstra flexibility in how it reports but ultimately it would need to satisfy the ACA as the regulator. 

Telstra and the ACA have already discussed Telstra’s reporting requirements.  From the commencement of the licence condition, they have agreed Telstra will continue to report on the same basis as it has reported to the IAP Advisory Panel, with some supplementation.  Matters Telstra will report on, therefore, will include the volume of customers access the program; the volume of customers accessing each component of the program; the duration of calls and website visits; the results of throughput tests; complaints; and promotional activities. 

It is envisaged, however, that reporting requirements may evolve over time.  Should the ACA find it needs to formally specify reporting requirements, under Part 27 of the Telecommunications Act 1997, the ACA can require a carrier to keep records and provide information on fulfilling its licence obligations. 

Subclause 31(14) requires the reports provided for in subclause 31(13) be quarterly, covering the periods of 1 January to 31 March, 1 April to 30 June, 1 July to 30 September, and 1 October to 31 December, or any other periods specified by the ACA following consultation with Telstra.  Subclause 31(14) also requires Telstra to provide its reports to the ACA within 30 days of the end of the period covered by the reports, or within any other period determined by the ACA following consultation with Telstra. 

The default arrangements reflect those applying under the IAP.

Licensee’s ongoing contractual obligations

Subclause 31(15) establishes that clause 31 does not affect Telstra’s obligations under the Extended Zones Agreement and the Internet Assistance Program Funding Deed.  While the licence condition established in clause 31 locks in the current arrangements under the IAP Deed and extends Telstra’s IAP obligations to provide the minimum equivalent throughput to its Outer Extended Zones, it does not in any way void any provisions of the two agreements.  The IAP Deed remains in force until June 2004 while the Extended Zones Agreement continues until 2011, with Telstra required to fulfil the conditions of both these agreements until otherwise agreed in a future agreement.  It is important for these agreements to remain in force unaffected because they cover many matters over and above those covered in proposed clause 31. 

Definitions

Subclause 31(16) sets out definitions used in the new clause provided for in Schedule 1.  Several of these are standard terms covered by the Telecommunications Act 1997 and the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999.  Other definitions specific to the licence condition have the following meanings given.

Four definitions are fundament to the operation of clause 31: ‘Internet assistance program’, which in turn depends on the definitions of ‘On-Line Help Service’, Technical Support Service’ and ‘minimum equivalent throughput’.  The important roles of these concepts are discussed above, particularly in the context of subclause 31(1).  These concepts are based closely on similar concepts in the IAP Deed.

Customer means a customer with up to two telephone services of the Internet utilising Telstra’s customer access network.  This effectively limits the conditions to households and small business customers.  As noted above, a customer may be a retail customer of Telstra or a customer of a competitor of Telstra, reselling Telstra’s standard telephone service.  Customers under the clause do not include users with intervening systems which may limit Internet data throughput (eg. PABX) or users with interim, interim priority, or alternative services.  The term also does not cover a carrier or carriage service provider.  Customer also includes a nominee of a customer.

Eligible Service Area (ESA) means a geographical area within the states and certain territories of Australia (including the Jervis Bay Territory).  The concept is used to define the geographical area to which the obligation applies. 

Extended Zones Agreement is an agreement signed between the Commonwealth Government and Telstra on 1 June 2001 for the duration of ten years.  Under the agreement, Telstra is obliged to provide customers in the Extended Zones, which cover the remotest 80 percent of Australia, with untimed local calls, untimed Internet access, and a number of other telecommunication services.  The content of the Extended Zones Agreement is reflected in clause 18 of the Carrier Licence Conditions (Telstra Corporation Limited) Declaration 1997 as varied by the Carrier Licence Conditions (Telstra Corporation Limited) Declaration 1997 (Amendment No. 2 of 2001).

Field activities include a wide range of activities undertaken by Telstra with the objective of providing a customer with the minimum equivalent throughput.  These may include inspections, on-site testing, maintenance, and infrastructure improvements.

Internet Assistance Program is a joint Commonwealth-Telstra program designed to assist customers in solving their Internet problems and achieve effective dial-up access speeds over Telstra’s fixed-line network.  Under the terms of the condition, the Internet assistance program will consist of two processes, the On-line Help Service and the Technical Support Service, the minimum equivalent throughput outcome, subject to circumstance beyond Telstra’s control as provided for under subclause 31(3).

Minimum equivalent throughput means an Internet throughput experience of a customer that corresponds to what would be experienced if the customer’s line actually operated at 19.2 kbps.

19.2 kbps meets the basic requirements of the majority of customers and is not cost prohibitive to provide to all customers.  19.2 kbps allows users to access basic email and Internet browsing services, and as such has been recommended by the RTI as the minimum data rate or equivalent throughput to be available to Australians.

Importantly, ‘minimum equivalent throughput’ refers to an Internet throughput ‘experience’ ‘equivalent’ to 19.2 kbps, rather than to the technical speed at which the line actually operates.  This equivalent throughput may be achieved through the use, for example, of data compression software.  In practice that means that the minimum equivalent throughput is determined by the download time for a set of Internet files that would be expected from typical Internet usage when transmitted under reasonable conditions and with cooperation of all the involved parties.

The online-testing facility mentioned in the definition of the Technical Support Service (see below) is designed to allow a customer to assess their Internet throughput against the minimum equivalent throughput.  The method of assessing minimum equivalent throughput is set out in the document entitled Telstra IAP Self-Help – Throughput Tester Technical Specification and Calibration, approved by the Internet Assistance Program Advisory Panel on 28 February 2002, or to be otherwise specified by the ACA following consultation with Telstra.  The Throughput Tester document will be available from the ACA.  The document will be used both in testing initial throughput and throughput following remedial action.

On-Line Help Service is a service operated by Telstra as part of the Internet assistance program.  The On-Line Help Service provides customers with a number of self-help solutions and resources for improving their Internet data throughput.  These solutions, including a practical Internet Self-Help Kit, are accessible on-line or by a freecall telephone requests, and are regularly updated as new solutions come to light. 

The Service is designed as a first contact point for customers seeking advice and support for improving the speeds of their Internet connections.  It features a help-desk function that recommends changes to the configuration and environment of a customer’s equipment, the most frequent reasons for compromised dial-up speeds. 

The Service is expected to promote the use of the Internet in general, and to provide independent advice on optimal Internet performance for customers with a variety of needs and requirements.  In cases where more detailed assessment and involved assistance are necessary, the Service is obliged to refer a customer to the Technical Support Service.

Technical Support Service is a service operated by Telstra under the terms of the Internet assistance program.  The Technical Support Service provides an on-line testing facility to assess customers’ Internet data throughputs and compare them to the minimum equivalent throughput set out in the condition. 

In cases when the minimum equivalent throughput is unavailable and the problem cannot be rectified by a customer with assistance from the On-line Help Service, the Technical Support Service is required to offer remote or on-site diagnosis of the causes of underperforming Internet connections.  The Service is also responsible for improving the performance of the customer access network through line-conditioning and other minor works, data compression software, and other Internet access technology solutions agreed upon by Telstra and the ACA.

In limited circumstances Telstra may be required to provide customers with alternative technological solutions (ie. solutions not based on the public switched telephone network, such as terrestrial wireless or satellite) to provide the minimum equivalent throughput.  Telstra is required to notify the ACA in writing of the kinds of alternative technological solution it is providing.  This is to enable the ACA to monitor the use of such solutions and assist with future policy development.

[1] Regional Telecommunications Inquiry, Connecting Regional Australia, Canberra, November 2002, p.156