ARCHIVED -  Telecom Public Notice CRTC 1990-79

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Telecom Public Notice

Ottawa, 4 September 1990
Telecom Public Notice CRTC 1990-79
The Commission has received an application from Teleglobe Canada Inc. (Teleglobe), dated 4 April 1990, concerning the use of Canada-U.S. transborder services offered by Bell Canada (Bell), British Columbia Telephone Company (B.C. Tel) and Unitel Communications Inc. (Unitel) (the respondents). In its application, Teleglobe requested that the general tariffs of the respondents be amended to state that resellers are prohibited from using transborder services to route voice traffic to and from overseas destinations via interconnection with the facilities of carriers in the U.S. The application relates to the diversion of Canada-overseas calling through the use of Canada-U.S. private lines leased by resellers and interconnected to the overseas facilities of U.S. carriers. In support of its application, Teleglobe cited various Commission rulings with respect to interconnection agreements between Canadian and American carriers, as well as policy statements by the Government of Canada favouring the carriage of Canadian traffic over Canadian facilities.
In its answer dated 4 May 1990, Unitel submitted that Teleglobe's application raises several important public interest questions and that parties other than the named respondents have an interest in those issues. Accordingly, Unitel requested that the Commission issue a public notice prior to final disposition of the application.
B.C. Tel and Bell, in answers dated 1 May 1990 and 4 May 1990, respectively, indicated that they shared Teleglobe's concerns and would be willing to modify their tariffs as requested. Bell provided a draft amendment to its tariffs for consideration.
The Commission agrees with Unitel that the application raises important public interest issues and that the Commission's decision with respect to it could affect parties other than the respondents. The Commission therefore invites interested parties to comment on the issues raised by the application, including the questions set out below:
(1) whether Teleglobe's arguments in support of its application apply to data traffic, non-interconnected traffic and traffic carried on private networks;
(2) whether concerns raised by Teleglobe with respect to Canada-overseas traffic carried through the U.S. are equally relevant to Canada-Canada traffic carried through the U.S.;
(3) whether restrictions on the use of Canada-U.S. private lines can be effectively and uniformly enforced;
(4) whether the potential for the routing of Canada-overseas and Canada-Canada traffic through the U.S. is significant in terms of traffic volume and revenues lost to Canadian carriers;
(5) whether there are approaches, other than that requested by Teleglobe, for dealing with the routing of Canada-overseas and Canada-Canada traffic through the U.S.
In Applications by Fonorola Inc. and ACC Long Distance Ltd., Telecom Decision CRTC 90-19, 4 September 1990, the Commission issued a ruling relevant to the carriage of Canada-overseas traffic. Specifically, the Commission found that it was in the public interest to allow resellers to access Teleglobe's MTS network by way of private lines terminated on Teleglobe's switches. The Commission indicated that one benefit of such an arrangement could be to recover some of the Canada-overseas calling that is currently being diverted through the U.S.
1. The Island Telephone Company Limited, Maritime Telegraph and Telephone Company Limited, The New Brunswick Telephone Company Limited, Newfoundland Telephone Company Limited, Northwestel Inc. and Telesat Canada are joined as parties to this proceeding (referred to hereafter, in conjunction with the respondents, as "the carriers").
2. Teleglobe's application and related documents may be examined at its business offices or at the offices of the CRTC in the following locations:
Room 201, Central Building,
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
1 Promenade du Portage
Hull, Quebec
Suite 1007
Bank of Commerce Building
1809 Barrington Street
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Complex Guy-Favreau
200 René-Lévesque Blvd. West
6th Floor
East Tower
Montréal, Quebec
275 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Suite 1500
800 Burrard Street
Vancouver, British Columbia
Copies may be obtained by any interested person upon request directed to Teleglobe at the address shown in paragraph 3.3. The mailing addresses to be used in connection with this proceeding are:
Mr. Alain-F. Desfossés
Secretary General
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N2
Mr. Jules Lemay
Regulatory and Corporate Analysis
Teleglobe Canada Inc.
680 Sherbrooke Street West
Montréal, Quebec
H3A 2S4
4. Persons wishing to participate in this proceeding (interveners) must notify the Commission at the address noted in paragraph 3 by 2 October 1990. The Commission will issue a complete list of parties and their mailing addresses.
5. The carriers are to file comments on the issues set out above and on any other issues raised by Teleglobe's application, serving copies on the interveners, on Teleglobe and on each other, by 16 October 1990.
6. Interveners may file comments with the Commission, serving copies on the carriers and on Teleglobe, by 6 November 1990.
7. The carriers may file replies, serving copies on the interveners, on Teleglobe and on each other, by 20 November 1990.
8. Teleglobe may file a reply, serving copies on the carriers and on the interveners, by 4 December 1990.
9. Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely mailed, by that date.
Alain-F. Desfossés
Secretary General

Date modified: