ARCHIVED -  Telecom Public Notice CRTC 96-2

This page has been archived on the Web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, 10 January 1996
Telecom Public Notice CRTC 96-2
 In Regulation of Wireless Services, Telecom Decision CRTC 94-15, 12 August 1994 (Decision 94-15), the Commission established a regulatory framework for mobile wireless providers. In Decision 94-15, the Commission concluded that it would forbear from exercising certain of its powers with respect to cellular services and public cordless telephone service (PCTS). At that time, the federal Government had granted licenses to four PCTS providers.
 The Commission also proposed to exempt companies offering all other types of mobile wireless services (other than the telephone companies) from the operation of the Telecommunications Act, and decided to forbear from regulating these services pending the issuance of a final exemption Order. However, for reasons discussed below, the Commission has decided not to take further action with regard to the proposed exemption Order at this time.
 Decision 94-15 was based on the premise that cellular and PCTS services are distinct from all other types of mobile wireless services. However, recent developments have cast doubt on this categorization. In the Commission's view, it now appears that PCTS will not likely develop as many had envisaged and that the federal Government's licensing of new Personal Communications Services (PCS) carriers consistent with its Policy and Call for Applications - Wireless Personal Communications Services in the 2 GHz Range - Implementing PCS in Canada, 15 June 1995, as well as the plans of the PCS industry, will result in the new PCS carriers providing service which would appear to be similar in many respects to cellular service.
 In light of the above, the Commission has formed the preliminary view that there has been a fundamental change in circumstances such that a review of the regulatory regime associated with mobile wireless services is warranted. Moreover, the Commission is of the view that the regulatory regime that has been established for cellular services, in Decision 94-15, continues to be appropriate and does not require further review. While the regulatory regime applicable to cellular services will not be an issue in this proceeding, the Commission notes that the classification of services to which this regime applies may be redefined.
 Accordingly, the Commission seeks comment on the foregoing, and on:
 (1) the appropriate categorization of mobile wireless services for the purpose of regulation;
 (2) specific proposals for definitions of categories of mobile wireless services and service providers; and
 (3) the appropriate regulatory treatment for the categories of services and service providers identified.
 1. Persons wishing to participate in this proceeding must notify the Commission of their intention to do so by writing to Mr. Allan J. Darling, Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, fax: (819) 953-0795, by 9 February 1996. The Commission will issue a complete list of parties and their mailing addresses.
 2. Interested parties may file comments with the Commission on the issues raised in this Public Notice, serving copies on all other interested parties, by 18 March 1996.
 3. Interested parties may file reply comments with the Commission, serving copies on all other parties, by 16 April 1996.
 4. 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.

 Allan J. Darling
 Secretary General
Date modified: