ARCHIVED - Telecom - Commission Letter - 8690-V22-01/02 - Application by VidéotronTélécom ltée against Bell Canada and Bell Nexxia relative to the Provision ofFibre Optic Private Networks

This page has been archived on the Web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.


Ottawa, 18 February 2003

Our file: 8690-V22-01/02

By Fax

Sheridan Scott
Chief Regulatory Officer
Bell Canada
105 Hôtel-de-Ville
Floor 6, Hull Québec
J8X 4H7

Subject: Application by Vidéotron Télécom ltée against Bell Canada and Bell Nexxia relative to the Provision of Fibre Optic Private Networks

Dear Ms. Scott:

With respect to Bell Canada's request of 13 February 2003 for an extension to the deadline for the filing of its answer to Vidéotron Télécom ltée's (VTL) comments, and after careful consideration of VTL`s letter of 13 February 2003, revised deadlines have been established and are set out below.

It is noted that this is the third time in this proceeding that Bell Canada has failed to comply with the deadlines to which it is subject. With respect to the first occurrence, in a letter dated 15 November 2002, and on the day interrogatory responses were due from Bell Canada, Bell Canada indicated that due to an "administrative oversight, the Commission's letter and interrogatories were misdirected within the Company and the relevant groups within Bell Canada only became aware of the letter and interrogatories today". The second occurrence involved Bell Canada missing the revised 29 November 2002 filing date by three days, without explanation. Most recently, Bell Canada has attributed a faulty facsimile transmission as to why it was non-compliant with the 11 February 2003 requested filing date. With respect to this latter occurrence, Commission staff notes that it does have a positive confirmation report associated with the facsimile transmission in question, as well as the fact that the revised filing dates were posted on the Commission's website.

The instances of missed filing dates, as cited above, are simply unacceptable. If Bell Canada fails, once again, to comply with deadlines to which it is subject, it runs the risk that the Commission will consider the record of this proceeding to be complete, notwithstanding the absence of Bell Canada's comments.

By 20 February 2003, Bell Canada may file its answer to VTL's comments, which were dated 4 February 2003, serving a copy on all other interested parties. VTL may file reply comments, serving a copy on other interested parties, by 27 February 2003.

Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, it should be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Godin
Director, Competition and Technology

c.c. D. Palmer
Vidéotron Télécom ltéé
Interested Parties

Date modified: