ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8622-B2-200602369 - 8622-T66-200602640
This page has been archived on the Web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.
LetterOttawa, 15 March 2006
File #: 8622-B2-200602369 By E-mail
Mr. Willie Grieve - and -
Mr. Mirko Bibic - and -
Ms. Teresa Griffin-Muir Dear Ms. Griffin-Muir and Messrs Grieve and Bibic: RE: TCC's letter's on MTS/Allstream Inc. - Tariffing requirements and Bell Canada's Part VII - MTS Allstream Inc.'s Lack of Compliance with Sections 24 & 25 of the Telecommunications Act On 24 February 2006 , the Commission received a letter from TELUS Communications Company (TCC) requesting that Commission staff investigate the mandatory service requirements in a recent Request for Proposal (RFP) issued by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) and awarded to MTS Allstream Inc.'s (MTS Allstream), with a view to determining whether tariffs are or are not required. TCC also requested that, if the Commission determines that tariffs are required, the Commission order MTS Allstream to notify PWGSC of its obligation to tariff, and be directed not to perform its contract obligation with PWGSC until supporting cost justification is approved. On 7 March 2006, the Commission received a Part VII application from Bell Canada seeking a determination from the Commission pursuant to section 48(1) or alternatively, under section 58 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act) regarding MTS Allstream's apparent lack of compliance with sections 24 and 25 of the Act. Bell Canada also requested that, if the Commission determines that a tariff is required, the Commission issue an order under section 51 of the Act prohibiting MTS Allstream from providing the services in the RFP issued by PWGSC, until it has received approval of an applicable tariff from the Commission. Bell Canada further requested that the Commission abridge the normal timeframes set out in the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure to allow for comments within 7 and 3 calendar days, respectively. By letter dated 9 March 2006 , PWGSC submitted comments with respect to TCC's letter of 24 February 2006 . Given that Bell Canada's application and TCC's request deal with the same subject matter, TCC's request will be treated as an application and both applications will be considered in the same proceeding pursuant to Part VII of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure With respect to Bell Canada 's request to abridge the timeframes, it is noted that TCC's and Bell Canada 's applications raise complex issues upon which interested parties should have adequate time to comment. If PWGSC has any additional comments, it should do so by 22 March 2006 serving copies on MTS Allstream, Bell Canada and TCC. MTS Allstream is requested to provide comments by 27 March 2006 serving copies on Bell Canada , TCC and PWGSC. TCC and Bell Canada may file reply comments by 3 April 2006 serving copies on MTS Allstream, PWGSC and each other. Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent by that date. Yours sincerely, 'Original signed by P. Godin'
Paul Godin
cc: Feridon Dadashzadeh (PWGSC) |
- Date modified: