ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8663-C12-200614439
This page has been archived on the Web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.
LetterOur File: 8663-C12-200614439 Ottawa, 26 June 2007 By Electronic mail
Mr. Thomas Copeland Dear Mr. Copeland: Re: Review of regulatory framework for wholesale services and definition of essential service - Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2006-14 The Commission is in receipt of a letter from the Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP) dated 23 June 2007, concerning a proposal made by Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership, Bell Canada, Saskatchewan Telecommunications and Télébec, société commandite (collectively Bell et al.) with respect to filing, on the public record, certain reports referenced in their evidence of 15 March 2007. The subject proposal was set out by Bell et al. in a letter dated 20 June 2007 in response to Commission staff's letter of 14 June 2007 , which requested Bell et al. to file copies of certain reports on the public record or to withdraw all references to them from their evidence by 22 June 2007 . Bell et al. stated that they were in the process of requesting consent from the relevant rightsholders to file complete copies of the reports on the public record. To the extent that any of the reports could not be provided on the public record by 22 June 2007, Bell et al. stated that they would provide the Commission and parties to this proceeding with a list of all references to such reports in Bell et al.'s evidence so that associated references could be deleted from the record of the proceeding. On 22 June 2007 , Bell et al. filed their list: References to Reports which are withdrawn from the Companies' 15 March 2007 Evidence. In response to Bell et al.'s proposed approach, CAIP requested that the Commission direct Bell et al. to resubmit their evidence with all text (and not just references) relating to the third party reports removed. CAIP stated its view that it is not sufficient for Bell et al. to merely send out a list of references to interested parties; rather Bell et al. should expunge references from their evidence along with surrounding text which relies upon or relates to the third-party reports. CAIP stated that anything less would mean that Bell et al. would be permitted to rely on information contained in the reports even though the reports themselves are not a matter of public record. Nonetheless, Commission staff considers that where any party identifies to the Commission a reference, or references, for deletion, then such parties have also withdrawn their reliance on the findings based on referenced reports for the purposes of their entire submission. In this regard, Bell et al. have clearly documented the affected areas which are, for the most part, constrained to specific appendices to their 15 March 2007 evidence. Commission staff considers that parties to this proceeding can clearly determine affected areas of Bell et al.'s submission and view their evidence in light of the withdrawn references. Accordingly, Commission staff considers Bell et al.'s proposal with respect to the filing of certain reports on the public record and the provision of a list of references for deletion from the public record to be acceptable. Yours sincerely, Original signed by
Robert G. Martin
CC: Mary-Louise Hayward, 819-953-7274 |
- Date modified: