ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8640-B54-200706476

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Letter

Ottawa, 20 December 2007

BY E-MAIL

Our File No.: 8640-B54-200706476 and 8640-C12-200706351

APPLICANT

Mr. Denis E. Henry
Vice-President, Regulatory Affairs
Bell Aliant Regional Communications
110 O'Connor Street, 14 th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1H1
regulatory@bell.aliant.ca

RESPONDENT

Mr. Kenneth G. Engelhart
Vice-President, Regulatory
Rogers Communications Inc.
333 Bloor Street East
Toronto, Ontario M4W 1G9
ken.engelhart@rci.rogers.com

Re: Telecom Decision 2007-67 and Telecom Decision 2007-79 - Bell Aliant's application for forbearance from residential local exchange services in the exchanges of Grand Valley and Mount Brydges, Ontario

On 16 April 2007, the Commission received an application by Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership (Bell Aliant) for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services in 8 exchanges in Ontario.   On 25 April 2007, the Commission received another application by Bell Aliant for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services in an additional 67 exchanges in Ontario and Quebec.

In its 8 June 2007 submission, Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI) identified, out of the 75 exchanges for which Bell Aliant was seeking local forbearance, exchanges where it was either not capable of serving at least 75 percent of the number of residential local exchange service lines that Bell Aliant is capable of serving, or where it simply did not provide any local exchange services.   The exchanges identified by RCI did not include the exchanges of Grand Valley and Mount Brydges, Ontario.

In a letter dated 11 June 2007, RCI filed a supplemental response indicating that after further review, it had identified two additional exchanges where it did not provide local exchange services, namely Grand Valley and Mount Brydges.  

In its consideration of Bell Aliant's application, the Commission, inadvertently, failed to take into account RCI's 11 June 2007 supplemental response.   In Telecom Decision 2007-67 dated 9 August 2007 and Telecom Decision 2007-79 dated 31 August 2007, the Commission determined that it would forbear from the regulation of residential local exchange services in 39 exchanges, including the exchanges of Grand Valley and Mount Brydges, once it determined that Bell Aliant has met the required competitor Q of S criterion for the Ontario and Quebec portion of its serving territory.

In Telecom Decision 2007-123 dated 4 December 2007, the Commission determined that Bell Aliant met the competitor Q of S criterion for local forbearance, therefore forbearing from the regulation of residential local exchange services in the exchanges identified in Telecom Decision 2007-67, including the Mount Brydges exchange, and in Telecom Decision 2007-79, including the Grand Valley exchange.

The Commission notes that based on the record of the proceeding, RCI does not provide residential local exchange services in the exchanges of Grand Valley and Mount Brydges .   Furthermore, Bell Aliant has not identified any other facilities-based, fixed-line telecommunications service provider capable of serving at least 75 percent of the number of residential local exchange service lines that it is capable of serving in these exchanges.   Therefore, based on the record of the proceeding, Bell Aliant is the only f acilities-based, fixed-line telecommunications service provider in those exchanges.

In light of the above, it appears the exchanges of Grand Valley and Mount Brydges did not meet all the local forbearance criteria set out in modified Telecom Decision 2006-15.   Therefore, the Commission will consider Bell Aliant's applications for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services in the exchanges of Grand Valley and Mount Brydges on a de novo basis.

Bell Aliant may file comments on RCI's letter of 11 June 2007, serving a copy on RCI by 4 January 2008.  

Please note that to the extent possible all documents should be filed with the Commission using the Procedure electronic form specifying the Commission file numbers indicated on this letter. Parties can access the electronic form on the Commission's website http://support.crtc.gc.ca/crtcsubmissionmu/forms/main.aspx?lang=e .   A copy of the document(s) should also be forwarded to Mario Bertrand, at mario.bertrand@crtc.gc.ca .

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

Yours sincerely,

Original signed by

Robert A. Morin
Secretary General

Copy:    TELUS Communications Company
             willie.grieve@telus.com

Date Modified: 2007-12-20
Date modified: