ARCHIVED - Letter
This page has been archived on the Web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, 29 January 2009
Our File No.: 8661-P54-200815251
By E-Mail
Ted Woodhead
Vice-President
Telecom Policy & Regulatory Affairs
TELUS
Floor 8, 215 Slater St
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 0A6
ted.woodhead@telus.com
Dear Mr. Woodhead:
Re: Public Works and Government Services Canada’s Application for a
Commission Decision pursuant to Section 27 of the Telecommunications Act
regarding telecommunications services provided by Bell Canada – TELUS’
Request for Adjournment
Late on 28 January 2009, TELUS Communications Company (TELUS) requested that the proceedings be adjourned for one week and TELUS be permitted to file evidence on DVACs costs and the transition, which could be tested by the Commission and other parties, as the COMMISSION considers appropriate. TELUS also raised concerns with respect to the process that the Commission has followed.
TELUS has had ample opportunity to comment, both on Public Works and Government Services Canada’s (PWGSC) application and the process followed in this proceeding. The facts are as follows:
- On 10 November 2008, PWGSC filed its application, where it specifically stated that it required DVACs for 2 years plus an optional year.
- By letter dated 3 December 2008, establishing a process for this proceeding, TELUS was provided an opportunity to provide evidence and submissions. Telus did not object to being treated differently than PWGSC and Bell Canada.
- Telus provided fulsome submissions on 15 December 2008, including specific evidence and submissions with respect to the matter of DVACs.
- By letter dated 19 December 2008, an expedited oral public hearing was announced to allow the Commission to ask questions, and PWGSC and Bell Canada to make submissions. PWGSC and Bell Canada were made the only parties to the oral public hearing. The letter noted that TELUS’ submissions dated 18 November, 28 November and 15 December 2008 would be considered by the Commission when making its final determination. TELUS did not object to this process.
- At the oral hearing on 22 January 2009, senior TELUS officials and its outside counsel were present. TELUS did not object to the process, including the in camera portion at which only PWGSC and Bell Canada representatives were present.
TELUS’ request comes well over a month after the process was established and after two sittings of the oral public hearing (on 22 January and 27 January 2009). The Commission notes that TELUS is a sophisticated and experienced participant in Commission proceedings and considers that it was incumbent on TELUS to make any objections known at the earliest possible opportunity and not on the eve of the Commission decision.
Moreover, the Commission considers that the arguments raised by TELUS in its letter in support of its participation are without merit. TELUS submits that its participation is necessary to correct the record of the proceeding regarding the transition path for DVACs services. The Commission notes, however, that the transition of DVACs has been an issue thoroughly canvassed during the entire proceeding and an issue on which TELUS itself commented in its 15 December submission. At many points in the proceeding, both public and the confidential, PWGSC made clear that its contractual requirements are for at least 1014 DVAC SIPs for two years, with an option for a third year regardless of the migration schedule. Indeed, this fact was on the public record of this proceeding as far back as PWGSC’s application dated 10 November 2008. The Commission considers that TELUS had ample opportunity to raise this matter and failed to do so until the last moment.
Accordingly, TELUS’ application is denied.
Sincerely,
Original letter signed by/
Robert A. Morin
Secretary General
cc: C. Bailey, CRTC, (819) 997-4557, christine.bailey@crtc.gc.ca
A. McIntyre, CRTC, (819) 994-7572, anthony.mcintyre@crtc.gc.ca
M. Pilon, CRTC, (819) 997-4535, marc.pilon@crtc.gc.ca
Public Works Government Services Canada
Acquisitions Branch & Telecommunications Systems Procurement Directorate
Brenda Wyber
Manager, Telecommunication Services Division
brenda.wyber@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca
Bell Canada - Mirko Bibic, Chief, Regulatory Matters
bell.regulatory@bell.ca
TELUS Communications Company Société TELUS Communications – Terry Connolly
Director, Regulatory Affairs
regulatory.affairs@telus.com
MTS Allstream Inc. - Teresa Griffin-Muir Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
iworkstation@mtsallstream.com
Rogers Cable Communications Inc. Communications Rogers Câble inc. –
Brenda Stevens Director Intercarrier Relations
brenda.stevens@rci.rogers.com
Coalition of Communications Consumers
Jennifer M. Long, Barrister and Solicitor
jennifer.mlong@gmail.com
- Date modified: