ARCHIVED - Letter

Ottawa, 13 November 2009

Our Reference:  8620-C12-200914029

BY E-MAIL

Distribution

Dear Madams, Sirs:

RE:  Registration as a Wireless Carrier by Globalive Wireless Management Corp.

Background

On 2 November 2009, Globalive Wireless Management Corp. (Globalive), operating as Wind Mobile, filed a letter of complaint with the Commission alleging that a number of local exchange carriers had stopped cooperating with Globalive on various inter-carrier wireless activities since the release of Telecom Decision CRTC 2009-678 – Review of Globalive Wireless Management Corp. under the Canadian Ownership and Control Regime, 29 October 2009 (Telecom Decision 2009-678).

Globalive requested that the Commission clarify that all local exchange carriers must continue to cooperate with Globalive in the manner that they did prior to the release of Telecom Decision 2009-678, unless and until the Commission revokes Globalive’s ‘Proposed Status’ as a wireless carrier, which had been granted in a Commission staff letter dated 18 November 2008 (the Status Letter).

The Commission received comments from Bell Canada, Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI), and TELUS Communications Company (TCC).

Positions of parties

Globalive argued that Telecom Decision 2009-678 in no way changed its ‘Proposed Status’ as a wireless carrier.  Globalive argued that the purpose of the Status Letter was to enable a new wireless entrant to negotiate with other carriers and to establish and test its network in order to be operational in a timely manner.

Globalive submitted that the Commission provided guidance in Telecom Decision 2009-678 as to the ownership and control conditions that Globalive must meet in order to be eligible to operate as a telecommunications common carrier.  Globalive submitted that it intends to satisfy all requirements prior to the launch of its service.  Globalive submitted that the wireless incumbents are not entitled to use Telecom Decision 2009-678 as a pretext for delaying its efforts to become operational in a timely manner.

Bell Canada and RCI submitted that Globalive’s request should be denied because Globalive is currently ineligible to operate as a telecommunications common carrier under section 16 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act).  Bell Canada and RCI submitted that certain tariffs prohibit the provision of services to entities that are not qualified telecommunications common carriers.

RCI also submitted that carriers should not be required to incur costs to facilitate interconnection arrangements with carriers who have been found to be ineligible to operate.

TCC submitted that it has been cooperating with Globalive and intends to continue to do so.  TCC also submitted that the Commission should revoke Globalive’s ‘Proposed Status’ if it does not come into compliance with the Canadian ownership and control requirements within a reasonable period of time, for example, within 60 or 90 days.

Commission’s analysis and determinations

The Commission considers that it is essential for newly licensed wireless entrants to be able to build their networks, establish interconnection arrangements, acquire numbering resources, conduct testing exercises with other carriers and perform other activities prior to the commercial launch of their services.  The Commission notes that the ‘Proposed Status’ that was granted to Globalive in the Status Letter was intended to facilitate such pre-launch activities.

The Commission notes that in Telecom Decision 2008-678 it set out the matters that must be addressed in order for Globalive to qualify as a Canadian telecommunications common carrier under section 16 of the Act.  The Commission further notes that Globalive has stated that it is committed to satisfying all requirements prior to the launch of its service.

With regards to the argument put forward by Bell Canada and RCI that certain tariffs prohibit the provision of services to Globalive, the Commission considers that these tariffs apply only once a company provides services to customers.  In the Commission’s view, the tariffs do not apply to wireless service providers who are in the pre-launch stage of network development and testing.

In terms of RCI’s argument concerning costs, the Commission considers that establishing interconnection arrangements and conducting testing exercises are normal costs of doing business for telecommunications service providers and that it is in the public interest for companies to continue to perform such activities to enable competition.

With regards to TCC’s submission concerning imposing a deadline on Globalive, the Commission does not consider it appropriate to specify a deadline for Globalive to meet the ownership and control requirements, as it must do so prior to the launch of its service.

In light of the above, the Commission determines that Globalive shall maintain its ‘Proposed Status’ as a wireless carrier, as described in the Status Letter.  Therefore, the Commission directs all carriers to cooperate with Globalive for the purposes of establishing interconnection arrangements, conducting testing exercises and performing other activities, as necessary, to enable Globalive to establish its network prior to the launch of its service.  Globalive may also continue with its procurement of identification and routing codes as well as other numbering resources as so required.

The Commission further determines that any entity that has obtained wireless spectrum from Industry Canada may request to be placed on the Commission’s ‘Proposed Status’ list as a wireless carrier for the purposes of negotiating with other carriers, building their networks, establishing interconnection arrangements, acquiring numbering resources, conducting testing exercises with other carriers and performing other activities, as necessary, prior to the commercial launch of their services.  The Commission directs all carriers to cooperate with any company that has been granted such ‘Proposed Status’.

Sincerely,

Original signed by

Robert A. Morin

Secretary General

Distribution List

Bell.regulatory@bell.ca; rwi_gr@rci.rogers.com; regulatory.affairs@telus.com; document.control@sasktel.sk.ca; iworkstation@mtsallstream.com; regulatory@bell.aliant.ca; kcampbell@windmobile.ca; awood@windmobile.ca; info@publicmobile.ca; info@davewireless.com

Date modified:

2009-11-16