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This page has been archived on the Web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, 26 July 2010
Our Reference: 8663-C12-201000653
Mr. Dennis Béland
Director, Regulatory Affairs,
Quebecor Media Inc.
Mr. Ken Engelhart
Senior Vice President
Mr. Jean Brazeau
Shaw Communications Inc.
Re: Routing of traffic destined for small ILECs utilizing Bell Canada’s local transit service
The Commission is in receipt of a letter, dated 13 July 2010, from Quebecor Media Inc. (on behalf of its affiliate Videotron Ltd.), Rogers Communications Inc. and Shaw Communications Inc., (collectively the CLECs), concerning a letter dated 4 June 2010 that they had received from Bell Canada Carrier Relations. In the Bell Canada letter, the CLECs were advised that competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) toll traffic destined to a small incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) could not be transited via Bell Canada’s local transit service. The CLECs were also advised that effective 4 August 2010 Bell Canada may, at its discretion; either block such non qualifying traffic or impose any applicable surcharge for ineligible traffic allowed in its tariffs.
The CLECs requested that the Commission direct Bell Canada to raise its concerns in the context of the proceeding initiated by Obligation to serve and other matters, Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2010-43, 28 January 2010, as amended 5 March 2010 and 30 March 2010 (Telecom Notice of Consultation 2010-43), and to refrain from taking any traffic blocking or other preemptive actions pending the outcome of that proceeding.
By letter dated 21 June 2010, Bell Canada submitted that the CLECs' requests are without merit and should be dismissed. Bell Canada stated its 4 June 2010 letter raises no new or policy issues and is simply a tariff implementation matter, and that there is no merit or requirement to subsume the interpretation of its existing local transit service tariff among the policy issues being explored in Telecom Notice of Consultation 2010-43.
On the basis of the information before it, Commission staff considers that the issue raised in the CLECs’ 13 July 2010 letter relate to the proper interpretation of existing tariffs and prior Commission determinations and, as such, do not fall within the scope of issues to be addressed as part of the Telecom Notice of Consultation 2010-43 proceeding. In this regard, it is worth further noting that the SILECs’ regulatory regime is not up for consideration as part of the Telecom Notice of Consultation 2010-43 proceeding. Consequently, the CLECs’ request is denied.
Commission staff notes that should the CLECs wish to challenge Bell Canada’s interpretation of its tariffs and related Commission determinations, it should follow the procedures set out in the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure, including the notice requirements therein set out.
Original signed by Lynne Fancy
cc.: Mirko Bibic – Bell Canada firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date modified: