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This page has been archived on the Web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, 9 June 2011
Our reference: 8622-T69-201108332
BY E-MAIL
Ted Woodhead
Vice-President, Telecom Policy & Regulatory Affairs
TELUS Communications Company
215 Slater St., 8th Floor
Ottawa ON
Canada K1P 0A6
ted.woodhead@telus.com
Roger Choquette
Consultant and Authorized Representative of Sogetel inc.
Comgate Telemanagement Ltd.
428 E. Thunderbird Road, #133
Phoenix AZ
USA
choquette@comgate.com
Dear Sirs:
Re: Request by TELUS for an expedited hearing process
In its letter dated 13 May 2011, TELUS Communications Company (TELUS) requested that the Commission hold an expedited hearing process in accordance with paragraph 29 of Broadcasting and Telecom Information Bulletin CRTC 2009-38, to hear a dispute between it and Sogetel inc. (Sogetel) regarding the relocation of a toll network point of interconnection (POI) in Lac-Etchemin, Quebec.
In its request, TELUS stated that it had placed a formal order with Sogetel for the delivery of toll network interconnection circuits for its point of presence in Lac-Etchemin, which is designated as a new POI. TELUS indicated that the present request is the result of the Sogetel’s non-delivery of the requested circuits. TELUS asked that the Commission direct Sogetel to
a. immediately deliver the number of DS-1s ordered by TELUS to its new POI for the interconnection of toll networks in Sogetel’s Lac-Etchemin switching centre;
b. migrate, as quickly as possible, TELUS’s toll traffic to the DS-1s delivered to the new POI;
c. once the migration in step b is completed, immediately cancel the DS-1s in service at the current TELUS POI; and
d. take this new toll network interconnection configuration (number of DS-1s and associated distance) into account for the calculation of applicable fees as of 1 January 2012, even if steps a, b, and c have not been completed by 31 July 2011, given that Sogetel’s failure to comply with the current regulations and tariffs has caused implementation delays beyond TELUS’s control.
TELUS stated that the urgency in resolving the dispute between itself and Sogetel is due to work related to the delivery of the DS-1s that it had ordered. This work must begin as soon as possible so that it may be completed by 31 July 2011.
In its reply dated 19 May 2011, Sogetel submitted that
a. TELUS’s request does not meet the Commission’s criteria for holding an expedited hearing process; and
b. the sole purpose of TELUS’s request is to circumvent the requirement, set out in Telecom Decision CRTC 2005-3, to file a request for co-location if it wants to supply its own circuits for the interconnection of toll networks in the Lac-Etchemin switching centre.
Sogetel also submitted that there is no need for urgency in resolving the dispute resulting from the issue of toll network interconnection.
Commission staff notes Sogetel’s statement that it had never been invited to take part in assisted mediation by Commission staff or by a third party. Commission staff is of the opinion that the file confirms that the parties have not had recourse to preliminary mediation to resolve their dispute.
Commission staff is also of the opinion that TELUS has not provided satisfactory arguments in support of its assertion that the urgency in resolving the dispute necessitates an expedited hearing.
In light of the above, Commission staff concludes that TELUS’s request does not meet the Commission’s criteria for holding an expedited hearing.
Further, Commission staff is of the opinion that, in light of the following clarifications, no formal Commission intervention is required. Commission staff notes that even if Telecom Decision CRTC 2005-3 requires small incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) to allow co-location as soon as they receive a request from an interexchange carrier (IXC), the decision does not force IXCs to co-locate. In fact, the decision expressly allows the IXC to choose whether to co-locate, either by using circuits leased to a small ILEC and delivered to a designated POI or by providing its own circuits and co-locating in the small ILEC's switching centre. Accordingly, Commission staff believes that TELUS's request to relocate its POI and to reconfigure its circuits for its toll network interconnection needs in Sogetel’s Lac-Etchemin switching centre meets the requirements of Telecom Decision CRTC 2005-3. Further, Commission staff considers that TELUS’s request can be met by 31 July 2011 and that Sogetel must comply with the request immediately.
Yours sincerely,
Original signed by
John Traversy
Executive Director
Telecommunications
cc: Sylvain Bellerive, Vice-President, Financial Services, Sogetel inc.
Gerry Lylyk, Director, Dispute Resolution, CRTC, gerry.lylyk@crtc.gc.ca
Mario Bertrand, Director, Competition Implementation & Technology, CRTC,
mario.bertrand@crtc.gc.ca
Diane Sullivan, TELUS Communications Company, Diane.Sullivan@telus.com
- Date modified: