ARCHIVED -  Procedural 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This page has been archived on the Web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, 31 January 2012

Mr Barry Chapman
Vice President – Regulatory affairs
Bell Canada

Re: Application number 2011-1661-6 - Undue preference/disadvantage complaint from OUTtv Network Inc. (OUTtv) - Admissibility of letter from Nanos Research

Mr Chapman,

Commission staff is in receipt of a letter dated 27 January 2012, whereby Bell Canada (Bell) applied to the Commission for leave to file a letter from Nik Nanos, the president of Nanos Research (Nanos Letter), in response to certain comments made by OUTtv in its Reply comments dated 25 January 2012 regarding the study produced by Nanos Research and filed with Bell’s answer dated 19 January 2012.

Specifically, Bell argued that the public interest and principles of nature justice and procedural fairness weigh heavily in favour of including the Nanos Letter on the record of this proceeding. Bell submitted, among other things, that consumer studies are important sources of evidence in determining whether a BDU’s repackaging initiatives comply with the regulatory requirements and the Commission would benefit from considering the Nanos Letter. Bell also submitted that it would be unfair to allow OUTtv to make claims regarding the study without affording Bell an opportunity to respond.

On 30 January 2012, OUTtv filed with the Commission a letter whereby it objected to the filing of the Nanos Letter by Bell.

Commission staff considers that the Nanos Letter does not contain evidence which could not have been reasonably filed by Bell in its answer dated 19 January 2012. Commission staff also considers that the Nanos Letter generally contains evidence that supplements information already submitted by Bell and is not required by the Commission in order for it to render its decision. Finally, Commission staff is of the view that were it to accept filing of the Nanos Letter, OUTtv, as the applicant in this proceeding, would be entitled to an opportunity to respond. If this were the case, the target date for rendering a decision, which was established by Commission staff in response to Bell’s desire to avoid interference with its planned new programming repackaging launch date of 19 February 2012, would be jeopardized.

In light of the above, Bell’s request for leave to file the Nanos Letter is denied. Commission staff hereby returns Bell’s correspondence dated 27 January 2012, including the Nanos Letter. A copy of this letter will be added to the public record of the proceeding.

Yours sincerely,

Scott Hutton,
Executive Director - Broadcasting, CRTC.

Cc: Brad Danks, Chief Operating Officer, OUTtv

Bell Canada filed on behalf of Bell Satellite and Fibe TV.

Bell also requested that the letter be included on the record of the mandatory mediation process, which will not be addressed in this letter.

Date modified: