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This page has been archived on the Web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.

Our references: 8620-A2-200906836

Ottawa, 19 January 2012 


To: Distribution List

Re: Amtelecom’s and CityWest’s wireless number portability implementation plans for Rogers

Dear Madam and Sirs:

In a letter dated 20 May 2011, Rogers Communications (Rogers), on behalf of Rogers Wireless operating as a Wireless Service Provider, confirmed that it was still interested in obtaining number portability in Amtelecom Telco GP Inc.’s (Amtelecom) Aylmer, Ontario, exchange and CityWest Telephone Corporation’s (CityWest) Prince Rupert, British Columbia, exchange. Subsequently, Amtelecom and CityWest filed plans for the implementation of wireless number portability (WNP) in the above-noted exchanges, based on the regulatory framework established in Telecom Decision 2008-122,1 as modified in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-291.2

In Network interconnection for voice services, Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2012-24, 19 January 2012, the Commission modified the WNP regulatory framework for the small incumbent local exchange carriers (small ILECs). Specifically, the Commission decided that implementation of WNP was to be conditional on the wireless carrier directly interconnecting with a small ILEC, unless otherwise negotiated.3

Given that the terms and conditions for the implementation of WNP in the small ILECs’ territories have changed, Commission staff requests Rogers to confirm by: 26 January 2012 whether

i.    Rogers and the small ILEC have agreed to interconnect outside of the small ILEC’s territory, as previously proposed by Rogers;

ii.   Rogers will interconnect directly within the small ILEC’s territory; or

iii.  Rogers withdraws its request for WNP in the small ILEC’s territory.

If the parties agree that interconnection will take place directly in the small ILEC’s territory, the small ILEC is to file the parts of its WNP implementation plan that need to be updated to address the changes caused by the agreed-upon arrangement, including revised costs with the methodology, assumptions, and detailed calculations for these costs, by: 16 February 2012. Rogers may provide reply comments on the updated plan by:  23 February 2012.

All submissions are to be made in accordance with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules and Procedure, SOR/2010-277.

Yours sincerely,

Original signed by:

Suzanne Bédard
Senior Manager, Tariffs

Attachment: Distribution List

cc:  William Craig, CityWest,
Laurie Ventura, CRTC (819) 997-4589,
Sylvie Labbé, CRTC (819) 953-4945,


Distribution List

Ms. Denise Heckbert
Regulatory Analyst, Regulatory Matters
6080 Young Street, Suite 801
P.O. Box 8660, Station “A”
Halifax, Nova Scotia
B3K 5M3

Mr. Don Holkestad
Operations Manager
CityWest Telephone Corporation
248 Third Avenue West
Prince Rupert, British Columbia
V8J 1L1

Mr. Simon-Pierre Oliver
Director, Regulatory Affairs
Rogers Communications
333 Bloor Street East
Toronto, Ontario
M4W 1G9

[1] Regulatory framework for the implementation of wireless number portability within the serving territories of the small incumbent local exchange carriers, Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-122, 18 December 2008

[2] Obligation to serve and other matters, Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011 291, 3 May 2011, as amended by Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011 291 1, 12 May 2011

[3] Previously, following a request by a wireless carrier and an approval process for WNP, the wireless carrier could use transit arrangements established with a large ILEC to transfer local voice calls to and from a small ILEC rather than directly interconnecting with a small ILEC.

Date modified: