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This page has been archived on the Web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, 4 October 2012
File No.: 8740-J34-201212125
BY E-MAIL
Mr. Andrew Matoga
Vice President, Network Planning and Development
ISP Telecom Inc.
1155, boul René Lévesque Ouest, Suite 2500
Montréal, QC
H3B 2K4
Andrew@isptelecom.net
RE: Tariff Notice 14 – Introduction of charge for LSR rejection
Dear Sir:
On 21 September 2012, the Commission received an application that was filed in confidence by ISP Telecom Inc. (ISP Telecom, or the company), under Tariff Notice 14 (TN 14), in which the company proposed introducing a charge for local service request (LSR) rejection with an effective date of 1 January 2012. The company indicated that its application was filed as a Group B tariff filing.
Commission staff notes that paragraph 22(2) of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure (the Rules of Procedure) sets out the information that applicants must include in their applications and that paragraph 59 of the Rules of Procedure specifies the procedural requirements established for the approval of a tariff or an agreement. Paragraph 8 of the Rules of Procedure provides that the Commission may return an application or close a file that does not meet these requirements.
Commission staff notes that, pursuant to subsection 61(3) of the Telecommunications Act (the Act), the Commission may make an ex parte decision where it considers that the circumstances of the case justify it. However, in the case of TN 14, the company provided no rationale as to why the Commission should treat its application on an ex parte basis.
In addition, Commission staff notes that, pursuant to subsection 25(4) of the Act, the Commission may ratify the charging of a rate by a Canadian carrier otherwise than in accordance with a tariff approved by the Commission. However, in the case of TN 14, the company provided no rationale as to why the Commission should approve the company’s proposal effective 1 January 2012.
Commission staff further notes that in Review of conditions for approval of a local service request rejection charge, Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2012-523, 28 September 2012, the Commission recently determined, among other things, that LSR rejection rate threshold values should be increased for local exchange carriers that do not provide access to their operational support systems.
In light of the above, the Commission will not process TN 14 as proposed, and this file is closed.
ISP Telecom may submit a new application, taking into account Telecom Decision 2012-523 as appropriate, under cover of a new Tariff Notice number.
Yours sincerely,
‘Original signed by M. Murray
Michel Murray
Director, Regulatory Implementation
Telecommunications
cc: Cameron Warriner, CRTC (819) 953-6081, cameron.warriner@crtc.gc.ca
- Date modified: