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This page has been archived on the Web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, 1 November 2012
Our Files: 8740-B20-201208249
See Distribution List
RE: Bell Canada Tariff Notice 925 and Télébec, and Société en commandite Tariff Notices 451 and 451A
On 11 July 2012, Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership; Bell Canada; and Télébec, Société en commandite (Télébec) (collectively, the Bell companies) filed Bell Canada Tariff Notice (TN) 925 and Télébec TN 451. On 27 September 2012, the Bell companies filed Télébec TN 451A.
On 10 August 2012, Bragg Communications Inc., carrying on business as EastLink; Cogeco Cable Inc.; Rogers Communications Partnership; Shaw Communications Inc.; and Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of its affiliate Videotron G.P. (collectively, the Cable carriers); and MTS Inc. and Allstream Inc. (collectively, MTS Allstream) filed comments.
Commission staff has reviewed the information on the record and determined that additional information is required to properly assess the applications. Accordingly, the Cable carriers and MTS Allstream are requested to provide by 22 November 2012, responses to the question set out in the Attachment, serving copies on all parties.
Other parties may file comments on the responses filed by the Cable carriers and MTS Allstream by 6 December 2012, serving copies on all parties. The Cable carriers and MTS Allstream may file reply comments by 17 December 2012, serving copies on all parties.
Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.
Original signed by
Director Dispute Resolution & Decisions
cc. : Bell Aliant : email@example.com
Bell Canada : firstname.lastname@example.org
Télébec : email@example.com
EastLink : firstname.lastname@example.org
Cogeco Cable Inc.: email@example.com
Quebecor Media Inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org
Rogers Communications Partnership : RCI.Regulatory@rci.rogers.com
Shaw Communications Inc. : Regulatory@sjrb.ca
MTS Allstream : email@example.com
1. In Bell Canada’s National Services Tariff Item 901.4(o) and in Télébec’s Tarif Général Chapitre 10.3 Article 10.3.4(15), the Bell companies propose to delete wording, specifically “When a licensee has an existing presence on a Support Structure, ...”.
In paragraph 53 of the Cable carriers’ 10 August 2012 comments, the Cable carriers state “[w]ithout this clarifying language, drop wires could be considered to become subject to the permit requirement.”
Explain how, without this clarifying language, subscriber drop wires could be considered to become subject to the permit requirement.
- Date modified: