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This page has been archived on the Web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, 28 July 2014
Our Reference: 8622-P8-201406984
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
1204- 1 Nicholas Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1N 7B7
RE: Application to review and vary Telecom Decision CRTC 2014-349
Dear Mr. Léger,
The Commission received an application by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(PIAC), dated 22 July 2014, seeking a review and variance of Telecom Decision CRTC 2014-349 Wightman Telecom Ltd. - Application regarding the appropriate interconnection regime for Rogers Wireless Home Phone Service (TD 2014-349) pursuant to Section 62 of the Telecommunications Act ("the Act") and under Part I of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure (CRTC Rules of Practice and Procedure).
Commission staff notes that in its Application, PIAC stated that it is not challenging the Commission’s determination in TD 2014-349 that Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI) was not required to offer its service solely as a competitive local exchange carrier. Rather, PIAC is concerned with paragraph 13 of TD 2014-349 in which the Commission stated that RCI and Wightman Telecom Inc. (Wightman) should only be required to support number portability in limited circumstances, namely, if RCI agreed to interconnect directly or with Wightman’s agreement.
Commission staff notes that paragraph 13 of TD 2014-349 does not constitute a Commission determination. In that paragraph, the Commission simply summarized, as part of its analysis, the determination it had made in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2012-24, Network interconnection for voice services (TRP 2012-24).
Commission staff therefore considers that with the present application, PIAC is essentially challenging the appropriateness of the Commission’s findings in TRP 2012-24 with respect to the circumstances in which wireless number portability is to be made available.
In light of the above, Commission staff is closing PIAC’s Part I application dated 22 July 2014.
Original signed by
c.c. Rogers Communications Inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org
Wightman Telecom Inc.: email@example.com
- Date modified: