ARCHIVED - Telecom Order CRTC 2015-448

This page has been archived on the Web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.

PDF version

Ottawa, 30 September 2015

File numbers: Bell Aliant Tariff Notice 519 and Bell Canada Tariff Notice 7460

Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership and Bell Canada – Withdrawal of services from Special Facilities Tariffs


  1. The Commission received applications from Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership and Bell Canada (collectively, the Bell companies), dated 5 June 2015, in which the Bell companies proposed to withdraw the following services from their respective Special Facilities Tariffs:
    • items G6 and G8 – Central Office Located Customer-Provided Equipment
    • item G14 – Type 1 and Type 2 Connections
    • item G16 – Cellular Voice Channels
    • item G17 – Cellular Access Service Types II and III
  2. The Bell companies submitted that they do not currently have any customers for the services, and that they have not had any customers for over eight years. They indicated that either the services are not relevant, or customers have found more efficient ways to supply the services, either through third parties or self-supply.
  3. The Commission received no interventions regarding the Bell companies’ applications. The public record of this proceeding, which closed on 24 August 2015, is available on the Commission’s website at or by using the file numbers provided above.

Commission’s analysis and determinations

  1. The Bell companies’ applications are reasonable, given that the withdrawal of the services will not affect any customers and that no customers have subscribed to the services for at least the last eight years. As well, the Bell companies’ applications meet the requirements set out in Telecom Information Bulletin 2010-455, in which the Commission set out its procedures for dealing with applications to destandardize and/or withdraw tariffed services.Footnote 1 In particular, the Bell companies have provided the amended tariff pages, adequate rationale for the withdrawal, and the required supporting documentation.
  2. The Commission assigned items G14, G16, and G17 to the interconnection service category in Telecom Decision 2008-17. However, as submitted by the Bell companies in response to a request for information, these services fail the essentiality test for wholesale services set out in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2015-326Footnote 2 since they do not meet the input component or the competition component.
  3. In light of the above, the Commission approves the Bell companies’ applications, effective the date of this order. Revised tariff pages are to be issued within 10 days of the date of this order.Footnote 3

Secretary General

Related documents


Footnote 1

This bulletin summarizes the Commission’s related determinations set out in Telecom Decision 2008-22 and is incorporated by reference in section 59 of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Return to footnote 1

Footnote 2

As set out in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2015-326, the essentiality test for wholesale services consists of the following three components:

  • the facility is required as an input by competitors to provide telecommunications services in a relevant downstream market (the input component);
  • the facility is controlled by a firm that possesses upstream market power such that denying (or withdrawing) access to the facility would likely result in a substantial lessening or prevention of competition in the relevant downstream market (the competition component); and
  • it is not practical or feasible for competitors to duplicate the functionality of the facility (the duplicability component).

Return to footnote 2

Footnote 3

Revised tariff pages can be submitted to the Commission without a description page or a request for approval; a tariff application is not required.

Return to footnote 3

Date modified: