ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter Addressed to the Distribution List
This page has been archived on the Web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, 9 June 2017
Our reference: 8663-C182-201702598
BY EMAIL
Distribution list
RE: Application by Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. (CNOC) for transitional aggregated wholesale high-speed access (HSA) services over incumbent fibre-to-the-premises facilities ‒ Reply to request for extension to extend deadline
Dear Madam, Sir:
On 6 June 2017, the Commission received a procedural request from TELUS Communications Company (TCC), in which it requested an extension to the deadline for interested parties to file comments in response to the new evidence contained in appendices B and C of CNOC’s reply comments.Footnote1
TCC submitted that it anticipated requiring an extension to the 13 June 2017 deadline specified in the Commission letter,Footnote2 which provided 14 days for interested parties to respond, rather than the 30 days normally allotted to replies to an application. TCC also submitted that CNOC should not be granted an opportunity to reply to the comments submitted in response to the new evidence, on the grounds that it raises issues of procedural fairness.
Bell Canada (Bell) submitted a letter supporting, in part, TCC’s request on 7 June 2017, noting that had CNOC filed the evidence as part of its original application, parties would be entitled to 30 days to respond.
CNOC submitted that the determinations contained in the above-referenced Commission staff letter established a fair and reasonable timeline and procedure. It further argued that the relief requested in its application is urgently needed on an expedited basis and that TCC would suffer no procedural unfairness if its request was denied, given that the scope of the comments is limited to the new evidence.
CNOC also submitted that providing it with the ability to respond duplicates the traditional Part 1 application process and that it would be procedurally unfair if CNOC did not have the right of reply.
In Commission staff’s view, given that interested parties normally have 30 days to respond to evidence presented in Part 1 applications, it would be consistent to allocate the same period for reply comments to the new evidence CNOC submitted. Furthermore, the specificity and relevance of the new evidence submitted justifies an extension to the reply period of interested parties, which may contribute to a more fulsome record on which the Commission renders its decision. Likewise, with respect to TCC’s request to deny CNOC an opportunity to reply to these comments, Commission staff considers that CNOC’s additional reply may contribute to a more fulsome record.
In light of the above, parties may file comments by 29 June 2017 (instead of 13 June 2017), serving a copy on CNOC. CNOC may file a reply to these interventions by 6 July 2017 (instead of 20 June 2017).
Sincerely,
Original signed by Laurie Ventura for
Kay Saicheua
Director, Competition and Emergency Services Policy
Telecommunications Sector
c.c.: Jeremy Lendvay, CRTC, 819-997-4946, jeremy.lendvay@crtc.gc.ca
Eric Macfarlane, CRTC, 819-997-4389, eric.macfarlane@crtc.gc.ca
Distribution list for Telecom Decision 2016-379: nels2510@telus.net; robin.winsor@cybera.ca; steve@openmedia.ca; reza.rajabiun@ryerson.ca; darrellkrahn@shaw.ca; chall2k5@gmail.com; hbgold@fiberbroadband.org ; ron.murch@haskayne.ucalgary.ca; regulatory@fibernetics.ca ; jeff_mcnamee@sympatico.ca ; cedwards@ccsa.cable.ca ; regulatory@ssimicro.com ; regulatory.matters@corp.eastlink.ca ; regulatory@mts.ca ; regulatory@zayo.com ; rs@summer.com ; corinne.pohlmann@cfib.ca ; john.pecman@cb-bc.gc.ca ; jpanter@auroracollege.nt.ca ; slambert-racine@uniondesconsommateurs.ca ; george.burger@vmedia.ca ; rob.olenick@tbaytel.com ; jlawford@piac.ca ; jonathan.holmes@itpa.ca ; MaryAnne.Bendfeld@calgary.ca ; blackwell@giganomics.ca ; jfmezei@vaxination.ca ; derek.leschinsky@bc-cb.gc.ca ; Monique.Moreau@cfib.ca ; regulatory@bell.aliant.ca ; document.control@sasktel.com ; regulatory.affairs@telus.com ; dennis.beland@quebecor.com ; david.watt@rci.rogers.com ; regulatory@sjrb.ca ; ctacit@tacitlaw.com ; regulatory@distributel.ca ; regulatory@primustel.ca ; regulatory@bcba.ca ; telecom.regulatory@cogeco.com ; bell.regulatory@bell.ca ; regulatory@teksavvy.com ; regaffairs@quebecor.com ; steve.sorochan@gov.yk.ca ; dmckeown@viewcom.ca ; Nathan.jarrett@rci.rogers.com
- Date modified: