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This page has been archived on the Web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, 4 August 2017
Our reference: 1011-NOC2017-0092
BY EMAIL
Distribution
Re: Phase-out of the local service subsidy regime, Telecom Notice of Consultation 2017-92Footnote1 – Request for disclosure of information designated as confidential
Dear Madam, Sir:
This letter addresses requests for disclosure of information designated as confidential in the proceeding initiated by Telecom Notice of Consultation 2017-92.
By letters dated 13 July 2017, Bell Canada et al.Footnote2 and the NPF-PIACFootnote3 requested disclosure of certain information for which confidentiality had been claimed in connection with the Commission’s requests for information dated 13 April 2017.
The following companies filed responses to the requests for disclosure: Bell Canada et al., Bragg Communications Inc., carrying on business as Eastlink (Eastlink), the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association (representing 23 small incumbent local exchange carriers), Saskatchewan Telecommunications, and TELUS Communications Company.
Assessment of the requests
Requests for disclosure of information designated as confidential are addressed in light of sections 38 and 39 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act) as well as sections 30 and following of the CRTC Rules of Practice and Procedure (the Rules of Procedure). In evaluating a request, an assessment is first made as to whether the information falls into a category of information that can be designated as confidential pursuant to section 39 of the Act. An assessment is then made as to whether there is any specific direct harm likely to result from the disclosure of the information in question and whether any such harm outweighs the public interest in disclosure. In making this evaluation, a number of factors are taken into consideration, including the degree of competition and the importance of disclosure of the information for the purpose of obtaining a fuller record. The factors considered are discussed in more detail in Procedures for filing confidential information and requesting its disclosure in Commission proceedings, Broadcasting and Telecom Information Bulletin CRTC 2010-961, 23 December 2010, as amended by Broadcasting and Telecom Information Bulletin CRTC 2010-961-1, 26 October 2012.
Commission staff considers that certain of the requests characterized by the NPF-PIAC as requests for disclosure are more properly classified as requests for additional information. With respect to these requests, Commission staff has considered the relevance of the information being requested to the specific issues within the scope of this proceeding.
Conclusions
Commission staff notes that Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (Rogers) has asked for information in its requests for information to other parties filed on 13 July 2017Footnote4 that are similar to certain of the NPF-PIAC’s requests and consequently raise similar issues. Commission staff considers that it would be more appropriate to deal with these issues in response to Rogers’ requests for information as part of the deficiency/confidentiality process set out in paragraphs 33 and 34 in Telecom Notice of Consultation 2017-92.
With respect to all other remaining requests, having regard to the considerations set out above and the responses to the requests for information provided by the other parties, no further disclosure or provision of information is required.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
John Macri
Director, Policy Framework
Telecommunications Sector
c.c.: Christine Brock, CRTC, (819) 997-4557, christine.brock@crtc.gc.ca
Julie Cook, CRTC, (819) 743-4591, julie.cook@crtc.gc.ca
Distribution List
9315-1884 Québec, richard.biron@sogetel.com
Bell Canada, bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Brooke Telecom Co-operative Ltd., geoff@brooketel.ca
Bruce Telecom, bart.cameron@brucetelecom.com
CityWest Telephone Corporation, Donovan.Dias@cwct.ca
Cochrane Telecom Services of the Town of Cochrane, smitch@cochranetel.ca
CoopTel, coop de télécommunication, mrocheleau@cooptel.coop
Eastlink, Regulatory.Matters@corp.eastlink.ca
Execulink Telecom Inc., ian.stevens@execulink.com
Gosfield North Communication Co-operative Limited, rob.petruk@gosfieldtel.ca
Groupe Maskatel LP, jgrenier@maskatel.qc.ca
Hay Communications Co-operative Limited, a.lawrence@hay.net
Huron Telecommunications Co-Operative Limited, grubb@hurontel.on.ca
Independent Telecommunications Providers Association, jonathan.holmes@itpa.ca
Lansdowne Rural Telephone Company Ltd., wagrier@1000island.net
Mornington Communications Co-operative Limited, knaylor@mornington.ca
Nexicom Telecommunications, a Division of Nexicom Inc., pdowns@nexicomgroup.net
Nexicom Telephones, a Division of Nexicom Inc., pdowns@nexicomgroup.net
North Frontenac Telephone Corporation Ltd, davesmith@frontenac.net
North Renfrew Telephone Company Limited Trade, moverton@nrtco.net
NPF-PIAC, alau@piac.ca
Quadro Communications Co-operative Inc., john.deheer@quadro.net
Roxborough Telephone Company Limited, roxboro@ontarioeast.net
Saskatchewan Telecommunications, Document.control@sasktel.com
Sogetel inc., richard.biron@sogetel.com
TELUS Communications Company, regulatory.affairs@telus.com
Tuckersmith Communications Co-operative Limited, rob@tccmail.ca
Wightman Telecom Ltd., rfigliuzzi@wightman.ca
WTC Communications, steve@wtccommunications.ca
- Date modified: