Telecom Decision CRTC 2019-175

PDF version

Ottawa, 23 May 2019

Public record: 8663-M22-201805714

Groupe Maskatel LP – Implementation of local competition for TELUS Communications Inc. in the exchanges of St-Éphrem and St-Victor, Quebec

The Commission approves Groupe Maskatel LP’s implementation plan for local competition, including local number portability, for TCI in the exchanges of St‑Éphrem and St‑Victor, Quebec.


  1. The Commission received an implementation plan for local competition, including local number portability (LNP), dated 26 October 2018, from Groupe Maskatel LP (Maskatel), a small incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC). In accordance with the framework set out in Telecom Decision 2006-14 and modified in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-291, the implementation plan was submitted in response to a formal signed expression of interest from TELUS Communications Inc. (TCI), which indicated that TCI wished to interconnect with Maskatel to provide local services as a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) in the exchanges of St-Éphrem and St‑Victor, Quebec.
  2. In its implementation plan, Maskatel identified the services and network components that it planned to make available to TCI. Maskatel indicated that certain services, like Enhanced 9-1-1, would be offered by Bell Canada, while others, such as relay services, would be provided by TCI. Maskatel submitted that the implementation of local competition, including LNP, would occur within five months of the Commission’s approval of the implementation plan. The company also submitted that it would (i) file revised tariff pages within 30 days of the Commission’s approval of the implementation plan, and (ii) file its cost recovery proposal at a later date, following the issuance of the Commission’s decision in the proceeding initiated by Telecom Notice of Consultation 2018-214.
  3. The Commission received an intervention from TCI, dated 26 November 2018, in which the company confirmed its support of the implementation plan. However, TCI also raised a concern about using AS2 as the method of data exchange.Footnote 1
  4. Maskatel submitted a revised implementation plan in response to TCI’s concern. Specifically, it included the option to exchange service orders by email if the existing AS2 agreement between the two companies could not be used. Maskatel also corrected two administrative errors.

Commission’s analysis and determinations

  1. The regulatory framework for the implementation of local competition in the small ILECs’ serving territories was established in Telecom Decision 2006-14, with the implementation of LNP being one of the key requirements. In that decision, the Commission directed each small ILEC to file an implementation plan with the Commission within 30 days following a formal signed expression of interest from a carrier requesting to use competitor services within a small ILEC’s serving territory. The decision also included directives that the small ILECs must follow when submitting their implementation plans. For example, the Commission indicated that the plan should include certain details, such as when tariffs will be filed; the timing of the implementation of local competitor services; the start-up costs to implement local competition, including LNP, if appropriate, and how those costs will be recovered; and any other implementation issues that may be unique to that small ILEC.
  2. The Commission reviewed this framework and determined, in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-291, that local competition should continue to be introduced in the serving territories of all the small ILECs based on the existing frameworks, subject to the modifications set out in that decision.
  3. As indicated above, Maskatel requested Commission approval of a plan for the implementation of local competition in the exchanges of St-Éphrem and St-Victor in response to a request from TCI. Further, the services and network components proposed in the implementation plan are similar to those that the Commission has approved for small ILECs that have implemented local competition in their serving territories.
  4. The Commission considers that approval of Maskatel’s implementation plan is reasonable and would benefit both competition and consumers in the exchanges of St‑Éphrem and St-Victor. Accordingly, the Commission approves Maskatel’s revised implementation plan, and directs the company to (i) file revised tariff pages to reflect the determinations set out in this decision within 30 days of the date of this decision, and (ii) provide information and assistance to TCI, as required, to implement local competition in accordance with the implementation plan.

Secretary General

Related documents

Date modified: