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This page has been archived on the Web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, 12 November 2019
Our references: 8740-B2-201606873, 8740-B2-201703447, 8740-C6-20160683, 8740-M59-201606980, 8740-R28-201606808, 8740-S22-201606823 8740-S9-201606790, 8740-T66-201606815 8740-V3-201606849, 8740-E17-201610262
RE: Telecom Order CRTC 2019-288 – Final rates for aggregated wholesale high-speed access (HSA) service – Requests for extensions of deadline for submission of review and vary applications
On 28 October 2019, the Commission received a letter from Cogeco Communications Inc., Bragg Communications Incorporated (carrying on business as Eastlink), Rogers Communications Canada Inc., Shaw Cablesystems G.P., and Videotron Limited (collectively, the Cable Carriers) proposing an extension to the deadline for submissions for review and vary applications for Follow-up to Telecom Orders 2016-396 and 2016-448 – Final rates for aggregated wholesale high-speed access services, Telecom Order CRTC 2019-288, dated 15 August 2019, (Telecom Order 2019-288).
Motions for Leave to Appeal Pursuant to Section 64(1) of the Telecommunications Act, dated 12 September 2019, were filed with the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) by Bell Canada and Bell MTS (collectively, the Bell Companies) and separately by the Cable Carriers. The FCA granted an interim stay of Telecom Order 2019-288 on 27 September 2019, resulting in a stay of the implementation of the final wholesale HSA rates.
Pursuant to section 71 of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure (SOR/2010-277) (the Rules of Procedure), (i) an application to review, rescind, or vary a decision of the Commission must be filed with the Commission within 90 days after the date of the decision, and (ii) the Commission may extend that deadline if it is of the opinion that it is just and equitable to do so.
The Cable Carriers submitted that Telecom Order 2019-288 raises important and complex issues at a time that regulatory resources for all parties in the industry are undertaking and working on many different proceedings. The Cable Carriers therefore requested that the time within which an application may be filed to review and vary Telecom Order 2019-288 be extended to 13 January 2020, instead of 13 November 2019.
The Commission received interventions from the Bell Companies, Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. (CNOC), Distributel Communications Limited (Distributel), Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel), TekSavvy Solutions Inc. (TekSavvy), TELUS Communications Company (now TELUS Communications Inc. [TCI]), and Vaxination Informatique (Vaxination).
The Bell Companies also requested to extend the deadline to file a review and vary application to 13 January 2020.
The Bell Companies and SaskTel submitted they concur with the Cable Carriers that a short extension would be just and equitable in light of the fact that regulatory resources are stretched thin across the industry and that as a matter of fairness, any party interested to file a review and vary of Telecom Order 2019-288 should be granted a similar extension.
Opposing parties (CNOC, Distributel, PIAC, TekSavvy, and Vaxination) were generally of the view that approving an extension would have a detrimental impact on competition and would allow potential applicants to request further interim relief should the FCA stays be lifted resulting in further delays to the implementation of Telecom Order 2019-288. In addition, opposing parties expressed concerns that the proposed extension requested could impact other major proceedings before the Commission.
Commission’s Analysis and Determination
The Commission considers that granting an extension request, in and of itself, would not impact the implementation of Telecom Order 2019-288 or the level of competition, as an extension would only provide potential applicants additional time to prepare review and vary applications.
Although Telecom Order 2019-288 made a number of determinations and several adjustments to proposed rates and was based on voluminous record that began in 2016 and concluded in 2019, parties that participated in the proceeding leading to the order would be well informed and should not require a long extension to prepare potential review and vary applications.
Having regard for the concurrent and future proceedings and the extensions requested, the Commission considers that a modified extension would be required to allow for the process to continue without extensive delay and would likely address the concerns that an extension could impact other major proceedings.
In the circumstances, the Commission considers that a 30 day extension is reasonable, as it would result in minimal prejudice to public interest and address the concerns identified.
Accordingly, the date for an application to file a review and vary of Telecom Order 2019-288 is revised to 13 December 2019.
Original signed by
c.c.: Lyne Renaud, CRTC, firstname.lastname@example.org
Matthew Alexander, CRTC email@example.com
William Lloyd, CRTC firstname.lastname@example.org
Lyne Renaud: email@example.com;
Matthew Alexander: firstname.lastname@example.org;
William Lloyd: email@example.com
Bell Canada: firstname.lastname@example.org;
MTS Inc.: email@example.com;
Zayo Canada Inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Saskatchewan Telecommunications: email@example.com;
TELUS Communications Company: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Cogeco Cable Inc.: email@example.com;
Quebecor Media Inc. (Videotron): firstname.lastname@example.org;
Rogers Communications Canada Inc.: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org;
Nathan Jarret: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org;
Shaw Cablesystems G.P.: Regulatory@sjrb.ca;
CNOC Regulatory: email@example.com;
TekSavvy Solutions Inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Vaxination Informatique: email@example.com;
VMedia Inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Steve Sorochan: email@example.com;
Darren Parberry: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Marcus Schultze: email@example.com;
Kathleen Turnsek: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Tacit Law: email@example.com;
Distributel Communications Limited: firstname.lastname@example.org;
BC Broadband Association (BCBA) email@example.com
Public Interest Advocacy Centre, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date modified: