Telecom Commission Letter addressed to the Distribution List

Ottawa, 12 November 2020

Our reference: 1011-NOC2020-0187


Distribution List

Re:  Call for comments – Appropriate network configuration for disaggregated wholesale high-speed access services, Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2020-187, as amended (CRTC File 1011-NOC2020-0187) – Request for order addressing alleged instances of non-compliance with Commission directions and related procedural matters

To all:

The Commission is in receipt of a procedural letter from the Competitive Network Operators of Canada (CNOC) dated 2 November 2020, requesting a Commission order to address alleged instances of non-compliance with certain directions in Telecom Notice of Consultation 2020-187 (the Notice) regarding configuration proposals submitted by Bragg Communications Inc., carrying on business as Eastlink (Eastlink), Cogeco Communications Inc., on behalf of its subsidiary Cogeco Connexion Inc. (Cogeco), and Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (RCCI).

CNOC requested that those three companies be directed to file updated configurations with reduced levels of disaggregation. CNOC also requested the adoption of additional procedural steps to allow parties to address requests for information (RFIs) to other parties along with an associated step to allow for requests for disclosure of information submitted in confidence and further responses. CNOC requested that reply comments should follow these steps.

Distributel supported CNOC’s request.

Cogeco, Eastlink and RCCI opposed CNOC’s procedural requests and submitted that their inclusion would further delay the proceeding. Cogeco, Eastlink and RCCI generally submitted that they have appropriately responded to the Commission’s questions in the Notice. In general, they noted that, if CNOC has issues with the responses, they have the opportunity to address their concerns in their reply comments and, if there is validity in CNOC’s arguments, they can be addressed at that point.

Vaxination proposed that the current reply deadline be maintained. An RFI stage could be added to be followed by final replies in January.

TELUS Communications Inc. submitted that if an RFI stage was necessary, it is the role of Commission staff to pose RFIs.

Commission staff considers it important that the overall process progresses in a timely manner and with minimal delays. Likewise, it is of the view that the public interest is better served by receiving reply comments by the deadline set out in the Notice in order to build the record of the proceeding, rather than adding additional procedural steps at this juncture. Therefore, Commission staff is of the view that, at this time, the current process will move forward as specified in the Notice, with replies due on 7 December 2020. Parties will have the opportunity to address any issues they have with the submissions of others in their reply comments. Further, should parties continue to have concerns regarding the record of the proceeding following the filing of reply comments, they can make their case at that time and consideration will be given as to whether any further process is necessary.

Accordingly, no change in the process as set out in the Notice is made at this time.


Original signed by

Chris Noonan
Director, Competitive Services & Costing Implementation
Telecommunications sector

c. c.: Tom Vilmansen, CRTC 819-997-9253

Distribution List:;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Date modified: