Telecom - Commission Letter addressed to Philippe Gauvin (Bell Canada)

Ottawa, 11 June 2021

Our reference: 8622-R28-202102862


Mr. Philippe Gauvin
Assistant General Counsel
Bell Canada
160 Elgin St., Floor 19
Ottawa, ON  K2P 2C4

RE:  Request for Information regarding the Part 1 Application submitted by Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (Rogers) for non-discriminatory and timely access to the multi-dwelling unit (MDU) development Telegraph Square and to future developments of IronGate Developments (IronGate)

Dear Mr. Gauvin,

On 6 May 2021, the Commission received an application from Rogers, filed pursuant to Part 1 of the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure.  Rogers submitted that it is seeking relief from an ongoing inability to obtain timely access, on reasonable terms and conditions, to IronGate’s MDU developments, including Telegraph Square and future IronGate MDU developments located in Saint John, New Brunswick.

Rogers requested that the Commission dispose of the Application on an expedited basis, in order for Rogers to obtain access to the Telegraph Square units during the construction period.  Commission staff set out an expedited process in a letter issued on 11 May 2021.  This process provided IronGate and any interested person until 21 May 2021 to file an answer or an intervention.  IronGate did not file an answer to Rogers’ application during this period and no interventions were received. 

We are contacting you, as Rogers’ application states that Bell Canada (Bell) is the only service provider to Telegraph SquareFootnote1.  In considering Commission decisions regarding MDU access, Commission staff is of the view that the current proceeding could have an impact on Bell’s provision of service.

The Commission established the MDU Access Condition in Telecom Decision CRTC (TD) 2003-45Footnote2, requiring that the provision of telecommunications services by a Local Exchange Carrier (LEC) in an MDU is subject to the condition that all LECs wishing to serve end-users in that MDU are able to access end-users in it, on a timely basis, by means of resale, leased facilities or their own facilities, under reasonable terms and conditions.

In TD 2003-45, the Commission also outlined access rights for LECs during the construction phaseFootnote3 and indicated that in accordance with the MDU Access Condition, it would take further action as appropriate, depending on the circumstances of each case, to ensure that all LECs are able to provide telecommunications services in an MDU.  

TD 2016-324Footnote4, TD 2015-148Footnote5 and TD 2014-42Footnote6 are subsequent Commission decisions related to the MDU Access Framework.  In these decisions, the Commission determined that service providers who had been granted access to the MDU building would no longer be permitted to provide telecommunications services to that building unless the applicant was given timely access, under reasonable terms and conditions.

Paragraph 37(1) (b) of the Telecommunications Act provides that the Commission may require Canadian carriers to file information or documents that the Commission considers necessary for administration of that Act.  Bell is requested to provide a response, including rationale and any supporting information, to the attached question by 18 June 2021, serving its response on Rogers and IronGate. 

Rogers and IronGate will have until 25 June 2021 to comment on Bell’s answer.


Original signed by

Michel Murray
Director, Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Implementation
Telecommunications Sector, CRTC

c.c.:  Pamela Dinsmore, Rogers,
Peter Kovacs, Rogers,
Stephen Brittain, IronGate Developments, 4 Brittain Lane, Rothesay, NB, E2H 0A8
Jane ven der Buhs, CRTC,
Attach. (1)

Attachment: Request for Information

1. Please provide comments on the referenced Rogers’ Part 1 Application, considering among other things, previous CRTC decisions regarding MDU access, including:

Date modified: