Search

Telecom - Procedural Letter addressed to Stephen Brittain (IronGate Developments Inc.)

Ottawa, 8 July 2021

Our reference:  8622-R28-202102862

BY EMAIL

Stephen Brittain
President, IronGate Developments Inc.
21 Burpee Ave. 
Rothesay, NB
E2H 1G9
stephen@villageviewsuites.com
stephenbrittain@me.com

Re:Document service to IronGate Developments Inc. (IronGate) and extension to deadline for responding to the Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (Rogers) Part 1 Application for non-discriminatory and timely access to the multi-dwelling unit (MDU) development Telegraph Square and to future developments of IronGate

Dear Stephen,

The Commission received an application from Rogers Footnote1 on 6 May 2021, filed pursuant to Part 1 of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure (the Rules of Practice and Procedure).  In its Application, Rogers is seeking relief from what it submitted was its ongoing inability to obtain timely access to the MDU development known as Telegraph Square and to future MDU developments of Iron Gate Developments in Saint John, New Brunswick.  Rogers indicated that it served this application on IronGate.

Commission staff issued a procedural letter on 11 May 2021 to Rogers and IronGate, approving Rogers’ request for an expedited process and setting out the process for review of the Application.  IronGate was asked to respond or provide confirmation that it would not file an answer to the Application by 21 May 2021.  Commission staff did not receive a response from IronGate.

Commission staff sent Bell, the sole service provider for Telegraph Square, a Request for Information (RFI) on 11 June 2021 regarding the Application, to better understand the impact of this proceeding on Bell’s provision of services to the MDU.  On 16 June 2021, Commission staff approved a request from Bell to extend Bell’s deadline for filing its RFI.  IronGate and Rogers were given until 30 June 2021 to comment on Bell’s answer.  The Commission served copies of both the RFI and the extension approval letters on IronGate and Rogers.

On 25 June 2021, Commission staff received an email from IronGate.  During a subsequent telephone discussion with staff, IronGate explained that it was unaware of the proceedings until it was served with a copy of Bell’s RFI response by email, as the Application and procedural letters were served at the address of 4 Brittain Lane, Rothesay, New Brunswick, which is no longer an address associated with or used by IronGate.

Given the above, Commission staff has enclosed a copy of the record (to date).

Commission staff notes that Rogers requested an expedited timeline and staff is of the view that an expedited process to consider Rogers’ application remains in the public interest. However, there are procedural fairness concerns that make it important to allow IronGate an opportunity to participate in the proceedings.  Commission staff therefore sets out the following revised process for this Application:

  1. IronGate may respond to, and any person may comment on, Rogers’ application by no later than 18 July 2021.  Iron Gate is requested to provide confirmation to the CRTC by no later than 18 July 2021 in the event it decides not to file an answer to Rogers’ application.
  2. Rogers may file a reply to IronGate’s response to Rogers’ application and to any other interventions, by no later than 23 July 2021.
  3. IronGate may provide comments on Bell’s RFI response by no later than 18 July 2021.

In addition to filing its documents with the Commission, and as set out in paragraph 26(2)(k) of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, IronGate’s answer to the Application must be served on the applicant (i.e., Rogers) and IronGate’s comments regarding Bell’s RFI answer must be served on Rogers and Bell.  The responsibility for serving Rogers and Bell with copies of the documents rests solely with IronGate; the Commission will not distribute copies of these documents to parties on behalf of other parties.

Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.

All submissions to the CRTC must be filed in accordance with the procedures and steps set out on the CRTC’s website, including ensuring that all correspondence is addressed to Mr. Claude Doucet, Secretary General. All documents filed with the CRTC must be submitted electronically, via My CRTC Account.

For any questions regarding this procedure, please contact Jane ven der Buhs at jane.venderbuhs@crtc.gc.ca.

Sincerely,

Original signed by

Michel Murray
Director, Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Implementation
Telecommunications Sector

c.c.:  Pamela Dinsmore, Rogers, Pam.Dinsmore@rci.rogers.com
Peter Kovacs, Rogers, Peter.Kovacs@rci.rogers.com
Richard Chan, Rogers, Richard.Chan@rci.rogers.com
Mr. Philippe Gauvin, Bell, Bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Jane ven der Buhs, CRTC, Jane.venderBuhs@CRTC.gc.ca

Attachments: (11)

  1. Rogers’ Part 1 Application
  2. Rogers’ Part 1 Application Appendix – Letter
  3. Rogers’ Part 1 Application Appendix – Access Agreement
  4. CRTC Procedural Letter
  5. Rogers’ Reply to Interventions
  6. CRTC Procedural Letter – Request for Information to Bell
  7. Bell Request for RFI Deadline Extension
  8. Rogers’ Comment on Bell RFI Deadline Extension Request
  9. CRTC Letter concerning RFI Extension
  10. Bell Answer to RFI
  11. Rogers Reply to Bell RFI Answer
Date modified: