Telecom - Commission Letter addressed to Distribution List
Ottawa, 9 August 2021
Our reference: 8663-J92-202101369
RE: Part 1 Application by the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association regarding the development of retail and wholesale NG9-1-1 rates in the geographic areas covered by SILEC exchanges
On 2 March 2021, the Commission received a Part 1 Application from the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association (ITPA) requesting from the Commission:
- A determination confirming that small Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (“SILECs”) are responsible for providing Next-generation 9-1-1 services (“NG9-1-1”) to all end-users resident in their traditional operating territories regardless of which Telecommunications Service Provider (“TSP”) serves a particular end-user;
- A determination confirming that for the purposes of the application of wholesale rates for NG9-1-1 that all end-users that have a registered 9-1-1 service address, and for those that are mobile a billing address, in SILEC operating territories should be charged a SILEC’s NG9-1-1 monthly rate either directly from the SILEC or indirectly from their TSP via a wholesale tariff;
- An order directing Bell Mobility, Bragg Communications, Freedom Mobile, Rogers Communications, TELUS Communications and Vidéotron ltée (collectively “the WSPs”) to provide the number of wireless access services (i.e. working telephone numbers equipped for outward local calling) associated with billing addresses in SILEC exchanges as of 28 February 2021;
- An order directing these companies to report these wireless access service counts to the SILEC on a monthly basis thereafter; and
- An order suspending the requirement for SILECs to file proposed retail and wholesale NG9-1-1 tariffs until a reasonable period of time after the 28 February 2021 wireless access service counts are provided by the WSPs in order to give SILECs the opportunity to incorporate this information into their NG9-1-1 cost studies.
Paragraph 28(1) (a) of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure provides that the Commission may request parties to file information or documents where needed.
Comprehensive responses to the requests for information must be filed via My CRCT AccountFootnote1, including rationale and any supporting information by 23 August 2021, serving copies on all other parties. Replies to the responses must be filed via My CRTC Account, serving copies on all other parties, by 30 August 2021.
All responses from the Applicant and intervenors will be published on the Commission’s website under the file number identified above.
Original signed by Christine Brock for
Director, Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Implementation
c.c.: Étienne Robelin, CFRTC, email@example.com
Joel McGrath, CRTC, firstname.lastname@example.org
Request for information
For the purposes of RFIs #1 and #2, the responsible Next Generation 9-1-1 (NG9-1-1) network provider is understood as the (Small) Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier (ILEC) whose incumbent operating territory covers the area from which a 9-1-1 communication is originated.
- Understanding that no approach is perfect, provide your assessment, along with supporting rationale, as to whether an approach based on customer billing address or the existing NPA/NXX process provides the most reasonable proxy to associate wireless subscribers with the NG9-1-1 network provider most likely responsible for delivering their NG9-1-1 communications to the appropriate Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP).
- Provide any other approaches, along with supporting rationale, (excluding using customer billing address or the NPA/NXX process), that provide the most reasonable proxy to associate wireless subscribers with the NG9-1-1 network provider most likely responsible for delivering their NG9-1-1 communications to the appropriate PSAP.
- In your understanding, what NG9-1-1 network components would be used by Wireless Service Provider’s (WSP) end-users in completing an NG9-1-1 communication initiated within the incumbent serving territory of a SILEC and how does this differ from a call made by a wireline Competitive Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC) end-user making an NG9-1-1 communication in the territory of a SILEC?
Jonathan L. Holmes, Executive Director email@example.com
Bell Canada, Philippe Gauvin, Assistant General Counsel firstname.lastname@example.org
Quebecor Media, Dennis Béland, Vice-président, Affaires réglementaires Télécommunications email@example.com
Rogers Communications Canada Inc., Howard Slawner, Vice President – Regulatory, Telecom firstname.lastname@example.org
Shaw Communications Inc., Dean Shaikh, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs email@example.com
TELUS, Stephen Schmidt, Vice-President – Telecom Policy & Chief Regulatory Legal Counsel firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date modified: