Telecom - Staff Letter addressed to the Distribution List
Ottawa, 3 August 2023
Our reference: 8620-B2-202303858
BY E-MAIL
To: Distribution List
Subject: Bell Canada Part 1 Application regarding access to Rogers’ wireless network in the TTC – Procedural request
Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (Rogers) filed a procedural request dated 19 July 2023 concerning certain arguments made by TELUS Communications Inc. (TELUS) in its 7 July 2023 intervention in response to the above-referenced application. Rogers submitted that TELUS has made a new allegation of undue preference and unjust discrimination which was not raised by Bell Canada Inc. (Bell) in its original application. In Rogers’ view, this amounts to case splitting and is procedurally unfair. Rogers argued that the CRTC Rules of Practice and Procedure (the Rules) require that an application identify the statutory or regulatory provisions under which the application is made and that it is those points which the respondent is required to address in its answer.
Rogers therefore requested the following relief from the Commission:
- Confirmation that TELUS’ intervention will only be considered to the limited extent that it supports the application on the basis of the sections of the Telecommunications Act (the Act) relied upon and relief sought by Bell;
- Direction to Bell that it cannot adopt or rely upon any of the new arguments raised by TELUS under section 27(2) of the Act; and
- Confirmation that the Commission will not make a determination on the application based on section 27(2) of the Act.
In the alternative, Rogers requested that, if the Commission intends to consider whether the test under section 27(2) of the Act has been satisfied, the other parties and itself be given 30 days to respond to what is, in effect, a new application by TELUS.
In its 20 July 2023 response to Rogers’ procedural request, TELUS objected to Rogers’ allegations of case-splitting and lack of procedural fairness, arguing that its intervention is fully compliant with the Rules. TELUS argued that it is permitted under the Rules to support the application based on different grounds than raised in the application. TELUS submitted that its intervention provides “other information” as set out in the Rules and therefore there can be no procedural fairness concern based on its intervention. However, TELUS indicated that it did not oppose Rogers’ alternative relief that its intervention in effect be treated as a new application and affording Rogers an opportunity to comment. TELUS proposed that Rogers be given 15 days to provide its comments and TELUS be given 7 days to respond.
Commission staff notes that section 26(2)(i) of the Rules permits interveners to include “any other information that might inform the Commission as to the nature, purpose and scope of the intervention”. In staff’s view, this Rule does not oust procedural fairness principles, nor can it serve to replace the Part 1 process.
Given that TELUS has, in its intervention, alleged a violation by Rogers of the Act that is not raised in the application, Commission staff considers that Rogers should be given the opportunity to address the issue. Accordingly, Commission staff sets out below the additional process. The Commission will decide whether to consider in the context of Bell’s application TELUS’ undue preference allegation, and accept the additional submissions filed pursuant to the process below, as part of its decision-making on the application.
Rogers and other interveners may, by 24 August 2023, file comments and serve copies on all other parties to the proceeding, solely in response to TELUS’ allegations of undue preference and unjust discrimination on the part of Rogers in violation of section 27(2) of the Act. Since the allegation of undue preference was made by TELUS in its intervention, the Part 1 process calls for Bell having an opportunity to reply to any additional submissions filed. Bell may, by 31 August 2023, file a reply solely in response to any additional submissions filed, serving a copy on all other parties.
All documents must be received and not merely sent by the dates indicated.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
Philippe Kent
Director, Telecom Services Policy
Telecommunications Sector
c.c.: Michel Murray, CRTC, Michel.murray@crtc.gc.ca
Jeremy Lendvay, CRTC, jeremy.lendvay@crtc.gc.ca
Greg Lang, CRTC, greg.lang@crtc.gc.ca
Distribution List
bell.regulatory@bell.ca
regulatory@rci.rogers.com
regaffairs@quebecor.com
piac@piac.ca
michael.atlas@ttc.ca
eric.edora@telus.com
- Date modified: