Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.
Ottawa, 23 January 2008
Re: Telecom Decision 2007-67 - Bell Aliant's application for forbearance from residential local exchange services in the exchange of Melbourne, Ontario
On 16 April 2007, the Commission received an application by Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership (Bell Aliant) for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services in 8 exchanges in Ontario, including the Melbourne exchange.
On 8 June 2007, Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI) provided further response to its initial submission, as directed by the Commission. RCI identified, out of the exchanges for which Bell Aliant was seeking local forbearance in different applications, exchanges where it was either not capable of serving at least 75 percent of the number of residential local exchange service lines that Bell Aliant is capable of serving, or where it simply did not provide any local exchange services. One of the exchanges identified by RCI was the Melbourne exchange.
In its consideration of Bell Aliant's 16 April 2007 application, the Commission, inadvertently, failed to take into account RCI's 8 June 2007 supplemental response.
In Telecom Decision 2007-67 dated 9 August 2007, the Commission determined that it would forbear from the regulation of residential local exchange services in 7 exchanges, including the Melbourne exchange, once it determined that Bell Aliant has met the required competitor Quality of Service criterion for the Ontario and Quebec portion of its serving territory.
In Telecom Decision 2007-123 dated 4 December 2007, the Commission determined that Bell Aliant met the competitor Q of S criterion for local forbearance, therefore forbearing from the regulation of residential local exchange services in the exchanges identified in Telecom Decision 2007-67, including the Melbourne exchange.
The Commission notes that based on the record of the proceeding, RCI does not provide residential local exchange services in the Melbourne exchange. Furthermore, Bell Aliant has not identified any other facilities-based, fixed-line telecommunications service provider capable of serving at least 75 percent of the number of residential local exchange service lines that it is capable of serving in that exchange. Therefore, based on the record of the proceeding, Bell Aliant is the only f acilities-based, fixed-line telecommunications service provider in that exchange.
In light of the above, it appears the Melbourne exchange did not meet all the local forbearance criteria set out in modified Telecom Decision 2006-15. Therefore, the Commission will consider Bell Aliant's application for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services in the Melbourne exchange on a de novo basis.
Bell Aliant may file comments on the Commission's decision to consider, on a de novo basis, Bell Aliant's application for forbearance from the regulation of residential local exchange services in the Melbourne exchange, serving a copy on RCI by 28 January 2008.
Please note that to the extent possible all documents should be filed with the Commission using the Procedure electronic form specifying the Commission file numbers indicated on this letter. Parties can access the electronic form on the Commission's website http://support.crtc.gc.ca/crtcsubmissionmu/forms/main.aspx?lang=e . A copy of the document(s) should also be forwarded to Mario Bertrand, at email@example.com .
Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, and not merely sent, by that date.
Original signed by
Robert A. Morin
Copy: TELUS Communications Company