Rogers opposing WNP implementation proposal from small ILECs

The wireless arm of Rogers Communications Inc. says an application from the small incumbent local exchange carriers (SILECs) should only be viewed as a tactic to delay the implementation of wireless number portability in their operating territories. The company says that the process for implementing WNP has already been set and there is no reason to create another one just for the small ILECs. The rules for WNP were established in Telecom Decision 2005-72. "The commission has already established a framework for the implementation of WNP in Canada and it has considered and rendered decisions and orders regarding the issues raised by the small ILECs in the application," reads Rogers' intervention. "Rogers believes that the most efficient and reasonable manner in which to implement WNP in the small ILEC territories would be by leveraging to the maximum extent possible, the existing WNP framework, including the rules, processes and timeframes that have been approved by the commission. There is no need to ‘re-invent the wheel' in this regard and the small ILECs have provided no evidence that customized rules and processes are required to implement WNP in their territories."The comments come in response to an application from members of the Ontario Telecommunications Association and Bruce Telecom that want to implement WNP differently than what has been laid out in a number of CRTC decisions. The OTA and Bruce contend that while there was a comprehensive, multi-stage review process for the large ILECs with respect to WNP, this wasn't the case for the small ILECs. They argue that WNP can't be implemented in the territories of the small ILECs because the commission has yet to address issues regarding the regulatory framework for wireline local number portability (LNP) in their operating regions. Rogers disputes these claims. In its letter to the commission, the company says a framework for WNP was not preceded by a review of the ILECs LNP framework either. "WNP was implemented following a proceeding that specifically considered WNP, not LNP or local competition," states the submission. "Effectively, a regulatory framework regarding WNP was developed by the commission independent of the ILEC LNP and local competition regime."The media and communications conglomerate highlights two cases where the commission ordered the small ILECs to implement LNP even though there hasn't been a broad review of the SILECs LNP regulatory framework. It refers to parts of Telecom Decision 2006-14 and Telecom Decision 2007-109. "Rogers submits that the reasonable and natural next step would be to direct the small ILECs and their wireless affiliates to implement WNP in a manner that is consistent with the framework already established for WNP," the company states.

Rogers opposing WNP implementation proposal from small ILECs

News | January 15, 2008

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Rogers opposing WNP implementation proposal from small ILECs

News | January 15, 2008

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Bell to abandon different names for flanker brands, investors told

Telecoms want CRTC to adjust service outage reporting, notification requirements

Cogeco, Eastlink get court hearing in appeal of CRTC wholesale access decision

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us