Telecom Decision CRTC 2022-160

PDF version

Reference: 2021-132

Ottawa, 15 June 2022

Public record: 1011-NOC2021-0132

Imposition of an administrative monetary penalty on Bell Canada in relation to the processing and granting of access permit applications for support structures in accordance with its National Services Tariff

The Commission imposes an administrative monetary penalty of $2.5 million on Bell Canada for each of its three violations of section 24 and subsections 25(1) and 27(2) of the Telecommunications Act, for a total amount of $7.5 million.

Background

1. On 16 June 2020, Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of Videotron Ltd. (Videotron), filed an application requesting that the Commission issue orders related to Bell Canada’s processing of access permit applications and granting of access permits to its support structures in accordance with Bell Canada’s National Services Tariff (the Tariff).
2. In Telecom Decision 2021-131 (the Decision), the Commission found that Bell Canada had breached clause 2.8 of its Support Structure Licence Agreement (SSLA), included in the Tariff, as well as item 901.3(h) of that tariff. The Commission found that Bell Canada had therefore breached section 24 and subsection 25(1) of the Telecommunications Act (the Act) by requiring Videotron to comply with construction standards that Bell Canada itself had not complied with.
3. In the Decision, the Commission also found that through the denial of access, even temporary, and unreasonable delays in processing Videotron’s permit applications, managing the required make-ready work, and deploying its own fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) network on structures with irregularities, all of which caused Videotron’s permit applications to be denied, Bell Canada granted itself a preference and imposed an undue and unreasonable disadvantage on Videotron, contrary to subsection 27(2) of the Act.
4. As a result of its determination that Bell Canada had breached section 24 and subsections 25(1) and 27(2) of the Act, and as a result of the impact of Bell Canada’s actions on end-users, the Commission stated in the Decision its preliminary view that an administrative monetary penalty (AMP) should be imposed on Bell Canada, and indicated that it would initiate a follow-up proceeding through a notice of consultation to determine whether it would be appropriate to impose an AMP, and, if so, the amount of the AMP.

Proceeding

5. On 16 April 2021, the Commission initiated Telecom Notice of Consultation 2021-132 (the Notice), in which it reiterated its preliminary view that it would be appropriate to impose an AMP on Bell Canada and invited interested persons to comment on this preliminary view and on what the AMP should be, if an AMP was deemed appropriate. As part of the Notice, the Commission also requested that parties provide supporting rationale and all evidence on which they relied to formulate their position by addressing, among other things, the criteria for a penalty set out in subsections 72.002(1) and 72.002(2) of the Act.
6. The Commission received interventions from the Canadian Communication Systems Alliance (CCSA), the Community Fibre Company (CFC), the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association (ITPA), Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (RCCI), TekSavvy Solutions Inc. (TekSavvy),^Footnote1 and Videotron. Bell Canada provided comments and replied to the interventions.

Background on the general AMP regime

7. Since 2014, the Act has included a general AMP regime. Pursuant to section 72.001 of the Act, the Commission may impose an AMP for contraventions of the Act and contraventions of a regulation or decision made by the Commission under the Act. However, subsection 72.002(2) of the Act qualifies this authority by prescribing that the purpose of the general AMP regime is to promote compliance and not to punish. As a result, in determining whether or not to impose an AMP in a given case, the Commission must consider whether the imposition of an AMP would ensure the regulatory purpose of promoting compliance and deterring future non-compliance, and not seek to punish a person for its violations.

Issues

8. The Commission has identified the following issues to be addressed in this decision:
   • Is it appropriate to impose an AMP on Bell Canada?
   • If it is appropriate to impose an AMP on Bell Canada, what should the amount of the AMP be?

Is it appropriate to impose an AMP on Bell Canada?

Positions of parties…

Read the Full Decision