By Ahmad Hathout
Beanfield is asking the CRTC to assist in the renewal of a support structure agreement (SSA) with Rogers.
The Toronto-based fibre internet service provider is asking the regulator to establish just and reasonable rates and terms after Rogers said it would not renew the agreement.
“The Commission’s intervention is necessary for Beanfield to continue offering competitive telecommunications services without disruption to the hundreds of premises served over the facilities in question,” the telecom claims in a Part 1 application to the commission, made public on Tuesday.
Beanfield claims Rogers told it in a March letter that it would terminate a reciprocal SSA entered between the two, effective September 30. Beanfield said it tried getting a copy of the agreement, which it was unable to locate, and only did so after CRTC intervention.
In early June, Beanfield requested that the CRTC suspend its initial Part 1 application on this matter after Rogers agreed to meet privately with Beanfield to discuss the SSA. But the two parties could not come to an agreement.
“The parties cannot agree on the Commission’s ability to adjudicate this dispute or the key elements of a go-forward agreement including rates and terms,” Beanfield says in its new Part 1. “The dispute is at an impasse and requires either a formal or informal Commission response in order to be resolved.
“On rates, Beanfield prefers that reasonable rates be agreed-upon in advance, but is willing to accept prevailing tariffed ILEC rates by operating territory, subject to a ten-year term, with three five-year rights to renew thereafter, and generally otherwise reasonable terms and conditions. These are, broadly speaking, the key elements that the parties are unable to agree on.”
Rogers has said that access to its support structures is not regulated, that the SSA is a commercial agreement, and that there is no basis nor jurisdiction for CRTC involvement, according to the application.
Beanfield disagrees. “Beanfield submits that Rogers, when providing access to support structures it owns or controls, is providing a telecommunications service and therefore subject to the Commission’s jurisdiction.
“Rogers’ assertion that access is provided to Beanfield through a negotiated agreement does not oust the Commission’s authority, nor is it otherwise reasonable commercial conduct. While the Commission has not, to date, applied ex ante regulation to the support structures, including conduit, of nonincumbent local exchange carriers, no less than three years ago the Commission reiterated its jurisdiction over and authority to regulate access to support structures owned by a Canadian carrier. Rogers is a Canadian carrier subject to the Commission’s jurisdiction.”
Beanfield mounts its argument on the claim that Rogers is using its dominant market position “in a harmful and anticompetitive manner”; that the 2023 policy direction requires the commission to support objectives including mandating improved access to support structures; and that the federal government’s intention, outlined in the 2025 budget, to pursue a “dig once” policy for coordinated installation of fibre lines reflects a commitment to “reducing barriers to telecommunications infrastructure deployment and encouraging coordinated access to shared facilities.”
Rogers, which said it will be filing a response, told Cartt that it is not terminating the agreement early and that it simply gave Beanfield notice that it chose not to renew it.
“As our existing agreement reaches the end of its term, we continue to host Beanfield equipment on our infrastructure and consider new requests for access going forward,” a Rogers spokesperson told us.
