GATINEAU — The CRTC has provided some relief to Iristel as it continues to consider a review and vary (R&V) application submitted by the independent telecom service provider regarding the Commission’s recent decision which found Iristel guilty of traffic stimulation to the 867 area code.
In its August 14 decision (which we reported on here), the Commission ordered Iristel to reduce its long-distance interexchange (IX) termination rate for calls to the 867 numbering plan area (NPA) in northern Canada from $0.038 per minute to $0.0098125. The new rate was to apply on an interim basis, and was to become final 90 days from the date of the decision, and to take effect retroactively to November 23, 2018, if Iristel had not filed a new tariff notice supported by a Phase II cost study proposing an alternate rate by November 16, 2020.
(That decision also concluded Telus’s decision to restrict Iristel traffic, which also affected Ice Wireless calls north, was unjust.)
In a procedural letter dated October 23 and posted to the CRTC website today, the Commission agrees to extend the deadline for Iristel to file a tariff notice with a Phase II cost study until the Commission provides further direction. In the meantime, the modified long-distance IX termination rate of $0.0098125 will remain interim until the Commission provides further notice, says the letter signed by CRTC secretary general Claude Doucet.
In its R&V application dated September 2, Iristel had asked for a stay of the Commission’s August decision, including the order to reduce its long-distance call termination rate. In its procedural letter, the Commission says it is denying Iristel’s stay application regarding modification of the rate, and said Iristel “has not demonstrated that it would suffer irreparable harm if the modified interim rate is kept in place pending a decision on the R&V.”
However, the Commission agreed Iristel could suffer harm if required to conduct a Phase II cost study before the R&V is decided.
“Iristel may suffer irreparable harm if: a) the stay is not granted; b) Iristel incurs the expense of a Phase II cost study; and c) the Commission eventually restores Iristel’s tariffed IX termination rate to match Northwestel’s tariffed CAT (carrier access tariff) rate of $0.038 in the R&V decision. In those circumstances, the harm would be real, definite, unavoidable, and could not be repaired later as the cost study expense, although quantifiable, would have been unnecessary and Iristel would be unable to recover it,” reads the Commission’s letter.
The Commission did not offer an estimate as to when it might rule on Iristel’s R&V application.
