Large telecoms not in favour of sharing data for NG911

Several large telecom companies have argued that the CRTC shouldn’t compel them to provide a list of the wireless service numbers with billing addresses in areas covered by small incumbent local exchanges (SILECs) to the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association (ITPA). In January, Rogers Communications Inc. told the ITPA in correspondence included with the association’s complaint that basing the data it is asking for on billing addresses in SILEC-covered areas would not provide accurate data because a “substantial amount” of billing addresses may not match up with the “primary location” of wireless customers. The ITPA is not asking for phone numbers or billing addresses themselves, but rather a report of the amount of wireless numbers with billing addresses in SILEC coverage areas. In an intervention filed Tuesday, Rogers reiterated the argument and added that the ITPA’s requests should be dismissed. Rogers was backed up by similar assertions from the other companies. In examples from Rogers, it said sharing data on wireless customers in a given area based on billing addresses raises concerns over the accuracy of the information. The company said people with prepaid services may not provide billing addresses, not everyone updates billing addresses after a move, some businesses in Canada provide thousands of employees with mobile phones with main offices listed as the billing address, and some family members on family plans may live away from home or have addresses listed out of the country. The association had asked the CRTC in March for an order forcing Rogers, BCE Inc., Telus Corp., Quebecor Inc.‘s Videotron, and Shaw Communications Inc.‘s Freedom Mobile, to give it the information, claiming it’s needed to facilitate the rollout of next-generation 911 networks. The ITPA complained in its Part 1 that, after requesting the necessary data from the large incumbent telecom companies, wireless service providers either rejected the request or gave information the ITPA argued is insufficient for the transition to NG911. The association had also requested that the CRTC allow each SILEC to collect a tariff levy for each wireless subscriber who has a billing address within one of their territories for access to the NG911 infrastructure, Telus said in its intervention. The company wrote in response that “the ITPA members would be receiving compensation without providing a service and without incurring any material costs whatsoever. Quite simply, SILECs are not providing a service to and as such, the Commission should not allow the ITPA members to levy tariffs against WSPs for services which it is not actively providing.” It said if the CRTC does grant the ITPA’s application, the tariff should only be applied to customers in SILEC areas that require the services of the SILEC to transit their 911 call to the NG911 network. “The SILEC customers that require SILEC NG9-1-1 are wireline customers that reside within a SILECs operating territory, not wireless customers. For WSP customers making 9-1-1 calls in SILEC territories, with these 9-1-1 calls not traversing the networks of the SILECs, no compensation is warranted.” In its original filing, the ITPA said it used to be that “SILECs entered into bilateral agreements with the surrounding large ILECs to accept and route 9-1-1 calls from end-users in SILEC exchanges to the correct and vice versa.” However, with the coming advent of NG911 services, SILECs will have to ensure the NG911 system functions properly in their operating territories, and therefore need new information from the large telecom providers on their wireless customers living in areas covered by SILEC exchanges. The association’s argument in favour of an order said “crucial revenue will be directed away from the underlying carriers that are responsible for NG9-1-1 in a given geographic area as TSPs take advantage of a least cost routing opportunity to avoid SILEC NG9-1-1 rates.” -Reporting by Hannah Daley at hdaley@thewirereport.ca and editing by Michael Lee-Murphy at mleemurphy@thewirereport.ca CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story did not clearly articulate the exact type of data the ITPA is seeking, and incorrectly stated that the ITPA was seeking billing addresses. The story has been corrected.

Large telecoms not in favour of sharing data for NG911

News | April 8, 2021

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

Large telecoms not in favour of sharing data for NG911

News | April 8, 2021

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

CRTC finalizes terms of Uvagut TV distribution

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

CRTC announces changes to Broadband Fund

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us