Telecom - Staff Letter addressed to Philippe Gauvin (Bell Canada) and Simon-Pierre Olivier (Rogers Communications Canada Inc.)

Gatineau, 5 December 2025

Our Reference: 8622-C230-202403161

BY EMAIL

Philippe Gauvin
Assistant General Counsel
Bell Canada
Floor 19
160 Elgin St.
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2C4
bell.regulatory@bell.ca

Simon-Pierre Olivier
Director Regulations and Economics
Rogers Communications Canada Inc.
333 Bloor St East
Toronto, ON, M4W 1G9
regulatory@rci.rogers.com

Subject: Part 1 Application by Continuum Online Services Ltd, operating as Netflash Internet Solutions requesting non-discriminatory and timely access on reasonable terms and conditions to MDUs administered by Greenwin Corp. — Request for Information

On 29 August 2025, the Commission issued Telecom Decision 2025-222. In that decision, the Commission directed Continuum Online Services Ltd, operating as Netflash (Netflash) and Greenwin Corp. (Greenwin) to inform it of the state of their negotiations and set out delays for the filing of such reports. Based on the most recent progress reports submitted by Netflash and Greenwin, staff are of the understanding that an access agreement has not yet been executed between the parties.

The decision also set out incremental restrictive measures to be implemented by Bell Canada and Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (Rogers). Specifically, the Commission stated that unless Continuum Online Services Ltd, operating as Netflash is permitted access to the Multiple Dwelling Units (MDUs) located at 220 Ira Needles Blvd. and 10 Highland Crescent in Kitchener, Ontario under reasonable terms and conditions, the Commission will enforce the MDU access condition pursuant to section 24 of the Act, as follows:

• Effective 30 days from the date of this decision, neither Bell Canada, Rogers, nor any other LECs or carrier ISPs will be permitted to provide services to any new customer, regardless of whether the customer is a new or a current resident.
• Effective 45 days from the date of this decision, neither Bell Canada, Rogers, nor any other LECs or carrier ISPs will be permitted to modify or upgrade the services being provided to an existing resident and customer.
• If access is not granted within 60 days from the date of this decision, the Commission will explore all regulatory options, including issuing an order under section 42 of the Act and issuing a decision which could result in all LECs and carrier ISPs present in the MDUs not being permitted to provide any services to the residents.

Pursuant to section 37 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act), the Commission may require any person to submit information that is necessary for the administration of the Act. Bell Canada and Rogers are required to provide a response to the attached questions by 14 December 2025.

As set out in section 39 of the Act and in Broadcasting and Telecom Information Bulletin 2010-961 (Procedures for filing confidential information and requesting its disclosure in Commission proceedings), persons may designate certain information as confidential. A detailed explanation on why the designated information is confidential and why its disclosure would not be in the public interest must be provided, including why the specific direct harm that would be likely to result from the disclosure would outweigh the public interest in disclosure. In addition to the confidential version, an abridged version of the document omitting only the confidential information must be filed or reasons why an abridged version cannot be filed must be provided.

Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.

Sincerely,

Original signed by

Suneil Kanjeekal
Director, Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Implementation
Telecommunications Sector, CRTC

c.c.: Dijana Lovric, Greenwin Corp, dlovric@greenwin.ca
Adrien Alexson, Netflash Internet Solutions, Adrien.alexson@netflash.net
Joël Beaupré, CRTC, joel.beaupre@crtc.gc.ca

Attach. (1)

Questions for Bell Canada:

1. Considering that Continuum Online Services Ltd, operating as Netflash (Netflash) has not yet been granted access to the multi-dwelling units (MDUs) at 220 Ira Needles Blvd. and 10 Highland Crescent in Kitchener, Ontario, confirm whether Bell Canada has implemented the restrictive measures set out in paragraph 32 of Telecom Decision 2025-222?

   1. If not, provide a detailed explanation as to why Bell Canada has not yet implemented the restrictive measures set out in paragraph 32 of Telecom Decision 2025-222?

Questions for Rogers Communications Canada Inc.:

2. Considering that Netflash has not yet been granted access to the MDUs at 220 Ira Needles Blvd. and 10 Highland Crescent in Kitchener, Ontario, confirm whether Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (Rogers) has implemented the restrictive measures set out in paragraph 32 of Telecom Decision 2025-222?

   1. If not, provide a detailed explanation as to why Rogers has not yet implemented the restrictive measures set out in paragraph 32 of Telecom Decision 2025-222?

Date modified:

2025-12-05