Telecom - Staff Letter addressed to Susan Wheeler (Rogers Communications Inc.)
Gatineau, 7 January 2026
Our Reference: 8622-C230-202403161
BY EMAIL
Susan Wheeler
Vice-President, Regulatory, Broadcasting
Rogers Communications Inc.
1 Mount Pleasant Road, 4th Floor
Toronto, Ontario M4Y 2Y5
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. — Incremental measures set out in Telecom Decision 2025-222
On 29 August 2025, the Commission issued Telecom Decision 2025-222 (the Decision). In that decision, the Commission set out incremental restrictive measures to be implemented by Bell Canada (Bell) and Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (Rogers). Specifically, the Commission stated that unless Continuum Online Services Ltd, operating as Netflash Internet Solutions (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 would enforce the MDU access condition pursuant to section 24 of the Telecommunications Act (the Act), as follows:
- Effective 30 days from the date of the decision, neither Bell Canada, Rogers, nor any other local exchange carriers (LECs) or carrier Internet service providers (ISPs) would 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 the decision, neither Bell Canada, Rogers, nor any other LECs or carrier ISPs would 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 the decision, the Commission would 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.
In a progress report submitted on 31 October 2025, Netflash stated that it had not yet been granted access to the MDUs under reasonable terms and conditions. However, the report noted significant progress in finalizing an access agreement.
Based on this progress and ongoing negotiations, in its progress report dated 9 December 2025, Greenwin Corp. (Greenwin), the administrator of the MDUs in question, reiterated its request that the Commission temporarily not prohibit Bell or Rogers from providing services to new customers or modifying their services to existing customers, or order that all LECs and carrier ISPs cease providing servicing to the residents of the MDUs.
On 12 December 2025, in response to a request for information regarding the implementation of the restrictive measures set out in paragraph 32 of the Decision, Rogers stated it believed that Greenwin had fulfilled the requirements under the Decision because Greenwin immediately took steps to comply by providing Netflash with an access agreement containing commercially reasonable terms and conditions. For that reason, Rogers had not yet implemented the measures and was awaiting the Commission’s decision on Greenwin’s request to delay the implementation of the incremental measures.
Although Commission staff is encouraged by the progress of the ongoing negotiations between Netflash and Greenwin, it reminds all parties that the Commission's deadlines and determinations set out in the Decision stand and remain in effect unless the Commission provides clear indication to the contrary.
In addition, paragraph 32 of the Decision does not mention the provision of an access agreement. Rather, it states that, unless Netflash is permitted access to the MDUs under reasonable terms and conditions, the incremental measures are to be applied. Based on the most recent progress reports submitted by Netflash and Greenwin, Netflash has not been granted access to the MDUs and therefore the restrictive measures must be implemented in accordance with the Commission’s determination in paragraph 32 of the Decision.
Furthermore, Rogers is reminded that it must comply with the binding determinations set out in Commission decisions, otherwise it could be found in violation of the Act. In such a case, the Commission may take enforcement action, including imposing administrative monetary penalties.
Accordingly, after receiving this letter, Rogers is to provide confirmation to the Commission that it has implemented the restrictive measures set out in paragraph 32 of the Decision.
Sincerely,
Original signed by Étienne Robelin for
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
Philippe Gauvin, Bell Canada, bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Joël Beaupré, CRTC, joel.beaupre@crtc.gc.ca
- Date modified: