ARCHIVED -  Telecom Costs Order CRTC 94-5

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Telecom Costs Order

Ottawa, 4 May 1994
Telecom Costs Order CRTC 94-5
In re: Northwestel Inc. - Revenue Requirement for 1993
Application for Costs by the Consumers' Association of Canada (Northwest Territories) (CAC (NWT)).
Submissions of Parties
In its answer to the application of the CAC (NWT), Northwestel Inc. (Northwestel) stated that although the applicant is experienced and is usually awarded full costs for its participation in Commission proceedings, an exception should be made in this case since the CAC (NWT) demonstrated little understanding of Northwestel, its operating area, or the issues in this proceeding. Furthermore, the evidence submitted by the CAC (NWT) on the issue of the appropriate rate of return on equity for Northwestel, prepared by Drs. Booth and Berkowitz, was largely similar to evidence filed by those expert witnesses in other recent rate proceedings before the Commission. The main differences noted by Northwestel between the evidence submitted by the CAC (NWT) in this proceeding was the lesser amount of detail, and there were few paragraphs specific to Northwestel or the northern economy.
In its reply, the CAC (NWT) argued that any synergies inherent in the testimony of its expert witnesses with other Commission rate proceedings is surely a point to be addressed by the Taxation Officer in the assessment of the quantum of costs to be awarded to the CAC (NWT) for its participation in this proceeding.
The Commission disagrees with Northwestel's view that the CAC (NWT) should be awarded less than its full costs for its participation in this proceeding for the reasons submitted in the company's answer. Further, it considers that the issue of "similar evidence" prepared by the CAC (NWT)'s expert witnesses and what, if any, effect this should have on the quantum of costs, is an issue properly addressed at the time of taxation.
DIRECTION AS TO COSTS
1. The Commission hereby approves the application of the CAC (NWT) for an award of costs in
respect of the above-noted proceeding.
2. The Commission considers that the CAC (NWT)'s application meets the requirements of section
56 of the Telecommunications Act and the criteria set out in subsection 44(1) of the
CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure.
3. Costs awarded herein shall be paid to the CAC (NWT) by Northwestel.
4. Costs awarded herein shall be subject to taxation in accordance with subsection 44(6) of the
CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure.
5. Costs awarded herein shall be taxed by Sylvie Courtemanche.
6. The CAC (NWT) shall, within 30 days of the issue of this order, submit a Bill of Costs and an
Affidavit of Disbursements to the Taxing Officer and serve a copy thereof on Northwestel.
7. Northwestel may, within two weeks of receipt of those documents, file comments with the Taxing
Officer with respect to the costs claimed, and serve a copy thereof on the CAC (NWT).
8. The CAC (NWT) may, within two weeks of receipt of Northwestel's comments, file a reply with
the Taxing Officer and serve a copy thereof on Northwestel.
9. All documents to be filed or served by a specific date must be actually received, not merely
mailed, by that date.
Allan J. Darling
Secretary General

Date modified: