ARCHIVED - Telecom - Commission Letter - 8638-C12-73/02 - TELUS' Revised ServiceImprovement Plan

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Letter

Our File: 8638-C12-73/02

Ottawa, 16 October 2002

BY TELECOPIER

Mr. Willie Grieve
Vice President
Public Policy & Regulatory Affairs
TELUS Communications Inc.
Floor 31
10020-100 Street NW
Edmonton, Alberta
T5J 0N5

Dear Mr. Grieve:

Subject: TELUS' Revised Service Improvement Plan

This is further to TELUS' revised Service Improvement Plan (SIP) dated 13 September 2002.

Commission staff has a number of questions for TELUS (see attached). The process for submissions and comment on the TELUS SIP and these interrogatories is amended to the following:

  • TELUS is to provide responses to the enclosed interrogatories by 21 days from the date of this letter, serving copies on all parties.
  • Interested parties may file comments regarding TELUS' SIP and its responses to interrogatories by seven days from the receipt of TELUS' responses, serving copies on all parties.
  • TELUS may file a reply regarding those comments by seven days from the receipt of comments, serving copies on all parties.

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

Yours sincerely,

Scott Hutton
Director - Contribution and Costing
(819) 997-4573

c.c.: Public Notice CRTC 2001-37 List of Interested Parties
Michelle Edge, CRTC
Hugh Thompson, CRTC, (819) 953-6081

Attachments 1 and 2

Attachment 1: Interrogatories for TELUS

 1.  A) With reference to TELUS' revised SIP dated 13 September 2002, paragraphs 7, 34, 35, and 36, the total of the communities is 35+9+8+7 = 59. In paragraph 6, TELUS stated that there are 61 total unserved communities. Reconcile the difference. The company should apply any required corrections to the Commission's interrogatories and its responses below.

     B) With reference to TELUS' revised SIP dated 13 September 2002, paragraphs 34, 35, and 36, provide three tables in the same format as Appendix 1 to set out: (i) the 9 communities that are technically eligible for the revised Service Improvement Plan (SIP) but that are not included in the revised SIP (paragraph 34); (ii) the 8 communities that are ineligible for the SIP because the capital cost per dwelling exceeds the $25,000 capital criteria (paragraph 35); and (iii) the 7 communities that are not in the SIP since they would be better off in the Service Extension Plan (SEP) (paragraph 36).

  2.  With reference to TELUS' revised SIP dated 13 September 2002, paragraphs 6 and 7, TELUS stated that $10.6 million was explicitly approved in Decision 2002-34 (paragraph 864), and the company subsequently filed a SIP for unserved premises that totalled $9.6 million for 35 communities (Appendix 1). TELUS then correctly pointed out that the Commission modified the criteria proposed by TELUS for unserved premises (paragraph 865) and filed a new estimate for the SIP that totalled $16.5 million for unserved premises in 46 communities, pursuant to the Commission's directives. The Commission also directed TELUS to commence the SIP in 2002 (paragraph 865) and complete the SIP in 2005 (paragraph 918). In light of the foregoing, provide a SIP for Commission approval that reflects the criteria approved in Decision 2002-34. This SIP should be in the same format as Appendix 1, and should include a minimum of 46 unserved communities that would cost $16.5 million. Also, provide a new three-year roll-out plan for the communities in question that completes in 2005 in the same format as Appendices II and IV.

  3.  With reference to paragraph 34, provide a new table to include the 9 communities that are technically eligible for the SIP in the revised SIP to the 46 communities totalling $16.5 million for a total of 55 communities in the same format as Appendix 1. Calculate the new total and set out a three-year roll-out plan in the same manner as the response to interrogatory 2 above.

  4.  With reference to paragraph 31, TELUS stated its intent to delay the commencement of the roll-out such that 2003 will be the first year of the SIP in terms of actual capital investment and construction activity. One of the reasons given for the delay was "the date by which the Decision was [issued]". Decision 2002-34 was issued on 30 May 2002, which allowed seven months for TELUS' construction activity in 2002. Given that the Commission approved a start date of 2002 (paragraph 865), provide more detailed justification for the postponement of the roll-out to 2003.

  5.  With reference to Appendix IV, confirm that Years 1 to 4 are actually 2003-2006.

  6.  Provide a Phase II cost study in the format as Bell Canada in its submission dated 18 September 2002 to recover the costs for the following SIPs: (i) the SIP that includes 46 communities; (ii) the SIP that includes 55 communities.

  7.  Refer to TELUS' revised SIP dated 13 September 2002, Appendix 1 [Document B], and to the response to interrogatory TELUS(CRTC)27Apr01-602, Attachment 1 [Document A]. The Commission notes that there have been additions and removals of localities to Document A to arrive at Document B. Provide a table indicating the additions and removals to Document A, indicating the associated costs and justification for the changes.

  8.  With reference to TELUS' revised SIP dated 13 September 2002, page 15, TELUS noted that the costs originally provided with respect to providing Internet access via a local call in the communities listed in the response to interrogatory TELUS(CRTC)27Apr01-613 were premised on other elements of TELUS' original SIP being approved as well. Commission staff notes that the costs for Greenville have increased significantly from $32K to either $1.39 million (paragraph 41) or $1.49 million (Appendix 3).

     a.  Indicate which is the correct amount; and

     b.  Provide a detailed description of the additional assets and associated costs required for Greenville, along with detailed justification for proceeding with this project in the light of the significant increase in costs.

   9.   With reference to TELUS' revised SIP dated 13 September 2002, paragraph 43, provide a detailed description (including a typical example) and justification for the charging of "other service and construction charges" as applicable pursuant to the company's tariffs given that the Commission's intent was that no customer should have to pay more than $1,000 if the locality met the criteria.

  10.  With reference to TELUS' revised SIP dated 13 September 2002, paragraph 44, provide a detailed description (including a typical example) and justification for the charging of "costs associated with providing facilities on private property" as applicable pursuant to the company's tariffs given that the Commission's intent was that no customer should have to pay more than $1,000 if the locality met the criteria.

  11.  A) With reference to TELUS' revised SIP dated 13 September 2002, paragraph 36, TELUS stated that the 7 unserved communities that are not being considered for the SIP would be better off in terms of their capital contribution under the SEP. Select the costliest project of the 7 communities in question and demonstrate that this statement is correct. Provide detailed calculations.

        B) Should the 7 communities in question not be included in the SIP, provide TELUS' view on whether it would be claiming a lesser amount than it would be entitled to in its cost recovery in the TSR.

  12.  Attachment 2 is a list prepared by Commission staff from current Commission records that reflects an approximate number of premises for which service has been requested in TELUS territory but currently are unserved. Update this list to indicate which premises can be served under the SIP and which premises can be served under the current tariff. Also update this list to indicate the costs, distance, and current schedule for service to each premises.

Attachment 2: List of premises that have requested service

 

 

 

 

 

COST

DATE

 

Rapids

Name

Location

Distance

Telus

Client

Request

Schedule

SIP?

67380

WILSON, Derek

AB, Beaverlodge

1,500 m.

7,500

 

06-Aug-02

2003

 

67031,
69825

VINISH, Dave & Julie

AB, Didsbury

1,500 m.

15,000

 

02-Aug-02

2003

 

66610

HOOD, Wendy Morey

AB, Jarvie

1600 m.

$8,000

560

04-Jul-02

2003

 

66426

WILLIAMS, Debbie

AB, Vulcan

2,700 m.

$18,000-$20,000

560

24-Jul-02

2003

 

65683

WILLIAMS, Clark

AB, Vulcan

2,700 m.

$18,000-$20,000

560

24-Jul-02

2003

 

65847

CHARLTON, Wayne

AB, Stoney Plain

1,600 m.

$8,400

560

25-Jul-02

2003

 

64850

FULTON, Rhonda

AB, Calgary

800 m.

$8,000

 

17-Jul-02

2003

 

64001

WATSON, Jody

AB, Camrose

2 km

$15,000

 

03-Jul-02

2003

 

60488

KWASNY, Kristina

AB, Peace River

5 km + 1 km

$24,000

 

04-Jun-02

2003

 

59299

COOK, Alexis

AB, Calgary

1,200 m.

$8,500-$10,000

560

29-May-02

2003

 

58077

SCHMALTZ, Steve

AB, Seven Persons

4 km

$20,000

 

30-May-02

2003

 

69486,

71720

NESS, Derek T.

AB, Sedgewick

 

 

 

22-Aug-02

2003

 

25639

NEFF, Yvonne

BC, Tatla Lake

 

 

 

10-Oct-01

 

no

71616

TETZ, Sandra

BC, Spillamacheen

 

 

 

19-Aug-02

 

 

66993

CLARKSON, Heather

BC, Post Creek

 

 

$1,000

24-Jul-02

 

SIP

66042

HARRIS, Dianne

BC, Glimpse Lake

 

 

 

29-Jul-02

 

SIP

65313

CARR, Chris

AB, Calgary (Bridlemeadows)

 

 

 

22-Jul-02

30-Sep 02

 

63464

FEHR, Valerie

BC, East Ootsa

 

 

 

26-Jun-02

 

SIP

52404

BURNELL-HIGGS, Richard

BC, Williams Lake

 

 

 

09-Apr-02

 

no

36923,
51188

PARKER, Don

BC, Chilliwack

 

 

 

8-Jan-02

 

 

49357

McNEIL, Sylvia

BC, Tahsis

 

 

 

07-Mar-02

42550

HARWOOD, Wes & Sandra

BC, Fort St. James
(135 km from)

 

 

 

26-Jan-02

 

 

42285

FUGGER, Frank

BC, Adams Lake

 

 

 

10-Feb-02

 

no

39412

PECK, Deborah & Ross

BC, Fort St. John

 

 

 

14-Jan-02

 

SIP

36399

PAGE, Margaret

BC, Port McNeill

 

 

 

10-Dec-01

 

SIP

36383

JEFFERY, Bertha

BC, Cortes Island

 

 

 

03-Dec-01

 

underserved

25423

YEATMAN, David

BC, Tatla Lake

 

 

 

10-Oct-01

 

no

24562

KELLER, Eric

AB, ?

 

 

 

15-Oct-01

 

 

22660

SAVARELLA, Roy

BC, McBride

2 km.

 

 

24-Sep-01

 

no

21774

WAKEMAN, Charles

BC, Croydon/Dunster

 

 

 

29-Sep-01

 

SIP

21124

DE KONING, Mark

BC, Boston Bar

 

 

 

27-Sep-01

 

 

20626

CHASTKAVICH, Trudy

BC, Ring Creek (Squamish)

 

 

 

25-Sep-01

 

SIP

19242

STURROCK, Sarah

BC, Bella Coola

 

 

 

14-Aug-01

2003

SIP

15673

KRAWSZ, John

BC, Winkley Creek

 

 

 

29-Jun-01

 

no

6436

CAMERON, Allan

BC, Rosswood

 

 

 

11-Jun-01

 

SEP

61357

CLANCEY, Michelle (Call)

BC, Post Creek

 

 

 

21-Jun-02

 

SIP

70374,
71747

WHITAKER, Wayne

AB, Manning

 

 

 

29-Aug-02

 

 

65188

WHYATT, Tim (Call)

AB, ?

 

 

 

19-Jul-02

 

 

63669

WHITNEY, Wayne (Call)

AB, ?

 

15,300

 

09-Jul-02

 

 

60546

RETTIE, Bob (Call)

AB, High River

 

 

 

17-Jun-02

 

 

60249

BROWN, Velma (Call)

AB, St. Albert

 

 

 

14-Jun-02

 

 

59917

HOFF, Peter (Call)

AB, ?

 

 

 

12-Jun-02

 

 

66444

NELSON, Jim (Call)

AB, Rocky Mountain House

 

 

 

30-Jul-02

 

 

65140

RIVARD, Dave (Call)

AB, Irvine

 

 

 

19-Jul-02

 

 

56358

DITTO, Lynda (Call)

BC, Big Bar Lake

 

 

 

16-May-02

 

 

52119

McCOTTER, Joanne (Call)

AB, Kinuso

 

 

 

16-Apr-02

 

 

10538,
47160

DEVAULT, Robert

BC, Tahsis

 

 

 

pre Aug 8, 2001

 

 

23534

BOYCHUK, Mitch & Catherine

AB, Valleyview

 

 

 

10-Oct-01

 

 

35707

COOK, Robert

BC, Lumby

 

 

 

17-Feb-00

 

no

 

Date modified: