ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - various files
This page has been archived on the Web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.
LetterOttawa, 16 August 2005 File Nos.: 8638-C12-200410465, 8740-T42-200411182, 8740-T46-200411190, 8740-B2-200500498, 8740-S22-200500464, 8740-A53-200500414 To: Attached Distribution List Re: Follow-up Items to Decision 2004-46: Trunking Arrangements for the interchange of traffic at the point of interconnection between local exchange carriers - Cost Studies As part of the follow-up to Trunking arrangements for the interchange of traffic and the point of interconnection between local exchange carriers , Telecom Decision CRTC 2004-46, 14 July 2004, (Decision 2004-46), the Commission has received cost studies used for determination of proposed rates for termination of Competitor Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC) intra-Local Interconnection Region (LIR) traffic from Aliant Telecom Inc. (Aliant) , Bell Canada, Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel) , and TELUS Communications Inc. (TCI). MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream) did not submit cost studies because, in their view, the rates for termination of CLEC intra-LIR traffic would not be different from their existing rates for the exchange-based regime. Interveners have provided comments on the rates proposed by each Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier (ILEC). Commission staff requires additional information in order to assess the proposed rates for termination of CLEC intra-LIR traffic. Accordingly, each ILEC is requested to respond to the interrogatories addressed to them in a companion letter and attachment. Commission staff sets out the following process for each ILEC to respond to the interrogatories, and to allow parties to comment on the responses:
The above material is to be filed and served on all other parties by the dates set out above, and must be received, not merely sent, by those dates. Yours sincerely, (original signed by Doug Thurston for Yvan Davidson)
Yvan Davidson Cc: Tom Vilmansen (819) 997 9253 Attachment Date Modified: 2005-09-09 |
- Date modified: