Search

ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8638-C12-81/02

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Archived

This page has been archived on the Web.

Letter

Ottawa, 27 April 2006

File No.: 8638-C12-81/02

BY FACSIMILE

Mr. David J. Hennessey
Manager - Regulatory Matters
Aliant Telecom Inc.
Fort Williams Building
P.O. Box 2110
St. John's , Newfoundland
A1C 5H6

Dear Mr. Hennessey:

Re:   Aliant Telecom Service Improvement Plan - 2005 Tracking Report

On 31 March 2006, pursuant to Regulatory framework for second price cap period, Telecom Decision CRTC 2002-34, 30 May 2002 (Decision 2002-34), Aliant Telecom Inc.

(Aliant Telecom) filed with the Commission its annual service improvement plan (SIP) tracking report, which tracked the company's SIP performance for the year 2005.

With reference to the information provided by the company, Aliant Telecom is requested to file responses to the attached interrogatories within 7 days from the date of this letter.

Yours sincerely,

( Original signed by )

John Macri
Director, Financial & Regulatory Matters
Telecommunications  

cc:   H. Thompson, CRTC (819) 953-6081

Attachment

ATTACHMENT

1.     Refer to Aliant Telecom's 2005 SIP tracking report dated 31 March 2006 .

a)  With respect to the drawdown from the deferral account, indicate whether the company is recovering its costs in non-high cost serving areas (non-HCSAs) over: (1) the SIP roll-out period (indicate the actual roll-out period used in the Phase II cost studies); or (2) the life of the equipment.  

b)  If in response to part (a) above, the company indicated that it is currently recovering its costs over the SIP roll-out period, provide revised SIP Phase II cost studies that reflect a cost recovery period over the life of the equipment, providing the assumed life estimates.   Also, recalculate the non-HCSA Phase II cost studies in the 31 March 2006 submission to reflect a cost recovery period over the life of the equipment.   Provide a table showing the revised total annual equivalent cost (AEC) for the years 2002 to 2010.

c)  Provide the company's views on the use of a cost recovery period over the life of the equipment, with supporting rationale.  

2. With respect to the drawdown from the National Contribution Fund (NCF), indicate whether the company is recovering its HCSA costs over: (1) the SIP roll-out period; or (2) the life of the equipment.   If the company has been recovering its HCSA costs over the SIP roll-out period, provide revised Phase II cost studies similar to those in interrogatory 1 using a cost recovery period over the life of the equipment.     Provide the corrections that must be made to the current monthly equivalent costs (MECs) on a going forward basis to reflect the results of the revised Phase II cost studies.

Date Modified: 2006-04-27
Date modified: