Search

ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8638-C12-58/01

This page has been archived on the Web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This page has been archived on the Web.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, 2 May 2006

File No.: 8638-C12-58/01

By E-mail

Ms. Teresa Griffin-Muir
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
MTS Allstream Inc.
45 O'Connor Street
Suite 1400
World Exchange Plaza
Ottawa , Ontario
K1P 1A4
iworkstation@allstream.com

Dear Ms. Griffin-Muir:

Re:   MTS Allstream Service Improvement Plan - 2005 Tracking Report

On 6 April 2006, pursuant to Follow-up to Decision 2002-63, Telecom Decision CRTC 2003-68, 10 October 2003 (Decision 2003-68), MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream) 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, MTS Allstream is requested to file responses to the attached interrogatories within 7 days from the date of this letter.

Yours sincerely,

Original signed by J. Macri

John Macri
Director, Financial & Regulatory Matters
Telecommunications

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

Attachment

ATTACHMENT

Refer to MTS Allstream's 2005 SIP tracking report dated 6 April 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 a revised SIP Phase II cost study that reflects a cost recovery period over the life of the equipment, indicating the life estimates used in the study.   Provide a table showing the revised total annual equivalent cost (AEC) for the years 2002 to 2010.

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

Date Modified: 2006-05-02
Date modified: