ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8740-B2-200718109

Letter

Ottawa, 21 December 2007  

File No.:   8740-B2-200718109
                8740-B54-200718116

BY EMAIL

David Palmer
Director - Regulatory Affairs
Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership
Bell Canada
110 O'Connor Street, 7 th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1H1
bell.regulatory@bell.ca

Denis E. Henry
Vice-President Regulatory Affairs
Bell Aliant Regional Communications, LP
100 O'Connor St., 4 th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1H1
regulatory@bell.aliant.ca 

Re: Competitor Digital Network Services

T he Commission is in receipt of Tariff Notice (TN) 7091 from Bell Canada and TN 146 from Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership (Bell Aliant),(collectively, the Companies). These applications relate to changes to Competitor Digital Network (CDN) Services and are supported by a cost study provided by Bell Canada. Bell Aliant submitted that the proposed changes to its CDN Services tariffs in TN 146 correspond to those proposed by Bell Canada.

To assist the Commission in disposing of these applications, the Companies are requested to provide responses to the interrogatories set out in Attachment 1 by 11 January 2008.  

The above material is to be filed by the date set out above, and must be received, not merely sent, by that date.

Yours sincerely,

Original signed by

Yvan Davidson
Senior Manager
Competitor Services and Costing

cc:    B.Natraj (Nat Natraj) (CRTC) 819-953-5081
        ken.engelhart@rci.rogers.com

Attachment 1

1)   With reference to Item 2.1 paragraph 4 of the attached regulatory economic study to Bell Canada's TN 7091, titled Bell Canada Report on the Economic Evaluation for the Tariff Revision of Competitor Digital Network Services:

a)   provide details of the work activities associated with each of (i) removing loading coils, (ii) removing bridge taps, (iii) pumping manholes, (iv) installing repeaters and (v) installing enclosures, and provide an estimate of the average time for each of these activities per DS-1;

b)   provide the rationale that the company used to establish the threshold of $3000 of conditioning costs [1] per DS-1, to be included in the proposed rates among the range of conditioning costs of a few hundred dollars to in excess of $10000 per access as indicated in paragraph 4 of the of the company's 10 December 2007 submission;

c)    for incremental copper conditioning costs in excess of $3000 per DS-1, provide the company's estimate, expressed in percentage terms, of the frequency with which this occurs; and

d)    for each band, provide the impact on the proposed DS-1 monthly access costs and rates assuming that copper conditioning costs and the installation of enclosures and additional signal repeaters are undertaken at the same time; the response should explain what is meant by an enclosure.

2)   Using the format of Table 6a - Detailed Summary of Phase II costs, for each band, provide revised study estimates of the PWAC and the associated monthly DS-1 access costs and corresponding proposed rate assuming that all copper conditioning costs are included in the study and recovered in the associated rate. Further provide the Companies' view on the rating approach whereby all copper conditioning costs are recovered in the average rate per band instead of a portion of conditioning costs up to $3000 as reflected in the Companies 10 December 2007 submission.

3)   Using the format of Table 6a - Detailed Summary of Phase II costs, for each band, provide a revised cost study that provides an estimate of the per end-user costs associated with copper conditioning in the event that a DS-1 customer request causes such costs. Further provide the proposed service charge rate under this scenario and the Companies' view on this alternative rating approach whereby the copper conditioning costs caused by a customer are recovered from that customer.

[1] Removing loading coils and bridge taps as well as pumping manholes