ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8740-B54-200801143
This page has been archived on the Web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, 13 February 2008 File No.:
BY E-MAIL Mr. Denis E. Henry Dear Mr. Henry: RE: Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership Tariff Notice 157 Please find attached interrogatories related to the tariff application of Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership (Bell Aliant) filed under cover of Tariff Notice 157, proposing revisions to its General Tariff, Item 2025 - Integrated Voice Messaging Service. Responses to these interrogatories are to be filed with the Commission by 26 February 2008. Yours sincerely, Original signed by Suzanne Bédard cc: Cliff Abbott, CRTC (819) 997-4509 Attach. Interrogatories related to Bell Aliant Tariff Notice 157 1. In its tariff application, Bell Aliant proposed, among other things, that it may provide Online Voice Mail service (Item 2025.6.(i)), at no charge, at the company's discretion, to service representatives who promote the company's services, in order to enhance the service representatives' abilities to promote and sell the service. a. Confirm that all service representatives referred to above are in fact employees of the company. b. Commission staff notes that "at the company's discretion" suggests that not all the service representatives who promote the company's services would receive the benefit. Provide comments, with full supporting rationale, as to why the condition is not contrary to Section 27(2) of the Act. 2. The company also proposed in its tariff application, among other things, that it may provide Online Voice Mail service (Item 2025.6.(i)), at no charge for up to six months, as a contest prize, at the company's discretion. Eligible contestants for any such contest will be determined at the company's discretion. The company also indicated that it would offer no more than 5 contests in a calendar year. a. Provide full details regarding the contests the company intends to offer, indicating terms, conditions, length of time the contest is to be open, possible limitations, and eligibility criteria for the contestants. b. In view of the fact that the service is tariffed, provide the company's justification for not providing the above details in the proposed tariff. c. With respect to the statement "Eligible contestants for any such contest will be determined at the company's discretion", provide comments with full supporting rationale, as to why the condition is not contrary to Section 27(2) of the Act Date Modified: 2008-02-13 |
- Date modified: