ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8663-C12-200717738

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Letter

Ottawa, 13 February 2008

File No.:   8663-C12-200717738

Via Email

To:   Distribution list (see attached)

Re:   Follow-up to Telecom Decision CRTC 2007-125: CRTC Interconnection Steering Committee - Non-Consensus Report on a Functional Architecture for the Implementation of Nomadic VoIP 9-1-1 Service in Canada (Decision 2007-125)

The Commission is in receipt of a letter from Cogeco Cable Inc., Quebecor Media Inc., Rogers Communications Inc. and Shaw Communications Inc. (collectively, the Cable Companies), dated 5 February 2008, regarding the proceeding established in Decision 2007-125.   In their letter, the Cable Companies requested at a minimum, a four week extension to the 29 February 2008 deadline to file an economic evaluation as directed in Decision 2007-125. The Cable Companies also proposed that they be provided an opportunity, prior to filing the economic evaluation, for an additional interrogatory process.

In a letter dated 8 February 2008, Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership, Bell Canada , Saskatchewan Telecommunications and TELUS Communications Company (collectively, the Companies) submitted that they are prepared to accept a 30 day extension should the Commission agree that an extension is warranted.

The Companies also submitted that an interrogatory process would not be an appropriate way to address any questions the Cable Companies may have. As an alternative, the Companies proposed to have either a conference call or a face-to-face meeting between the representatives of the Companies and the Cable Companies.

Commission staff considers that based on the information provided it is appropriate to grant both the Cable Companies and the Companies an extension, to 28 March 2008 , to file their economic evaluations.

Commission staff notes that following the Companies proposals above, the Cable Companies and MTS Allstream expressed support for having a conference call between their representatives and the Companies' specifically to address their questions.

Accordingly, the Cable Companies, the Companies and MTS Allstream Inc. are requested to set up such a meeting as soon as possible, and no later than 29 February 2008.

In light of the above, the schedule in Decision 2007-125 is revised as follows:

Companies and Large ASPs file Phase II Costs

28 March 2008

Interrogatories on Phase II Evaluation

11 April 2008

Response to Interrogatories

25 April 2008

Requests for Further Responses to Interrogatories

2 May 2008

Responses to Requests for Further Responses

9 May 2008

Information Response to Requests for Further Responses as per Commission determinations

23 May 2008

Comments

6 June 2008

Reply Comments

20 June 2008

Yours truly,

Original signed by

Paul Godin
Director General,
Competition, Costing and Tariffs  
Telecommunications

cc. James Ndirangu (819) 997 3670

Distribution list:  

Cogeco Cable Inc. ; michel.messier@cogeco.com
Quebecor Media Inc.; beland.dennis@quebecor.com
Rogers Communications Inc. ; ken.engelhart@rci.rogers.com
Shaw Communications; jean.brazeau@sjrb.ca
The Companies; bell.regulatory@bell.ca
MTS Allstream Inc.; Scott.Thomson@mtsallstream.com
Members of the ESWG

Date Modified: 2008-02-13
Date modified: