|
Letter
Ottawa, 21 April 2008
File No.: 8740-T78-200804668
By E-mail
Mr Allen Mercier
Director - Regulatory
Telebec, Limited Partnership
7151, Jean-Talon Street East
Anjou, Quebec
H1M 3N8
reglementa@telebec.com
Dear Mr Mercier,
RE: Tariff Notice 366 - 9-1-1 Public Emergency Reporting Service
On 27 March 2008, the Commission received an application by Telebec, Limited Partnership, under the cover of Tariff Notice 366, in which the company proposed tariffs for its 9-1-1 Public Emergency Reporting Service (PERS) as directed by the Commission in Telebec, Limited Partnership and TELUS Communications Company - Local network interconnection and network component unbundling , Telecom Decision 2007-132, 20 December 2007.
To assist the Commission in disposing of this application, the company is requested to provide responses to the interrogatories set out in Appendix 1 by 1 st May 2008 . Consequently Commission will not be able to render a decision within 10 business days of the date of receipt of the application. The Commission expects to render its decision within 45 business days of the application being filed.
Yours sincerely,
Original signed by
Suzanne Bédard
Senior Manager, Tariffs
Telecommunications
cc: Henri Jacques, CRTC, (819) 953-4945, henri.jacques@crtc.gc.ca
Appendix 1
Page 1 of 1
Telebec's TN 366: 9-1-1 Emergency Service
Refer to the economic study dated 27 March 2008 , filed in support of TN 366.
1. Refer to Table 6.5 -1:
a) Provide a break-down of the line item Supply (Expenses causal to demand) into its components, indicating a) the functionality provided by each component and, b) the associated costs split into the categories: $ for the total period and $/unit/month. Explain how the cost components were calculated.
b) Indicate whether the costs for DS-0 and DS-1 circuits used to route 9-1-1 calls, referenced in section 6.4 - Cost components, are included in the line item Supply expense and specify the component in which they are included. The response should indicate if the costs of DS-0 and DS-1 circuits to Bell Canada 's or TELUS' Public Safety Answering Points were included. If yes, indicate how the DS-0 and DS-1 costs were determined.
c) If DS-0 and DS-1 circuit costs are included in the line item Supply expense, confirm that they are Phase II costs. If not, provide a revised Table 6.5 -1 reflecting Phase II costs for the DS-0 and DS-1 circuits used to route 9 -1-1 calls. If Phase II costs are estimated based on a rate adjusted to remove the associated mark-up, indicate the mark-up excluded.
d) Confirm that the line item Current cost value is the present worth (PW) of costs over the study period. If not, define the term Current cost value and explain how this value was estimated.
e) Confirm that the demand reflected in the line item Current demand value is the PW of demand over the study period. If not, provide a revised Table 6.5 -1 based on the PW of demand over the study period.
f) Provide a break-down of the line item Other (expense causal to service) into its components and the associated costs split into the categories: $ for total the period, and $/unit/month. Explain how the cost components were calculated.
2. Refer to Table 4.2, and describe the functionality acquired from a third party for the monthly cost shown in column (d), and identify the ILECs providing the service.
3. Refer to Table 5.1, and provide a list of services included in the annual demand forecast such as residential, business, multi-line business, Centrex and wireless. If wireless demand is excluded, provide the supporting rationale for the exclusion considering that in section 3.1 a rate element for wireless services is proposed.
Refer to Telebec's letter dated 27 March 2008 .
4. In its letter, Telebec stated that it feels that it could be eligible for compensation for the difference between the $0.32 rate and the $0.54 costs by the application of an exogenous factor on baskets of service other than the basket of services for which the rates are capped.
a) Outline the company's view, with supporting rationale, with respect to compensation for the difference between the $0.32 rate and the $0.54 costs and the Commission ' s determinations relating to the going-in revenue requirement in Implementation of price cap regulation for Telebec and TELUS Qu é bec , Telecom Decision CRTC 2002-43, 31 July 2002.
b) Identify if and when the company intends to file an application for an exogenous factor.
Date Modified: 2008-04-21 |