ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8661-S9-200510588

Letter

Ottawa, 12 June 2008

File No.: 8661-S9-200510588

Abridged

By email

Mr. Jean Brazeau
Vice President
Telecommunications Regulatory Affairs
Shaw Communications Inc.
630-3 rd Avenue SW, Suite 900
Calgary , Alberta   T2P 4L4
regulatory@sjrb.ca
jean.brazeau@sjrb.ca

Dear Mr Brazeau:

RE:   Part VII application by Shaw Communications Inc. to revise TBayTel PSO tariff rate

Shaw Communications Inc. (Shaw) is requested to file its response to the attached interrogatories, and serve copies on TBayTel, by 30 June 2008.

One of the attached interrogatories is being asked in confidence given that it contains information received from Shaw on a confidential basis.

Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, and not merely sent, by that date.

Yours sincerely,

Original signed by

Mario Bertrand
Acting Director
Competition Implementation and Technology
Telecommunications

cc:   David Wilkie, TBayTel  
      david.wilkie@tbaytel.com    
      Jesslyn Mullaney (819) 953-5255

Attachment

Attachment

Interrogatories to Shaw Communications Inc.

1.   Provide a copy of the most recent signed agreement(s) between Shaw Communications Inc. and Thunder Bay Hydro with respect to pole attachment rates, terms and conditions for the Partial Systems Offering (PSO).

2.  With regard to the rate being charged by Thunder Bay Hydro to Shaw:

(a) provide a detailed description of the service(s) or facilities being provided by Thunder Bay Hydro to Shaw associated with the TBayTel owned PSO and TBayTel owned strand attached to Thunder Bay Hydro poles. 

(b) indicate whether the rate relates in whole or in part to the subscriber drops (drop wires) and amplifiers attached or anchored to Thunder Bay Hydro poles? If so, provide supporting documentation. 

3.   Describe the respective responsibilities, if any, of TBayTel and Shaw to perform the repairs and maintenance of the PSO including the strand. Identify any other entity that may perform these functions.

4.   In interrogatory response Shaw(CRTC)10April08-1, Shaw stated that the PSO is attached to 8,113 Thunder Bay Hydro poles.   In TBayTel(CRTC)10April08-3, TBayTel stated that TBayTel strand supporting the PSO is attached to 13,680 Thunder Bay Hydro poles.

(a) Provide an explanation for the differences in the number of poles.

(b) Are there any TBayTel PSO facilities that are not used by Shaw?

5.   In interrogatory response Shaw(CRTC)10April08-1, Shaw stated that the PSO is attached to 406 TBayTel poles. In TBayTel(CRTC)10April08-3, TBayTel stated that TBayTel strand supporting the PSO is attached to 130 TBayTel poles.

Provide an explanation for the differences in the number of poles.

6.        (a) Confirm that Shaw owns all the subscriber drops and amplifiers related to the PSO plant.   If not, identify the entity that owns these facilities.

(b) If Shaw owns any subscriber drops and amplifiers, does Shaw perform the repair, maintaining and other servicing of these facilities?   If not, identify the entity that performs these functions.

7.        (a) Indicate whether the subscriber drops and or amplifiers are anchored directly to TBayTel and Thunder Bay Hydro poles.

(b) How many TBayTel poles on which the PSO plant is attached also have Shaw subscriber drops and or amplifiers from the PSO, anchored or otherwise attached to TBayTel poles?

(c) How many Thunder Bay Hydro poles on which the PSO plant is attached also have Shaw subscriber drops and or amplifiers from the PSO, anchored or otherwise attached to Thunder Bay Hydro poles?