ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8661-T66-200807240
This page has been archived on the Web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, 29 July 2008 File No.: 8661-T66-200807240 BY EMail Mr. Ted Woodhead Re: Wireless Number Portability On 21 May 2008, the Commission received an application by TELUS Communications Company (TCC) requesting that it be allowed to recover that portion of the costs incurred by the company to modify the wireline network to enable wireless number portability (WNP). Additionally, TCC filed responses to Commission interrogatories on 11 July 2008. TCC is requested to provide responses to additional interrogatories as set out in the Attachment by 30 August 2008. Yours sincerely, Original signed by Suzanne Bédard cc: Interested Parties to PN 2006-3 Attachment 1) With reference to the response to interrogatory TELUS(CRTC)18Jun08-1, provide details of the following costs.
2) Refer to paragraph 13 of TELUS' revised Part VII application dated 11 July 2008 regarding increasing the rate ceiling for forborne residential services by $0.07/month. Explain, with supporting rationale, how this proposal is consistent with paragraph 454 of Telecom Decision CRTC 2006-15, in which the Commission found it appropriate to maintain its powers and duties under subsection 27(1) of the Telecommunications Act to the extent necessary to impose a price ceiling on stand-alone residential PES. The Commission considered that such a ceiling would provide vulnerable and uncontested customers with a safeguard against unreasonable rate increases in a forborne environment without a pricing safeguard. Date Modified: 2008-07-29 |
- Date modified: