ARCHIVED - Letter

This page has been archived on the Web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.


Ottawa, 13 May 2009

 

File #   8669-C12-01/01 
         8638-C12-200314641 
         8638-C12-200907131

 

By Email

 

Mr. Ted Woodhead
Vice-President
Telecom Policy & Regulatory Affairs
215 Slater Street, 8th floor
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1P 0A6
regulatory.affairs@telus.com

Dear Mr. Woodhead:

 

Re: Follow-up to Implementation of wireless Phase II E9-1-1 service, Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-40 - Proposed Roll-out Schedule of TELUS Communications Company

 

On 1 May 2009, TELUS Communications Company (TELUS) filed a confidential submission regarding its proposed roll-out schedule for wireless Phase II E9-1-1 services.   In its submission, TELUS outlined the activities undertaken to date and its proposed implementation schedule with specific reasons as to why it needs additional time to complete part of the last phase of its implementation.

 

Commission staff notes that all the documents that TELUS filed were filled in confidence and that an abridged version of these confidential documents were not submitted in accordance with the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure.

 

Commission staff also notes that the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure state that any claim for confidentiality made in connection with a document filed with the Commission or requested by the Commission or any party shall be accompanied by the reasons therefore, and, where it is asserted that specific direct harm would be caused to the party claiming confidentiality, sufficient details shall be provided as to the nature and extent of such harm (ss. 19(2)).

 

In addition, a party claiming confidentiality in connection with a document shall file with the Commission an abridged version of the document to be placed on the public record or its reasons for objecting to the filing of an abridged version thereof.

 

A claim for confidentiality referred to in subsection 19 (2) shall be placed on the public record and a copy thereof shall be provided on request to any party.

 

Furthermore, Commission staff notes that much of the information in the documents filed by TELUS in confidence is already public.

 

Commission staff therefore requests TELUS to submit to the Commission by the end of business day 15 May 2009, an abridged version of all the documents filed in confidence or its reasons for objecting to the filing of an abridged version.   In addition, any claim for confidentiality should be accompanied by the reasons therefore, and where it is asserted that specific direct harm would be caused to TELUS, sufficient details should be provided as to the nature and extent of such harm.

 

Sincerely,

 

Paul Godin
Director General,
Competition, Costing and Tariffs

Date modified: