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This page has been archived on the Web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, 15 July 2009
File Nos. 8662-V42-200907826
BY E- MAIL
Mr. Tom Copeland
Chair
Canadian Association of Internet Providers
Mr John Lawford
Counsel for PIAC
Jean-François Mezei
Vaxination Informatique
86 Harwood Gate
Beaconsfield , QC
H9W 3A3
Dear Sirs:
Re: Part VII Applications Requesting a Review and Vary of Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-108
In Service standards for the disposition of telecommunications applications , Telecom Circular CRTC 2006-11, 7 December 2006 , the Commission stated that it would categorize Part VII applications into two types: Type 1 applications that generally do not involve multiple parties or raise significant policy issues and Type 2 applications that do involve multiple parties and/or raise significant policy issues.
The Commission also adopted the following service standards for Part VII applications:
• Type 1 Part VII applications – 90 percent of determinations to be issued on an interim or final basis within four months of the close-of-record; and
• Type 2 Part VII applications – 85 percent of determinations to be issued on an interim or final basis within eight months of the close-of-record.
The Commission stated that it would inform applicants, by letter, within 10 days of the end of the comment period for applications, whether the application is considered to be a Type 1 or Type 2 application, and the applicable service standard.
Commission staff has assessed the above application and considers it to be a Type 2 application. Accordingly, the Commission expects to issue an interim or final determination within eight months of the close-of-record.
Yours sincerely,
Original signed by
Yvan Davidson,
Senior Manager,
Competition, Costing & Tariffs
cc: regulatory@bell.aliant.ca ; bell.regulatory@bell.ca ; iworkstation@mtsallstream.com ; Regulatory@sjrb.ca ; Regulatory.Matters@corp.eastlink.ca ; michel.messier@cogeco.com ; document.control@sasktel.sk.ca ; regaffairs@quebecor.com ; ken.engelhart@rci.rogers.com ; regulatory@primustel.ca ; johnm@barrettxplore.com ; regulatory.affairs@telus.com ; hemond@consommateur.qc.ca ; andre.labrie@mcccf.gouv.qc.ca ; dmckeown@viewcom.ca ; cataylor@cyberus.ca ; regulatory@lya.com ; marcel.mercia@cybersurf.com ; crtc@les.net ; crtc@mhgoldberg.com ; help@coalitioncc.com ; progers@osler.com ; abriggs@cogeco.ca ; hintven@mccarthy.ca ; David.Wilkie@tbaytel.com ; regulatory@execulink.com ; blackwell@giganomics.ca ; louise.begin@sogetel.com ; gabriolaradio@shaw.ca ; kirsten.embree@fmc-law.com ; henryvlug@telus.net ; danmatan+crtc@gmail.com ; morgan@stripsearch.ca ; sjohnston@privcom.gc.ca ; investor_relations@sandvine.com ; mario.mota@cftpa.ca ; christopher@christopher-parsons.com ; telecom@gov.bc.ca ; bmunson@itac.ca ; christopher.libertelli@skype.net ; merickson@holcherickson.com ; eric@rothschildco.com ; Rocky@TekSavvy.com ; lefebvre@rogers.com ; mlafontaine@s-vox.com ; mastin@cftpa.ca ; cedwards@ccsa.cable.ca ; matthew.kellison@bc-cb.gc.ca ; p_gordon@rogers.com ; piac@piac.ca ; pjones@cab-acr.ca ; taylor.richard@cb-bc.gc.ca ; plawson.cdm@gmail.com ; dfewer@uottawa.ca ; rob@zip.ca
- Date modified: