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This page has been archived on the Web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, 6 March 2012

File Nos.:   8740-B54-201115858


Mr. Denis Henry
Vice-President – Regulatory, Government Affairs and Public Law
Bell Aliant
160 Elgin Street, 19th floor
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 2C4

- AND -

Mr. Philippe Gauvin
Counsel - Regulatory Law and Policy
Bell Canada
160 Elgin Street, 19th floor
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 2C4

Re:  Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership’s Tariff Notices 390 and 390A and Bell Canada’s Tariff Notices 7337 and 7337A – Introduction of Access to 9-1-1 ALI Information

The Commission received applications by Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership and Bell Canada (collectively, the Bell companies), dated 6 December 2011, in which they proposed changes to item 1400 – 9-1-1 Public Emergency Reporting Service of their respective General Tariffs, in order to introduce Access to 9-1-1 Automatic Location Identification (ALI) Information.

The Bell companies are to file responses to the attached interrogatories by 16 March 2012.

All parties may submit reply comments pertaining to the additional information provided to the Commission by 23 March 2012.

Copies of the documents should also be sent to Greg Milosek (

Sincerely yours,

Original signed by

Yvan Davidson

Director, Costing and Competitive Services



cc:  MTS Allstream Inc.,
      Rogers Communications Partnership,


Interrogatories for the Bell companies’ TNs 390, 390A, 7337, and 7337A

Refer to paragraph 8 of the Bell companies’ response comments to Eastlink, dated 2 February 2012, where the Bell companies listed sub-activities related to the “CISC – Ongoing support of Task Identification”  major activity included in its cost study, including:

(i)  Task identification associated with providing Access to 9-1-1 ALI information service,

(ii)  Task Identification Form (TIF) 64 analysis and assessment in pursuit of complying with mandated tasks, and

(iii)  Providing ESWG with suggestions, alternatives and assessments in support of 9-1-1 ALI information service

Provide responses to the following:

a)  Describe each of the above three sub-activities and provide justification as to why they are viewed to be causal to the service. 

b)  Provide a breakdown of the proposed CISC PWAC costs by each of the three sub-activities.

c)  Quantify the expenses included in the PWAC for “CISC – Ongoing support of Task Identification” that were incurred prior to the Commission’s approval of the recommendations contained in consensus report ESRE0055 in Telecom Decision CRTC 2011-309, CISC consensus reports – Emergency Services Working Group, 11 May 2011. Explain why any of these CISC expenses were included in the cost study.

d)  Explain whether any expenses included in the PWAC for “CISC – Ongoing support of Task Identification” form part of expenses that are to be excluded from regulatory economic studies as specified in Appendix 1 of Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-14, Review of certain Phase II costing issues, 21 February 2008 (e.g. personnel expenses from regulatory, legal, or product/service development entities as identified in Appendix 1). If so, explain why such expenses were included in the cost study.

Date modified: