Search

ARCHIVED - Telecom Order CRTC 2014-516

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Archived

This page has been archived on the Web.

PDF version

Ottawa, 3 October 2014

File number: Aliant Telecom Tariff Notice 464

Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership – Introduction of Wireless Service Provider Enhanced 9-1-1 Service In-Call Location Update feature

  1. The Commission received an application from Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership (Bell Aliant), dated 27 February 2014, in which the company proposed revisions to its General Tariff item 648 – Wireless Service Provider Enhanced 9-1-1 (WSP E9-1-1) Service. Specifically, Bell Aliant proposed to introduce the In-Call Location Update (ICLU) feature, pursuant to the Commission’s direction in Telecom Decision 2013-124. The ICLU feature enables public safety answering points (PSAPs) to request an update to a wireless 9-1-1 caller’s location information when the caller is in motion or has changed locations. Bell Aliant submitted a cost study in support of its application.
  2. In Telecom Order 2014-112, the Commission approved Bell Aliant’s application on an interim basis, effective 1 April 2014.
  3. The Commission received interventions regarding Bell Aliant’s application from Bragg Communications Inc., operating as Eastlink (Eastlink), and Rogers Communications Partnership (RCP). The public record of this proceeding, which closed on 14 April 2014, is available on the Commission’s website at www.crtc.gc.ca or by using the file number provided above.
  4. Eastlink and RCP requested that the Commission ensure that Bell Canada has not previously claimed costs shared between it and Bell Aliant. Eastlink and RCP requested that the Commission review Bell Aliant’s cost study to ensure that all costs included were causal to the introduction of the ICLU feature, and that no cost associated with the provision of Text Messaging with 9-1-1 or any future enhancement be included. Specifically, they requested that the Commission validate that the hardware and software costs outlined in the cost study, and the “Other” costs, which represented a large portion of Bell Aliant’s total costs, were causal to the implementation of the ICLU feature.
  5. In reply, Bell Aliant confirmed that the costs shared between it and Bell Canada have been apportioned based on wireless telephone number demand distribution.
    Bell Aliant confirmed that all costs included in the cost study, including the hardware, software, and “Other” costs, were causal to the introduction of the ICLU feature. Bell Aliant also clarified the components included in these categories. Specifically, Bell Aliant confirmed that the costs included in the cost study did not reflect changes or enhancements to other aspects of its network. It clarified that provision of the ICLU feature required a redesign of its system and infrastructure to enable two-way communications between 9-1-1 service providers and PSAPs. Although this architecture supports other future 9-1-1-related features, the ICLU feature could not have been provided without the company implementing the new architecture and incurring the associated costs. Bell Aliant argued that therefore, these costs are causal to the introduction of the ICLU feature.
  6. The Commission considers that Bell Aliant’s reply addresses Eastlink’s and RCP’s concerns. The Commission has reviewed Bell Aliant’s cost study and determines that it is consistent with the costing methodology approved for the incumbent local exchange carriers. The Commission also considers Bell Aliant’s costs to be reasonable and causal to the ICLU feature. The Commission is satisfied that
    Bell Aliant’s cost study includes only Bell Aliant’s portion of the costs it shares with Bell Canada, and does not include any of Bell Canada’s costs. The Commission also finds that the associated proposed rate is just and reasonable.
  7. In light of the above, the Commission approves on a final basis Bell Aliant’s application.

Secretary General

Related documents

 

 

Date modified: