Search

ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter addressed to Roger Choquette, P.E. (Sogetel inc.)

This page has been archived on the Web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This page has been archived on the Web.

Ottawa, 14 July 2014

Our reference:  8663-S4-201404772

BY EMAIL

Roger Choquette, P.E.
Consultant and Authorized Representative
Sogetel inc.
111 12-Novembre Street
Nicolet, Quebec  J3T 1S3
choquette@comgate.com

RE: Sogetel inc. – Implementation plan for local competition – Sogetel inc. / Sogetel Mobilité

Dear Mr. Choquette:

The Commission needs additional information to evaluate the Part I application process noted above. Accordingly, Sogetel inc. is to file with the Commission, no later than 21 July 2014, responses to the interrogatory attached to this letter and to serve a copy on all parties to the proceeding.

Sincerely,

Original signed by

Mario Bertrand
Director, Dispute Resolution
Telecommunications

cc: Martin Brazeau, CRTC, martin.brazeau@crtc.gc.ca
Josiane Lord, CRTC, josiane.lord@crtc.gc.ca
Sylvain Bellerive, Sogetel, sylvain.bellerive@sogetel.com
Jean-Philippe Saia, Sogetel Mobilité, philippe.saia@sogetel.com
Bastien Néron, Sogetel Mobilité, bastien.neron@sogetel.com

Attachment

Interrogatory – Sogetel implementation plan for local competition for Sogetel Mobilité

In telecom decisions 2012-42 and 2013-176, the Commission approved the implementation of local competition and number portability for several exchanges served by Sogetel, including the Beauceville and Nicolet exchanges. In both decisions, the Commission also approved the recovery of associated costs.

In paragraph 5 of its implementation plan for local competition for Sogetel Mobilité, Sogetel indicated that the company’s needs with respect to the use of competitor services are similar to those of competitors, whose entry into competition was planned in telecom decisions 2012-42 and 2013-176. Thus, to meet the needs of Sogetel Mobilité, Sogetel proposes to retain the same terms and conditions approved in the two abovementioned decisions for the Beauceville and Nicolet exchanges, with the exception of certain additional implementation costs specific to the Sogetel Mobilité application.

In its application, Sogetel indicated that the additional implementation costs were due to (1) consulting fees; (2) modification of internal systems; and (3) portability fees.

Since local competition and number portability are already implemented in the Beauceville and Nicolet exchanges and the competitor services necessary for Sogetel Mobilité to enter the market are already available,

  1. Provide an accurate explanation along with justification of what is not already implemented and is needed to meet the needs of Sogetel Mobilité and draw up a list of what is needed.
  2. To implement the items contained in the response to question 1, for each activity:
    1. Describe the activities for which the consulting firm will be responsible; and;
    2. Provide an estimate of the number of hours needed by the consulting firm for each activity and include with supporting documentation.
  3. Regarding the modification of internal systems:
    1. Provide a detailed explanation of what modifications to are required and identify each activity to be carried out to complete the work; and
    2. For each activity indicated in response to question 3.a), provide a cost estimate with supporting rationale and calculations.
Date modified: