ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter addressed to Daniel Stern (Telus Communications Company)
This page has been archived on the Web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, 22 March 2016
Our Reference: 8662-B2-201512161 and 4754-509
DELIVERED BY EMAIL
Mr. Daniel Stern
Senior Regulatory Legal Counsel, Telus Communications Company
215 Slater Street, 8th floor
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 0A6
Canada
Email: daniel.stern@telus.com
RE: Application for costs award with respect to the participation of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre and the Consumers’ Association of Canada in the proceeding initiated by Bell Canada to review and vary Telecom Regulatory Policy 2015-326 – Request for Comments
Dear Mr. Stern:
On 18 December 2015, the Commission received an application for costs from the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) on its own behalf and on behalf of the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC) [collectively PIAC/CAC] for its participation in the proceeding initiated by Bell Canada (Bell) to review and vary Telecom Regulatory Policy 2015-326 (the proceeding).
In their application, PIAC/CAC named Bell as the appropriate costs respondent because it was the applicant of the proceeding.
The purpose of this letter is to provide all parties who participated in the proceeding who could be named as potential costs respondents to have an opportunity to make submissions on the Commission naming parties other than, or in addition to, Bell as responsible for the payment of PIAC/CAC’s costs.
Commission staff is providing all parties with a 5 day comment period, followed by a 2 day reply period for PIAC/CAC.
The information is to be filed with the Commission by 31 March 2016 for all parties who wish to make comments, and PIAC/CAC must file any replies by 4 April 2016.
A copy of this letter and all related correspondence will be added to the public record of the proceeding.
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at (613) 697-4027 or megan.maloney@crtc.gc.ca
In the meantime, the Commission is currently continuing its review of the costs application.
Yours Sincerely,
originally signed by
Megan Maloney
Articling Student
cc:
Pauline Jessome, Director Regulatory, Allstream Inc., iworkstation@mtsallstream.com;
Philippe Gauvin, Senior Legal Counsel, Bell Canada, bell.regulatory@bell.ca;
William Sandiford, Chair of the Board and President, Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc., regulatory@cnonc.ca;
Natalie MacDonald, Vice President Regulatory Matters, Eastlink, regulatory.matters@corp.eastlink.ca;
Geoffrey White, Legal Counsel, Public Interest Advocacy Centre and the Consumers' Association of Canada, gwhite@piac.ca;
Kyle Mitchell, Regulatory Counsel, Primus Telecommunications Canada Inc.; regulatory@primustel.ca;
Dennis Béland, Vice-président Affaires réglementaires, Québecor Média Inc., dennis.beland@quebecor.com;
David Watt, Senior Vice President Regulatory, Rogers Communications, david.watt@rci.rogers.com;
Morgan Elliott, Senior Vice President Regulatory and Government Relations, Shaw Communications Inc., regulatory@sjrb.ca
- Date modified: