ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter Addressed to Louise Bégin (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This page has been archived on the Web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.

Ottawa, 20 February 2018

Our reference: 8740-S4-201710666


Ms. Louise Bégin, Lawyer
Director of Regulatory Affairs
Sogetel inc.
111, rue du 12-Novembre
Nicolet, QC  J3T 1S3

Re: Sogetel Tariff Notice 184

Dear Madam,

On 13 November 2017, the Commission received Tariff Notice 184 from Sogetel inc. (Sogetel) in which the company proposed modifications to its Access Tariff in order to introduce two charges for new competitor services. Sogetel proposed a charge for the accelerated processing of a Local Service Request and a charge to be applied to cancellations of port-out requests exceeding a certain monthly threshold.

To assist in the analysis of the application, Sogetel is to provide responses to the attached requests for information (RFI) by 22 March 2018. Parties may file comments in response to the RFIs by 2 April 2018 and Sogetel may file reply comments by 9 April 2018.


Original signed by

Lyne Renaud
Director, Competitor Services and Costing Implementation
Telecommunications Sector

cc: Curtis Eagan, CRTC, 819-953-4947,

Attach (1)

Requests for Information

Question 1
Refer to the Canadian Local Ordering Guidelines (Version 6.3), Section 2 – Local Service Request (LSR) Form Preparation Guide, Item 17 EXP – Expedite Flag. Provide the company's reasons, with supporting rationale, for proposing to introduce a charge for the accelerated processing of an LSR given that a mechanism (i.e. the Expedite Flag) already exists for addressing such requests.

Question 2
Explain the reasons why Sogetel included cost elements related to the normal processing of an LSR in the company's proposed charge for the accelerated processing of an LSR.

Question 3
For each cost element included in the cost study for Sogetel's proposed charge for accelerated processing of an LSR, identify whether it is:

  1. strictly related to the normal processing of an LSR;
  2. strictly related to the accelerated processing of an LSR; or
  3. common to both the normal and accelerated processing of an LSR.

Question 4
Present a charge for the accelerated processing of an LSR that strictly reflects the costs incurred by the company that are not captured in the normal processing of an LSR. Support this charge with a cost study.

Date modified: