ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter adressed to the Distribution List
This page has been archived on the Web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, 28 February 2018
Our references: 1011-NOC2017-0259; 4754-583 and 4754-584
To: Distribution List
Re: Reconsideration of Telecom Decision 2017-56 regarding final terms and conditions for wholesale mobile wireless roaming service, Telecom Notice of Consultation 2017-259 – Applications for Costs Awards by parties
Dear Sir or Madam,
This letter concerns the applications for awards of costs filed by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre and OpenMedia Engagement Network for participation in the proceeding initiated by Reconsideration of Telecom Decision 2017-56 regarding final terms and conditions for wholesale mobile wireless roaming service, Telecom Notice of Consultation 2017-259(the proceeding).
TELUS Communications Inc. (TCI) argued, on the record of the applications, that the Commission should deviate from its general practice of allocating costs on the basis of telecommunications operating revenues (TORs) in the event that it awarded costs to these applicants. TCI proposed that, given the focus of the proceeding on the Commission’s mandated wireless roaming policy, the Commission should allocate costs on the basis of cost respondents’ wireless revenues instead of TORs.
The purpose of this letter is to allow potential costs respondents and the applicant to comment on:
- Whether the Commission should deviate from its general practice with respect to allocation of costs in any or all of the applications noted above; and
- If the Commission were to deviate from this general practice, whether the Commission ought to do so on the basis of wireless revenues or on some other basis.
Potential costs respondents and the applicant may file comments, on these matters only, by no later than 12 March 2018.
Original signed by
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
c.c: Ricardo Wicker, Student-at-Law, Ricardo.firstname.lastname@example.org
Bell Mobility: email@example.com;
Canadian Cable Systems Alliance Inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association: email@example.com;
CNOC Regulatory: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Cogeco Cable Inc.: email@example.com;
Déry Télécom inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Distributel Communications Limited: email@example.com;
Execulink Telecom Inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Ice Wireless Inc.: email@example.com;
Public Interest Advocacy Centre: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Quantum Republic Inc.: email@example.com;
Quebecor Media Inc. (Videotron): firstname.lastname@example.org;
Rogers Communications Canada Inc.: email@example.com;
Shaw Communications Inc.: Regulatory@sjrb.ca;
Saskatchewan Telecommunications: firstname.lastname@example.org;
SSi Micro Ltd: email@example.com;
TELUS Communications Company: firstname.lastname@example.org;
TNW Wireless Inc.: email@example.com;
Tucows Inc.: firstname.lastname@example.org
Xplornet Communications Inc.: email@example.com
- Date modified: