ARCHIVED - Order CRTC 2000-121

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Order CRTC 2000-121

Ottawa, 15 February 2000
File No.: 8626-A4-10/99

1.

By letter dated 30 June 1999, AT&T Canada Corp. (AT&T Canada) requested an exemption from contribution with respect to a dedicated cross-border circuit to be used in conjunction with AT&T Canada's asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) network. AT&T Canada stated that this circuit crosses the Canada-U.S. border in British Columbia.

2.

AT&T Canada stated that this application was filed without prejudice to its position that further contribution exemption applications for cross-border circuits carrying non-circuit switched traffic are moot as a result of Regulatory Regime for the Provision of International Telecommunications Services, Telecom Decision CRTC 98-17, dated 1 October 1998, which dispensed with the requirement to report minutes of contribution eligible traffic effective 1 April 1999.

3.

AT&T Canada noted that it has already received a contribution exemption, by Telecom Order CRTC 98-888 dated 3 September 1998 (Order 98-888), for a similar configured cross-border circuit used in conjunction with the company's ATM network crossing in Bell Canada (Bell) territory. AT&T Canada stated that this previous exemption application included an independent technical audit. AT&T Canada stated that in order to save additional undue expense of another external technical audit, it was filing an affidavit dated 29 June 1999 to fulfill any evidentiary obligations that may apply in connection with the present application. AT&T Canada requested an effective date of the date of this application.

4.

By letter dated 28 July 1999, BC TEL noted that the switching and data transferred over this circuit are controlled by AT&T Canada and in these situations, the appropriate evidentiary
requirement is the provision of a technical audit by an independent third party confirming the exempt use of the circuit. BC TEL stated that although AT&T Canada has previously filed a technical audit for a similar configured circuit in Bell territory, it was not involved in that application and has not seen the audit report. Thus, BC TEL stated that it could not verify the use of the circuit nor justify that the exemption is warranted.

5.

BC TEL submitted that in light of the above, should the Commission grant AT&T Canada a contribution exemption for its dedicated cross-border circuit, consistent with previous Commission determinations, the circuit at issue should be subject to: (1) the internal control procedures set out in AT&T Canada – Contribution Accounting and Reporting Practices, Telecom Decision CRTC 97-3, 25 February 1997 and Telecom Order CRTC 98-321 dated 8 April 1998 to ensure their continued eligibility for contribution exemption; and (2) the possibility of future random audits.

6.

BC TEL agreed with AT&T Canada's request that the effective date for this exemption be the application date of 30 June 1999.

7.

In Applications for Contribution Exemptions, Telecom Decision CRTC 93-2, 1 April 1993 (Decision 93-2), the Commission stated that "where a competitor seeks to add or delete circuits to or from an existing service configuration that has been granted an exemption, … a simple method should exist to extend the exemption to the revised configuration. The Commission considers it adequate that an officer of the competitor send an attestation to the carrier describing the configuration for which the exemption was originally granted, identifying the circuits being added or deleted, and setting out the reasons why the rationale upon which the Commission based the original exemption continues to apply."

8.

The Commission notes that the situation described in Decision 93-2 involves one service configuration in one telephone company's operating territory. In this application, the configuration in question is similar but separate from the one approved in Order 98-888, and is located in a different telephone company's operating territory. Accordingly, an additional technical audit would normally have been required.

9.

However, the Commission, in a letter dated 17 December 1999, agreed with the recommendations of the Industry Task Force on International Issues, with respect to contribution exemptions, and in particular, found that no explicit exemption application or Commission Order should be required for a licensee to be relieved of the requirement to report international non-contribution eligible minutes under Condition 3 of the Class A International Telecommunications Services licence. The licensee should simply not report such minutes in its contribution reports, subject to the existence of a well-documented audit trail for the excluded minutes.

10.

Given the Commission's determination in its 17 December 1999 letter to remove the requirement to file for exemptions, and the Commission's interest in reducing regulatory burden, the Commission considers AT&T Canada's affidavit as satisfactory evidence to support the exemption in this case, including for the timeframe prior to the implementation of the new audit regime.

11.

Accordingly, in light of the foregoing, AT&T Canada's application is approved effective the date of application (30 June 1999).
Secretary General

This document is available in alternative format upon request and may also be viewed at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca

 

 

Date modified: