ARCHIVED - Telecom Order CRTC 97-453
This page has been archived on the Web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.
Telecom Order |
|
Ottawa, 3 April 1997
|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 97-453
|
|
IN THE MATTER OF an application by Tempest Global Communications Inc. (Tempest) dated 16 December 1996, for an exemption from contribution charges for services described as reorigination services, also known as callback.
|
|
Reference: 96-2175
|
|
WHEREAS Tempest included with its application a copy of a form used by Bell Canada's (Bell) Carrier Services Group to track additions and changes to existing configurations;
|
|
WHEREAS by letter dated 17 January 1997, Bell stated that Tempest provided neither identification of the services to be used for which an exemption is requested, nor satisfactory evidence in support of its request for an exemption, in accordance with the evidentiary requirements set out in Applications for Contribution Exemptions, Telecom Decision CRTC 93-2, 1 April 1993 (Decision 93-2) and subsequent Orders;
|
|
WHEREAS Bell also stated that it had no further information about the applicant's proposed service arrangements;
|
|
WHEREAS accordingly, based on the lack of information provided on the record, Bell submitted that the application by Tempest should be deferred pending provision of an adequate description of the proposed service arrangements, and suitable evidence to support an application for exemption from contribution charges;
|
|
WHEREAS Bell submitted that should Tempest fail to provide the required evidence within a reasonable period, the application should be denied;
|
|
WHEREAS by letter dated 28 January 1997, Tempest stated that it is seeking an advance ruling on a circuit which has not yet been installed; thus, a circuit identification number is not available, but will be provided to both Bell and the Commission when it is available;
|
|
WHEREAS Tempest stated that the circuit will be used exclusively for transit traffic, as defined in Decision 93-2, and that all traffic carried on the circuit will neither originate nor terminate in Canada;
|
|
WHEREAS Tempest stated that, in order to meet the Commission's evidentiary requirements, it will provide an affidavit once the circuit has been installed;
|
|
WHEREAS accordingly, Tempest submitted that all required information and evidentiary requirements have been met, and that an advance ruling for contribution exemption should be granted;
|
|
WHEREAS by letter dated 10 February 1997, Bell noted that in all cases where an exemption from contribution charges has been granted to a configuration used for transit traffic, evidence in support of an application for exemption has consisted of either carrier verification or a technical audit to confirm that the service is configured to prevent traffic originated or terminated in Canada from being carried on the circuits to be exempted;
|
|
WHEREAS Bell submitted that an affidavit is not satisfactory evidence to support such an exemption;
|
|
WHEREAS Bell further noted that Tempest has provided no substantive information about the proposed service arrangements or the intended supplier of the facilities, or the matter in which the carriage of Canadian originated or terminated calls will be prevented;
|
|
WHEREAS Bell submitted that no prima facie case has been made to justify the granting of advance approval;
|
|
WHEREAS Bell maintained its view stated in its letter of 17 January 1997, that the application by Tempest should be deferred pending provision of an adequate description of the proposed service arrangements, and suitable evidence to support an application for exemption from contribution charges;
|
|
WHEREAS Bell submitted that such evidence should consist of either carrier verification or a technical audit, confirming that the service arrangement is configured so that no calls can originate or terminate in Canada, and that suitable controls exist to prevent changes to the configuration which would permit such calls in future;
|
|
WHEREAS the Commission agrees with Bell that the appropriate evidentiary requirement to support an application for exemption for transit traffic is carrier verification or a technical audit (reference Telecom Orders CRTC 96-1076 dated 27 September 1996, 96-828 dated 2 August 1996, 96-766 dated 18 July 1996, 95-628 dated 30 May 1995 and 95-319 dated 16 March 1995); and
|
|
WHEREAS the Commission is of the view that Tempest's application should be deferred pending provision of an adequate description of the proposed service arrangements (including a schematic diagram), and carrier verification or a technical audit to support its application -
|
|
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
|
|
Tempest's application is deferred pending provision of an adequate description of the proposed service arrangements (including a schematic diagram), as well as carrier verification or a technical audit to support the application.
|
|
Allan J. Darling
Secretary General |
|
|
- Date modified: