ARCHIVED -  Telecom Order CRTC 97-689

Telecom Order

Ottawa, 26 May 1997

Telecom Order CRTC 97-689

The Commission received, on 6 March 1997, an application by Maidens Communications (Maidens) dated 19 December 1996, for an exemption from contribution for single-hop Centrex services and two business administrative lines, due to a reconfiguration of its network from single-hop Centrex service to both single-hop and double-hop Centrex services.

File No.: 97-8626-M10-01

1. In support of its application for the single-hop Centrex service, Maidens provided an affidavit dated 20 February 1997, describing the manner in which it provided both single-hop and double-hop services and affirming that the services for which an exemption is requested are used solely to provide single-hop services to its customers. In support of its application for exemption for its two administrative lines, Maidens provided an affidavit dated 20 February 1997, affirming that the lines identified are used solely for the purpose of making and receiving administrative calls.

2. By letter dated 4 April 1997, Bell Canada (Bell) noted that in support of its application Maidens provided two affidavits dated 20 February 1997.

3. Bell noted that the first affidavit described the manner in which Maidens provides both single-hop and double-hop services. Bell submitted that the service arrangement in question is provided and configured by Bell, and Bell controls the routing of calls to each system and each public switched telephone network (PSTN) group, as well as the ability to make any changes to the routing arrangements. Accordingly, Bell stated that it is able to verify that the services are used as described, and that the PSTN connections designated for single-hop services are not used to carry double-hop services.

4. Bell stated that the second affidavit related to the two business lines which are used for administrative purposes, noting the number of services involved is reasonable, and that the affidavit satisfies the Commission's evidentiary requirements in support of such an exemption.

5. Accordingly, Bell agreed that the requested exemption is consistent with the current regulations for contribution and therefore should be granted.

6. The Commission is of the view that Bell has provided carrier verification consistent with the Commission's evidentiary requirements as set out in Applications for Contribution Exemptions, Telecom Decision CRTC 93-2, 1 April 1993.

7. The Commission notes that the application was dated 19 December 1996 and received on 6 March 1997, and that the affidavits were dated 20 February 1997. The Commission notes that in Effective Date of Contribution Exemptions, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 95-26, 12 June 1995 (PN 95-26), the Commission stated that exemptions from contribution will generally be granted effective the later of the date of application or date of installation, absent special circumstances. Nevertheless, in its recent practice, after reviewing situations on a case-by-case basis, the Commission has considered the earlier of the letter of application or date of the affidavit as constituting the date of application, as long as there is no substantial difference between the dates.

8. In this case it appears to the Commission that Maidens dated its application 19 December 1996, but through an oversight by Maidens the application was not received until 6 March 1997.

9. The Commission notes that in a related application for exemption from contribution for New Wave Communications Ltd. (New Wave) for Centrex single-hop service, an affidavit dated 20 December 1996 was provided affirming that single-hop Centrex service configurations are provisioned for New Wave, Maidens, and Future Link Telecommunications.

10. In Telecom Order CRTC 97-267, dated 27 February 1997 (Order 97-267), the Commission granted New Wave an exemption from contribution for its reconfiguration from single-hop to single-hop and double-hop Centrex service, effective 19 December 1996.

11. The Commission notes that, in commenting on the New Wave application that led to Order 97-267, Bell noted that other resellers were also involved in providing portions of the service configuration reflected in the application.

12. The circuits involved for Maidens were previously granted an exemption from contribution for Centrex single-hop service through Telecom Order CRTC 96-284 dated 1 April 1996. The Commission notes that there was no change in the exchange groupings for the single-hop Centrex services in the follow-up affidavit dated 20 February 1997 and these circuits were included in those that Bell had mentioned as requiring separate applications for exemption.

13. Taking the above into consideration, in the Maidens case, the Commission is of the view that 19 December 1996 should be considered the date of application and would be consistent with the exemption from contribution for New Wave.

14. In light of the foregoing, the Commission orders that:

(a) Maidens' application for the exemption from contribution for the Centrex one-hop service is approved effective 19 December 1996; and

(b) Maidens' application for an exemption from contribution for the two Centrex administrative lines is approved effective the date of installation.

Allan J. Darling
Secretary General

This document is available in alternative format upon request.