ARCHIVED -  Telecom Order CRTC 97-957

Telecom Order

Ottawa, 11 July 1997

Telecom Order CRTC 97-957

The Commission received a letter dated 16 November 1995 (followed by a letter dated 12 July 1996) from Access Calling Services Inc. (ACSI) requesting that the Commission review and vary Telecom Order CRTC 95-481, 20 April 1995 (Order 95-481) to grant it an exemption from contribution charges retroactive to the date of the original application (7 September 1994).

File No.: 96-2189

1. ACSI was granted an exemption from contribution charges in Order 95-481 for single-hop services, based on an application originally filed on 7 September 1994, and a revised affidavit dated 14 February 1995. At the time that Order 95-481 was issued on 20 April 1995, the Commission's accepted practice was that exemptions from contribution charges were effective the date of the Order.

2. By letter dated 16 November 1995, ACSI submitted that it should receive credit for contribution paid from the date its services went into operation in January 1994 (sic). Bell Canada (Bell) confirmed, in a letter dated 5 February 1997, that contribution charges have been billed for the period from September 1994 to April 1995. Commission staff, in a letter dated 6 December 1995, advised ACSI that its request would have to be dealt with in the form of an application to review and vary Order 95-481, and provided an explanation to ACSI of the requirements to be addressed and the process involved to make such an application.

3. By letter dated 12 July 1996, ACSI requested that the Commission review and vary Decision 78-7 (sic: should read Order 95-481) to grant it an exemption retroactive to the date of the original affidavit (September 1994). ACSI submitted that there is substantial doubt as to the correctness of the Decision. ACSI submitted that the exemption was only effective the date of the Order and it should have been effective as of September 1994. ACSI also submitted that there was an error of law or fact.

4. On 13 December 1996, Commission staff sent a letter reiterating the requirement for the applicant to address the review and vary criteria.

5. By letter dated 18 December 1996, ACSI submitted that any assessment of contribution is unjust. ACSI stated that it has rented lines from Bell since December 1993 and never at any time have any of its lines been used for double-hopping. After submitting a new affidavit on 14 February 1995, ACSI stated that Bell made some adjustment, but only from the time it received the second affidavit, not back to the beginning.

6. By letter dated 5 February 1997, Bell replied that ACSI had not addressed the criteria to review and vary a Decision or an Order of the Commission, nor had it specified in what manner Order 95-481 should be varied. Bell submitted that ACSI has not followed the basic rules and procedures of the regulatory process, and has chosen to ignore, in its submissions, the clear and specific requests of the Commission with regard to the requirements of evidence and process. Bell concluded that the Commission should advise ACSI that it has not met the requirements to apply for a review and variance of Order 95-481, and that the Commission should take no further action with respect to ACSI's request.

7. Dealing, first, with the question of whether ACSI addressed the criteria under section 62 of the Telecommunications Act for the review and variance of a decision or order, the Commission notes that since Order 95-481 was released, it issued Effective Date of Contribution Exemptions, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 95-26, 12 June 1995 (PN 95-26). The Commission also notes that previously, in other cases, as reflected in Telecom Order CRTC 95-1064 dated 28 September 1995 (Order 95-1064), the Commission has accepted similar arguments that Order 95-481 be varied based on the fact that the applicants had been prejudiced by the Commission's delay in issuing the Order. As was the case in Order 95-1064 and given PN 95-26 (to which Order 95-1064 refers), the Commission is of the view that ACSI's argument supports the criterion of substantial doubt as to the correctness of the effective date of the exemptions granted to ACSI. The Commission therefore considers that Order 95-481 should be varied.

8. Dealing, secondly, with the question of to which date should the effective date of ACSI's contribution exemption be varied, the Commission notes that according to the current rules as set out in PN 95-26, effective dates are generally to be the later of the date of application or the date of installation for circuits carrying competitive traffic. Based on the materials filed in this case, the Commission considers that the effective date should be the date of application, 7 September 1994.

9. Based on the foregoing, the Commission orders that:

Order 95-481 is varied such that the effective date for ACSI's contribution exemption is 7 September 1994.

Laura M. Talbot-Allan
Secretary General

This document is available in alternative format upon request.