ARCHIVED -  Telecom Order CRTC 98-169

This page has been archived on the Web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, 16 February 1998
Telecom Order CRTC 98-169
By letter dated 10 July 1997, 9047-9767 Québec Inc., operating as P.A.V.E.L (Pavel), requested an exemption from contribution charges with respect to a Centrex system. Pavel included an affidavit also dated 10 July 1997 affirming that a Centrex system in St-Janvier is used solely for local or single-hop calling.
File No.: 8626-P12-01/97
1. By letter dated 26 November 1997, Bell Canada (Bell) noted that Pavel does not appear to have a Centrex system in St-Janvier, but has installed a new system in the Ste-Thérèse (514-433) exchange. Bell assumed, therefore, that the affidavit should refer to the Ste-Thérèse system. Accordingly, Bell submitted that, prior to approval of its application, Pavel should provide a revised affidavit reflecting the Ste-Thérèse system, if it is the subject of Pavel's application.
2. Bell also noted that Pavel was granted a contribution exemption in Telecom Order CRTC 96-899 dated 16 August 1996 (Order 96-899), subject to the receipt, in 30 days, of a revised affidavit listing the exchange NNX codes for the Centrex systems which were the subject of that application (Ste-Julienne 514-831 and Montréal 514-324). Bell stated that the Commission directed that the revised affidavit affirm that no interexchange private line services or local private line services, whether provided by Bell or any other service provider, are connected to these Centrex systems or any telephone equipment connected to these systems.
3. In this respect, Bell noted that it can find no record that Pavel has ever filed the required affidavit with the Commission or the company. In the absence of receipt of the required affidavit pursuant to Order 96-899, Bell requested that the Commission revoke the existing contribution exemption granted in that Order.
4. By fax dated 17 December 1997, Pavel provided two new affidavits dated 8 December 1997 for Ste-Julienne and Montréal. Pavel reiterated that its application of 10 July 1997 in fact covers St-Janvier and not Ste-Thérèse as indicated by Bell.
5. The Commission has established that Pavel's application correctly cites St-Janvier.
6. The Commission is of the view that Pavel's evidence for St-Janvier meets the Commission's evidentiary requirements for an exemption and should be approved effective the date of application, 10 July 1997.
7. The Commission also is of the view that the affidavits filed with respect to Ste-Julienne and Montréal meet the Commission's requirements set out in Order 96-899.
8. In light of the foregoing, the Commission orders that:
(i) Pavel's application for St-Janvier is approved effective the date of application, 10 July 1997; and
(ii) Pavel's new affidavits with respect to Ste-Julienne and Montréal meet the Commission's requirements set out in Order 96-899.
Laura M. Talbot-Allan
Secretary General
This document is available in alternative format upon request.

Date modified: