|
|
|
Ottawa, 5 March 1998
|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 98-235
|
|
By letter dated 19 September 1997, Instant Access Communications (Instant Access) requested a contribution exemption, effective the date of its letter, on single-hop circuits with respect to Centrex systems in Ajax and Toronto which will be used to place either single-hop or double-hop calls. Instant Access stated that Bell Canada (Bell) will configure "our switch to ensure compliance with the CRTC regulations", and that it has "arranged with Bell Canada to configure our Centrex system so that one Centrex system can not call the other Centrex system on a dial 9 (contribution exempt circuit)".
|
|
|
File No.: 8626-J7-01/97
|
|
1. By letter dated 21 October 1997, Bell noted that it will only have limited call routing control via virtual facilities group (VFG) code restriction programming on Instant Access' network. Bell understood that the customer's equipment located on the premises of Instant Access is capable of selecting the VFG or other route for each individual call, thereby exercising ultimate control over call routing. In light of this, Bell stated that it does not have complete control over the routing of calls and cannot provide carrier verification that the systems are configured to ensure that double-hop calls only utilize access lines designated for that purpose.
|
|
2. Bell noted that in cases where systems are capable of carrying single-hop and multiple-hop calls and where the underlying carrier cannot verify the configuration, a technical audit of the configuration is required. Accordingly, Bell submitted that a technical audit of the systems in question should be conducted prior to rendering a final decision with respect to Instant Access' application.
|
|
3. By fax dated 30 October 1997, Instant Access stated that it had engaged a professional engineer to perform the technical audit. By letter dated 5 January 1997 (sic: should be 1998), Instant Access provided its technical audit for Toronto and Ajax.
|
|
4. By letter dated 30 January 1998, Bell stated that it has reviewed the technical audit report and is of the view that it has satisfied the Commission's evidentiary requirements where Centrex systems are used for single-hop and multiple-hop calls. Accordingly, based on the auditor's findings, Bell agreed with the requested contribution exemption.
|
|
5. The Commission is of the view that Instant Access has filed a satisfactory technical audit and met the evidentiary requirements where Centrex systems are used for single-hop and multiple-hop calls, and notes that Bell agreed with the exemption.
|
6. The Commission understands that Instant Access has added double-hop circuits to an existing Centrex configuration in Ajax where the single-hop circuits have already been granted exemption in Telecom Order CRTC 96-1508 dated 20 December 1996. Accordingly, the Commission is of the view that it would be appropriate to continue the exemption at Ajax from the date from which the double-hop circuits were added, such that no contribution is payable.
|
|
7. The Commission understands that Instant Access has newly instituted single-hop and double-hop circuits in Toronto, and accordingly is of the view that it would be appropriate to grant an exemption for Toronto effective the date of application 19 September 1997, as requested.
|
|
8. In light of the above, the Commission orders that:
|
|
(a) the exemption at Ajax is continued from the date from which the double-hop circuits were added, such that no contribution is payable; and
|
|
(b) an exemption for Toronto is granted effective the date of application, 19 September 1997.
|
|
Laura M. Talbot-Allan
Secretary General
|
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request.
|
|
|