|
|
|
Ottawa, 26 August 1998
|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 98-854
|
|
By letter and affidavit dated 21 October 1996, ExcelNet Communications inc. (ExcelNet) requested an exemption from contribution charges for services provided to ExcelNet by Bell Canada (Bell).
|
|
File No.: 8626-E5-01/98
|
|
1.By letter dated 24 April 1997, Bell noted that the application does not provide any information with respect to the nature of the configuration in question. Further, Bell stated that the affidavit provided does not specify what type of contribution exemption is required. Accordingly, Bell submitted that the Commission should defer a ruling with respect to ExcelNet's application pending the receipt of further information including a revised affidavit clearly describing the nature of the exemption requested.
|
|
2.By letter dated 25 May 1998, ExcelNet provided a list of its services, but no revised affidavit describing the nature of the exemption requested.
|
|
3.By letter dated 23 June 1998, Commission staff requested ExcelNet to submit a revised affidavit describing the nature of the exemption requested.
|
|
4.By letter dated 29 June 1998, ExcelNet provided an affidavit dated 8 July 1998 in response to the Commission staff letter dated 23 June 1998.
|
|
5.By letter dated 27 July 1998, Bell noted that the affidavit indicated that the exemption is requested on the basis that the Centrex services identified are used only for one or more of the following purposes: (a) single-hop resale; (b) resale of local services; (c) the provision of Audiotex services; and (d) internal administrative use. Bell also noted that the affidavit affirmed that the Centrex services are not connected to an interexchange network. Bell assumed that this reference also included a restriction from the provision of such services using a multiple-hop network configuration.
|
|
6.In light of the foregoing, Bell stated that it appeared that ExcelNet has satisfied the evidentiary requirements for the types of exemptions requested, which include circuits used for single-hop resale, administrative purposes and for the provision of local services. Accordingly, Bell agreed with the requested exemption.
|
|
7.The Commission is of the view that ExcelNet has satisfied the evidentiary requirements for the types of exemptions requested, which include circuits used for single-hop resale, administrative purposes and for the provision of local services and notes that Bell agreed with the requested exemption.
|
|
8.In light of the foregoing, ExcelNet's application is approved effective the date of the application (21 October 1996).
|
|
Laura M. Talbot-Allan
Secretary General
|
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request.
|
|
|