ARCHIVED - Order CRTC 2000-392
This page has been archived on the Web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.
Order CRTC 2000-392 |
|
Ottawa, 9 May 2000 | |
Rates for service in Nova Scotia and changes to provisions for contribution and direct connection
|
|
Reference: MetroNet Communications Tariff Notices 9 and 10 | |
This order approves on an interim basis revisions to MetroNet Communications' General Tariff providing for access services in Nova Scotia and Commission directed changes to definitions, contribution provisions and direct connection rates. | |
|
AT&T Canada Telecom Services Company filed applications proposing revisions to MetroNet Communications' General Tariff (CRTC 21170). The applications, filed under Tariff Notices 9 and 10, were filed on 15 and 28 March 2000 respectively. |
|
Bell Canada filed comments on behalf of itself, Island Telecom Inc., Maritime Tel & Tel Limited, MTS Communications Inc., NBTel Inc. and NewTel Communications Inc. on 13 April 2000. |
|
AT&T Canada's proposed changes to MetroNet's contribution charge provisions do not fully reflect the Commission's determinations in the decisions listed below and should be amended to correct discrepancies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, the Commission considers that a note should be added specifying that the provisions associated with contribution charges would apply to MetroNet's switched interexchange services where interexchange services are defined by the applicable incumbent local exchange carrier's (ILEC's) exchange boundaries. |
|
Further, throughout Part C of MetroNet's tariff there are references to the terms "alternate provider of long distance services (APLDS)" and "interexchange carrier (IXC)". The term "APLDS" excludes the interexchange operations of the incumbent telephone companies while the term "IXC" excludes those of resellers. |
|
The Commission considers that AT&T Canada should replace the terms "APLDS" and "IXC" with the term "interexchange service provider (IXSP)", where applicable, to ensure that MetroNet's tariff is accurate with respect to the applicability of various interconnection and contribution provisions. In association with this change, the tariff should include a definition for IXSP. |
|
MetroNet's tariff does not include provisions for 9-1-1 Emergency Response Service (ERS) in the province of Nova Scotia. The Commission notes that competitive local exchange carriers are required to enter into agreements with the municipalities or the province for the provision of 9-1-1 ERS. In the absence of such agreements, a tariff would define the relationship between MetroNet and particular municipalities or the province. |
|
In addition to the above, the Commission is of the view that the tariff requires other minor changes for the purposes of correcting and clarifying various terms and conditions. |
9. |
In light of the foregoing, the Commission orders that: |
a) The proposed tariffs are approved on an interim basis, with the following amendments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Overseas and Canada-U.S. Circuits | |
a) For each overseas circuit that uses an international interconnection point located in the applicable ILEC's operating territory and for each Canada-U.S. circuit that crosses the border at a point located in the applicable ILEC's operating territory, the contribution charges specified below apply. The determination of whether or not an individual carrier's or other service provider's international traffic is DAL surcharge-exempt is based on the exempt/non-exempt status of the carrier or other service provider that hands off the international traffic directly to or receives such traffic directly from the Class A licensee. Where the originating/terminating carrier or other service provider is also the Class A licensee, it is the status of the originating/terminating carrier or other service provider that applies. | |
Carriers and other service providers that use DALs |
|
Contribution charge, each minute of traffic (effective 2000/01/01) |
|
Peak Period $0.0075 |
|
Off-Peak Period $0.0038 |
|
Carriers and other service providers that have attested that they do not use DALs (Note 1) | |
Contribution charge, each minute of traffic (effective 2000/01/01) |
|
Peak Period $0.0066 |
|
Off-Peak Period $0.0033 |
|
Note 1: An attestation that a carrier or other service provider does not use DALs requires that the carrier or other service provider provide an affidavit to the applicable ILEC and the Commission, sworn by a senior officer of the company, attesting to the fact that the carrier or other service provider does not use any DALs to originate or terminate traffic in the applicable ILEC's operating territory. The affidavit must be resubmitted on an annual basis and include a statement that if, during the year, the carrier or other service provider uses any DALs, the carrier or other service provider will notify the Commission immediately, serving a copy on the ILEC, and the contribution rate applicable to the carriers and other service providers that do use DALs would immediately apply. |
|
b) Class A licensees are required to report detailed monthly contribution minute information to the applicable ILEC, the Commission and the Central Fund Administrator (CFA) within 60 days of the end of the applicable month as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In cases in which the licensee has no traffic to report, the licensee shall provide a nil report to the ILEC, the Commission and the CFA. | |
(c) Class A licensees are required to provide a quarter-ending report to the applicable ILEC, the Commission and the CFA within 60 days of the end of the applicable quarter as follows: | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
If there is no traffic to report, the affidavit shall state why the licensee has no traffic to report. |
|
d) As an alternative to providing monthly and quarterly reports to the ILEC as noted in b) and c) above, the Class A licensee may choose to provide these reports to an affiliated CLEC or a CLEC with which such Class A licensee has a preferred relationship, as defined in the Central Fund Administration Agreement, and to remit the applicable contribution payment to that CLEC. When a Class A licensee elects to use this alternative reporting method, that Class A licensee must advise the ILEC in writing of this choice, at least one month prior to the date the change becomes effective. | |
e) in Item 304(4), delete sub-item (iii) and renumber the remaining items accordingly. | |
b) AT&T Canada is directed to issue forthwith revised tariff pages incorporating the changes set out above. | |
c) In the absence of executed 9-1-1 ERS agreements with the municipality or province of Nova Scotia, AT&T Canada is directed to file forthwith proposed 9-1-1 ERS tariff provisions for the province of Nova Scotia. |
|
Secretary General |
|
This document is available in alternate format upon request and may also be examined at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca |
- Date modified: