TELECOM ACCESS STANDARDS NEWSLETTER NO. 138 March 2003 CONTENTS 1. INCREASED CHARGES FOR TELEPERMIT APPLICATION PROCESSING 2. OVERSEAS PAYMENTS OF TELEPERMIT CHARGES 3. "GENERAL PURPOSE" PABX TELEPHONES: TELEPERMIT ISSUES 4. TELEPERMIT LABELLING ISSUES 5. CHARGES FOR FAULTS CAUSED BY CUSTOMER-OWNED CPE AND WIRING RETURN TO MAIN INDEX 1. INCREASED CHARGES FOR TELEPERMIT APPLICATION PROCESSING Our charges for Telepermit processing were last increased on 1 April 1996. Since that time, we have made a number of savings, but costs continue to rise even with the present low levels of inflation. Above all, we have now published these Newsletters and most of our specifications on-line, "free of charge", so we have lost a significant revenue stream. In the circumstances, we will be increasing our Telepermit processing charges by a nominal 16% across the board from 1 July 2003. Our revised charging structure, exclusive of GST, will this be as follows:-   Current New "Single line, single function" and most "single line multi-function" CPE, tested to PTC 200, PTC 270, etc, and inclusive of their power units, where applicable $300 $350 CPE variants, for which the same test report applies as for the first item In a "family", and for which Telepermits are applied for under the same Application $100 $116 Multi-line equipment, such as PABX and KTS systems, will be dealt with as a unit charge for each specific "system", plus a "same time application" charge for each type of trunk and extension card $100 $116 Variations to products, product name changes, etc, for which no test reports have to be examined $60 $70 "Bulk changes" covering several products and part of the same request will be subject to a range of discounts depending on the number of products involved. The general aim is to charge according to the total amount of work we need to do Telepermit applications received before 1 July 2003 will be processed at the current charge, but only if they have been sent with all the necessary submission information by that date. Note that the additional charge related to the additional work involved in examining overseas test reports does NOT apply to electrical safety test reports (overseas test labs report to IEC 950 or IEC 60950, which apply also in New Zealand). We will continue to provide our usual advisory service to Telepermit applicants at no cost, as we are happy to assist suppliers to meet our requirements in what ever way we can. 2. OVERSEAS PAYMENTS OF TELEPERMIT CHARGES There have been several recent cases where our overseas clients have had difficulties in paying their Telepermit charges following receipt of a Telecom invoice. The vast majority of these invoices are obviously intended for New Zealand customers, who can simply arrange an automatic credit transfer, pay by cheque, etc. In contrast, overseas clients need to know the various banks and account numbers used by Telecom so that a formal transfer can be arranged. This generally involves their own bank, its corresponding bank in New Zealand and that bank transferring funds to Telecom's bank and to the correct account. This process involves at least two lots of bank fees. In an effort to simplify the process, we have revised our earlier Credit Card payment system so that it is relatively easy to insert the details provided on a Telecom invoice, along with the customer's own credit card information. The completed form (in Word) can then be emailed direct to our Accounts Section. The new form is now available under "Forms" on our website. We leave overseas clients to decide whether to use this in place of the more conventional bank transfer process. Note that this payment process is intended for overseas clients paying Telepermit charges, NOT for local customers to pay their telephone bills!! 3. "GENERAL PURPOSE" PABX TELEPHONES We have received Telepermit applications for a number of "general purpose" PABX telephone sets, which claim to be replacements for proprietary telephones used on a fairly wide range of PABX systems. These telephones typically have several DIP switches which are claimed to allow the installer to replicate the interfaces provided by the PABX systems concerned. The problem, as far as Telepermitting such products is concerned, is that the original proprietary telephones were tested via the associated system, taking into account the combination of the telephone, the extension card, any internal system characteristics and the trunk card. This combination complied with PTC 200 in order for the original products to gain their Telepermits. Should another telephone be tested to PTC 200 direct to a line in its "standard analogue telephone mode", we have no way of assuring that the same telephone works as intended when it is switched to "PABX "x" mode. Such testing needs to be carried out with the other components of each "x" "combination". Another potential difficulty is the status of the PABX proprietary interface. We do not know whether the use of any proprietary interface information has been authorised by the intellectual property owner. Another point is the potential impact of such CPE on the performance of the parent system and the original supplier's obligations to maintain that system. Preferably, the applicant should have obtained the formal agreement of the system Telepermit holder(s) to use the new product on such systems. However, this seems an unlikely prospect. In view of these points, even where we have suitable test reports and therefore grant a Telepermit, we will have to make it a condition of the grant that the Telepermit holder is responsible for any such authorisations. 4. TELEPERMIT LABELLING ISSUES The subject of Telepermit labelling is likely to have more significance in coming months. Telecom's "Standard Terms and Conditions" for its residential and business services include wording to the effect that it is the customer's obligation to: "make sure nothing is connected to our network unless it has a Telepermit or Telecom label on it; this helps make sure the equipment does not damage our network but does not mean it will always remain compatible with our network" Telecom's moves towards a "Next Generation Network" are expected to have at least some impact on older models of CPE, such as dial telephones (decadic signalling will not be supported, as explained in several previous Newsletters since 1996) and some PABX systems. While Telecom will generally assist customers whose Telepermitted equipment is adversely impacted by network changes, especially where such equipment is relatively new, no assistance will be given if the equipment does not bear a Telepermit label. This means it is important that suppliers who hold Telepermits do, in fact, place their labels on the equipment they sell. 5. CHARGES FOR FAULTS CAUSED BY CUSTOMER-OWNED CPE AND WIRING The Telepermit label indicates to customers that Telecom has granted permission for that equipment to be lawfully connected to its network. It does not indicate any endorsement or warranty of that product by Telecom. The supplier is wholly responsible for warranty support of the product and for on-going servicing. In some cases, privately-owned CPE or incorrectly installed internal wiring may be found to be the cause of a service fault reported to Telecom. If this report has resulted in a visit by a Telecom staff member or contractor, a call-out charge will now usually be payable by the customer. If the Telecom representative is asked to make repairs, an additional charge may be incurred. In the circumstances, it is important that suppliers do provide clear information to customers on warranty claims and servicing, such that Telecom is not called unnecessarily. Where customers do not subscribe to our premises wiring maintenance services, it is particularly important that contractors carry our wiring in accordance with Telecom's code of practice, PTC 103. This is available free of charge on our website. DOUG BURRUS Manager Access Standards