Res 2000-045 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9 10.07 Subject: ago. (The conclusion of this legal opinion is that state universities are not considered to be exempt under Chapter 771.074.) A question concerning the prOVISIon of free promotional telephone services and whether 9-1-1 fees are still applicable Reference: ACSEC attorney opinion and response Source: Policy: 910.08 Subject: July 21, 1998 internal e-mail to ACSEC Staff The policy states that if end-users are not going to be charged "toll" charges, then according to the statute and current rules, no 9-1-1 equalization or poison surcharges should be billed to those customers. For CLECs that are offering free promotional rates, the billing should be treated the same as "no bill" accounts, like for telephone company employees, i.e. no fee billing and collection. ACSEC Rule 255.4 currently only counts a line for a telephone company if a Ilfederal subscriber line charge is assessed on the customer's bill." Response to a citizen who does not want service fee to be applied to a telephone line that is used for data only Reference: Chapter 771 and the Application of a Federal Subscriber Line Charge Source: Policy: 9 10.09 Subject: June 19,1998 internal e-mail to staff from the ACSEC attorney Local lines provided directly to a "state agency", the "federal governmenf or for "pay phones" are exempt from the Chapter 771 and Chapter 772 fees. In ACSEC's areas, the answer to the question depends on whether a "federal subscriber line charge" is billed on the local line. In the district areas, it depends on the definition in the statute and possibly on any interpretations made by the district(s). Financial reporting and the classification of service fees Reference: State Auditor policy and response Source: Policy: April 23, 1998 SAO letter to ACSEC Excerpt from SAO letter ACSEC Policies and Procedures Februarj1999 Page 41