[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 56 (Monday, March 24, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13852-13853]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7527]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Chapter I

[CC Docket No. 96-98; DA 97-557]


Petition of MCI for Declaratory Ruling That New Entrants Need Not 
Obtain Separate License or Right-to-Use Agreements Before Purchasing 
Unbundled Elements

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Petition for declaratory ruling; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commission has released a Public Notice which establishes 
a pleading cycle for comments on a petition for declaratory ruling 
filed by MCI requesting the Commission to issue a declaratory ruling 
that new entrants need not obtain separate license or right-to-use 
agreements before purchasing unbundled network elements, and that the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, requires an incumbent LEC to 
provide requesting telecommunications carriers the same rights to 
intellectual property that the incumbent LEC enjoys. The Commission 
wishes to build a complete record on this issue.

DATES: Comments are due on or before April 15, 1997, and reply comments 
are due on or before May 6, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments and reply comments should be sent to Office of the 
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, NW., Room 
222, Washington, DC 20554, with a copy to Janice Myles of the Common 
Carrier Bureau, 1919 M Street, NW., Room 544, Washington, DC 20554. 
Parties should also file one copy of any documents filed in this docket 
with the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription 
Services, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kalpak Gude, Common Carrier Bureau, 
Policy and Program Planning Division, (202) 418-1580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Synopsis of Public Notice

    On March 11, 1997, MCI filed a petition for declaratory ruling 
requesting the Commission to issue a declaratory ruling that any 
requirement imposed by an incumbent local exchange carrier (LEC) or by 
a state or local government that a requesting telecommunications 
carrier obtain separate license or right-to-use agreements before the 
requesting carrier may purchase access to unbundled network elements 
violates sections 251 and 253 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended (the Act). MCI also asks the Commission to issue a declaratory 
ruling that the Act's nondiscrimination requirement requires an 
incumbent LEC to provide requesting telecommunications carriers the 
same rights to intellectual property that the incumbent LEC enjoys.
    We are assigning file number CCBPol 97-4 to this proceeding. This 
issue MCI raises was also raised in a Petition for Reconsideration of 
the First Report and Order in CC Docket No. 96-98 (61 FR 45476 (August 
29, 1996)) that was filed by Local Exchange Carrier Coalition. 
Therefore, commenters must include both the docket number and the file 
number on all pleadings, and should file copies in both proceedings.
    In order to build as complete a record as possible, we encourage 
parties to comment on the following questions: (1) Does providing 
access to unbundled network elements implicate the intellectual 
property rights of equipment vendors or other third parties? Why or why 
not? We urge parties to provide specific supporting information, 
including descriptions of the types of provisions included in existing 
contracts between incumbent

[[Page 13853]]

LECs and third parties. (2) Does providing access to network elements 
other than access to vertical features of unbundled switches implicate 
intellectual property rights of equipment vendors or other third 
parties? Why or why not? (3) Does providing access to services for 
resale, in accordance with section 251, implicate intellectual property 
rights of equipment vendors or other third parties? Why or why not? (4) 
What are the potential burdens on requesting telecommunications 
carriers if they are required to independently negotiate licensing 
agreements with equipment vendors or other third parties before 
obtaining access to unbundled network elements? Are there ways to 
eliminate or reduce those burdens on requesting telecommunications 
carriers? In addition, we encourage parties to comment on MCI's 
proposal that incumbent LECs bear the burden of negotiating any 
extension or augmentation of intellectual property rights that might be 
implicated in interconnection agreements.
    Interested parties should file comments on MCI's petition by April 
15, 1997, and reply comments by May 6, 1997, with the Secretary, FCC, 
1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. A copy should also be sent 
to Janice Myles, Common Carrier Bureau, FCC, Room 544, 1919 M Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554, and to the Commission's contractor for 
public service records duplication, ITS, Inc., 2100 M Street, N.W., 
Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037. Parties filing comments should 
include the Policy Division internal reference number, CCBPol 97-4, as 
well as the docket number, CC Docket No. 96-98, on their pleadings. 
MCI's petition is available for inspection and copying during regular 
business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554, as well as in the Common Carrier Bureau's 
Public Reference Room, Room 575, 2000 M Street, N.W., Washington, D. C. 
20554. Copies can also be obtained from ITS by calling (202) 857-3800. 
Comments and reply comments must include a short and concise summary of 
the substantive arguments raised in the pleading.
    We will treat this proceeding as non-restricted for purposes of the 
Commission's ex parte rules. See generally 47 CFR Secs. 1.1200-1.1216. 
Parties may not file more than a total of ten (10) pages of ex parte 
submissions, excluding cover letters. This ten-page limit does not 
include: (1) written ex parte filings made solely to disclose an oral 
ex parte contract; (2) written material submitted at the time of an 
oral presentation to Commission staff that provides a brief outline of 
the presentation; or (3) written material filed in response to direct 
requests from Commission staff. Ex parte filings in excess of this 
limit will not be considered as part of the record in this proceeding.

Federal Communications Commission
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-7527 Filed 3-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P