[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 47 (Monday, March 11, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10919-10920]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-5673]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[CC Docket No. 02-39; FCC 02-57]


Review of the Equal Access and Nondiscrimination Obligations 
Applicable to Local Exchange Carriers

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document initiates an inquiry to examine the continued 
importance of the equal access and nondiscrimination obligations of 
section 251(g) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act). 
This document also seeks to develop a baseline record regarding the 
current state of equal access and nondiscrimination requirements. As 
such, it seeks comment on the existing equal access and 
nondiscrimination obligations of Bell Operating Companies (BOCs), both 
with and without section 271 authority. The Commission also seeks 
comment on the equal access and nondiscrimination obligations of 
incumbent independent local exchange carriers (LECs) and competitive 
LECs. Then, the Commission asks commenters what the equal access and 
nondiscrimination requirements of all these carriers should be, 
considering the many legal and marketplace changes that have transpired 
since the earlier requirements were adopted.

DATES: Comments are due May 10, 2002, and reply comments are due June 
10, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Veach, Attorney-Advisor, Policy 
and Program Planning Division, Common Carrier Bureau, at (202) 418-
1558, or via the Internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Inquiry (NOI) in CC Docket No. 02-39, FCC 02-57, adopted February 
19, 2002, and released February 28, 2002. The complete text of this NOI 
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Room CY-A257, Washington, DC, 20554. This document may also be 
purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Qualex 
International, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, 
Washington, DC 20554, telephone 202-863-2893, facsimile 202-863-2898, 
or via e-mail [email protected]. It is also available on the 
Commission's Web site at http://www.fcc.gov.

Synopsis of the Notice of Inquiry (NOI)

    1. The Commission's goals in conducting this inquiry are: (1) To 
facilitate an environment that will be conducive to competition, 
deregulation and innovation; (2) to establish a modern equal access and 
nondiscrimination regulatory regime that will benefit consumers; (3) to 
balance regulatory costs against these benefits, and (4) to harmonize 
the requirements of similarly-situated carriers as much as possible.
    2. Background. By adopting the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 
Act), Congress sought to lay the foundation for pro-competitive, 
deregulatory telecommunications policies that facilitate investment in 
and deployment of advanced services to all

[[Page 10920]]

Americans. Mindful that competition would not develop in all markets 
immediately, Congress left in place certain safeguards, such as section 
251(g). That statutory provision preserves the equal access and 
nondiscrimination requirements that were established for LECs ``under 
any court order, consent decree, or regulation, order, or policy of the 
Commission'' prior to passage of the 1996 Act. Notably, section 251(g) 
imports the obligations of the Modification of Final Judgment (MFJ), 
the consent decree that settled the Department of Justice's antitrust 
suit against AT&T and required divestiture of the BOCs, as well as 
Commission equal access requirements. Section 251(g) grants the 
Commission authority to prescribe regulations superseding pre-existing 
equal access and nondiscrimination obligations.
    3. First, the Commission seeks comment on how it should go about 
changing or eliminating any existing equal access and nondiscrimination 
requirements, should it decide to do so. Specifically, section 251(g) 
states that all pre-1996 Act requirements continue to apply ``until 
such restrictions and obligations are explicitly superseded by 
regulations prescribed by the Commission.'' Congress expected that 
``[w]hen the Commission promulgates its new regulations, * * * the 
Commission will explicitly identify those parts of the interim 
restrictions and obligations that it is superseding so that there is no 
confusion as to what restrictions and obligations remain in effect.'' 
The Commission asks whether it should adopt new rules to replace the 
existing section 251(g) requirements, or is it enough for the 
Commission to state in an order that such requirements are no longer 
necessary in the wake of the 1996 Act? Alternatively, it asks whether 
the Commission should forbear from such requirements to the extent they 
meet the standards of 47 U.S.C. 160?
    4. Changing Market Conditions. The Commission seeks comment on what 
equal access and nondiscrimination requirements were carried through 
from the MFJ, to which carriers these requirements apply, and the 
extent to which these requirements are relevant today. The Commission 
further seeks comment on whether the goals underlying section 251(g) 
can be achieved through any other means, including reliance on other 
provisions of section 251 and the requirements that the Commission has 
imposed pursuant to those provisions. It further asks how sections 201 
and 202, and the Commission's orders interpreting those sections, 
affect the need for separate equal access and nondiscrimination 
requirements in light of current marketplace conditions, including the 
state of competition in the local market and BOC entry into the long 
distance market.
    5. Bell Operating Companies. The Commission seeks comment on the 
existing equal access and nondiscrimination requirements of BOCs, which 
include the line of cases stemming from the MFJ. It also seeks comment 
on what the BOCs' equal access and nondiscrimination obligation should 
be, whether changes in equal access and nondiscrimination requirements 
are now needed for BOCs and what changes are appropriate. Should BOCs 
be required to provide information regarding all available 
interexchange carriers? What kind of marketing arrangements between 
BOCs and other carriers are permissible? What is the relationship 
between sections 251(g) and 272?
    6. Incumbent Independent Local Exchange Carriers. Section 251(g) 
also imports equal access and nondiscrimination requirements that 
existed for incumbent independent LECs prior to the 1996 Act. The 
Commission seeks comment on what, if any, ``order, consent decree, or 
regulation, order, or policy of the Commission'' applies to incumbent 
independent LECs. It also asks what the regulatory costs to these 
carriers are under the current equal access and nondiscrimination 
requirements and whether those requirements should continue to apply to 
incumbent independent LECs in view of the new competitive paradigm 
contemplated by the 1996 Act. The Commission also asks for comment on 
the extent to which it can harmonize the obligations of incumbent 
independent LECs that provide interLATA services through a separate 
affiliate with the obligations of other LECs that provide interLATA 
services through a separate affiliate, and the extent to which it can 
harmonize the obligations of incumbent independent LECs that provide 
interLATA services on an integrated basis with the obligations of other 
LECs that provide interLATA services on an integrated basis.
    7. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers. The Commission also seeks 
comment on the existing equal access and nondiscrimination obligations 
that apply to competitive LECs. What Commission orders or other law 
impose equal access and nondiscrimination requirements on non-incumbent 
LECs today, and what are the regulatory costs to these carriers of 
those requirements? What, if any, should the equal access and 
nondiscrimination obligations of competitive LECs be? Can the 
Commission harmonize the obligations of competitive LECs with the 
obligations of other LECs that provide interLATA services on an 
integrated basis?

    Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
 Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 02-5673 Filed 3-8-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P