//$TRANSMITTED FOR FCC RECORD ONLY//$ $//ORDER, VIA USA, LTD, Intl Ext of Lines, FCC 94-227//$ $/63.01 Contents of Applications/$ $/300.214 Extension of Lines/$ Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FCC 94-227 Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) VIA USA, LTD ) File Nos. I-T-C-93-031 TELEGROUP, INC. ) I-T-C-93-050 ) Applications for Authority Under ) Section 214 of the Communications ) Act of 1934, as amended, to operate ) as International Resale Carriers ) ) DISCOUNT CALL INTERNATIONAL CO. ) File No. I-T-C-93-054 ) Application for Authority Under ) Section 214 of the Communications ) Act, as amended ) ORDER Adopted: September 2, 1994 Released: September 12, 1994 By the Commission: 1. On May 11, 1994, the Commission granted the above-referenced Section 214 applications of VIA USA, Ltd., Telegroup, Inc., and Discount Call International Co. to resell international switched services of other carriers using a "call-back" configuration. This service allows a customer in a foreign country to use foreign facilities to dial a telephone number in the United States and receive dial tone at a switch at the reseller's U.S. location, which the customer can then use to place a call via an outbound switched service of a U.S. carrier. The calls originating at U.S. locations are billed at U.S.-tariffed rates. 2. AT&T petitioned to deny these applications alleging that this service constitutes an unreasonable practice under Section 201 of the Communications Act ("the Act") and may constitute wire fraud. We denied AT&T's petition. On June 10, 1994, AT&T filed a petition for reconsideration asking us to find that uncompleted call signalling is an unreasonable practice under Section 201(b) of the Act, is contrary to the public interest standard of Section 214 of the Act, violates Section 202(a) of the Act, and violates the federal wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C.  1343. 3. We received comments in support of AT&T's petition from MCI Telecommunications Corporation (MCI), Sprint Communications Company L.P. (Sprint), and The Regional Technical Commission on Telecommunications of Central America (COMTELCA) and the National Telecommunications Institute of Panama (INTEL)(collectively referred to as COMTELCA/INTEL). Oppositions to AT&T's petition were filed by VIA USA, Ltd. (VIA USA), Telegroup, Inc. (Telegroup) and the Telecommunication Resellers Association (TRA). 4. Both VIA USA and Telegroup filed motions to strike the comments filed by MCI, Sprint and COMTELCA/INTEL. AT&T, MCI, Sprint and COMTELCA/INTEL opposed the motions to strike the supporting comments. VIA USA and Telegroup argue in their motions that the comments supporting AT&T's petition are untimely, procedurally defective requests for the Commission to reconsider its initial grant of Section 214 authority to the above-captioned applicants. In particular, VIA USA and Telegroup state that Section 1.106(g) of the Commission's Rules only contemplates the filing of "oppositions" to petitions for reconsideration, not comments in support of such petitions. Further, they state that, in addition to repeating and expounding upon AT&T's arguments in its petition, the COMTELCA/INTEL comments raise new issues relating to the legality of call-back services under international law and the law of foreign countries. Alternatively, VIA USA and Telegroup contend that, if we do not grant their motions to strike, we should extend the reply period several months because COMTELCA/INTEL have raised new arguments not previously raised by any party, which significantly expand the scope of the proceeding. 5. The comments supporting AT&T's petition raise issues involving complex questions of international law, international comity and the law of foreign countries. In particular, COMTELCA/INTEL raise the argument that call- back services employing an uncompleted call signaling configuration violate international law, i.e. Article 1.5 and 3.3 of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Regulations. In addition, COMTELCA/INTEL's comments also claim that the applicants may not offer uncompleted call signalling services except pursuant to appropriate operating agreements with foreign telecommunications administrations. Moreover, COMTELCA/INTEL have submitted evidence as to the effect that our authorization of this service may have on international comity. 6. We conclude that the issues raised in the comments supporting AT&T's petition merit examination. Therefore, we will, on our own motion, seek additional comment from the parties and members of the public on all of the issues raised in the comments supporting AT&T's petition. 7. Because we have decided on our own motion to expand the scope of this reconsideration proceeding, we find that the motions to strike the supporting comments of MCI, Sprint and COMTELCA/INTEL are moot. These supporting comments address the issues which we will be examining, and therefore will be made part of the record. We will, however, grant VIA USA's and Telegroup's alternative request that we further extend the period for filing comments. In addition, we will seek the advice of the Department of State regarding the issues of international law, international comity, and the laws of foreign countries. Further, in order to augment the record with respect to AT&T's assertion that uncompleted call signalling violates the federal wire fraud statute, we also will seek the advice of the Department of Justice on this issue. Finally, as noted above, because of the general importance of the issues in this case, we will entertain additional comments from all interested members of the public as well as from the parties to this proceeding. 8. This Section 214 proceeding will continue to be conducted as a non- restricted proceeding in which written and oral ex parte contacts are permitted, but subject to disclosure. See 47 C.F.R.  1206. 9. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the comments of MCI, Sprint and COMTELCA/INTEL are accepted into the record of this proceeding, and Telegroup's and VIA USA's motions to strike the comments ARE DISMISSED as moot. 10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this proceeding is opened to the general public and interested persons are invited to file comments on any of the issues raised in AT&T's petition or the supporting comments by October 14, 1994, and reply comments by November 14, 1994. 11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Secretary shall serve a copy of this Order on each party to this proceeding by certified mail. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William F. Caton Acting Secretary