********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect to ASCII Text format.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************
                            Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                      Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of                   )
                                   )
WILTEL, INC.,                      )
                                   )
            Complainant,           )
                                        )           
                   v.                             )              
                                   )         
BELL ATLANTIC TELEPHONE COMPANIES, )         File No. E-94-1
EAST ASCENSION TELEPHONE COMPANY,  )         File No. E-94-7 
ENTERPRISE TELEPHONE COMPANY, and  )         File No. E-94-8          
SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE        )         File No. E-94-14
COMPANY,                           )    
                                   )
           Defendants.             )
                                   )


                             ORDER


   Adopted:  May 1,  1997               Released:  May  2, 1997


By the Chief, Formal Complaints and Investigations Branch, Enforcement Division, Common
Carrier Bureau:


     1.   On October 5, 1993, WilTel, Inc. (now a wholly-owned subsidiary of WorldCom)
filed the above captioned complaints, alleging violations of Commission rules and Section 201(b)
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  201(b).  WilTel claimed that Bell
Atlantic Telephone Companies (Bell Atlantic), Enterprise Telephone Company (Enterprise),
Southwestern Telephone Company (SWBT), and East Ascension Telephone Company (East
Ascension), among others, were charging nonrecurring charges that resulted in double recovery in
meet point billing of interstate switched access trunking arrangements.   WilTel requested an order
prohibiting future double billing and awarding damages for alleged overcharges.  

     2.   WorldCom has subsequently filed requests to withdraw its complaints against the
aforementioned companies.  On June 24, 1996, WorldCom filed a motion to withdraw its complaint
against Bell Atlantic, with prejudice.   In its motion, WorldCom indicated that "the withdrawal of
the complaint will serve the public interest by eliminating the need for the expenditure of further
time by WorldCom, Bell Atlantic and this Commission."  On March 13, 1997, WorldCom and
Frontier Corporation (formerly known as Enterprise Telephone Company) jointly filed a motion
requesting that the Commission dismiss WorldCom's complaint, stating that "[t]he parties wish to
avoid continued litigation and have reached a mutually acceptable settlement agreement."  They
request that the Commission dismiss the complaint, without prejudice, pursuant to the provisions
of their agreement and thereafter, with prejudice.   On April 7, 1997, WorldCom filed a request to
withdraw its complaint, without prejudice, against SWBT indicating that "Worldcom has decided
to dismiss its complaint against SWBT."  On April 11, 1997, WorldCom and East Ascension
Telephone Company jointly filed a motion requesting that the Commission dismiss WorldCom's
complaint, without prejudice, pursuant to the provisions of their agreement and thereafter, with
prejudice.  In their joint motion they state that they "wish to avoid continued litigation and have
reached a mutually acceptable settlement agreement." 

     3.   We are satisfied that granting, in part, WorldCom's requests to withdraw and to
dismiss its complaints will serve the public interest by eliminating the need for further litigation and
the expenditure of further time and resources by the parties and by the Commission.   In dismissing
these complaints, we reach no conclusions on the terms of the settlement agreements.  Moreover,
we conclude that WorldCom has not presented sufficient grounds to show that dismissal without
prejudice would serve the public interest.   We therefore dismiss the complaints with prejudice.  

     4.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 208 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i), 154(j), 208, and the authority
delegated in Sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291, that
WorldCom's Motions to Withdraw and for Voluntary Dismissal of the above-captioned complaints
ARE GRANTED to the extent indicated herein.

     5.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned complaints ARE 
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and that these proceedings ARE TERMINATED.




                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                              Kurt A. Schroeder
                              Chief, Formal Complaints and
                              Investigations Branch
                              Enforcement Division
                              Common Carrier Bureau