********************************************************    
                         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                     )
                                     )
Procedures for Bell Operating Company) 
Applications under Section 271 of the)
Communications Act of 1934, as amended)
                                     )



                                  ORDER


   Adopted: February 4, 1998                  Released:  February 4, 1998  


By the Chief, Policy and Program Planning Division, Common Carrier Bureau:


 1.   On March 4, 1997, AT&T filed a Motion to Modify Procedures for Section
271 Applications.  In its Motion, AT&T requested that the Commission impose a
moratorium on "presentations by the [Bell Operating Company] during the period
commencing with the filing of its [section 271] application, through the date for comments by
interested third parties -- 'approximately twenty days' under the Commission's existing
procedures." 

 2.   On December 9, 1997, AT&T filed a letter withdrawing its Motion, without
prejudice.  In its letter, AT&T noted that since it filed its Motion, the Commission had
issued its order denying Ameritech's section 271 application to provide in-region, interLATA
services in Michigan.  According to AT&T, the Commission reaffirmed in the Ameritech
Michigan Order that a BOC is required to include as part of its application all facts and
arguments upon which the BOC relies, and that no weight will be given to late-filed evidence
or arguments submitted in violation of the Commission's requirements.  AT&T further
stated that it "is hopeful that the measures adopted in the Ameritech Michigan Order will
prevent the abuses of the ex parte process that were the subject of AT&T's Motion, and that
the relief sought by the Motion will no longer be necessary."  Accordingly, we dismiss
AT&T's Motion to Modify Procedures to Section 271 Applications.

 3.   IT IS ORDERED that AT&T's Motion to Modify Procedures for Section 271
Applications IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

      
      FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION



      Carol E. Mattey
      Chief
      Policy and Programming Division
      Common Carrier Bureau