[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 44 (Thursday, March 6, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10221-10222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5498]


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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 53

[CC Docket No. 96-149; FCC 96-489]


Implementation of the Non-Accounting Safeguards of Sections 271 
and 272 of the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended; Final rule; 
Correction

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; Correction.

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

SUMMARY: This documents contains corrections to the final regulations 
which were published Tuesday, January 21, 1997 (62 FR 2927). The 
regulations related to special provisions relating to Bell Operating 
Companies.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 6, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Di Scipio (202) 418-1580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The final regulations that are the subject of these corrections 
affect Bell Operating Companies.

Need for correction

    As published, the final regulations contain errors which may prove 
to be misleading and are in need of clarification. Accordingly, the 
publication on January 21, 1997 of the final regulations (FCC 97-52) is 
corrected as follows:
    1. On page 2939, in the second column, the first indented paragraph 
is replaced by the following:
    We note that, under Computer II and Computer III, we have treated 
three categories of protocol processing services as basic services, 
rather than enhanced services. These categories include protocol 
processing: (1) involving communications between an end user and the 
network itself (e.g., for initiation, routing, and termination of 
calls) rather than between or among users; (2) in connection with the 
introduction of a new basic network technology (which requires protocol 
conversion to maintain compatibility with existing CPE); and (3) 
involving internetworking (conversions taking place solely within the 
carrier's network to facilitate provision of a basic network service, 
that result in no net conversion to the end user). We agree with PacTel 
that analogous treatment should be extended to these categories of 
protocol processing services under the statutory regime. Because the 
listed protocol processing services are information service 
capabilities used ``for the management, control, or operation of a 
telecommunications system or the management of a telecommunications 
service,'' they are excepted from the statutory definition of 
information service. These excepted protocol conversion services 
constitute telecommunications services, rather than information 
services, under the 1996 Act.
    2. On page 2940, column 3, the first indented paragraph is replaced 
by the following:
    Remote Databases/Network Efficiency. BOCs may not provide interLATA 
services in their own regions, either over their own facilities or 
through resale, before receiving authorization from the Commission 
under section 271(d). Therefore, we conclude that BOCs may not provide 
interLATA information services, except for those designated as 
incidental interLATA services under section 271(g), in any of their in-
region states prior to obtaining section 271 authorization. Section 
271(g)(4) designates as an incidental interLATA service the interLATA 
provision by a BOC or its affiliate of ``a service that permits a 
customer that is located in one

[[Page 10222]]

LATA to retrieve stored information from, or file information for 
storage in, information storage facilities of such company that are 
located in another LATA.'' Because BOCs were able to provide incidental 
interLATA services immediately upon enactment of the 1996 Act, they may 
provide interLATA information services that fall within the scope of 
section 271(g)(4) without receiving section 271(d) authorization from 
the Commission. Since section 271(g)(4) services are not among the 
incidental interLATA services exempted from section 272 separate 
affiliate requirements, however, they must be provided in compliance 
with those requirements. To the extent that parties have argued in the 
record that centralized data storage and retrieval services that fall 
within section 271(g)(4) either are not interLATA information services, 
or are not subject to the section 272 separate affiliate requirements, 
we specifically reject these arguments.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-5498 Filed 3-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P