$// Ord. on Recon., AT&T v. MCI, File No. E-89-297, FCC  94-353 //$
$/  47 U.S.C.  208 Complaints to the Commission,  409 Provisions relating to
     Proceedings - Witnesses and Depositions /$
               
                                Before the
                     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                          Washington, D.C.  20554
               
In the Matter of    )
               )
AT&T COMMUNICATIONS,)
               )
     Complainants,                  )    
               )
          v.   )  File No. E-89-297
               )
MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION, )
               )
     Defendant.)

                         ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

               Adopted: December 28, 1994;  Released: February 10, 1995

By the Commission:

          1.  MCI Telecommunications Corporation (MCI), pursuant to Section 1.106 of
the Commission's rules, requests reconsideration of the Commission's finding  that MCI
violated Section 203 of the Communications Act (the "Act"), as interpreted by the court in
AT&T v. FCC.

          2.  MCI argues that the Commission should reconsider its finding that MCI
violated Section 203 because: (1) it is contrary to the Commission's decision in CC Docket
No. 92-13 which reaffirmed and codified its permissive detariffing rules;  and (2) it is based
on a court decision that was still subject to further judicial review at the time MCI  filed its
petition.    MCI contends the Commission's finding of a violation was premature and 



unnecessary for purposes of conducting the remand proceeding ordered by the Court in AT&T
v. FCC.  

          3.  In its Opposition, AT&T notes that on June 4, 1993, the court summarily
reversed the Commission's Rulemaking Order as contrary to Section 203.  AT&T argues that
although the AT&T v. FCC decision may be subject to further judicial review, that
circumstance alone does not relieve agencies of their obligation to obey a Court's mandate.

          4.  We deny MCI's petition.  Its arguments are baseless.  First, the Commission
was required to apply the Court's mandate in AT&T v. FCC regardless of the views expressed
in the Rulemaking Order (which, in any event, the Commission had stayed in light of the AT&T
v. FCC decision).  Second, the fact that the AT&T v. FCC decision was subject to possible
further Supreme Court review did not effect its enforceability in the interim.  In any event, the
Supreme Court has denied certiorari of that decision and recently the Court affirmed the Court
of Appeals' reversal of our Rulemaking Order.  Our prior decision was appropriate, and
timely.

          5. We note, however, that, although it is now settled that MCI is required under
the Act to file tariffs, it was the Commission itself that earlier determined that MCI and other
nondominant carriers need not file tariffs.  Subsequent judicial rulings have overturned the
Commission's determinations on this issue, and we have no choice but to reaffirm that MCI's
failure to file tariffs violated the Communications Act.      







     6. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 208, and 409 of the
Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  4(i), 208, 409 and Section 1.106 of the
Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.106, that the petition for reconsideration filed by MCI
Telecommunications Corporation IS DENIED. 



               FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



               William F. Caton
               Acting Secretary