PUBLIC NOTICE
     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
     1919 M STREET N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554
     News media information 202/418-0500  Recorded listing of
releases and texts 202/418-2222.
    
______________________________________________________________

                                                                
DA  97-864 
                                                            
April 23, 1997


     ALTS'S MOTION TO DISMISS SBC COMMUNICATIONS INC.'S
APPLICATION FOR SECTION 271 AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE IN-REGION,
INTERLATA SERVICE IN THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
                         (CC DOCKET NO. 97-121)

On April 23, 1997, the Association for Local Telecommunications
Services (ALTS) filed a document entitled "Motion to Dismiss"
which asks the Commission to dismiss SBC Communications, Inc.'s
(SBC's) recently filed application for authorization under
section 271 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, to
provide in-region, interLATA service in the State of Oklahoma. 
On April 11, 1997, SBC filed its application and the Common
Carrier Bureau issued a Public Notice that, inter alia,
established a procedural schedule for the SBC application. 
Pursuant to this schedule, comments are due from interested
parties on or before May 1, 1997.

In its application, SBC represents that Brooks Fiber Properties,
Inc. (Brooks Fiber) is a facilities-based competitor as described
in section 271(c)(1)(A).  Specifically, it represents that
Brooks Fiber is presently providing local exchange service to
both business and residential customers.   SBC does not assert
that there is any other facilities-based competitor as
described in section 271(c)(1)(A) in Oklahoma.   

ALTS's motion to dismiss challenges the assertion that Brooks
Fiber is providing residential local exchange service in
Oklahoma.  It includes an affidavit, dated April 21, 1997, from
an officer of Brooks Fiber, who states that "Brooks is not now
offering residential service in Oklahoma, nor has it ever offered
residential service in Oklahoma."  ALTS also argues SBC
is precluded from filing under section 271(c)(1)(B) because there
have been "interconnection requests" in Oklahoma.  Thus, ALTS
argues that SBC's application should be dismissed.

We seek comment, on an expedited basis, on the issues raised in
ALTS's motion by interested third parties, including SBC, by
April 28, 1997.  All other comment dates established in the
April 11th Public Notice remain in effect.

In commenting on the issues raised in ALTS's motion, parties
should address in detail their legal theory of when a BOC is
permitted to file under section 271(c)(1)(B) and when a BOC
is foreclosed from proceeding under section 271(c)(1)(B). 
Parties should address, among other things, the nature of the
"request" that is referred to in section 271(c)(1)(B) and whether
and when SBC has received such a request from Brooks Fiber or any
other carrier in Oklahoma.  Parties should provide in detail the
factual basis for any assertion that such a request has been
made.  Parties should also address SBC's apparent suggestion that
no competitive local exchange carrier qualified as a requesting
carrier under section 271(c)(1)(B) until Brooks commenced
providing local exchange service on January 15, 1997. 

By the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau

News Media contact:  Rochelle Cohen (202) 418-1500.
FCC Common Carrier Bureau contact:  Craig J. Brown (202)
418-1580.


                                  - FCC -