# DA-06-1100: In the Matter of Teleconununications Relay Services And Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities (05/25/06): In the Matter of Teleconununications Relay Services And Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities

> Federal · Rulings · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_06_1100

## Section

- **Citation:** DA-06-1100: In the Matter of Teleconununications Relay Services And Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities (05/25/06)
- **Heading:** In the Matter of Teleconununications Relay Services And Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Rulings
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** FCC Declaratory Rulings / In the Matter of Teleconununications Relay Services And Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities

## Text

Federal Communications Commission
DA 06-1100
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Teleconununications Relay Services
And Speech-to-Speech Services for
Individuals with Hearing and Speech
Disabilities
CG Docket No. 03-123
DECLARATORY RULING ON RECONSIDERATION
Adopted: May 25,2006
Released: May 25,2006
By the Chief, Consumo- &
Governmental Afhiirs Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1.
On May 16,2006, the Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau released a Declaratory
Ruling' denying a petition filed by Telco Group Inc. (Telco Grorq>),^ which requested that the
Commission either exclude international revenues fiom the end-user revenue base used to calculate
payments due to the Interstate Telecommunications Relay Service^ Fund (Fund), or in the altonative,
waive the portion of Telco Group's contribution based on its international end-user revenues.^ That
Order, however, did not contain an analysis of the conqilete record.' We therefore, on our own motion,
reconsider the merits of the Petition.
'
Teiecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Servicesfor Individuals with Hearing and Speech
Disabilities, CG Docket No. 03-123, Declaratory Rulii^, DA 06-1043 (May 16,2006).
^ Telco Group, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling, or in the Alternative, Petition for Waiver, CG Docket No. 03-
123 (filed July 26,2004) {PetUion).
'
"Teleconmnmications Relay Service" (TRS), created by Title IV of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
(ADA), enables an individual with a hearing or speech disability to communicate by telephone or other device
through the telephone system with a person without such a disability. See 47 U.S.C. § 22S(a)(3) (definite TRS);
47 C.F.R
ver, CG Docket No. 03-
123 (filed July 26,2004) {PetUion).
'
"Teleconmnmications Relay Service" (TRS), created by Title IV of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
(ADA), enables an individual with a hearing or speech disability to communicate by telephone or other device
through the telephone system with a person without such a disability. See 47 U.S.C. § 22S(a)(3) (definite TRS);
47 C.F.R. § 64.601(14); see generally Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Servicesfor
Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CC Dockets 90-571 and 98-67 and CG Docket 03-123, Report
and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Red 12475, at 12479-
12480, para. 3 n.l8 (June 30,2004) {2004 TRS Report &
Order) (discussing how TRS woiks).
* Petition at 1. Further, Telco Group requested a stay of its payment obligation pending the Commission's
decision.
'
The May 16,2006, Declaratory Ruling did not consider reply comments filed by Telco Group in this proceeding.
5962

Federal Communications Commission
DA 06-1100
2.
On reconsideration, we again deny the Petition. For the reasons discussed below, we
find that the inclusion of international end-user revenues in calculating carriers' obligations to the
Interstate TRS Fimd is appropriate. In addition, we are unable to find good cause to waive the portion of
Telco Group's Interstate TRS Fund assessment based on its international services revenue. Because we
address the merits of the Petition, the request for stay is dismissed as moot.
n. BACKGROUND
3.
Title IV of the ADA directs the Commission to ensure that into^te and intrastate
telecommunications relay services are available, to the extent possible and in the most efHcient manner,
to individuals with hearing and speech disabilities in the Unit^ States.^ Section 225 requires the
Commission to establish regulations to ensure the quality of relay service.^ The Commission initially
implemented this mandate in three orders.
4
e Commission to ensure that into^te and intrastate
telecommunications relay services are available, to the extent possible and in the most efHcient manner,
to individuals with hearing and speech disabilities in the Unit^ States.^ Section 225 requires the
Commission to establish regulations to ensure the quality of relay service.^ The Commission initially
implemented this mandate in three orders.
4.
In TRS /, the Commission adopted rules identifying the relay services that carriers
offering voice telephone transmission services must provide to persons with hearing and speech
disabilities and the TRS mandatory minimum standards that govern die provision of service.^ In TRS II,
the Commission adopted a shared funding mechanism for interstate TRS cost recov^, spreading the
cost of providing TRS to all subscribers of every interstate service.' The Commission also proposed that
under tMs mechanism a charge would be assessed on all common carriers that offer interstate
telecommunications services to create the Interstate TRS Fund, and that the providers would be
conqiensated fiom the Fund for providing TRS based on a national average TRS interstate minute of use
rate.'" In TRS III, the Commission established the Interstate TRS Fund, currently administered by the
National Exchange Carrier Association (NECA), to reimburse TRS providers for the costs of providing
interstate TRS." That order also finalized the contribution methodology for payments into the Fund and
defined the interstate services subject to the contribution assessment. The Commission adopted a
regulation providing that "[cjontributions shall be made by all carriers who provide interstate services.
* See generally Pub. L. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327,366-69 (July 26,1990), codified at 47 U.S.C. § 225; see also 47
U.S.C. § 225(b)(1).
'47 U.S.C. § 225(b).
'
See Telecommunications Relay Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, and the
Americans with Disabilities Act of1990, CO Docket No
oviding that "[cjontributions shall be made by all carriers who provide interstate services.
* See generally Pub. L. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327,366-69 (July 26,1990), codified at 47 U.S.C. § 225; see also 47
U.S.C. § 225(b)(1).
'47 U.S.C. § 225(b).
'
See Telecommunications Relay Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, and the
Americans with Disabilities Act of1990, CO Docket No. 90-571, Report and Order and Request for Comments, 6
FCC Red 4657 (July 26,1991) (TRS I); see 47 CJ.R. § 64.604 (the TRS "mandatory minimum standards").
Q
See Telecommunications Servicesfor Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, and the Americans with
Disabilities Act of1990, CC Docket No. 90-571, Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and Order, and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 8 FCC Red 1802, 1805-1806, at paras. 19-27 (Feb. 25,1993) (TRSII). Under
Section 225(d)(3), the Commission's regulations governing the jurisdictional separation of costs shall generally
provide that the costs caused by interstate TRS shall be recovered fiom all subscribers to every interstate service,
and the costs caused by intrastate TRS shall be recovered by the states. 47 U.S.C. § 225(d)(3).
TRSII, 8 FCC Red at 1806, paras. 23-26.
'' See Telecommunications Services, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of1990, CC Docket No. 90-571,
Third Report and Order, 8 FCC Red 5300 (July 20,1993) (JRS HI).
5963

Federal Communications Commission
DA 06-1100
»12
including, but not limited to... international... services;
5.
In its Petition, Telco Group requests that the Commission exclude international revenues
from the revenue base used to calculate payments due to the Interstate TRS Fund, "at least for those
carriers whose international revenues con:q)rise a significant portion of their total interstate and
international revenues," or in the altemative, find good cause to waive Telco Group's obligations to the
Fund that are based on its international revenues.*'
6
mission exclude international revenues
from the revenue base used to calculate payments due to the Interstate TRS Fund, "at least for those
carriers whose international revenues con:q)rise a significant portion of their total interstate and
international revenues," or in the altemative, find good cause to waive Telco Group's obligations to the
Fund that are based on its international revenues.*'
6.
Telco Group Ttiaintains that such relief is warranted because, in what Telco Group argues
is an analogous case involving the Universal Service Fund (USF), the United States Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit required the Commission to revisit the USF assessment on tire international services
revenue of a provider of primarily international services and de minimis interstate services.'* The Court
foimd that requiring a carrier to pay an assessment on its international services revenue that exceeded the
carrier's total interstate revraiue violated the equitable and nondiscriminatory contribution requirement of
the Universal Service statute. Section 254 of the Communications Act of 1934 (Act), as amoided."
Although the Interstate TRS Fund is governed by Section 225 of the Act, rather than Section 254, Telco
Group argues that the Interstate TRS Fxmd contribution rules also are "designed to be equitable and
nondiscriminatory" and, therefore, the relief afforded in TOPUC should be extended to TRS." Telco
Group argues that its circumstance is comparable to the TOPUC plaintifFbecause the "vast majority" of
Telco Group's revenues -
approximately 96 percent" — are derived fiom international services
Telco
Group argues that the Interstate TRS Fxmd contribution rules also are "designed to be equitable and
nondiscriminatory" and, therefore, the relief afforded in TOPUC should be extended to TRS." Telco
Group argues that its circumstance is comparable to the TOPUC plaintifFbecause the "vast majority" of
Telco Group's revenues -
approximately 96 percent" — are derived fiom international services.
Moreover, Telco Groiq) argues the public interest will be served by granting the requested relief because
it will ensure Telco Group "remains as a viable con^etitor in the market for interstate services."" Telco
Group adds that the "high payment obligations also hinder Telco Groiqj's ability to concrete outside the
United States, and so contradict the Commission's efforts to promote and encourage conqretition in the
international and interstate markets.""
*^ 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(c)(5)(iiiKA); see also TRS III, 8 FCC Red at 5306, para. 33 (ordering clause adopting rule
amendments set forth in Appendix B); Telecommunications Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech
Disabilities, Recommended TRS Cost Recovery Guidelines, CC Docket No. 98-67, Memorandum Opinion and
Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 16 FCC Red 22948,22949-22950, para. 2
(Dec. 21,2001)
(noting that TRS III required "that every carrier providing interstate telecommunications services contribute to the
TRS Fund on the basis of... interstate and international revenues").
"
Petition at 1.
'* Id. at 3 (citing Texas Office of the Public Utility Counsel v. FCC, 183 F.3d 393 (5'*' Cir. 1999) {TOPUC)).
"
TOPUC, 183 F.3d at 434-435; see 47 U.S.C. § 254(b)(4).
"
Petition at 4.
Id. at3.
Id. at 9.
"
Id. at 9-10 (citii^ 2000 Biennial Regulatory Review -
Policies and Procedures Concerning the International,
Interexchange Marketplace, IB Docket No. 02-202, Report and Order, 16 FCC Red 10647 (March 20, 2001)).
5964
Office of the Public Utility Counsel v. FCC, 183 F.3d 393 (5'*' Cir. 1999) {TOPUC)).
"
TOPUC, 183 F.3d at 434-435; see 47 U.S.C. § 254(b)(4).
"
Petition at 4.
Id. at3.
Id. at 9.
"
Id. at 9-10 (citii^ 2000 Biennial Regulatory Review -
Policies and Procedures Concerning the International,
Interexchange Marketplace, IB Docket No. 02-202, Report and Order, 16 FCC Red 10647 (March 20, 2001)).
5964

Federal Communications Commission
DA 06-1100
7.
On October 25,2004, the Telco Group Petition was place on Public Notice.^" Two
oppositions were filed, one fiom a carrier and one from an organization representing the deaf
community.^' Telco Group filed reply comments.^
in. DISCUSSION
8.
Telco Group's Petition is premised on the congruence between Section 254 of the Act,
which establishes Universal Service requirements, and Section 225 of the Act, which establishes
requirements for the provision of TRS. Sections 254 and 225, however, differ in fundamental and, in this
case, dispositive ways. Unlike USE assessments, contributions to the Interstate TRS Fund are used, in
part, to reimburse international relay calls. Therefore, in this case, the public interest lies in ensuring
adequate fimding for interstate TRS -
including international TRS - by assessing contributions on as
broad a revenue base as can be justified. Accordingly, Telco Group's request that the Commission
exclude international revraiues frnm the end-user revenue base used to calculate payments due to the
Interstate TRS Fimd is denied. Because Telco Group has not demonstrated why individualized relief is
appropriate, the conqrany's request for waiver of the interstate TRS assessment on international services
revenue is also denied.
9.
Unlike the Universal Service Fund, which does not directly support international services
but only may be used only to support domestic services, the Interstate TRS Fu^ is used to support
international TRS.^' Therefore, imlike the USE assessments at issue in TOPUC, excluding international
Telco Group. Inc
waiver of the interstate TRS assessment on international services
revenue is also denied.
9.
Unlike the Universal Service Fund, which does not directly support international services
but only may be used only to support domestic services, the Interstate TRS Fu^ is used to support
international TRS.^' Therefore, imlike the USE assessments at issue in TOPUC, excluding international
Telco Group. Inc. Files Petition for Declaratory Ruling or Waiver to Exclude International Revenuesfrom the
Revenue Base Used to Calculate Payment to the Interstate TRS Fund, CC Docket No. 98-67, Public Notice, 19
FCC Red 20965 (Oct. 25,2004).
Comments were filed by MCI (MCI)
(Nov. 26,2004) and Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc. (TDI)
(Nov.
24,2004). Late filed comments were filed by Globecomm Systems, Inc. ("GSI") on February 14,2006. On that
same date, GSI also filed a petition for declaratory ruling that there is no obligation to pay into the Interstate TRS
Fund based on revenues arising from traffic that does not originate or terminate in the United States. Globecomm
Systems, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling (filed Feb. 14,2006). Because the issue in the GSI petition —
whether certain calls should be considered international calls -
is distinct from the issue raised in Telco Group's
Petition, we will address GSI's petition in a separate order.
^
Reply of Telco Group, Inc. to Oppositions to Telco Group's Petition for Declaratory Ruling, or in the
Alternative, Petition for Waiver (filed Dec. 10,2004, in CC Docket No. 98-67).
^ TRS I Order, 6 FCC Red at 4660-4661, para. 18 (discussit^ comments that relay services should relay
international calls that originate or terminate in the United States provided that equipment of the foreign country is
conqiatible with U.S. equipment); TRS HI Order, 8 FCC Red at 5301, para. 9 n. 14 (in adopting rule requiring
contributions to the Fund to be based on, inter alia, international services
I Order, 6 FCC Red at 4660-4661, para. 18 (discussit^ comments that relay services should relay
international calls that originate or terminate in the United States provided that equipment of the foreign country is
conqiatible with U.S. equipment); TRS HI Order, 8 FCC Red at 5301, para. 9 n. 14 (in adopting rule requiring
contributions to the Fund to be based on, inter alia, international services. Commission notes Sprint's argument
"that international services should be included because TRS providers will be compensated by the administrator for
international TRS minutes of use"). IP Relay service is an exception to this rule. See, e.g.. Telecommunications
Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Servicesfor Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CC Docket
No. 98-67, Order, 19 FCC Red 12224,12242, at para. 48 n.l21 (June 30,2004) (noting that the Fund "does not
currently reimburse providers for the costs of providing international calls via IP Relay"); Telecommunications
Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CC Docket
No. 98-67, Order, 18 FCC Red 12823,12837, at para. 42 (June 30,2003) (noting that in March 2003 NECA was
directed to suspend payment to TRS providers for international IP Relay service minutes); see also 2004 TRS
Report &
Order, 19 FCC Red at 12525, para. 129 (noting that although Fund does not pay for international IP
Relay service calls, it does pay for international Video Relay Service calls).
5965
8-67, Order, 18 FCC Red 12823,12837, at para. 42 (June 30,2003) (noting that in March 2003 NECA was
directed to suspend payment to TRS providers for international IP Relay service minutes); see also 2004 TRS
Report &
Order, 19 FCC Red at 12525, para. 129 (noting that although Fund does not pay for international IP
Relay service calls, it does pay for international Video Relay Service calls).
5965

Federal Communications Commission
DA 06-1100
revenues from the revenue base used for calculating TRS contributions would not serve the public
interest. With the TRS Fund, it is not the case -
as in TOPUC -
that a provider of only de minimis
interstate service may be required to bear a disproportionately heavy burden in subsidizing the provision
of such services by other carriers. Contributions to the Interstate TRS Fund based on Telco Group's
international services revenue can, in turn, be used to subsidize intmiational TRS. Moreover, Telco
Group is required to contribute the same percentage of its interstate and international revenues to the
Interstate TRS Fund as other carriers that provide both interstate and international services. Therefore,
this approach is both equitable and nondiscriminatory,^^ even as applied to an entity like Telco Group
that may largely have international revenues.^'
10.
In any event, TOPUC is specifically based on the equitable and nondiscriminatory
contribution requirement of Section 254.^^ Section 225, however, contains no such express requirement.
In the absence of such language, and particularly because international services are supported by the
Interstate TRS Fund, the Commission is not bound by the TOPUC decision to reduce or eliminate
Interstate TRS Fund assessments on international services for Telco Grotq) or similarly situated
providers.^' Accordingly, Telco Group's request for a declaratory ruling excluding international services
revenue from the interstate contribution base is denied.^^
Opposition of MCI at 3
are supported by the
Interstate TRS Fund, the Commission is not bound by the TOPUC decision to reduce or eliminate
Interstate TRS Fund assessments on international services for Telco Grotq) or similarly situated
providers.^' Accordingly, Telco Group's request for a declaratory ruling excluding international services
revenue from the interstate contribution base is denied.^^
Opposition of MCI at 3. As MCI notes, "it would be discriminatoiy if Telco Group, and other internationally-
oriented carriers, were allowed to exclude international revenues from the TRS contribution base. CQnq>anies such
as MCI, vdio also earn international revenues by providing international prepaid calling services, as well as other
international services, would be required to conq)ete against conqranies who would have been granted a
discriminatory cost advantage were the Commission to grant Telco Groiqr's request" Id.
^
See Telco Reply Comments at 2-3 (arguing that the TRS funding mechanism is not equitable and
nondiscriminatory as applied to Telco Group because it must pay a high proportion of its "U.S. interstate revenues
into the TRS Fund").
^
Section 254 states that "[a]ll providers of telecommunications services should make an equitable and
nondiscriminatory contribution to the preservation and advancement of universal service." 47 U.S.C. § 254(b)(4).
The Court found that requiring COMSAT, a satellite provider of primarily international services along with de
minimis interstate service offerings, to contribute to the Universal Service Fund based on its international services
revenues was inequitable and discriminatory given that COMSAT's contribution based on international services
revenue would exceed the conq)any's total interstate revenues. The Court stated that "the agency's interpretation
of 'equitable and nondiscrimiiutory,' allowing it to impose prohibitive costs on carriers such as COMSAT,
is
'arbitrary and capricious'..
nd based on its international services
revenues was inequitable and discriminatory given that COMSAT's contribution based on international services
revenue would exceed the conq)any's total interstate revenues. The Court stated that "the agency's interpretation
of 'equitable and nondiscrimiiutory,' allowing it to impose prohibitive costs on carriers such as COMSAT,
is
'arbitrary and capricious'... [because] COMSAT and carriers like it will contribute more in universal service
payments than they will generate from interstate service." TOPUC, 183 F.3d at 434-435.
With respect to contributions, the only limiting lai^uage of Section 225 is jurisdictional in nature. See 47
U.S.C. § 225(d)(3) (addressing jurisdictional separation of costs). Telco Group also suggests that even if TOPUC
does not tqrply in the TRS context, the Commission has the discretion to ^ly a similar rule for TRS. Telco Reply
Comments at 4. The issue presented is not, however, whether the Coimnission could apply the TOPUC principle
to TRS, but vdiether the rule the Commission did adopt for TRS (requiring payments into the Fund based on
international revenues) is reasonable and in the public interest.
Telco Groiq) also asserts that because it does not receive any TRS frinds, and does minimal business in the
United States, it should not have to pay into the Fund based on international revenues "in return for 'benefits'
largely and primarily enjoyed by other carriers." Telco Reply Comments at 3-4. The obligation to pay into the
Fund, however, is not tied to particular benefits contributors may receive from the Fimd. Under the rules, a broad
range of interstate telecommunications carriers are required to pay into the Fund, regardless of vbether they also
(continued....)
5966
onal revenues "in return for 'benefits'
largely and primarily enjoyed by other carriers." Telco Reply Comments at 3-4. The obligation to pay into the
Fund, however, is not tied to particular benefits contributors may receive from the Fimd. Under the rules, a broad
range of interstate telecommunications carriers are required to pay into the Fund, regardless of vbether they also
(continued....)
5966

Federal Communications Commission
DA 06-1100
11.
Telco Groin's request for waiver of the interstate TRS assessment on its international
services revenue is also denied. Although the Commission may waive a provision of its rules for "good
cause shown,"^' Telco Groiq)'s argument rests on the fact that a high percent of its revenues derive from
international services and therefore its TRS payment is substantially Ugher that it would be if
international revenues were not included and burdensome.'® As noted above, however, because the Fund
supports both international and interstate TRS, TRS assessments are based on both international and
interstate revenues, and the fact that some contributors have relatively more international revenues, or
more interstate revenues, is not relevant to ensuring adequate funding for these services.
rv. ORDERING CLAUSES
12.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in Section 225 of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 225, and Sections 0.141,0.361, and 1.108 of
the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.141,0.361, and 1.108, iHsis Declaratory Ruling on
Reconsideration IS hereby ADOPTED.
13.
To request materials in accessible formats (such as Braille, large print, electronic files, or
audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau
at (202) 418-0530 (voice) or (202) 418-0432 (TTY). This Order can also be downloaded in Word and
Portable Document Formats (PDF)
at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb.dro.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Monica S
To request materials in accessible formats (such as Braille, large print, electronic files, or
audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau
at (202) 418-0530 (voice) or (202) 418-0432 (TTY). This Order can also be downloaded in Word and
Portable Document Formats (PDF)
at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb.dro.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Monica S. Desai, Chief
Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau
(Continued from previous page)
;
provide relay services paid for by the Fund or otherwise "benefit" directly fiom the provision of relay service. See
47 C.F.R. § 64.604(c)(5XiiiKA).
^'47C.F.R.§ l.y, see generally 2004 TRS Report & Order, 19 FCC Red at 12520, para. 110 (discussing standard
for waiving Commission rules).
^
Petition at 9-10.
5967

## Nearby sections

- [DA-00-1341: A&E Television Networks For Declaratory Ruling (06/20/00) A&E Television Networks For Declaratory Ruling](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_00_1341.md)
- [DA-01-2234: Request for Declaratory Ruling Removing the Commission's Minimum Carrier Tone Requirement for OFDM Modulation in the Multipoint Distribution and Instructional Television Fixed Services (09/26/01) Request for Declaratory Ruling Removing the Commission's Minimum Carrier Tone Requirement for OFDM Modulation in the Multipoint Distribution and Instructional Television Fixed Services](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_01_2234.md)
- [DA-01-2871: Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan (12/11/01) Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_01_2871.md)
- [DA-02-765: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS AND ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS' EMERGENCY PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OR CLARIFICATION OF BROADCAST CARRIAGE RULES FOR SATELLITE CARRIERS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 76.66 (04/04/02) NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS AND ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS' EMERGENCY PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OR CLARIFICATION OF BROADCAST CARRIAGE RULES FOR SATELLITE CARRIERS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 76.66](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_02_765.md)
- [DA-02-2078: Time-Telepictures Television (08/26/02) Time-Telepictures Television](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_02_2078.md)
- [DA-03-2865: INFINITY BROADCASTING OPERATIONS INC (09/09/03) INFINITY BROADCASTING OPERATIONS INC](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_03_2865.md)
- [DA-03-4108: Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Petition for Revocation of Certification Request for Expedited Consideration (01/06/04) Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Petition for Revocation of Certification Request for Expedited Consideration](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_03_4108.md)
- [DA-04-970: List of Foreign Telecommunications Carriers that Are Presumed to Possess Market Power in Foreign Telecommunications Markets (04/08/04) List of Foreign Telecommunications Carriers that Are Presumed to Possess Market Power in Foreign Telecommunications Markets](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_970.md)
- [DA-04-3201: Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies (10/06/04) Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_3201.md)
- [DA-04-3576: Thrifty Call, Inc. Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning BellSouth Tariff F.C.C. No. 1 (11/12/04) Thrifty Call, Inc. Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning BellSouth Tariff F.C.C. No. 1](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_3576.md)
- [DA-05-140: Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities (01/26/05) Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_140.md)
- [DA-05-148: CLARIFICATION OF RECONSIDERATION PERIOD AND EFFECTIVE DATE FOR TERMINATIONS OF WIRELESS RADIO SERVICE AUTHORIZATIONS (01/21/05) CLARIFICATION OF RECONSIDERATION PERIOD AND EFFECTIVE DATE FOR TERMINATIONS OF WIRELESS RADIO SERVICE AUTHORIZATIONS](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_148.md)
- [DA-05-1618: Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (06/09/05) Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_1618.md)
- [DA-05-1667: Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (06/15/05) Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_1667.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_06_1100. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.