Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, 37317-37318 [05-12467]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules
compliance or reporting requirements
under the rule for small entities; (3) the
use of performance, rather than design,
standards; and (4) an exemption from
coverage of the rule, or any part thereof,
for small entities.
85. The NPRM specifically seeks
comment on whether the Commission
should expand the scope and
requirements of the rules, recognizing
that such an expansion may not be
appropriate with regard to all VoIP
service providers. With one exception,
the NPRM does not adopt any tentative
conclusions regarding what specific
regulations would apply to any entity,
including small entities. We hereby
specifically seek comment on the effect
the various proposals described in the
NPRM, and summarized above, will
have on small entities, and on what
effect alternative rules would have on
those entities. How can the Commission
achieve its goal of ensuring that all users
of VoIP services ultimately covered by
the Commission’s E911 rules are able to
access ubiquitous and reliable E911
service while also imposing the least
necessary burdens on small entities?
What specific steps could the
Commission take in this regard?
6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rules
86. None.
Ordering Clauses
87. It is ordered that pursuant to the
authority contained in sections 1, 4(i),
4(j), 251(e), and 303(r) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i)–(j),
251(e), 303(r), the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in WC Docket No. 05–196
is adopted.
88. It is further ordered that the
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
including the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05–12827 Filed 6–28–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:26 Jun 28, 2005
Jkt 205250
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket No. 02–278; DA 05–1346]
Rules and Regulations Implementing
the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act of 1991
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; petition for
declaratory ruling, comments requested.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the
Commission seeks comment on a
petition for declaratory ruling filed by a
coalition of 33 organizations, including
trade associations, individual
companies, and non-profit entities
engaged in interstate telemarketing
activities (‘‘Joint Petitioners’’), raising
issues concerning the scope of the
Commission’s jurisdiction over
interstate telemarketing calls under the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act
(‘‘TCPA’’). In particular, Joint Petitioners
ask the Commission to issue a ruling
declaring the Commission’s exclusive
regulatory jurisdiction over interstate
telemarketing calls and barring state
regulation of such calls.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
July 29, 2005, and reply comments are
due on or before August 18, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further
filing instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelli Farmer, Consumer Policy Division,
Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau, (202) 418–2512 (voice),
Kelli.Farmer@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s
document, DA 05–1346, released May
13, 2005. On July 3, 2003, the
Commission released a Report and
Order (2003 TCPA Order) revising its
rules under the TCPA, published at 68
FR 44144, July 25, 2003. In the 2003
TCPA Order, the Commission
determined that it would consider any
alleged conflicts between state and
federal requirements and the need for
preemption on a case-by-case basis.
Accordingly, the Commission instructed
any party that believes a state law is
inconsistent with section 227 of the
Communications Act or the
Commission’s rules to seek a declaratory
ruling from the Commission. This
petition argues that the Commission has
exclusive jurisdiction over interstate
telemarketing rules and need not deal
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37317
with preemption petitions on a case-bycase basis. When filing comments on the
joint petition, please reference CG
Docket No. 02–278, DA 05–1346.
Comments may be filed using the
Commission’s Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper
copies. See Electronic Filing of
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,
63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998. Comments
filed through the ECFS can be sent as an
electronic file via the Internet to
https://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html.
Generally, only one copy of an
electronic submission must be filed. In
completing the transmittal screen,
commenters should include their full
name, U.S. Postal Service mailing
address, and the applicable docket or
rulemaking number. Parties may also
submit an electronic comment by
Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions
for e-mail comments, commenters
should send e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and
should include the following words in
the body of the message, ‘‘get form
.’’ A sample form
and directions will be sent in reply.
Parties who choose to file by paper
must send an original and four (4)
copies of each filing. Filings can be sent
by hand or messenger delivery, by
electronic media, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail
(although the Commission continues to
experience delays in receiving U.S.
Postal Service mail). The Commission’s
contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive
hand-delivered or messenger-delivered
paper filings or electronic media for the
Commission’s Secretary at 236
Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110,
Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours
at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All
hand deliveries must be held together
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes must be disposed of before
entering the building. Commercial and
electronic media sent by overnight mail
(other than U.S. Postal Service Express
Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to
9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol
Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service
first-class mail, Express Mail, and
Priority Mail should be addressed to 445
12th Street, SW., Washington, DC
20554. All filings must be addressed to
the Commission’s Secretary, Marlene H.
Dortch, Office of the Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room TW–B204,
Washington, DC 20554.
This proceeding shall be treated as a
‘‘permit but disclose’’ proceeding in
accordance with the Commission’s ex
parte rules, 47 CFR 1.1200. Persons
making oral ex parte presentations are
reminded that memoranda summarizing
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
37318
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules
the presentations must contain
summaries of the substances of the
presentations and not merely a listing of
the subjects discussed. More than a one
or two sentence description of the views
and arguments presented is generally
required. See 47 CFR 1.1206(b). Other
rules pertaining to oral and written ex
parte presentations in permit-butdisclose proceedings are set forth in
section 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s
rules, 47 CFR 1.1206(b).
The full text of this document and
copies of any subsequently filed
documents in this matter will be
available for public inspection and
copying during regular business hours
at the FCC Reference Information
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554,
(202) 418–0270. This document may be
purchased from the Commission’s
duplicating contractor, Best Copy and
Printing (BCPI), Inc., Portals II, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554. Customers may
contact BCPI, Inc. at their Web site:
https://www.bcpiweb.com or by calling
1–800–378–3160. To request materials
in accessible formats for people with
disabilities (Braille, large print,
electronic files, audio format) send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice) or
(202) 418–0432 (TTY). This document
can also be downloaded in Word or
Portable Document Format (PDF) at
https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/policy.
Synopsis
On April 29, 2005, a coalition of 33
organizations, including trade
associations, individual companies, and
non-profit entities engaged in interstate
telemarketing activities (‘‘Joint
Petitioners’’), filed with the Commission
a joint petition for declaratory ruling.
The joint petition raises issues
concerning the scope of the
Commission’s jurisdiction over
interstate telemarketing calls under the
TCPA. In particular, Joint Petitioners ask
the Commission to issue a ruling
declaring the Commission’s exclusive
regulatory jurisdiction over interstate
telemarketing calls and barring state
regulation of such calls. The
Commission seeks comment on the
issues raised in the joint petition.
Joint Petitioners assert that, in the
TCPA, Congress sought to ‘‘establish
uniform national standards that balance
the concerns of consumers with the
legitimate interests of telemarketers.’’
According to Joint Petitioners, states
have adopted and proposed ‘‘divergent
rules applicable to interstate
telemarketing that undermine the
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:26 Jun 28, 2005
Jkt 205250
desired uniform federal regulatory
regime.’’ Citing dozens of existing and
proposed state laws that differ from the
Commission’s TCPA rules and that do
not distinguish between intrastate and
interstate telemarketing calls, Joint
Petitioners contend that these state
regulations place ‘‘undue and at times
impossible compliance burdens on
interstate telemarketers, and lead state
courts in enforcement actions to * * *
impose substantial fines on
telemarketers for interstate calls
expressly permitted by the federal
rules.’’
To resolve this situation, Joint
Petitioners ask the Commission to
‘‘revisit’’ determinations that it made in
its 2003 TCPA Order concerning ‘‘the
interplay between federal and state
authority’’ over interstate telemarketing
activities and ‘‘clarify that the FCC has
exclusive authority over interstate
telemarketing.’’ Joint Petitioners
contend that the Commission’s conflict
preemption approach to resolving
alleged conflicts between state and
federal telemarketing laws is ‘‘unsound’’
because, in their view, states have no
authority to regulate interstate
telemarketing. Joint Petitioners state that
the Commission’s regulatory authority
under the TCPA must be understood
against the backdrop of pre-existing
federal law governing the regulation of
interstate communications. Specifically,
they assert that Congress: (1) Provided
the Commission with exclusive
jurisdiction over interstate
communications in section 2(a) of the
Communications Act; (2) expanded the
Commission’s authority over intrastate
telemarketing calls in the TCPA
amendments to section 2(b) of the Act;
and thus (3) made clear that it
considered telemarketing to be
‘‘communication’’ covered by section 2
of the Act. Joint Petitioners also take
issue with the Commission’s statement
in its 2003 TCPA Order that section
227(e)(1) of the Act is ‘‘ambiguous’’ as
to whether states may regulate interstate
telemarketing calls, asserting that that
section instead reflects Congress’s desire
to ‘‘(a) expand federal power over
intrastate calls, (b) restrict, but * * *
not eliminate, state authority over such
calls, and (c) * * * not grant to the
states any authority over interstate
calls.’’
Based on the view that Congress
intended the Commission to have
exclusive jurisdiction over interstate
telemarketing calls, Joint Petitioners
contend that the Commission cannot
lawfully delegate that jurisdiction to the
states. Joint Petitioners assert that
‘‘acknowledging the Commission’s
exclusive jurisdiction over interstate
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
telemarketing’’ would not deprive states
of their ability to protect their residents
from unwanted interstate telephone
solicitations. Joint Petitioners note that
the TCPA both allows state attorneys
general to enforce federal telemarketing
rules in federal court and ‘‘preserves the
right of state attorneys general to
proceed in state court against
telemarketers ‘‘on the basis of an alleged
violation of any general civil or criminal
statute of such State’.’’ Thus, Joint
Petitioners contend, the TCPA does not
interfere with state police powers or
long-arm statutes, which are used to
protect consumers generally against
fraud.
If the Commission determines that the
Communications Act, as amended by
the TCPA, does not already bar states
from regulating interstate telemarketing,
Joint Petitioners argue, in the
alternative, that the Commission should
exercise its own authority to
‘‘categorically preempt’’ state regulation
of interstate telemarketing calls. Joint
Petitioners urge the Commission to
categorically preempt all state
regulation of interstate telemarketing on
the basis that such regulation is
‘‘inconsistent with the sound, procompetitive policy of prohibiting
multiple, inconsistent regulation.’’
Federal Communications Commission.
Monica Desai,
Acting Chief, Consumer & Governmental
Affairs Bureau.
[FR Doc. 05–12467 Filed 6–28–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket No. 02–278; DA 05–1347]
Rules and Regulations Implementing
the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act of 1991
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; petition for
declaratory ruling, comments requested.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the
Commission reopens the public
comment period for six declaratory
ruling petitions that seek Commission
preemption under the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act (‘‘TCPA’’) of
the application of particular state laws
to interstate telemarketing calls.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
July 29, 2005, and reply comments are
due on or before August 18, 2005.
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 29, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37317-37318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12467]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket No. 02-278; DA 05-1346]
Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act of 1991
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; petition for declaratory ruling, comments
requested.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission seeks comment on a petition
for declaratory ruling filed by a coalition of 33 organizations,
including trade associations, individual companies, and non-profit
entities engaged in interstate telemarketing activities (``Joint
Petitioners''), raising issues concerning the scope of the Commission's
jurisdiction over interstate telemarketing calls under the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act (``TCPA''). In particular, Joint Petitioners
ask the Commission to issue a ruling declaring the Commission's
exclusive regulatory jurisdiction over interstate telemarketing calls
and barring state regulation of such calls.
DATES: Comments are due on or before July 29, 2005, and reply comments
are due on or before August 18, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further filing
instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelli Farmer, Consumer Policy
Division, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, (202) 418-2512
(voice), Kelli.Farmer@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
document, DA 05-1346, released May 13, 2005. On July 3, 2003, the
Commission released a Report and Order (2003 TCPA Order) revising its
rules under the TCPA, published at 68 FR 44144, July 25, 2003. In the
2003 TCPA Order, the Commission determined that it would consider any
alleged conflicts between state and federal requirements and the need
for preemption on a case-by-case basis. Accordingly, the Commission
instructed any party that believes a state law is inconsistent with
section 227 of the Communications Act or the Commission's rules to seek
a declaratory ruling from the Commission. This petition argues that the
Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over interstate telemarketing
rules and need not deal with preemption petitions on a case-by-case
basis. When filing comments on the joint petition, please reference CG
Docket No. 02-278, DA 05-1346. Comments may be filed using the
Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper
copies. See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,
63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998. Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent
as an electronic file via the Internet to https://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be
filed. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should include
their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the
applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an
electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions for
e-mail comments, commenters should send e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and
should include the following words in the body of the message, ``get
form .'' A sample form and directions will be sent
in reply.
Parties who choose to file by paper must send an original and four
(4) copies of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger
delivery, by electronic media, by commercial overnight courier, or by
first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although the
Commission continues to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal
Service mail). The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive
hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings or electronic media
for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite
110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m.
to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands
or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the
building. Commercial and electronic media sent by overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent
to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal
Service first-class mail, Express Mail, and Priority Mail should be
addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. All filings
must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Marlene H. Dortch,
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room TW-B204, Washington, DC 20554.
This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit but disclose''
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules, 47 CFR
1.1200. Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing
[[Page 37318]]
the presentations must contain summaries of the substances of the
presentations and not merely a listing of the subjects discussed. More
than a one or two sentence description of the views and arguments
presented is generally required. See 47 CFR 1.1206(b). Other rules
pertaining to oral and written ex parte presentations in permit-but-
disclose proceedings are set forth in section 1.1206(b) of the
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1206(b).
The full text of this document and copies of any subsequently filed
documents in this matter will be available for public inspection and
copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC
20554, (202) 418-0270. This document may be purchased from the
Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing (BCPI),
Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC
20554. Customers may contact BCPI, Inc. at their Web site: https://www.bcpiweb.com or by calling 1-800-378-3160. To request materials in
accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print,
electronic files, 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 document can also be downloaded
in Word or Portable Document Format (PDF) at https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/policy.
Synopsis
On April 29, 2005, a coalition of 33 organizations, including trade
associations, individual companies, and non-profit entities engaged in
interstate telemarketing activities (``Joint Petitioners''), filed with
the Commission a joint petition for declaratory ruling. The joint
petition raises issues concerning the scope of the Commission's
jurisdiction over interstate telemarketing calls under the TCPA. In
particular, Joint Petitioners ask the Commission to issue a ruling
declaring the Commission's exclusive regulatory jurisdiction over
interstate telemarketing calls and barring state regulation of such
calls. The Commission seeks comment on the issues raised in the joint
petition.
Joint Petitioners assert that, in the TCPA, Congress sought to
``establish uniform national standards that balance the concerns of
consumers with the legitimate interests of telemarketers.'' According
to Joint Petitioners, states have adopted and proposed ``divergent
rules applicable to interstate telemarketing that undermine the desired
uniform federal regulatory regime.'' Citing dozens of existing and
proposed state laws that differ from the Commission's TCPA rules and
that do not distinguish between intrastate and interstate telemarketing
calls, Joint Petitioners contend that these state regulations place
``undue and at times impossible compliance burdens on interstate
telemarketers, and lead state courts in enforcement actions to * * *
impose substantial fines on telemarketers for interstate calls
expressly permitted by the federal rules.''
To resolve this situation, Joint Petitioners ask the Commission to
``revisit'' determinations that it made in its 2003 TCPA Order
concerning ``the interplay between federal and state authority'' over
interstate telemarketing activities and ``clarify that the FCC has
exclusive authority over interstate telemarketing.'' Joint Petitioners
contend that the Commission's conflict preemption approach to resolving
alleged conflicts between state and federal telemarketing laws is
``unsound'' because, in their view, states have no authority to
regulate interstate telemarketing. Joint Petitioners state that the
Commission's regulatory authority under the TCPA must be understood
against the backdrop of pre-existing federal law governing the
regulation of interstate communications. Specifically, they assert that
Congress: (1) Provided the Commission with exclusive jurisdiction over
interstate communications in section 2(a) of the Communications Act;
(2) expanded the Commission's authority over intrastate telemarketing
calls in the TCPA amendments to section 2(b) of the Act; and thus (3)
made clear that it considered telemarketing to be ``communication''
covered by section 2 of the Act. Joint Petitioners also take issue with
the Commission's statement in its 2003 TCPA Order that section
227(e)(1) of the Act is ``ambiguous'' as to whether states may regulate
interstate telemarketing calls, asserting that that section instead
reflects Congress's desire to ``(a) expand federal power over
intrastate calls, (b) restrict, but * * * not eliminate, state
authority over such calls, and (c) * * * not grant to the states any
authority over interstate calls.''
Based on the view that Congress intended the Commission to have
exclusive jurisdiction over interstate telemarketing calls, Joint
Petitioners contend that the Commission cannot lawfully delegate that
jurisdiction to the states. Joint Petitioners assert that
``acknowledging the Commission's exclusive jurisdiction over interstate
telemarketing'' would not deprive states of their ability to protect
their residents from unwanted interstate telephone solicitations. Joint
Petitioners note that the TCPA both allows state attorneys general to
enforce federal telemarketing rules in federal court and ``preserves
the right of state attorneys general to proceed in state court against
telemarketers ``on the basis of an alleged violation of any general
civil or criminal statute of such State'.'' Thus, Joint Petitioners
contend, the TCPA does not interfere with state police powers or long-
arm statutes, which are used to protect consumers generally against
fraud.
If the Commission determines that the Communications Act, as
amended by the TCPA, does not already bar states from regulating
interstate telemarketing, Joint Petitioners argue, in the alternative,
that the Commission should exercise its own authority to
``categorically preempt'' state regulation of interstate telemarketing
calls. Joint Petitioners urge the Commission to categorically preempt
all state regulation of interstate telemarketing on the basis that such
regulation is ``inconsistent with the sound, pro-competitive policy of
prohibiting multiple, inconsistent regulation.''
Federal Communications Commission.
Monica Desai,
Acting Chief, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau.
[FR Doc. 05-12467 Filed 6-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P