FCC Web Documents citing 1.1214

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-695A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-695A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-695A1.txt
  • C.F.R. § 73.3587. Station listeners Karen Bush and William McGuinness, IV also filed Informal Objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Their objections were in the form of letters to Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who then forwarded the letters to the Commission. The letters were then served on the parties and placed in the record pursuant to Sections 1.1214(d) and (e) of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. § 1.1214(d), (e). 47 U.S.C. § 310(d). 47 U.S.C. § 309(d)(1). See id.; Astroline Communications Co. v. FCC, 857 F.2d 1556, 1561 (D.C. Cir. 1988). 47 U.S.C. § 309(d)(2). See Petition at 7-14. Id. Petitioners rely on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPRM'') in support of their argument that the format change
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-20A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-20A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-20A1.txt
  • affect other parties' ability to respond to the merits of a dispute'' and that ``future allegations [by Marcus] may, if the facts warrant, be handled in a more summary fashion.'' Marcus accuses OGC of having ``shown a disinterest in enforcing'' the ex parte rules and of taking a ``shoot the messenger'' approach towards Marcus. Marcus observes that 47 C.F.R. § 1.1214 provides that ``Any party to a proceeding or any Commission employee who has substantial reason to believe that any violation of this subpart has been solicited, attempted, or committed shall promptly advise the Office of General Counsel in writing of all the facts and circumstances which are known to him or her.'' Marcus asserts that it should not be criticized
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/anticollusion/releases/da980644.pdf
  • would be resolved on or before August 13, 1997YHigh Plains contended that the alleged conversation constituted an improper ex parte presentation and that High Plains was entitled to full disclosure of the facts and circumstances related to the conversation and an opportunity to respond. High Plains's allegations werereferred to the Office of General Counsel (OGC) for disposition. See 47 C.F.R.5 1.1214, OGC responded: In order to clarify this matter,the Office of General Counsel conducted an inquiry into the relevant facts and circumstances.Commission staff members, including Mr.Phythyon and Chairman Hundt's Chief of Staff, Blair Levin, provided information.They indicate that during the time period in question, Mr. Levin received several inquiries from Congressional Offices as to when action would be taken on the
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2000/98-1516.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2000/98-1516.html
  • As the FCC noted, the petition states that Schoenbohm made the recording on January 17, 1998\emdash si x months before the FCC rendered its original decision on his renewal application. Schoenbohm could have, and under FCC rules should have, submitted this evidence prior to that decision.}{\cs19\super\insrsid744098 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\super\insrsid744098 \chftn }{\fs24\insrsid744098 }{\i\fs22\insrsid744098 See}{\fs22\insrsid744098 47 C.F.R. \'a7 1.1214 ("Any party to a proceeding ... who has substantial reason to believe that any violation of [the ex parte rules] has been solicited, attempted, or committed shall promptly advise the Office of General Counsel in writing of all the facts and circum stances which are known to him or her."); }{\i\fs22\insrsid744098 see also}{\fs22\insrsid744098 47 C.F.R. \'a7 1.65(a) ("Each applicant is
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/echostar-directv/fccextensionletter030702.pdf
  • no later than the next business day following the presentation. Under Section 1.1216, violations of the ex parte rules may result in sanctions, including forfeitures. We admonish the Applicants to comply with the ex parte requirements on a going-forward basis, and caution that future violations will be referred to the Office of General Counsel for further action pursuant to Section 1.1214. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Marcia Glauberman, Policy and Rules Division, Cable Services Bureau, 202-418-7046. Sincerely, W. Kenneth Ferree Chief, Cable Services Bureau 2 Letter to W. Kenneth Ferree, Cable Services Bureau, from Pantelis Michalopoulos and Gary M. Epstein, March 5, 2002. 3 See Commission Emphasizes the Public's Responsibilities in Permit-But-Disclose Proceedings, Public Notice, 15