47 C.F.R. § 69.606

Computation of average schedule company payments

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Payments shall be made in accordance with a formula approved or modified by the Commission. Such formula shall be designed to produce disbursements to an average schedule company that simulate the disbursements that would be received by a company that is representative of average schedule companies.

(b) The association shall submit a proposed revision of the formula for each annual period subsequent to December 31, 1986, or certify that a majority of the directors of the association believe that no revisions are warranted for such period on or before December 31 of the preceding year.

(47 U.S.C. 154 (i) and (j), 201, 202, 203, 205, 218 and 403 and 5 U.S.C. 553) [48 FR 10358, Mar. 11, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 41356, Oct. 10, 1985; 55 FR 6990, Feb. 28, 1990; 91 FR 20379, Apr. 16, 2026]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1987–1993 · leading case: City of Brookings Mun. Tel. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 822 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Brookings Mun. Tel. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 822 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1987). · cites it 4× “47 C.F.R. § 69.606 (a) (1986). This rule, in effect, required revision of average schedules to reflect the change in the way cost companies are reimbursed, which for NTS costs is no longer usage-sensitive.”

Icore, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 985 F.2d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 1993). “The Commission in 1983 started to correct the disparity by adopting a new rule, 47 CFR § 69.606 (a) (1991), which in effect required that average schedule companies be compensated under principles paralleling those for cost companies.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.