47 U.S.C. § 410

Joint boards and commissions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 47 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) State joint boards; reference of communication matters; composition; jurisdiction, powers, duties, and obligations; conduct of proceedings; force and effect of joint board action; members: nomination, appointment, and rejection; allowances for expenses

Except as provided in section 409 of this title, the Commission may refer any matter arising in the administration of this chapter to a joint board to be composed of a member, or of an equal number of members, as determined by the Commission, from each of the States in which the wire or radio communication affected by or involved in the proceeding takes place or is proposed. For purposes of acting upon such matter any such board shall have all the jurisdiction and powers conferred by law upon an examiner provided for in section 3105 of title 5, designated by the Commission, and shall be subject to the same duties and obligations. The action of a joint board shall have such force and effect and its proceedings shall be conducted in such manner as the Commission shall by regulations prescribe. The joint board member or members for each State shall be nominated by the State commission of the State or by the Governor if there is no State commission, and appointed by the Federal Communications Commission. The Commission shall have discretion to reject any nominee. Joint board members shall receive such allowances for expenses as the Commission shall provide.

(b) State commissions; conferences with Commission regarding matters of carriers subject to their jurisdiction; joint hearings; cooperation with Commission

The Commission may confer with any State commission having regulatory jurisdiction with respect to carriers, regarding the relationship between rate structures, accounts, charges, practices, classifications, and regulations of carriers subject to the jurisdiction of such State commission and of the Commission; and the Commission is authorized under such rules and regulations as it shall prescribe to hold joint hearings with any State commission in connection with any matter with respect to which the Commission is authorized to act. The Commission is authorized in the administration of this chapter to avail itself of such cooperation, services, records, and facilities as may be afforded by any State commission.

(c) Federal-State Joint Board; reference of proceedings regarding jurisdictional separation of common carrier property and expenses between interstate and intrastate operations and other matters relating to common carrier communications of joint concern; jurisdiction, powers, duties, and obligations; recommendation of decisions; State members; presence at oral arguments and nonvoting participation in deliberations; composition; Chairman

The Commission shall refer any proceeding regarding the jurisdictional separation of common carrier property and expenses between interstate and intrastate operations, which it institutes pursuant to a notice of proposed rulemaking and, except as provided in section 409 of this title, may refer any other matter, relating to common carrier communications of joint Federal-State concern, to a Federal-State Joint Board. The Joint Board shall possess the same jurisdiction, powers, duties, and obligations as a joint board established under subsection (a) of this section, and shall prepare a recommended decision for prompt review and action by the Commission. In addition, the State members of the Joint Board shall sit with the Commission en banc at any oral argument that may be scheduled in the proceeding. The Commission shall also afford the State members of the Joint Board an opportunity to participate in its deliberations, but not vote, when it has under consideration the recommended decision of the Joint Board or any further decisional action that may be required in the proceeding. The Joint Board shall be composed of three Commissioners of the Commission and of four State commissioners nominated by the national organization of the State commissions and approved by the Commission. The Chairman of the Commission, or another Commissioner designated by the Commission, shall serve as Chairman of the Joint Board.

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title IV, § 410, 48 Stat. 1098; July 16, 1952, ch. 879, § 17, 66 Stat. 722; Aug. 2, 1956, ch. 874, § 4, 70 Stat. 932; Pub. L. 92–131, § 2, Sept. 30, 1971, 85 Stat. 363; Pub. L. 103–414, title III, § 303(a)(21), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4295.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (a) and (b), was in the original “this Act”, meaning act June 19, 1934, ch. 652, 48 Stat. 1064, known as the Communications Act of 1934, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 609 of this title and Tables.

Codification

In subsec. (a), “section 3105 of title 5” substituted for “section 11 of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 1010)” on authority of Pub. L. 89–554, § 7(b), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 631, the first section of which enacted Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Amendments

1994—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103–414 struck out “, as referred to in sections 202(b) and 205(f) of the Interstate Commerce Act,” after “State commissions”.

1971—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 92–131 added subsec. (c).

1956—Subsec. (a). Act Aug. 2, 1956, inserted in second sentence “and examiner provided for in section 3105 of title 5, designated by” after “the Commissioner”.

1952—Subsec. (a). Act July 16, 1952, inserted first sentence so as to bring these provisions in conformity with section 409 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 34 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1975–2021 · leading case: Direct Commc'ns Cedar Valley, LLC v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 753 F.3d 1015 (10th Cir. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Direct Commc'ns Cedar Valley, LLC v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 753 F.3d 1015 (10th Cir. 2014). · cites it 5× “Did the FCC violate the mandatory referral duty imposed by 47 U.S.C. § 410 (c)? 3. Did the FCC irrationally refuse to modify service obligations for carriers to whom it denied USF support? 4.”

Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. FCC, 476 U.S. 355 (1986). “" In our view, the jurisdictional limitations placed on the FCC by § 152(b), coupled with the fact that the Act provides for a "separations" proceeding to determine the portions of a single asset that are used for interstate and intrastate service, 47 U. S. C. § 410 (c), answer…”

Huawei Tech USA v. FCC, 2 F.4th 421 (5th Cir. 2021). “36 35 Congress created the Federal-State Joint Board, inter alia, to make recommendations to the FCC “regarding the jurisdictional separation of common carrier property and expenses between interstate and intrastate operations.”

Ton Servs., Inc. v. Qwest Corp., 493 F.3d 1225 (10th Cir. 2007). “If so, the FCC, perhaps with assistance from state regulators using the conference procedure set forth in 47 U.S.C. § 410 (b), could determine whether Qwest’s April 1997 to April 2002 tariff rates in each jurisdiction were cost-based and consistent with all aspects of § 276(a),…”

Texas Off. of Pub. Util. Couns. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 183 F.3d 393 (5th Cir. 1999). “26 Instead of arguing that the new rule is arbitrary and capricious, GTE claims that the agency failed properly to refer the matter to the Joint Board, in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 410 (c), which states that “[t]he Commission shall refer any proceeding regarding the…”

Bell Atl. Maryland, Inc. v. MCI Worldcom, Inc., 240 F.3d 279 (4th Cir. 2001). “Without reviewing here the involved history of telecommunications regulation since the enactment of the 1934 Act, it is sufficient to observe that the 1996 Act did not supplant the 1934 Act, and importantly, it did not repeal 47 U.”

New England Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 448 A.2d 272 (Me. 1982). “The FCC has initiated a rulemaking proceeding to amend the Separations Manual pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 410 (c), inviting interested parties to submit recommendations on the proper allocation of exchange plant investment between interstate and intrastate services.”

State of Texas v. United States of Am., & Interstate Com. Comm'n, 866 F.2d 1546 (5th Cir. 1989). “47 U.S.C. § 410 (c); see Louisiana Public Service, 106 S.”

Puerto Rico Tel. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, & United States of Am., Comtronics, Inc., Intervenor, 553 F.2d 694 (1st Cir. 1977). “§ 410 , made it clear that Congress recognized that the federal and state regulatory commissions for purposes of rate-setting have coordinate jurisdiction over a wide range of telephone equipment, including household telephone instruments. S.Rep. No.”

Puerto Rico Tel. Co. v. T-Mobile Puerto Rico LLC, 678 F.3d 49 (1st Cir. 2012). “” 47 U.S.C. § 410 (c). This board is charged with “prepar[ing] a recommended decision for prompt review and action by the Commission.”

Illinois Bell Tel. Co. v. Illinois Com. Comm'n, 740 F.2d 566 (7th Cir. 1984). · cites it 3× “1 47 U.S.C. § 410 (c). The FCC has adopted separations procedures, which are set forth in a “Separations Manual.”

Verizon Maryland, Inc. v. Global Naps, Inc., 377 F.3d 355 (4th Cir. 2004). · cites it 2× “Indeed, 47 U.S.C. § 410 created a joint federal-state board to resolve disputes over regu- latory jurisdiction.”

Show all 34 citing cases →

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.