**FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE News Media Contact:**

**August 4, 2004 Julius Knapp**

**(202) 418-2468**

**FCC ADOPTS *NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING AND DECLARATORY RULING*
REGARDING COMMUNICATIONS ASSISTANCE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT**

Washington, DC -- The Federal Communications Commission today begins a
thorough examination of the appropriate legal and policy framework for
implementing the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act
("CALEA"), particularly regarding broadband access and services. It is
the Commission's primary policy goal in this proceeding to ensure that
law enforcement agencies ("LEAs") have all of the resources that CALEA
authorizes to combat crime and support Homeland Security. However, the
Commission recognizes that LEAs' needs must be balanced with the
competing policies of not impeding the development of new communications
services and technologies and protecting customer privacy.

The Commission initiates this proceeding at the request of, and in
response to, a Joint Petition filed by the Department of Justice,
Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Drug Enforcement Administration
("Law Enforcement") in March 2004. In its Petition, Law Enforcement
states that, although the Commission has taken steps to implement CALEA
-- which was enacted in 1994 -- there remain several outstanding issues
that require immediate attention and resolution by the Commission, so
that industry and LEAs have clear guidance as the CALEA implementation
process moves forward.

In the *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* (*Notice*), the Commission
tentatively concludes that CALEA applies to facilities-based providers
of any type of broadband Internet access service -- including wireline,
cable modem, satellite, wireless, and powerline -- and to managed or
mediated Voice over Internet Protocol ("VoIP") services. These tentative
conclusions are based on a Commission proposal that these services fall
under CALEA as "a replacement for a substantial portion of the local
telephone exchange service."

Additionally, the Commission tentatively concludes that it is
unnecessary to identify future services and entities subject to CALEA.
The Commission recognizes Law Enforcement's need for certainty regarding
the applicability of CALEA to new services and technologies, but
anticipates that the Report and Order in this proceeding will provide
substantial clarity sufficient to resolve Law Enforcement's and
industry's uncertainty about future compliance obligations.

The Commission seeks comment on telecommunications carriers' obligations
under section 103 of CALEA and compliance solutions as they relate to
broadband Internet access and VoIP. In particular, the Commission seeks
comment on the feasibility of carriers relying on a trusted third party
to manage their CALEA obligations and whether standards for packet-mode
technologies are deficient and thus preclude carriers from relying on
them as safe harbors for complying with CALEA.

With regard to compliance, the Commission proposes mechanisms to ensure
that telecommunications carriers comply with CALEA. Specifically, the
Commission proposes to restrict the availability of compliance
extensions under CALEA section 107(c) and clarifies the role and scope
of CALEA section 109, under which carriers may be reimbursed for their
CALEA compliance costs. The Commission proposes to afford all carriers
with pending petitions a reasonable period of time (*e.g.*, 90 days) in
which to comply with, or seek relief from, any determinations that it
eventually adopts in this proceeding. Additionally, the Commission
considers whether, in addition to the enforcement remedies through the
courts available to LEAs under CALEA section 108, it may take separate
enforcement action against carriers that fail to comply with CALEA and
tentatively finds that it has general authority under the Communications
Act to promulgate and enforce CALEA rules against carriers and
non-common carriers.

With regard to costs, the Commission tentatively concludes that carriers
are responsible for CALEA development and implementation costs for
post-January 1, 1995 equipment and facilities; seeks comment on cost
recovery issues for wireline, wireless and other carriers; and refers to
the Federal-State Separations Joint Board cost recovery issues for
carriers subject to Title II of the Communications Act.

Finally, the Commission requests comment on what would be a reasonable
amount of time for entities that heretofore have not been subject to
CALEA to comply with its requirements, if the Commission ultimately
decides that those entities are subject to CALEA.

In the companion *Declaratory Ruling*, the Commission grants in part a
Law Enforcement request in the Petition and clarifies that commercial
wireless "push-to-talk" services are subject to CALEA, regardless of the
technologies that Commercial Mobile Radio Service providers choose to
apply in offering them.

Action by the Commission August 4, 2004, by *Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and Declaratory Ruling* in ET Docket No. 04295 (FCC 04-187).
Chairman Powell, Commissioners Abernathy and Martin with Commissioner
Copps and Adelstein Concurring. Separate statements issued by Chairman
Powell, Commissioners Abernathy, Copps, and Adelstein.

Office of Engineering and Technology contacts: Rodney Small at (202)
418-2452 and Geraldine Matise at 202-418-2322.

ET Docket No. 04-295

-FCC-