I
107TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 1765
To increase penalties for common carrier violations of the Communications
Act of 1934, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 8, 2001
Mr. UPTON (for himself, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. FOSSELLA, Mr. TERRY, Mr.
SHIMKUS, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. SAWYER, Mr. GORDON, Mr. RUSH,
Mr. BOUCHER, Mr. EHRLICH, Mr. TOWNS, Mr. GILLMOR, and Mr. BILI-
RAKIS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce
A BILL
To increase penalties for common carrier violations of the
Communications Act of 1934, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. COMMON CARRIER ENFORCEMENT.
(a) CEASE AND DESIST AUTHORITY.—Section 501 of
the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 501) is
amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘Any person’’ and inserting ‘‘(a)
FINES AND IMPRISONMENT.—Any person’’;
(2) by adding at the end the following new sub-
section:
‘‘(b) CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS.— If, after a hear-
ing, the Commission determines that any common carrier
is engaged in an act, matter, or thing prohibited by this
Act, or is failing to perform any act, matter, or thing re-
quired by this Act, the Commission may order such com-
mon carrier to cease or desist from such action or inac-
tion.’’.
(b) FORFEITURE PENALTIES.—Section 503(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 503(b)) is
amended—
(1) in paragraph (2)(B)—
(A) by striking ‘‘exceed $100,000’’ and in-
serting ‘‘exceed $1,000,000’’; and
(B) by striking ‘‘of $1,000,000’’ and in-
serting ‘‘of $10,000,000’’;
(2) in paragraph (2)(C), by striking ‘‘subpara-
graph (A) or (B)’’ and inserting ‘‘subparagraph (A),
(B), or (C)’’;
(3) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) and
(D) of paragraph (2) as subparagraphs (D) and (E),
respectively;
(4) by inserting after subparagraph (B) of
paragraph (2) the following new subparagraph:
‘‘(C) If a common carrier has violated a cease and
desist order or has previously been assessed a forfeiture
penalty for a violation of a provision of this Act or of any
rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission, and
if the Commission or an administrative law judge deter-
mines that such common carrier has willfully violated the
same provision, rule, regulation, that this repeated viola-
tion has caused harm to competition, and that such com-
mon carrier has been assessed a forfeiture penalty under
this subsection for such previous violation, the Commis-
sion may assess a forfeiture penalty not to exceed
$2,000,000 for each violation or each day of continuing
violation; except that the amount of such forfeiture pen-
alty shall not exceed $20,000,000.’’; and
(5) in paragraph (6)(B), by striking ‘‘1 year’’
and inserting ‘‘2 years’’.
(c) EVALUATION OF IMPACT.—
(1) EVALUATION REQUIRED.—Within 2 years
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal
Communications Commission shall conduct an eval-
uation of the impact of the increased remedies avail-
able under the amendments made by this section on
improving compliance with the requirements of the
Communications Act of 1934, and with the rules,
regulations, and orders of the Commission there-
under. Such evaluation shall include—
(A) an assessment of the number of en-
forcement proceedings commenced before and
after such date of enactment;
(B) an analysis of any changes in the num-
ber, type, seriousness, or repetition of viola-
tions; and
(C) an analysis of such other factors as the
Commission considers appropriate to evaluate
such impact.
(2) REPORT.—Within 30 months after such
date of enactment, the Commission shall submit a
report on the evaluation to the Committee on En-
ergy and Commerce of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate.
SEC. 2. DISPUTE RESOLUTION.
Section 252 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. 252) is amended—
(1) by redesignating subsection (j) as sub-
section (k); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (i) the fol-
lowing new subsection:
‘‘(j) DISPUTE RESOLUTION.—
‘‘(1) ARBITRATION.—At any time after any
interconnection agreement has been approved by the
State under subsection (e), any party to that inter-
connection agreement may petition a State commis-
sion to arbitrate any dispute concerning matters in-
cluded in an interconnection agreement.
‘‘(2) OPPORTUNITY
TO
RESPOND.—The non-
petitioning party may respond to the other party’s
petition and provide such additional information as
the nonpetitioning party wishes.
‘‘(3) ACTION BY STATE COMMISSION.—
‘‘(A) The State Commission may require
either party to provide such information as may
be necessary to reach a decision. If any party
refuses or fails unreasonably to respond on a
timely basis to any reasonable request from the
State Commission; then the State Commission
may proceed on the basis of the best informa-
tion available to it from whatever source de-
rived.
‘‘(B) The State Commission shall limit its
consideration of any petition to the matters in
dispute that are described in the petition.
‘‘(C) The State Commission shall resolve
the disputed matter not later than 60 days
after receipt of the petition.
‘‘(D) This subsection is the exclusive ad-
ministrative remedy for disputes concerning
matters included in an interconnection agree-
ment.’’.
SEC. 3. SERVICE QUALITY.
Section 252(e)(3) of the Communications Act of
1934 (47 U.S.C. 252(e)(3)) is amended by adding at the
end the following new sentence: ‘‘Nothing in this section
limits or affects the authority of a State to prescribe meth-
ods to ensure timely and effective compliance with any
interconnection agreement, including the imposition of
service quality performance requirements.’’.
Æ