WPC 2BJ Romanr#|P&Roman (TT)man Bold P6G;PTimes New RomanOOM 228 LPT1HPLA4MP0.PRSx  @\ifX@26 ZFD#|X#XPPS - PSt 4M ROOM 228 LPT1XPPSPS.WRSSC\  P6Q!fPX01Í ÍX01Í ÍTimes New Roman (TT) (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)ic23V HvJTimes New Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT) (TT)WP CyrillicA (TT)]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNa݅@  I.   X(# 2K'&$'^t%(d%)6&SubheadingSubheading&0\ E A.  FOOTNOTEFootnote - Appearance'PHIGHLIGHT 1Italics and Boldldedd(+. DRAFT ONHeader A Text = DRAFT and Date) X =8` (#FDRAFTă r  ` (#=D3 1, 43 12pt (Z)(PC-8))T2Dă  ӟ2**}'+X(,1m(-1)DRAFT OFFTurn Draft Style off*@@    HEADERHeader A - Appearance+LETTER LANDLetter Landscape - 11 x 8.5, 3'3'Standard'3'3StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11 ;   LEGAL LANDLegal Landscape - 14 x 8.5-f 3'3'Standard'A'AStandardZ K e6VE L"nu;   2)..1+/12,0nc-1X-LETTER PORTLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11.L 3'3'Standard3'3'StandardZ K e6VE L"nU9   LEGAL PORTLegal Portrait - 8.5 x 14/ 3'3'StandardA'A'StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 119   TITLETitle of a Document0K\ * ăFOOTERFooter A - Appearanced1202[.3i.4dE/5j/BLOCK QUOTESmall, single-spaced, indented2N X HEADING 33rd Heading Level3| XHIGHLIGHT 2Large and Bold Large4B*d. HIGHLIGHT 3Large, Italicized and Underscored5 V -q266E07Ed28-3984LETTERHEADLetterhead - date/margins6u H XX  3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"n3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"nE9    * 3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"n3' II"n"Tv3'StandarddZ K e VE L"nU9 Ѓ   INVOICE FEETFee Amount for Math Invoice7 ,, $0$0  MEMORANDUMMemo Page Format8D.   ! M E M O R A N D U M ă r  y<N dddy   INVOICE EXPSEExpense Subtotals for Math Invoice9:A ,p, $0$0029:8@6;x7<X9=[q9INVOICE TOTTotals Invoice for Math Macro:z 4p, $0$00INVOICE HEADRHeading Portion of Math Invoice;+C`*   4X 99L$0 **(  ӧ XX NORMALReturn to Normal Typestyle<SMALLSmall Typestyle=2j;>[9?[Y:@[:A[;FINEFine Typestyle>LARGELarge Typestyle?EXTRA LARGEExtra Large Typestyle@VERY LARGEVery Large TypestyleA2o>B;CX=DXw=E=ENVELOPEStandard Business Envelope with HeaderB+w ,,EnvelopeZ K e VE L"n,,EnvelopeLarge, Italicized and Under;    ,, 88+  `   MACNormalC,.1DdfStyle 14Swiss 8 Pt Without MarginsE$$D Co> PfQ  )a [ PfQO 2(FF>GA?Hl DIEStyle 12Dutch Italics 11.5F$$F )^ `> XifQ  )a [ PfQO Style 11Initial Codes for Advanced IIGJ )a [ PfQK  dddn  #  [ X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 ! )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   x )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   j-n )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  jBX )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 3oDutch Roman 11.5 with Margins/TabsH )a [ PfQO  ddn  # c0*b, oT9 !Style 4 PSwiss 8 Point with MarginsIDq Co> PfQ  dddd  #  2HJZFK|FLbGMHStyle 1.5Dutch Roman 11.5 FontJ4h )a [ PfQO  dddn Style 2Dutch Italic 11.5K$ )^ `> XifQ Style 5Dutch Bold 18 PointL$RH$L T~> pfQ_  )a [ PfQO Style 7Swiss 11.5M$$V )ao> PfQ ]  )a [ PfQO 2XNHOtIP{NQSStyle 6Dutch Roman 14 PointN$$N w [ PfQ   )a [ PfQO Style 10oInitial Codes for AdvancedO U )a [ PfQK  dddn  ##  [[ b, oT9 !b, oT9 !n )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   f )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   Q" )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  QN~ )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 8PfInitial Codes for BeginninggPi )a [ PfQK  dddn  # X` hp x (#%'b, oT9  [ &e )^ `> XifQ ` Beginning Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   d )^ `> XifQ Beginning Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   jH )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  j )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 9Initial Codes for IntermediateQ )a [ PfQK  dddn  # X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 Њ [ e )^ `> XifQ ` Intermediate Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   3 )^ `> XifQ Intermediate Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   jf )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc.`+ >Page  jX )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 2_RXS]T^U}_UpdateInitial Codes for Update ModuleR )a [ PfQK  dddn  #  [ X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 !n )^ `> XifQ ` Legal WordPerfect 5.0 Update Class Learning Guide   f )^ `> XifQ Legal WordPerfect 5.0 Update Class Learning Guide   Q" )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`7 CPage  jN~ )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Default Paragraph FoDefault Paragraph FontS11#XXz PQXP##Iz PQP#head1 #T'd#2p}wC@ #a1Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfU$ 2bV_W?`X`Ypaa2Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfV/` ` ` a3Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfW:` ` `  a4Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfXE` ` `  a5Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfYP  ` ` ` hhh 2dZKb[b\c]pda6Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfZ[   a7Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf[f  a8Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf\q Document[8]C^iDocument StyleNeF2CC -2( -Ct )B]` ` ` 2f^q*e_ee`efaefDocument[4]C^iDocument StyleNeF2CCW -2( -Ct )B^  . Document[6]C^iDocument StyleNeF2CCe -2( -Ct )B_  Document[5]C^iDocument StyleNeF2CCs -2( -Ct )B`  Document[2]C^iDocument StyleNeF2CC -2( -Ct )Ba*    2\ibp*gcgd,hehDocument[7]C^iDocument StyleNeF2CC -2( -Ct )Bb  ` ` ` Right Par[1]C^iRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )Bc8@  Right Par[2]C^iRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )BdA@` ` `  ` ` ` Document[3]C^iDocument StyleNeF2CC -2( -Ct )Be0     2Tlfig2jhjikRight Par[3]C^iRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )BfJ` ` ` @  ` ` ` Right Par[4]C^iRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )BgS` ` `  @  Right Par[5]C^iRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )Bh\` ` `  @hhh hhh Right Par[6]C^iRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )Bie` ` `  hhh@ hhh 2^ojlkNmlnmnRight Par[7]C^iRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers  -2( -Ct )Bjn` ` `  hhh@  Right Par[8]C^iRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )Bkw ` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp Document[1]C^iDocument StyleNeF2CCE -2( -Ct )BlF34   ׃  Technical[5]C^iTechnical Document StyleCCS -2( -Ct )Bm&56  . 2qnoopppqFqTechnical[6]C^iTechnical Document StyleCCa -2( -Ct )Bn&78  . Technical[2]C^iTechnical Document StyleCCo -2( -Ct )Bo*9:    Technical[3]C^iTechnical Document StyleCC} -2( -Ct )Bp';<   Technical[4]C^iTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )Bq&=>   2Ctr rsrtAsu}sTechnical[1]C^iTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )Br4?$@     Technical[7]C^iTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )Bs&AB  . Technical[8]C^iTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )Bt&CD  . Paragraph[1]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bu$ab 2vvutwtxuy.vParagraph[2]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bv/cd` ` ` Paragraph[3]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bw:ef` ` `  Paragraph[4]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )BxEgh` ` `  Paragraph[5]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )ByPij` ` ` hhh 2d{z w{w||x}FyParagraph[6]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )Bz[kl Paragraph[7]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B{fmn Paragraph[8]C^i1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )B|qop toc 1toc 1}` hp x (#44` hp x (#2~{}toc 2toc 2~` hp x (#4 4 ` hp x (#toc 3toc 3` hp x (#4 4 ` hp x (#toc 4toc 4` hp x (#4 <4 <` hp x (#toc 5toc 5` hp x (#4<4<` hp x (#2@v^Ԇtoc 6toc 6` hp x (#44` hp x (#toc 7toc 7 toc 8toc 8` hp x (#44` hp x (#toc 9toc 9` hp x (#44` hp x (#2`B`~index 1index 1` hp x (#4 4 ` hp x (#index 2index 2` hp x (#4 4 ` hp x (#toatoa` hp x (#` hp x (#captioncaption;1#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#2 L q_Equation Caption_Equation Caption11#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#endnote referenceendnote reference44#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#footnote referencefootnote reference4#XP\  P6QXP#2S&C6C^fDocument StyleNF2CC -2( -Ct )s t . 2e;ep3S&C7C^fDocument StyleNF2CC -2( -Ct ) uv 4S&C8C^fDocument StyleNF2CC! -2( -Ct ) wx 5S&C9C^fDocument StyleNF2CC/ -2( -Ct )*yz   6S&C:C^fDocument StyleNF2CC= -2( -Ct ){|` ` ` 2:̗g7S&C;C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK -2( -Ct )8}~@  8S&C<C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersY -2( -Ct )A@` ` `  ` ` ` 9S&C=C^fDocument StyleNF2CCg -2( -Ct )0    10S&C>C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersu -2( -Ct )J` ` ` @  ` ` ` 2ҙ511S&C?C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )S` ` `  @  12S&C@C^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )\` ` `  @hhh hhh 13S&CAC^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )e` ` `  hhh@ hhh 14S&CBC^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )n` ` `  hhh@  2y15S&CCC^fRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers -2( -Ct )w` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp 16S&CDC^fDocument StyleNF2CC -2( -Ct )F   ׃  17S&CEC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )&  . 18S&CFC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )&  . 2*Qz19S&CGC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )*    20S&CHC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )'   21S&CIC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )&   22S&CJC^fTechnical Document StyleCC -2( -Ct )4$     2k\}f23S&CKC^fTechnical Document StyleCC+ -2( -Ct )&  . 24S&CLC^fTechnical Document StyleCC9 -2( -Ct )&  . 25S&CMC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)CG -2( -Ct )$ 26S&CNC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)CU -2( -Ct )/` ` ` 2+0Υw27S&COC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)Cc -2( -Ct ):` ` `  28S&CPC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)Cq -2( -Ct )E` ` `  29S&CQC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )P` ` ` hhh 30S&CRC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )[ 2]31S&CSC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )f 32S&CTC^f1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)C -2( -Ct )q Default ParaC^fDefault Paragraph Font2CC -2( -Ct );;#PP##PP#_Equation CaC^f_Equation CaptionF2CC -2( -Ct );;#PP##PP#2 vvendnote refeC^fendnote referenceF2CC -2( -Ct )>>#PP##PP#footnote refC^ffootnote referenceF2CC -2( -Ct )>#PP#heading 4heading 4 heading 5heading 5 2v<vv(vheading 6heading 6 heading 7heading 7 heading 8heading 8 endnote textendnote text 2vFZڱd4footnote textfootnote text toa headingtoa heading` hp x (#(#(#` hp x (#1, 2, 3,?@65NumbersO@/"=(1*1÷$t ?.E1.A, B,t ?@65Uppercase Letters1 ?*1÷$t ?.E .2´ʲp|qe]footnote tex6footnote text̺=(?. 0&ܺ*?.ںd 0E2(33`O5hT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5h.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>` ` ` 34`O5iT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5i.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  . 35`O5jT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5j.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  2eYp\36`O5kT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5k.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>  37`O5lT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5l.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>*   38`O5mT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5m.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>` ` ` 39`O5nT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>8@   2 P40`O5oT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>A@` `  ` ` ` 41`O5pT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5p.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>0    42`O5qT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>J` ` @  ` `  43`O5rT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>S` `  @  2ӹH44`O5sT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>\` `  @hh# hhh 45`O5tT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>e` `  hh#@( hh# 46`O5uT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>n` `  hh#(@- ( 47`O5vT(G2PRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>w` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 2sͽR׾48`O5wT(G2PDocument Style&^aO5w.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>F *  ׃  49`O5xT(G2PTechnical Document Stylex.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&  . 50`O5yT(G2PTechnical Document Styley.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&  . 51`O5zT(G2PTechnical Document Stylez.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>*    2:~52`O5{T(G2PTechnical Document Style{.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>'   53`O5|T(G2PTechnical Document Style|.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&   54`O5}T(G2PTechnical Document Style}.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>4$     55`O5~T(G2PTechnical Document Style~.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&  . 2R5}756`O5T(G2PTechnical Document Style.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>&  . 57`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>$ 58`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>/` ` ` 59`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>:` ` `  2>"60`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>E` ` `  61`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>P` ` ` hhh 62`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>[ 63`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>f 2"p:0&64`O5T(G2P1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a).K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>q 65`O5T(G2PDefault Paragraph Font5.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>OO#P P##P P#66`O5T(G2P_Equation Caption^aO5.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>OO#PP##PP#67`O5T(G2Pendnote reference^aO5.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>RR#PP##PP#2Tpqp68`O5T(G2Pfootnote reference^aO5.K+&,$@`O5Bȗ+&>R#PP#69 _5(_>7footnote text _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+tZP70 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t` ` ` 71 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t  . 2eexpp72 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t  73 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t  74 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t*   75 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t` ` ` 2x?76 _5(_>7Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+b70t _5xŗ+t8@   77 _5(_>7Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+b70t _5xŗ+tA@` `  ` ` ` 78 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+t0     79 _5(_>7Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+b70t _5xŗ+tJ` ` @  ` `  2W 80 _5(_>7Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+b70t _5xŗ+tS` `  @  81 _5(_>7Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+b70t _5xŗ+t\  ` `  @hh# hhh 82 _5(_>7Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+b70t _5xŗ+te  ` `  hh#@( hh# 83 _5(_>7Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+b70t _5xŗ+tn ` `  hh#(@- ( 2[Q84 _5(_>7Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersK+b70t _5xŗ+tw` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 85 _5(_>7Document Style _5dK+b70t _5xŗ+tF *  ׃  86 _5(_>7Technical Document StyledK+b70t _5xŗ+t&  . 87 _5(_>7Technical Document StyledK+b70t _5xŗ+t&  . 2)R88 _5(_>7Technical Document StyledK+b70t _5xŗ+t*    89 _5(_>7Technical Document StyledK+b70t _5xŗ+t'   90 _5(_>7Technical Document StyledK+b70t _5xŗ+t&   91 _5(_>7Technical Document StyledK+b70t _5xŗ+t4$     2C4}>92 _5(_>7Technical Document StyledK+b70t _5xŗ+t&   . 93 _5(_>7Technical Document StyledK+b70t _5xŗ+t&!"  . 94 _5(_>71. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)dK+b70t _5xŗ+t$#$ 95 _5(_>71. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)dK+b70t _5xŗ+t/%&` ` ` 2uO96 _5(_>71. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)dK+b70t _5xŗ+t:'(` ` `  97 _5(_>71. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)dK+b70t _5xŗ+tE)*` ` `  98 _5(_>71. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)dK+b70t _5xŗ+tP+,` ` ` hhh 99 _5(_>71. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)dK+b70t _5xŗ+t[-. 25XK?K100_5(_>71. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)dK+b70t _5xŗ+tf/0 0y.C8*XpC\  P6QP17PC2X XP\  P6QXP.27UC2XXU4  pQX.y.G8*XNG4  pQpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDdddddd/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""d<d<CCYYdCCddCYCdYzzzzCCCCqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddnddddddd2O@ @@"5@^2Coddȧ8CCdr2C28ddddddddddCCrrrdzNdzoȐC8CtdCdoYoYCdo8Co8odooYNCodddYO,Oh2CC!CCPRCdodddddȐYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddoddddzodddYYYYYYddddooPoNoNCNodo8RoodȐYYoNoNNF2ldCddddddt45772Fc7<22222222222222222222222222222222H/@5@/8*D3?.?.mO<+L8L8J5F5[CL8H4M894B,<.?.LGG2M9F4cSdTH6\G=-C0iLF3C/8*8*8*O3C0C0mO8'7)L8%%!2*J5J5J5J8^EL8cIS9[BR7?.?.H3H3;(G2G2F7\@L8F4F4cSG5H3kI6$@>H4H3H/?.C0L8%%H4?.\GC0iLF3H/?.?.L8H4?.\GC0iLF322!!!!222222222222222"5@^*7]SS.77S_*7*.SSSSSSSSSS77___SxoxxofASoxfx]oxxxxo7.7aS7S]J]J7S].7].]S]]JA7]SxSSJB%BW*7777CE7S]xSxSxSxSxSxxJoJoJoJoJA.A.A.A.x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxJxJxJoJoJoJSSSS]]C]A]A7A]S]o.oEx]x]SxxJxJ]A]AN:*ZS7SSSSSS27}}S2}}S}277SSS77SS7S72t7[\\[_\d*C`_.wRSSn\Cfx`xWlRx\]\cdIfIs`Wx\rriwgd*7]SS.77S_*7*.SSSSSSSSSS77___SxoxxofASoxfx]oxxxxo7.7aS7S]J]J7S].7].]S]]JA7]SxSSJB%BW7SSSS7]777SS:S7A7xx*7SSSS%S7}2S_7}SC[227`Z*727S}}}SxxxxxxxooooAAAAxx_xxxxxf]SSSSSSxJJJJJ....S]SSSSS[S]]]]S]y.K8?XpK\  P@QP7PC2X XP\  P6QXP.7UC2XXU4  pQXLx/[8SX9q[R  PQPL8nCdX9XnR  PQXPW!0(Xh0\  P6QhPL G7!2X9]|,7R  PQ,P.!y.G8*XNG4  pQ"I-!&X,-\  P@Q,Py.C8*XpC\  P6QP2O@@ Z#Z"5@^&&209<!!&>>400000000009>9+@04242079$4+<744440-909020!!!4002-2--42O4020(($4+90-+!!94)0400000000000G2-2-2-2-2-744040404094949494-004240402-40220044002-2-2-2-442-7-7077-7-94944444$42++)7474444(4)0(N$2+00020000-00000000t0>77+0c7<&&209<!!&>>400000000009>9+@04242079$4+<744440-909020!!!4002-2--42O4020(($4+90-+!!9-002240000000>00-$000000+0000000222224744444049999224000000G-----0400000+04444-2"5@^*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ*7777CE7SSxJxJxJxJxJooJfJfJfJfJ7.7.7.7.xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxJxSxSxSxSxS]SxSxJxJoJoJoJfJfJfJxSxSxxSxSxSxSCS7S777SAxSf.fExSxSxSxo7oE]A]AN:*LS7JSSSSS.4}}S2S}277JJS77SS7J72t7[\\[^\d*C`^.wRSSn\Cfx`xWlRx\]\cdIfIs`Wx\rriwgd*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ7SJSS7]777JJ:S7A7xx*7SSSS!S7.S^7SC[227`L*724S}}}Jxxxxxxoffff7777xxxxxxx^xxxxxx]SJJJJJJoJJJJJ....SSSSSSS[SSSSSSS2     X r X-X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:Commission review of an order issued by the Common Carrier Bureau (the "Bureau") in the  X&-abovecaptioned proceeding.YX& yO-  ԍXxIn the Matter of Federation of American Health Systems,Petition for Declaratory Ruling, or in the  yOg-  Alternative, Petition for Waiver, 9 FCC Rcd 3303 (Com. Car. Bur. 1994) (hereinafter "Health Systems  yO/-Order").(#Y   X- ` x2.` ` In the Health Systems Order, the Bureau addressed a petition for declaratory ruling  X- x("Petition") filed by FAHS regarding the requirement imposed by Section 64.704(c)R yOz-ԍXx47 C.F.R.  64.704(c).(#R of the  xCommission's rules to permit access to the 10XXX dialing sequence from telephones located in  X- x hospital patient rooms.Xx yO"-  ԍXxThe Commission rule that authorizes the Commission to issue declaratory rulings states: "The Commission   .may, in accordance with section 5(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act, on motion or on its own motion issue a declaratory ruling terminating a controversy or removing uncertainty." 47 C.F.R.  1.2. (#Ə In the Petition, FAHS asked that the Commission rule that patient  xbedside telephones are not aggregator equipment. The Petition asked in the alternative for a  xlpermanent waiver of Section 64.705(c)(5) for the benefit of medical facilities with a "small  Xn- xvolume of interexchange calls."Kn yO(-ԍXxPetition at 4, 11.(#K The Bureau dismissed the declaratory ruling request on"n( ,))JJ"  xprocedural grounds. The Bureau also denied the alternative request by FAHS for waiver of this section of our rules. For the reasons discussed below, we deny the Application for Review.  X-T Ã  X-fII. BACKGROUND ă  X- ` x3.` ` In 1991, the Commission adopted comprehensive regulations governing the  xpractices and telephone service offerings of operator service providers and the call aggregators  X_- xwith whom they contract to provide operator services._* yO-  ԍXxPolicies and Rules Concerning Operator Service Providers, CC Docket No. 90313, Report and Order, 6  yO -FCC Rcd 2744 (1991) (Report and Order), recon. denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3882 (1992).(# Among other things, the regulations  xincluded the following statutory definition of "aggregator": "any person that, in the ordinary  xcourse of its operations, makes telephones available to the public or to transient users of its  X -premises, for interstate telephone calls using a provider of operator services." * yO -ԍXx47 C.F.R.  64.708(b); see also 47 U.S.C.  226(a)(2).(#Ƈ  X - ` x4. ` ` On May 20, 1992, FAHS filed its Petition, requesting that the Commission issue  xKa ruling declaring that hospitals and other health care facilities are not "aggregators" with respect  xto patient bedside telephones because, according to FAHS, such equipment is not provided in the  X - xyordinary course of their operations. Alternatively, FAHS asked the Commission to waivel * yO-  0ԍXxThe Commission rule authorizing the Commission to suspend, amend, or waive its rules states: "The   provisions of this chapter may be suspended, revoked, amended, or waived for good cause shown, in whole   or in part, at any time the Commission, subject to the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act and   /the provisions of this chapter. Any provision of the rules may be waived by the Commission on its own motion or on petition if good cause therefor is shown." 47 C.F.R.  1.3. (#l on a  xpermanent basis the requirements of Section 64.704(c)(5) of its rules for medical facilities with  xan average monthly volume of less than 2,500 interstate minutes of use for operatorassisted  Xb-telephone calls from patient telephones. b` * yOs-  ԍXxPetition at 12. Section 64.704(c)(5) provides that "[a]ll equipment not included in paragraphs (c)(1),   (c)(2),(c)(3) and (c)(4) of this section shall, no later than April 17, 1997, allow the consumer to use equal   access ['10XXX'] codes to obtain access to the consumer's desired provider of operator services." 47 C.F.R. 64.704(c)(5). (#  X4- ` x5.` ` The Bureau found that, although FAHS styled its original filing as a petition for  x=declaratory ruling, it was in substance a petition for reconsideration of the Commission's 1991  X- xReport and Order. The Bureau noted that the position advocated by FAHS, that hospitals and  xkother health care facilities should not be included within the definition of "aggregator" with  xrespect to telephones located in hospital patient rooms, was presented to the Commission in CC  xZDocket No. 90313 and that the Commission specifically discussed this argument, concluding that  X- xhospitals and other health care facilities are within the scope of the definition of "aggregator."j H * yO&-ԍXxHealth Systems Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 330304.(#j " ,^(^(JJR"  X- xRelying on Section 405 of the Communications Act (the "Act"), X* yOy-  ԍXx47 U.S.C.  405. This section reads in pertinent part: "A petition for reconsideration [of an action by the   Commission or by delegated authority] must be filed within thirty days from the date upon which public  yO -notice is given of the order, decision, report, or action complained of." Id.(#ƙ  X-  .and Section 1.429(d) of the Commission's rules,  yO- ԍX47 C.F.R.  1.429(d). This section reads in pertinent part: "The petition for reconsideration and any supplement thereto shall be filed within 30 days from the date of public notice of such action. . . ."(# the Bureau found that FAHS filed its Petition  X-  almost a year after the statutory deadline for a petition for reconsideration had expired.j @ yO -ԍXHealth Systems Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 330304.(#j The   Bureau also ruled that FAHS made no argument that any exception to the Act or to the   [Commission's rules applied in this case. Therefore, the Bureau dismissed FAHS' Petition as an  X-untimely petition for reconsideration.L  yO-ԍXId. at 3304. (#L  X_-  6.` ` The Bureau did, however, address FAHS' contention that the Commission must   \defer to the definition of patient telephones in hospitals adopted by the U.S. Department of  X1-  Health and Human Services.@1`  yOB- ԍXId. FAHS contended that in the Medicare Act, Congress described the facilities, services, and equipment  that are normally made available by a hospital in the ordinary course of its operations. Petition at 6, citing  42 U.S.C.  1395(x)(b)(2). FAHS argued that in the rulemaking proceeding implementing the Medicare  Act, the Department of Health and Human Services defined patient bedside telephones as personal comfort  0items, not as services ordinarily furnished by hospitals to patients. Petition at 67 citing 42 C.F.R.   411.15(j). FAHS noted that the Medicare Act was enacted prior to the Telephone Operator Consumer  ]Services Improvement Act, 47 U.S.C.  226, Pub. L. No. 101435, 101 Stat. 986 (1990) (hereinafter "TOCSIA"). (#ƪ The Bureau found that there was no logical inconsistency   Zbetween the two statutory interpretations, because of the crucial differences in both the statutory   Klanguage and purposes. It therefore determined no need to harmonize the Commission's TOCSIA   zregulations with the Medicare Act and those regulations promulgated under it by excluding  X -  hospitals from the definition of "aggregator."dX h yO- ԍXIn addition, noting FAHS' observation that the Medicare Act was enacted before TOCSIA, the Bureau held  yO- that FAHS should have raised its concerns before the Commission in earlier comments. Health Systems  yO~-Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 3304.(#d Moreover, the Bureau found that the legislative   history of TOCSIA clearly established that Congress considered hospitals to be aggregators,  X -contrary to FAHS' assertion that they are not.X  yO"- ԍXHealth Systems Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 3304. The Bureau pointed out that the Senate report accompanying  yO#- TOCSIA states that the term aggregator "includes hotels and motels, hospitals, . . . and others." See S. Rep. No. 101439, 101st Cong., 2nd Sess. 10 (emphasis added).(#ƃ  Xy-  7. ` ` Regarding FAHS' request for a waiver of Section 64.704(c)(5) of the"y,^(^(JJ"  X-  Commission's rules,U yOy-ԍX47 C.F.R.  64.704(c)(5).(#U the Health Systems Order recognized that pursuant to Section 1.3 of the  X-  Commission's rules,LX yO-ԍX47 C.F.R.  1.3.(#L the Commission has authority to waive its rules for good cause shown.   The Bureau observed that the agency may exercise its discretion to waive a rule where particular  X-  Zfacts would make compliance inconsistent with the public interest.PX yOT- ԍXHealth Systems Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 3304 (citing Northeast Cellular Telephone Company, 897 F.2d 1164  yO - /(D.C. Cir. 1990), WAIT Radio, Inc., 418 F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1970)). (#P The Bureau found, however,   ythat FAHS had failed to establish sufficient facts to justify its request for a broad waiver of our   rules. According to the Bureau, FAHS did not offer any probative evidence showing that the   10XXX unblocking requirement would create a burden that is inconsistent with the public   interest. In particular, the Bureau noted that the Commission adopted a lengthy phasein period   of five years in order to ease the impact of compliance with Section 64.704(c) on aggregators,   and that FAHS made no attempt to demonstrate that this transition is inadequate to address the   concerns raised by its waiver request. Moreover, the Bureau found that FAHS failed to present   -a principled basis for its proposal to use 2,500 minutes of interstate traffic, rather than some other   figure, as a benchmark for waiver, and instead, simply presumed that this amount of traffic  X -justifies a waiver.g  yO-ԍXHealth Systems Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 3305.(#g l  X - III. CONTENTIONS AND DISCUSSION  Xy- A. Petition for Declaratory Ruling V  XK-1. Contentions.  X4-  X-  28.` ` FAHS contends that the Bureau's dismissal of the Petition "solely on procedural   =grounds" is contrary to the Administrative Procedure Act, the Commission's regulations, case   precedent, and established policy. FAHS argues that the Petition raised important questions of  X-  law that have not previously been resolved by the Commission.H yO! -ԍApplication at 5.H According to FAHS, case law   requires the Commission to address the merits of its Petition before the FAHS can proceed to  X-  ycourt.(  yO#-ЍXId. (citing Action for Children's Television v. FCC, 827 F. Supp. 4 (D.D.C. 1993)).(#Ƣ FAHS maintains that the Bureau erroneously concluded that the thirtyday period for " ,^(^(JJo"   Lfiling petitions for reconsideration could not be waived. According to FAHS, Section 405 has  X-never been an absolute bar to reconsideration of issues raised after thirty days.* yOb- ԍXApplication at 5 (citing Meredith Corp. v. FCC, 809 F.2d 863, 869 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (Meredith Corp.);  yO*-Bowen v. City of New York, 476 U.S. 467, 479, 106 S. Ct. 2022, 2029 (1986) (Bowen)).(#*  X-  9.` ` FAHS argues that it was wrongfully deprived of an opportunity for a substantive   ruling on its request for declaratory ruling and the accompanying waiver request, and that it   obtained no answer to its question as to the validity of the definition of "aggregator" contained  Xv-  in the Commission's rules.Jv  yOG -ԍXApplication at 7.(#J FAHS observes that Section 1.2 of the Commission's rulesLv yO -ԍX47 C.F.R.  1.2.(#L allows   FAHS to request a declaratory order to remove the uncertainty it sees as to whether "healthcare   institutions are 'aggregators' under the Commission's rules when, according to regulations   =prescribed under the Medicare Act, they do not provide patient bedside telephones under the  X -  <ordinary course of their business."L @ yO -ԍXApplication at 56.(#L FAHS also cites the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing   that Section 5(e) of this Act states that the Commission "may issue a declaratory order to  X -terminate a controversy or remove uncertainty."f  yOm-ԍXId. at 6 (citing 5 U.S.C.  554(e)).(#f  X -  P 10.` ` AT&T characterizes as "wrong" the FAHS argument that the Bureau had erred in  X -  jdealing with its Petition as an untimely effort to seek reconsideration.J `  yO-ԍXId. at 45.(#J AT&T argues that the   Commission had no obligation to issue a substantive declaratory order here because there was "no   uncertainty" over whether the TOCSIAordered rules were to be applied to hospitals and health   .care facilities. AT&T contends that this was because the Commission "as early as 1991 in the  XK-  Docket 90313 Order [had] addressed and rejected analogous claims by other hospitals that their  X4-  patient bedside telephones were not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction under TOCSIA."4  yO-ԍXId. at 5 (citing Report and Order at 2750).(#Ƃ   AT&T further maintains that the original Petition was not an effort for clarification; rather, it was   xan attempt to vitiate the Commission's earlier decision on the status of hospital patient telephones  X-under TOCSIA.1X  yO #- ԍXFor this reason, AT&T states, the claim by FAHS that the Bureau violated either Section 1.2 of the  lCommission's rules or the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act deserves rejection. AT&T Opposition at 56.(#1 ",^(^(JJ"  X-2. Discussion.  X-    11.` ` After considering the record before us, we deny FAHS' Application for Review  X-  las it relates to all of FAHS' claims.  The Commission considered and rejected a claim that  X-  >hospitals and health care facilities were not "aggregators" under TOCSIA in its Report and  X-  Order.K yO-ԍX6 FCC Rcd at 2752.(#K  Indeed, we specifically held that "hospitals and universities are clearly within the scope  Xv-  of the definition of 'aggregator'."H vX yO -ԍXId.(#H In addition, the Bureau had entertained a similar argument   by the Association of College and University Telecommunications Administrators, contending that   colleges and universities were not aggregators under TOCSIA for purposes of telephones in  X1-  dormitory rooms and similar locations.!1 yO -ԍXSee Association of College and University Telecommunications Administrators, 8 FCC Rcd 1781 (1992).(#ƨ We are not inclined to issue a declaratory ruling on an issue that the Commission has fully addressed.  X -  o  12.` ` Because the Commission had addressed the issue in its rulemaking Report and   >Order, the nonwaiver portions of the FAHS Petition must either be treated as a petition for   zreconsideration or a petition for rulemaking. To the extent it is to be treated as a petition for   reconsideration, we agree with the Bureau that it was untimely under Section 405 of the Act and  X-  jcannot be considered.L"x yO-ԍX47 U.S.C.  405.(#L FAHS filed its Petition almost a year after the statutory deadline had   expired. In its Petition, FAHS did not show (or even argue) that the Commission failed to  Xb-  0provide public notice of the Report and Order in which the Commission had specifically   discussed the issue of whether hospitals and other health care facilities were included within the  X4-  definition of "aggregator".#4 yO- /ԍXSee  generally Reuters v. FCC, 781 F.2d 946 (D.C. Cir. 1986), Gardner v. FCC, 530 F.2d 1086 (D.C. Cir. 1976)(# In any event, as discussed below, to the extent we were to consider the filing to be a petition for rulemaking, we would deny it for the reasons set forth below.  X- B. The Bureau's Statutory Interpretation  X-1. Contentions.  X-  _ 13.` ` FAHS challenges the Bureau ruling for concluding that, in enacting TOCSIA and   the Medicare Act, Congress used the same term, "patient telephones," but gave the term   [inconsistent meanings. FAHS argues that the Bureau gave no "reasoned explanation" for this  XN-  inconsistency.L$N`  yO_&-ԍXApplication at 89.(#L FAHS also contends that the Bureau ruling misread the statutory language in"N $,^(^(JJ"  X-  =TOCSIA, and incorrectly relied on the legislative history.% yOy- ԍXId. at 9 (citing Toibb v. Radloff, 500 U.S. 157, 162 (1991); Pacific Gas and Electric. Co. v. United States, 664 F.2d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 1981)).(# FAHS observes that the Medicare Act was enacted before TOCSIA, and argues   that where the meaning of a statutory term is clearly accepted in judicial and legislative practice,  X-  that definition applies.&  yO-ԍXApplication at 1011 (citing West Virginia University Hospitals, Inc. v. Casey, 499 U.S. 83, 92 (1991)).(#Ƨ FAHS contends that when the same words are used in different statutes,   xsuch as the Medicare Act and TOCSIA, Congress usually intends for these words to be given the  X-  same meaning.' yO -ԍXApplication at 10 (citing Gladwell v. Harline, 950 F. 2d 669, 674 (10th Cir. 1991)).(#Ɠ In the Medicare Act, FAHS contends, Congress described the facilities and   equipment that are typically made available by hospitals in the ordinary course of their   operations, and Congress deferred to the expertise of Health and Human Services ("HHS") to   determine what equipment a hospital makes available to the public "in the ordinary course of its  X1-  =operations."i(1@ yO"-ԍXApplication at 10 (citing 42 U.S.C.  1395). (#i FAHS contends that HHS determined that patient bedside telephones "are not   furnished in the ordinary course of a hospital's business," and in applying the Medicare Act, HHS   jadopted regulations that defined patient telephones as "personal comfort items" which are not   services "ordinarily" furnished to patients by hospitals. Because the Medicare Act was enacted   prior to TOCSIA, FAHS continues, this definition must be "presumed to have been known to  X -Congress when it enacted" TOCSIA.)  yO?-ԍXApplication at 11 (citing Caminetti v. United States, 242 U.S. 470, 473 (1917)).(#Ɛ  X-  4 14.` ` AT&T refutes FAHS' claim that the Bureau's decision was an arbitrary and   icapricious interpretation of TOCSIA. AT&T states that "[t]he legislative findings in the preamble   xto TOCSIA expressly recognize the need to reduce customer confusion and prevent unreasonable  XK-  practices resulting from increased competition 'to provide operator services to hotels, hospitals,  X4-  airports, and other aggregators of telephone business from consumers.'"|*4`  yOE-ԍXApplication at 6 (citing TOCSIA,  2(3) (emphasis added)).(#| AT&T observes that   the scope of TOCSIA's definition of an aggregator is intended to fulfill this Congressional   objective. AT&T also points out that in the Senate Report accompanying the bill points out that  X-  the term aggregator "include[s] hotels and motels, hospitals, . . . and others."+  yO!-ԍXAT&T Opposition at 67 (citing S. Rep. No. 101439, 101st Cong., 2nd Sess. 10 (emphasis added)).(#ƙ AT&T argues that   the legal authority and statutory history here are clear, and that FAHS submits nothing persuasive   to advance its position that the members of FAHS are not aggregators as that term is used in  X-  TOCSIA.P,  yO%-ԍXAT&T Opposition at 78.(#P The Bureau, AT&T states, correctly held that FAHS' attempt to reconcile the   disparate statutory schemes of Medicare and TOCSIA is "specious." AT&T also notes that there",,^(^(JJ"   are "crucial differences" in the statutory language and purposes. There is no basis, according to   .AT&T, for FAHS' claim that the Commission is required to harmonize its TOCSIA regulations   jand the Medicare regulations with the Medicare Act by excluding hospitals from the definition  X-of aggregators.B- yO4-ԍXId.(#B  X-2. Discussion.  X_-  15.` ` The Commission has always viewed hospitals as aggregators.._X yOh -ԍXSee, e.g., Report and Order, 6 FCC Rcd at 2752 ("Aggregators include hotels and motels, hospitals(# . . . ") (emphasis added). The language and   Congressional reports of TOCSIA make clear that Congress intended hospitals and other health  X1-  xcare facilities for inclusion in the category of "aggregators."/1 yO- ԍXSee TOCSIA, Pub. L. 101435, 104 Stat. 986 (1990),  2(3) (codified at 47 U.S.C.  226); S. Rep. No. 101 yOZ-(#(#Z(#(#439, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. (1990). hh,(#h As discussed below, we agree with   the Bureau that TOCSIA and the Medicare Act are distinct statutory schemes, unrelated for   <purposes of determining whether hospitals and other health care facilities are "aggregators." We therefore find no basis for revisiting our interpretation of the statutory definition of "aggregators."  X -   16.` ` Under TOCSIA, an aggregator is defined as "any person that, in the ordinary  X -  course of its operations, makes telephones available to the public or to transient users of its  X-  premises, for interstate telephone calls using a provider of operator services."0 yOI-ԍXSee 47 U.S.C.  226 (a)(2); 47 C.F.R.  64.708 (b) (emphasis added).(#Ɖ FAHS' sole   .support for the critical contention that its members are not aggregators with respect to patient   ibedside telephones is its observation that bedside telephones are excluded from the classification  XK-  of equipment "ordinarily furnished . . . for the care and treatment of patients" under the Medicare  X4-  Act.14 yO}-ԍX42 U.S.C.  1395(x)(b)(2); 42 C.F.R.  411.15(j) (emphasis added).(#Ɓ FAHS therefore claims that the classification of patient bedside telephones under the   [Medicare Act necessarily means that Congress also excluded those instruments from TOCSIA   \requirements. Each Act, however, not only has different statutory language, but also has a   different legislative intent. Under the Medicare Act, Congress was seeking to provide a hospital  X-  insurance program for the elderly.i2(  yO!-ԍX42 U.S.C.  100, Pub. L. 8997, 79 Stat. 286.(#i The legislative findings in the preamble to TOCSIA make   kclear that in enacting TOCSIA Congress was concerned about the need to reduce customer   confusion and prevent unreasonable practices resulting from increased competition "to provide  X-  ioperator services, to hotels, hospitals, airports, and other aggregators of telephone business from" 2,^(^(JJo"  X-  consumers. . . ."3 yOy- ԍXSee TOCSIA, Pub. L. 101435, 104 Stat. 986 (1990),  2(3) (codified at 47 U.S.C.  226) (emphasis added).(#ƺ The Bureau therefore was not arbitrary in its conclusion that hospitals are to   be treated as aggregators under TOCSIA, despite the categorization of telephones as "personal   jcomfort items" under the Medicare Act. Thus, were we to treat FAHS' Petition as a request for rulemaking, we would deny it.  X- C. Waiver Request  X_-1. Contentions.  X1-  B17.` ` FAHS argues that its Petition established good cause for a "limited waiver" of   ySection 64.705(c)(5) of the Commission's rules for medical facilities with less than 2,500 minutes   iof interstate telephone calls per month. The Bureau ruling, FAHS states, did not reach the correct  X -  decision on this matter because it failed to give FAHS' Petition the required "hard look."4  yO- ԍXApplication at 1213 (citing WAIT Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 418 F. 2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969) (WAIT  yO-Radio), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1972)).(#   According to FAHS, forcing rural medical facilities to make a choice between buying new   medical technology or selective 10XXX blocking capabilities will have the "inevitable  X -consequence" of thwarting the advancement of rural healthcare.K5 x yO-ԍXApplication at 14.(#K  Xy-  18.` ` AT&T contends that there is "no principled basis to support FAHS' claim" that   [the Bureau committed error by not granting a blanket waiver of the TOCSIAbased unblocking   rules at hospital health care locations that have less than 2,500 minutes of interstate operator  X4-  traffic monthly. AT&T also maintains that the Bureau applied precedent correctly in its order.H64 yO-ԍXId. at 8.(#H  X-2. Discussion.  X-  n19.` ` We conclude the Bureau correctly evaluated FAHS' waiver request in finding that   a permanent waiver of our rules was not justified. The Commission rule which authorizes  X-  waivers states expressly that waivers may be granted "for good cause" shown.L7 yO!-ԍX47 C.F.R.  1.3.(#L Generally, a   waiver is appropriate only if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule; that   is, the rule is uniquely burdensome on the party seeking the waiver, and that such deviation will  Xe-serve the public interest.8e(  yO>&-ԍSee Northeast Cellular Telephone Company,  897 F.2d 1164, 1165 (D.C.Cir. 1990). "N 8,^(^(JJ"Ԍ X-  P20.` ` In arguing for a waiver, FAHS did not describe with particularity the nature of the   -burden on the health care industry presented by the requested waiver. FAHS' Petition presented   only conclusory, brief, and general information about the industry's need for a waiver. FAHS   did not demonstrate why it believed the proposed threshold of 2,500 minutes was necessary, nor   did it show how the proposed regulation would affect its membership. Rather, FAHS simply stated that hospitals with less than 2,500 minutes of interstate calling volume faced  Xunnecessary capital expenditures of millions of dollars to modify or completely  replace otherwise satisfactory PBXs. . . . Such hospitals would be forced to  redirect substantial financial resources away from their mission of providing  nmedical care because revenues received from interexchange calls will be too small  Ato help pay for the high cost of selective 10XXX blocking. Medical facilities with  a lower calling volume tend to be located in smaller towns or more rural areas,  X -and face more severe constraints on their capital spending.K9  yON-ԍXPetition at 1112.(#K   X -  yFAHS also argued in its Petition that "because of their size, they [the providers covered by the   Lwaiver request] face constraints on capital spending; and, because they are not in business to   provide telephone service, they need to focus their spending on health care rather than on  Xb-personal items."O:bX yOk-ԍXId. at 13.(#O   X4-  o21.` ` FAHS' Application did not furnish any new evidence in this area. FAHS failed   to consider the impact of the varied factors which the Commission placed in operation to ease   the period of phasein for this unblocking, most significantly that it could be phased in over five   years. Furthermore, FAHS failed to offer any probative evidence demonstrating that the 10XXX   [unblocking requirements would create a burden inconsistent with the public interest, nor did it   -try to demonstrate that the lengthy transition period for aggregators was inadequate. FAHS also   failed to show that all medical facilities within the threshold proposed by FAHS would be  X-  [similarly burdened.m; yO,-ԍXHealth Systems Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 3305.(#m In addition, FAHS made no persuasive argument that the permanent rule   waiver it sought was in the public interest. Therefore, the Bureau properly found that FAHS  Xe-"failed to establish sufficient facts to justify its request for a broad waiver of our rules."Q<ex yO!-ԍXId. at 3304.(#Q  XN- xx-  X7-HIV. ORDERING CLAUSE ă   X - %22. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 405, that the Application for " <,^(^(JJZ"   LReview filed by FAHS IS DISMISSED with respect to its request for a declaratory ruling to the extent discussed above, and is otherwise DENIED with respect to its request for waiver. ` `  hh,VFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ` `  hh,VWilliam F. Caton ` `  hh,VActing Secretary