Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2007-08-30 · AID Agency for International Development NOTICES Privacy Act; systems of records, 50096 E7-17180 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Forest Service See Rural Utilities Service Air Force Air Force D · Unknown

Unknown. Final rule

64,143 words·~292 min read·/register/2007/08/30/07-4253

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

--- schema: federal-register doc_type: fedreg source_file: FR-2007-08-30.xml --- 72 168 Thursday, August 30, 2007 Contents AID Agency for International Development NOTICES Privacy Act; systems of records, 50096 E7-17180 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Forest Service See Rural Utilities Service Air Force Air Force Department NOTICES Base realignment and closure: Federal real property suitable for exchange— Charleston Air Force Base, SC, 50101 E7-17182 Civil Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings;
State advisory committees: Hawaii; correction, 50098 E7-17224 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge operations: California, 50052 E7-17146 Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, safety zones, security zones, etc.: Buzzards Bay, MA, 50052-50059 E7-16844 NOTICES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Cook Inlet Regional Citizen's Advisory Committee, 50114 E7-17145 Commerce Commerce Department See International Trade Administration See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Defense Defense Department See Air Force Department See Navy Department NOTICES Meetings:
Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve Defense Advisory Board, 50101 07-4257 Education Education Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, E7-17201 50103-50104 E7-17202 Election Election Assistance Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 50104 07-4296 Employment Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Adjustment assistance; applications, determinations, etc.: Chassis Supply Partners et al., 50125-50126 E7-17105 Dako Colorado, 50127 E7-17177 Ford Motor Co., 50127-50128 E7-17178 Track Corp., 50128 E7-17179 Energy Energy Department NOTICES Meetings:
Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board— Chairs, 50105 E7-17187 Idaho National Laboratory, 50104-50105 E7-17186 EPA Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States: Connecticut, 50059-50063 E7-17004 PROPOSED RULES Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States: Connecticut, 50084-50085 E7-17002 NOTICES Meetings: Science Advisory Board, 50105-50107 E7-17197 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.:
Nitrogen oxides; integrated science assessment; health criteria, 50107-50108 E7-17198 Executive Executive Office of the President See Presidential Documents See Trade Representative, Office of United States FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness directives: Airbus, 50042-50046 E7-17011 Class E airspace, 50046-50047 E7-17069 NOTICES Airport noise compatibility program: Noise exposure maps— Alexandria International Airport, LA, 50155-50157 07-4245 Meetings: RTCA, Inc., 50157-50159 07-4246 07-4247 07-4248 07-4249 FCC Federal Communications Commission RULES Common carrier services:
Commercial mobile radio service providers; roaming obligations reexamination, 50064-50074 E7-17122 Radio stations table of assignments: New York, 50074 E7-17021 Television broadcasting: Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act; implementation— Telecommunications services; availability of cable home run wiring in multiple dwelling units to alternative video service providers, 50074-50077 E7-17206 PROPOSED RULES Common carrier services: Commercial mobile radio service providers; roaming obligations reexamination, 50085-50095 E7-17123 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 50108-50109 E7-17119 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Federal agency actions on proposed highways; judicial review claims:
Bexar County, TX; US Highway 281 tollway expansion project, 50159-50160 07-4258 FMC Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Investigations, hearings, petitions, etc.: Barnett-Walker, Angella, 50109-50110 E7-17147 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Traffic control systems; discontinuance or modification: Union Pacific Railroad, 50160 E7-17189 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Banks and bank holding companies: Change in bank control, E7-17141 50110 E7-17190 Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 50110-50111 E7-17142 E7-17191 E7-17192 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service RULES Migratory bird hunting:
Early seasons and bag and possession limits for certain migratory game birds, 50164-50199 07-4255 Food Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 50112 E7-17153 Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Office of the Commissioner, 50112-50114 07-4259 Foreign Foreign Assets Control Office RULES Cuban assets control, Burmese sanctions, Sudanese sanctions, and Iranian transactions regulations: Publishing activities; general license, 50047-50052 E7-17054 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent:
Plumas National Forest, CA, 50096-50098 07-4253 GSA General Services Administration NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 50111-50112 07-4282 Health Health and Human Services Department See Food and Drug Administration Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Land Management Bureau See National Park Service International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping:
Certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from— India, 50098 E7-17225 Corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from— Korea, 50099 E7-17226 Export trade certificates of review, E7-17152 50099-50100 E7-17185 International International Trade Commission NOTICES Meetings: Sunshine Act, 50119 E7-17231 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Administrative protective orders; commission practice summary, 50119-50124 E7-17188 Justice Justice Department NOTICES Pollution control; consent judgments:
Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority, 50124 07-4251 Valero Energy Co., et al., 50124-50125 07-4250 Labor Labor Department See Employment and Training Administration Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Meetings: North Slope Science Initiative, Science Technical Advisory Panel, 50115 E7-17169 Resource Advisory Councils— Twin Falls District, 50115-50116 E7-17181 Realty actions; sales, leases, etc.: Colorado, 50116-50117 07-4266 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 50128-50129 E7-17207 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration RULES Insurer reporting requirements:
Insurers required to file reports; list, 50077-50080 E7-17149 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: National Sea Grant Review Panel, 50100 E7-17193 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Native American human remains, funerary objects; inventory, repatriation, etc.: Augusta Museum of History, Augusta, GA, 50117-50118 E7-17204 Safety Harbour Museum of Regional History, Safety Harbour, FL, 50118 07-4263 Navy Navy Department NOTICES Ships available for donation:
Guided Missile Cruiser ex-TICONDEROGA, 50101-50103 E7-17209 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Meetings: Nuclear Waste and Materials Advisory Committee, 50129-50130 E7-17173 Office of U.S. Trade Office of United States Trade Representative See Trade Representative, Office of United States Presidential Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Colombia; drug interdiction assistance (Presidential Determination) No. 2007-28 of August 16, 2007, 50035 07-4284 RUS Rural Utilities Service PROPOSED RULES Materials and construction; electric standards and specifications:
Primary underground power cable, 50081-50084 E7-17194 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Meetings: Sunshine Act, 50131 E7-17167 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 50131-50148 E7-17163 E7-17165 International Securities Exchange, LLC, 50148-50149 E7-17162 NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 50149-50152 E7-17174 E7-17175 National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., 50153-50155 E7-17166 SBA Small Business Administration RULES Organization, functions, and authority delegations:
Agency management titles; conforming nomenclature change, 50037-50042 E7-17130 NOTICES Meetings: National Small Business Development Center Advisory Board, 50155 07-4261 State State Department NOTICES Culturally significant objects imported for exhibition: Art and Emancipation in Jamaica: Isaac Mendes Belisario and His Worlds, 50155 E7-17312 Surface Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Rail carriers: Control exemptions— Northwestern Pacific Railroad Co., 50161 E7-17164 Trade Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES World Trade Organization:
Dispute settlement panel proceedings— Brazil; agricultural products; domestic support measures and export credit guarantees, 50130-50131 E7-17233 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Highway Administration See Federal Railroad Administration See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration See Surface Transportation Board Treasury Treasury Department See Foreign Assets Control Office NOTICES Meetings: Financial Literacy and Education Commission, 50161-50162 E7-17154 Immigration U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 50114-50115 E7-17200 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 50164-50199 07-4255 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws. To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 72 168 Thursday, August 30, 2007 Rules and Regulations SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 13 CFR Parts 101, 105, 115, 117, 120, 121, 124, 125, 126, 134, 136, and 145 RIN 3245-AF64 Agency Titling Procedure Revision;
Nomenclature Changes AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA or Agency) is amending its regulations to change the titles of certain SBA officials mentioned in the regulations. These nomenclature changes within SBA's management will conform SBA's management titles to those commonly used across the Federal Government. No changes will be made to the responsibilities, reporting relationship, or other regulatory duties of the SBA officials whose titles are changed.
DATES: This final rule is effective August 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard L. Brechbiel, Chief Human Capital Officer, Office of Human Capital Management, Office of Management and Administration, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416. Tel:
(202)205-6780. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SBA is amending its regulations to reflect the new titles of certain SBA officials. The new titles conform SBA's management titles with those commonly used across the Federal Government. No changes are made to the responsibilities, reporting relationship, or other regulatory duties of the SBA officials whose titles are changed. Basically, the title “Associate Deputy Administrator” is retired and replaced with the title “Associate Administrator.” All current Associate Administrators will also receive new titles. Heads of program offices that report directly to the Office of the Administrator will receive the title “Assistant Administrator.” Heads of program offices that do not report directly to the Office of the Administrator, and report through a new Associate Administrator, will receive the title of “Director” of their respective offices. The nomenclature changes will help clarify and add transparency to a management structure that has become unwieldy and opaque to our customers, partners, and the public. Almost all of these changes can be made administratively. SBA has asked for Congressional assistance with changing the few statutory titles that would require legislation to conform to SBA's new title procedures. The statutory titles for SBA officials are:
(1)Associate Administrator for Investment;
(2)Associate Administrator for Minority Small Business
(MSB)and Capital Ownership Development (COD);
(3)Associate Administrator for Veterans Business Development (VBD);
(4)Associate Administrator for Small Business Development Centers (SBDC);
(5)Assistant Administrator for Women's Business Ownership (WBO);
(6)Director of the Division of Program Certification and Eligibility;
(7)Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman;
(8)Director of Office of Rural Affairs (ORA); and
(9)Chief Counsel for Advocacy. Savings Provision This rule shall constitute notice that all references to the old titles cited in SBA rules affected by this Final Rule in any documents, statements, or other communications, in any form or media, and whether made before, on, or after the effective date of this rule, shall be deemed to be references to the new titles. Any actions undertaken in the name of or on behalf of these SBA officials under the old title, whether taken before, on, or after the effective date of this rule, shall be deemed to have been taken in the name of the SBA official under the new title. Compliance With Executive Orders 13132, 12988 and 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 35) The final rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, for the purposes of Executive Order 13132, SBA determines that this final rule has no federalism implications warranting preparation of a federalism assessment. The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has determined that this rule does not constitute a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. This action meets applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. The action does not have retroactive or preemptive effect. SBA has determined that this final rule does not impose additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35. The provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 553), requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for public participation, and a delay in effective date, are inapplicable because this rule involves a rule of agency organization, procedure, or practice. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Further, no other law requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment be given for this final rule. Because a notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for public comment are not required to be given for this rule under 5 U.S.C. or any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* ) are not applicable. Accordingly, this rule is issued in final form. Although there is no formal comment period, public comments on this rule are welcome on a continuing basis. Comments should be submitted to Richard L. Brechbiel, Chief Human Capital Officer, Office of Human Capital Management, Office of Management and Administration, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416. Tel:
(202)205-6780. List of Subjects 13 CFR Part 101 Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations (Government agencies), Organization and functions (Government agencies), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 13 CFR Part 105 Conflicts of interest. 13 CFR Part 115 Claims, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small business, Surety bonds. 13 CFR Part 117 Civil rights, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 13 CFR Part 120 Community development, Loan programs—business, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small business. 13 CFR Part 121 Administrative practice and procedure, Government procurement, Government property, Grant programs-business, Loan programs—business, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small business. 13 CFR Part 124 Administrative practice and procedure, Government procurement, Minority businesses, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small business, Technical assistance. 13 CFR Part 125 Government contracts, Government procurement, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small business, Technical assistance. 13 CFR Part 126 Administrative practice and procedure, Government procurement, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small business. 13 CFR Part 134 Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Organization and functions (Government agencies). 13 CFR Part 136 Administrative practice and procedure, Civil rights, Federal buildings and facilities. 13 CFR Part 145 Administrative practice and procedure, Grant programs, Loan programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 13 CFR parts 101, 105, 115, 117, 120, 121, 124, 125, 126, 134, 136, and 145 are amended as follows: PART 101—ADMINISTRATION 1. The authority citation for part 101 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552 and App. 3, secs. 2, 4(a), 6(a), and 9(a)(1)(T); 15 U.S.C. 633, 634, 687; 31 U.S.C. 6506; 44 U.S.C. 3512; E.O. 12372 (July 14, 1982), 47 FR 30959, 3 CFR, 1982 Comp., p. 197, as amended by E.O. 12416 (April 8, 1983), 48 FR 15887, 3 CFR, 1983 Comp., p. 186. § 101.105 [Amended] 2. Amend § 101.105 in paragraph
(b)as follows: a. Remove “Assistant Administrator for Administration” and add in its place “Director, Office of Business Operations”. b. Remove “Associate Administrator for Minority Enterprise Development” and add in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 101.107 [Amended] 3. Section 101.107(b) is amended by removing “Assistant Administrator for Administration” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Operations”. PART 105—STANDARDS OF CONDUCT AND EMPLOYEE RESTRICTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4. The authority citation for part 105 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 7301; 15 U.S.C. 634, 637(a)(18) and (a)(19), 642, and 645(a). § 105.401 [Amended] 5. In § 105.401: a. Amend paragraph 105.401(b)(2) as follows: i. Remove “Associate Deputy Administrator for Management and Administration” and add in its place “Associate Administrator, Office of Management and Administration”; and ii. Remove “Assistant Administrator for Administration” and add in its place “Director, Office of Business Operations”. b. Amend paragraph 105.401(b)(3) by removing “Director of Human Resources” and adding in its place “Chief Human Capital Officer”. PART 115—SURETY BOND GUARANTEE 6. The authority citation for part 115 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. app 3; 15 U.S.C. 687b, 687c, 694a, 694b; 694b note, Pub. L. 106-554. 7. Amend § 115.10 by removing the definition for “AA/SG”and adding a definition in alphabetical order for “D/SG” to read as follows: § 115.10 Definitions *D/SG* means SBA's Director, Office of Surety Guarantees. § 115.11 [Amended] 8. Section 115.11 is amended by removing “AA/SG” and adding in its place “D/SG”. § 115.18 [Amended] 9. Section 115.18(d) is amended by removing “AA/SG” and adding in its place “D/SG”. § 115.30 [Amended] 10. Section 115.30(c) is amended by removing “AA/SG” each time it appears and adding in its place “D/SG”. § 115.60 [Amended] 11. Section 115.60(b) is amended by removing “AA/SG” and adding in its place “D/SG”. § 115.64 [Amended] 12. Section 115.64 is amended by removing “AA/SG” and adding in its place “D/SG”. PART 117—NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY ASSISTED PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES OF SBA—EFFECTUATION OF THE AGE DISCRIMINATION ACT OF 1975, AS AMENDED 13. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: Authority: Age Discrimination Act of 1975, 42 U.S.C. 6101, *et seq.* § 117.11 [Amended] 14. Sections 117.11(b) and 117.11(d)(4) are amended by removing “Director, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity and Compliance and Chief, Office of Civil Rights Compliance” and adding in its place “Assistant Administrator, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity & Civil Rights Compliance”. § 117.15 [Amended] 15. Section 117.15(a)(3) is amended by removing “Chief, Office of Civil Rights Compliance through the Director, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity and Compliance,” and adding in its place “Assistant Administrator, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity & Civil Rights Compliance”. PART 120—BUSINESS LOANS 16. The authority citation for part 120 continues to read as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 634(b)(6), 636(a) and (h), 696(3), and 697(a)(2). § 120.193 [Amended] 17. Section 120.193 is amended by removing “Associate Administrator for Financial Assistance (AA/FA)” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Financial Assistance (D/FA)”. § 120.211 [Amended] 18. Amend section 120.211 as follows: a. In paragraphs
(a)and
(c)by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”; and b. In paragraph
(b)by removing “Associate Administrator for Minority Enterprise Development” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 120.376 [Amended] 19. Section 120.376 is amended in paragraph
(a)by removing “Associate Administrator for Minority Enterprise Development (“MED”)” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 120.424 [Amended] 20. Section 120.424(a) is amended by removing “Associate Administrator for Financial Assistance (AA/FA)” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.434 [Amended] 21. Section 120.434(b) is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.441 [Amended] 22. Section 120.441(b) is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.442 [Amended] 23. Section 120.442 is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.451 [Amended] 24. Section 120.451 is amended in paragraphs (a), (c), (e), and
(f)by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.455 [Amended] 25. Section 120.455 is amended by removing “AA/FA” each time it appears and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.553 [Amended] 26. Section 120.553 is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.630 [Amended] 27. Section 120.630 is amended in paragraph
(a)introductory text and paragraph (a)(4) by removing “AA/FA” each time it appears, and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.631 [Amended] 28. Section 120.631 is amended in paragraph
(a)introductory text, and paragraph (b), and
(c)by removing “AA/FA” each time it appears, and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.660 [Amended] 29. Section 120.660 is amended in paragraph
(a)introductory text, paragraph
(b)introductory text, and paragraph
(c)by removing “AA/FA” each time it appears and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.702 [Amended] 30. Section 120.702(b) is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.710 [Amended] 31. Amend § 120.710 as follows: a. In paragraph
(c)by removing “SBA's Associate Administrator for Financial Assistance (“AA/FA”) and adding in its place “Director, Office of Financial Assistance (“D/FA”); and b. In paragraphs
(c)and
(d)and paragraph
(e)introductory text, by removing “AA/FA” each time it appears and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.716 [Amended] 32. Section 120.716 is amended in paragraph
(a)introductory text, paragraph
(b)introductory text, and paragraph
(d)by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.810 [Amended] 33. Section 120.810(d) is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.812 [Amended] 34. Section 120.812(c) is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.837 [Amended] 35. Section 120.837(a) is amended by removing “AA/FA” each time it appears and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.840 [Amended] 36. Section 120.840(b) is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.845 [Amended] 37. Section 120.845(b) is amended by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.847 [Amended] 38. Amend § 120.847 as follows: a. In paragraph (h)(2) in the second sentence by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”; b. In paragraph (h)(2) in the third sentence by removing “AA/FA's” and adding in its place “D/FA's”; and c. In paragraph
(i)by removing “AA/FA's” and adding in its place “D/FA's”. § 120.854 [Amended] 39. Section 120.854 is amended in paragraph
(a)introductory text, paragraph
(b)introductory text, and paragraph
(c)introductory text, by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.855 [Amended] 40. Section 120.855 is amended in paragraph
(a)introductory text, and paragraphs (b), (c), and
(d)by removing “AA/FA” and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.856 [Amended] 41. Section 120.856 is amended in paragraphs (a)(1),(2); (b)(1),(5); (c)(1),(2); (d); and (e)(2),(3) by removing “AA/FA” each time it appears and adding in its place “D/FA”. § 120.956 [Amended] 42. Section 120.956 is amended by removing “AA/FA” each time it appears and adding in its place “D/FA”. PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE REGULATIONS 43. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 636(b), 637(a), 644, and 662(5); and Pub. L. 105-135, sec. 401 *et seq.* , 111 Stat. 2592. § 121.102 [Amended] 44. Section 121.102(d) is amended by removing “Assistant Administrator for Size Standards” and adding in its place “Division Chief, Office of Size Standards”. § 121.903 [Amended] 45. Section 121.903 is amended in paragraphs (a)(2) introductory text, and paragraph
(4)by removing “Assistant Administrator for Size Standards” and adding in its place “Division Chief, Office of Size Standards”. § 121.1001 [Amended] 46. Amend § 121.1001 as follows: a. In paragraphs (a)(1)(iii), (a)(3)(iv), (a)(5)(iii), (a)(7)(iii) and (a)(8)(iv) and paragraphs (b)(3)(ii), (b)(4)(i), and (b)(9), by removing “Associate Administrator for Government Contracting” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Government Contracting”; b. In paragraph (a)(4)(iii), by removing “Assistant Administrator for Technology” and adding “Division Chief, Office of Technology”; c. In paragraphs (a)(6)(iv) and (b)(8)(ii), remove “Associate Administrator for the HUBZone program” and add “Director, Office of HUBZone”; and d. In paragraph (a)(2)(iii), remove “Associate Administrator for 8(a) Business Development” and add in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. e. In paragraphs (a)(5)(iii), (b)(2)(i)(B), (b)(2)(ii)(C), and (b)(7)(ii) remove “Associate Administrator for 8(a) BD” and add in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. f. In paragraph (a)(7)(iii) remove “Associate Administrator for MED” and add in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 121.1008 [Amended] 47. Amend § 121.1008 as follows: a. In paragraph
(a)by removing “AA/HUB” and adding “D/HUB”; b. In paragraph
(a)by removing “Assistant Administrator for Technology” and adding “Division Chief, Office of Technology”; and c. In paragraph
(a)by removing “AA/8(a) BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 121.1103 [Amended] 48. Section 121.1103 is amended in paragraph
(a)by removing “Associate Administrator for 8(a) Business Development” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 121.1203 [Amended] 49. Section 121.1203 is amended by removing “Associate Administrator for Government Contracting” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Government Contracting”. § 121.1204 [Amended] 50. Section 121.1204 is amended in paragraphs (a)(2), (5), (6), (7)(i); and (b)(2),
(3)by removing “SBA Associate Administrator for Government Contracting” each time it appears, and adding in its place “Director, Office of Government Contracting”. PART 124—8(a) BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT/SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS STATUS DETERMINATIONS 51. The authority citation for part 124 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 634(b)(6), 636(j), 637(a), 637(d) and Pub. L. 99-661, sec. 1207, Pub. L. 100-656, Pub. L. 101-37, Pub. L. 101-574, and 42 U.S.C. 9815. § 124.103 [Amended] 52. Section 124.103 is amended in paragraph (b)(3) by removing “Associate Administrator for 8(a)(BD) (AA/8(a)BD)” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.105 [Amended] 53. Section 124.105 is amended in paragraph
(i)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” each time it appears and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.106 [Amended] 54. Section 124.106 is amended in paragraphs (e)(2) and
(3)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” each time it appears, and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.108 [Amended] 55. Section 124.108 is amended in paragraphs (a)(1) and
(2)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” each time it appears and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.109 [Amended] 56. Section 124.109 is amended in paragraph
(b)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.204 [Amended] 57. Section 124.204 is amended in paragraphs (a), (e), and
(f)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” each time it appears, and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.206 [Amended] 58. Section 124.206 is amended in paragraphs
(b)and
(d)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” each time it appears, and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.304 [Amended] 59. Section 124.304 is amended in paragraphs (c), (d), and
(e)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.305 [Amended] 60. Section 124.305 is amended in paragraphs (a), (d), and
(e)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” each time it appears, and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.503 [Amended] 61. Section 124.503 is amended in paragraph (a)(5) by removing “AA/8(a)BD” each time it appears, and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.504 [Amended] 62. Section 124.504 is amended in paragraph
(a)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.506 [Amended] 63. Section 124.506 is amended in paragraph
(c)introductory text, and paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3) and
(d)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.509 [Amended] 64. Section 124.509 is amended in paragraph (e)(1) by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.517 [Amended] 65. Section 124.517 is amended in paragraph (d)(1) by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.520 [Amended] 66. Section 124.520 is amended in paragraphs (b)(2) and (e)(2) by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 124.1008 [Amended] 67. Amend § 124.1008 as follows: a. In paragraphs
(a)and
(f)by removing “Assistant Administrator for Small Disadvantaged Business Certification and Eligibility (AA/SDBCE)” and adding in its place “Division Chief, Small Disadvantaged Business Certification and Eligibility (DC/SDBCE)”. b. In paragraphs (f)(1), (2), (3)(i-ii) and
(4)by removing “AA/SDBCE” each time it appears and adding in its place “DC/SDBCE”. § 124.1010 [Amended] 68. Section 124.1010(b) introductory text is amended by removing “AA/SDBCE” and adding in its place “DC/SDBCE”. § 124.1016 [Amended] 69. Section 124.1016(b) is amended by removing “AA/SDBCE” and adding in its place “DC/SDBCE”. § 124.1018 [Amended] 70. Section 124.1018(e) is amended by removing “SBA's Deputy Associate Deputy Administrator for Government Contracting and Minority Enterprise Development (DADA/GC&MED)” and adding in its place “Associate Administrator for Government Contracting and Business Development (AA/GC&BD)”. § 124.1020 [Amended] 71. Section 124.1020 is amended in paragraphs (b)(3), (c)(2), and (d)(1) by removing “AA/SDBCE” and adding in its place “DC/SDBCE”. § 124.1022 [Amended] 72. Section 124.1022 is amended in paragraph (a), paragraph
(b)introductory text, paragraph (b)(1), and paragraph
(c)introductory text, by removing “AA/SDBCE” each time it appears, and adding in its place “DC/SDBCE”. § 124.1023 [Amended] 73. Amend § 124.1023 as follows: a. In paragraph
(a)by removing “AA/SDBCE” and adding in its place “DC/SDBCE”; and b. In paragraphs (h)(1) and
(2)by removing “DADA/GC&MED” each time it appears, and adding in its place “AA/GC&BD”. § 124.1024 [Amended] 74. Amend § 124.1024 as follows: a. Paragraphs (a), (b), (g), and
(i)by removing “DADA/GC&MED” and adding in its place “AA/GC&BD”; and b. Paragraph
(d)by removing “AA/SDBCE” each time it appears, and adding in its place “DC/SDBCE”. PART 125—GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING PROGRAMS 75. The authority citation for part 125 continues to read as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632(p), (q); 634(b)(6); 637; 644 and 657(f). § 125.5 [Amended] 76. Sections 125.5(i)(3) and (j)(2) are amended by removing “Associate Administrator for Government Contracting (AA/GC)” each time it appears, and adding in its place “Director, Office of Government Contracting (D/GC)”. § 125.6 [Amended] 77. Section 125.6(d)(1) is amended by removing “Associate Administrator of the Office of Government Contracting” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Government Contracting”. § 125.25 [Amended] 78. Sections 125.25(c) and
(e)are amended by removing “Associate Administrator for Government Contracting” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Government Contracting”. § 125.26 [Amended] 79. Section 125.26(a) is amended by removing “Associate Administrator for Government Contracting” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Government Contracting”. PART 126—HUBZONE PROGRAM 80. The authority citation for part 126 continues to read as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632(a), 632(j), 632(p) and 657a. 81. Amend § 126.103 as follows: a. By removing the definition of “AA/BD” and adding a new definition to read as follows: b. By removing the definition of “AA/HUB” and adding a new definition to read as follows: and c. By removing the definition of “ADA/GC&8(a)BD” and adding a new definition to read as follows: § 126.103 What definitions are important in the HUBZone program. “D/BD means SBA's Director, Office of Business Development”; “D/HUB means SBA's Director Office of HUBZone”; “AA/GC&BD means Associate Administrator, Office of Government Contracting & Business Development”. § 126.303 [Amended] 82. Section 126.303 is amended by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.306 [Amended] 83. Section 126.306(a) is amended by removing “AA/HUB” each time that it appears and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.307 [Amended] 84. Section 126.307 is amended by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.308 [Amended] 85. Section 126.308 is amended by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.400 [Amended] 86. Section 126.400 is amended by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.403 [Amended] 87. Section 126.403(a) is amended by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.501 [Amended] 88. Section 126.501 is amended by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.503 [Amended] 89. Section 126.503 is amended in paragraphs (a), (b), and
(c)by removing “AA/HUB” each time it appears and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.606 [Amended] 90. Amend § 126.606 as follows: a. By removing “AA/BD” and adding in its place “D/BD”; and b. By removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.610 [Amended] 91. Section 126.610(b) is amended by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.801 [Amended] 92. Section 126.801 is amended in paragraph (c)(2) and paragraph
(e)by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.802 [Amended] 93. Section 126.802 is amended by removing “AA/HUB” and adding in its place “D/HUB”. § 126.803 [Amended] 94. Section 126.803(d) is amended by removing “ADA/GC&BD” and adding in its place “AA/GC&BD”. PART 134—RULES OF PROCEDURE GOVERNING CASES BEFORE THE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS 95. The authority citation for part 134 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 504; 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 637(a), 648(l), 656(i), and 687(c); E.O. 12549, 51 FR 6370, 3 CFR 1986 Comp., p. 189. § 134.302 [Amended] 96. Section 134.302 is amended in paragraph
(b)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 134.403 [Amended] 97. Section 134.403 is amended in paragraphs
(a)and
(b)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 134.406 [Amended] 98. Section 134.406 is amended in paragraph
(e)by removing “AA/8(a)BD” each time it appears, and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Development”. § 134.501 [Amended] 99. Amend § 134.501 as follows: a. By removing “Associate Administrator for Government Contracting (AA/GC)”; and adding in its place “Director, Office of Government Contracting (D/GC)”. b. By removing “AA/GC” and adding in its place “D/GC”. § 134.505 [Amended] 100. Sections 134.505(a)(2) and (b)(1) are amended by removing “AA/GC” and adding in its place “D/GC”. § 134.507 [Amended] 101. Section 134.507 is amended by removing “AA/GC” each time it appears, and adding in its place “D/GC”. § 134.508 [Amended] 102. Section 134.508 is amended by removing “AA/GC's” and adding in its place “D/GC's”. § 134.515 [Amended] 103. Section 134.515(c) is amended by removing “AA/GC” and adding in its place “D/GC”. PART 136—ENFORCEMENT OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAP IN PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 104. The authority citation for part 136 continues to read as follows: Authority: 29 U.S.C. 794. § 136.170 [Amended] 105. Amend § 136.170 as follows: a. In paragraph (c)(2) by removing “Chief, Office of Civil Rights Compliance (OCRC)” and adding in its place “Assistant Administrator, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity & Civil Rights Compliance (AA/EEOCCR)”; b. In paragraphs (c)(3), (c)(4); paragraphs (e)(1-3) introductory text; paragraphs (f)(1-3); paragraph
(g)introductory text; paragraphs (g)(4); (h)(1), (h)(3), (h)(4)(i) introductory text; and paragraphs (i)(1-2) and; (j)(4) by removing “Chief, OCRC” each time it appears and adding in its place “AA/EEOCCR”; and c. In paragraphs (h)(1, 3 and 4); (i)(1); and (j)(1-3), by removing “Director, OEEOC” each time it appears, and adding in its place “AA/EEOCCR”. PART 145—GOVERNMENTWIDE DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION (NONPROCUREMENT) 106. The authority citation for part 145 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 *et seq.* ; 15 U.S.C. 631 *et seq.* ; Sec. 2455, Pub. L. 103-355, 108 Stat. 3327 (31 U.S.C. 6101 note); E.O. 11738, 3 CFR 1973 Comp., p. 799; E.O. 12549, 3 CFR, 1986 Comp. p. 189; E.O. 12689, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 235. § 145.935 [Amended] 107. In § 145.935: a. Paragraph
(b)is amended by removing “Assistant Administrator for Lender Oversight” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Credit Risk Management”. b. Paragraph
(b)is amended by removing “Assistant Administrator for Administration” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Operations”. § 145.1010 [Amended] 108. In § 145.1010: a. Paragraph
(b)is amended by removing “Assistant Administrator for Lender Oversight” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Credit Risk Management”. b. Paragraph
(b)is amended by removing “Assistant Administrator for Administration” and adding in its place “Director, Office of Business Operations”. Dated: August 23, 2007. Steven C. Preston, Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-17130 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29073; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-178-AD; Amendment 39-15184; AD 2007-18-04] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330 and A340 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: Two A330 operators have reported uncontained APU (auxiliary power unit) generator failures on ground. Preliminary investigations confirmed an uncontained APU Generator failure with subsequent aircraft structural damages to the APU compartment and, in one case, to the stabiliser compartment. Loose APU generator parts can lead to damage to the APU fire wall which might reduce its fire extinguishing capability, possibly leading to a temporary uncontrolled fire which constitutes an unsafe condition. This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: This AD becomes effective September 14, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of September 14, 2007. On June 26, 2007 (72 FR 31973, June 11, 2007), the Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain other publications. We must receive comments on this AD by October 1, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *DOT Docket Web Site:* Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • *Fax:*
(202)493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* , or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is located on the ground floor of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Backman, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425)227-2797; fax
(425)227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion On May 30, 2007, we issued AD 2007-12-10, Amendment 39-15088 (72 FR 31973, June 11, 2007). That AD required actions intended to address an unsafe condition on the products listed above. Since we issued AD 2007-12-10, it has been determined that the drive end bearing
(DEB)failures did not occur instantly, and small debris in the filter could be detected before collapse of the DEB. The one-time inspection mandated by AD 2007-12-10 only detects large debris. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive
(EAD)2007-0188R1, dated July 24, 2007 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: Two A330 operators have reported uncontained APU (auxiliary power unit) generator failures on ground. Preliminary investigations confirmed an uncontained APU Generator failure with subsequent aircraft structural damages to the APU compartment and, in one case, to the stabiliser compartment. Loose APU generator parts can lead to damage to the APU fire wall which might reduce its fire extinguishing capability, possibly leading to a temporary uncontrolled fire which constitutes an unsafe condition. Further detailed investigations are ongoing to determine the root causes. It has been evidenced that for both events, this unknown root cause initiates a collapse of the Drive End Bearing
(DEB)leading to an uncontained failure. Evidence shows also that the DEB failures were not instantaneous, and therefore, the detection of small debris could indicate early stage of DEB failure. A one-time inspection for detection of large-scale debris in the Generator Scavenge inlet screen (last chance filter) of the APU allowing to identify APU Generator in a state close to failure has been rendered mandatory by Airworthiness Directive
(AD)2007-0080-R1 [that AD corresponds to FAA AD 2007-12-10]. The original Emergency Airworthiness Directive
(AD)2007-0188-E mandated a repetitive inspection of the APU Generator Scavenge filter element and filter housing and APU Generator Drain plug for signs of small debris coming from the APU Generator and therefore to detect any APU Generator failure in an early stage. The corrective action includes retaining the requirements of the existing AD (a one-time inspection of the inlet screen and, for certain airplanes, a check of the differential pressure indicator button, and applicable corrective actions). The corrective action adds repetitive inspections of the APU Generator scavenge oil filter element and housing and the APU Generator drain plug for signs of metallic debris, and applicable corrective actions. Those corrective actions include shipping the debris to Airbus or Goodrich. The corrective actions also include the following: • Replacing the APU generator scavenge oil filter for airplanes on which metallic debris is found. • Inspecting the inside filter element and outer diameter of the filter housing for damage to the packing and replacing the packing if damaged. • Cleaning the generator drain plug and reinstalling the plug with a new seal for airplanes on which no metallic debris or metallic debris within acceptable criteria is found. • Keeping the APU inoperative. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued All Operators Telexes
(AOTs)A330-24A3044 and A340-24A5021, both Revision 01, both dated July 20, 2007; and AOT A340-24A4057, Revision 02, dated August 14, 2007. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD. FAA's Determination of the Effective Date An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because an uncontained APU failure can lead to damage to the APU fire wall, which might reduce its fire extinguishing capability, possibly leading to an uncontrolled fire. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days. Comments Invited This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2007-29073; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-178- AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this AD. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Amendment 39-15088 (72 FR 31973, June 11, 2007) and adding the following new AD: **2007-18-04 Airbus:** Amendment 39-15184. Docket No. FAA-2007-29073; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-178-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective September 14, 2007. Affected ADs
(b)This AD supersedes AD 2007-12-10. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Airbus Model A330 and A340 airplanes; certificated in any category; all certified models, all serial numbers. Subject
(d)Air Transport Association
(ATA)of America Code 24: Electrical power. Reason
(e)The mandatory continued airworthiness information
(MCAI)states: Two A330 operators have reported uncontained APU (auxiliary power unit) generator failures on ground. Preliminary investigations confirmed an uncontained APU Generator failure with subsequent aircraft structural damages to the APU compartment and, in one case, to the stabilizer compartment. Loose APU generator parts can lead to damage to the APU fire wall which might reduce its fire extinguishing capability, possibly leading to a temporary uncontrolled fire which constitutes an unsafe condition. Further detailed investigations are ongoing to determine the root causes. It has been evidenced that for both events, this unknown root cause initiates a collapse of the Drive End Bearing
(DEB)leading to an uncontained failure. Evidence shows also that the DEB failures were not instantaneous, and therefore, the detection of small debris could indicate an early stage of DEB failure. A one-time inspection for detection of large-scale debris in the Generator Scavenge inlet screen (last chance filter) of the APU allowing to identify APU Generator in a state close to failure has been rendered mandatory by Airworthiness Directive
(AD)2007-0080-R1 [that AD corresponds to FAA AD 2007-12-10]. The original Emergency Airworthiness Directive
(AD)2007-0188-E mandated a repetitive inspection of the APU Generator Scavenge filter element and filter housing and APU Generator Drain plug for signs of small debris coming from the APU Generator and therefore to detect any APU Generator failure in an early stage. The corrective action includes retaining the requirements of the existing AD (a one-time inspection of the inlet screen and, for certain airplanes, a check of the differential pressure indicator button, and applicable corrective actions). The corrective action adds repetitive inspections of the APU Generator scavenge oil filter element and housing and the APU Generator drain plug for signs of metallic debris, and applicable corrective actions. Those corrective actions include shipping the debris to Airbus or Goodrich. The corrective actions also include the following: Replacing the APU generator scavenge oil filter for airplanes on which metallic debris is found; inspecting the inside filter element and outer diameter of the filter housing for damage to the packing and replacing the packing if damaged; cleaning the generator drain plug and reinstalling the plug with a new seal for airplanes on which no metallic debris or metallic debris within acceptable criteria is found; or keeping the APU inoperative. Restatement of Requirements of AD 2007-12-10
(f)Unless already done, do the following actions.
(1)For airplanes on which the date of issuance of the original French standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original French export certificate of airworthiness is before March 1, 2007: Within 63 days after June 26, 2007, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus All Operators Telex
(AOT)A330-24A3042, A340-24A4056, or A340-24A5020, all Revision 02, all dated April 12, 2007; as applicable: Inspect the inlet screen (last chance filter) for the generator scavenge-oil pump for signs of debris and, as applicable, apply all associated corrective actions before further flight.
(2)For Model A330 aircraft operating under MMEL (master minimum equipment list) Item 24-22-01 “AC Main Generation” or MMEL Item 36-11-01 “Bleed Air Supply System Failure” and on which the date of issuance of the original French standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original French export certificate of airworthiness is before March 1, 2007: As of June 26, 2007, before each flight, perform a check of the differential pressure indicator button on the lube filter and the generator scavenge filter in accordance with the instructions of Airbus AOT A330-24A3042, Revision 02, dated April 12, 2007, until accomplishment of paragraph (g)(5) of this AD. Note 1: The repetitive checks before each flight specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD are not required for airplanes operated under MMEL Item 36-11-01, provided the APU generator has been removed or deactivated in accordance with the instructions of Airbus AOT A330-24A3042, Revision 02, dated April 12, 2007.
(3)Actions done before June 26, 2007, in accordance with the applicable Airbus service information in Table 1 of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding provisions of paragraph
(f)of this AD. Table 1.—Acceptable Earlier Revisions of Service Information Airbus all operators telex Revision level Date A330-24A3042 Original March 22, 2007. A330-24A3042 01 March 29, 2007. A340-24A4056 Original March 22, 2007. A340-24A4056 01 March 29, 2007. A340-24A5020 Original March 22, 2007. A340-24A5020 01 March 29, 2007. New Requirements of This AD: Actions and Compliance
(g)Unless already done, do the following actions.
(1)For airplanes on which the date of issuance of the original French standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original French export certificate of airworthiness is on or before July 1, 2007: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, in accordance with the instructions of paragraph 4.2.1 of the applicable Airbus service information specified in Table 2 of this AD: Clean and inspect the APU Generator scavenge oil filter element and housing and inspect the APU generator drain plug to detect metallic debris, and apply all applicable associated corrective actions before further flight. Table 2.—Service Information Airbus all operators telex Revision level Date A330-24A3044 01 July 20, 2007. A340-24A4057 02 August 14, 2007. A340-24A5021 01 July 20, 2007.
(2)Within 450 aircraft flight hours or 200 APU operating hours, whichever occurs later, after accomplishing the inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, in accordance with the instructions of paragraph 4.2.2 of the applicable Airbus service information specified in Table 2 of this AD: Inspect the APU generator scavenge oil filter element and housing and the APU generator drain plug to detect metallic debris; and apply all applicable associated corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspections thereafter at intervals not to exceed 450 aircraft flight hours or 200 APU operating hours, whichever occurs later.
(3)For airplanes on which the date of issuance of the original French standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original French export certificate of airworthiness is after July 1, 2007: Within 450 aircraft flight hours or 200 APU operating hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, in accordance with the instructions of paragraph 4.2.2 of the applicable Airbus service information specified in Table 2 of this AD: Inspect the APU generator scavenge oil filter element and housing and the APU generator drain plug to detect metallic debris; and apply all applicable associated corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspections thereafter at intervals not to exceed 450 aircraft flight hours or 200 APU operating hours, whichever occurs later.
(4)Actions done before the effective date of this AD, in accordance with the applicable Airbus service information in Table 3 of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding provisions of paragraph
(g)of this AD. Table 3.—Acceptable Earlier Revisions of Service Information Airbus all operators telex Revision level Date A330-24A3044 Original July 5, 2007. A340-24A4057 Original July 5, 2007. A340-24A4057 01 July 20, 2007. A340-24A5021 Original July 5, 2007.
(5)For Model A330 aircraft operating under MMEL Item 24-22-01, “AC Main Generation,” or MMEL Item 36-11-01, “Bleed Air Supply System Failure”: Unless the APU generator has been deferred in accordance with the MMEL by deactivation (quill shaft removed) or removal, the inspection required by paragraph (g)(2) or (g)(3), as applicable, of this AD must be performed prior to the first flight of the specified MMEL repair time interval. Accomplishing the actions in this paragraph terminates the actions required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD. Note 2: For A330 aircraft, MMEL Item 24-22-01 (AC Main Generation) and/or MMEL Item 36-11-01 (Bleed Air Supply System Failure) require that the APU be used during the entire flight. FAA AD Differences Note 3: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions
(h)The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, International Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Tim Backman, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425)227-2797; fax
(425)227-1149. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information
(i)Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI)European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)Airworthiness Directive
(EAD)2007-0188R1, dated July 24, 2007, and the AOTs specified in Table 2 of this AD, for related information. Material Incorporated by Reference
(j)You must use the applicable Airbus service information specified in Table 4 of this AD to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. (Only the first page of these documents contains the document number, revision level, and date; no other pages of these documents contain this information.)
(1)The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the Airbus service information specified in Table 5 of this AD under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2)The Director of the Federal Register previously approved the incorporation by reference of the Airbus service information specified in Table 6 of this AD on June 26, 2007 (72 FR 31973, June 11, 2007).
(3)For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.
(4)You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
(202)741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html* . Table 4.—All Material Incorporated by Reference Airbus all operators telex Revision level Date A330-24A3042 02 April 12, 2007. A330-24A3044 01 July 20, 2007. A340-24A4056 02 April 12, 2007. A340-24A4057 02 August 14, 2007. A340-24A5020 02 April 12, 2007. A340-24A5021 01 July 20, 2007. Table 5.—New Material Incorporated by Reference Airbus all operators telex Revision level Date A330-24A3044 01 July 20, 2007. A340-24A4057 02 August 14, 2007. A340-24A5021 01 July 20, 2007. Table 6.—Material Previously Incorporated by Reference Airbus all operators telex Revision level Date A330-24A3042 02 April 12, 2007. A340-24A4056 02 April 12, 2007. A340-24A5020 02 April 12, 2007. Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 21, 2007. Daniel I. Cheney, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7-17011 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-27911; Airspace Docket No. 07-ANM-8] Revision of Class E Airspace; Hailey, ID AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action will establish Class E surface airspace at Hailey, ID. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate aircraft using a new Area Navigation
(RNAV)Required Navigational Performance
(RNP)Instrument Approach Procedure
(IAP)at Friedman Memorial Airport, Hailey, ID. DATES: *Effective Date:* 0901 UTC, December 20, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation Administration, Western Service Area Office, System Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone
(425)917-6726. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: History On June 1, 2007, the FAA published in the **Federal Register** a notice of proposed rulemaking to establish Class E airspace at Hailey, ID (72 FR 30498). This action would improve the safety of IFR aircraft at Friedman Memorial Airport, Hailey, ID. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9P dated September 1, 2006, and effective September 15, 2006, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in that Order. The Rule This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by establishing Class E airspace at Hailey, ID. Additional controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate IFR aircraft at Friedman Memorial Airport, Hailey, ID. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9P, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated September 1, 2006, and effective September 15, 2006 is amended as follows: Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as a Surface Area. ANM ID E5 Hailey, ID [Revised] Friedman Memorial Airport, ID (Lat. 43°30′14″ N., long. 114°17′45″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 5.5-mile radius of Friedman Memorial Airport, and within 2 miles west and 5.5 miles east of the 328° bearing from the airport extending from the 5.5-mile radius to 10 miles northwest of the airport, and within 2 miles west and 4 miles east of the 159° bearing from the airport extending from the 5.5-mile radius to 15.5 miles southeast of the airport; that airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface bounded by a line beginning at lat. 44°00′00″ N., long. 114°55′00″ W., thence to lat. 44°00′00″ N., long. 113°53′00″ W., thence to lat. 43°00′00″ N., long. 113°49′00″ W., thence to lat. 43°00′00″ N., long. 114°55′00″ W., thence to point of beginning. Issued in Seattle, Washington, on August 20, 2007. Clark Desing, Manager, System Support Group, Western Service Center. [FR Doc. E7-17069 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of Foreign Assets Control 31 CFR Parts 515, 537, 538, and 560 Cuban Assets Control Regulations, Burmese Sanctions Regulations, Sudanese Sanctions Regulations, and Iranian Transactions Regulations AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury is revising the general license for certain publishing activities contained in the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, Burmese Sanctions Regulations, Sudanese Sanctions Regulations, and Iranian Transactions Regulations. DATES: *Effective Date:* August 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202/622-2480, Assistant Director for Compliance, Outreach & Implementation, tel.: 202/622-2490, Assistant Director for Policy, tel.: 202/622-4855, Office of Foreign Assets Control, or Chief Counsel (Foreign Assets Control), tel.: 202/622-2410, Office of the General Counsel, Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC 20220 (not toll free numbers). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic and Facsimile Availability This document and additional information concerning the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) are available from OFAC's Web site ( *http://www.treas.gov/ofac* ) or via facsimile through a 24-hour fax-on demand service, tel.:
(202)622-0077. Background On December 17, 2004, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) of the Department of the Treasury amended the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 CFR Part 515 (the “CACR”), the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR Part 538 (the “SSR”), and the Iranian Transactions Regulations, 31 CFR Part 560 (the “ITR”), to authorize certain activities related to publishing. See 69 FR 75468 (December 17, 2004). OFAC added §§ 515.577, 538.529, and 560.538 to the CACR, SSR, and ITR, respectively, to authorize by general license transactions not already exempt from regulation that support the publishing and marketing of manuscripts, books, journals, and newspapers in paper and electronic format (“written publications”). On August 16, 2005, OFAC amended and reissued the Burmese Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR Part 537 (the “BSR”) including, at § 537.526, a general license for the same publishing-related transactions. OFAC is amending these general licenses in various places to authorize the augmentation of written publications in electronic format through the addition of embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching the written publications as well as the exportation of such embedded software provided certain conditions are met. These amendments also clarify that the term “written publications” used in the general licenses includes manuscripts, books, journals, and newspapers even if they are published solely in electronic format. A note is added to each general license clarifying that the importation and exportation of information or informational materials are exempt from the prohibitions and regulations contained in the CACR, SSR, and ITR and, in the case of the BSR, clarifying that the importation of informational materials is authorized and the exportation of informational materials is exempt from the prohibitions and regulations of the BSR. These amendments also make various other technical corrections, clarifications, and conforming changes. Public Participation; Procedural Requirements Because the CACR, BSR, SSR, and ITR involve a foreign affairs function, the provisions of Executive Order 12866 and the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, opportunity for public participation, and delay in effective date are inapplicable. Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this rule, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) does not apply. Paperwork Reduction Act The collections of information related to 31 CFR parts 515, 537, 538, and 560 are contained in 31 CFR part 501. Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), those collections of information have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1505-0164. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid control number. List of Subjects 31 CFR Part 515 Administrative practice and procedure, Cuba, Exports, Foreign trade, Imports, Information. 31 CFR Part 537 Administrative practice and procedure, Burma, Exports, Foreign trade, Imports, Information. 31 CFR Part 538 Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Foreign trade, Imports, Information, Sudan. 31 CFR Part 560 Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Foreign trade, Iran, Imports, Information. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, OFAC amends 31 CFR parts 515, 537, 538, and 560 as follows: PART 515—CUBAN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 515 continues to read as follows: Authority: 18 U.S.C. 2332d; 22 U.S.C. 2370(a), 6001-6010; 31 U.S.C. 321(b); 50 U.S.C. App 1-44; Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 106-387, 114 Stat. 1549; E.O. 9193, 7 FR 5205, 3 CFR, 1938-1943 Comp., p. 1147; E.O. 9989, 13 FR 4891, 3 CFR, 1943-1948 Comp., p. 748; Proc. 3447, 27 FR 1085, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 157; E.O. 12854, 58 FR 36587, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 614. Subpart E—Licenses, Authorizations, and Statements of Licensing Policy 2. Section 515.577 is revised to read as follows: § 515.577 Authorized transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to publishing.
(a)To the extent that such activities are not exempt from this part, and subject to the restrictions set forth in paragraphs
(b)through
(d)of this section, persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States are authorized to engage in all transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of manuscripts, books, journals, and newspapers in paper or electronic format (collectively, “written publications”). This section does not apply if the parties to the transactions described in this paragraph include the Government of Cuba. For the purposes of this section, the term “Government of Cuba” includes the state and the Government of Cuba, as well as any political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including the Central Bank of Cuba; any person occupying the positions identified in § 515.570(a)(3); employees of the Ministry of Justice; and any person acting or purporting to act directly or indirectly on behalf of any of the foregoing with respect to the transactions described in this paragraph. For the purposes of this section, the term “Government of Cuba” does not include any academic and research institutions and their personnel. Pursuant to this section, the following activities are authorized, provided that persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States ensure that they are not engaging, without separate authorization, in the activities identified in paragraphs
(b)through
(d)of this section:
(1)Commissioning and making advance payments for identifiable written publications not yet in existence, to the extent consistent with industry practice;
(2)Collaborating on the creation and enhancement of written publications; (3)(i) Augmenting written publications through the addition of items such as photographs, artwork, translation, explanatory text, and, for a written publication in electronic format, the addition of embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching the written publication;
(ii)Exporting embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching a written publication in electronic format, provided that, to the extent a license is required under the Export Administration Regulations, 15 CFR parts 730 through 774 (the “EAR”), the exportation is licensed or otherwise authorized by the Department of Commerce under the provisions of the EAR;
(4)Substantive editing of written publications;
(5)Payment of royalties for written publications;
(6)Creating or undertaking a marketing campaign to promote a written publication; and
(7)Other transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications as described in this paragraph (a).
(b)This section does not authorize transactions involving the provision of goods or services not necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications as described in paragraph
(a)of this section. For example, this section does not authorize persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States:
(1)To provide or receive individualized or customized services (including, but not limited to, accounting, legal, design, or consulting services), other than those necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications, even though such individualized or customized services are delivered through the use of information and informational materials;
(2)To create or undertake for any person a marketing campaign with respect to any service or product other than a written publication, or to create or undertake a marketing campaign of any kind for the benefit of the Government of Cuba;
(3)To engage in the exportation or importation of goods to or from Cuba other than the exportation of embedded software described in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section;
(4)To operate a publishing house, sales outlet, or other office in Cuba; or
(5)To engage in transactions related to travel to, from, or within Cuba. Note to paragraph (b): The importation from Cuba and the exportation to Cuba of information or informational materials, as defined in § 515.332, whether commercial or otherwise, regardless of format or medium of transmission, are exempt from the prohibitions and regulations of this part. See § 515.206(a).
(c)This section does not authorize persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to engage the services of publishing houses or translators in Cuba unless such activity is primarily for the dissemination of written publications in Cuba.
(d)This section does not authorize:
(1)Transactions for the development, production, or design of software;
(2)Transactions for the development, production, design, or marketing of technology specifically controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 22 CFR parts 120 through 130 (the “ITAR”), the EAR, or the Department of Energy Regulations set forth at 10 CFR part 810.
(3)The exportation of information or technology subject to the authorization requirements of 10 CFR part 810, or Restricted Data as defined in section 11 y. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or of other information, data, or technology the release of which is controlled under the Atomic Energy Act and regulations therein;
(4)The exportation of any item (including information) subject to the EAR where a U.S. person knows or has reason to know that the item will be used, directly or indirectly, with respect to certain nuclear, missile, chemical, or biological weapons or nuclear-maritime end-uses as set forth in part 744 of the EAR. In addition, U.S. persons are precluded from exporting any item subject to the EAR to certain restricted end-users, as set forth in part 744 of the EAR, as well as certain persons whose export privileges have been denied pursuant to parts 764 or 766 of the EAR, without authorization from the Department of Commerce; or
(5)The exportation of information subject to licensing requirements under the ITAR, or exchanges of information that are subject to regulation by other government agencies.
(e)Pursuant to § 515.564, specific licenses may be issued on a case-by-case basis authorizing the travel-related transactions set forth in § 515.560(c) and such additional transactions that are directly incident to attendance of professional meetings that are necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications. PART 537—BURMESE SANCTIONS REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 537 is amended to read as follows: Authority: 3 U.S.C. 301; 31 U.S.C. 321(b); 50 U.S.C. 1601-1651, 1701-1706; Sec. 570 Pub. L. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009; Pub. L. 108-61, 117 Stat. 864; Pub. L. 109-177, 120 Stat. 192; E.O. 13047, 62 FR 28301, 3 CFR 1997 Comp., p. 202; E.O. 13310, 68 FR 44853, 3 CFR 2004 Comp., p. 241l. Subpart E—Licenses, Authorizations, and Statements of Licensing Policy 2. Section 537.526 is revised to read as follows: § 537.526 Authorized transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to publishing.
(a)To the extent that such activities are not exempt from this part, and subject to the restrictions set forth in paragraphs
(b)through
(d)of this section, U.S. persons are authorized to engage in all transactions otherwise prohibited by § 537.201 or § 537.202 that are necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of manuscripts, books, journals, and newspapers in paper or electronic format (collectively, “written publications”). This section does not apply if the parties to the transactions described in this paragraph include the State Peace and Development Council of Burma or the Union Solidarity and Development Association of Burma; any successor entity to any of the foregoing entities; or any person, other than personnel of academic and research institutions, acting or purporting to act directly or indirectly on behalf of the foregoing entities with respect to the transactions described in this paragraph. Pursuant to this section, transactions incident to the following activities are authorized, provided they do not involve any importations prohibited by § 537.203 that are not authorized by another section of this part 537, and further provided that U.S. persons ensure that they are not engaging, without separate authorization, in the activities identified in paragraphs
(b)through
(d)of this section:
(1)Commissioning and making advance payments for identifiable written publications not yet in existence, to the extent consistent with industry practice;
(2)Collaborating on the creation and enhancement of written publications; (3)(i) Augmenting written publications through the addition of items such as photographs, artwork, translation, explanatory text, and, for a written publication in electronic format, the addition of embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching the written publication;
(ii)Exporting embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching a written publication in electronic format, provided that, to the extent a license is required under the Export Administration Regulations, 15 CFR parts 730 through 774 (the “EAR”), the exportation is licensed or otherwise authorized by the Department of Commerce under the provisions of the EAR;
(4)Substantive editing of written publications;
(5)Payment of royalties for written publications;
(6)Creating or undertaking a marketing campaign to promote a written publication; and
(7)Other transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications as described in this paragraph (a).
(b)This section does not authorize transactions constituting the exportation or reexportation of financial services from the United States or by U.S. persons to Burma that are not necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications as described paragraph
(a)of this section. For example, this section does not authorize U.S. persons to transfer funds to Burma relating to the following:
(1)The provision or receipt of individualized or customized services (including, but not limited to, accounting, legal, design, or consulting services), other than those necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications, even though such individualized or customized services are delivered through the use of information and informational materials;
(2)The creation or undertaking of a marketing campaign for any person with respect to any service or product other than a written publication, or the creation or undertaking of a marketing campaign of any kind for the benefit of the State Peace and Development Council of Burma or the Union Solidarity and Development Association of Burma; or
(3)The operation of a publishing house, sales outlet, or other office in Burma. Note to paragraph (b): The importation of information or informational materials, as defined in § 537.308, that are products of Burma is authorized by the general license set forth in § 537.515. The exportation to Burma of information or informational materials, as defined in § 537.308, whether commercial or otherwise, regardless of format or medium of transmission, is exempt from the prohibitions and regulations of this part. See § 537.210(b).
(c)This section does not authorize U.S. persons to engage in transactions constituting the exportation or reexportation of financial services to Burma that relate to the services of publishing houses or translators in Burma unless such activity is primarily for the dissemination of written publications in Burma.
(d)This section does not authorize:
(1)The importation into the United States of any article that is a product of Burma. Note to paragraph (d)(1): The importation of information or informational materials, as defined in § 537.308, that are products of Burma is authorized by the general license set forth in § 537.515.
(2)Transactions constituting the exportation or reexportation of financial services from the United States or by U.S. persons to Burma that relate to the development, production, design, or marketing of technology specifically controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 22 CFR parts 120 through 130 (the “ITAR”), the EAR, or the Department of Energy Regulations set forth at 10 CFR part 810.
(3)Transactions constituting the exportation or reexportation of financial services from the United States or by U.S. persons to Burma that relate to the exportation of information or technology subject to the authorization requirements of 10 CFR part 810, or Restricted Data as defined in section 11y. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or of other information, data, or technology the release of which is controlled under the Atomic Energy Act and regulations therein;
(4)Transactions constituting the exportation or reexportation of financial services from the United States or by U.S. persons to Burma that relate to the exportation of any item (including information) subject to the EAR where a U.S. person knows or has reason to know that the item will be used, directly or indirectly, with respect to certain nuclear, missile, chemical, or biological weapons or nuclear-maritime end-uses as set forth in part 744 of the EAR. In addition, U.S. persons are precluded from exporting any item subject to the EAR to certain restricted end-users, as set forth in part 744 of the EAR, as well as certain persons whose export privileges have been denied pursuant to parts 764 or 766 of the EAR, without authorization from the Department of Commerce; or
(5)Transactions constituting the exportation or reexportation of financial services from the United States or by U.S. persons to Burma that relate to the exportation of information subject to licensing requirements under the ITAR or exchanges of information that are subject to regulation by other government agencies. PART 538—SUDANESE SANCTIONS REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 538 is amended to read as follows: Authority: 3 U.S.C. 301; 31 U.S.C. 321(b); 18 U.S.C. 2339B, 2332d; 50 U.S.C. 1601-1651, 1701-1706; Pub. L. 106-387, 114 Stat. 1549; Pub. L. 109-177, 120 Stat. 192; E.O. 13067, 62 FR 59989; 3 CFR, 1997 Comp., p. 230. Subpart E—Licenses, Authorizations, and Statements of Licensing Policy 2. Section 538.529 is revised to read as follows: § 538.529 Authorized transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to publishing.
(a)To the extent that such activities are not exempt from this part, and subject to the restrictions set forth in paragraphs
(b)through
(d)of this section, U.S. persons are authorized to engage in all transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of manuscripts, books, journals, and newspapers in paper or electronic format (collectively, “written publications”). This section does not apply if the parties to the transactions described in this paragraph include the Government of Sudan. For the purposes of this section, the term “Government of Sudan” includes the state and the Government of Sudan, as well as any political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including the Central Bank of Sudan, and any person acting or purporting to act directly or indirectly on behalf of any of the foregoing with respect to the transactions described in this paragraph. For the purposes of this section, the term “Government of Sudan” does not include any academic and research institutions and their personnel. Pursuant to this section, the following activities are authorized, provided that U.S. persons ensure that they are not engaging, without separate authorization, in the activities identified in paragraphs
(b)through
(d)of this section:
(1)Commissioning and making advance payments for identifiable written publications not yet in existence, to the extent consistent with industry practice;
(2)Collaborating on the creation and enhancement of written publications; (3)(i) Augmenting written publications through the addition of items such as photographs, artwork, translation, explanatory text, and, for a written publication in electronic format, the addition of embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching the written publication;
(ii)Exporting embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching a written publication in electronic format, provided that the software is classified as “EAR 99” under the Export Administration Regulations, 15 CFR parts 730-774 (the “EAR”), or is not subject to the EAR;
(4)Substantive editing of written publications;
(5)Payment of royalties for written publications;
(6)Creating or undertaking a marketing campaign to promote a written publication; and
(7)Other transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications as described in this paragraph (a).
(b)This section does not authorize transactions involving the provision of goods or services not necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications as described in paragraph
(a)of this section. For example, this section does not authorize U.S. persons:
(1)To provide or receive individualized or customized services (including, but not limited to, accounting, legal, design, or consulting services), other than those necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications, even though such individualized or customized services are delivered through the use of information and informational materials;
(2)To create or undertake for any person a marketing campaign with respect to any service or product other than a written publication, or to create or undertake a marketing campaign of any kind for the benefit of the Government of Sudan;
(3)To engage in the exportation or importation of goods to or from Sudan other than the exportation of embedded software described in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section; or
(4)To operate a publishing house, sales outlet, or other office in Sudan. Note to paragraph (b): The importation from Sudan and the exportation to Sudan of information or informational materials, as defined in § 538.306, whether commercial or otherwise, regardless of format or medium of transmission, are exempt from the prohibitions and regulations of this part. See § 538.211(c).
(c)This section does not authorize U.S. persons to engage the services of publishing houses or translators in Sudan unless such activity is primarily for the dissemination of written publications in Sudan.
(d)This section does not authorize:
(1)The exportation from or importation into the United States of services for the development, production, or design of software;
(2)Transactions for the development, production, design, or marketing of technology specifically controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 22 CFR parts 120 through 130 (the “ITAR”), the EAR, or the Department of Energy Regulations set forth at 10 CFR part 810.
(3)The exportation of information or technology subject to the authorization requirements of 10 CFR part 810, or Restricted Data as defined in section 11 y. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or of other information, data, or technology the release of which is controlled under the Atomic Energy Act and regulations therein;
(4)The exportation of any item (including information) subject to the EAR where a U.S. person knows or has reason to know that the item will be used, directly or indirectly, with respect to certain nuclear, missile, chemical, or biological weapons or nuclear-maritime end-uses as set forth in part 744 of the EAR. In addition, U.S. persons are precluded from exporting any item subject to the EAR to certain restricted end-users, as set forth in part 744 of the EAR, as well as certain persons whose export privileges have been denied pursuant to parts 764 or 766 of the EAR, without authorization from the Department of Commerce; or
(5)The exportation of information subject to licensing requirements under the ITAR or exchanges of information that are subject to regulation by other government agencies. PART 560—IRANIAN TRANSACTIONS REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 560 continues to read as follows: Authority: 3 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 2339B, 2332d; 22 U.S.C. 2349aa-9; 31 U.S.C. 321(b); 50 U.S.C. 1601-1651, 1701-1706; Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 106-387, 114 Stat. 1549; E.O. 12613, 52 FR 41940, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 256; E.O. 12957, 60 FR 14615, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 332; E.O. 12959, 60 FR 24757, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 365; E.O. 13059, 62 FR 44531, 3 CFR, 1997 Comp., p. 217. Subpart E—Licenses, Authorizations, and Statements of Licensing Policy 2. Section 560.538 is revised to read as follows: § 560.538 Authorized transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to publishing.
(a)To the extent that such activities are not exempt from this part, and subject to the restrictions set forth in paragraphs
(b)through
(d)of this section, U.S. persons are authorized to engage in all transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of manuscripts, books, journals, and newspapers in paper or electronic format (collectively, “written publications”). This section does not apply if the parties to the transactions described in this paragraph include the Government of Iran. For the purposes of this section, the term “Government of Iran” includes the state and the Government of Iran, as well as any political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, which includes the Central Bank of Islamic Republic of Iran, and any person acting or purporting to act directly or indirectly on behalf of any of the foregoing with respect to the transactions described in this paragraph. For the purposes of this section, the term “Government of Iran” does not include any academic and research institutions and their personnel. Pursuant to this section, the following activities are authorized, provided that U.S. persons ensure that they are not engaging, without separate authorization, in the activities identified in paragraphs
(b)through
(d)of this section:
(1)Commissioning and making advance payments for identifiable written publications not yet in existence, to the extent consistent with industry practice;
(2)Collaborating on the creation and enhancement of written publications; (3)(i) Augmenting written publications through the addition of items such as photographs, artwork, translation, explanatory text, and, for a written publication in electronic format, the addition of embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching the written publication;
(ii)Exporting embedded software necessary for reading, browsing, navigating, or searching a written publication in electronic format, provided that the software is classified as “EAR 99” under the Export Administration Regulations, 15 CFR parts 730 through 774 (the “EAR”), or is not subject to the EAR;
(4)Substantive editing of written publications;
(5)Payment of royalties for written publications;
(6)Creating or undertaking a marketing campaign to promote a written publication; and
(7)Other transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications as described in this paragraph (a).
(b)This section does not authorize transactions involving the provision of goods or services not necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications as described in paragraph
(a)of this section. For example, this section does not authorize U.S. persons:
(1)To provide or receive individualized or customized services (including, but not limited to, accounting, legal, design, or consulting services), other than those necessary and ordinarily incident to the publishing and marketing of written publications, even though such individualized or customized services are delivered through the use of information and informational materials;
(2)To create or undertake for any person a marketing campaign with respect to any service or product other than a written publication, or to create or undertake a marketing campaign of any kind for the benefit of the Government of Iran;
(3)To engage in the exportation or importation of goods to or from Iran other than the exportation of embedded software described in paragraph (a)(3)(ii); or
(4)To operate a publishing house, sales outlet, or other office in Iran. Note to paragraph (b): The importation from Iran and the exportation to Iran of information or informational materials, as defined in § 560.315, whether commercial or otherwise, regardless of format or medium of transmission, are exempt from the prohibitions and regulations of this part. See § 560.210(c).
(c)This section does not authorize U.S. persons to engage the services of publishing houses or translators in Iran unless such activity is primarily for the dissemination of written publications in Iran.
(d)This section does not authorize:
(1)The exportation from or importation into the United States of services for the development, production, or design of software;
(2)Transactions for the development, production, design, or marketing of technology specifically controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 22 CFR parts 120 through 130 (the “ITAR”), the EAR, or the Department of Energy Regulations set forth at 10 CFR part 810.
(3)The exportation of information or technology subject to the authorization requirements of 10 CFR part 810, or Restricted Data as defined in section 11 y. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or of other information, data, or technology the release of which is controlled under the Atomic Energy Act and regulations therein;
(4)The exportation of any item (including information) subject to the EAR where a U.S. person knows or has reason to know that the item will be used, directly or indirectly, with respect to certain nuclear, missile, chemical, or biological weapons or nuclear-maritime end-uses as set forth in part 744 of the EAR. In addition, U.S. persons are precluded from exporting any item subject to the EAR to certain restricted end-users, as set forth in part 744 of the EAR, as well as certain persons whose export privileges have been denied pursuant to parts 764 or 766 of the EAR, without authorization from the Department of Commerce; or
(5)The exportation of information subject to licensing requirements under the ITAR or exchanges of information that are subject to regulation by other government agencies. Dated: August 21, 2007. Adam J. Szubin, Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control. [FR Doc. E7-17054 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4811-42-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. CGD11-07-013] Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Sacramento River, Rio Vista, CA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations. SUMMARY: The Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District, has issued a temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the Rio Vista Drawbridge across the Sacramento River, mile 12.8, at Rio Vista, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow the bridge owner, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), to conduct required maintenance of the drawspan. This deviation allows for a 4-hour notice for openings. DATES: This deviation is effective from 9 p.m. September 5, 2007 through 5 a.m. on October 21, 2007. ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this document are available for inspection or copying at Commander (dpw), Eleventh Coast Guard District, Building 50-2, Coast Guard Island, Alameda, CA 94501-5100, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is
(510)437-3516. The Eleventh Coast Guard District maintains the public docket for this temporary deviation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District, telephone
(510)437-3516. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Caltrans requested a temporary change to the operation of the Rio Vista Drawbridge, mile 12.8, Sacramento River, at Rio Vista, CA. The Rio Vista Drawbridge navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 17 feet above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. The draw opens on signal as required by 33 CFR 117.5. Navigation on the waterway consists of both commercial and recreational vessels. This deviation allows the bridge to require a 4-hour notice for openings. The 4-hour notice for openings during the maintenance period, from 9 p.m. September 5, 2007 through 5 a.m. on October 21, 2007, will allow Caltrans to clear the drawspan of maintenance equipment so as not to delay approaching vessels. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with all affected waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised. Vessels that can transit the bridge, while in the closed-to-navigation position, may continue to do so at any time. In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35. Dated: August 22, 2007. C.E. Bone, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7-17146 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Parts 161 and 165 [CGD01-04-133] RIN 1625-AB17 Regulated Navigation Area; Buzzards Bay, MA; Navigable Waterways Within the First Coast Guard District AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard revises the regulations governing the Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA)in First Coast Guard District waters to require that certain tank vessels and tug/barge combinations transiting Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts, be accompanied by escort tugs and pilots operating under a properly endorsed Federal pilot's license. The Coast Guard establishes a Vessel Movement Reporting System
(VMRS)for Buzzards Bay, and requires mandatory participation in the VMRS by vessels subject to the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge VHF Radiotelephone regulations, including tug/barge combinations. The purpose of this rule is to reduce the likelihood of an incident that might result in a collision, allision, or grounding and the aftermath discharge or release of oil or hazardous material into the navigable waters of the United States. DATES: This rule is effective November 28, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of the docket and are available for inspection and copying at the offices of Commander, Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England, East Providence office, 20 Risho Avenue, East Providence, RI 02914, between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc at Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England, East Providence, RI, 401-435-2351. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information On March 29, 2006, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM)in Volume 71, No. 60, pages 15649 to 15656 of the **Federal Register** , under the heading “Navigation and Waterways Management Improvements, Buzzards Bay, MA”. We received 17 comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested and none was held. Pursuant to issues and obligations discussed in *Federalism* below, on September 13, 2006, the Coast Guard held a consultation meeting for Massachusetts cities and towns that border Buzzards Bay. The city of New Bedford and the town of Westport sent representatives to this meeting and were consulted on the Coast Guard's actions with respect to this rulemaking process and their federalism implications. On October 11, 2006, the Coast Guard held a similar consultative meeting with the Acting Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. Background and Purpose Congress designated Buzzards Bay as an Estuary of National Significance in 1985, one of only five estuaries in the U.S. so designated. The Bay has some of Massachusetts' most productive shellfish beds. It interacts with three very different marine systems, the Atlantic Ocean to the south, Vineyard Sound to the east, and Cape Cod Bay to the north. In 2002, there were nearly 10,000 commercial vessel transits and over 1,200 tank barge transits in Buzzards Bay. An estimated 80% of those tank barges were single hull vessels. Note that the term “single hull” and other terms used in this rule have the same meaning as those found in Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), § 165.100(b). Since 1969 there have been several significant incidents of tank barge groundings with oil spills in Buzzards Bay. These included the grounding of the tank barge *Florida* in 1969 with a spill of approximately 175,000 gallons of No. 2 fuel oil; the grounding of the tank barge *Bouchard* in 1977 with a spill of approximately 81,000 gallons of No. 2 fuel oil; the grounding of the tank barge *ST-85* in 1986 with a spill of approximately 119,000 gallons of gasoline; the grounding of the tug *Marie J. Turecamo* and its asphalt-laden barge in 1999; the grounding of the tug *Mary Turecamo* and its barge *Florida* in 1999 carrying 4.7 million gallons of No. 6 fuel oil; and the grounding of the barge *B-120* in April 2003 with a spill of No. 6 oil estimated to be of approximately 22,000 to 98,000 gallons. Groundings, allisions, or collisions of single hull tank barges could lead to a significant discharge or release of oil or other hazardous materials, as demonstrated by the incidents noted above, with potentially significant adverse impacts to people, property, the coastal and maritime environment, and the local economy. The purpose of these navigation safety and waterways management regulations for Buzzards Bay is to reduce the likelihood of another incident that might result in the discharge or release of oil or hazardous material, or other serious harm, on the navigable waters of the United States. After a previous oil spill from the tank barge *North Cape* off of Point Judith, Rhode Island, in 1996, the Coast Guard chartered a Regional Risk Assessment Team (RRAT), comprised of government, commercial, and environmental entities, to examine navigation safety issues within New England waters. The RRAT recommended, and the Coast Guard implemented, a Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA)that imposed certain requirements on single hulled tank barges transiting New England waters, including Buzzards Bay. Regulations governing the RNA in First Coast Guard District waters are contained in 33 CFR 165.100. Subsequent to an oil spill in Buzzards Bay in April, 2003, noted above, the Coast Guard sponsored a Ports and Waterways Safety Assessment (PAWSA), which was conducted by a cross-section of key Buzzards Bay waterways users and stakeholders, resulting in numerous suggestions for improving navigation safety in the Bay. The safety assessment process is a disciplined approach to identify major waterway safety hazards, estimate risk levels, evaluate potential mitigation measures, and set the stage for implementation of selected measures to reduce risk. The process involved convening a select group of waterway users/stakeholders and conducting a two-day structured workshop to meet these objectives. The assessment process represents a significant part of joint public-private sector planning for mitigating risk in waterways. When applied consistently and uniformly in a number of waterways, the process provides a basis for making best value decisions for risk mitigation investments, both on the local and national level. For further information on the PAWSA project go to: *http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/mwv/projects/pawsa/PAWSA_home.htm* . The PAWSA report suggested, in part, that the risk for oil or hazardous material discharge in Buzzards Bay is relatively high, and that one method of reducing that risk, among many that were suggested, might be to “establish requirements for escort tugs.” (The PAWSA report is available in docket CGD01-04-133. See ADDRESSES above on procedures to access the docket.) The PAWSA also recommended that Recommended Vessel Routes be established to help assist vessel traffic and provide a safer transit route for commercial vessels. Additionally, in a letter from several members of the U.S. Congressional delegation from Massachusetts, the Coast Guard was asked to consider measures similar to those recommended in the PAWSA, specifically: Assist tugs, Recommended Routes, and an Automatic Identification System (AIS). This letter, along with the Coast Guard's response, is available in the docket. The Automatic Identification System
(AIS)is a maritime navigation safety communications system standardized by the International Telecommunication Union
(ITU)and adopted by the International Maritime Organization
(IMO)that provides vessel information, including the vessel's identity, type, position, course, speed, navigational status and other safety-related information automatically to appropriately equipped shore stations, other ships, and aircraft; receives automatically such information from similarly fitted ships; monitors and tracks ships; and exchanges data with shore-based facilities. As of December 31, 2004, AIS is required on most commercial vessels either navigating abroad or within a Vessel Traffic Service
(VTS)area, such as VTS New York. (See 33 CFR 164.46.) As the vast majority of tug/barge combinations that transit Buzzards Bay are either traveling from or to New York and hence must participate in New York's VTS, they already carry AIS. The Coast Guard plans to propose expanding AIS requirements in the future. Regardless of whether a tug/barge combination is equipped with AIS, under this rule it must still participate in the Vessel Movement Reporting System
(VMRS)by either AIS or VHF radiotelephone. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), at the request of the Coast Guard, has already overlaid recommended vessel routes on navigational charts for Rhode Island Sound, Narragansett Bay, and Buzzards Bay. These recommended vessel routes are currently included on all new editions of charts 13205, 13218, 13221, and 13230. To allow maximum operating flexibility to meet differing conditions and situations, at this time the Coast Guard is not making the recommended vessel routes depicted on these charts mandatory. Currently, an escort tug is required in Buzzards Bay only for single hull tank barges, unless the single hull tank barge is being towed by a primary towing vessel with twin-screw propulsion and with a separate system for power to each screw. Consequently, the vast majority of tug and barge combinations transiting Buzzards Bay employ tugs with twin screws and twin engines, but with no additional positive control. Discussion of Comments and Changes On March 29, 2006, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed Rule Making
(NPRM)that proposed amending the current First Coast Guard District RNA to require that all single hull tank barges carrying 5,000 or more barrels of oil or other hazardous material and being towed through Buzzards Bay: 1. Participate in a Vessel Movement Reporting System
(VMRS)(33 CFR part 161, subpart B) managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers at its Cape Cod Canal control center on behalf of the Coast Guard. 2. Be accompanied by a federally licensed pilot, who could remain on the escort tug vessel, to monitor the navigation of the tug/barge, and to advise the master of the tug/barge accordingly. 3. Be accompanied by an escort tug between the west entrance to Buzzards Bay and the east end of the Cape Cod Canal. Seventeen comments were received in response to the NPRM. All late comments received were reviewed and considered. Nine comments concerned the provision in the NPRM that would allow pilots, in times of adverse weather, to remain on the escort tug and to advise the master of the primary tug (i.e., the vessel actually towing the tank barge) from the escort tug. The comments noted that a pilot executing his/her pilotage duties from any vessel other than the primary tug would add little or no value, and may even increase danger due to confusion and communications difficulties. The Coast Guard concurs with these comments. Accordingly, the provision to permit pilots to advise the master of a primary tug from an escort tug has been removed. Consequently, when this rule applies, pilots will be required to embark the primary tug during transits of Buzzards Bay. Three comments urged that pilots be required to embark the primary tug only from a pilot boat, not an escort tug. Comments noted that pilot boats are better designed for such transfers of people between two underway vessels, and would be safer than permitting a transfer between a tug escort and primary tug. Many factors must be considered when deciding what constitutes a safe transfer between two underway vessels (e.g., an escort tug and primary tug, or a pilot boat and primary tug), including the design of each vessel, weather, physical abilities of the person transferring, etc. These decisions are better left to those actually on-scene and are not addressed in this rule. Three comments asked that state-licensed pilots be required in addition to or in place of federally licensed pilots. One comment suggested that pilotage requirements similar to those for Prince William Sound, Alaska, be adopted for Buzzards Bay. In Prince William Sound, pilots are required to be state-licensed, but operate under their federal pilot's license. The Coast Guard notes that the pilotage requirement to which the commenter refers was enacted by Congress as part of Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101-380, and that both the Prince William Sound requirement and the request that the Coast Guard adopt a similar requirement in Buzzards Bay by this regulation is contrary to the generally applicable Congressional scheme for state-federal pilotage of vessels in Chapter 85 of Subtitle II of Title 46, U.S. Code. The Coast Guard has looked carefully at whether, as a matter of federal regulatory exercise of authority, it can vary that generally applicable state-federal pilotage scheme and has concluded that it is without authority to do so. Unlike the Congressionally mandated Prince William Sound state-federal pilotage requirements, this regulation is being promulgated under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, Public Law 92-340, section 5 (33 U.S.C. 1223(a)(4)). Authority under this Act is not so broad as to support a provision mandating the carriage of a state pilot where such a provision is contrary to the usual Congressional scheme prohibiting states from requiring a state licensed or commissioned pilot on a vessel subject to inspection under part B of subtitle II of Title 46, or is subject to inspection under chapter 37 of that Title. An examination of the legislative history of that provision shows that nowhere did Congress mention imposing a State commissioned pilot in addition to or in lieu of a Federal pilot on vessels operating on the navigable waters of the United States. Given the long standing Congressional scheme for division of responsibility among Federal and State pilotage on vessels, which these comments would run counter to, and the absence of any legislative history that would suggest that Congress intended the words “operating condition” to include authority to promulgate a regulation that runs counter to that scheme, the Coast Guard is without authority to promulgate such a regulation. Accordingly, the Coast Guard does not adopt the suggestion in these comments. One comment requested that the Coast Guard conduct a cost-benefit analysis to demonstrate that the benefits of this rule outweigh the cost. As noted in the NPRM and contained in the docket for this rule (CGD01-04-133), a Regulatory Evaluation was conducted in March 2006. That evaluation found that this rule would prevent approximately 500 barrels of oil from being spilled into Buzzards Bay, would have a negligible impact on consumer energy costs, and would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Some comments stated it was unclear if the pilotage requirement was for a federally licensed pilot in addition to the vessel's master, or if a master (or other crewmember) holding a Federal pilot's license could also serve as pilot while transiting Buzzards Bay. The requirement in this rule is for a federally licensed pilot in addition to the vessel's master and crew. Under this rule, neither a master of a primary tug nor any member of its crew may serve as pilot while transiting Buzzards Bay. It is intended that the federally licensed pilot be an additional navigation resource to the master and crew of the vessel. Some comments recommended this rule, particularly the escort tug requirement, apply to single hull tank ships in addition to barges. The PAWSA report specifically addresses the hazards associated with single hull tank barges and was used as an indicator and resource for this rule. There is no indication in the PASWA that tank ships represent a similar risk of pollution. Consequently, this rule applies only to single hull tank barges, not tank ships. Some comments asked for clarification on whether or not federally licensed pilots are required aboard escort tugs. They are not. The requirement is for a federally licensed pilot to be aboard the primary tug towing a single hull tank barge. Three written comments stated that the requirement for escort tugs should apply to double hull tanks vessels in addition to single hull tank vessels. At the consultative meeting discussed elsewhere in this preamble, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection also urged that all tank vessels transiting Buzzards Bay, both single and double hull, be required to have an escort tug. The majority of tank barge casualties in Buzzards Bay have been caused by groundings, and the bottom characteristics of the area are generally rocky. Double hulls provide sufficient protection against this type of casualty, and there has never been a major oil spill from a double hull tank barge grounding in Buzzards Bay. Therefore, the Coast Guard does not feel it is necessary to require tug escorts for double hull tank barges at this time. Additionally, the Coast Guard considers that, as adopted in this rule, its three-pronged approach to navigation safety ((1) Mandatory participation in a Vessel Movement Reporting System (VMRS);
(2)a federally licensed pilot and
(3)a tug escort for single hull tank barges) constitutes a redundant vessel accident and pollution prevention system that will provide a sufficient measure of safety for tank vessels transiting Buzzards Bay. Two comments suggested that use of the currently-existing (and voluntary) recommended vessel route in Buzzards Bay be mandated for commercial vessels. The Coast Guard recognizes that, in light of variations in visibility, traffic density, tides and currents, and other on-scene conditions, and given the uniqueness of vessel and tow configurations and handling characteristics, prudent seamanship (and the Rules of the Road) may dictate departure from any given vessel route. The Coast Guard wishes to avoid creating any situation in which a mariner may feel constrained to follow a set route when conditions may warrant an alternative approach. Importantly, the VMRS established by this rule will provide the Coast Guard the capability to monitor tank vessel movements in Buzzards Bay, including the capability to ascertain vessel intentions before entering the Bay. Most, if not all, tank vessels currently use the recommended vessel route voluntarily. Through the VMRS established by this rule, the Coast Guard will be able to monitor vessels as they transit the recommended vessel route to query and respond appropriately should a vessel deviate from the route without good and sufficient reason, including, but not limited to, proceeding to an anchorage, or briefly exiting the route to allow an approaching vessel to pass. Consequently, the Coast Guard considers the voluntary recommended vessel route, when combined with the enhanced ability to monitor the usage thereof, to provide an ample measure of safety. While no comments addressed the proposed requirement that VMRS Buzzard's Bay users attain “approval” from the VMRS center
(1)Prior to entering into, or getting underway within, the VMRS area; and
(2)prior to meeting, crossing, or overtaking other VMRS users; in keeping with the monitoring—vice directive—function of a Vessel Movement Reporting System, the word “approval” was changed to better reflect the requirement that vessels “notify” the VMRS before undertaking the aforementioned actions. Two comments suggested that escort tugs should have minimum horsepower or bollard pull requirements. This rule amends the currently existing Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA)for waters within the First Coast Guard District. As defined in the current RNA, an escort tug is a vessel of “sufficient capability to promptly push or tow the tank barge away from danger of grounding or collision * * *” That definition is the product of several recommendations made by a Regional Risk Assessment Team
(RRAT)chartered by the Coast Guard in 1996 to examine tug and barge operation and navigation procedures in the waters of the First Coast Guard District. The RRAT was composed of operators of towing vessels and tank barges, environmental groups, state agencies, and Coast Guard officials. In the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-383), Congress directed the Coast Guard to adopt the recommendations of the RRAT. Consequently, the Coast Guard believes that definition is sufficient for this amendment to the existing RNA. One comment requested that oil spill response vessels (OSRVs) and oil spill response barges (OSRBs) be exempt from these regulations. The commenter was concerned that, after one or more of these vessels had been called to respond to an oil spill in Buzzards Bay, its exit from the Bay (after recovering spilled oil) may be delayed due to the requirements of these regulations. The Coast Guard considers these regulations to be important for all single hull tank barges carrying oil or petroleum products in sufficient quantity, including OSRVs and OSRBs, so as to enhance navigation safety and environmental protection in Buzzard's Bay. Further, we view the impacts of this regulation to be minimal on an OSRV or OSRB. Consequently, we did not provide the requested exemption. One comment asked that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts be included in any partnership between the Coast Guard and the Army Corps of Engineers to operate a Vessel Movement Reporting System
(VMRS)for Buzzards Bay. The Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers are finalizing a Memorandum of Agreement that will delineate the functions and responsibilities of each agency in operating the VMRS. This MOA, once executed, will be added in the final docket for this rule. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection has been and will remain a key partner in the planning and operation of the VMRS for Buzzards Bay. In addition to the 17 comments received, two joint letters from U.S. Representatives Barney Frank, William D. Delahunt, and James P. McGovern were sent to the Commandant of the Coast Guard on July 26, 2006, and September 14, 2006, respectively. Both letters urged the Coast Guard to adopt navigation safety provisions for Buzzards Bay similar to those provided for in a Massachusetts oil spill prevention law which had recently been overturned by a Federal court. Specifically, the Representatives requested that the Coast Guard: 1. Institute minimum watch and manning requirements for oil tankers and barges; 2. Mandate the use of State pilots to assist in navigating Buzzards Bay; 3. Mandate the use of tugboat escorts for all oil barges; 4. Institute mandatory navigational routes through state waters; and 5. Mandate a certificate of at least $1 billion in financial backing to dock in Massachusetts, unless the shipping companies take special safety measures, such as using double hulls. Although the Coast Guard did not adopt a state pilot requirement, the Coast Guard did adopt a requirement that the primary tug towing a single hull tank barge in Buzzards Bay have on board a federally licensed pilot, in addition to the vessel's master and normal crew complement. Thus, the provisions of this rule, along with other currently existing Federal statutes and regulations, will sufficiently address each of the Representatives' concerns for the following reasons: 1. Federal regulations at 46 CFR 15 comprehensively regulate manning and watchstanding on tank vessels and tugs. Additionally, 33 CFR 164.13(c) specifically requires tankers to have at least two licensed deck officers on watch on the bridge; 2. This rule requires that a federally licensed pilot be employed in addition to the normal crew for the transit of any single hull tank barge through Buzzards Bay; 3. This rule requires escort tugs, in addition to the primary tug, for all single hull tank barges transiting Buzzards Bay; 4. For the reasons discussed in this Notice, while use of the recommended vessel route in Buzzards Bay will not be mandatory, vessel movements within the route will be monitored through the Vessel Movement Reporting System established by this rule; and 5. Under Title VI of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-241), the financial liability limits for vessel oil discharge removal costs and damages under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2704) were amended, and the Financial Responsibility for Water Pollution regulations at 33 CFR part 138 will be amended accordingly via separate rulemaking. For further information on this rulemaking, see docket USCG-2005-21780 at *http://dms.dot.gov/* , or contact Mr. Benjamin White at Coast Guard National Pollution Fund Center at 202-493-6863. Regulatory Evaluation Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review”, 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993, requires a determination whether a regulatory action is “significant” and therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)and subject to the requirements of the Executive Order. This rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866 and has not been reviewed by OMB. During the period of analysis, 2006-2014, this rule is expected to cost approximately $3.9 million net present value (7 percent discount rate). A copy of the regulatory evaluation, which further describes the expected costs and benefits of this rule, is posted in the docket and is available for inspection and copying at the offices of Commander, Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England, East Providence office, 20 Risho Avenue, East Providence, RI 02914, between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. No comments to the NPRM were received challenging the content of the regulatory evaluation, nor claiming a significant adverse economic impact should this rule be implemented as proposed. Nonetheless, to confirm the conclusions of the regulatory evaluation that this rule would not create a significant adverse impact on small entities, the Coast Guard reviewed selected economic data for the period of time between the evaluation's original publication in March 2006 and the publication of this rule in July 2007. A comparison of the regulatory evaluation's forecast of tug and barge activity with actual transits validated those projections. For example, the regulatory evaluation projected that there would be 234 transits of loaded tank barges through Buzzards Bay in 2006. The actual number was 208, only an 11% deviation from the projection. A review of more recent cost data associated with tug escort and pilot fees, when compared with revenue data of the small businesses most affected by this rule, also confirmed the fundamental finding of the regulatory evaluation, which is that the cost of compliance with this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of tugs and/or single hull barges carrying 5,000 or more barrels of oil or other hazardous materials and intending to transit or anchor in Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts. This rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This rule requires escort tugs and federally licensed pilots only for single hull barges, which are being phased out of operation in accordance with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), specifically 46 U.S.C. 3703a, and will be prohibited from operating effective January 1, 2015. Additionally, the VMRS established by this rulemaking applies only to vessels subject to the bridge-to-bridge radiotelephone regulations in § 26.03 (and therefore already equipped with VHF radios), so no additional costs will be incurred to participate in the VMRS. Those vessels with a Coast Guard-approved, properly installed, operational AIS would be relieved from the voice reporting requirements implemented by this rule. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc at Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England, Providence, RI, 401-435-2351. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.). The reports required by this rule are considered to be operational communications, transitory in nature, and, do not constitute a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. The U.S. Supreme Court, in the cases of *United States* v. *Locke* , 529 U.S. 89
(2000)and *Ray* v. *Atlantic Richfield Co.* , 435 U.S. 151
(1978)has ruled that certain regulations issued pursuant to the Ports and Waterways Safety Act of 1972, as amended, are reserved exclusively to the Coast Guard, and that state regulation in these areas is preempted. In general, only the federal government may regulate the design, construction, alteration, repair, maintenance, operation, equipping, personnel qualification, and manning of tank vessels. Similarly, where the Coast Guard enacts regulations—such as those implemented by this final rule—that control vessel traffic or are otherwise intended to protect navigation and the marine environment, or affirmatively determines that such regulation is unnecessary or inappropriate, a state may not enact rules that conflict with the Coast Guard's determination in that area, including situations in which the State rules are identical to the federal rules. The Coast Guard believes that by operation of law and our Agency determination, State law is preempted on the subjects covered by this rulemaking. The Coast Guard's affirmative decisions:
(1)Not to institute mandatory ship routes, but to monitor use of the existing recommend routes via the Vessel Movement Reporting System created by this rule;
(2)to require a federally licensed pilot in addition to the normal crew aboard a tug towing a single hull tank barge thorough Buzzard's Bay, but not to require any other modifications to the applicable manning requirements; and
(3)to require an escort tug in addition to the primary tug, for all single hull tank barges transiting Buzzard's Bay, but not for other vessels; each represent a considered determination of the appropriate level of regulation to ensure navigation safety and environmental protection. As such, the Coast Guard has determined that any other non-Coast Guard schemes relating to vessel routing, manning, and tug escort requirements in Buzzards Bay are preempted. To the extent not otherwise already preempted, this rule is intended to, and does, preempt those provisions of Massachusetts' “Act Relative to Oil Spill Prevention and Response in Buzzards Bay and Other Harbors and Bays of the Commonwealth,” (“MOSPA”) regarding enhanced manning requirements for tank barges and tow vessels in Buzzards Bay, see Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 21M § 4, and tugboat escorts for certain waters, see id. § 6. Further, it is the Coast Guard's view that, by Operation of Law, MOSPA's provisions regarding mandatory vessel routes in Massachusetts waters, see id. § 5; and compulsory State pilotage, see Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 103 § 21, are likewise preempted. See *U.S.* v. *Massachusetts* , 440 F.Supp.2d 24 (D.Mass., 2006), *remanded on other grounds* —F.3d—, 2007 WL 1775913 (1st Cir., June 21, 2007) (NO. 06-2361, 06-2362). In accordance with E.O. 13132 for regulations with preemptive effect, the following federalism impact statement is provided to document
(1)The extent of the Coast Guard's consultation with State and local officials,
(2)a summary of the nature of their concerns and the Coast Guard's position thereon, and
(3)a statement of the extent to which the concerns of State and local officials have been met. The Coast Guard provided elected officials of affected state and local governments notice and an opportunity to consult on this rulemaking. Ten Massachusetts municipalities surrounding Buzzards Bay indicated that they wished to participate, as did the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Accordingly, the Coast Guard engaged the towns of Bourne, Dartmouth, Fairhaven, Gosnold, Marion, Mattapoisett, Wareham, Westport, Falmouth, the city of New Bedford, and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) to discuss their concerns. On September 13, 2006, after inviting all parties desiring consultative status to participate, the Coast Guard met with representatives from the city of New Bedford and the town of Westport. On October 11, 2006, the Coast Guard met with the Acting Commissioner of DEP. Representatives from the towns of Bourne, Fairhaven, Marion, and Mattapoisett, and representatives from DEP, spoke at public hearings held on this rulemaking. Ten municipalities (Bourne, Buzzards Bay, Dartmouth, Fairhaven, Gosnold, Marion, Mattapoisett, New Bedford, Wareham, and Westport) submitted statements regarding recommended oil spill prevention measures for Buzzard's Bay. We also received additional written comments to the docket from the towns of Bourne and Mattapoisett, the Massachusetts Attorney General, and DEP. In general, all consulting state and local officials agreed upon the need for increased oil spill prevention measures in Buzzard's Bay and certain other Massachusetts' waters. The consulted parties' concerns related to the specific mechanisms to accomplish this goal. Essentially, the consulted parties encouraged the Coast Guard to enact regulations that would require
(1)Implementation of a mandatory, Coast Guard-administered vessel movement system
(2)mandatory use of the existing “recommended vessel route,”
(3)State-licensed (vice federally licensed) pilots aboard certain tank barges, and
(4)escort tugs for both single and double hull tank barges. As discussed in greater detail in Discussion of comments and changes, above, the Coast Guard is establishing a Vessel Movement Reporting System
(VMRS)as urged. Regarding mandatory ship routes in Buzzard's Bay, as previously indicated, the Coast Guard wishes to avoid creating any situation in which a mariner may feel constrained to follow a set route when operating or weather conditions may warrant an alternative approach. Thus, use of the already existing recommended vessel routes in Buzzards Bay will not be mandatory. Vessel movement along these recommended routes, however, will now be closely tracked through the VMRS established by this rule. For reasons also set forth above, the Coast Guard is without the authority to require that a tug have a Federal pilot that is also licensed or commissioned by the State. The Coast Guard is, however, requiring a federally licensed pilot aboard vessels towing certain single hulled tank barges through Buzzard's Bay as an additional navigation resource to the master and crew of the vessel. With respect to the issue of requiring escort tugs for only single hull tank barges, as opposed to both single and double hulled barges, the Coast Guard believes that mandatory participation in a VMRS, the requirement to embark and employ a federally licensed pilot, and a tug escort requirement together provide a sufficient measure of safety for tank vessels transiting Buzzards Bay. Accordingly, the Coast Guard believes that the concerns for navigation safety and environmental protection underlying the specific recommendations of the consulted State and localities will be met by the regulations promulgated by this final rule. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this rule would not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) and (34)(i) of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This rule fits the category selected from paragraph (34)(g) and (34)(i), as it amends a currently existing Regulated Navigation Area and establishes a VMRS. An “Environmental Analysis Check List” and “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 161 Harbors, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels, Waterways. 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR parts 161 and 165 as follows: PART 161—VESSEL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT 1. The authority citation for part 161 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 70114, 70117; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. In § 161.12, add an entry for Buzzard's Bay, in alphabetical order, and renumber footnotes 5 and 6 to read footnotes 6 and 7. Add a new footnote 5 to table 161.12(c) to read as follows: § 161.12 Vessel operating requirements. Table 161.12(c).—VTS and VMRS Centers, Call Signs/MMSI, Designated Frequencies, and Monitoring Areas Center MMSI call sign Designated frequency (channel designation)— purpose Monitoring area * * * * * * * Buzzards Bay Buzzards Bay Control 5 156.600 MHz (Ch. 12) The waters east and north of a line drawn from the southern tangent of Sakonnet Point, Rhode Island, in approximate position latitude 41°-27.2′ N, longitude 70°-11.7′ W, to the Buzzards Bay Entrance Light in approximate position latitude 41°-23.5′ N, longitude 71°-02.0′ W, and then to the southwestern tangent of Cuttyhunk Island, Massachusetts, at approximate position latitude 41°-24.6′ N, longitude 70°-57.0′ W, and including all of the Cape Cod Canal to its eastern entrance, except that the area of New Bedford harbor within the confines (north of) the hurricane barrier, and the passages through the Elizabeth Islands, is not considered to be “Buzzards Bay”. * * * * * * * Notes: * * * * * * * 5 In addition to the vessels denoted in Section 161.16 of this chapter, requirements set forth in subpart B of this chapter also apply to any vessel transiting VMRS Buzzards Bay when equipped with a bridge-to-bridge radiotelephone as defined in part 26 of this chapter. * * * * * * * PART 165—WATERWAYS SAFETY; REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 3. The authority citation for part 165 is amended to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 4. In § 165.100— a. Revise paragraphs (d)(1)(i) introductory text and (d)(1)(i)(G) to read as set out below; and b. Add paragraph (d)(5) to read as follows: § 165.100 Regulated Navigation Area: Navigable waters within the First Coast Guard District.
(d)* * *
(1)* * *
(i)Except as provided in paragraph (d)(1)(iii) and paragraph 5 of this section, each single hull tank barge, unless being towed by a primary towing vessel with twin-screw propulsion and with a separate system for power to each screw, must be accompanied by an escort tug of sufficient capability to promptly push or tow the tank barge away from danger of grounding or collision in the event of—
(G)Any other time a vessel may be operating in a Hazardous Vessel Operating Condition as defined in § 161.2 of this Chapter.
(5)*Special Buzzards Bay Regulations.*
(i)For the purposes of this section, “Buzzards Bay” is the body of water east and north of a line drawn from the southern tangent of Sakonnet Point, Rhode Island, in approximate position latitude 41°-27.2′ North, longitude 70°-11.7′ West, to the Buzzards Bay Entrance Light in approximate position latitude 41°-23.5′ North, longitude 71°-02.0′ West, and then to the southwestern tangent of Cuttyhunk Island, Massachusetts, at approximate position latitude 41°-24.6′ North, longitude 70°-57.0′ West, and including all of the Cape Cod Canal to its eastern entrance, except that the area of New Bedford harbor within the confines (north) of the hurricane barrier, and the passages through the Elizabeth Islands, is not considered to be “Buzzards Bay”.
(ii)*Additional Positive Control for Barges.* Except as provided in paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section, each single hull tank barge transiting Buzzards Bay and carrying 5,000 or more barrels of oil or other hazardous material must, in addition to its primary tug, be accompanied by an escort tug of sufficient capability to promptly push or tow the tank barge away from danger of grounding or collision in the event of—
(A)A propulsion failure;
(B)A parted tow line;
(C)A loss of tow;
(D)A fire;
(E)Grounding;
(F)A loss of steering; or
(G)Any other time a vessel may be operating in a Hazardous Vessel Operating Condition as defined in § 161.2 of this subchapter.
(iii)*Federal Pilotage.* Each single hull tank barge transiting Buzzards Bay and carrying 5,000 or more barrels of oil or other hazardous material must be under the direction and control of a pilot, who is not a member of the crew, operating under a valid, appropriately endorsed, Federal first class pilot's license issued by the Coast Guard (“federally licensed pilot”). Pilots are required to embark, direct, and control from the primary tug during transits of Buzzards Bay.
(iv)*Vessel Movement Reporting System.* In addition to the vessels denoted in § 161.16 of this chapter, requirements set forth in subpart B of this part also apply to any vessel transiting VMRS Buzzards Bay when equipped with a bridge-to-bridge radiotelephone as defined in part 26 of this chapter.
(A)A VMRS Buzzards Bay user must:
(1)Not enter or get underway in the area without first notifying the VMRS Center;
(2)Not enter VMRS Buzzards Bay if a Hazardous Vessel Operating Condition or circumstance per § 161.2 of this Subchapter exists;
(3)If towing astern, do so with as short a hawser as safety and good seamanship permits;
(4)Not meet, cross, or overtake any other VMRS user in the area without first notifying the VMRS center;
(5)Before meeting, crossing, or overtaking any other VMRS user in the area, communicate on the designated vessel bridge-to-bridge radiotelephone frequency, intended navigation movements, and any other information necessary in order to make safe passing arrangements. This requirement does not relieve a vessel of any duty prescribed by the International Regulations for Prevention of Collisions at Sea, 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1602(c)) or the Inland Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C. 2005). Dated: August 17, 2007. T.S. Sullivan, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. E7-16844 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0373; A-1-FRL-8461-5] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut; Establishment of Interim Progress for the Annual Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan
(SIP)revision submitted by the State of Connecticut. This revision establishes early fine particulate (PM <sup>2.5</sup> ) transportation conformity emission budgets for the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 29, 2007, unless EPA receives adverse comments by October 1, 2007. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the **Federal Register** informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0373 by one of the following methods: 1. *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.* 3. *Fax:*
(617)918-0047. 4. *Mail:* “Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0373”, Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. 5. *Hand Delivery or Courier* . Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold, Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0373. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through *www.regulations.gov* , or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The *www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” systems, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov* your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket:* All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays. In addition, copies of the state submittal are also available for public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the State Air Agency, the Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-1630. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023, telephone number
(617)918-1668, fax number
(617)918-0668, e-mail *cooke.donald@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble. I. Background and Purpose II. Comparison of Year 2002 Emissions to Year 2009 III. Adequacy Process and SIP Approval IV. Transportation Conformity Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets V. Basis for Approval VI. Final Action VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Purpose On December 17, 2004, (69 FR 943; January 5, 2005), EPA designated the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT area as nonattainment for the annual National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs) for fine particle pollution or PM <sup>2.5.</sup> [Airborne particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter are considered to be “fine particles,” also referred to as PM <sup>2.5</sup> .] One year after the April 5, 2005 effective date of the PM <sup>2.5</sup> designations, transportation conformity applies to this multi-state PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. Within three years of final designation, (by April 5, 2008), consistent with section 172(b) of the Clean Air Act, and 40 CFR 51.1002 of the PM <sup>2.5</sup> implementation regulations, the States of New Jersey, New York and Connecticut are required to submit an attainment demonstration and adopted regulations ensuring that the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area will attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards as expeditiously as practicable. This PM <sup>2.5</sup> attainment demonstration must include motor vehicle emissions budgets for direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> (including re-entrained road dust and/or highway and transit construction dust if determined significant contributors), and any PM <sup>2.5</sup> precursors determined to be significant (which may include nitrogen oxides (NO <sup>X</sup> ), volatile organic compounds (VOC), sulfur dioxide (SO <sup>2</sup> ) and ammonia (NH <sup>3</sup> )). The SIP must clearly identify the budgets (motor vehicle emissions budgets) for transportation conformity purposes. In the June 8, 2006 **Federal Register** (71 FR 33305), EPA announced that the direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> motor vehicle emissions budgets identified in New Jersey's PM <sup>2.5</sup> early progress state implementation plan
(SIP)for the New Jersey portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area were adequate for transportation conformity purposes. As a result of EPA's adequacy finding, the two metropolitan planning organizations in northern New Jersey (the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) and the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC)) must use the new 2009 direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> budgets from the early progress PM <sup>2.5</sup> SIP for future conformity determinations. In addition, with the establishment of adequate motor vehicle emissions budgets, New Jersey can independently determine conformity for the New Jersey portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area and is no longer tied to New York and Connecticut for transportation conformity determinations. On July 10, 2006, EPA approved the PM <sup>2.5</sup> motor vehicle emissions budgets for Northern New Jersey into the New Jersey SIP (71 FR 38770). On April 17, 2007, the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP)submitted a revision to its SIP for establishing early fine particulate (PM <sup>2.5</sup> ) transportation conformity emission budgets for the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. This SIP revision was developed in accordance with EPA's transportation conformity rule (69 FR 40028; July 1, 2004), which allows states with PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment areas to adopt early motor vehicle emission budgets that address the annual PM <sup>2.5</sup> NAAQSs in advance of a complete SIP attainment demonstration. This SIP revision establishes early budgets to simplify the conformity process for Connecticut Metropolitan Planning Organizations
(MPOs)while increasing the level of protection for Connecticut's citizens during this interim period before PM <sup>2.5</sup> attainment plans are due in April 2008. The PM <sup>2.5</sup> motor vehicle emission budgets for calendar year 2009 included in Connecticut's April 17, 2007 SIP revision apply to MPOs in the Connecticut counties of Fairfield and New Haven. Before these budgets were determined adequate (see Section C below), these Connecticut MPOs were required to determine conformity jointly with the New York MPOs included in the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area based on a calendar year 2002 interim baseline budget test. Consistent with a supplemental EPA rulemaking on transportation conformity (70 FR 24280; May 6, 2005), Connecticut's April 17, 2007 SIP revision establishes early motor vehicle budgets for direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions and for emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO <sup>X</sup> ) [the only PM <sup>2.5</sup> precursor found to be significant at this time for onroad mobile sources]. Since the budgets have been determined adequate, Connecticut MPOs must demonstrate that all transportation plans result in emissions of PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> that do not exceed the annual 2009 motor vehicle emissions budget levels. II. Comparison of Year 2002 Emissions to Year 2009 The total inventory of direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment Area is 6,663 tons in calendar year 2002, and is projected to be 6,495 tons in calendar year 2009. This represents an overall inventory reduction of 2.5% (168 tons of direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions). Table 1, below, compares calculated year 2002 and year 2009 direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> inventories by source type for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. Although direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions from area and point sources are projected to increase by two and eight percent, respectively, emissions from nonroad and onroad sources are projected to decrease by 13 and 31 percent, respectively. Table 1.—Direct Annual PM <sup>2.5</sup> Emissions [Tons] Area 2002 2009 Nonroad 2002 2009 Point 2002 2009 Onroad 2002 2009 Fairfield County 2,349 2,388 526 454 190 202 269 185 New Haven County 2,427 2,476 448 395 202 220 252 175 Total for CT Portion of NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> Nonattainment Area 4,776 4,864 974 849 392 422 521 360 The total inventory of NO <sup>X</sup> emissions for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area is 61,199 tons in calendar year 2002, and projected to be 44,433 tons in calendar year 2009. This represents an overall inventory reduction of 27% (16,766 tons of NO <sup>X</sup> emissions). Table 2, below, compares calculated 2002 and 2009 annual NO <sup>X</sup> inventories by source type for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. Although NO <sup>X</sup> emissions from area and point sources are projected to increase by four and seven percent, respectively, emissions from nonroad and onroad sources are projected to decrease by 12 and 46 percent, respectively. Table 2.—Annual NO <sup>X</sup> Emissions [Tons] Area 2002 2009 Nonroad 2002 2009 Point 2002 2009 Onroad 2002 2009 Fairfield County 3,134 3,269 7,150 6,104 3,892 4,183 17,411 9,314 New Haven County 2,937 3,061 7,935 7,108 2,305 2,429 16,435 8,965 Total for CT Portion of NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> Nonattainment Area 6,071 6,330 15,085 13,212 6,197 6,612 33,846 18,279 III. Adequacy Process and SIP Approval On March 2, 1999, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision on EPA's third set of transportation conformity amendments in response to a case brought by the Environmental Defense Fund. The decision held that conformity determinations could no longer be based on submitted SIP emissions budgets, prior to a positive adequacy determination by EPA. A May 14, 1999, EPA memorandum from Gay MacGregor to the Regional Division Directors provides guidance on how to review budgets for adequacy and the process for public comment and notification (posting on the Web). The May 14, 1999 guidance is available on EPA's conformity Web site at URL address: *http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/epaguidf.pdf.* EPA provided additional guidance in its Final Rulemaking on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004-40081) “Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the New 8-hour Ozone and PM <sup>2.5</sup> National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes; Final Rule.” EPA initiated the adequacy process for Connecticut's motor vehicle emissions budgets on April 19, 2007, by announcing that Connecticut had submitted an early progress SIP for PM <sup>2.5</sup> on EPA's Web site “SIP Submissions Currently Under EPA Adequacy Review” *http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm.* The criteria by which EPA determines whether a SIP's motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(i) through 93.118(e)(4)(vi) and 93.118(e)(5). On May 24, 2007, EPA notified the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CT DEP) that no comments were received during the thirty day public comment period, and that EPA had determined the 2009 motor vehicle emissions budgets submitted on April 17, 2007, to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes. EPA New England published a Notice of Adequacy **Federal Register** on Tuesday, June 5, 2007 (72 FR 31069), announcing our May 24, 2007 adequacy determination and making the motor vehicle emissions budgets effective on June 20, 2007. A copy of EPA's May 24, 2007 adequacy determination to CT DEP and the **Federal Register** Notice of Adequacy are both posted in the electronic docket as well as on EPA's Web site “SIP Submissions that EPA has Found Adequate or Inadequate,” at URL address: *http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/pastsips.htm.* This positive adequacy determination simplifies the administrative process for demonstrating transportation conformity by establishing the 2009 direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> motor vehicle emissions budgets as conformity criteria for all 2009 and later evaluation years. Connecticut's early motor vehicle emissions budgets will insure progress is made towards achieving and maintaining the PM <sup>2.5</sup> NAAQS by limiting the transportation sector to a more restrictive year 2009 level of on-road direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> than currently allowed by transportation conformity's interim emissions tests which are based on 2002 emissions in the New York and Connecticut portions of the nonattainment area. Connecticut will also be able to evaluate conformity independently and will no longer be required to re-evaluate conformity whenever a MPO in the New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area triggers conformity. EPA's adequacy determination for New Jersey's PM <sup>2.5</sup> motor vehicle emissions budgets (71 FR 33305; June 8, 2006) already allows New Jersey to independently determine conformity. Today's direct final rulemaking approves Connecticut's adequate 2009 direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> motor vehicle emissions budgets into the Connecticut SIP. IV. Transportation Conformity Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets The early direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> annual motor vehicle emissions budgets being established are the on-road portion of the 2009 projections illustrated in Table 3, below, 360 tons per year for direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and 18,279 tons per year for NO <sup>X</sup> . The State of Connecticut Department of Transportation and Metropolitan Planning Organizations within the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area [Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (portion), Greater Bridgeport and Valley Regional Planning Organizations, Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials (portion), South Central Regional Council of Governments, and South Western Regional Planning Agency], shall use these budgets for future transportation conformity determinations. Table 3.—2009 Transportation Conformity Emission Budgets Annual direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions
(tons)Annual NO <sup>X</sup> emissions
(tons)Connecticut Portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> Nonattainment Area 360 18,279 V. Basis for Approval EPA's review of Connecticut's SIP revision concludes that this SIP revision is consistent with EPA's Transportation Conformity Rule. Approval of Connecticut's SIP revision is directionally sound since it would approve year 2009 motor vehicle emissions budgets which are more stringent than the year 2002 baseline emissions now used to evaluate transportation conformity in the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. The projected overall annual inventory reduction in direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions from 2002 to 2009 is approximately 2.5 percent, along with a 27 percent reduction in NO <sup>X</sup> emissions. This results from a projected 31 percent reduction in direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions and a 46 percent reduction in NO <sup>X</sup> emissions from onroad sources. Connecticut's projected reduction in direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> emissions demonstrates progress towards attainment of the PM <sup>2.5</sup> annual standard. Although, the projected reduction in direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions is below the five to ten percent reduction that was provided as an example in the July 2004 conformity rule preamble (69 FR 40019; July 1, 2004), EPA believes that Connecticut's early progress SIP should be approved since it will strengthen the existing SIP. Listed below are several factors that make Connecticut's SIP package directionally sound. 1. Fairfield County and New Haven County were included in the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area because of traffic and commuting patterns and other weighting factors used in EPA's designation process. Connecticut has never monitored values at or above the annual NAAQSs for PM <sup>2.5</sup> . 1 1 This SIP is addressing requirements for the annual PM <sup>2.5</sup> standard. Nonattainment of the revised 24-hour PM <sup>2.5</sup> standard (35 micrograms per cubic meter of air (μg/m3)) has not yet been determined. 2. There were no monitored violations of EPA's annual PM <sup>2.5</sup> standard in Fairfield and New Haven counties in 2002, and any reduction in the overall inventory for the two county area below 2002 levels should help ensure that this level of air quality is maintained or improved in the future. 3. There is a significant projected tonnage decrease in overall PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions (168 tons) and NO <sup>X</sup> emissions (16,766 tons) by 2009 in comparison to 2002 base year levels. 4. There is a very large percent reduction projected in both PM <sup>2.5</sup> direct and NO <sup>X</sup> on-road emissions (31% and 46%, respectively) and traffic and commuting patterns were one of the areas highlighted in the technical support documentation for EPA's PM <sup>2.5</sup> designation decisions. 5. The large reduction in Connecticut's NO <sup>X</sup> emissions (27% overall reduction from all inventory sources) may be more beneficial to transport issues by reducing precursors, than immediate reduction of direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions in Connecticut. VI. Final Action EPA is approving the Connecticut SIP revision for establishment of interim progress for the annual fine particle National Ambient Air Quality Standard, which was submitted on April 17, 2007. The direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and annual NO <sup>X</sup> motor vehicle emissions budgets being approved are the on-road mobile source 2009 projections of 360 tons per year of direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> and 18,279 tons per year of NO <sup>X</sup> . These motor vehicle emissions budgets must be used to demonstrate that all transportation plans in the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area result in emissions of PM <sup>2.5</sup> and NO <sup>X</sup> that do not exceed the annual 2009 motor vehicle emissions budget levels. The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this **Federal Register** publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse comments be filed. This action will be effective October 29, 2007 without further notice unless the EPA receives adverse comments by October 1, 2007. If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on October 29, 2007 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule. VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 29, 2007. Interested parties should comment in response to the proposed rule rather than petition for judicial review, unless the objection arises after the comment period allowed for in the proposal. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: August 20, 2007. Robert W. Varney, Regional Administrator, EPA New England. Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Subpart H—Connecticut 2. Section 52.379 is added to read as follows: § 52.379 Control strategy: PM <sup>2.5</sup> . Approval—Revision to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP)on April 17, 2007. the revision is for the purpose of establishing early fine particulate (PM <sup>2.5</sup> ) transportation conformity emission budgets for the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. The April 17, 2007 revision establishes PM <sup>2.5</sup> motor vehicle emission budgets for 2009 of 360 tons per year of direct PM <sup>2.5</sup> emissions and 18,279 tons per year of NO <sup>X</sup> emissions to be used in transportation conformity in the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. [FR Doc. E7-17004 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 20 [WT Docket No. 05-265; FCC No. 07-143] Reexamination of Roaming Obligations of Commercial Mobile Radio Service Providers AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC)clarifies by final rule that automatic roaming is a common carrier obligation for commercial mobile radio service
(CMRS)carriers, requiring them to provide roaming services to other carriers upon reasonable request and on a just, reasonable, and non-discriminatory basis. DATES: This rule is effective October 29, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christina Clearwater at
(202)418-1893, *Christina.Clearwater@fcc.gov,* Spectrum and Competition Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau; Won Kim at
(202)418-1368, *Won.Kim@fcc.gov,* Spectrum and Competition Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report and Order, WT Docket No. 05-265, FCC No. 07-143, adopted August 7, 2007 and released August 16, 2007. The full text of the Report and Order is available for public inspection on the Commission's Internet site at *http://www.fcc.gov* . It is also available for inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center (CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The full text of this document also may be purchased from the Commission's duplication contractor, Best Copy and Printing Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554; telephone
(202)488-5300; fax
(202)488-5563; e-mail *FCC@BCPIWEB.COM* . Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis The Report and Order does not contain an information collection subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and therefore does not contain any new or modified “information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002. Synopsis 1. In this Report and Order, the Commission finds that automatic roaming is a common carrier obligation pursuant to Sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act, and discusses the scope of the automatic roaming obligation for commercial mobile radio service
(CMRS)carriers. The Commission also declines to regulate the automatic roaming rates and addresses other issues raised by commenters in the record, including a request for “most favored” roaming partner rates for Tier IV CMRS carriers, in-market or home roaming issues, access to non-interconnected features and enhanced digital networks, and public filing of roaming rates. Finally, the Commission codifies the automatic roaming obligations into a rule, imposing an affirmative obligation to provide automatic roaming on CMRS carriers under certain conditions, denies the petition for investigation pursuant to Section 403 of the Act, and declines to sunset the existing manual roaming rule at this time. 2. The Commission believes its findings and clarifications in this Report and Order with respect to CMRS providers' obligations regarding roaming services serve the public interest and safeguard wireless consumers' reasonable expectations of receiving seamless nationwide commercial mobile telephony services through roaming. A. Automatic Roaming Obligations 1. Automatic Roaming 3. The Commission clarifies that automatic roaming is a common carrier service, subject to the protections outlined in Sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act. If a CMRS carrier receives a reasonable request for automatic roaming, pursuant to Section 332(c)(1)(B) and Section 201(a), it is desirable and serves the public interest for that CMRS carrier to provide automatic roaming service on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions. Services that are covered by the automatic roaming obligation are limited to real-time, two-way switched voice or data services, provided by CMRS carriers, that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. These findings are consistent with the Commission's previous determinations. 4. Roaming is a common carrier service, because roaming capability gives end users access to a foreign network in order to communicate messages of their own choosing, as previously determined in CC Docket No. 94-54, published at 61 FR 44026, August 27, 1996. 1 In finding that roaming is a common carrier service, the Commission noted the contrast between roaming and services such as billing and collection offered by local exchange carriers
(LECs)and interexchange carriers (IXCs), which are not common carriage because they do “not allow customers of the service * * * to communicate or transmit intelligence of their own design and choosing,” and because they can be offered by non-communications entities such as credit card companies. The Commission also found that roaming satisfies all the statutory elements of commercial mobile radio service, and “is thus a common carrier service, because it is
(1)an interconnected mobile service
(2)offered for profit
(3)in such a manner as to be available to a substantial portion of the public.” There are two forms of roaming—manual and automatic. The Commission finds that both forms of roaming are common carrier services because both forms of roaming capability give end users access to a foreign network in order to communicate messages of their own choosing. 1 *See* Interconnection and Resale Obligations Pertaining to Commercial Mobile Radio Services, CC Docket No. 94-54, Second Report and Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 11 FCC Rcd 9462, 9468-69 Para. 10
(1996)(“Interconnection and Resale Obligations Second Report and Order” and “Interconnection and Resale Obligations Third NPRM,” respectively). 5. Further, under Section 332 of the Communications Act, CMRS providers are subject to common carrier regulations. Section 332(c)(1)(A) provides that a “person engaged in the provision of a service that is a commercial mobile service shall, insofar as such person is engaged, be treated as a common carrier,” and Subsection (c)(1)(B) states that, “[u]pon reasonable request of any person providing commercial mobile service, the Commission shall order a common carrier to establish physical connections with such service pursuant to the provisions of Section 201 of this Title.” Like any other common carrier service offering, if a CMRS provider offers automatic roaming, it triggers its common carrier obligations with respect to the provisioning of that service under the Communications Act. The Commission determines that, if a CMRS carrier receives a reasonable request for automatic roaming, pursuant to Section 332(c)(1)(B) and Section 201(a), it is desirable and necessary to serve the public interest for that CMRS carrier to provide automatic roaming service on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions. 6. Additionally, the Commission determines that a reasonable request for automatic roaming will be limited to real-time, two-way switched voice or data services, provided by CMRS carriers, that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. This ensures that all CMRS providers competing in the mass market for real-time, two-way voice and data services are similarly obligated to provide automatic roaming services, thereby equally benefiting all subscribers of mobile telephony services who seek to roam seamlessly over CMRS networks. The Commission also concludes, as it has in prior proceedings, that an important indicator of a provider's ability to compete with other CMRS providers is whether the provider's system has “in-network” switching capability. In-network switching facilities accommodate the reuse of frequencies in different portions of the same service area, thus enabling any CMRS provider to offer interconnected service to a larger group of customers and compete directly with other CMRS providers in the mass consumer market. 7. *Complaint Procedures.* Based on its finding that automatic roaming is a common carrier service, the Commission determines that the provisioning of automatic roaming service is subject to Section 208 which provides that complaints may be filed with the Commission against common carriers subject to the Communications Act. There has been some confusion regarding whether the provisioning of automatic roaming services is subject to the requirements of Section 208. Given the fact-specific nature of the roaming issues that have come to light during this proceeding and several merger proceedings, the Commission concludes that many disputes involving automatic roaming services would be best resolved through an adjudicatory process. In deciding roaming complaints, the Commission will consider whether a request is reasonable or whether the activity complained of is unjust and unreasonable based on the totality of the circumstances of the case. When roaming-related complaints are filed, the Commission intends to address them expeditiously on a case-by-case basis. 8. Further, the Commission notes that the Accelerated Docket procedure, including pre-complaint mediation, is available to roaming complaints. Several commenters—including parties both supporting and opposing adoption of an automatic roaming rule—requested use of the Commission's Accelerated Docket procedures to resolve roaming complaints. Although all roaming complaints will not automatically be placed on the Accelerated Docket, an affected carrier can seek consideration of its complaint under the Commission's Accelerated Docket rules and procedures where appropriate. 9. *Reasonableness of Automatic Roaming Requests.* In order to provide some guidance as to the reasonableness of automatic roaming requests under Sections 201(b) and 202(a), the Commission also establishes several rebuttable presumptions with respect to requests for automatic roaming and the would-be host carriers' response. The Commission will presume a request for automatic roaming to be reasonable, in the first instance, if the requesting CMRS carriers' network is technologically compatible and the roaming request is for areas outside of the requesting carrier's home market. As noted above, to be deemed reasonable, a request for automatic roaming may involve only those real-time, two-way switched voice or data services that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. When a presumptively reasonable automatic roaming request is made, a would-be host CMRS carrier has a duty to respond to the request and avoid actions that unduly delay or stonewall the course of negotiations regarding that request. For example, following receipt of a reasonable automatic roaming request, evidence of a would-be host carrier's refusal to respond at all or a persistent pattern of stonewalling behavior will likely support a finding of a breach of the would-be host carrier's automatic roaming obligations. 10. The presumptions and examples of reasonableness cited above are not exhaustive, but rather are intended to provide some guidance to parties that may be participating in a Section 208 complaint proceeding involving roaming services. CMRS carriers may argue that the Commission should consider other relevant factors in determining whether there is a violation of the automatic roaming obligations, based on the totality of the circumstances present in a particular case. 2. Determination Not to Impose Rate Regulation on Roaming Agreements 11. The Commission declines to impose a price cap or any other form of rate regulation on the fees carriers pay each other when one carrier's customer roams on another carrier's network. In particular, the Commission is not persuaded that consumers would be harmed in the absence of a price cap or some other form of rate regulation. The Commission believes that the better course, as established in this Report and Order, is that the rates individual carriers pay for automatic roaming services be determined in the marketplace through negotiations between the carriers, subject to the statutory requirement that any rates charged be reasonable and non-discriminatory. 12. The Commission finds that there is insufficient evidence to justify regulating the roaming rates of carriers, and that any harm to consumers in the absence of affirmative regulation in this regard is speculative. Moreover, with the clarifications it makes herein with respect to automatic roaming, the Commission finds that consumers are protected from being harmed by the level and structure of roaming rates negotiated between carriers. Absent a finding that the existing level and structure of roaming rates harm consumers, regulation of rates for automatic roaming service is not warranted. 13. Because it is not persuaded that the existing level and structure of roaming rates negotiated between carriers harm consumers of mobile telephony services, the Commission does not need to address the argument that the state of competition in the intermediate product market is such as to warrant rate regulation. 14. Based on the foregoing considerations, the Commission concludes that regulation of roaming rates is not warranted on economic grounds. In addition, however, the Commission agrees with concerns raised in the record that rate regulation has the potential to distort carriers' incentives and behavior with regard to pricing and investment in network buildout. Capping roaming rates by tying them to a benchmark based on larger carriers' retail rates may diminish larger carriers' incentives to lower retail prices paid by their customers, and perhaps even give them an incentive to raise retail rates. At the same time, by requiring larger carriers to offer national roaming coverage to their competitors' customers at nearly the same rates offered to their own customers, this form of rate regulation may also give smaller regional carriers an incentive to reduce, or even eliminate, the discounts they offer on regional calling plans, thereby driving up the prices regional subscribers pay for calls within their plan's calling area. 15. Similarly, regulation to reduce roaming rates has the potential to deter investment in network deployment by impairing buildout incentives facing both small and large carriers. By enabling smaller regional carriers to offer their customers national roaming coverage at more favorable rates without having to build a nationwide network, rate regulation would tend to diminish smaller carriers' incentives to expand the geographic coverage of their networks. In addition, by reducing or eliminating any competitive advantage gained as a result of building out nationwide or large regional networks, rate regulation would impair larger carriers' incentives to expand, maintain, and upgrade their existing networks. B. Other Issues 1. “Most Favored” Roaming Partner Rates for Tier IV CMRS Providers 16. Since the Commission's determination that automatic roaming is common carrier service applies to all CMRS providers regardless of size, it declines to create a special Tier IV category for roaming services. The Commission also declines to adopt a rule requiring that large nationwide carriers offer the same roaming arrangements to Tier IV providers as they offer to their “most favored” roaming partners. 17. Because the need for automatic roaming services may not always be the same, and the value of roaming services may vary across different geographic markets due to differences in population and other factors affecting the supply and demand for roaming services, it is likely that automatic roaming rates will reasonably vary. Mobile services in the United States are differentiated based on price, as well as non-price attributes, including geographic coverage. Competition between mobile telephone pricing plans that are differentiated in these ways benefits consumers by allowing them to choose pricing plans that offer the best deal on the types of services they use most frequently. Mandating that a subcategory of CMRS carriers ( *i.e.* , Tier IV providers) are entitled to the same rates as “most favored” roaming partners and imposing this obligation on certain large CMRS carriers, without a clear demonstration of why such a requirement would serve the public interest, would distort competitive market conditions, resulting in unjust and unreasonable practices and discriminatory treatments. 18. Accordingly, the Commission declines to mandate that a subcategory of CMRS carriers ( *i.e.* , Tier IV providers) be entitled to the same rates as “most favored” roaming partners. The Commission similarly declines to impose such an obligation on only certain larger CMRS carriers. Instead, the Commission believes that its finding that automatic roaming rule is a common carrier service subject to provisions of Sections 201, 202 and 208 of the Communications Act and guidance as to rebuttable presumptions establishing the reasonableness of an automatic roaming request provide small CMRS carriers with an effective mechanism for recourse against unjust and unreasonable practices. 2. In-Market or Home Roaming 19. The Commission determines that the automatic roaming obligation does not include an in-market or home roaming requirement. The Commission is not requiring a CMRS carrier to provide automatic roaming to a requesting CMRS carrier in a market where the CMRS carrier directly competes with the requesting CMRS carrier. Specifically, a CMRS carrier is not required to provide automatic roaming to a requesting CMRS carrier where the requesting CMRS carrier holds a wireless license or spectrum usage rights ( *e.g.* , spectrum leases) in the same geographic location as the would-be host CMRS carrier. In geographic areas outside of these overlapping areas or markets, however, a host carrier must comply with the Commission's automatic roaming requirement and provide this service in a manner consistent with the common carrier obligations of Sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act. 20. The Commission finds that an automatic roaming request in the home area of a requesting CMRS carrier, the area where the requesting CMRS carrier has the spectrum to compete directly with the would-be host carrier, does not serve the Commission's public interest goals of encouraging facilities-based service and supporting consumer expectations of seamless coverage when traveling outside the home area. The Commission finds that if a carrier is allowed to “piggy-back” on the network coverage of a competing carrier in the same market, then both carriers lose the incentive to build out into high cost areas in order to achieve superior network coverage. This conclusion, however, should not be construed as prohibiting a requesting carrier from seeking to negotiate a roaming agreement including such terms if desired, or a host carrier from providing a requesting CMRS carrier with in-market or home roaming should it chose to do so. The Commission continues to encourage all CMRS carriers to negotiate desired terms and conditions of automatic roaming agreements, including automatic roaming in overlapping geographic markets. 21. For purposes of this exclusion from automatic roaming obligations, in-market or home roaming is defined as any geographic location where the would-be host carrier and the requesting CMRS carrier have wireless licenses or spectrum usage rights that could be used to provide CMRS that cover or overlap the same geographic location(s). Within these overlapping geographic areas, the would-be host carrier is not required to comply with an automatic roaming request. This in-market or home roaming exclusion does not depend on the level of service the requesting CMRS carrier is providing in the overlapping geographic area. The exclusion applies regardless of whether the requesting CMRS carrier is providing no service, limited service, or state-of-the-art service. 22. Finally, the Commission also determines that the automatic roaming obligation under Sections 201 and 202 and the home roaming exclusion are not intended to resurrect CMRS resale obligations. CMRS resale entails a reseller's purchase of CMRS service provided by a facilities-based CMRS carrier in order to provide resold service within the same geographic market as the facilities-based CMRS provider. The Commission notes that its mandatory resale rule was sunset in 2002, and automatic roaming obligations can not be used as a backdoor way to create de facto mandatory resale obligations or virtual reseller networks. 3. Access to Certain Data Features and Enhanced Digital Networks
(a)Access to Push-to-Talk, Text Messaging
(SMS)and Non-Interconnected Data Features 23. As discussed above, the scope of automatic roaming services includes only services offered by CMRS carriers that are real-time, two-way switched voice or data services that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables providers to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. The Commission finds that it would serve the public interest to extend automatic roaming obligations to push- to-talk and SMS. The Commission declines at this time, however, to adopt a rule extending the automatic roaming obligation beyond that to offerings that do not fall within the scope of the automatic roaming services' definition, such as non-interconnected services or features. 24. With respect to push-to-talk and SMS, the Commission notes that such offerings are typically bundled as a feature on the handset with other CMRS services, such as real-time, two-way switched mobile voice or data, that are interconnected with the public switched network. Provision of these features differs from one carrier to another, *i.e.* , push-to-talk and SMS are interconnected features or services in some instances, but non-interconnected in others, depending on the technology and network configuration chosen by the carriers. The Commission is also aware that consumers consider push-to-talk and SMS as features that are typically offered as adjuncts to basic voice services, and expect the same seamless connectivity with respect to these features and capabilities as they travel outside their home network service areas. For these reasons, the Commission finds that it is in the public interest to impose an automatic roaming obligation on push-to-talk and SMS offerings, subject to several provisos. Namely, the requesting carrier must offer push-to-talk and SMS to its subscribers on its own home network; push-to-talk and SMS roaming must be technically feasible; and any changes to the would-be host carrier's network that are necessary to accommodate push-to-talk and SMS roaming requests must be economically reasonable. 25. With respect to non-interconnected features or services, the Commission finds that the record in this proceeding lacks a clear showing that it is in the public interest at this time to impose an automatic roaming obligation. While proponents of unrestricted data roaming have argued that requiring roaming access to the non-interconnected features of a competitor's network would benefit consumers by providing greater availability for data features that are increasingly used by consumers, opponents are concerned that that it might undercut incentives to differentiate products and could chill innovation. These opponents claim that extending roaming to non-interconnected features of a competitors' network may also adversely affect business decisions to build out facilities for facilities-based competition and reduce the incentives to access the spectrum through other means such as initial spectrum licensing or secondary markets. In light of these diverse views, the Commission believes it is in the public interest, however, to examine the issue of automatic roaming for non-interconnected features or services through a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM).
(b)Access to Enhanced Digital Networks 26. As previously explained, the automatic roaming obligation applies to real-time, two-way switched voice or data services that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables providers to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. As discussed above with respect to non-interconnected services, the Commission similarly declines at this time to extend the scope of the automatic roaming services definition to include non-interconnected services provided over enhanced digital networks, such as wireless broadband Internet access. The Commission finds that automatic roaming, as a common carrier obligation, does not extend to services that are classified as information services or to other wireless services that are not CMRS. 27. While the Commission finds that, based on the current record, it is premature to impose any roaming obligation regarding enhanced data services that are not CMRS and not interconnected to the public switched network, the Commission will examine this matter further in the FNPRM. 4. Public Filing of Roaming Rates 28. The Commission declines to impose an affirmative obligation on CMRS carriers to post their roaming rates. As is generally the case with commercial agreements, roaming agreements are confidential and filing them would impose administrative costs on the carriers. In light of its adoption of an automatic roaming rule as discussed below, the Commission finds that the available remedies for redress are sufficient to address disputes that may arise. C. Codification of Automatic Roaming Obligations 29. The Commission codifies the automatic roaming obligations of CMRS carriers into a rule requiring that they provide automatic roaming to any requesting technologically compatible CMRS carrier outside of the requesting CMRS carrier's home market on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions. This rule applies to CMRS carriers that offer real-time, two-way switched voice or data service over digital network that is interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. The Commission also notes that codification of an automatic roaming obligation gives CMRS carriers another avenue to redress roaming disputes, benefiting mobile telephony subscribers. 30. Finally, the Commission clarifies that automatic roaming, pursuant to Sections 201 and 202, as a common carrier obligation applies to CMRS carriers' analog networks. The Commission does not find, however, that it is necessary to codify this obligation into a specific rule. With the sunset of the analog service requirement on February 18, 2008, there would be little benefit to a codified automatic roaming rule for analog networks that might potentially apply between now and that date. Individual carriers may, of course, enter into automatic roaming agreements for their analog networks, and any allegations that particular practices on analog networks are unjust, unreasonable or otherwise in violation of Sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act would be subject to the complaint process of Section 208 of the Communications Act. D. Petition for Investigation Pursuant to Section 403 of the Act 31. Because the Commission finds that the record is sufficient to codify automatic roaming obligations of CMRS carriers, the Commission denies the Joint Petition for Investigation Pursuant to Section 403, which petitioners contend will assist the Commission in gathering necessary information to support the adoption of an automatic roaming rule. E. Manual Roaming 32. The Commission declines to sunset its existing manual roaming rule and, instead, retains it as a safety net for consumers. The Commission is aware that as automatic roaming becomes increasingly ubiquitous, it will render the need for manual roaming obsolete. The Commission notes, however, that the record demonstrates that automatic roaming is not available in certain instances today and, therefore, the continuing utility of the manual roaming rule in the immediate future is not completely obviated. For this reason, the Commission retains the manual roaming rule as a safety net to ensure that subscribers can initiate a wireless call when they are outside of their service area through manual roaming if there is no automatic roaming agreement in place. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 33. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), 2 an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA)was incorporated in the NPRM in WT Docket No. 05-265, published at 70 FR 56612, September 28, 2005. 3 The Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in the NPRM, including comment on the IRFA. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA)conforms to the RFA. 4 2 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, *see* 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996). 3 *See* In the Matter of Reexamination of Roaming Obligations of Commercial Mobile Radio Service Providers, Automatic and Manual Roaming Obligations Pertaining to Commercial Mobile Radio Services, Memorandum Opinion & Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, WT Docket No. 05-265, 20 FCC Rcd 15047, 15068 App.
(2005)(“MO&O” and “NPRM,” respectively). 4 *See* 5 U.S.C. 604. A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order 34. In the Report and Order, with regard to commercial services, the Commission takes an affirmative step to facilitate the provision of wireless services to consumers, especially those in rural areas, and to clarify its rules related to roaming. The Commission clarifies that automatic roaming is a common carrier obligation for CMRS carriers, requiring them to provide roaming services to other carriers upon reasonable request and on a just, reasonable, and non-discriminatory basis pursuant to Sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act. The Commission reiterates its earlier determination that roaming is a common carrier service because roaming capability gives end users access to a foreign network in order to communicate messages of their own choosing. Thus, the provision of roaming is subject to the requirements of Section 201, 202, and 208 of the Communications Act. 5 5 *See* Reexamination of Roaming Obligations of Commercial Mobile Radio Service Providers, Automatic and Manual Roaming Obligations Pertaining to Commercial Mobile Radio Services, WT Docket No. 05-265, Memorandum Opinion & Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 20 FCC Rcd 15047, 15048 para. 2
(2005)(“Reexamination NPRM”); Interconnection and Resale Obligations Pertaining to Commercial Mobile Radio Services, CC Docket No. 94-54, Second Report and Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 11 FCC Rcd 9462, 9463-71 paras. 1-14
(1996)(“Interconnection and Resale Obligations Second Report and Order” and “Interconnection and Resale Obligations Third NPRM,” respectively). *See also* 47 CFR 20.15. Section 332(c)(1) of the Act provides that a person engaged in the provision of a service that is a commercial mobile service shall be treated as a common carrier for purposes of the Act. *See* 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(1). 35. The Commission also finds that the common carrier obligation to provide roaming extends to services that are real-time, two-way switched voice or data service that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. The Commission notes that roaming, as a common carrier obligation, does not extend to services that are classified as information services or to services that are not CMRS. 6 6 Appropriate Regulatory Treatment for Broadband Access to the Internet Over Wireless Networks, Declaratory Ruling, FCC No. 07-30, paras. 11-12 (rel. Mar. 23, 2007) (“Wireless Broadband Internet Access Declaratory Ruling”). 36. The Commission recognizes that today CMRS consumers increasingly rely on mobile telephony services and they reasonably expect to continue their wireless communications even when they are out of their home network area. Thus, the findings in this Report and Order with respect to CMRS providers' obligations regarding roaming services serve the public interest and safeguard wireless consumers' reasonable expectations of seamless continuous nationwide commercial mobile telephony services through roaming. The Commission also declines to sunset the existing manual roaming requirement at this time to provide additional flexibility for consumers. B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to the IRFA 37. There were no comments filed specifically in response to the IRFA. C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which Rules Will Apply 38. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, where feasible, an estimate of, the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. 7 The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” 8 In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. 9 A “small business concern” is one which:
(1)Is independently owned and operated;
(2)is not dominant in its field of operation; and
(3)satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). 10 7 5 U.S.C. 604(a)(3). 8 5 U.S.C. 601(6). 9 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of “small-business concern” in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies “unless an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the **Federal Register** .” 10 15 U.S.C. 632. 39. In the following paragraphs, the Commission further describes and estimates the number of small entity licensees that may be affected by the rules the Commission adopts in this Report and Order. The Commission's finding that automatic roaming is a common carrier service subject to protections outlined in Sections 201, 202 and 208 of the Act affects all CMRS carriers that provide real-time, two-way switched voice or data service that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. Such carriers are obligated to provide automatic roaming. As a common carrier obligation, the automatic roaming rule does not extend to non-interconnected services/features or services that are classified as information services or to services that are not CMRS. 40. Since this Report and Order applies to multiple services, this FRFA analyzes the number of small entities affected on a service-by-service basis. When identifying small entities that could be affected by the Commission's new rules, this FRFA provides information that describes auctions results, including the number of small entities that were winning bidders. However, the number of winning bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction does not necessarily reflect the total number of small entities currently in a particular service. The Commission does not generally require that licensees later provide business size information, except in the context of an assignment or a transfer of control application that involves unjust enrichment issues. 41. *Wireless Service Providers.* The SBA has developed a small business size standard for wireless firms within the two broad economic census categories of “Paging” 11 and “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.” 12 Under both categories, the SBA deems a wireless business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 13 Of this total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 14 Thus, under this category and associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. For the census category of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 15 Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 16 Thus, under this second category and size standard, the majority of firms can, again, be considered small. 11 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517211. 12 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 13 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,” Table 5, NAICS code 517211 (issued Nov. 2005). 14 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 15 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,” Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005). 16 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 42. *Cellular Licensees.* The SBA has developed a small business size standard for small businesses in the category “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.” 17 Under that SBA category, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 18 For the census category of “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,” Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 19 Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 20 Thus, under this category and size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 17 13 CFR 121.201, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 517212. 18 *Id.* 19 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,” Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005). 20 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 43. *Broadband Personal Communications Service.* The broadband Personal Communications Service
(PCS)spectrum is divided into six frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held auctions for each block. The Commission has created a small business size standard for Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years. 21 For Block F, an additional small business size standard for “very small business” was added and is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. 22 These small business size standards, in the context of broadband PCS auctions, have been approved by the SBA. 23 No small businesses within the SBA-approved small business size standards bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. There were 90 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the C Block auctions. A total of 93 “small” and “very small” business bidders won approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F. 24 On March 23, 1999, the Commission reauctioned 155 C, D, E, and F Block licenses; there were 113 small business winning bidders. 25 On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of 422 C and F PCS licenses in Auction 35. 26 Of the 35 winning bidders in this auction, 29 qualified as “small” or “very small” businesses. Subsequent events concerning Auction 35, including judicial and agency determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C and F Block licenses being available for grant. 21 *See* Amendment of Parts 20 and 24 of the Commission's Rules—Broadband PCS Competitive Bidding and the Commercial Mobile Radio Service Spectrum Cap, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 7824, 7850-7852 paras. 57-60 (1996); see also 47 CFR 24.720(b). 22 *See* Amendment of Parts 20 and 24 of the Commission's Rules—Broadband PCS Competitive Bidding and the Commercial Mobile Radio Service Spectrum Cap, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 7824, 7852 para. 60. 23 *See* Letter to Amy Zoslov, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated December 2, 1998. 24 FCC News, “Broadband PCS, D, E and F Block Auction Closes,” No. 71744 (rel. January 14, 1997). 25 *See* “C, D, E, and F Block Broadband PCS Auction Closes,” public notice, 14 FCC Rcd 6688 (WTB 1999). 26 *See* “C and F Block Broadband PCS Auction Closes; Winning Bidders Announced,” public notice, 16 FCC Rcd 2339 (2001). 44. *Narrowband Personal Communications Service.* The Commission held an auction for Narrowband Personal Communications Service
(PCS)licenses that commenced on July 25, 1994, and closed on July 29, 1994. A second commenced on October 26, 1994 and closed on November 8, 1994. For purposes of the first two Narrowband PCS auctions, “small businesses” were entities with average gross revenues for the prior three calendar years of $40 million or less. 27 Through these auctions, the Commission awarded a total of forty-one licenses, 11 of which were obtained by four small businesses. 28 To ensure meaningful participation by small business entities in future auctions, the Commission adopted a two-tiered small business size standard in the Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order. 29 A “small business” is an entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $40 million. 30 A “very small business” is an entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $15 million. 31 The SBA has approved these small business size standards. 32 A third auction commenced on October 3, 2001 and closed on October 16, 2001. Here, five bidders won 317 (MTA and nationwide) licenses. 33 Three of these claimed status as a small or very small entity and won 311 licenses. 27 Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act—Competitive Bidding Narrowband PCS, Third Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 10 FCC Rcd 175, 196 para. 46 (1994). 28 *See* “Announcing the High Bidders in the Auction of ten Nationwide Narrowband PCS Licenses, Winning Bids Total $617,006,674,” public notice, PNWL 94-004 (rel. Aug. 2, 1994); “Announcing the High Bidders in the Auction of 30 Regional Narrowband PCS Licenses; Winning Bids Total $490,901,787,” public notice, PNWL 94-27 (rel. Nov. 9, 1994). 29 Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications Services, Narrowband PCS, Second Report and Order and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 15 FCC Rcd 10456, 10476 para. 40 (2000). 30 *Id.* 31 *Id.* 32 *See* Letter to Amy Zoslov, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated December 2, 1998. 33 *See* “Narrowband PCS Auction Closes,” public notice, 16 FCC Rcd 18663 (WTB 2001). 45. *Specialized Mobile Radio* . The Commission awards “small entity” bidding credits in auctions for Specialized Mobile Radio
(SMR)geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands to firms that had revenues of no more than $15 million in each of the three previous calendar years. 34 The Commission awards “very small entity” bidding credits to firms that had revenues of no more than $3 million in each of the three previous calendar years. 35 The SBA has approved these small business size standards for the 900 MHz Service. 36 The Commission has held auctions for geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands. The 900 MHz SMR auction began on December 5, 1995, and closed on April 15, 1996. Sixty bidders claiming that they qualified as small businesses under the $15 million size standard won 263 geographic area licenses in the 900 MHz SMR band. The 800 MHz SMR auction for the upper 200 channels began on October 28, 1997, and was completed on December 8, 1997. Ten bidders claiming that they qualified as small businesses under the $15 million size standard won 38 geographic area licenses for the upper 200 channels in the 800 MHz SMR band. 37 A second auction for the 800 MHz band was held on January 10, 2002 and closed on January 17, 2002 and included 23 BEA licenses. One bidder claiming small business status won five licenses. 38 34 47 CFR 90.814(b)(1). 35 *Id.* 36 *See* Letter to Thomas Sugrue, Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated August 10, 1999. 37 *See* “Correction to Public Notice DA 96-586 `FCC Announces Winning Bidders in the Auction of 1020 Licenses to Provide 900 MHz SMR in Major Trading Areas,”' public notice, 18 FCC Rcd 18367 (WTB 1996). 38 *See* “Multi-Radio Service Auction Closes,” public notice, 17 FCC Rcd 1446 (WTB 2002). 46. The auction of the 1,050 800 MHz SMR geographic area licenses for the General Category channels began on August 16, 2000, and was completed on September 1, 2000. Eleven bidders won 108 geographic area licenses for the General Category channels in the 800 MHz SMR band qualified as small businesses under the $15 million size standard. In an auction completed on December 5, 2000, a total of 2,800 Economic Area licenses in the lower 80 channels of the 800 MHz SMR service were sold. Of the 22 winning bidders, 19 claimed “small business” status and won 129 licenses. Thus, combining all three auctions, 40 winning bidders for geographic licenses in the 800 MHz SMR band claimed status as small business. 47. In addition, there are numerous incumbent site-by-site SMR licensees and licensees with extended implementation authorizations in the 800 and 900 MHz bands. The Commission does not know how many firms provide 800 MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR pursuant to extended implementation authorizations, nor how many of these providers have annual revenues of no more than $3 million or $15 million (the special small business size standards), or have no more than 1,500 employees (the generic SBA standard for wireless entities, discussed, supra). One firm has over $15 million in revenues. The Commission assumes, for purposes of this analysis, that all of the remaining existing extended implementation authorizations are held by small entities. 48. *Advanced Wireless Services.* In the AWS-1 Report and Order, the Commission adopted rules that affect applicants who wish to provide service in the 1710-1755 MHz and 2110-2155 MHz bands. 39 The AWS-1 Report and Order defines a “small business” as an entity with average annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $40 million, and a “very small business” as an entity with average annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $15 million. The AWS-1 Report and Order also provides small businesses with a bidding credit of 15 percent and very small businesses with a bidding credit of 25 percent. 39 Service Rules for Advanced Wireless Services in the 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz Bands, WT Docket No. 02-353, Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 25162
(2003)(AWS-1 Report and Order). 49. *Rural Radiotelephone Service.* The Commission uses the SBA small business size standard applicable to cellular and other wireless telecommunication companies, i.e., an entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. 40 There are approximately 1,000 licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission estimates that there are 1,000 or fewer small entity licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. 40 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 50. *Wireless Communications Services.* This service can be used for fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite uses in the 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz bands. The Commission defined “small business” for the wireless communications services
(WCS)auction as an entity with average gross revenues of $40 million for each of the three preceding years, and a “very small business” as an entity with average gross revenues of $15 million for each of the three preceding years. 41 The SBA has approved these definitions. 42 The Commission auctioned geographic area licenses in the WCS service. In the auction, which commenced on April 15, 1997 and closed on April 25, 1997, there were seven bidders that won 31 licenses that qualified as very small business entities, and one bidder that won one license that qualified as a small business entity. 41 Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Part 27, the Wireless Communications Service (WCS), Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 10785, 10879 para. 194 (1997). 42 *See* Letter to Amy Zoslov, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated December 2, 1998. 51. *220 MHz Radio Service—Phase I Licensees.* The 220 MHz service has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. Phase I licensing was conducted by lotteries in 1992 and 1993. There are approximately 1,515 such non-nationwide licensees and four nationwide licensees currently authorized to operate in the 220 MHz Band. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities specifically applicable to such incumbent 220 MHz Phase I licensees. To estimate the number of such licensees that are small businesses, the Commission applies the small business size standard under the SBA rules applicable to “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” companies. This category provides that a small business is a wireless company employing no more than 1,500 persons. 43 For the census category of “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,” Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 44 Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 45 Thus, under this category and size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 43 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 44 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,” Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005). 45 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 52. *220 MHz Radio Service—Phase II Licensees.* The 220 MHz service has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. The Phase II 220 MHz service is subject to spectrum auctions. In the 220 MHz Third Report and Order, the Commission adopted a small business size standard for defining “small” and “very small” businesses for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment payments. 46 This small business standard indicates that a “small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years. 47 A “very small business” is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that do not exceed $3 million for the preceding three years. 48 The SBA has approved these small size standards. 49 Auctions of Phase II licenses commenced on September 15, 1998, and closed on October 22, 1998. 50 In the first auction, 908 licenses were auctioned in three different-sized geographic areas: Three nationwide licenses, 30 Regional Economic Area Group
(EAG)Licenses, and 875 Economic Area
(EA)Licenses. Of the 908 licenses auctioned, 693 were sold. 51 Thirty-nine small businesses won 373 licenses in the first 220 MHz auction. A second auction included 225 licenses: 216 EA licenses and 9 EAG licenses. Fourteen companies claiming small business status won 158 licenses. 52 A third auction included four licenses: 2 BEA licenses and 2 EAG licenses in the 220 MHz Service. No small or very small business won any of these licenses. 53 46 Amendment of Part 90 of the Commission's Rules to Provide For the Use of the 220-222 MHz Band by the Private Land Mobile Radio Service, Third Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 10943, 11068-70 paras. 291-295 (1997). 47 *Id.* at 11068 para. 291. 48 *Id.* 49 *See* Letter to Daniel Phythyon, Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated January 6, 1998. 50 *See* generally “220 MHz Service Auction Closes,” public notice, 14 FCC Rcd 605 (WTB 1998). 51 *See* “FCC Announces It is Prepared to Grant 654 Phase II 220 MHz Licenses After Final Payment is Made,” public notice, 14 FCC Rcd 1085 (WTB 1999). 52 *See* “Phase II 220 MHz Service Spectrum Auction Closes,” public notice, 14 FCC Rcd 11218 (WTB 1999). 53 *See* “Multi-Radio Service Auction Closes,” public notice, 17 FCC Rcd 1446 (WTB 2002). 53. *700 MHz Guard Band Licenses.* In the 700 MHz Guard Band Order, the Commission adopted size standards for “small businesses” and “very small businesses” for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment payments. 54 A small business in this service is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years. 55 Additionally, a “very small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three years. 56 SBA approval of these definitions is not required. 57 An auction of 52 Major Economic Area
(MEA)licenses commenced on September 6, 2000, and closed on September 21, 2000. 58 Of the 104 licenses auctioned, 96 licenses were sold to nine bidders. Five of these bidders were small businesses that won a total of 26 licenses. A second auction of 700 MHz Guard Band licenses commenced on February 13, 2001, and closed on February 21, 2001. All eight of the licenses auctioned were sold to three bidders. One of these bidders was a small business that won a total of two licenses. 59 54 Service Rules for the 746-764 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules, Second Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5299 (2000). Service rules were amended in 2007, but no changes were made to small business size categories. *See* Service Rules for the 698-746, 747-762 and 777-792 MHz Bands, WT Docket No. 06-150, Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems, CC Docket No. 94-102, Section 68.4(a) of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones, WT Docket No. 01-309, Biennial Regulatory Review—Amendment of Parts 1, 22, 24, 27, and 90 to Streamline and Harmonize Various Rules Affecting Wireless Radio Services, WT Docket 03-264, Former Nextel Communications, Inc. Upper 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules, WT Docket No. 06-169, Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz Band, PS Docket No. 06-229, Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket No. 96-86, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 8064 (2007). 55 *Id.* at 5343 para. 108. 56 *Id.* 57 *Id.* At 5343 para. 108 n.246 (for the 746-764 MHz and 776-704 MHz bands, the Commission is exempt from 15 U.S.C. 632, which requires Federal agencies to obtain Small Business Administration approval before adopting small business size standards). 58 *See* “700 MHz Guard Bands Auction Closes: Winning Bidders Announced,” public notice, 15 FCC Rcd 18026 (2000). 59 *See* “700 MHz Guard Bands Auctions Closes: Winning Bidders Announced,” public notice, 16 FCC Rcd 4590 (WTB 2001). 54. *Upper 700 MHz Band Licenses.* The Commission released a Report and Order authorizing service in the Upper 700 MHz band. 60 An auction for these licenses, previously scheduled for January 13, 2003, was postponed. 61 60 Service Rules for the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules, Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 1239 (2001). Service rules were amended in 2007, but no changes were made to small business size categories. *See* Service Rules for the 698-746, 747-762 and 777-792 MHz Bands, WT Docket No. 06-150, Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems, CC Docket No. 94-102, Section 68.4(a) of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones, WT Docket No. 01-309, Biennial Regulatory Review—Amendment of Parts 1, 22, 24, 27, and 90 to Streamline and Harmonize Various Rules Affecting Wireless Radio Services, WT Docket 03-264, Former Nextel Communications, Inc. Upper 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules, WT Docket No. 06-169, Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz Band, PS Docket No. 06-229, Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket No. 96-86, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 8064 (2007). 61 *See* “Auction of Licenses for 747-762 and 777-792 MHz Bands (Auction No. 31) Is Rescheduled,” public notice, 16 FCC Rcd 13079 (WTB 2003). 55. *Lower 700 MHz Band Licenses.* The Commission adopted criteria for defining three groups of small businesses for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits. 62 The Commission has defined a small business as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years. 63 A very small business is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three years. 64 Additionally, the Lower 700 MHz Band has a third category of small business status that may be claimed for Metropolitan/Rural Service Area (MSA/RSA) licenses. The third category is entrepreneur, which is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding three years. 65 The SBA has approved these small size standards. 66 An auction of 740 licenses (one license in each of the 734 MSAs/RSAs and one license in each of the six Economic Area Groupings (EAGs)) commenced on August 27, 2002, and closed on September 18, 2002. Of the 740 licenses available for auction, 484 licenses were sold to 102 winning bidders. Seventy-two of the winning bidders claimed small business, very small business or entrepreneur status and won a total of 329 licenses. 67 A second auction commenced on May 28, 2003, and closed on June 13, 2003, and included 256 licenses: 5 EAG licenses and 476 CMA licenses. 68 Seventeen winning bidders claimed small or very small business status and won sixty licenses, and nine winning bidders claimed entrepreneur status and won 154 licenses. 69 62 *See* Reallocation and Service Rules for the 698-746 MHz Spectrum Band (Television Channels 52-59), Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 1022 (2002). 63 *Id.* at 1087-88 para. 172. 64 *Id.* 65 *Id.* at 1088 para. 173. 66 *See* Letter to Thomas Sugrue, Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated August 10, 1999. 67 *See* “Lower 700 MHz Band Auction Closes,” public notice, 17 FCC Rcd 17272 (WTB 2002). 68 *See* “Lower 700 MHz Band Auction Closes,” public notice, 18 FCC Rcd 11873 (WTB 2003). 69 *Id.* D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements for Small Entities 56. The only reporting or recordkeeping costs to be incurred are administrative costs to ensure that an entity's practices are in compliance with the rule. The only compliance requirement is that CMRS carriers must provide automatic roaming to any requesting technologically compatible CMRS carrier outside of the requesting CMRS carrier's home market on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions. This rule applies to CMRS carriers that offer real-time, two-way switched voice or data service over digital network that is interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. 70 70 *See* Report and Order, supra, paras. 28-29. E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered 57. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others):
(1)The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities;
(2)the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3)the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and
(4)an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities. 71 71 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603(c). 58. In this Report and Order, the Commission clarifies that automatic roaming is a common carrier obligation for CMRS carriers, requiring them to provide roaming services to other carriers upon reasonable request and on a just, reasonable, and non-discriminatory basis pursuant to Sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act. In adopting this rule, the Commission determined that when a reasonable request is made by a technologically compatible CMRS carrier, a host CMRS carrier must provide automatic roaming to the requesting carrier outside of the requesting carrier's home market, consistent with the protections of Sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act. 59. In the Report and Order, the Commission finds that the scope of automatic roaming services includes only services offered by CMRS carriers that are real-time, two-way switched voice or data services that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. In addition, the Commission determines that it would serve the public interest to extend automatic roaming obligation to push-to-talk and text messaging (SMS). However, the Commission declines to adopt a rule extending the automatic roaming obligation beyond that to offerings that do not fall within the scope of the automatic roaming services' definition, such as non-interconnected services or features or services that are classified as information services or to services that are not CMRS. 72 72 Appropriate Regulatory Treatment for Broadband Access to the Internet Over Wireless Networks, Declaratory Ruling, FCC No. 07-30, paras. 11-12 (rel. Mar. 23, 2007) (“Wireless Broadband Internet Access Declaratory Ruling”). 60. In response to the Reexamination NPRM, some of the commenters requested that the Commission cap the rates that a carrier may charge other carriers for automatic roaming service based on some benchmark of retail rates. 73 Some of these commenters have also submitted economic analyses in support of their proposals. 74 Other commenters oppose any rate regulation and, in turn, have submitted their own economic analyses disputing the theory and evidence used to justify the imposition of rate regulation. 75 In the Report and Order, the Commission declines to impose a price cap or any other form of rate regulation on the fees carriers pay each other when one carrier's customer roams on another carrier's network. The Commission believes that the rates individual carriers pay for automatic roaming services should be determined in the marketplace through negotiations between the carriers, subject to the statutory requirement that any rates charged be reasonable and non-discriminatory. 73 *See* Leap Comments at 17, 19-20 (recommending that, in geographic areas where there are three or fewer facilities-based carriers from which the carrier seeking automatic roaming service could obtain such service, the Commission prohibit a facilities-based carrier from charging rates for automatic roaming that exceed the carrier's average retail revenue per minute for that area). *See also* SouthernLINC Comments at 49 (proposing that the Commission establish a presumption that a carrier's roaming rates in a region are unreasonable if they exceed the lowest prevailing per-minute retail rates that it charges its own subscribers in that region). 74 *See,* e.g., Leap Comments, Attachment A (ERS Group, Wholesale Pricing Methods of Nationwide Carriers Providing Commercial Mobile Radio Services: An Economic Analysis); SouthernLINC Comments, Attachment B (R. Preston McAfee, The Economics of Wholesale Roaming in CMRS Markets); SouthernLINC Reply Comments, Attachment B (R. Preston McAfee, The Economics of Wholesale Roaming in CMRS Markets: Reply Comments); Leap Reply Comments, Attachment A (David S. Sibley, The Existence of Regional, Technology-Specific Wholesale Antitrust Markets for Roaming Services); Leap Reply Comments, Attachment B (ERS Group, A Further Analysis of the Wholesale Pricing Methods of Nationwide Carriers Providing Commercial Mobile Radio Service). 75 *See,* e.g., Rosston/Sprint Nextel Comments; Rosston/Sprint Nextel Reply Comments; Hazlett/Cingular Reply Comments; Furchtgott-Roth/T-Mobile Reply Comments. 61. The Commission reiterates that the general policy regarding CMRS services is to allow competitive market forces, rather than regulations, to promote the development of wireless services. On balance, taking into consideration the concerns raised in the record by certain CMRS carriers 76 and its preference for allowing competitive market forces to govern rate and rate structures for wireless services, the Commission expressly declines to impose any corresponding rate regulation of automatic roaming services. 76 *See,* e.g., Cingular Comments at i, 18-30; NDNC Comments at 3; Nextel Partners Comments at 5-6. 62. In the Reexamination NPRM, the Commission sought comment on whether a carrier should be required to enter into an automatic roaming arrangement on a nondiscriminatory basis with a facilities-based-competitor in the same market. In the Report and Order, the Commission determines that the automatic roaming obligation does not include an in-market or home roaming requirement. The Commission finds that an automatic roaming request in the home area of a requesting CMRS carrier, the area where the requesting CMRS carrier has the spectrum to compete directly with the would-be host carrier, does not serve public interest goals of encouraging facilities-based service and supporting consumer expectations of seamless coverage when traveling outside the home area. 63. In the Reexamination NPRM, the Commission sought comment on access to push-to-talk, dispatch, or other data roaming. Some carriers advocate that the Commission should adopt an automatic roaming rule that requires carriers to permit roaming access to all technical features of their systems, and/or require carriers to make the same features accessible to all of their roaming partners (e.g., push-to-talk, dispatch, text messaging
(SMS)or other data roaming services). Based on the record, in the Report and Order, the Commission finds that it would serve public interest to extend automatic roaming obligations to push-to-talk and SMS. However, the Commission declines to adopt a rule extending the automatic roaming obligation beyond that to offerings that do not fall within the scope of the automatic roaming services' definition, such as non-interconnected services or features. With respect to push-to-talk and SMS, the Commission finds that such offerings are typically bundled as a feature on the handset with other CMRS services, such as real-time, two-way switched mobile voice or data, which are interconnected with the public switched network. Thus, consumers consider push-to-talk and SMS as features that are typically offered as adjuncts to basic voice services, and expect the same seamless connectivity with respect to these features and capabilities as they travel outside their home network service areas. 64. With respect to non-interconnected data service, the Commission finds that it is not in the public interest at this time to impose an automatic roaming obligation. In the absence of a clear showing in the record that it would serve the public interest, the Commission believes that open access to the non-interconnected features of a competitor's network might undercut incentives to differentiate products and could chill innovation. It may also adversely affect business decisions to build out facilities for facilities-based competition and reduce the incentives to access the spectrum through other means such as initial spectrum licensing or secondary markets. For these reasons, the Commission declines to impose an automatic roaming requirement on non-interconnected features, such as stand alone dispatch, at this time. 65. In the Report and Order, the Commission also declines to impose an affirmative obligation on CMRS carriers to post their roaming rates. The Commission notes that roaming agreements are generally confidential and filing them would impose administrative costs on the carriers. In light of the adoption of an automatic roaming rule, the Commission finds that the available remedies for redress are sufficient to address disputes that may arise. Therefore, the Commission finds it unnecessary to burden CMRS carriers by requiring them to file roaming agreements. F. Report to Congress 66. The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. 77 In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including the FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the Report and Order and the FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the **Federal Register** . 78 77 *See* 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). 78 *See* 5 U.S.C. 604(b). Ordering Clauses 67. Accordingly, *it is ordered that,* pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 1, 4(i), 201, 202, 251(a), 253, 303(r), and 332(c)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201, 202, 251(a), 253, 303(r), and 332(c)(1)(B), and Section 1.425 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.425, this Report and Order and *FNPRM is hereby adopted.* 68. *It is further ordered that* Sections 20.3 and 20.12 of the Commission's rules *are amended* as specified in Appendix A, and such rule amendments shall be effective 60 days after the date of publication of the text thereof in the **Federal Register** . 69. *It is further ordered that* the Joint Petition for Commission Inquiry Pursuant to Section 403 of the Communications Act filed by AIRPEAK Communications, LLC, Airtel Wireless LLC, Cleveland Unlimited, Inc., Leap Wireless International, Inc., MetroPCS Communications, Inc., Punxsutawney Communications, Rural Telecommunications Group, Inc., and Southern Communications Services, Inc. d/b/a SouthernLINC Wireless, on April 25, 2006 *is hereby denied.* 70. *It is further ordered that* the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, *shall send* a copy of this Report and Order and the FNPRM, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20 Communications common carriers, Communications equipment, Radio. Federal Communications Commission. William F. Caton, Deputy Secretary. Final Rules For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 20 as follows: PART 20—COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 160, 251-254, 303 and 332 unless otherwise noted. 2. Section 20.3 is amended by adding the following terms alphabetically to read as follows: § 20.3 Definitions. *Automatic Roaming* . With automatic roaming, under a pre-existing contractual agreement between a subscriber's home carrier and a host carrier, a roaming subscriber is able to originate or terminate a call in the host carrier's service area without taking any special actions. *Home Carrier* . For automatic roaming, a home carrier is the facilities-based CMRS carrier with which a subscriber has a direct contractual relationship. A home carrier may request automatic roaming service from a host carrier on behalf of its subscribers. *Home Market* . For automatic roaming, a CMRS carrier's home market is defined as any geographic location where the home carrier has a wireless license or spectrum usage rights that could be used to provide CMRS. *Host Carrier* . For automatic roaming, the host carrier is a facilities-based CMRS carrier on whose system a subscriber roams when outside its home carrier's home market. *Manual Roaming* . With manual roaming, a subscriber must establish a relationship with the host carrier on whose system he or she wants to roam in order to make a call. Typically, the roaming subscriber accomplishes this in the course of attempting to originate a call by giving a valid credit card number to the carrier providing the roaming service. 3. Section 20.12 is amended by revising paragraphs
(a)and
(c)and adding paragraph
(d)as follows: § 20.12 Resale and roaming. (a)(1) *Scope of Manual Roaming and Resale* . Paragraph
(c)of this section is applicable to providers of Broadband Personal Communications Services (part 24, subpart E of this chapter), Cellular Radio Telephone Service (part 22, subpart H of this chapter), and specialized Mobile Radio Services in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands (included in part 90, subpart S of this chapter) if such providers offer real-time, two-way switched voice or data service that is interconnected with the public switched network and utilizes an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to re-use frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. The scope of paragraph
(b)of this section, concerning the resale rule, is further limited so as to exclude from the requirements of that paragraph those Broadband Personal Communications Services C, D, E, and F block licensees that do not own and control and are not owned and controlled by firms also holding cellular A or B block licenses.
(2)*Scope of Automatic Roaming* . Paragraph
(d)of this section is applicable to CMRS carriers if such carriers offer real-time, two-way switched voice or data service that is interconnected with the public switched network and utilizes an in-network switching facility that enables the carrier to re-use frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. Paragraph
(d)of this section is also applicable to the provision of push-to-talk and text-messaging service by CMRS carriers.
(c)*Manual Roaming* . Each carrier subject to paragraph (a)(1) of this section must provide mobile radio service upon request to all subscribers in good standing to the services of any carrier subject to paragraph (a)(1) of this section, including roamers, while such subscribers are located within any portion of the licensee's licensed service area where facilities have been constructed and service to subscribers has commenced, if such subscribers are using mobile equipment that is technically compatible with the licensee's base stations.
(d)*Automatic Roaming* . Upon a reasonable request, it shall be the duty of each host carrier subject to paragraph (a)(2) of this section to provide automatic roaming to any technologically compatible home carrier, outside of the requesting home carrier's home market, on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions. [FR Doc. E7-17122 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 07-3425; MB Docket No. 06-97; RM-11254] Radio Broadcasting Services; Dundee and Odessa, NY AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule; dismissal. SUMMARY: The staff dismisses a counterproposal filed by Bible Broadcasting Network, Inc. to allot Channel 238A to Savona, New York, as a first local aural service. The Media Bureau also modifies its Consolidated Data Base System to reflect Channel 238A at Odessa, New York, as the reserved assignment for Station WFLR-FM in lieu of Channel 238A at Dundee, New York in response to a proposal filed by Finger Lakes Radio Group, Inc., and modifies Station WFLR-FM's license and construction permit accordingly. The reference coordinates for Channel 238A at Odessa, NY, are 42-20-38 NL and 76-53-03 WL. With this action, the proceeding is terminated. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew J. Rhodes, Media Bureau,
(202)418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MB Docket No. 06-97, adopted July 25, 2007, and released July 27, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* Finger Lakes Radio Group, Inc.'s proposal was formerly a rule change to Section 73.202(b), the FM Table of Allotments. *See* 71 FR 30856 (May 31, 2006). As a result of changes to the Commission's processing rules, modifications of FM channels for existing stations are no longer listed in Section 73.202(b) and are instead reflected in the Media Bureau's Consolidated Data Base System (CDBS). *See Revision of Procedures Governing Amendments to FM Table of Allotments and Changes of Community of License in the Radio Broadcast Services,* Report and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 14212 (December 20, 2006). Nevertheless, a summary of the Report and Order in the instant proceeding is being published in the **Federal Register** because the counterproposal involved a proposed amendment to Section 73.202(b). Although the Report and Order set forth an effective date of September 10, 2007, Station WFLR-FM's license and construction permit will be modified effective 30 days after publication of this summary in the **Federal Register** in compliance with Sections 1.427 and 1.429 of the Commission's rules. This document is not subject to the Congressional Review Act. (The Commission is, therefore, not required to submit a copy of this Report and Order to GAO, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, *see* 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) because the counterproposal was dismissed.) List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Radio, Radio broadcasting. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E7-17021 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 76 [CS Docket No. 95-184; MM Docket No. 92-260; FCC 07-111] Telecommunications Services Inside Wiring Customer Premises Equipment, Implementation of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Cable Home Wiring AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission eliminates barriers to competitive entry in multiple dwelling units
(MDUs)and in multiunit premises, when a new entrant seeks to compete against an incumbent provider. The Commission concluded that cutting and repairing sheet rock adds significantly to the physical difficulty and cost of wiring an MDU. In this document, the Commission again concludes that cable wiring located behind sheet rock qualifies as physically inaccessible under the Commission's rules for purposes of determining the demarcation point between home wiring and home run wiring. This ruling will facilitate competition in video distribution markets by clarifying the circumstances under which the existing cable home run wiring in MDUs can be made available to alternative video service providers. DATES: Effective August 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this proceeding, contact Karen Kosar, *Karen.Kosar@fcc.gov* of the Media Bureau, Policy Division,
(202)418-2120. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of that portion of the Commission's *Report and Order and Declaratory Ruling,* FCC 07-111, adopted on May 31, 2007, and released on June 8, 2007, which addresses the Commission's adoption in 2003 of the note to 47 CFR 76.5(mm)
(4)and the subsequent remand by the U.S. Court of Appeals. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS ( *http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/* ). (Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) The complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. To request this document in accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording, and Braille), send an e-mail to *fcc504@fcc.gov* or call the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at
(202)418-0530 (voice),
(202)418-0432 (TTY). I. Summary of the Final Rule 1. In this *Order,* the Commission eliminates barriers to competitive entry in multiple dwelling units
(MDUs)and in multiunit premises, when a new entrant seeks to compete against an incumbent provider. An MDU is a building or buildings with two or more residences, such as an apartment building, condominium building, or cooperative. *See* 47 CFR 76.800. This *Order* responds to a decision issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit regarding amendment of the Commission's cable television inside wiring rules. In the 2003 order reviewed by the court, the Commission had modified its rules to provide that “home run wiring” located behind sheet rock is considered physically inaccessible for purposes of determining the demarcation point between home wiring and home run wiring. Cable home run wiring in a MDU is the wiring that runs from the demarcation point to the point at which the multichannel video programming distributor's
(MVPD)wiring becomes devoted to an individual subscriber or individual loop. *See* 47 CFR 76.800(d). In contrast, “cable home wiring” is the internal wiring contained within the premises of a subscriber, which begins at the demarcation point and runs to the subscriber's television set or other customer premises equipment. *See* 47 CFR 76.5(ll). The Commission concluded in 2003 that cutting and repairing sheet rock adds significantly to the physical difficulty and cost of wiring an MDU. In this *Order,* the Commission concludes that cable wiring located behind sheet rock qualifies as physically inaccessible under the Commission's rules for purposes of determining the demarcation point between home wiring and home run wiring. The record shows that accessing such wiring causes significant damage or modification to a preexisting structural element and generally adds significantly to the physical difficulty and/or cost of accessing the subscriber's home wiring. This ruling will facilitate competition in video distribution markets by clarifying the circumstances under which the existing cable home run wiring in MDUs can be made available to alternative video service providers. 2. The *Order* takes important steps to ensure that the pro-competitive, deregulatory goals of the 1996 Act are realized. The Commission actions here remove both economic and operational barriers to infrastructure investment in the communications market. New entrants to the video services market should not be foreclosed from competing for consumers in MDUs based on regulatory technicalities or costly and inefficient industry practices. By removing these obstacles, the Commission furthers the opportunities for consumers living in MDUs to enjoy the social and economic benefits of communication services competition. 3. In 1993, the Commission first promulgated rules for cable home wiring and for the disposition of that wiring after termination of service. In 1996, the Commission addressed certain cable home wiring issues and sought comment regarding how the Commission should revise these rules to reflect new developments, and how to promote competition by ensuring that the Commission's rules would facilitate the use of new and diverse services. In 1997, the Commission sought further comment on and addressed issues regarding procedures for the disposition of home run wiring in MDUs when an MDU owner decides to terminate service for the entire building and when an MDU owner is willing to permit two or more video service providers to compete for subscribers in the MDU on a unit-by-unit basis. In 2003, the Commission resolved the issues presented on reconsideration in that proceeding. See 18 FCC Rcd at 1342 (2003). 4. Central to any discussion on cable home wiring or cable home run wiring is the matter of the MDU demarcation point, which is the point at which a consumer's home wiring becomes the network's home run wiring. The Commission had previously stated that the cable wiring demarcation point serves such multiple purposes as defining
(1)the location at which the subscriber may control the internal home wiring if he or she owns it;
(2)the point at which an alternative multichannel video programming distributor
(MVPD)would attach its wiring to the subscriber's wiring in order to provide service; and
(3)the point from which the customer has the right to purchase cable home wiring upon termination of service. For purposes of this proceeding, a critical component of our discussion involves the location of the demarcation point because it is where a competing provider may access existing cable home wiring in an MDU building. The demarcation point for MDUs is set at (or about) twelve inches outside of where the cable wire enters the subscriber's individual dwelling unit. The demarcation point for single unit installations is the same. *See* 47 CFR 76.5(mm)(1). The presumptive demarcation point was adopted in the *Cable Wiring Order,* 8 FCC Rcd 1435 (1993). In the event that the cable demarcation point is “physically inaccessible” to an alternative MVPD, the demarcation point moves away from the individual dwelling unit to a point at which it first becomes physically accessible. The Commission has concluded that, for the cable demarcation point to be “physically inaccessible,” access to the wiring must
(1)require significant modification or damage to preexisting structural elements, and
(2)add significantly to the physical difficulty and/or cost of accessing the subscriber's home wiring. 5. The Appeals Court decision remanded that portion of the 2003 order that amended the Note to § 76.5(mm)(4) of the Commission's rules to indicate that wiring embedded in sheet rock would be considered physically inaccessible. Previously, the Commission provided examples of wiring that would be considered “physically inaccessible,” including wiring embedded in brick, metal conduit, and cinder blocks with limited or no access openings. Wiring simply enclosed within hallway molding would not be considered inaccessible. The Court found that the Commission offered no reasoned basis for expanding the Note to include sheet rock and remanded the case to the Commission for further consideration. In response, the Commission sought comment on its conclusions in the 2003 order with regard to § 76.5(mm)(4) of the rules and the amendment of the applicable Note. 6. The Court asserted that the Commission did not adequately support its conclusion that wiring behind sheet rock is “physically inaccessible” for purposes of the inside wiring rules. The Court found that the Commission had not explained why or how accessing wiring behind sheet rock requires “significant modification of, or significant damage to” the sheet rock. The Court also found that the Commission failed to explain the relative nature of the “damage” or “modification” related to accessing wiring behind sheet rock, and therefore that the Commission's conclusion regarding physical inaccessibility lacked adequate evidentiary support. 7. The Court also criticized the Commission's assessment of whether accessing cable wire behind sheet rock would “add significantly to the physical difficulty and/or cost” of accessing the subscriber's home wiring. The Court stated that while the Commission acknowledged that cutting through sheet rock is easier than boring through brick, metal, or cinder block, it did not support the conclusion that the lesser physical difficulty and cost are “significant.” 8. In response, the Commission sought additional comment with respect to whether cable wiring behind sheet rock should be considered physically inaccessible. The Commission set forth its premise that what preexisting structural elements should be included for purposes of determining the demarcation point and what is considered to be an accessible or inaccessible location should be based on practicality. In the 2003 order, the Commission incorporated its response to a *Request for Letter Ruling from RCN-BeCoCom,* L.L.C. asking the Commission to address the issue of whether cable wiring behind sheet rock is “physically inaccessible,” such that the demarcation point should be located not at the twelve inch mark, but rather at the operator's junction box. Based on the *RCN Request for Letter Ruling* and responses to that request, the Commission incorporated sheet rock as one of the examples of materials to be considered as a “preexisting structural element” in its definition of physical inaccessibility. 9. In this *Order,* the Commission finds that sheet rock is a preexisting structural element and that accessing inside wiring behind sheet rock would cause significant modification and damage to that structural element. Sheet rock is a preexisting structural element and not merely a surface finish or decorative finish like molding. Sheet rock is not added after a building is completed. Sheet rock is a fundamental component of the construction of the building. Thus, sheet rock is more like “brick or cinder block” because it is commonly used to form ceilings and walls in MDUs and other structures. We believe that ceilings and walls are an integral and permanent part of the building structure of MDUs, and therefore, sheet rock used to form ceilings and walls qualifies as a preexisting structural element for purposes of the Commission's rules. 10. The Commission concludes that the record supports the conclusion that accessing inside wiring behind sheet rock causes significant modification and damage to structural elements, i.e., walls and ceilings, albeit modification and damage that may be repairable. MDU resident owners and their managers are not only concerned with the condition of individually-owned units or apartments, but also with the condition of the common elements in these structures. For example, the record reveals that MDU resident owners and their managers will sometimes require an entire wall or ceiling to be repainted or re-wallpapered even where the hole cut in the sheet rock is significantly smaller than the wall or ceiling in order to restore the area to its original appearance. Requiring such extensive repair is a strong indication that there has been significant modification or damage to the pre-existing structural area. Unlike with single family residences, MDU residents share common walls and ceilings and have an interest in the condition and treatment of those common elements. With regard to the issues of fire safety and possible degradation of a building's resistance to moisture, we take a conservative approach and give credence to the commenters who argue that cutting into sheet rock may pose a safety risk or affect a building's resistance to moisture and thus may lead to significant modification or damage to such structural elements. Consequently, the Commission concludes that penetration of sheet rock for purposes of accessing inside wiring constitutes significant modification and damage to structural elements under the Commission's rules. 11. The Commission also finds that accessing the demarcation point behind sheet rock adds significantly to the physical difficulty and/or cost of accessing the subscriber's home wiring. The Commission notes that a finding of “physical difficulty” is not required because our rule requires that we find that cutting through the sheet rock would add significantly to the physical difficulty and/or costs of accessing the subscriber's home wiring. Nevertheless, the Commission concludes that the record supports a finding of significant physical difficulty in accessing the subscriber's home wiring. Accessing such wiring requires some level of physical harm to the property—i.e., access holes cut in the sheet rock—and that the property be restored to its original integrity and appearance. As the Commission has recognized throughout this decision, the repair is not always limited to the hole(s) cut; it can include repainting and/or re-wallpapering necessary to restore the premises. Those tasks can add significantly to the physical difficulty involved in accessing the wiring, certainly as compared to accessing wiring behind hallway molding (the example in the Commission's rules of wiring that is not physically inaccessible), *See* note to 47 CFR 76.5(mm)(4). In any event, the Commission needs only find that cutting through sheet rock significantly increases the physical difficulty or cost of accessing the wiring and, as described below, the Commission finds that the additional costs are typically significant. 12. The Commission concludes that the cost of accessing wiring behind sheet rock is significant. In analyzing the costs involved in accessing wiring behind sheet rock, the Commission recognizes that the record reveals a wide divergence among the estimates offered by commenters—ranging from $25 to $1,000—as the appropriate sum needed to accomplish the job. Although the Commission finds that it cannot pick a precise monetary figure that fairly reflects the costs associated with accessing cable inside wiring, we believe it is reasonable that costs estimates could include factors such as how difficult it may be to satisfy the MDU owner and manager with repair work and whether a single unit or many units are worked on in one time period. Although the Commission does not have specific quotes for restoration work, it seems likely that repainting and/or re-wallpapering entire ceilings and walls can, at a minimum, run into the hundreds of dollars, particularly for more high-end MDUs that use more expensive surface finishes. These figures appear significant, especially when compared to the estimates we received for accessing wiring behind hallway molding. 13. The Commission is persuaded that removing and replacing molding is generally less intrusive and less expensive than cutting into sheet rock, locating the wiring, and then repairing the wall or ceiling to the satisfaction of MDU owners and managers. While there may be cases in which the cost of accessing wiring behind sheet rock may be comparable to removable molding the record demonstrates that the cost for sheet rock generally will be higher, and often significantly so. 14. The Commission finds that that cable wiring located behind sheet rock qualifies as physically inaccessible under Commission rules for purposes of determining the demarcation point between home wiring and home run wiring. Specifically, the Commission concludes that
(1)accessing such wiring causes significant damage or modification to a preexisting structural element, and
(2)accessing wiring behind sheet rock generally adds significantly to the physical difficulty and/or cost of accessing the subscriber's home wiring. The Commission's cable inside wiring rules are intended to facilitate competition in video distribution markets. This ruling will foster opportunities for competing MVPDs to provide service in MDUs by clarifying the circumstances under which the existing cable home run wiring in MDUs can be made available to alternative video service providers. Procedural Matters 15. *Final Regulatory Flexibility Act.* As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA)was incorporated into the *Further Notice* in this proceeding. The Commission sought written public comment on the possible significant economic impact on small entities regarding the proposals addressed in the *Further Notice* , including comments on the IFRA. Pursuant to the RFA, a Final Flexibility Analysis is contained in Appendix C. 16. *Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis.* This Order does not contain new or modified information collection requirements subject to the paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified “information collection burdens for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). 17. *Congressional Review Act.* The Commission will send a copy of this Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). II. Ordering Clauses 18. Accordingly, *it is ordered* that, pursuant to authority found in sections 1, 4(i), 601, 623, 624, and 632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 521, 543, 544 and 552, the Commission's amendment of the Note to Section 76.5(mm)(4) of the Commission's rules to include sheet rock as an example of one of the materials that would likely be considered physically inaccessible for purposes of the Commission's cable television inside wiring rules *is affirmed* . 19. *It is further ordered* , that in light of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia's Circuit's decision in *NCTA* v. *FCC* , No. 03-1140, 2004 WL 335201, which remanded but did not vacate the decision adopted in *Telecommunications Services Inside Wiring, Customer Premises Equipment; Implementation of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Cable Home Wiring* , 18 FCC Rcd 1342
(2003)(“Home Wiring Decision”), the note to 47 CFR 76.5(mm)(4) adopted in the Home Wiring Decision shall remain in effect. 20. *It is further ordered* that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, *shall send* a copy of this Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel of the Small Business Administration. Federal Communications Commission. William F. Caton, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-17206 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 544 [Docket No.: NHTSA-2006-27240] RIN 2127-AJ98 Insurer Reporting Requirements; List of Insurers Required to File Reports AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This final rule amends regulations on insurer reporting requirements. The appendices list those passenger motor vehicle insurers that are required to file reports on their motor vehicle theft loss experiences. An insurer included in any of these appendices must file three copies of its report for the 2004 calendar year before October 25, 2007. If the passenger motor vehicle insurers remain listed, they must submit reports by each subsequent October 25. DATES: This final rule becomes effective on October 1, 2007, given the date of submission. Insurers listed in the appendices are required to submit reports before October 25, 2007. If you wish to submit a petition for reconsideration of this rule, your petition must be received by October 15, 2007. ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket number and be submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Room W41-307, Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosalind Proctor, Office of International Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Room W43-302, Washington, DC 20590, by electronic mail to *rosalind.proctor@dot.gov.* Ms. Proctor's telephone number is
(202)366-0846. Her fax number is
(202)493-0073. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33112, *Insurer reports and information,* NHTSA requires certain passenger motor vehicle insurers to file an annual report with the agency. Each insurer's report includes information about thefts and recoveries of motor vehicles, the rating rules used by the insurer to establish premiums for comprehensive coverage, the actions taken by the insurer to reduce such premiums, and the actions taken by the insurer to reduce or deter theft. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33112(f), the following insurers are subject to the reporting requirements:
(1)Issuers of motor vehicle insurance policies whose total premiums account for 1 percent or more of the total premiums of motor vehicle insurance issued within the United States;
(2)Issuers of motor vehicle insurance policies whose premiums account for 10 percent or more of total premiums written within any one state; and
(3)Rental and leasing companies with a fleet of 20 or more vehicles not covered by theft insurance policies issued by insurers of motor vehicles, other than any governmental entity. Pursuant to its statutory exemption authority, the agency exempted certain passenger motor vehicle insurers from the reporting requirements. A. Small Insurers of Passenger Motor Vehicles Section 33112(f)(2) provides that the agency shall exempt small insurers of passenger motor vehicles if NHTSA finds that such exemptions will not significantly affect the validity or usefulness of the information in the reports, either nationally or on a State-by-State basis. The term “small insurer” is defined, in Section 33112(f)(1)(A) and (B), as an insurer whose premiums for motor vehicle insurance issued directly or through an affiliate, including pooling arrangements established under State law or regulation for the issuance of motor vehicle insurance, account for less than 1 percent of the total premiums for all forms of motor vehicle insurance issued by insurers within the United States. However, that section also stipulates that if an insurance company satisfies this definition of a “small insurer,” but accounts for 10 percent or more of the total premiums for all motor vehicle insurance issued in a particular state, the insurer must report about its operations in that State. In the final rule establishing the insurer reports requirement (49 CFR part 544), (52 FR 59; January 2, 1987), NHTSA exercised its exemption authority by listing in Appendix A each insurer that must report because it had at least 1 percent of the motor vehicle insurance premiums nationally. Listing the insurers subject to reporting, instead of each insurer exempted from reporting because it had less than 1 percent of the premiums nationally, is administratively simpler since the former group is much smaller than the latter. In Appendix B, NHTSA lists those insurers required to report for particular states because each insurer had a 10 percent or greater market share of motor vehicle premiums in those states. In the January 1987 final rule, the agency stated that it would update Appendices A and B annually. NHTSA updates the appendices based on data voluntarily provided by insurance companies to A.M. Best, which A.M. Best 1 publishes in its *State/Line Report* each spring. The agency uses the data to determine the insurers' market shares nationally and in each state. 1 A.M. Best Company is a well-recognized source of insurance company ratings and information. 49 U.S.C. 33112(i) authorizes NHTSA to consult with public and private organizations as necessary. B. Self-Insured Rental and Leasing Companies In addition, upon making certain determinations, NHTSA grants exemptions to self-insurers, i.e., any person who has a fleet of 20 or more motor vehicles (other than any governmental entity) used for rental or lease whose vehicles are not covered by theft insurance policies issued by insurers of passenger motor vehicles, 49 U.S.C. 33112(b)(1) and (f). Under 49 U.S.C. 33112(e)(1) and (2), NHTSA may exempt a self-insurer from reporting, if the agency determines:
(1)The cost of preparing and furnishing such reports is excessive in relation to the size of the business of the insurer; and 33112(e)(1) and (2),
(2)The insurer's report will not significantly contribute to carrying out the purposes of Chapter 331. In a final rule published June 22, 1990 (55 FR 25606), the agency granted a class exemption to all companies that rent or lease fewer than 50,000 vehicles, because it believed that the largest companies' reports sufficiently represent the theft experience of rental and leasing companies. NHTSA concluded that smaller rental and leasing companies' reports do not significantly contribute to carrying out NHTSA's statutory obligations and that exempting such companies will relieve an unnecessary burden on them. As a result of the June 1990 final rule, the agency added Appendix C, consisting of an annually updated list of the self-insurers subject to Part 544. Following the same approach as in Appendix A, NHTSA included, in Appendix C, each of the self-insurers subject to reporting instead of the self-insurers which are exempted. NHTSA updates Appendix C based primarily on information from *Automotive Fleet Magazine* and *Auto Rental News* . 2 2 Automotive Fleet Magazine and Auto Rental News are publications that provide information on the size of fleets and market share of rental and leasing companies. C. When a Listed Insurer Must File a Report Under Part 544, as long as an insurer is listed, it must file reports on or before October 25 of each year. Thus, any insurer listed in the appendices must file a report before October 25, and by each succeeding October 25, absent an amendment removing the insurer's name from the appendices. II. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 1. Insurers of Passenger Motor Vehicles On April 9, 2007, NHTSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to update the list of insurers in Appendices A, B, and, C required to file reports (72 FR 17465). Appendix A lists insurers that must report because each had 1 percent of the motor vehicle insurance premiums on a national basis. The list was last amended in a final rule published on September 5, 2006 (71 FR 52291). Based on the 2004 calendar year market share data from A.M. Best, NHTSA proposed to remove Travelers PC Group and add St Paul Travelers Companies to Appendix A. Each of the 18 insurers listed in Appendix A are required to file a report before October 25, 2007, setting forth the information required by Part 544 for each State in which it did business in the 2004 calendar year. As long as these 18 insurers remain listed, they are required to submit a report by each subsequent October 25 for the calendar year ending slightly less than 3 years before. Appendix B lists insurers required to report for particular States for calendar year 2004, because each insurer had a 10 percent or greater market share of motor vehicle premiums in those States. Based on the 2004 calendar year data for market shares from A.M. Best, we proposed to remove Arbella Mutual Insurance (Massachusetts) and add the Farm Bureau of Idaho Group (Idaho) to Appendix B. The nine insurers listed in Appendix B are required to report on their calendar year 2004 activities in every State where they had a 10 percent or greater market share. These reports must be filed by October 25, 2007, and set forth the information required by Part 544. As long as these nine insurers remain listed, they would be required to submit reports on or before each subsequent October 25 for the calendar year ending slightly less than 3 years before. 2. Rental and Leasing Companies Appendix C lists rental and leasing companies required to file reports. Based on information in *Automotive Fleet Magazine* and *Auto Rental News* for 2004, NHTSA proposed to add Emkay, Inc. Each of the eight companies (including franchisees and licensees) listed in Appendix C are required to file reports for calendar year 2004 no later than October 25, 2007, and set forth the information required by Part 544. As long as those eight companies remain listed, they would be required to submit reports before each subsequent October 25 for the calendar year ending slightly less than 3 years before. Public Comments on Final Determination Insurers of Passenger Motor Vehicles The agency received no comments in response to the NPRM for Appendices A, B and C. Therefore, this final rule adopts the proposed changes to Appendix A, B and C. Accordingly, NHTSA has determined that each of the 18 insurers listed in Appendix A, each of the nine insurers listed in Appendix B and each of eight companies listed in Appendix C are required to submit an insurer report on its experience for calendar year 2004 as required by 49 CFR Part 544. Submission of Theft Loss Report Passenger motor vehicle insurers listed in the appendices can forward their theft loss reports to the agency in several ways: a. *Mail:* Rosalind Proctor, Office of International Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, Department of Transportation, NHTSA, West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., NVS-131, Room W43-302, Washington, DC 20590 b. *E-mail: rosalind.proctor@dot.gov* ; or c. *Fax:*
(202)493-0073. Theft loss reports may also be submitted to the docket electronically by: d. Logging onto the Dockets Management System Web site at *http://dms.dot.gov* . Click on “ES Submit” or “Help” to obtain instructions for filing the document electronically. Regulatory Impacts 1. Costs and Other Impacts This notice has not been reviewed under Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. NHTSA has considered the impact of this final rule and determined that the action is not “significant” within the meaning of the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This final rule implements the agency's policy of ensuring that all insurance companies that are statutorily eligible for exemption from the insurer reporting requirements are in fact exempted from those requirements. Only those companies that are not statutorily eligible for an exemption are required to file reports. NHTSA does not believe that this rule, reflecting current data, affects the impacts described in the final regulatory evaluation prepared for the final rule establishing Part 544 (52 FR 59; January 2, 1987). Accordingly, a separate regulatory evaluation has not been prepared for this rulemaking action. Using the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for 2006 ( *see http://www.bls.gov/cpi* ), the cost estimates in the 1987 final regulatory evaluation were adjusted for inflation. The agency estimates that the cost of compliance is $100,800 for any insurer added to Appendix A, $40,320 for any insurer added to Appendix B, and $11,632 for any insurer added to Appendix C. In this final rule, the agency made no additional changes to Appendices A, B, or C of the list of insurers published in the April 9, 2007 NPRM. Therefore, there will be no additional net effect of this final rule. Accordingly, this final will adopt the proposed changes to Appendix A, B and C. Interested persons may wish to examine the 1987 final regulatory evaluation. Copies of that evaluation were placed in Docket No. T86-01; Notice 2. Any interested person may obtain a copy of this evaluation by writing to NHTSA, Docket Section, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building (Ground Floor), Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, or by calling
(202)366-4949. 2. Paperwork Reduction Act The information collection requirements in this final rule were submitted and approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)pursuant to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). The existing information collection indicates that the number of respondents for this collection is forty-five, however, the actual number of respondents fluctuate from year to year. Therefore, because the number of respondents required to report for this final rule does not exceed the number of respondents indicated in the existing information collection, the agency does not believe that an amendment to the existing information collection is necessary. This collection of information is assigned OMB Control Number 2127-0547 (“Insurer Reporting Requirements”) and is approved for use through August 31, 2009, and the agency will seek to extend the approval afterwards. 3. Regulatory Flexibility Act The agency also considered the effects of this rulemaking under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA)(5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). I certify that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rationale for the certification is that none of the companies listed on Appendices A, B, or C are construed to be a small entity within the definition of the RFA. “Small insurer” is defined, in part under 49 U.S.C. 33112, as any insurer whose premiums for all forms of motor vehicle insurance account for less than 1 percent of the total premiums for all forms of motor vehicle insurance issued by insurers within the United States, or any insurer whose premiums within any State, account for less than 10 percent of the total premiums for all forms of motor vehicle insurance issued by insurers within the State. This notice exempts all insurers meeting those criteria. Any insurer too large to meet those criteria is not a small entity. In addition, in this rulemaking, the agency exempts all “self insured rental and leasing companies” that have fleets of fewer than 50,000 vehicles. Any self-insured rental and leasing company too large to meet that criterion is not a small entity. 4. Federalism This action has been analyzed according to the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined that the final rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 5. Environmental Impacts In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, NHTSA has considered the environmental impacts of this final rule and determined that it would not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. 6. Civil Justice Reform This final rule does not have any retroactive effect, and it does not preempt any State law, 49 U.S.C. 33117 provides that judicial review of this rule may be obtained pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 32909, and section 32909 does not require submission of a petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court. 7. Regulation Identifier Number
(RIN)The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier number
(RIN)to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may use the RIN contained in the heading, at the beginning, of this document to find this action in the Unified Agenda. 8. Plain Language Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in plain language. Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration of the following questions: • Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs? • Are the requirements in the proposal clearly stated? • Does the proposal contain technical language or jargon that is not clear? • Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand? • Would more (but shorter) sections be better? • Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams? • What else could we do to make the proposal easier to understand? If you have any responses to these questions, you can forward them to me several ways: a. *Mail:* Rosalind Proctor, Office of International Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., NVS-131, Room W43-302, Washington, DC 20590. b. *E-mail: rosalind.proctor@dot.gov* ; or c. *Fax:*
(202)493-0073. List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 544 Crime insurance, Insurance, Insurance companies, Motor vehicles, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 544 is amended as follows: PART 544—INSURER REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 1. The authority citation for part 544 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33112; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. 2. In § 544.5, paragraph (a), the second sentence is revised to read as follows: § 544.5 General requirements for reports.
(a)* * * This report shall contain the information required by § 544.6 of this part for the calendar year 3 years previous to the year in which the report is filed (e.g., the report due by October 25, 2007 will contain the required information for the 2004 calendar year). 3. Appendix A to part 544 is revised to read as follows: Appendix A—Insurers of Motor Vehicle Insurance Policies Subject to the Reporting Requirements in Each State in Which They Do Business Allstate Insurance Group American Family Insurance Group American International Group Auto-Owners Insurance Group CNA Insurance Companies Erie Insurance Group Berkshire Hathaway/GEICO Corporation Group Hartford Insurance Group Liberty Mutual Insurance Companies Metropolitan Life Auto & Home Group Mercury General Group Nationwide Group Progressive Group Safeco Insurance Companies State Farm Group St Paul Travelers Companies 1 1 Indicates a newly listed company which must file a report beginning with the report due October 25, 2007. USAA Group Farmers Insurance Group 4. Appendix B to part 544 is revised to read as follows: Appendix B—Issuers of Motor Vehicle Insurance Policies Subject to the Reporting Requirements Only in Designated States Alfa Insurance Group (Alabama) Auto Club (Michigan) Commerce Group, Inc. (Massachusetts) Farm Bureau of Idaho Group (Idaho) 1 1 Indicates a newly listed company which must file a report beginning with the report due October 25, 2007. Kentucky Farm Bureau Group (Kentucky) New Jersey Manufacturers Group (New Jersey) Safety Group (Massachusetts) Southern Farm Bureau Group (Arkansas, Mississippi) Tennessee Farmers Companies (Tennessee) 5. Appendix C to part 544 is revised to read as follows: Appendix C—Motor Vehicle Rental and Leasing Companies (Including Licensees and Franchisees) Subject to the Reporting Requirements of Part 544 Cendant Car Rental Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group EmKay, Inc. 1 Enterprise Rent-A-Car Enterprise Fleet Services Hertz Rent-A-Car Division (subsidiary of The Hertz Corporation) U-Haul International, Inc. (Subsidiary of AMERCO) Vanguard Car Rental USA 1 Indicates a newly listed company which must file a report beginning with the report due October 25, 2007. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. E7-17149 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P 72 168 Thursday, August 30, 2007 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service 7 CFR Part 1728 RIN AC11 Specifications for Primary Underground Power Cable AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service, an agency delivering the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA)Rural Development Utilities Programs, hereinafter referred to as Rural Development and/or the Agency, proposes to amend its regulations regarding Bulletin 50-70 (U-1) for electric distribution specifications for 15 kV and 25 kV primary underground power cable. This proposed rule is necessary to provide Agency electric borrowers with updated specifications for 15 kV and 25 kV underground power cable, and to provide borrowers with specifications for 35 kV underground power cable for use in 25 kV primary systems. These specifications cover single-phase and multi-phase primary underground power cable which Agency electric borrowers use to construct their rural underground electric distribution systems. DATES: Written comments must be received by the Agency or bear a postmark or equivalent no later than October 29, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit adverse comments or notice of intent to submit adverse comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and, in the lower “Search Regulations and Federal Actions” box, select “Rural Utilities Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click on “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select RUS-07-Electric-0009 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. • *Postal Mail:* Addressed to Michele L. Brooks, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, USDA Rural Development, Utilities Programs, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 1522, Washington, DC 20250-1522. • *Hand Delivery/Courier:* Addressed to Michele L. Brooks, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, USDA Rural Development, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 5168 South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522. *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name and the subject heading “Primary Underground Power Cable.” All comments received must identify the name of the individual (and the name of the entity, if applicable) who is submitting the comment. All comments received will be posted without change to *http://www.usda.gov/rus/index2/Comments.htm,* including any personal information provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Trung V. Hiu, Electrical Engineer, Electric Staff Division, Distribution Branch, Utilities Program, USDA Rural Development, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room 1262-S, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-1569. Telephone:
(202)720-1877. Fax:
(202)720-7491. E-mail: *Trung.Hiu@wdc.usda.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive Order 12866 This proposed rule is exempted from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)review for purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by OMB. Executive Order 12372 This proposed rule is excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Consultation, which may require consultation with State and local officials. A notice of final rule entitled “Department Programs and Activities Excluded from Executive Order 12372,” (50 FR 47034) exempted USDA Rural Development Utilities Program loans and loan guarantees to from coverage under this order. Executive Order 12988 This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. USDA Rural Development has determined that this proposed rule meets the applicable standards provided in section 3 of the Executive Order. In addition, all state and local laws and regulations that are in conflict with this rule will be preempted. No retroactive effect will be given to this rule and in accordance with section 212(e) of the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6912(e)) administrative appeal procedures, if any, must be exhausted before an action against the Department or its agencies may be initiated. Executive Order 13132 This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Under Executive Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to require preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification USDA Rural Development has been determined that the Regulatory Flexibility Act is not applicable to this rule since USDA Rural Development is not required by 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. or any other provision of the law to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking with request to the subject matter of this rule. Information Collection and Recordkeeping Requirements This proposed rule contains no additional information collection or recordkeeping requirements approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance The program described by this proposed rule is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs under No. 10.850, Rural Electrification Loans and Loan Guarantees. This catalog is available on a subscription basis from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325, telephone number
(202)512-1800. Executive Order 12372 This proposed rule is excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Consultation, which may require consultation with State and local officials. See the final rule related notice titled “Department Programs and Activities Excluded from Executive Order 12372” (50 FR 47034), advising that USDA Rural Development Utilities Programs loans and loan guarantees are excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372. Unfunded Mandates This proposed rule contains no Federal Mandates (under the regulatory provision of title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 [2 U.S.C. Chapter 25]) for State, local, and tribal governments or the private sector. Thus, this proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. National Environmental Policy Act Certification USDA Rural Development has determined that this proposed rule will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment as defined by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Therefore, this action does not require an environmental impact statement or assessment. Background Pursuant to the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (7 U.S.C. 901 et seq.), the Agency is proposing to amend Title 7 CFR Chapter XVII, Part 1728, Electric Standards and Specifications for Materials and Construction, by revising RUS Bulletin 50-70 (U-1), “Specifications for 15 kV and 25 kV Primary Underground Power Cable.” This revised bulletin will be renumbered and renamed Bulletin 1728F-U1, “Specification for Primary Underground Power Cable.” The proposed action would continue to incorporate the revised bulletin by reference in 7 CFR 1728.97 and RUS Bulletin 50-70 (U-1) would be rescinded and removed from the list in 7 CFR 1728.97. The change in the bulletin number and reformatting is necessary to conform to current publications and directives system. The Agency maintains a system of bulletins that contain construction standards and specifications for materials and equipment which must be complied with when system facilities are constructed by electric and telecommunications borrowers in accordance with the loan contract. These standards and specifications contain standard construction units and material items and equipment units commonly used in electric and telecommunications borrowers' systems. Bulletin 50-70 (U-1) provides standard requirements for 15 kV and 25 kV single-phase and multi-phase primary underground power cable with cross-linked polyethylene with tree retardant or ethylene propylene rubber insulation, concentric neutral, and insulating outer jacket. The Agency proposes to update the specifications for 15 kV and 25 kV primary underground cable while adding specifications for 35 kV primary underground power cable. *The following changes and updating of Bulletin 50-70 (U-1) are proposed:* 1. Water blocking sealant would be required in all stranded conductor cables. 2. The plain cross-linked polyethylene
(XLP)would be removed and be replaced by tree-retardant cross-linked polyethylene (TR-XLPE) as an acceptable insulation material. 3. Nominal insulation thickness on 25 kV cable would be reduced from 345 mils to 260 mils. 4. An optional semi-conducting jacketing material would be added to the specification for cables of all three specified voltages. Cables with semi-conducting jackets may be used by USDA Rural Development borrowers in areas with soil resistivity greater than 25 ohm-meter, in lieu of using cables with an insulating jacket to help improve the effectiveness of system grounding in locations of high soil resistivity. The following table summarizes all of the changes and contains a cross walk between the format of the current bulletin and the new proposed bulletin: RUS Specifications for Primary Underground Power Cable [Summary of proposed changes] Existing section Bulletin 50-70 (U-1) (old numbering system) Proposed new location Bulletin 1728F-U1 (new numbering system) Action taken Proposed content change N/A 1.a Summary New addition Identifies new title and number for REA Bulletin 50-70(U-a) and updates the superseded reference. N/A 1.b Principal Revisions New addition Lists the principal changes made in the reissued and renumbered bulletin. 1.1.1 Scope 2.a General Specifications Modified States the revised scope to add 35 kV rated cable and semiconducting jacket to the existing 15 and 25 kV specifications. Removes XLPE as an acceptable insulation material. Removes reference to 13.2/7.62 kV power cables. 1.1.2 2.b No change 1.1.3 2.c Modified Adds conductor size for 35 kV cable. 1.1.4 2.d Modified Updates reference to the renamed industry standard reference for material specifications (this comment pertains to all such references throughout Bulletin 1728F-U1). 1.1.5 2.d No substantive change Updates reference to renamed industry standard references. 2. 3.a Modified Updates references to renamed industry standard references for material specifications. Incorporates additional material specifications added to the industry standard reference since the last publication of this bulletin. N/A 3.b(1), b(2) New Provides information to reader on where to obtain industry standard references incorporated in this bulletin. 3.3.1 4.a No change 3.3.2 4.b Modified Adds combination unilay stranded phase conductors. 3. 3.2.1 4.b Modified Adds combination unilay stranded phase conductors. 3.3.3.1 4.c(1) No change 3.3.3.2 4.c(2) Modified Adds compact round concentric-lay-stranded phase conductors and combination unilay stranded aluminum phase conductors. 3.3.4 4.c(3) Modified Changes the acceptable filler for interstices between strands of stranded conductors from “conductive” material to “material designed to fill the interstices,” adds requirement that the surfaces of the strands that form the outer surface of the stranded conductor shall be free of the fill material. Adds testing requirement for compatibility of the strand fill material and water penetration. N/A 4.c(4) Added Requires the solid conductor and center strand of stranded conductors to be indented at fixed interval with the name of manufacturer and year of manufacture. 4.4.1 5.a No substantive change 5.5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.1.3 6.a Modified Removes XLPE as an acceptable insulation material. Conforms references to industry standard references. 5.2 6.b Modified Maintains 220 mils as the nominal allowed insulation thickness on 15 kV cable, reduces the allowed insulation nominal thickness from 345 mils to 260 mils on 25 kV cable and establishes nominal insulation thickness of 345 mils on 35 kV cable. 6.6.1 7.a No change 6.6.2 Deleted Removes specific test requirement for sunlight exposure and atmospheric conditions. There is no current test reference available. 6.6.3 7.b No change 6.6.4 7.c Modified Specifies specific stripping tension values in lieu of cross referencing industry standards. 6.6.5 7.d No change 7.7.1 8.a Modified Adds requirement that concentric neutral wires shall remain in continuous intimate contact with the extruded insulation shield. 7.7.2 Deleted 7.7.3 8.a Adds full neutral requirement for single phase and 1/3 neutral requirement for three phase applications. Establishes minimum wire size of 16 AWG for the concentric neutral. 7.7.4 8.b No substantive change 8.8.1 9.a Modified Adds semi-conducting outer jacket. 8.8.1.1 9.a(1) No substantive change Adds requirement that the jacket material shall have three red stripes longitudinally extruded into the jacket surface 120 degrees apart. 8.8.1.2 9.a(2) No substantive change Adds medium density and high density HMW black polyethylene compound. Specifies that polyvinyl chloride
(PVC)and chlorinated polyethylene
(CPE)jackets are not acceptable. 8.2 Deleted 8.3 9.b No change 9.1 10. No change 10.1 11.a No substantive change 10.1.1 11.a(1) No change 10.1.2 11.a(2) No change 10.1.3 11.a(3) No change 10.2 11.b No substantive change Eliminates affirmative requirements to submit data to REA. 10.2.1 11.b(1) No change 10.2.2 11.b(2) No change 10.3 11.c Modified Clarifies that the tests in this section 11c are to be performed on cable jackets from the same production sample as is subjected to tests specified in section 11b. 10.3.1 11.c(1) No change 10.3.2 11.c(2) Modified Prescribes the same test voltage (4.5kV AC) for cable diameters less than or equal to 1.5 inches and sets a test voltage of 7.0 kV for cable diameters greater than 1.5 inches. 10.4 11.d No change 10.5 Deleted Removes measurement requirement that is implicit in other sections of the bulletin. 10.6 11.e Added Adds provision that certified copies of all tests results performed pursuant to this renumbered section 11 shall be provided on request of the borrower for all orders. 11.1 12.a Modified Clarifies with greater specificity markings that are considered suitable on the outer surface of the jacket. 11.2 12.b Modified Adds requirement that each end of the cable shall be firmly and properly secured to the reel. N/A 12.c Added Adds requirement that reels are to be covered with a suitable covering to help protect the cable. 11.3 12.d No substantive change Provides that the beginning and ending sequential footage numbers are to be included on the label regardless of whether they are marked on the cable jacket. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1728 Electric power, Loan programs—energy, Rural areas. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 7 CFR part 1728 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 1728—ELECTRIC STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 1. The authority citation for part 1728 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 901 *et seq.,* 7 U.S.C. 1921 *et seq.;* 7 U.S.C. 6941 *et seq.* 2. Section 1728.97(b) is amended by removing the entry for RUS Bulletin 50-70, and adding to the list of bulletins, in numerical order, the entry for Bulletin 1728F-U1 to read as follows: § 1729.97 Incorporation by reference of electric standards and specifications.
(b)List of bulletins. Bulletin 1728F-U1, Specifications for Primary Underground Power Cable, *[Insert month and year of effective date of final rule].* Dated: August 23, 2007. James M. Andrew, Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. E7-17194 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0373; A-1-FRL-8461-4] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut; Establishment of Interim Progress for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP)revision submitted by the State of Connecticut. This revision proposes to establish early fine particulate (PM <sup>2.5</sup> ) transportation conformity emission budgets for the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM <sup>2.5</sup> nonattainment area. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 1, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0373 by one of the following methods: 1. *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.* 3. *Fax:*
(617)918-0047. 4. *Mail:* “EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0373”, Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. 5. *Hand Delivery or Courier:* Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold, Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays. Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules Section of this **Federal Register** for detailed instructions on how to submit comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023, telephone number
(617)918-1668, fax number
(617)918-0668, e-mail *cooke.donald@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules Section of this **Federal Register** , EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules Section of this **Federal Register** . Dated: August 20, 2007. Robert W. Varney, Regional Administrator, EPA New England. [FR Doc. E7-17002 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 20 [WT Docket No. 05-265, FCC No. 07-143] Reexamination of Roaming Obligations of Commercial Mobile Radio Service Providers AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: In this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC)seeks comment on whether it should extend the automatic roaming obligation of commercial mobile radio service
(CMRS)carriers to non-interconnected services or features, including services that have been classified as information services, such as wireless broadband Internet access service, or other non-CMRS services. The FCC further seeks comment on the implications of extending the automatic roaming obligation in this manner. DATES: Comments due on or before October 29, 2007 and reply comments are due on or before November 28, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WT Docket No. 05-265, by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail:* Include the docket number in the subject line of the message. • *People With Disabilities:* Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: *FCC504@fcc.gov* or phone: 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432. For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christina Clearwater at
(202)418-1893, *Christina.Clearwater@fcc.gov,* Spectrum and Competition Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau; Won Kim at
(202)418-1368, *Won.Kim@fcc.gov,* Spectrum and Competition Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), WT Docket No. 05-265, FCC No. 07-143, adopted August 7, 2007 and released August 16, 2007. The full text of the FNPRM is available for public inspection on the Commission's Internet site at *http://www.fcc.gov.* It is also available for inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The full text of this document also may be purchased from the Commission's duplication contractor, Best Copy and Printing Inc., Portals II, 445 12th St., SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554; telephone
(202)488-5300; fax
(202)488-5563; e-mail *FCC@BCPIWEB.COM.* Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis This document does not contain an information collection subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and therefore does not contain any new or modified “information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002. Synopsis 1. In the FNPRM, the FCC seeks comment on whether it should extend the automatic roaming obligation of CRMS carriers to non-interconnected services or features, including services that have been classified as information services, such as wireless broadband Internet access service, or other non-interconnected non-CMRS services offered by CMRS carriers, and on the legal and policy basis for doing so. The FCC further seeks comment on the implications of extending the automatic roaming obligation in this manner. 2. To what extent, if any, would requiring roaming access to non-interconnected services and features undermine carriers' incentive to innovate or invest in mobile wireless broadband network facilities? Would the potential for undermining innovation be mitigated by conditioning roaming access to non-interconnected services and features, as the Commission has, for example, with push-to-talk and SMS? Namely, should the Commission require that the requesting carrier must offer the requested service or feature to its subscribers on its own home network; that roaming must be technically feasible; and any changes to the would-be host carrier's network that are necessary to accommodate roaming requests extending to these services and features must be economically reasonable? 3. If the Commission were to extend automatic roaming obligations to non-interconnected services and features, are there any special issues (technical, economic, or otherwise) associated with roaming data networks that may not exist when roaming among CMRS carriers' interconnected voice networks? For example, are there any issues regarding network capacity, network integrity, or network security? The Commission seeks comment on the effect that automatic roaming would have on the capacity of data networks and the ability of carriers to offer full access to their own customers. The Commission would be concerned if requiring a carrier to offer roaming service on its data network to the customers of other carriers resulted in the carrier facing capacity constraints that adversely affect its own customers. The Commission therefore asks whether a carrier should have the right to limit access to its network by roamers, and what parameters should be considered as justification for such limits. The Commission invites commenters to suggest specific standards for determining when the requirement should or should not apply. 4. If the Commission were to extend automatic roaming obligations to non-interconnected services and features, should all such services and features be included? Are there any public interest reasons to treat narrowband and broadband data services differently in the context of automatic roaming? In the Wireless Broadband Classification Order, 1 the Commission determined that mobile wireless broadband Internet access service is an information service, and that it is not CMRS. If the Commission were to impose an automatic roaming obligation on mobile wireless broadband Internet access services, how could it do so in accordance with the determinations in that order? For example, could the Commission base the requirement on Title I ancillary jurisdiction, or on the Title III regulation of radio services? Or should the Commission restrict the automatic roaming mandate only to non-interconnected data services that are not classified as information services? The Commission notes that while a few CMRS providers have requested that the Commission require automatic roaming for all services, including non-interconnected data services provided over enhanced digital networks, other CMRS providers, including several small carriers, are against imposing automatic roaming rules for enhanced data services, arguing that forced roaming would thwart market forces by benefiting only those providers that have opted to invest less on their systems. Given these contradictory positions, what is the appropriate balance to be drawn between providing seamless service accessibility to end-users, and allowing service providers to gain competitive advantages from their investments and innovations? 1 *See generally,* Appropriate Regulatory Treatment for Broadband Access to the Internet Over Wireless Networks, Declaratory Ruling, 22 FCC Rcd 5901 (2007). Ex Parte Presentations 5. The rulemaking shall be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. 2 Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentations must contain summaries of the substance of the presentations and not merely a listing of the subjects discussed. More than a one or two sentence description of the views and arguments presented generally is required. 3 Other requirements pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in Section 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules. 4 2 47 CFR 1.200 *et seq.* 3 *See* 47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2). 4 47 CFR 1.1206(b). Comment Filing Procedures 6. Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 5 interested parties may file comments on or before 60days after publication of the FNPRM in the **Federal Register** and reply comments regarding the FNPRM may be filed on or before 90 days after publication of the FNPRM in the **Federal Register.** All filings related to this FNPRM should refer to WT Docket No. 05-265. Comments may be filed using:
(1)The Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS),
(2)the Federal Government's eRulemaking Portal, or
(3)by filing paper copies. 6 5 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419. 6 *See* Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998). • *Electronic Filers:* Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: *http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/* or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov.* Filers should follow the instructions provided on the website for submitting comments. • ECFS filers must transmit one electronic copy of the comments for WT Docket No. 05-265. In completing the transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and WT Docket No. 05-265. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions, filers should send an e-mail to *ecfs@fcc.gov* and include the following words in the body of the message, “get form.” A sample form and directions will be sent in response. • *Paper Filers:* Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although the Commission continues to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Marlene H. Dortch, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. • The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. • Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. • U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. 7. Parties should send a copy of their filings to: Christina Clearwater, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or by e-mail to *christina.clearwater@fcc.gov* and Won Kim, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or by e-mail to *won.kim@fcc.gov.* Parties shall also serve one copy with the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI), Portals II, Room CY-B402, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554,
(202)488-5300, or via e-mail to *fcc@bcpiweb.com.* 8. Documents in WT Docket No. 05-265 will be available for public inspection and copying during business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The documents may also be purchased from BCPI, telephone
(202)488-5300, facsimile
(202)488-5563, TTY
(202)488-5562, e-mail *fcc@bcpiweb.com.* 9. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to *FCC504@fcc.gov* or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY). Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations for filing comments (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CARTS, etc.) by e-mail: *FCC504@fcc.gov;* phone: 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY). Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 10. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (the “RFA”), 7 the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (“IRFA”) of the possible significant economic impact of the policies and rules proposed in the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“FNPRM”) on a substantial number of small entities. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the FNPRM provided in the item. The Commission will send a copy of the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (“SBA”). 8 In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the **Federal Register** . 9 7 The RFA, *see* 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (“SBREFA”), Pub. L. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996). 8 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603(a). 9 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603(a). A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules 11. Building on the decisions made in the Report and Order, the FNPRM encompasses issues concerning the applicability of the automatic roaming obligation for all wireless providers. In the Report and Order, the Commission clarifies that the automatic roaming is a common carrier obligation and adopts an automatic roaming rule that is applicable to services offered by CMRS carriers that are real-time, two-way switched voice or data services that are interconnected with the public switched network, and to push-to-talk and text messaging service. Recognizing wireless subscribers' increasing reliance on mobile telephony services, especially the growing demand of data services by consumers, the FNPRM seeks comment on whether the Commission should extend the applicability of the automatic roaming requirements to non-interconnected services or features, including services that have been classified as information services, such as wireless broadband Internet access service, or other non-CMRS services. The FNPRM further seeks comment on the implications of extending the automatic roaming obligation in this manner. The Commission's primary objective in this proceeding is to facilitate seamless wireless communications for consumers, even when they are outside of the coverage area of their own service providers. 12. In the FNPRM, the Commission notes that while a few CMRS providers have requested that the Commission require automatic roaming for all services, including non-interconnected data services provided over enhanced digital networks, 10 other CMRS providers, including several small carriers, are against imposing automatic roaming rules for enhanced data services, arguing that forced roaming would thwart market forces by benefiting only those providers that have opted to invest less on their systems. 11 Given these contradictory positions, the FNPRM seeks comments on what is the appropriate balance to be drawn between providing seamless service accessibility to end-users, and allowing service providers to gain competitive advantages from their investments and innovations. 10 *See* ACS Comments at 6; MetroPCS Comments at 25 n.58. 11 *See e.g.* , EDGE Reply Comments at 1, 8-9; *see also,* NDNC Comments at 3 (arguing against automating roaming rules because they create a disincentive for companies to further develop their networks). B. Legal Basis 13. The authority for the actions taken in this FNPRM is contained in Sections 1, 4(i), 201, 202, 251(a), 253, 303(r), and 332(c)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201, 202, 251(a), 253, 303(r), and 332(c)(1)(B). C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply 14. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where feasible, an estimate of, the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. 12 The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” 13 In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. 14 A “small business concern” is one which:
(1)Is independently owned and operated;
(2)is not dominant in its field of operation; and
(3)satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). 15 12 5 U.S.C. 604(a)(3). 13 5 U.S.C. 601(6). 14 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of “small-business concern” in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies “unless an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the **Federal Register** .” 15 15 U.S.C. 632. 15. In the following paragraphs, the Commission further describes and estimates the number of small entity licensees that may be affected by the rules the Commission adopts in this Report and Order. The Commission's finding that automatic roaming is a common carrier service subject to protections outlined in sections 201, 202 and 208 of the Act affects all CMRS carriers that provide real-time, two-way switched voice or data service that are interconnected with the public switched network and utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. Such carriers are obligated to provide automatic roaming. As a common carrier obligation, the automatic roaming rule does not extend to non-interconnected services/features or services that are classified as information services or to services that are not CMRS. 16. Since this Report and Order applies to multiple services, this FRFA analyzes the number of small entities affected on a service-by-service basis. When identifying small entities that could be affected by the Commission's new rules, this FRFA provides information that describes auction results, including the number of small entities that were winning bidders. However, the number of winning bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction does not necessarily reflect the total number of small entities currently in a particular service. The Commission does not generally require that licensees later provide business size information, except in the context of an assignment or a transfer of control application that involves unjust enrichment issues. 17. *Wireless Service Providers.* The SBA has developed a small business size standard for wireless firms within the two broad economic census categories of “Paging” 16 and “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.” 17 Under both categories, the SBA deems a wireless business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 18 Of this total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 19 Thus, under this category and associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. For the census category of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 20 Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 21 Thus, under this second category and size standard, the majority of firms can, again, be considered small. 16 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517211. 17 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 18 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),” Table 5, NAICS code 517211 (issued Nov. 2005). 19 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 20 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),” Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005). 21 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 18. *Cellular Licensees* . The SBA has developed a small business size standard for small businesses in the category “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.” 22 Under that SBA category, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 23 For the census category of “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,” Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 24 Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 25 Thus, under this category and size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 22 13 CFR 121.201, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 517212. 23 *Id.* 24 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,” Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005). 25 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 19. *Broadband Personal Communications Service* . The broadband Personal Communications Service
(PCS)spectrum is divided into six frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held auctions for each block. The Commission has created a small business size standard for Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years. 26 For Block F, an additional small business size standard for “very small business” was added and is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. 27 These small business size standards, in the context of broadband PCS auctions, have been approved by the SBA. 28 No small businesses within the SBA-approved small business size standards bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. There were 90 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the C Block auctions. A total of 93 “small” and “very small” business bidders won approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F. 29 On March 23, 1999, the Commission reauctioned 155 C, D, E, and F Block licenses; there were 113 small business winning bidders. 30 On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of 422 C and F PCS licenses in Auction 35. 31 Of the 35 winning bidders in this auction, 29 qualified as “small” or “very small” businesses. Subsequent events concerning Auction 35, including judicial and agency determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C and F Block licenses being available for grant. 26 *See* Amendment of Parts 20 and 24 of the Commission's Rules—Broadband PCS Competitive Bidding and the Commercial Mobile Radio Service Spectrum Cap, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 7824, 7850-7852 paras. 57-60 (1996); *see also* 47 CFR 24.720(b). 27 *See* Amendment of Parts 20 and 24 of the Commission's Rules—Broadband PCS Competitive Bidding and the Commercial Mobile Radio Service Spectrum Cap, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 7824, 7852 para. 60. 28 *See* Letter to Amy Zoslov, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated December 2, 1998. 29 FCC News, “Broadband PCS, D, E and F Block Auction Closes,” No. 71744 (rel. January 14, 1997). 30 *See* “C, D, E, and F Block Broadband PCS Auction Closes,” public notice, 14 FCC Rcd 6688 (WTB 1999). 31 *See* “C and F Block Broadband PCS Auction Closes; Winning Bidders Announced,” public notice, 16 FCC Rcd 2339 (2001). 20. *Narrowband Personal Communications Service* . The Commission held an auction for Narrowband Personal Communications Service
(PCS)licenses that commenced on July 25, 1994, and closed on July 29, 1994. A second commenced on October 26, 1994 and closed on November 8, 1994. For purposes of the first two Narrowband PCS auctions, “small businesses” were entities with average gross revenues for the prior three calendar years of $40 million or less. 32 Through these auctions, the Commission awarded a total of forty-one licenses, 11 of which were obtained by four small businesses. 33 To ensure meaningful participation by small business entities in future auctions, the Commission adopted a two-tiered small business size standard in the Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order. 34 A “small business” is an entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $40 million. 35 A “very small business” is An entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $15 million. 36 The SBA has approved these small business size standards. 37 A third auction commenced on October 3, 2001 and closed on October 16, 2001. Here, five bidders won 317 (MTA and nationwide) licenses. 38 Three of these claimed status as a small or very small entity and won 311 licenses. 32 Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act—Competitive Bidding Narrowband PCS, Third Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 10 FCC Rcd 175, 196 para. 46 (1994). 33 *See* “Announcing the High Bidders in the Auction of ten Nationwide Narrowband PCS Licenses, Winning Bids Total $617,006,674,” public notice, PNWL 94-004 (rel. Aug. 2, 1994); “Announcing the High Bidders in the Auction of 30 Regional Narrowband PCS Licenses; Winning Bids Total $490,901,787,” public notice, PNWL 94-27 (rel. Nov. 9, 1994). 34 Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish New Personal Communications Services, Narrowband PCS, Second Report and Order and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 15 FCC Rcd 10456, 10476 para. 40 (2000). 35 *Id.* 36 *Id.* 37 *See* Letter to Amy Zoslov, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated December 2, 1998. 38 *See* “Narrowband PCS Auction Closes,” public notice, 16 FCC Rcd 18663 (WTB 2001). 21. *Specialized Mobile Radio* . The Commission awards “small entity” bidding credits in auctions for Specialized Mobile Radio
(SMR)geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands to firms that had revenues of no more than $15 million in each of the three previous calendar years. 39 The Commission awards “very small entity” bidding credits to firms that had revenues of no more than $3 million in each of the three previous calendar years. 40 The SBA has approved these small business size standards for the 900 MHz Service. 41 The Commission has held auctions for geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands. The 900 MHz SMR auction began on December 5, 1995, and closed on April 15, 1996. Sixty bidders claiming that they qualified as small businesses under the $15 million size standard won 263 geographic area licenses in the 900 MHz SMR band. The 800 MHz SMR auction for the upper 200 channels began on October 28, 1997, and was completed on December 8, 1997. Ten bidders claiming that they qualified as small businesses under the $15 million size standard won 38 geographic area licenses for the upper 200 channels in the 800 MHz SMR band. 42 A second auction for the 800 MHz band was held on January 10, 2002 and closed on January 17, 2002 and included 23 BEA licenses. One bidder claiming small business status won five licenses. 43 39 47 CFR 90.814(b)(1). 40 *Id.* 41 *See* Letter to Thomas Sugrue, Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated August 10, 1999. 42 *See* “Correction to public notice DA 96-586 ‘FCC Announces Winning Bidders in the Auction of 1020 Licenses to Provide 900 MHz SMR in Major Trading Areas,' ” public notice, 18 FCC Rcd 18367 (WTB 1996). 43 *See* “Multi-Radio Service Auction Closes,” public notice, 17 FCC Rcd 1446 (WTB 2002). 22. The auction of the 1,050 800 MHz SMR geographic area licenses for the General Category channels began on August 16, 2000, and was completed on September 1, 2000. Eleven bidders won 108 geographic area licenses for the General Category channels in the 800 MHz SMR band qualified as small businesses under the $15 million size standard. In an auction completed on December 5, 2000, a total of 2,800 Economic Area licenses in the lower 80 channels of the 800 MHz SMR service were sold. Of the 22 winning bidders, 19 claimed “small business” status and won 129 licenses. Thus, combining all three auctions, 40 winning bidders for geographic licenses in the 800 MHz SMR band claimed status as small business. 23. In addition, there are numerous incumbent site-by-site SMR licensees and licensees with extended implementation authorizations in the 800 and 900 MHz bands. The Commission does not know how many firms provide 800 MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR pursuant to extended implementation authorizations, nor how many of these providers have annual revenues of no more than $3 million or $15 million (the special small business size standards), or have no more than 1,500 employees (the generic SBA standard for wireless entities, discussed supra). One firm has over $15 million in revenues. The Commission assumes, for purposes of this analysis, that all of the remaining existing extended implementation authorizations are held by small entities. 24. *Advanced Wireless Services* . In the AWS-1 Report and Order, the Commission adopted rules that affect applicants who wish to provide service in the 1710-1755 MHz and 2110-2155 MHz bands. 44 The AWS-1 Report and Order defines a “small business” as an entity with average annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $40 million, and a “very small business” as an entity with average annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $15 million. The AWS-1 Report and Order also provides small businesses with a bidding credit of 15 percent and very small businesses with a bidding credit of 25 percent. 44 Service Rules for Advanced Wireless Services in the 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz Bands, WT Docket No. 02-353, Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 25162
(2003)(AWS-1 Report and Order). 25. *Rural Radiotelephone Service* . The Commission uses the SBA small business size standard applicable to cellular and other wireless telecommunication companies, i.e., an entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. 45 There are approximately 1,000 licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission estimates that there are 1,000 or fewer small entity licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. 45 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 26. *Wireless Communications Services* . This service can be used for fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite uses in the 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz bands. The Commission defined “small business” for the wireless communications services
(WCS)auction as an entity with average gross revenues of $40 million for each of the three preceding years, and a “very small business” as an entity with average gross revenues of $15 million for each of the three preceding years. 46 The SBA has approved these definitions. 47 The Commission auctioned geographic area licenses in the WCS service. In the auction, which commenced on April 15, 1997 and closed on April 25, 1997, there were seven bidders that won 31 licenses that qualified as very small business entities, and one bidder that won one license that qualified as a small business entity. 46 Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Part 27, the Wireless Communications Service (WCS), Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 10785, 10879 para. 194 (1997). 47 *See* Letter to Amy Zoslov, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated December 2, 1998. 27. *220 MHz Radio Service—Phase I Licensees* . The 220 MHz service has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. Phase I licensing was conducted by lotteries in 1992 and 1993. There are approximately 1,515 such non-nationwide licensees and four nationwide licensees currently authorized to operate in the 220 MHz Band. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities specifically applicable to such incumbent 220 MHz Phase I licensees. To estimate the number of such licensees that are small businesses, the Commission applies the small business size standard under the SBA rules applicable to “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” companies. This category provides that a small business is a wireless company employing no more than 1,500 persons. 48 For the census category of “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,” Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 49 Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 50 Thus, under this category and size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 48 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 49 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),” Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005). 50 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 28. *220 MHz Radio Service—Phase II Licensees.* The 220 MHz service has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. The Phase II 220 MHz service is subject to spectrum auctions. In the 220 MHz Third Report and Order, the Commission adopted a small business size standard for defining “small” and “very small” businesses for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment payments. 51 This small business standard indicates that a “small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years. 52 A “very small business” is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that do not exceed $3 million for the preceding three years. 53 The SBA has approved these small size standards. 54 Auctions of Phase II licenses commenced on September 15, 1998, and closed on October 22, 1998. 55 In the first auction, 908 licenses were auctioned in three different-sized geographic areas: three nationwide licenses, 30 Regional Economic Area Group
(EAG)Licenses, and 875 Economic Area
(EA)Licenses. Of the 908 licenses auctioned, 693 were sold. 56 Thirty-nine small businesses won 373 licenses in the first 220 MHz auction. A second auction included 225 licenses: 216 EA licenses and 9 EAG licenses. Fourteen companies claiming small business status won 158 licenses. 57 A third auction included four licenses: 2 BEA licenses and 2 EAG licenses in the 220 MHz Service. No small or very small business won any of these licenses. 58 51 Amendment of Part 90 of the Commission's Rules to Provide For the Use of the 220-222 MHz Band by the Private Land Mobile Radio Service, Third Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 10943, 11068-70 paras. 291-295 (1997). 52 *Id.* at 11068 para. 291. 53 *Id.* 54 *See* Letter to Daniel Phythyon, Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated January 6, 1998. 55 *See generally* “220 MHz Service Auction Closes,” public notice, 14 FCC Rcd 605 (WTB 1998). 56 *See* “FCC Announces It is Prepared to Grant 654 Phase II 220 MHz Licenses After Final Payment is Made,” public notice, 14 FCC Rcd 1085 (WTB 1999). 57 *See* “Phase II 220 MHz Service Spectrum Auction Closes,” public notice, 14 FCC Rcd 11218 (WTB 1999). 58 *See* “Multi-Radio Service Auction Closes,” public notice, 17 FCC Rcd 1446 (WTB 2002). 29. *700 MHz Guard Band Licenses.* In the 700 MHz Guard Band Order, the Commission adopted size standards for “small businesses” and “very small businesses” for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment payments. 59 A small business in this service is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years. 60 Additionally, a “very small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three years. 61 SBA approval of these definitions is not required. 62 An auction of 52 Major Economic Area
(MEA)licenses commenced on September 6, 2000, and closed on September 21, 2000. 63 Of the 104 licenses auctioned, 96 licenses were sold to nine bidders. Five of these bidders were small businesses that won a total of 26 licenses. A second auction of 700 MHz Guard Band licenses commenced on February 13, 2001, and closed on February 21, 2001. All eight of the licenses auctioned were sold to three bidders. One of these bidders was a small business that won a total of two licenses. 64 59 Service Rules for the 746-764 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules, Second Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5299 (2000). Service rules were amended in 2007, but no changes were made to small business size categories. *See* Service Rules for the 698-746, 747-762 and 777-792 MHz Bands, WT Docket No. 06-150, Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems, CC Docket No. 94-102, Section 68.4(a) of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones, WT Docket No. 01-309, Biennial Regulatory Review—Amendment of Parts 1, 22, 24, 27, and 90 to Streamline and Harmonize Various Rules Affecting Wireless Radio Services, WT Docket 03-264, Former Nextel Communications, Inc. Upper 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules, WT Docket No. 06-169, Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz Band, PS Docket No. 06-229, Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket No. 96-86, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 8064 (2007). 60 *Id.* at 5343 para. 108. 61 *Id.* 62 *Id.* at 5343 para. 108 n.246 (for the 746-764 MHz and 776-704 MHz bands, the Commission is exempt from 15 U.S.C. 632, which requires Federal agencies to obtain Small Business Administration approval before adopting small business size standards). 63 *See* “700 MHz Guard Bands Auction Closes: Winning Bidders Announced,” public notice, 15 FCC Rcd 18026 (2000). 64 *See* “700 MHz Guard Bands Auctions Closes: Winning Bidders Announced,” public notice, 16 FCC Rcd 4590 (WTB 2001). 30. *Upper 700 MHz Band Licenses.* The Commission released a Report and Order authorizing service in the Upper 700 MHz band. 65 An auction for these licenses, previously scheduled for January 13, 2003, was postponed. 66 65 Service Rules for the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules, Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 1239 (2001). Service rules were amended in 2007, but no changes were made to small business size categories. *See* Service Rules for the 698-746, 747-762 and 777-792 MHz Bands, WT Docket No. 06-150, Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems, CC Docket No. 94-102, Section 68.4(a) of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones, WT Docket No. 01-309, Biennial Regulatory Review—Amendment of Parts 1, 22, 24, 27, and 90 to Streamline and Harmonize Various Rules Affecting Wireless Radio Services, WT Docket 03-264, Former Nextel Communications, Inc. Upper 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules, WT Docket No. 06-169, Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband, Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz Band, PS Docket No. 06-229, Development of Operational, Technical and Spectrum Requirements for Meeting Federal, State and Local Public Safety Communications Requirements Through the Year 2010, WT Docket No. 96-86, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 8064 (2007). 66 *See* “Auction of Licenses for 747-762 and 777-792 MHz Bands (Auction No. 31) Is Rescheduled,” public notice, 16 FCC Rcd 13079 (WTB 2003). 31. *Lower 700 MHz Band Licenses.* The Commission adopted criteria for defining three groups of small businesses for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits. 67 The Commission has defined a small business as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years. 68 A very small business is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three years. 69 Additionally, the Lower 700 MHz Band has a third category of small business status that may be claimed for Metropolitan/Rural Service Area (MSA/RSA) licenses. The third category is entrepreneur, which is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding three years. 70 The SBA has approved these small size standards. 71 An auction of 740 licenses (one license in each of the 734 MSAs/RSAs and one license in each of the six Economic Area Groupings (EAGs)) commenced on August 27, 2002, and closed on September 18, 2002. Of the 740 licenses available for auction, 484 licenses were sold to 102 winning bidders. Seventy-two of the winning bidders claimed small business, very small business or entrepreneur status and won a total of 329 licenses. 72 A second auction commenced on May 28, 2003, and closed on June 13, 2003, and included 256 licenses: 5 EAG licenses and 476 CMA licenses. 73 Seventeen winning bidders claimed small or very small business status and won sixty licenses, and nine winning bidders claimed entrepreneur status and won 154 licenses. 74 67 *See* Reallocation and Service Rules for the 698-746 MHz Spectrum Band (Television Channels 52-59), Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 1022 (2002). 68 *Id.* at 1087-88 para. 172. 69 *Id.* 70 *Id.* at 1088 para. 173. 71 *See* Letter to Thomas Sugrue, Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration, dated August 10, 1999. 72 *See* “Lower 700 MHz Band Auction Closes,” public notice, 17 FCC Rcd 17272 (WTB 2002). 73 *See* “Lower 700 MHz Band Auction Closes,” public notice, 18 FCC Rcd 11873 (WTB 2003). 74 *Id.* 32. *Common Carrier Paging.* The SBA has developed a small business size standard for wireless firms within the broad economic census category of “Paging.” 75 Under this category, the SBA deems a business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 76 Of this total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 77 Thus, under this category, the majority of firms can be considered small. In the Paging Third Report and Order, the Commission developed a small business size standard for “small businesses” and “very small businesses” for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment payments. 78 A “small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years. Additionally, a “very small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding three years. 79 The SBA has approved these small business size standards. 80 An auction of Metropolitan Economic Area licenses commenced on February 24, 2000, and closed on March 2, 2000. 81 Of the 985 licenses auctioned, 440 were sold. Fifty-seven companies claiming small business status won. Also, according to Commission data, 365 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of paging and messaging services. 82 Of those, the Commission estimates that 360 are small, under the SBA-approved small business size standard. 83 75 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517211. 76 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),” Table 5, NAICS code 517211 (issued Nov. 2005). 77 *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the largest category provided is for firms with “1000 employees or more.” 78 Amendment of Part 90 of the Commission's Rules to Provide for the Use of the 220-222 MHz Band by the Private Land Mobile Radio Service, PR Docket No. 89-552, Third Report and Order and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 12 FCC Rcd 10943, 11068-70, paras. 291-295, 62 FR 16004 (Apr. 3, 1997). 79 *See* Letter to Amy Zoslov, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, FCC, from A. Alvarez, Administrator, SBA (Dec. 2, 1998) (SBA Dec. 2, 1998 Letter). 80 Revision of Part 22 and Part 90 of the Commission's Rules to Facilitate Future Development of Paging Systems, Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration and Third Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 10030, paras. 98-107 (1999). 81 *Id.* at 10085, para. 98. 82 FCC Wireline Competition Bureau, Industry Analysis and Technology Division, “Trends in Telephone Service” at Table 5.3., page 5-5 (Feb. 2007). This source uses data that are current as of October 20, 2005. 83 *Id.* 33. *Wireless Communications Services.* This service can be used for fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite uses. The Commission established small business size standards for the wireless communications services
(WCS)auction. 84 A “small business” is an entity with average gross revenues of $40 million for each of the three preceding years, and a “very small business” is an entity with average gross revenues of $15 million for each of the three preceding years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. 85 The Commission auctioned geographic area licenses in the WCS service. In the auction, there were seven winning bidders that qualified as “very small business” entities, and one that qualified as a “small business” entity. 84 Public notice, “Auction of Wireless Communications Services, Auction Notes and Filing Requirements for 128 WCS Licenses Scheduled for April 15, 1997,” DA 97-386, Feb. 21, 1997. 85 SBA Dec. 2, 1998 Letter. 34. *Wireless Telephony.* Wireless telephony includes cellular, personal communications services (PCS), and specialized mobile radio
(SMR)telephony carriers. As noted earlier, the SBA has developed a small business size standard for “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” services. 86 Under that SBA small business size standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 87 According to Commission data, 432 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of wireless telephony. 88 The Commission has estimated that 221 of these are small under the SBA small business size standard. 86 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 87 *Id.* 88 FCC Wireline Competition Bureau, Industry Analysis and Technology Division, “Trends in Telephone Service” at Table 5.3, page 5-5 (Feb. 2007). This source uses data that are current as of October 20, 2005. 35. *Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service.* The Commission has not adopted a small business size standard specific to the Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service. 89 The Commission will use SBA's small business size standard applicable to “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,” i.e., an entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. 90 There are approximately 100 licensees in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission estimates that almost all of them qualify as small under the SBA small business size standard. 89 The service is defined in section 22.99 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 22.99. 90 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 36. *Aviation and Marine Radio Services.* Small businesses in the aviation and marine radio services use a very high frequency
(VHF)marine or aircraft radio and, as appropriate, an emergency position-indicating radio beacon (and/or radar) or an emergency locator transmitter. The Commission has not developed a small business size standard specifically applicable to these small businesses. For purposes of this analysis, the Commission uses the SBA small business size standard for the category “Cellular and Other Telecommunications,” which is 1,500 or fewer employees. 91 Most applicants for recreational licenses are individuals. Approximately 581,000 ship station licensees and 131,000 aircraft station licensees operate domestically and are not subject to the radio carriage requirements of any statute or treaty. For purposes of evaluation in this analysis, the Commission estimates that there are up to approximately 712,000 licensees that are small businesses (or individuals) under the SBA standard. In addition, between December 3, 1998 and December 14, 1998, the Commission held an auction of 42 VHF Public Coast licenses in the 157.1875-157.4500 MHz (ship transmit) and 161.775-162.0125 MHz (coast transmit) bands. For purposes of the auction, the Commission defined a “small” business as an entity that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues for the preceding three years not to exceed $15 million dollars. In addition, a “very small” business is one that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues for the preceding three years not to exceed $3 million dollars. 92 There are approximately 10,672 licensees in the Marine Coast Service, and the Commission estimates that almost all of them qualify as “small” businesses under the above special small business size standards. 91 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 92 Amendment of the Commission's Rules Concerning Maritime Communications, PR Docket No. 92-257, Third Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 19853 (1998). 37. *Fixed Microwave Services.* Fixed microwave services include common carrier, 93 private operational-fixed, 94 and broadcast auxiliary radio services. 95 At present, there are approximately 22,015 common carrier fixed licensees and 61,670 private operational-fixed licensees and broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in the microwave services. The Commission has not created a size standard for a small business specifically with respect to fixed microwave services. For purposes of this analysis, the Commission uses the SBA small business size standard for the category “Cellular and Other Telecommunications,” which is 1,500 or fewer employees. 96 The Commission does not have data specifying the number of these licensees that have more than 1,500 employees, and thus is unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of fixed microwave service licensees that would qualify as small business concerns under the SBA's small business size standard. Consequently, the Commission estimates that there are up to 22,015 common carrier fixed licensees and up to 61,670 private operational-fixed licensees and broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in the microwave services that may be small and may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. The Commission noted, however, that the common carrier microwave fixed licensee category includes some large entities. 93 *See* 47 CFR 101 *et seq.* (formerly, Part 21 of the Commission's Rules) for common carrier fixed microwave services (except Multipoint Distribution Service). 94 Persons eligible under parts 80 and 90 of the Commission's Rules can use Private Operational-Fixed Microwave services. *See* 47 CFR Parts 80 and 90. Stations in this service are called operational-fixed to distinguish them from common carrier and public fixed stations. Only the licensee may use the operational-fixed station, and only for communications related to the licensee's commercial, industrial, or safety operations. 95 Auxiliary Microwave Service is governed by Part 74 of Title 47 of the Commission's rules. *See* 47 CFR 74. This service is available to licensees of broadcast stations and to broadcast and cable network entities. Broadcast auxiliary microwave stations are used for relaying broadcast television signals from the studio to the transmitter, or between two points such as a main studio and an auxiliary studio. The service also includes mobile television pickups, which relay signals from a remote location back to the studio. 96 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 38. *Offshore Radiotelephone Service.* This service operates on several UHF television broadcast channels that are not used for television broadcasting in the coastal areas of states bordering the Gulf of Mexico. 97 There are presently approximately 55 licensees in this service. The Commission is unable to estimate at this time the number of licensees that would qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard for “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” services. 98 Under that SBA small business size standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 99 97 This service is governed by Subpart I of Part 22 of the Commission's rules. *See* 47 CFR 22.1001 through 22.1037. 98 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212. 99 *Id.* 39. *39 GHz Service.* The Commission created a special small business size standard for 39 GHz licenses—an entity that has average gross revenues of $40 million or less in the three previous calendar years. 100 An additional size standard for “very small business” is: An entity that, together with affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. 101 The SBA has approved these small business size standards. 102 The auction of the 2,173 39 GHz licenses began on April 12, 2000 and closed on May 8, 2000. The 18 bidders who claimed small business status won 849 licenses. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 18 or fewer 39 GHz licensees are small entities that may be affected by the rules and polices adopted herein. 100 *See* Amendment of the Commission's Rules Regarding the 37.0-38.6 GHz and 38.6-40.0 GHz Bands, ET Docket No. 95-183, Report and Order, 63 FR 6079 (Feb. 6, 1998). 101 *Id.* 102 *See* Letter to Kathleen O'Brien Ham, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, FCC, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, SBA (Feb. 4, 1998). 40. *Broadband Radio Service and Educational Broadband Service.* Broadband Radio Service comprises Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service
(MMDS)systems and Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS). 103 MMDS systems, often referred to as “wireless cable,” transmit video programming to subscribers using the microwave frequencies of MDS and Educational Broadband Service (formerly known as Instructional Television Fixed Service). 104 Wireless cable systems use 2 GHz band frequencies of the Broadband Radio Service (“BRS”), formerly Multipoint Distribution Service (“MDS”), 105 and the Educational Broadband Service (“EBS”), formerly Instructional Television Fixed Service (“ITFS”), 106 to transmit video programming and provide broadband services to residential subscribers. 107 These services were originally designed for the delivery of multichannel video programming, similar to that of traditional cable systems, but over the past several years licensees have focused their operations instead on providing two-way high-speed Internet access services. 108 We estimate that the number of wireless cable subscribers is approximately 100,000, as of March 2005. Local Multipoint Distribution Service (“LMDS”) is a fixed broadband point-to-multipoint microwave service that provides for two-way video telecommunications. 109 As described below, the SBA small business size standard for the broad census category of Cable and Other Program Distribution, which consists of such entities generating $13.5 million or less in annual receipts, appears applicable to MDS, ITFS and LMDS. 110 Other standards also apply, as described. 103 Amendment of Parts 1, 21, 73, 74, and 101 of the Commission's Rules to Facilitate the Provision of Fixed and Mobile Broadband Access, Educational and Other Advanced Services in the 2150-2162 and 2500-2690 MHz Bands, WT Docket No. 03-66, RM-10586, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 14165 (2004). 104 *See id.* 105 MDS, also known as Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service (“MMDS”), is regulated by part 21 of the Commission's rules; *see* 47 CFR Part 21, subpart K; and has been renamed the Broadband Radio Service (BRS); *see* Amendment of Parts 1, 21, 73, 74 and 101 of the Commission's Rules to Facilitate the Provision of Fixed and Mobile Broadband Access, Educational and Other Advanced Services in the 2150-2162 and 2500-2690 MHz Bands; Part 1 of the Commission's Rules—Further Competitive Bidding Procedures; Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 to Enable Multipoint Distribution Service and the Instructional Television Fixed Service Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 to Engage in Fixed Two-Way Transmissions; Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 of the Commission's Rules With Regard to Licensing in the Multipoint Distribution Service and in the Instructional Television Fixed Service for the Gulf of Mexico, 19 FCC Rcd 14165
(2004)(“MDS/ITFS Order”). 106 ITFS systems are regulated by Part 74 of the Commission's rules; *see* 47 CFR Part 74, subpart I. ITFS, an educational service, has been renamed the Educational Broadband Service (EBS); *see* MDS/ITFS Order, 19 FCC Rcd 14165. ITFS licensees, however, are permitted to lease spectrum for MDS operation. 107 *See* Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming, Eleventh Annual Report, 20 FCC Rcd 2507, 2565 para. 131
(2006)(“2006 Cable Competition Report”). 108 *Id.* 109 *See* Local Multipoint Distribution Service, 12 FCC Rcd 12545 (1997). 110 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517510. 41. The Commission has defined small MDS (now BRS) and LMDS entities in the context of Commission license auctions. In the 1996 MDS auction, 111 the Commission defined a small business as an entity that had annual average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the previous three calendar years. 112 This definition of a small entity in the context of MDS auctions has been approved by the SBA. 113 In the MDS auction, 67 bidders won 493 licenses. Of the 67 auction winners, 61 claimed status as a small business. At this time, the Commission estimates that of the 61 small business MDS auction winners, 48 remain small business licensees. In addition to the 48 small businesses that hold BTA authorizations, there are approximately 392 incumbent MDS licensees that have gross revenues that are not more than $40 million and are thus considered small entities. 114 MDS licensees and wireless cable operators that did not receive their licenses as a result of the MDS auction fall under the SBA small business size standard for Cable and Other Program Distribution. Information available to us indicates that there are approximately 850 of these licensees and operators that do not generate revenue in excess of $13.5 million annually. Therefore, we estimate that there are approximately 850 small entity MDS (or BRS) providers, as defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules. 111 MDS Auction No. 6 began on November 13, 1995, and closed on March 28, 1996. (67 bidders won 493 licenses.) 112 47 CFR 21.961(b)(1). 113 *See* ITFS Order, 10 FCC Rcd at 9589. 114 47 U.S.C. 309(j). Hundreds of stations were licensed to incumbent MDS licensees prior to implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 309(j). For these pre-auction licenses, the applicable standard is SBA's small business size standards for “other telecommunications” (annual receipts of $13.5 million or less). *See* 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517910. 42. Educational institutions are included in this analysis as small entities; however, the Commission has not created a specific small business size standard for ITFS (now EBS). 115 The Commission estimates that there are currently 2,032 ITFS (or EBS) licensees, and all but 100 of the licensees are held by educational institutions. Thus, the Commission estimates that at least 1,932 ITFS licensees are small entities. 115 In addition, the term “small entity” within SBREFA applies to small organizations (nonprofits) and to small governmental jurisdictions (cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, and special districts with populations of less than 50,000). 5 U.S.C. 601(4)-(6). The Commission does not collect annual revenue data on ITFS licensees. 43. *Local Multipoint Distribution Service.* Local Multipoint Distribution Service
(LMDS)is a fixed broadband point-to-multipoint microwave service that provides for two-way video telecommunications. 116 The auction of the 1,030 Local Multipoint Distribution Service
(LMDS)licenses began on February 18, 1998 and closed on March 25, 1998. The Commission established a small business size standard for LMDS licenses as an entity that has average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years. 117 An additional small business size standard for “very small business” was added as an entity that, together with its affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. 118 The SBA has approved these small business size standards in the context of LMDS auctions. 119 There were 93 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the LMDS auctions. A total of 93 small and very small business bidders won approximately 277 A Block licenses and 387 B Block licenses. On March 27, 1999, the Commission re-auctioned 161 licenses; there were 40 winning bidders. 116 *See* Local Multipoint Distribution Service, Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 12545 (1997). 117 *Id.* 118 *See id.* 119 *See* Letter to Dan Phythyon, Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, FCC, from Aida Alvarez, Administrator, SBA (Jan. 6, 1998). 44. *218-219 MHz Service.* The first auction of 218-219 MHz spectrum resulted in 170 entities winning licenses for 594 Metropolitan Statistical Area
(MSA)licenses. Of the 594 licenses, 557 were won by entities qualifying as a small business. For that auction, the small business size standard was an entity that, together with its affiliates, has no more than a $6 million net worth and, after federal income taxes (excluding any carry over losses), has no more than $2 million in annual profits each year for the previous two years. 120 In the 218-219 MHz Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Commission established a small business size standard for a “small business” as an entity that, together with its affiliates and persons or entities that hold interests in such an entity and their affiliates, has average annual gross revenues not to exceed $15 million for the preceding three years. 121 A “very small business” is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates and persons or entities that hold interests in such an entity and its affiliates, has average annual gross revenues not to exceed $3 million for the preceding three years. 122 Currently, no second auction is scheduled. 120 Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act—Competitive Bidding, PP Docket No. 93-253, Fourth Report and Order, 59 FR 24947 (May 13, 1994). 121 Amendment of Part 95 of the Commission's Rules to Provide Regulatory Flexibility in the 218-219 MHz Service, WT Docket No. 98-169, Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order, 64 FR 59656 (Nov. 3, 1999). 122 Amendment of Part 95 of the Commission's Rules to Provide Regulatory Flexibility in the 218-219 MHz Service, WT Docket No. 98-169, Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order, 64 FR 59656 (Nov. 3, 1999). 45. *24 GHz—Incumbent Licensees.* This analysis may affect incumbent licensees who were relocated to the 24 GHz band from the 18 GHz band, and applicants who wish to provide services in the 24 GHz band. The applicable SBA small business size standard is that of “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” companies. This category provides that such a company is small if it employs no more than 1,500 persons. 123 The Commission believes that there are only two licensees in the 24 GHz band that were relocated from the 18 GHz band, Teligent 124 and TRW, Inc. It is the Commission's understanding that Teligent and its related companies have less than 1,500 employees, though this may change in the future. TRW is not a small entity. Thus, only one incumbent licensee in the 24 GHz band is a small business entity. 123 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 513322 (changed to 517212 in October 2002). 124 Teligent acquired the DEMS licenses of FirstMark, the only licensee other than TRW in the 24 GHz band whose license has been modified to require relocation to the 24 GHz band. 46. *24 GHz—Future Licensees.* With respect to new applicants in the 24 GHz band, the small business size standard for “small business” is an entity that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average annual gross revenues for the three preceding years not in excess of $15 million. 125 “Very small business” in the 24 GHz band is an entity that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues not exceeding $3 million for the preceding three years. 126 The SBA has approved these small business size standards. 127 These size standards will apply to the future auction, if held. 125 Amendments to Parts 1, 2, 87 and 101 of the Commission's Rules to License Fixed Services at 24 GHz, Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 16934, 16967 (2000); *see also* 47 CFR 101.538(a)(2). 126 Amendments to Parts 1, 2, 87 and 101 of the Commission's Rules to License Fixed Services at 24 GHz, Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 16934, 16967 (2000); *see also* 47 CFR 101.538(a)(1). 127 *See* Letter to Margaret W. Wiener, Deputy Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, FCC, from Gary M. Jackson, Assistant Administrator, SBA (July 28, 2000). 47. *Internet Service Providers.* The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Internet Service Providers (ISPs). ISPs “provide clients access to the Internet and generally provide related services such as Web hosting, Web page designing, and hardware or software consulting related to Internet connectivity.” 128 Under the SBA size standard, such a business is small if it has average annual receipts of $23 million or less. 129 According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were 2,529 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. 130 Of these, 2,437 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and an additional 47 firms had receipts of between $10 million and $24,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these firms are small entities that may be affected by the Commission's action. 128 U.S. Census Bureau, “2002 NAICS Definitions: 518111 Internet Service Providers” (Feb. 2004) *http://www.census.gov.* 129 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 518111 (changed from previous code 514191, “On-Line Information Services,” in Oct. 2002). 130 U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, “Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),” Table 4, NAICS code 514191 (issued Oct. 2000). 48. *Part 15 Device Manufacturers.* The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities applicable to unlicensed communications devices manufacturers. Therefore, the Commission will utilize the SBA definition applicable to Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: “This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of products made by these establishments are: Transmitting and receiving antennas, cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and broadcasting equipment.” 131 The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which is: All such firms having 750 or fewer employees. 132 According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were 1,041 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. 133 Of this total, 1,010 had employment of under 500, and an additional 13 had employment of 500 to 999. 134 Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 131 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, “334220 Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing”; *http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF334.HTM#N3342.* 132 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 334220. 133 U.S. Census Bureau, American FactFinder, 2002 Economic Census, Industry Series, Industry Statistics by Employment Size, NAICS code 334220 (released May 26, 2005); *http://factfinder.census.gov.* The number of “establishments” is a less helpful indicator of small business prevalence in this context than would be the number of “firms” or “companies,” because the latter take into account the concept of common ownership or control. Any single physical location for an entity is an establishment, even though that location may be owned by a different establishment. Thus, the numbers given may reflect inflated numbers of businesses in this category, including the numbers of small businesses. In this category, the Census breaks-out data for firms or companies only to give the total number of such entities for 2002, which was 929. 134 *Id.* An additional 18 establishments had employment of 1,000 or more. 49. *Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing.* The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: “This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing wire telephone and data communications equipment. These products may be standalone or board-level components of a larger system. Examples of products made by these establishments are central office switching equipment, cordless telephones (except cellular), PBX equipment, telephones, telephone answering machines, LAN modems, multi-user modems, and other data communications equipment, such as bridges, routers, and gateways.” 135 The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing, which is: All such firms having 1,000 or fewer employees. 136 According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of 518 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. 137 Of this total, 511 had employment of under 1,000, and an additional 7 had employment of 1,000 to 2,499. 138 Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 135 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, “334210 Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing”; *http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF334.HTM#N3342.* 136 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 334210. 137 U.S. Census Bureau, American FactFinder, 2002 Economic Census, Industry Series, Industry Statistics by Employment Size, NAICS code 334210 (released May 26, 2005); *http://factfinder.census.gov.* The number of “establishments” is a less helpful indicator of small business prevalence in this context than would be the number of “firms” or “companies,” because the latter take into account the concept of common ownership or control. Any single physical location for an entity is an establishment, even though that location may be owned by a different establishment. Thus, the numbers given may reflect inflated numbers of businesses in this category, including the numbers of small businesses. In this category, the Census breaks-out data for firms or companies only to give the total number of such entities for 2002, which was 450. 138 *Id.* An additional 4 establishments had employment of 2,500 or more. 50. *Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing.* The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: “This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing communications equipment (except telephone apparatus, and radio and television broadcast, and wireless communications equipment).” 139 The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which is: All such firms having 750 or fewer employees. 140 According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of 503 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. 141 Of this total, 493 had employment of under 500, and an additional 7 had employment of 500 to 999. 142 Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 139 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, “334290 Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing”; *http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF334.HTM#N3342.* 140 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 334290. 141 U.S. Census Bureau, American FactFinder, 2002 Economic Census, Industry Series, Industry Statistics by Employment Size, NAICS code 334290 (released May 26, 2005); *http://factfinder.census.gov.* The number of “establishments” is a less helpful indicator of small business prevalence in this context than would be the number of “firms” or “companies,” because the latter take into account the concept of common ownership or control. Any single physical location for an entity is an establishment, even though that location may be owned by a different establishment. Thus, the numbers given may reflect inflated numbers of businesses in this category, including the numbers of small businesses. In this category, the Census breaks-out data for firms or companies only to give the total number of such entities for 2002, which was 471. 142 *Id.* An additional 3 establishments had employment of 1,000 or more. D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements for Small Entities 51. Should the Commission decide to extend the automatic roaming requirement to non-interconnected services or features, including services that have been classified as information services, such as broadband Internet access service, or other non-CMRS services, the only reporting or recordkeeping costs incurred will be administrative costs to ensure that an entity's practices are in compliance with the automatic rule. The compliance requirement is that carriers must provide automatic roaming to any requesting technologically compatible carrier outside of the requesting carrier's home market on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions. 143 The Commission seeks comment on the possible burden such requirements would place on small entities. Also, the Commission seeks comment on whether a special approach toward any possible compliance burden on small entities might be appropriate. Entities, especially small businesses, are encouraged to quantify the costs and benefits of any compliance requirement that may result from this proceeding. 143 *See* Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Section 78. E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered 52. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others):
(1)The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities;
(2)the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3)the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and
(4)an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities. 144 144 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603(c). 53. The Commission's primary objective in this proceeding is to facilitate seamless wireless communications for consumers, even when they are outside of the coverage area of their own service providers. The FNPRM seeks to build on the decisions made in the Report and Order. In the Report and Order, the Commission clarifies that the automatic roaming is a common carrier obligation and adopts an automatic roaming rule that is applicable to services offered by CMRS carriers that are real-time, two-way switched voice or data services that are interconnected with the public switched network, and to push-to-talk and text messaging service. 145 Recognizing wireless subscribers' increasing reliance on mobile telephony services, especially the growing demand of data services by consumers, the FNPRM seeks comment on whether the Commission should extend the applicability of the automatic roaming requirements to non-interconnected services or features, including services that have been classified as information services, such as wireless broadband Internet access service, or other non-CMRS services. 145 *See supra* paras. 2, 65-67. 54. To the extent that addressing the issue raised in the FNPRM requires modifying the applicability of the automatic roaming rules, the Commission seeks comment on the effect that such rule changes will have on small entities, on whether alternative rules should be adopted for small entities in particular, and on what effect such alternative rules would have on those entities. The Commission invites comment on ways in which the Commission can achieve its goals while at the same time impose minimal burdens on small wireless service providers. Below, the Commission summarizes the issues raised in the FNPRM. 55. *Mobile Data Service Roaming.* The item seeks comment on whether the Commission should extend automatic roaming obligations to non-interconnected services and features, including information services. To the extent that a covered carrier might be a small entity, the Commission believes that extending the scope of automatic roaming obligation would be a benefit rather than a burden. 56. *Technical Issues.* The item also seeks comment on whether there are any special technical issues (or otherwise) associated with roaming among data networks that may not exist when roaming among CMRS carriers' interconnected voice networks. In the FNPRM, the Commission noted that it would be concerned if requiring a carrier to offer roaming service on its data network to the customers of other carriers resulted in the carrier facing capacity constraints that adversely affect its own customers. The FNPRM, therefore, asks whether a carrier should have the right to limit access to its network by roamers, and what parameters should be considered as justification for such limits. 57. *Jurisdiction over Information Service.* In the Wireless Broadband Classification Order, 146 the Commission determined that mobile wireless broadband Internet access service is an information service, and that it is not CMRS. If the Commission were to impose an automatic roaming on mobile wireless broadband Internet access service as proposed in the FNPRM, the jurisdictional issue should be considered regarding how could we treat the information service for roaming purpose. For example, could the Commission base the requirement on Title I ancillary jurisdiction, or on the Title III regulation of radio services? Alternatively, the FNPRM seeks comment on whether the Commission should restrict the automatic roaming mandate only to non-interconnected data services that are not classified as information services. 146 *See generally,* Wireless Broadband Internet Access Declaratory Ruling. 22 FCC Rcd 5901. F. Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict with the Proposed Rules 58. None. Ordering Clauses 59. Accordingly, *it is ordered that,* pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 1, 4(i), 201, 202, 251(a), 253, 303(r), and 332(c)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201, 202, 251(a), 253, 303(r), and 332(c)(1)(B), and Section 1.425 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.425, this Report and Order and *FNPRM is hereby adopted.* 60. *It is further ordered that* Sections 20.3 and 20.12 of the Commission's rules *are amended* as specified in Appendix A, and such rule amendments shall be effective 60 days after the date of publication of the text thereof in the **Federal Register** . 61. *It is further ordered that* the Joint Petition for Commission Inquiry Pursuant to Section 403 of the Communications Act filed by AIRPEAK Communications, LLC, Airtel Wireless LLC, Cleveland Unlimited, Inc., Leap Wireless International, Inc., MetroPCS Communications, Inc., Punxsutawney Communications, Rural Telecommunications Group, Inc., and Southern Communications Services, Inc. d/b/a SouthernLINC Wireless, on April 25, 2006 *is hereby denied.* 62. *It is further ordered that* the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, *shall send* a copy of this Report and Order and the FNPRM, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Federal Communications Commission. William F. Caton, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-17123 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P 72 168 Thursday, August 30, 2007 Notices AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Privacy Act of 1974, System of Records AGENCY: United States Agency for International Development. ACTION: Notice to delete systems of records. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974 (U.S.C. 552a), as amended, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is deleting nine systems of records notices in its existing inventory. DATES: This proposed action will be effective on October 1, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: *eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions on submitting comments. *E-mail: privacy@usaid.gov* *Fax:*
(703)666-1466. *Mail:* Chief Privacy Officer, United States Agency for International Development, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 2.12-003, Washington, DC 20523-2120. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Barbara English, Office of Human Resources, Policy, Planning and Information Division either by e-mail at *benglish@usaid.gov* or by phone on
(202)712-1913. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USAID has reviewed its Privacy Act systems of records. As a result of this review, USAID is deleting nine systems of records notices in its existing inventory. All nine systems being deleted are covered under government-wide systems of records. The specific deletions are set forth below. Dated: August 20, 2007. Philip M. Heneghan, Chief Privacy Officer, USAID. System Name: AID-1, Foreign Service Employee Personnel Records System. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-1 (General Personnel Records), a government-wide system of record. System Name: AID-2, Civil Service Employee Office Personnel Records. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-1 (General Personnel Records), a government-wide system of record. System Name: AID-6, Recruiting, Examining, Placement and Employee Records. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-5 (Recruiting, Examining, Placement and Employee Records), a government-wide system of record. System Name: AID-7, Foreign Service Personnel Evaluation Records. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-2 (Employee Performance File System Records), a government-wide system of record. System Name: AID-11, Employee Conduct and Discipline Records. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-3 (Adverse Actions and Actions Based on Unacceptable Performance), a government-wide system of record. System Name: AID-12, Executive Assignment Records. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-1 (General Personnel Records), a government-wide system of record. System Name: AID-13, Orientation and Training Records. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-1 (General Personnel Records), a government-wide system of record. System Name: AID-14, Awards and Incentive Records. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-2 (Employee Performance File System Records), a government-wide system of record. System Name: AID-24, Emergency Case File. *Reason:* The records contained in this system of records are covered by OPM/GOVT-1 (General Personnel Records), a government-wide system of record. [FR Doc. E7-17180 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6116-01-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Plumas National Forest, Feather River Ranger District, CA; Flea Project AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact statement to disclose the environmental effects resulting from construction of fuel breaks known as defensible fuel profile zones (DFPZs); harvest and reforestation of timber stands; restoration and enhancement of aquatic and riparian habitat; improvement of wildlife habitat and long term watershed condition; underburning to improve the health of unique plant communities; and road construction, reconstruction, and decommissioning. DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received within 30 days of the publication of this notice in the **Federal Register.** The draft environmental impact statement is expected by January 2008, and the final environmental impact statement is expected by April 2008. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Karen Hayden, District Ranger, Plumas National Forest, Feather River Ranger District, 875 Mitchell Ave, Oroville, CA 95965. Comments may be
(1)Mailed to the Responsible Official;
(2)hand-delivered between the hours of 8 a.m.-4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding holidays;
(3)faxed to
(530)532-1210; or
(4)electronically mailed to: *comments-pacificsouthwest-plumas-featherrvr@fs.fed.us.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Zarlengo, Project Leader, Feather River Ranger District, 875 Mitchell Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965, or call
(530)532-8932. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Flea Project area is located within the Feather River Ranger District of the Plumas National Forest in Butte County. Encompassing approximately 11,000 acres, the project area is located north and east of Paradise, from De Sabla in the northwest to Jorbo Gap in the southeast, and north and west of Mayaro and North Fork of the Feather River in the northeast. Treatment units range in elevation from 1,600 to 4,300 feet above sea level. Communities in and near the project area include Paradise, Magalia, DeSabla, Yankee Hill, Concow, Pulga and Mayaro. The Flea Project is proposed as part of a broad resource management program to promote the ecological health of lands and economic health and stability of communities in the northern Sierra Nevada under the authority of the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act (HFQLG Act). Purpose and Need for Action The Forest Service has identified the following project objectives:
(1)Protect communities and forest ecosystems from high-intensity wildfires;
(2)promote a healthy all-aged, multistoried, fire-resilient forest;
(3)contribute to the stability and economic health of communities;
(4)promote the health of unique plant communities;
(5)promote healthy aquatic and riparian ecosystems, and improve long term watershed condition; and
(6)improve wildlife habitat. Proposed Action To achieve project objectives, the Forest Service proposes to construct approximately 2,007 acres of fuelbreaks known as Defensible Fuel Profile Zones (DFPZ). A DFPZ is a strategically located strip of land approximately 1/2 mile in width on which fuels, both living and dead, have been modified in order to reduce the potential for sustained crown fire and to allow fire suppression personnel a safer location from which to take action against a wildfire. The DFPZs in the Flea Project would be part of a larger, strategic system of DFPZs on the Plumas National Forest, adjacent private lands, and other national forests. Proposed DFPZs are generally located on ridges, along roads, or adjacent to private property within wildland urban interface with tree crowns spaced at a distance that reduces the potential for crown fire spread (generally 40 percent canopy cover). DFPZs would be constructed through mechanically thinning and biomass removal on approximately 671 acres, mastication on approximately 456 acres, underburning on approximately 447 acres, and hand cutting, piling, and burning on approximately 433 acres. The Forest Service proposes to harvest up to 5 million board feet of timber from group selection units (228 acres), and DFPZ mechanical thinning units (546 acres). Group selection involves harvest of trees less than 30-inches in diameter from small (0.5 to 2 acres) groups. Over time, this would create an uneven-aged (all-aged) forest made up of a mosaic of small groups of same-aged trees. Use of existing and temporary roads would be needed to access group selection and DFPZ treatment areas. An estimated 13.4 miles of existing road would be reconstructed with 0.45 additional miles of new classified road construction and 4.5 miles of new temporary spur construction. An estimated 9.5 miles of system roads would be decommissioned or closed by various methods, such as ripping and seeding, re-contouring, and installing barriers. Future use of all other roads and user-developed OHV routes in the Flea Project area would be determined by the Plumas National Forest's travel management process. Improve the health of serpentine plant communities through the use of prescribed fire. Underburn approximately 100 acres included as DFPZ treatment. Aquatic and riparian restoration projects include restoring and enhancing aquatic, native plant, and riparian habitat and improving long term watershed condition by decommissioning 9.5 miles of system roads, replacing or upgrading three culverts to restore aquatic species passage to approximately 5 miles of upstream habitat; and stabilizing stream channels and banks. Habitat for northern goshawk would be improved by enhancing tree growth and health, and by creating a more desirable open understory on 84 acres included as DFPZ treatment. Responsible Official Karen L. Hayden, District Ranger, 875 Mitchell Ave., Oroville, CA 95965 is the Responsible Official. The Forest Service intends to use Stewardship contracting authority to apply the value from timber harvest to offset costs of fuel treatments. Nature of Decision To Be Made The Responsible Official will decide whether to implement this proposal, an alternative design that moves the project area towards the desired conditions, or not to implement any project at this time. Scoping Process Public questions and comments regarding this proposal are an integral part of this environmental analysis process. Comments will be used to identify issues and develop alternatives to the proposed action. To assist the Forest service in identifying and considering issues and concerns related to the proposed actions, comments should be as specific as possible. Information about the proposed action will be mailed to the adjacent landowners, as well as to those people and organizations that have indicated a specific interest in the project, to Native American entities, and federal, state, and local agencies. The public will be notified of any meetings regarding this proposal by mailings and press releases sent to local newspapers and media. A community meeting in the project area is planned for January 2008, although specific information is not available at this time. Preliminary Issues The following preliminary issues have been identified for this proposal:
(a)Impacts of ground disturbing activities on watershed condition,
(b)impacts of activities on highly erodible soils,
(c)economic feasibility of the project due to high treatment and regeneration costs, and
(d)impacts of activities on habitat used by the California spotted owl and northern goshawk. Continued analysis will determine the relevance of these preliminary issues. Additional issues may be identified during the scoping process. Permits or Licenses Required No federal permits, licenses, or entitlements are necessary to implement the proposed project. State requirements, based on federal laws, and administered by the County Agricultural Commissioner for air quality management will be followed. These requirements include burning only on permissive burn days or receiving a special variance prior to ignition. Smoke permits are required from the Northern Sierra and Feather River Air Quality Management Districts
(AQMD)prior to any understory or pile burning. Timber Harvest Activity Waivers are required from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Comment Requested This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The public is encouraged to take part in the process and is encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies and other individuals or organizations that may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed vegetation management activities. *Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent Environmental Review:* A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the ** Federal Register** . The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions. *Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.* v. *NRDC* , 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. *City of Angoon* v. *Hodel* , 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and *Wisconsin Heritages, Inc.* v. *Harris* , 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 45 day comment period so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final environmental impact statement. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal and will be available for public inspection. Dated: August 21, 2007. Karen L. Hayden, District Ranger. [FR Doc. 07-4253 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 72
Traces to 72 documents
U.S. Code
105 references not yet in our index
  • 5 USC 601-612
  • 13 CFR 101
  • 13 CFR 105
  • 13 CFR 115
  • 13 CFR 117
  • 13 CFR 120
  • 13 CFR 121
  • 13 CFR 124
  • 13 CFR 125
  • 13 CFR 126
  • 13 CFR 134
  • 13 CFR 136
  • 13 CFR 145
  • Pub. L. 106-554
  • Pub. L. 105-135
  • 111 Stat. 2592
  • Pub. L. 99-661
  • Pub. L. 100-656
  • Pub. L. 101-37
  • Pub. L. 101-574
  • 3 CFR 1986
  • Pub. L. 103-355
  • 108 Stat. 3327
  • 3 CFR 1973
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 1 CFR 51
  • 14 CFR 71
  • 31 CFR 515
  • 31 CFR 538
  • 31 CFR 560
  • 31 CFR 537
  • 31 CFR 501
  • Pub. L. 101-410
  • 104 Stat. 890
  • Pub. L. 106-387
  • 114 Stat. 1549
  • 10 CFR 810
  • 50 USC 1601-1651
  • Pub. L. 104-208
  • Pub. L. 108-61
+ 65 more
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Final rule
Fed. Reg.Proposed Rules
Fed. Reg.Notices
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 553
U.S.C.§ 601
U.S.C.§ 552
U.S.C.§ 633
U.S.C.§ 6506
U.S.C.§ 3512
SCOTUS529 U.S. 89
SCOTUS435 U.S. 151
F. Supp.440 F. Supp. 2d 24
Cites 177 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.