Review of the Emergency Alert System, 71072-71077 [05-23270]
Download as PDF
71072
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
III. Where Can I Find More Information
About This Proposal and the
Corresponding Direct Final Rule?
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
This action only applies to specific
SO2 sources located in Dearborn
County, Indiana.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI
to EPA through RME, regulations.gov or
e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be
CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD–ROM that you mail to EPA, mark
the outside of the disk or CD–ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically
within the disk or CD–ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the
comment that includes information
claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment
that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is proposing to approve revisions
to Indiana’s SO2 SIP for specified
existing stationary sources located in
Dearborn County, Indiana. The SIP
revisions amend 326 IAC 7–4–13, by
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:23 Nov 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
removing obsolete rule language for the
Indiana Michigan Power Tanners Creek
Station. The SIP revision also updates
information for other companies listed
in 326 IAC 7–4–13, including adding
source identification numbers. The
amendments to this rule are minor, and
will not result in an increase in SO2
emissions in Dearborn County because
no emission limits were increased.
III. Where Can I Find More Information
About This Proposal and the
Corresponding Direct Final Rule?
For additional information, see the
Direct Final Rule which is located in the
Rules section of this Federal Register.
Copies of the request and the EPA’s
analysis are available electronically at
RME or in hard copy at the above
address. (Please telephone Charles
Hatten at (312) 886–6031 before visiting
the Region 5 Office.)
Dated: November 10, 2005.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 05–23278 Filed 11–23–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 11
[EB Docket No. 04–296; FCC 05–191]
Review of the Emergency Alert System
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) examines the reach of
Emergency Alert System (EAS), as
currently constituted, to cover digital
communications technologies that are
increasingly being used by the
American public to receive news and
entertainment—digital television and
radio, digital cable, and satellite
television and radio. The Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking is the most
recent in a series of proceedings in
which the Commission has sought to
contribute to an efficient and
technologically current public alert and
warning system.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
January 24, 2006, and reply comments
are due on or before February 23, 2006.
Written comments on the Paperwork
Reduction Act proposed information
collection requirements must be
submitted to the public, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
other interested parties on or before
January 24, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send comments and reply
comments to the Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission,
445 12th Street, SW., Room TW–A325,
Washington, DC 20554. You may submit
comments, identified by EB Docket No.
04–296, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Web site: https://
www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• 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. You may submit your
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
comments by electronic mail or U.S.
mail. To submit your PRA comments by
electronic mail, send comments to:
PRA@fcc.gov. To submit your PRA
comments by U.S. mail, mark them to
the attention of Judith B. Herman and
address them to the Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1–
C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean
Ann Collins, Senior Counsel, Office of
Homeland Security, Enforcement
Bureau, at (202) 418–1199. For
additional information concerning the
Paperwork Reduction Act information
collection requirements contained in
this document, send an e-mail to
PRA@fcc.gov or contact Judith B.
Herman at (202) 418–0214.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(FNPRM) in EB Docket No. 04–296, FCC
05–191, adopted November 3, 2005, and
released November 10, 2005. The
complete text of this document is
available for inspection and copying
during normal business hours in the
FCC Reference Information Center,
Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room
CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. This
document may also be purchased from
the Commission’s duplicating
contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc.,
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800)
378–3160 or (202) 863–2893, facsimile
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
(202) 863–2898, or via e-mail at
www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available
on the Commission’s website at https://
www.fcc.gov.
This document contains proposed
information collection requirements.
The Commission, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
burdens, invites the general public and
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to comment on the information
collection requirements contained in
this document, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. Public and agency
comments are due January 24, 2006.
Comments should address: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the Commission,
including whether the information shall
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
the Commission’s burden estimates; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on the
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
In addition, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4), The Commission seeks
specific comment on how it might
‘‘further reduce the information
collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25
employees.’’
OMB Control Number: 3060–0207.
Title: Part 11—Emergency Alert
System (EAS).
Form No.: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of currently
approved collection.
Respondents: Businesses or other forprofit; not-for-profit institutions; and/or
state, local or tribal governments.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
22,008.
Estimated Time Per Response: Range
from 0.017–40 hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion
reporting requirement and
recordkeeping requirement.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
22,100 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Costs: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: Not
applicable.
Needs and Uses: As currently
approved by OMB and reflected in the
information above, Part 11 contains
rules and regulations providing for an
emergency alert system. The EAS
provides the President with the
capability to provide immediate
communications and information to the
general public during periods of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:23 Nov 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
national emergency. The EAS also
provides state and local governments, as
well as the National Weather Service
with the capability to provide
immediate communications and
information to the general public
concerning emergency situations posing
a threat to life and property. With the
adoption of the FNPRM, the
Commission seeks comment on what
actions the Commission, along with its
Federal, State and industry partners,
should take to help expedite the
development of a robust, state-of-the-art,
digitally based public alert and warning
system. The Commission also seeks
comment on how to amend the EAS
rules to ensure that EAS messages more
effectively reach individuals with
hearing and vision disabilities, as well
as speakers of languages other than
English.
In addition to filing comments with
the Office of the Secretary, a copy of any
comments on the Paperwork Reduction
Act information collection requirements
contained herein should be submitted to
Judith B. Herman, Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1–
C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20554, or via the Internet to JudithB.Herman@fcc.gov.
Synopsis of the Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking
1. Background. In the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (69 FR
52843, August 30, 2004), the
Commission sought comment on
whether the EAS in its present form is
the most efficient mechanism for
warning the American public of an
emergency and, if not, on how the
Emergency Alert System (EAS) can be
improved. The main objective of the
NPRM was to seek comment on whether
the EAS as currently constituted is the
most effective and efficient public
warning system that best takes
advantage of appropriate technological
advances and best responds to the
public’s need to obtain timely
emergency information. The NPRM
sought comment on the current efficacy
of EAS in an age when the
communications landscape has evolved
from what it was when EAS
predecessors, and EAS itself, were
originally conceived.
2. Introduction. The Commission
realizes the immediate objective of
ensuring that the large and growing
segments of the population who rely on
digital radio and television technologies
are not left without access to alerts in
the event of an emergency. While the
current EAS performs a critical
function, the Commission believes it
could be improved. In this Further
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71073
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(FNPRM), the Commission seeks
specific comments on what actions the
Commission should take to help
expedite the development of a more
comprehensive system.
3. An accurate, wide-reaching public
alert and warning system is critical to
the public’s safety and a vital part of the
Commission’s core mission to promote
the safety of life and property through
a robust communications system. Such
a system should enable officials at the
national, state and local levels to reach
affected citizens in the most effective
and efficient manner possible. It should
have built-in redundancy features and
use a variety of communications media
so that officials can reach large numbers
of people simultaneously. In response to
the NPRM, commenters identified a
number of approaches to digital alert
and warning. The Commission seeks
further comment on these approaches
and asks what the Commission can do
to facilitate the development of a more
effective, comprehensive digital public
alert and warning system. Specifically,
comment is sought on the appropriate
role for the Commission among the
various government and industry
entities that are involved in the creation
of this system. In addition, the
Commission seeks further comment on
how to amend the EAS rules to ensure
that EAS messages more effectively
reach individuals with hearing and
vision disabilities, and speakers of
languages other than English.
4. The comments filed in response to
the NPRM reveal a multitude of
technical approaches to a digital alert
and warning system, from specific
approaches to individual technologies
to broad approaches to architecture and
protocol design. The FNPRM includes a
representative sample of issues for
parties to address. The issues we
include are representative, and do not
constitute an exclusive list. Parties
can—and should—comment on any
next generation issues, and should
consider what role the Commission
should play in facilitating choice among
these options.
5. It is the Commission’s intention in
this proceeding to seek comment on
these and an array of other questions
and potential rule changes. The
Commission has already begun—and
will continue throughout this
proceeding—to coordinate carefully
with the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS), its component, FEMA,
and the Department of Commerce and
its component, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration’s
(NOAA’s) National Weather Service
(NWS). The Commission anticipates
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
71074
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
these federal partners will be active
participants in the proceeding. In
addition to seeking comments from all
interested individuals and federal
entities on the issues raised in this
FNPRM, the Commission also
specifically seeks the participation of
state and local emergency planning
organizations and solicit their views.
Finally, the Commission seeks input
from all telecommunications industries
concerned about developing a more
effective EAS.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
6. With respect to this FNPRM, an
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) is contained in Appendix A. As
required by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the
Commission has prepared an IRFA of
the possible significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities by the policies and rules
proposed in this FNPRM. 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 as
described above. The Commission will
send a copy of the FNPRM, including
this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration (SBA).
Need for, and Objectives of, the
Proposed Rules
7. The EAS First Report and Order,
which accompanies the FNPRM, is the
Commission’s first step to ensure that
digital media is capable of receiving and
disseminating EAS messages. In the
Order, the Commission realized the
immediate objective of ensuring that the
large and growing segments of the
population who rely on digital radio
and television technologies are not left
without access to alerts in the event of
an emergency. Although the current
EAS performs a critical function, the
Commission believes it could be
improved. An accurate, wide-reaching
public alert and warning system is
critical to the public safety and a vital
part of the Commission’s core mission
to promote the safety of life and
property through a robust
communications system. The
Commission believes that such a system
should be technologically up-to-date,
should have built-in redundancy
features, and should use a variety of
communications media to allow
officials at the national, state and local
levels to send messages to reach the
greatest number of citizens in the
affected areas in the most effective and
efficient manner possible.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:23 Nov 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
8. Accordingly, the Commission is
initiating this FNPRM to seek additional
comment on what actions the
Commission, along with its Federal,
State and industry partners, should take
to help expedite the development of a
robust, state-of-the-art, digitally based
public alert and warning system. The
Commission also seeks comment on the
appropriate role for the Commission
among the various government and
industry entities that are involved in the
creation of this system. In their
comments, parties should also comment
on the Commission’s statutory authority
to regulate such a system.
9. The comments filed in response to
the NPRM reveal a multitude of
technical approaches to a digital alert
and warning system, from specific
approaches to individual technologies
to broad approaches to architecture and
protocol design. The Commission does
not seek to duplicate that significant
effort, but rather seeks comment on a
representative group of issues. The
issues on which comment is sought do
not constitute an exclusive list. Parties
can—and should—comment on any
issues relevant to specific technologies
that can aid the development of a nextgeneration alert and warning system.
10. Specifically, the Commission
seeks comment on the appropriate role
for the Commission in developing
system architecture and common
protocols that could be used for message
distribution across different platforms.
The Commission also asks questions
specific to particular technologies, such
as how DTH and SDARS could deliver
local alerts; how best to involve wireless
providers; and whether traditional
wireline telephone companies that
become content providers should have
an obligation to provide alerts. To
ensure that the American public
receives public alert and warning in an
accurate and timely fashion from this
next-generation system, the Commission
seeks comment whether it will need to
adopt performance standards and
reporting requirements.
11. The Commission also seeks
comment regarding how it may,
consistent with the EAS First Report
and Order, make EAS alerts more
accessible to people with disabilities.
The Commission is committed to
ensuring that persons with disabilities
have equal access to public warnings
and are considered in emergency
preparedness planning. Thus, it seeks
comment on how any next-generation,
digitally based alert and warning system
can be developed in a manner that
assures that persons with disabilities
will be given equal access to alert and
warning as other Americans. The
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Commission also seeks comment on
whether there are disparities in or
conflicts between the EAS rules and the
Commission’s other disability access
rules contained in section 79.2, and if
so, the manner in which such
disparities or conflicts could be resolved
in subsequent rules.
12. The Commission recognizes the
historic and important role of states and
localities in public safety matters, and
the essential role of states and localities
in public safety matters, and the
essential role that state and local
governments play in delivering alert and
warning. Accordingly, the Commission
seeks comment on how it can best work
with the states to help implement the
EAS rules adopted in the Order as well
as to develop the next generation of alert
and warning systems. In particular, the
Commission notes that there is a vital
connection between state and local alert
and warning and Federal efforts to
mitigate disasters. The Commission
seeks comment on whether its rules
should be revised to require that states
notify the Commission of any changes
in EAS participants’ state EAS Local
Area and/or EAS designation (PEP, LP1,
LP2, SR, LR, etc.) within thirty days of
such change, and in the absence of a
change, a yearly confirmation that all
state EAS Local Area and EAS
designations remain the same.
13. On September 22, 2005, the
Independent Spanish Broadcasters
Association, the Office of
Communication of the United Church of
Christ, Inc., and the Minority Media and
Telecommunications Council filed a
Petition for Immediate Relief with the
Commission proposing changes to the
Commission’s EAS rules to require
stations to air EAS messages in other
languages in addition to English. The
Commission seeks comment on the
issues raised in the petition and, for that
purpose, incorporates the petition as
well as the other pleadings filed in
response to the petition into the record
of this proceeding. The Commission
seeks comment on how this proposal
would be implemented, and seeks
comment on any other proposals
regarding how to best alert non-English
speakers.
Legal Basis
14. Authority for the actions proposed
in this FNPRM may be found in sections
1, 4(i), 4(o), 303(r), 403, 624(g) and 706
of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j),
154(o), 303(r), 544(g) and 606.
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Description and Estimate of the Number
of Small Entities to Which Rules Will
Apply
15. 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 rules adopted herein. The RFA
generally defines the term ‘‘small
entity’’ as having the same meaning as
the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small
organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental
jurisdiction.’’ In addition, the term
‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning
as the term ‘‘small business concern’’
under the Small Business Act. A ‘‘small
business concern’’ is one which: (1)
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).
16. A small organization is generally
‘‘any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and
is not dominant in its field.’’
Nationwide, as of 2002, there were
approximately 1.6 million small
organizations. The term ‘‘small
governmental jurisdiction’’ is defined as
‘‘governments of cities, towns,
townships, villages, school districts, or
special districts, with a population of
less than fifty thousand.’’ As of 1997,
there were approximately 87,453
governmental jurisdictions in the
United States. This number includes
39,044 county governments,
municipalities, and townships, of which
37,546 (approximately 96.2%) have
populations of fewer than 50,000, and of
which 1,498 have populations of 50,000
or more. Thus, we estimate the number
of small governmental jurisdictions
overall to be 84,098 or fewer.
Nationwide, there are a total of
approximately 22.4 million small
businesses, according to SBA data.
17. Television Broadcasting. The SBA
has developed a small business sized
standard for television broadcasting,
which consists of all such firms having
$12 million or less in annual receipts.
Business concerns included in this
industry are those ‘‘primarily engaged in
broadcasting images together with
sound.’’ According to Commission staff
review of BIA Publications, Inc. Master
Access Television Analyzer Database, as
of May 16, 2003, about 814 of the 1,220
commercial television stations in the
United States had revenues of $12
million or less. The Commission notes,
however, that, in assessing whether a
business concern qualifies as small
under the above definition, business
(control) affiliations must be included.
The Commission’s estimate, therefore,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:23 Nov 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
likely overstates the number of small
entities that might be affected by its
action, because the revenue figure on
which it is based does not include or
aggregate revenues from affiliated
companies. There are also 2,127 low
power television stations (LPTV). Given
the nature of this service, we will
presume that all LPTV licensees qualify
as small entities under the SBA size
standard.
18. Radio Stations. The proposed
rules and policies potentially will apply
to all AM and commercial FM radio
broadcasting licensees and potential
licensees. The SBA defines a radio
broadcasting station that has $6 million
or less in annual receipts as a small
business. A radio broadcasting station is
an establishment primarily engaged in
broadcasting aural programs by radio to
the public. Included in this industry are
commercial, religious, educational, and
other radio stations. Radio broadcasting
stations which primarily are engaged in
radio broadcasting and which produce
radio program materials are similarly
included. However, radio stations that
are separate establishments and are
primarily engaged in producing radio
program material are classified under
another NAICS number. According to
Commission staff review of BIA
Publications, Inc. Master Access Radio
Analyzer Database on March 31, 2005,
about 10,840 (95%) of 11,410
commercial radio stations have revenue
of $6 million or less. The Commission
notes, however, that many radio stations
are affiliated with much larger
corporations having much higher
revenue. The Commission’s estimate,
therefore, likely overstates the number
of small entities that might be affected
by itsr action.
19. Cable and Other Program
Distribution. The SBA has developed a
small business size standard for cable
and other program distribution, which
consists of all such firms having $12.5
million or less in annual receipts.
According to Census Bureau data for
1997, in this category there was a total
of 1,311 firms that operated for the
entire year. Of this total, 1,180 firms had
annual receipts of under $10 million,
and an additional 52 firms had receipts
of $10 million to $24,999,999. Thus,
under this size standard, the majority of
firms can be considered small. In
addition, limited preliminary census
data for 2002 indicate that the total
number of cable and other program
distribution companies increased
approximately 46 percent from 1997 to
2002.
20. Cable System Operators (Rate
Regulation Standard). The Commission
has developed its own small business
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71075
size standard for cable system operators,
for purposes of rate regulation. Under
the Commission’s rules, a ‘‘small cable
company’’ is one serving fewer than
400,000 subscribers nationwide. The
Commission estimates that there were
1,439 cable operators who qualified as
small cable system operators at the end
of 1995. Since then, some of those
companies may have grown to serve
over 400,000 subscribers, and others
may have been involved in transactions
that caused them to be combined with
other cable operators. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that there are
now fewer than 1,439 small entity cable
system operators that may be affected by
the rules and policies proposed herein.
21. Cable System Operators (Telecom
Act Standard). The Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, also contains
a size standard for small cable system
operators, which is ‘‘a cable operator
that, directly or through an affiliate,
serves in the aggregate fewer than 1
percent of all subscribers in the United
States and is not affiliated with any
entity or entities whose gross annual
revenues in the aggregate exceed
$250,000,000.’’ The Commission has
determined that there are 67,700,000
subscribers in the United States.
Therefore, an operator serving fewer
than 677,000 subscribers shall be
deemed a small operator, if its annual
revenues, when combined with the total
annual revenues of all its affiliates, do
not exceed $250 million in the
aggregate. Based on available data, the
Commission estimates that the number
of cable operators serving 677,000
subscribers or fewer, totals 1,450. The
Commission neither requests nor
collects information on whether cable
system operators are affiliated with
entities whose gross annual revenues
exceed $250 million, and therefore are
unable, at this time, to estimate more
accurately the number of cable system
operators that would qualify as small
cable operators under the size standard
contained in the Communications Act of
1934.
22. Multipoint Distribution Systems.
The established rules apply to
Multipoint Distribution Systems (MDS)
operated as part of a wireless cable
system. The Commission has defined
‘‘small entity’’ for purposes of the
auction of MDS frequencies as an entity
that, together with its affiliates, has
average gross annual revenues that are
not more than $40 million for the
preceding three calendar years. This
definition of small entity in the context
of MDS auctions has been approved by
the SBA. The Commission completed its
MDS auction in March 1996 for
authorizations in 493 basic trading
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
71076
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
areas. Of 67 winning bidders, 61
qualified as small entities. At this time,
we estimate that of the 61 small
business MDS auction winners, 48
remain small business licensees.
23. MDS also includes licensees of
stations authorized prior to the auction.
As noted above, the SBA has developed
a definition of small entities for pay
television services, cable and other
subscription programming, which
includes all such companies generating
$12.5 million or less in annual receipts.
This definition includes MDS and thus
applies to MDS licensees that did not
participate in the MDS auction.
Information available to us indicates
that there are approximately 392
incumbent MDS licensees that do not
generate revenue in excess of $11
million annually. Therefore, the
Commission estimates that there are at
least 440 (392 pre-auction plus 48
auction licensees) small MDS providers
as defined by the SBA and the
Commission’s auction rules which may
be affected by the rules adopted herein.
In addition, limited preliminary census
data for 2002 indicate that the total
number of cable and other program
distribution companies increased
approximately 46 percent from 1997 to
2002.
24. Instructional Television Fixed
Service. The established rules would
also apply to Instructional Television
Fixed Service facilities operated as part
of a wireless cable system. The SBA
definition of small entities for pay
television services also appears to apply
to ITFS. There are presently 2,032 ITFS
licensees. All but 100 of these licenses
are held by educational institutions.
Educational institutions are included in
the definition of a small business.
However, we do not collect annual
revenue data for ITFS licensees, and are
not able to ascertain how many of the
100 non-educational licensees would be
categorized as small under the SBA
definition. Thus, the Commission
tentatively concludes that at least 1,932
are small businesses and may be
affected by the established rules.
25. Wireless Service Providers. The
SBA has developed a small business
size standard for wireless small
businesses within the two separate
categories of Paging and Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications.
Under both SBA categories, a wireless
business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees. According to Commission
data, 1,012 companies reported that
they were engaged in the provision of
wireless service. Of these 1,012
companies, an estimated 829 have 1,500
or fewer employees and 183 have more
than 1,500 employees. This SBA size
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:23 Nov 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
standard also applies to wireless
telephony. Wireless telephony includes
cellular, personal communications
services, and specialized mobile radio
telephony carriers. According to the
data, 437 carriers reported that they
were engaged in the provision of
wireless telephony. The Commission
has estimated that 260 of these are small
businesses under the SBA small
business size standard.
26. Broadband Personal
Communications Service. The
broadband personal communications
services (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. 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. These small business size
standards, in the context of broadband
PCS auctions, have been approved by
the SBA. 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 Block C 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. On March 23, 1999, the Commission
reauctioned 155 C, D, E, and F Block
licenses; there were 113 small business
winning bidders. On January 26, 2001,
the Commission completed the auction
of 422 C and F Broadband PCS licenses
in Auction No. 35. 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.
27. Incumbent Local Exchange
Carriers (Incumbent LECs). The
Commission has included small
incumbent local exchange carriers in
this present IRFA analysis. As noted
above, a ‘‘small business’’ under the
RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the
pertinent small business size standard
(e.g., a telephone communications
business having 1,500 or fewer
employees), and ‘‘is not dominant in its
field of operation.’’ The SBA’s Office of
Advocacy contends that, for RFA
purposes, small incumbent LECs are not
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
dominant in their field of operation
because any such dominance is not
‘‘national’’ in scope. The Commission
has therefore included small incumbent
local exchange carriers in this RFA
analysis, although we emphasize that
this RFA action has no effect on
Commission analyses and
determinations in other, non-RFA
contexts. Neither the Commission nor
the SBA has developed a small business
size standard specifically for incumbent
local exchange services. The appropriate
size standard under SBA rules is for the
category Wired Telecommunications
Carriers. Under that size standard, such
a business is small if it has 1,500 or
fewer employees. According to
Commission data, 1,303 carriers have
reported that they are engaged in the
provision of incumbent local exchange
services. Of these 1,303 carriers, an
estimated 1,020 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and 283 have more than
1,500 employees. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that most
providers of incumbent local exchange
service are small businesses that may be
affected by its proposed rules.
28. Competitive Local Exchange
Carriers (Competitive LECs),
Competitive Access Providers (CAPs),
‘‘Shared-Tenant Service Providers,’’ and
‘‘Other Local Service Providers.’’
Neither the Commission nor the SBA
has developed a small business size
standard specifically for these service
providers. The appropriate size standard
under SBA rules is for the category
Wired Telecommunications Carriers.
Under that size standard, such a
business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees. According to Commission
data, 769 carriers have reported that
they are engaged in the provision of
either competitive access provider
services or competitive local exchange
carrier services. Of these 769 carriers, an
estimated 676 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and 93 have more than 1,500
employees. In addition, 12 carriers have
reported that they are ‘‘Shared-Tenant
Service Providers,’’ and all 12 are
estimated to have 1,500 or fewer
employees. In addition, 39 carriers have
reported that they are ‘‘Other Local
Service Providers.’’ Of the 39, an
estimated 38 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and one has more than 1,500
employees. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that most
providers of competitive local exchange
service, competitive access providers,
‘‘Shared-Tenant Service Providers,’’ and
‘‘Other Local Service Providers’’ are
small entities that may be affected by its
proposed rules.
29. Satellite Telecommunications and
Other Telecommunications. The
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 226 / Friday, November 25, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Commission has not developed a small
business size standard specifically for
providers of satellite service. The
appropriate size standards under SBA
rules are for the two broad categories of
Satellite Telecommunications and Other
Telecommunications. Under both
categories, such a business is small if it
has $12.5 or less in average annual
receipts. For the first category of
Satellite Telecommunications, Census
Bureau data for 1997 show that there
were a total of 324 firms that operated
for the entire year. Of this total, 273
firms had annual receipts of under $10
million, and an additional twenty-four
firms had receipts of $10 million to
$24,999,999. Thus, the majority of
Satellite Telecommunications firms can
be considered small.
30. The second category—Other
Telecommunications—includes
‘‘establishments primarily engaged in
* * * providing satellite terminal
stations and associated facilities
operationally connected with one or
more terrestrial communications
systems and capable of transmitting
telecommunications to or receiving
telecommunications from satellite
systems.’’ Of this total, 424 firms had
annual receipts of $5 million to
$9,999,999 and an additional 6 firms
had annual receipts of $10 million to
$24,999,990. Thus, under this second
size standard, the majority of firms can
be considered small.
Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
31. There are potential reporting or
recordkeeping requirements proposed in
this FNPRM, particularly with regard to
state and local EAS participation and
participation by digital broadcasters. For
example, the Commission is considering
whether to adopt performance standards
and reporting obligations for EAS
participants. The proposals set forth in
this FNPRM are intended to advance the
Commission’s public safety mission and
enhance the performance of the EAS
while reducing regulatory burdens
wherever possible.
Steps Taken To Minimize the
Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives
Considered
32. The RFA requires an agency to
describe any significant alternatives that
it has considered in developing its
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:23 Nov 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
entities; (2) the clarification,
consolidation, or simplification of
compliance and reporting requirements
under the rule for such 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 such small entities.’’
33. The NPRM invited comments on
a number of alternatives to the
imposition of EAS obligations on the
digital communications technologies.
The Commission has considered each of
those comments and in its Order
imposes minimal regulation on small
entities to the extent consistent with its
goal of advancing the Commission’s
public safety mission by adopting rules
that expand the reach of EAS. The
Commission believes that requiring
DTV, DAB, digital cable, satellite DTH
and SDARS providers to install and use
EAS equipment will not impose undue
regulatory or financial burdens.
34. This FNPRM seeks additional
comment to help expedite the
development of a robust, state-of-the-art,
digitally based public alert and warning
system, and to further minimize the
impact on small entities. In particular,
the Commission seeks comment on how
DTH and SDARS could deliver local
alerts; how best to involve wireless
providers; and how the Commission can
best work with the states to help
implement the EAS rules adopted in the
EAS First Report and Order as well as
to develop the next generation of alert
and warning systems. The Commission
notes that it sought specific comment
concerning possible alternatives in its
approach toward small entities in the
context of making EAS accessible to
persons with disabilities.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rules
35. None.
Ex Parte Rules
36. These matters shall be treated as
a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ proceeding in
accordance with the Commission’s ex
parte rules. 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 is generally
required. Other requirements pertaining
to oral and written presentations are set
forth in § 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s
rules.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71077
Ordering Clauses
37. Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority contained in sections 1, 4(i)
and (o), 303(r), 403, 624(g) and 706 of
the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j),
154(o), 303(r), 403, 544(g), and 606,
Notice is Hereby Given of the proposals
described in the Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
38. The Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
the Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, including the Initial
Regulatory Analysis, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05–23270 Filed 11–23–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 79
[CG Docket No. 05–231; DA 05–2974]
Closed Captioning of Video
Programming, Telecommunications for
the Deaf, Inc.; Petition for Rulemaking
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of
reply comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau grants a request for an extension
of time to file reply comments in
response to the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) adopted by the
Commission in the ‘‘Closed Captioning
of Video Programming’’ proceeding. The
extension is granted to provide parties
the necessary time to coordinate and file
reply comments that will result in a
more complete record.
DATES: Reply comments are due on or
before December 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may
submit reply comments, identified by
CG Docket No. 05–231, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Web Site: https://
www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• People with Disabilities: Contact
the FCC to request reasonable
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 226 (Friday, November 25, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71072-71077]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23270]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 11
[EB Docket No. 04-296; FCC 05-191]
Review of the Emergency Alert System
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) examines the reach of Emergency Alert System (EAS), as
currently constituted, to cover digital communications technologies
that are increasingly being used by the American public to receive news
and entertainment--digital television and radio, digital cable, and
satellite television and radio. The Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking is the most recent in a series of proceedings in which the
Commission has sought to contribute to an efficient and technologically
current public alert and warning system.
DATES: Comments are due on or before January 24, 2006, and reply
comments are due on or before February 23, 2006. Written comments on
the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection
requirements must be submitted to the public, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on or before January 24,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Send comments and reply comments to the Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. You may submit comments, identified
by EB Docket No. 04-296, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications Commission's Web site: https://
www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
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. You may submit your Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) comments by electronic mail or U.S. mail. To submit
your PRA comments by electronic mail, send comments to: PRA@fcc.gov. To
submit your PRA comments by U.S. mail, mark them to the attention of
Judith B. Herman and address them to the Federal Communications
Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean Ann Collins, Senior Counsel,
Office of Homeland Security, Enforcement Bureau, at (202) 418-1199. For
additional information concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act
information collection requirements contained in this document, send an
e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Judith B. Herman at (202) 418-0214.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) in EB Docket No. 04-296,
FCC 05-191, adopted November 3, 2005, and released November 10, 2005.
The complete text of this document is available for inspection and
copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC
20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's
duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street,
SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 378-3160 or
(202) 863-2893, facsimile
[[Page 71073]]
(202) 863-2898, or via e-mail at www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available
on the Commission's website at https://www.fcc.gov.
This document contains proposed information collection
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments
are due January 24, 2006. Comments should address: (a) Whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the
information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on the
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology. In addition, pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), The Commission seeks specific comment on how it
might ``further reduce the information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.''
OMB Control Number: 3060-0207.
Title: Part 11--Emergency Alert System (EAS).
Form No.: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of currently approved collection.
Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit; not-for-profit
institutions; and/or state, local or tribal governments.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 22,008.
Estimated Time Per Response: Range from 0.017-40 hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement and
recordkeeping requirement.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 22,100 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Costs: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: Not applicable.
Needs and Uses: As currently approved by OMB and reflected in the
information above, Part 11 contains rules and regulations providing for
an emergency alert system. The EAS provides the President with the
capability to provide immediate communications and information to the
general public during periods of national emergency. The EAS also
provides state and local governments, as well as the National Weather
Service with the capability to provide immediate communications and
information to the general public concerning emergency situations
posing a threat to life and property. With the adoption of the FNPRM,
the Commission seeks comment on what actions the Commission, along with
its Federal, State and industry partners, should take to help expedite
the development of a robust, state-of-the-art, digitally based public
alert and warning system. The Commission also seeks comment on how to
amend the EAS rules to ensure that EAS messages more effectively reach
individuals with hearing and vision disabilities, as well as speakers
of languages other than English.
In addition to filing comments with the Office of the Secretary, a
copy of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act information
collection requirements contained herein should be submitted to Judith
B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to Judith-
B.Herman@fcc.gov.
Synopsis of the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
1. Background. In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (69 FR
52843, August 30, 2004), the Commission sought comment on whether the
EAS in its present form is the most efficient mechanism for warning the
American public of an emergency and, if not, on how the Emergency Alert
System (EAS) can be improved. The main objective of the NPRM was to
seek comment on whether the EAS as currently constituted is the most
effective and efficient public warning system that best takes advantage
of appropriate technological advances and best responds to the public's
need to obtain timely emergency information. The NPRM sought comment on
the current efficacy of EAS in an age when the communications landscape
has evolved from what it was when EAS predecessors, and EAS itself,
were originally conceived.
2. Introduction. The Commission realizes the immediate objective of
ensuring that the large and growing segments of the population who rely
on digital radio and television technologies are not left without
access to alerts in the event of an emergency. While the current EAS
performs a critical function, the Commission believes it could be
improved. In this Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), the
Commission seeks specific comments on what actions the Commission
should take to help expedite the development of a more comprehensive
system.
3. An accurate, wide-reaching public alert and warning system is
critical to the public's safety and a vital part of the Commission's
core mission to promote the safety of life and property through a
robust communications system. Such a system should enable officials at
the national, state and local levels to reach affected citizens in the
most effective and efficient manner possible. It should have built-in
redundancy features and use a variety of communications media so that
officials can reach large numbers of people simultaneously. In response
to the NPRM, commenters identified a number of approaches to digital
alert and warning. The Commission seeks further comment on these
approaches and asks what the Commission can do to facilitate the
development of a more effective, comprehensive digital public alert and
warning system. Specifically, comment is sought on the appropriate role
for the Commission among the various government and industry entities
that are involved in the creation of this system. In addition, the
Commission seeks further comment on how to amend the EAS rules to
ensure that EAS messages more effectively reach individuals with
hearing and vision disabilities, and speakers of languages other than
English.
4. The comments filed in response to the NPRM reveal a multitude of
technical approaches to a digital alert and warning system, from
specific approaches to individual technologies to broad approaches to
architecture and protocol design. The FNPRM includes a representative
sample of issues for parties to address. The issues we include are
representative, and do not constitute an exclusive list. Parties can--
and should--comment on any next generation issues, and should consider
what role the Commission should play in facilitating choice among these
options.
5. It is the Commission's intention in this proceeding to seek
comment on these and an array of other questions and potential rule
changes. The Commission has already begun--and will continue throughout
this proceeding--to coordinate carefully with the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), its component, FEMA, and the Department of
Commerce and its component, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA's) National Weather Service (NWS). The
Commission anticipates
[[Page 71074]]
these federal partners will be active participants in the proceeding.
In addition to seeking comments from all interested individuals and
federal entities on the issues raised in this FNPRM, the Commission
also specifically seeks the participation of state and local emergency
planning organizations and solicit their views. Finally, the Commission
seeks input from all telecommunications industries concerned about
developing a more effective EAS.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
6. With respect to this FNPRM, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) is contained in Appendix A. As required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Commission
has prepared an IRFA of the possible significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed
in this FNPRM. 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 as described above. The Commission will
send a copy of the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA).
Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
7. The EAS First Report and Order, which accompanies the FNPRM, is
the Commission's first step to ensure that digital media is capable of
receiving and disseminating EAS messages. In the Order, the Commission
realized the immediate objective of ensuring that the large and growing
segments of the population who rely on digital radio and television
technologies are not left without access to alerts in the event of an
emergency. Although the current EAS performs a critical function, the
Commission believes it could be improved. An accurate, wide-reaching
public alert and warning system is critical to the public safety and a
vital part of the Commission's core mission to promote the safety of
life and property through a robust communications system. The
Commission believes that such a system should be technologically up-to-
date, should have built-in redundancy features, and should use a
variety of communications media to allow officials at the national,
state and local levels to send messages to reach the greatest number of
citizens in the affected areas in the most effective and efficient
manner possible.
8. Accordingly, the Commission is initiating this FNPRM to seek
additional comment on what actions the Commission, along with its
Federal, State and industry partners, should take to help expedite the
development of a robust, state-of-the-art, digitally based public alert
and warning system. The Commission also seeks comment on the
appropriate role for the Commission among the various government and
industry entities that are involved in the creation of this system. In
their comments, parties should also comment on the Commission's
statutory authority to regulate such a system.
9. The comments filed in response to the NPRM reveal a multitude of
technical approaches to a digital alert and warning system, from
specific approaches to individual technologies to broad approaches to
architecture and protocol design. The Commission does not seek to
duplicate that significant effort, but rather seeks comment on a
representative group of issues. The issues on which comment is sought
do not constitute an exclusive list. Parties can--and should--comment
on any issues relevant to specific technologies that can aid the
development of a next-generation alert and warning system.
10. Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on the appropriate
role for the Commission in developing system architecture and common
protocols that could be used for message distribution across different
platforms. The Commission also asks questions specific to particular
technologies, such as how DTH and SDARS could deliver local alerts; how
best to involve wireless providers; and whether traditional wireline
telephone companies that become content providers should have an
obligation to provide alerts. To ensure that the American public
receives public alert and warning in an accurate and timely fashion
from this next-generation system, the Commission seeks comment whether
it will need to adopt performance standards and reporting requirements.
11. The Commission also seeks comment regarding how it may,
consistent with the EAS First Report and Order, make EAS alerts more
accessible to people with disabilities. The Commission is committed to
ensuring that persons with disabilities have equal access to public
warnings and are considered in emergency preparedness planning. Thus,
it seeks comment on how any next-generation, digitally based alert and
warning system can be developed in a manner that assures that persons
with disabilities will be given equal access to alert and warning as
other Americans. The Commission also seeks comment on whether there are
disparities in or conflicts between the EAS rules and the Commission's
other disability access rules contained in section 79.2, and if so, the
manner in which such disparities or conflicts could be resolved in
subsequent rules.
12. The Commission recognizes the historic and important role of
states and localities in public safety matters, and the essential role
of states and localities in public safety matters, and the essential
role that state and local governments play in delivering alert and
warning. Accordingly, the Commission seeks comment on how it can best
work with the states to help implement the EAS rules adopted in the
Order as well as to develop the next generation of alert and warning
systems. In particular, the Commission notes that there is a vital
connection between state and local alert and warning and Federal
efforts to mitigate disasters. The Commission seeks comment on whether
its rules should be revised to require that states notify the
Commission of any changes in EAS participants' state EAS Local Area
and/or EAS designation (PEP, LP1, LP2, SR, LR, etc.) within thirty days
of such change, and in the absence of a change, a yearly confirmation
that all state EAS Local Area and EAS designations remain the same.
13. On September 22, 2005, the Independent Spanish Broadcasters
Association, the Office of Communication of the United Church of
Christ, Inc., and the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council
filed a Petition for Immediate Relief with the Commission proposing
changes to the Commission's EAS rules to require stations to air EAS
messages in other languages in addition to English. The Commission
seeks comment on the issues raised in the petition and, for that
purpose, incorporates the petition as well as the other pleadings filed
in response to the petition into the record of this proceeding. The
Commission seeks comment on how this proposal would be implemented, and
seeks comment on any other proposals regarding how to best alert non-
English speakers.
Legal Basis
14. Authority for the actions proposed in this FNPRM may be found
in sections 1, 4(i), 4(o), 303(r), 403, 624(g) and 706 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j),
154(o), 303(r), 544(g) and 606.
[[Page 71075]]
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which Rules
Will Apply
15. 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 rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) 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).
16. A small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.'' Nationwide, as of 2002, there were
approximately 1.6 million small organizations. The term ``small
governmental jurisdiction'' is defined as ``governments of cities,
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts,
with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' As of 1997, there were
approximately 87,453 governmental jurisdictions in the United States.
This number includes 39,044 county governments, municipalities, and
townships, of which 37,546 (approximately 96.2%) have populations of
fewer than 50,000, and of which 1,498 have populations of 50,000 or
more. Thus, we estimate the number of small governmental jurisdictions
overall to be 84,098 or fewer. Nationwide, there are a total of
approximately 22.4 million small businesses, according to SBA data.
17. Television Broadcasting. The SBA has developed a small business
sized standard for television broadcasting, which consists of all such
firms having $12 million or less in annual receipts. Business concerns
included in this industry are those ``primarily engaged in broadcasting
images together with sound.'' According to Commission staff review of
BIA Publications, Inc. Master Access Television Analyzer Database, as
of May 16, 2003, about 814 of the 1,220 commercial television stations
in the United States had revenues of $12 million or less. The
Commission notes, however, that, in assessing whether a business
concern qualifies as small under the above definition, business
(control) affiliations must be included. The Commission's estimate,
therefore, likely overstates the number of small entities that might be
affected by its action, because the revenue figure on which it is based
does not include or aggregate revenues from affiliated companies. There
are also 2,127 low power television stations (LPTV). Given the nature
of this service, we will presume that all LPTV licensees qualify as
small entities under the SBA size standard.
18. Radio Stations. The proposed rules and policies potentially
will apply to all AM and commercial FM radio broadcasting licensees and
potential licensees. The SBA defines a radio broadcasting station that
has $6 million or less in annual receipts as a small business. A radio
broadcasting station is an establishment primarily engaged in
broadcasting aural programs by radio to the public. Included in this
industry are commercial, religious, educational, and other radio
stations. Radio broadcasting stations which primarily are engaged in
radio broadcasting and which produce radio program materials are
similarly included. However, radio stations that are separate
establishments and are primarily engaged in producing radio program
material are classified under another NAICS number. According to
Commission staff review of BIA Publications, Inc. Master Access Radio
Analyzer Database on March 31, 2005, about 10,840 (95%) of 11,410
commercial radio stations have revenue of $6 million or less. The
Commission notes, however, that many radio stations are affiliated with
much larger corporations having much higher revenue. The Commission's
estimate, therefore, likely overstates the number of small entities
that might be affected by itsr action.
19. Cable and Other Program Distribution. The SBA has developed a
small business size standard for cable and other program distribution,
which consists of all such firms having $12.5 million or less in annual
receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, in this category
there was a total of 1,311 firms that operated for the entire year. Of
this total, 1,180 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and
an additional 52 firms had receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999.
Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can be considered
small. In addition, limited preliminary census data for 2002 indicate
that the total number of cable and other program distribution companies
increased approximately 46 percent from 1997 to 2002.
20. Cable System Operators (Rate Regulation Standard). The
Commission has developed its own small business size standard for cable
system operators, for purposes of rate regulation. Under the
Commission's rules, a ``small cable company'' is one serving fewer than
400,000 subscribers nationwide. The Commission estimates that there
were 1,439 cable operators who qualified as small cable system
operators at the end of 1995. Since then, some of those companies may
have grown to serve over 400,000 subscribers, and others may have been
involved in transactions that caused them to be combined with other
cable operators. Consequently, the Commission estimates that there are
now fewer than 1,439 small entity cable system operators that may be
affected by the rules and policies proposed herein.
21. Cable System Operators (Telecom Act Standard). The
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, also contains a size standard
for small cable system operators, which is ``a cable operator that,
directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1
percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated
with any entity or entities whose gross annual revenues in the
aggregate exceed $250,000,000.'' The Commission has determined that
there are 67,700,000 subscribers in the United States. Therefore, an
operator serving fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small
operator, if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual
revenues of all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the
aggregate. Based on available data, the Commission estimates that the
number of cable operators serving 677,000 subscribers or fewer, totals
1,450. The Commission neither requests nor collects information on
whether cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross
annual revenues exceed $250 million, and therefore are unable, at this
time, to estimate more accurately the number of cable system operators
that would qualify as small cable operators under the size standard
contained in the Communications Act of 1934.
22. Multipoint Distribution Systems. The established rules apply to
Multipoint Distribution Systems (MDS) operated as part of a wireless
cable system. The Commission has defined ``small entity'' for purposes
of the auction of MDS frequencies as an entity that, together with its
affiliates, has average gross annual revenues that are not more than
$40 million for the preceding three calendar years. This definition of
small entity in the context of MDS auctions has been approved by the
SBA. The Commission completed its MDS auction in March 1996 for
authorizations in 493 basic trading
[[Page 71076]]
areas. Of 67 winning bidders, 61 qualified as small entities. At this
time, we estimate that of the 61 small business MDS auction winners, 48
remain small business licensees.
23. MDS also includes licensees of stations authorized prior to the
auction. As noted above, the SBA has developed a definition of small
entities for pay television services, cable and other subscription
programming, which includes all such companies generating $12.5 million
or less in annual receipts. This definition includes MDS and thus
applies to MDS licensees that did not participate in the MDS auction.
Information available to us indicates that there are approximately 392
incumbent MDS licensees that do not generate revenue in excess of $11
million annually. Therefore, the Commission estimates that there are at
least 440 (392 pre-auction plus 48 auction licensees) small MDS
providers as defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules
which may be affected by the rules adopted herein. In addition, limited
preliminary census data for 2002 indicate that the total number of
cable and other program distribution companies increased approximately
46 percent from 1997 to 2002.
24. Instructional Television Fixed Service. The established rules
would also apply to Instructional Television Fixed Service facilities
operated as part of a wireless cable system. The SBA definition of
small entities for pay television services also appears to apply to
ITFS. There are presently 2,032 ITFS licensees. All but 100 of these
licenses are held by educational institutions. Educational institutions
are included in the definition of a small business. However, we do not
collect annual revenue data for ITFS licensees, and are not able to
ascertain how many of the 100 non-educational licensees would be
categorized as small under the SBA definition. Thus, the Commission
tentatively concludes that at least 1,932 are small businesses and may
be affected by the established rules.
25. Wireless Service Providers. The SBA has developed a small
business size standard for wireless small businesses within the two
separate categories of Paging and Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications. Under both SBA categories, a wireless business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data,
1,012 companies reported that they were engaged in the provision of
wireless service. Of these 1,012 companies, an estimated 829 have 1,500
or fewer employees and 183 have more than 1,500 employees. This SBA
size standard also applies to wireless telephony. Wireless telephony
includes cellular, personal communications services, and specialized
mobile radio telephony carriers. According to the data, 437 carriers
reported that they were engaged in the provision of wireless telephony.
The Commission has estimated that 260 of these are small businesses
under the SBA small business size standard.
26. Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband
personal communications services (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.
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. These small business
size standards, in the context of broadband PCS auctions, have been
approved by the SBA. 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 Block C 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. On March 23, 1999, the Commission reauctioned 155
C, D, E, and F Block licenses; there were 113 small business winning
bidders. On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of
422 C and F Broadband PCS licenses in Auction No. 35. 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.
27. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (Incumbent LECs). The
Commission has included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this
present IRFA analysis. As noted above, a ``small business'' under the
RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size
standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 or
fewer employees), and ``is not dominant in its field of operation.''
The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small
incumbent LECs are not dominant in their field of operation because any
such dominance is not ``national'' in scope. The Commission has
therefore included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this RFA
analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect on
Commission analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size
standard specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The
appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission
data, 1,303 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the
provision of incumbent local exchange services. Of these 1,303
carriers, an estimated 1,020 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 283 have
more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that
most providers of incumbent local exchange service are small businesses
that may be affected by its proposed rules.
28. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (Competitive LECs),
Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), ``Shared-Tenant Service
Providers,'' and ``Other Local Service Providers.'' Neither the
Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard
specifically for these service providers. The appropriate size standard
under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers.
Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or
fewer employees. According to Commission data, 769 carriers have
reported that they are engaged in the provision of either competitive
access provider services or competitive local exchange carrier
services. Of these 769 carriers, an estimated 676 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and 93 have more than 1,500 employees. In addition, 12
carriers have reported that they are ``Shared-Tenant Service
Providers,'' and all 12 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees.
In addition, 39 carriers have reported that they are ``Other Local
Service Providers.'' Of the 39, an estimated 38 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and one has more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local exchange
service, competitive access providers, ``Shared-Tenant Service
Providers,'' and ``Other Local Service Providers'' are small entities
that may be affected by its proposed rules.
29. Satellite Telecommunications and Other Telecommunications. The
[[Page 71077]]
Commission has not developed a small business size standard
specifically for providers of satellite service. The appropriate size
standards under SBA rules are for the two broad categories of Satellite
Telecommunications and Other Telecommunications. Under both categories,
such a business is small if it has $12.5 or less in average annual
receipts. For the first category of Satellite Telecommunications,
Census Bureau data for 1997 show that there were a total of 324 firms
that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 273 firms had annual
receipts of under $10 million, and an additional twenty-four firms had
receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. Thus, the majority of Satellite
Telecommunications firms can be considered small.
30. The second category--Other Telecommunications--includes
``establishments primarily engaged in * * * providing satellite
terminal stations and associated facilities operationally connected
with one or more terrestrial communications systems and capable of
transmitting telecommunications to or receiving telecommunications from
satellite systems.'' Of this total, 424 firms had annual receipts of $5
million to $9,999,999 and an additional 6 firms had annual receipts of
$10 million to $24,999,990. Thus, under this second size standard, the
majority of firms can be considered small.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
31. There are potential reporting or recordkeeping requirements
proposed in this FNPRM, particularly with regard to state and local EAS
participation and participation by digital broadcasters. For example,
the Commission is considering whether to adopt performance standards
and reporting obligations for EAS participants. The proposals set forth
in this FNPRM are intended to advance the Commission's public safety
mission and enhance the performance of the EAS while reducing
regulatory burdens wherever possible.
Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
32. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in developing its 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 and reporting requirements under the rule for such 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
such small entities.''
33. The NPRM invited comments on a number of alternatives to the
imposition of EAS obligations on the digital communications
technologies. The Commission has considered each of those comments and
in its Order imposes minimal regulation on small entities to the extent
consistent with its goal of advancing the Commission's public safety
mission by adopting rules that expand the reach of EAS. The Commission
believes that requiring DTV, DAB, digital cable, satellite DTH and
SDARS providers to install and use EAS equipment will not impose undue
regulatory or financial burdens.
34. This FNPRM seeks additional comment to help expedite the
development of a robust, state-of-the-art, digitally based public alert
and warning system, and to further minimize the impact on small
entities. In particular, the Commission seeks comment on how DTH and
SDARS could deliver local alerts; how best to involve wireless
providers; and how the Commission can best work with the states to help
implement the EAS rules adopted in the EAS First Report and Order as
well as to develop the next generation of alert and warning systems.
The Commission notes that it sought specific comment concerning
possible alternatives in its approach toward small entities in the
context of making EAS accessible to persons with disabilities.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
35. None.
Ex Parte Rules
36. These matters shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose''
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. 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 is generally required. Other requirements
pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in Sec.
1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules.
Ordering Clauses
37. Accordingly, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1,
4(i) and (o), 303(r), 403, 624(g) and 706 of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 154(o), 303(r), 403,
544(g), and 606, Notice is Hereby Given of the proposals described in
the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
38. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of the Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Analysis, to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in
accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-23270 Filed 11-23-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P