Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted for Review to the Office of Management and Budget, 6483-6485 [06-1058]
Download as PDF
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 2006 / Notices
Title: Deployment of Wireline
Services Offering Advanced
Telecommunications Capability, CC
Docket No. 98–147.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit.
Number of Respondents: 1,750.
Estimated Time Per Response: .50–40
hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion
reporting requirement, third party
disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 165,600 hours.
Total Annual Cost: N/A.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The Commission is
submitting this information collection to
OMB as an extension (no change in
information collection requirements) in
order to obtain the full three-year
clearance from them. This collection
contains 17 different information
collection requirements. The
Commission sought to further
Congress’s goal of promoting innovation
and investment by all participating in
the telecommunications marketplace, in
order to stimulate competition for all
services, including advanced
telecommunications services. In
furtherance of this goal, the Commission
imposes certain information collection
requirements on incumbent local
exchange carriers (LECs) in order to
ensure compliance with the incumbent
LEC’s collocation obligations and to
assist incumbent LECs in protecting
network integrity. All of the information
collections will be used by the
Commission and by competitive carriers
to facilitate the deployment of advanced
services and to implement section 251
of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0076.
Title: Common Carrier Annual
Employment Report.
Form No.: FCC Form 395.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit.
Number of Respondents: 1,100.
Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour.
Frequency of Response: Annual
reporting requirement, recordkeeping
requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 1,100 hours.
Total Annual Cost: N/A.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The Commission is
submitting this information collection to
OMB as a revision in order to obtain the
full three-year clearance from them. The
Commission has revised the FCC Form
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Feb 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
395 to conform to OMB’s revised
standards in Statistical Policy Directive
No. 15, Race and Ethnic Standards for
Federal Statistics and Administrative
Reporting. Additionally, the total
annual burden for this information
collection has been adjusted to reflect a
decrease in the number of respondents
since the last OMB renewal period
which was three years ago. The current
number of respondents is 4,000. With
this submission, we are reporting 1,100
respondents; and 1,100 total annual
burden hours.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0835.
Title: Ship Inspections.
Form Nos.: FCC Forms 806, 824, 827,
and 829.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit, not-for-profit institutions and
State, local or tribal government.
Number of Respondents: 1,210.
Estimated Time Per Response: .084
hours to complete inspection certificate;
4 hours for the ship inspection; and .25
hours to provide a summary in the
ship’s log.
Frequency of Response: Annual and
every five year reporting requirement,
recordkeeping requirement and third
party disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 5,245 hours.
Total Annual Cost: N/A.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The Commission is
seeking an extension (no change in
reporting requirements) for this
information collection in order to obtain
the full three-year clearance from OMB.
The FCC seeks to promote efficiency
in the Commission’s service to the
public and to encourage the use of
private sector organizations to take over
government operations whenever
possible. The Communications Act
requires the Commission to inspect the
radio installation of large cargo ships
and certain passenger ships at least once
a year to ensure that the radio
installation is in compliance with the
requirements of the Communications
Act. Additionally, the Communications
Act requires the inspection of small
passenger ships at least once every five
years. The Safety Convention (which the
United States is a signatory) also
requires an annual inspection. However,
the Safety Convention permits an
Administrator to entrust the inspections
to either surveyors nominated for the
purpose or to organizations recognized
by it. Therefore, the United States can
have other parties conduct the radio
inspection of vessels for compliance
with the Safety Convention. The
Commission allows FCC-licensed
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6483
technicians to conduct these
inspections. FCC-licensed technicians
certify that the ship passed an
inspection and issue a safety certificate.
These safety certificates (FCC Forms
806, 824, 827 and 829) indicate that the
vessel complies with the
Communications Act and the Safety
Convention. These technicians are
required to provide a summary of the
results of the inspection in the ship’s
log. In addition, the vessel’s owner,
operator, or ship’s master must certify in
the ship’s log that the inspection was
satisfactory. Inspection certificates
issued in accordance with the Safety
Convention must be posted in a
prominent place on the ship.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–970 Filed 2–7–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
Notice of Public Information
Collection(s) Being Submitted for
Review to the Office of Management
and Budget
December 27, 2005.
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications
Commission, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork burden
invites the general public and other
Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on the
following information collection(s), as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104–13.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control
number. No person shall be subject to
any penalty for failing to comply with
a collection of information subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that
does not display a valid control number.
Comments are requested concerning (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 estimate; (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.
DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) comments should be
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
6484
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 2006 / Notices
submitted on or before March 10, 2006.
If you anticipate that you will be
submitting PRA comments, but find it
difficult to do so within the period of
time allowed by this notice, you should
advise the contact listed below as soon
as possible.
ADDRESSES: Direct all Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) comments to
Judith B. Herman, Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1–
C804, 445 12th Street, SW., DC 20554 or
via the Internet to JudithB.Herman@fcc.gov. If you would like to
obtain or view a copy of this
information collection, you may do so
by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at:
https://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information or copies of the
information collection(s), contact Judith
B. Herman at 202–418–0214 or via the
Internet at Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Control No.: 3060–0645.
Title: Section 17.4, Antenna
Registration.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit, not-for-profit institutions, and
state, local or tribal government.
Number of Respondents: 25,600.
Estimated Time per Response: .2–1.2
hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion
reporting requirement, recordkeeping
requirement and third party disclosure
requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 40,965 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $3,200,000.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The requirements
contained in Part 17 are necessary to
implement a uniform registration
process for owners of antenna
structures. The following are the
information collection requirements
subject to OMB review and approval: (1)
Antenna structure owners will be
required to provide tenant licensees
with a copy of the antenna registration;
(2) display the registration number on or
around the antenna structure; (3) notify
of improperly function of antenna
structure lights; and (4) recording of
improperly function of antenna
structure lights. The information will be
used by the Commission during
investigations related to air safety or
radio frequency interference. A
registration number will be issued to
identify antenna structure owners in
order to enforce congressionally
mandated provisions related to the
owners. The Commission is submitting
this information collection to OMB as
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Feb 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
an extension (no change in
requirements) in order to obtain the full
three year clearance.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0901.
Title: Reports of Common Carriers and
Affiliates.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit, not-for-profit institutions, and
state, local or tribal government.
Number of Respondents: 20
respondents; 1,200 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 5
hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion
and one-time reporting requirements,
and third party disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 6,000 hours.
Total Annual Cost: N/A.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The Commission is
submitting this information collection to
OMB as an extension (no change in
requirements) in order to obtain the full
three year clearance. The rules
applicable to this information collection
are contained in Section 43.51(a). This
rule requires, in part, that common
carriers file copies of all contracts
entered into with a communications
entity in a foreign point for the
provision of a common carriers service
between the United States and that
foreign point. In a Report and Order and
Order on Reconsideration adopted in
May 1999, the Commission amended
Section 43.51 to exempt from this
requirement U.S. carriers that enter into
such a contract with a foreign carrier
that lacks market power. The
Commission also amended Section
43.51 with respect to carriers filing
agreements with foreign carriers that
have market power on routes for which
the Commission eliminated the
International Settlements Policy. It
amended the rules specifically to permit
these carriers to request confidential
treatment of and to redact from the
public view, the rates, terms and
conditions that govern the settlement of
international traffic.
OMB Control No.: 3060–0678.
Title: Part 25 of the Commission’s
Rules Governing the Licensing of, and
Spectrum Usage by, Satellite Network
Stations and Space Stations.
Form No.: FCC 312, Schedule S.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit.
Number of Respondents: 3,432.
Estimated Time per Response: 1–40
hours.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Frequency of Response: On occasion
and annual reporting requirements, and
third party disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 42,108 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $608,401,936.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The Commission has
revised this information collection in a
Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
FCC 05–62. In this proceeding, the
Commission proposed to combine
power level requirements and antenna
diameter requirements into one off-axis
equivalent isotropically radiated power
(EIRP) requirement. (EIRP is the product
of the gain of the antenna in a given
direction relative to an isotropic
antenna and the power supplied to that
antenna.) If this proposal is adopted, it
would give earth station operators more
flexibility in their operations and help
expedite its review of some non-routine
earth station applications. The
Commission invited comments on what
revisions would be necessary to its rules
to provide protection from interference
for earth stations in the event that it
adopts an off-axis EIRP requirement for
fixed satellite service (FSS) earth
stations. Additionally, the Commission
invited comment on what specific
information should be required from
earth station applicants in order to
comply with the proposed off-axis EIRP
requirement. The following new
information collection requirements are
proposed in the rulemaking: (1) Earth
station applicants will provide a table
showing the EIRP of the antenna at
various specific off-axis angles; (2) Very
Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT)
licensees will certify that they will meet
any applicable requirements for
contention protocols adopted in this
proceeding; (3) any party questioning a
license applicant’s contention protocol
certification will provide a technical
analysis showing that the applicant’s
planned contention protocol usage is
likely to cause harmful interference to
adjacent satellites or terrestrial wireless
operations; and (4) a certificate of
coordination signed by an authorized
representative of the National Radio
Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) will be
made to the Commission upon request.
If the proposals are adopted by the
Commission, it is anticipated that the
FCC Form 312 will be revised and/or
new applications will be developed to
accommodate the off-axis EIRP
requirement for earth stations.
Furthermore, the modification of the
FCC Form 312 and/or creation of new
applications would necessitate revisions
to the International Bureau Filing
System (IBFS) so that applicants can file
the new or revised applications
electronically with the Commission.
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 2006 / Notices
(Note: No changes to the Schedule S will
be required to accommodate the off-axis EIRP
requirement for earth stations.)
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–1058 Filed 2–7–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
[CC Docket Number 96–45; DA 06–55]
Federal-State Joint Board on Universal
Service, National Exchange Carrier
Association, Inc. 2006 Modification of
Average Schedule Universal Service
Formulas
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, each year,
the Commission must review and
approve or modify any proposed
modifications to the formulas used to
calculate Part 36 high-cost loop support
and local switching support for average
schedule companies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cara
Voth, Senior Attorney, Wireline
Competition Bureau,
Telecommunications Access Policy
Division, (202) 418–7400, TTY (202)
418–0484.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Order in
CC Docket No. 96–45 released on
January 12, 2006. The full text of this
document is available for public
inspection during regular business
hours in the FCC Reference Center,
Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
I. Introduction
1. In the Order, each year, the
Commission must review and approve
or modify any proposed modifications
to the formulas used to calculate Part 36
high-cost loop support and local
switching support for average schedule
companies. Historically, the National
Exchange Carrier Association, Inc.
(NECA) has filed the annual average
schedule company formula
modifications for both Part 36 high-cost
loop support and local switching
support. Pursuant to § 54.301(f) of the
Commission’s rules, however, the
Universal Service Administrative
Company (USAC) now submits the
proposed formula for local switching
support. The Commission’s rules
require that these formulas simulate the
disbursements that would be received
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Feb 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
by a company that is representative of
average schedule companies.
2. On August 30, 2005, NECA filed
proposed modifications to the current
high-cost loop universal service formula
for average schedule companies,
requesting that they take effect on
January 1, 2006, and remain in effect
through December 31, 2006. On
September 30, 2005, USAC filed
proposed modifications to the current
local switching support formula for
average schedule companies. On
October 20, 2005, the Wireline
Competition Bureau (Bureau) issued a
public notice soliciting comments on
NECA’s high-cost support filing. For the
reasons discussed below, we approve
USAC’s modified local switching
support formula and, with respect to
Part 36 high-cost support, we adopt
NECA’s cost per loop (CPL) formula. As
we have done previously, we direct
USAC to provide support to average
schedule carriers consistent with this
Order retroactive to January 1, 2006.
II. Local Switching Support Formula
3. The local switching support
formula is used to determine the
amount of support for switching costs
that will be provided to average
schedule companies from the
Commission’s universal service highcost support mechanism. The current
interstate local switching support
formula was approved on December 30,
2004. In its September 30, 2005, filing,
USAC proposes a formula for 2006 that,
if approved, would increase annual
payments for local switching support
from approximately $83.7 million in
2005 to approximately $85.8 million in
2006, an increase of approximately 2.5
percent. We have reviewed USAC’s
filing and the supporting information in
NECA’s 2005 Modification of Average
Schedules and find that the method
used to develop this year’s proposed
formula is the same method that NECA
has used to develop the formula we
approved during the last payment
period. Consistent with the Bureau’s
prior orders, we approve USAC’s
proposed 2006 average schedule local
switching support formula.
4. USAC’s average schedule local
switching support filing provided only
its proposed 2006 formulas. Supporting
documentation for the 2006 local
switching support formulas was filed
eight months earlier in NECA’s 2005
Modification of Average Schedules. In
average schedule local switching
support filings prior to 2005, NECA
provided detailed explanations,
supporting documentation, and data.
Such a consolidated single filing of the
formulas, necessary information, and
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6485
data enables us to conduct a more
efficient review of local switching
support filings. Thus, beginning with
the local switching support filing due in
2006, and for all subsequent filings, we
require USAC to provide at least the
same level of explanative detail and
data that NECA had included previously
with its average schedule local
switching support formula filings.
III. Discussion
5. Consistent with our reasoning in
our 2003 Order, Federal-State Joint
Board on Universal Service in CC
Docket No. 96–45, DA 02–3587, released
on December 27, 2002; 2004 Order,
Federal-State Joint Board on Universal
Service in CC Docket No. 96–45, DA 03–
4063, released on December 24, 2003;
and 2005 Order, Federal-State Joint
Board on Universal Service in CC
Docket No. 96–45, DA 04–4070, released
on December 30, 2004, we adopt the
CPL formula for purposes of calculating
average schedule company expense
adjustments for 2006. In previous
average schedule formula filings, NECA
conceded that the CPL formula better
estimates cost per loop, but argued that
the Bureau should instead approve
NECA’s EAPL formula because NECA
believes it better estimates the expense
adjustments that an average schedule
carrier should receive. We again find,
however, that we are not required to
adopt a formula based on its ability to
predict expense adjustments per loop,
i.e., ‘‘disbursements,’’ compared to a
formula’s ability to predict costs per
loop. The Bureau has consistently held,
and the Commission has upheld, that
the appropriate high-cost loop support
formula should reasonably approximate
the cost per loop of the sample average
schedule companies and allocate funds
accurately to average schedule
companies. Because the CPL formula
provided by NECA in its filing better
estimates the cost per loop of sample
average schedule companies than the
proposed EAPL formula, based on the
current record, the Bureau concludes, as
it did in its 2003 Order, that the CPL
formula is a more appropriate means of
calculating universal service high-cost
loop support for average schedule
companies. Because NECA’s submission
of the results derived from the CPL
formula appear to be accurate and
complete, we therefore approve the CPL
formula results provided in NECA’s
August 30, 2005 submission.
6. Although today, based on the
current record, we approve NECA’s CPL
formula for 2006, which is essentially
the same CPL formula filed since 2002
adjusted for changes in the sample cost
data, we are concerned about yearly
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 26 (Wednesday, February 8, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6483-6485]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-1058]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted for
Review to the Office of Management and Budget
December 27, 2005.
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public
and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the
following information collection(s), as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any
penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that does not display a valid
control number. Comments are requested concerning (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 estimate; (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.
DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) comments should be
[[Page 6484]]
submitted on or before March 10, 2006. If you anticipate that you will
be submitting PRA comments, but find it difficult to do so within the
period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact
listed below as soon as possible.
ADDRESSES: Direct all Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) comments to Judith
B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th
Street, SW., DC 20554 or via the Internet to Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.
If you would like to obtain or view a copy of this information
collection, you may do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: https://
www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or copies
of the information collection(s), contact Judith B. Herman at 202-418-
0214 or via the Internet at Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Control No.: 3060-0645.
Title: Section 17.4, Antenna Registration.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit
institutions, and state, local or tribal government.
Number of Respondents: 25,600.
Estimated Time per Response: .2-1.2 hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement,
recordkeeping requirement and third party disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 40,965 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $3,200,000.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The requirements contained in Part 17 are necessary
to implement a uniform registration process for owners of antenna
structures. The following are the information collection requirements
subject to OMB review and approval: (1) Antenna structure owners will
be required to provide tenant licensees with a copy of the antenna
registration; (2) display the registration number on or around the
antenna structure; (3) notify of improperly function of antenna
structure lights; and (4) recording of improperly function of antenna
structure lights. The information will be used by the Commission during
investigations related to air safety or radio frequency interference. A
registration number will be issued to identify antenna structure owners
in order to enforce congressionally mandated provisions related to the
owners. The Commission is submitting this information collection to OMB
as an extension (no change in requirements) in order to obtain the full
three year clearance.
OMB Control No.: 3060-0901.
Title: Reports of Common Carriers and Affiliates.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit
institutions, and state, local or tribal government.
Number of Respondents: 20 respondents; 1,200 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 5 hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion and one-time reporting
requirements, and third party disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 6,000 hours.
Total Annual Cost: N/A.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The Commission is submitting this information
collection to OMB as an extension (no change in requirements) in order
to obtain the full three year clearance. The rules applicable to this
information collection are contained in Section 43.51(a). This rule
requires, in part, that common carriers file copies of all contracts
entered into with a communications entity in a foreign point for the
provision of a common carriers service between the United States and
that foreign point. In a Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration
adopted in May 1999, the Commission amended Section 43.51 to exempt
from this requirement U.S. carriers that enter into such a contract
with a foreign carrier that lacks market power. The Commission also
amended Section 43.51 with respect to carriers filing agreements with
foreign carriers that have market power on routes for which the
Commission eliminated the International Settlements Policy. It amended
the rules specifically to permit these carriers to request confidential
treatment of and to redact from the public view, the rates, terms and
conditions that govern the settlement of international traffic.
OMB Control No.: 3060-0678.
Title: Part 25 of the Commission's Rules Governing the Licensing
of, and Spectrum Usage by, Satellite Network Stations and Space
Stations.
Form No.: FCC 312, Schedule S.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
Number of Respondents: 3,432.
Estimated Time per Response: 1-40 hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion and annual reporting
requirements, and third party disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 42,108 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $608,401,936.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
Needs and Uses: The Commission has revised this information
collection in a Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 05-62. In this
proceeding, the Commission proposed to combine power level requirements
and antenna diameter requirements into one off-axis equivalent
isotropically radiated power (EIRP) requirement. (EIRP is the product
of the gain of the antenna in a given direction relative to an
isotropic antenna and the power supplied to that antenna.) If this
proposal is adopted, it would give earth station operators more
flexibility in their operations and help expedite its review of some
non-routine earth station applications. The Commission invited comments
on what revisions would be necessary to its rules to provide protection
from interference for earth stations in the event that it adopts an
off-axis EIRP requirement for fixed satellite service (FSS) earth
stations. Additionally, the Commission invited comment on what specific
information should be required from earth station applicants in order
to comply with the proposed off-axis EIRP requirement. The following
new information collection requirements are proposed in the rulemaking:
(1) Earth station applicants will provide a table showing the EIRP of
the antenna at various specific off-axis angles; (2) Very Small
Aperture Terminal (VSAT) licensees will certify that they will meet any
applicable requirements for contention protocols adopted in this
proceeding; (3) any party questioning a license applicant's contention
protocol certification will provide a technical analysis showing that
the applicant's planned contention protocol usage is likely to cause
harmful interference to adjacent satellites or terrestrial wireless
operations; and (4) a certificate of coordination signed by an
authorized representative of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory
(NRAO) will be made to the Commission upon request.
If the proposals are adopted by the Commission, it is anticipated
that the FCC Form 312 will be revised and/or new applications will be
developed to accommodate the off-axis EIRP requirement for earth
stations. Furthermore, the modification of the FCC Form 312 and/or
creation of new applications would necessitate revisions to the
International Bureau Filing System (IBFS) so that applicants can file
the new or revised applications electronically with the Commission.
[[Page 6485]]
(Note: No changes to the Schedule S will be required to
accommodate the off-axis EIRP requirement for earth stations.)
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-1058 Filed 2-7-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P