Recommendations of the Independent Panel Reviewing the Impact of Hurricane Katrina on Communications Networks, 43406-43407 [E6-12447]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
43406
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 147 / Tuesday, August 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Michigan Zone 2 (Frankfort): Beginning at
44°47′23″ N, 086°41′12″ W; then south to
44°34′06″ N, 086°48′54″ W; then east to
44°35′55″ N, 086°33′03″ W; then north to
44°46′41″ N, 086°28′43″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 3 (Manistee): Beginning at
44°22′18″ N, 086°53′41″ W; then southwest to
44°14′34″ N, 087°01′06″ W; then southeast to
44°09′18″ N, 086°51′36″ W; then northeast to
44°21′49″ N, 086°40′14″ W; then northwest to
the point of origin.
Michigan Zone 4 (Ludington): Beginning at
43°59′40″ N, 086°46′24″ W; then south to
43°51′24″ N, 086°49′50″ W; then east to
43°51′11″ N, 086°42′28″ W; then north to
43°59′21″ N, 086°39′15″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 5 (Grand Haven): Beginning
at 43°13′03″ N, 086°46′57″ W; then south to
43°00′27″ N, 086°46′04″ W; then east to
43°00′17″ N, 086°27′13″ W; then north to
43°13′49″ N, 086°32′00″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 6 (St. Joseph): Beginning at
42°12′52″ N, 086°50′10″ W; then south to
42°05′41″ N, 086°53′55″ W; then east to
42°05′24″ N, 086°43′45″ W; then north to
42°12′19″ N, 086°39′42″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 7 (Michigan City):
Beginning at 41°58′36″ N, 087°02′53″ W; then
south to 41°48′42″ N, 087°02′53″ W; then
northeast to 41°52′51″ N, 086°51′40″ W; then
north to 41°59′06″ N, 086°48′00″ W; then
west to the point of origin.
Michigan Zone 8 (Chicago): Beginning at
41°55′18″ N, 087°15′49″ W; then south to
41°48′29″ N, 087°17′46″ W; then east to
41°47′45″ N, 087°08′57″ W; then north to
41°55′18″ N, 087°08′48″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 9 (Waukeegan): Beginning
at 42°22′28″ N, 087°39′14″ W; then south to
42°17′49″ N, 087°39′27″ W; then southeast to
42°13′42″ N, 087°37′35″ W; the east to
42°14′02″ N, 087°31′36″ W; then north to
42°22′58″ N, 087°33′02″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 10 (Kenosha): Beginning at
42°39′28″ N, 087°33′19″ W; then south to
42°30′17″ N, 087°31′09″ W; then east to
42°30′21″ N, 087°23′23″ W; then north to
42°38′55″ N, 087°24′30″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 11 (Milwaukee): Beginning
at 43°05′13″ N, 087°32′48″ W; then south to
42°54′37″ N, 087°34′27″ W; then east to
42°54′50″ N, 087°26′27″ W; then north to
43°05′13″ N, 087°25′55″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 12 (Two Rivers): Beginning
at 44°08′20″ N, 087°24′08″ W; then south to
43°49′06″ N, 087°27′34″ W; then east to
43°48′59″ N, 087°20′19″ W; then north to
44°06′04″ N, 087°16′43″ W; then northwest to
the point of origin.
Michigan Zone 13 (Sturgeon Bay):
Beginning at 44°41′22″ N, 087°08′43″ W; then
south to 44°32′49″ N, 087°13′21″ W; then east
to 44°32′32″ N, 087°04′10″ W; then north to
44°40′33″ N, 087°01′41″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Michigan Zone 14 (Washington Island):
Beginning at 45°19′17″ N, 086°35′58″ W; then
southwest to 45°12′50″ N, 086°41′39″ W; then
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:05 Jul 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
southeast to 45°10′50″ N, 086°30′48″ W; then
northeast to 45°17′29″ N, 086°25′32″ W; then
northwest to the point of origin.
navigable waters of the United States to
which this section applies. No person or
vessel may enter the safety zones
established in this section unless
Lake Superior:
authorized by the cognizant Captain of
Superior Zone 1 (Whitefish Bay):
Beginning at 46°41′30″ N, 084°54′00″ W; then the Port or their designated
representative. All vessels authorized to
south to 46°36′00″ N, 084°55′00″ W;
continuing south to 46°34′30″ N, 084°54′36″
enter these safety zones must operate at
W; then east to 46°33′18″ N, 084°50′54″ W;
the minimum speed necessary to
continuing east to 46°32′48″ N, 084°46′00″ W; maintain a safe course and must
then north to 46°33′12″ N, 084°45′54″ W;
proceed as directed by the cognizant
then northwest to 46°36′06″ N, 084°49′48″ W;
Captain of the Port or his designated
continuing northwest to 46°42′00″ N,
representative.
084°52′18″ W; then southwest to the point of
(g) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard
origin.
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
Superior Zone 2 (Sault Ste. Marie):
Beginning at 46°56′16″ N, 085°39′01″ W; then may enforce the rules in this section.
southeast to 46°51′55″ N, 085°24′04″ W; then
northeast to 46°53′07″ N, 085°12′37″ W; then
northwest to 46°58′20″ N, 085°29′44″ W; then
southwest to the point of origin.
Superior Zone 3 (Marquette) Beginning at
46°47′39″ N, 087°11′42″ W; then south to
46°39′54″ N, 087°09′47″ W; then east to
46°41′13″ N, 086°57′33″ W; then north to
46°48′14″ N, 086°58′31″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
Superior Zone 4 (Portage): Beginning at
47°11′05″ N, 087°53′30″ W; then southwest to
47°07′21″ N, 088°02′39″ W; then southeast to
47°03′54″ N, 087°53′30″ W; then northeast to
47°07′21″ N, 087°44′21″ W; then northwest to
the point of origin.
Superior Zone 5 (Bayfield): Beginning at
46°49′09″ N, 090°19′16″ W; then southwest to
46°42′50″ N, 090°21′27″ W; then northeast to
46°46′52″ N, 090°11′38″ W; then northeast to
46°52′26″ N, 090°09′15″ W; then southwest to
the point of origin.
Superior Zone 6 (Duluth): Beginning at
47°03′29″ N, 091°16′57″ W; then southwest to
46°59′54″ N, 091°27′22″ W; then southeast to
46°59′13″ N, 091°20′55″ W; then northeast to
47°02′29″ N, 091°08′59″ W; then northwest to
the point of origin.
Superior Zone 7 (Grand Marais): Beginning
at 47°40′53″ N, 090°04′51″ W; then south to
47°34′18″ N, 090°05′09″ W; then east to
47°34′37″ N, 089°53′35″ W; then north to
47°41′47″ N, 089°53′52″ W; then west to the
point of origin.
All coordinates use above are based upon
North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83).
(d) Obtaining permission to enter or
move within the safety zones. All
vessels must obtain permission from the
Captain of the Port or a Designated
Representative to enter or move within
the safety zones established in this
section when these safety zones are
enforced.
(e) Compliance. Upon notice of
enforcement by the cognizant Captain of
the Port, the Coast Guard will enforce
these safety zones in accordance with
the rules set out in this section. Upon
notice of suspension of enforcement by
the Captain of the Port, all persons and
vessels are authorized to enter, transit,
and exit these safety zones.
(f) Regulations. The general
regulations in 33 CFR part 165 subpart
C, apply to any vessel or person in the
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dated: July 14, 2006.
John E. Crowley, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–12332 Filed 7–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15,
17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 52, 53, 54, 63,
64, 68, 73, 74, 76, 78, 79, 90, 95, 97 and
101
[EB Docket No. 06–119; DA 06–1524]
Recommendations of the Independent
Panel Reviewing the Impact of
Hurricane Katrina on Communications
Networks
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; comments
requested.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) reminds parties about the
comment cycle applicable to the Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
seeking comment on the
recommendations of the Independent
Panel Reviewing the Impact of
Hurricane Katrina on Communications
Networks (Independent Panel). In
addition, the Commission requests that,
in addressing the issues raised in the
NPRM, parties address the applicability
of the Panel’s recommendations to all
types of natural disasters (e.g.,
earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, forest
fires) as well as other types of incidents
(e.g., terrorist attacks, flu pandemic,
industrial accidents, etc.). Parties
should also discuss whether the Panel’s
recommendations are broad enough to
take into account the diverse
topography of our Nation, the
susceptibility of a region to a particular
type of disaster, and the multitude of
E:\FR\FM\01AUP1.SGM
01AUP1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 147 / Tuesday, August 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
communications capabilities a region
may possess.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
August 7, 2006 and reply comments are
due on or before August 21, 2006.
Written comments on the Paperwork
Reduction Act proposed information
collection requirements set forth in the
NPRM [71 FR 38564, 38565, July 7,
2006] must be submitted by the public,
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), and other interested parties on
or before September 5, 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.
06–119, 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/. Following 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.
In addition to filing with the
Secretary, a copy of any comments on
the Paperwork Reduction Act
information collection requirements
contained in the NPRM [71 FR at 38565,
July 7, 2006] should be submitted to
Judith B. Herman, Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1–
B441, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20554, or via the Internet to
PRA@fcc.gov, and to Kristy L. LaLonde,
OMB Desk Officer, Room 10234, NEOB,
725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20503, via the Internet to Kristy_L._
LaLonde@omb.eop.gov or fax at 202–
395–5167.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
M. Fowlkes, Assistant Bureau Chief,
Enforcement Bureau, at (202) 418–7452.
For additional information concerning
the Paperwork Reduction Act
information collection requirements
contained in the NPRM [71 FR at 38565,
July 7, 2006], contact Judith B. Herman
at (202) 418–0214 or via the Internet at
PRA@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Public
Notice in EB Docket No. 06–119, DA
06–1524 released July 26, 2006. The
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:05 Jul 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
complete text of this document, as well
as a complete text of the NPRM 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., Portals II,
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800)
378–3160 or (202) 488–5300, facsimile
(202) 488–5563, or via e-mail at
fcc@bciweb.com. It is also available on
the Commission’s Web site at https://
www.fcc.gov. The Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis as well as proposed
information collection requirements
were set forth in the NPRM [71 FR at
38565, 38568–38573, July 7, 2006].
Synopsis of the Public Notice
In January 2006, Chairman Kevin J.
Martin established the Independent
Panel pursuant to the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, Public Law 92–463, as
amended. The mission of the
Independent Panel was to review the
impact of Hurricane Katrina on the
telecommunications and media
infrastructure in the areas affected by
Hurricane Katrina and make
recommendations to the Commission.
On June 12, 2006, the Independent
Panel submitted its Report to the
Commission. On June 19, 2006, the
Commission issued a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking initiating a
comprehensive rulemaking to address
and implement the recommendations
presented by the Independent Panel. [71
FR 38564, July 7, 2006]
In the NPRM, the Commission sought
comment on what actions it can take to
address the Independent Panel’s
recommendations which were
categorized into four areas: (1) Prepositioning the communications
industry and the government for
disasters in order to achieve greater
network reliability and resiliency; (2)
improving recovery coordination to
address existing shortcomings and to
maximize the use of existing resources;
(3) improving the operability or
interoperability of public safety and 911
communications in times of crisis; and
(4) improving communication of
emergency information to the public. As
the Commission stated in the Notice, its
goal in this proceeding is to take the
lessons learned from this disaster and
build upon them to promote more
effective, efficient response and
recovery efforts, as well as a heightened
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43407
readiness and preparedness in the
future. The Commission also stated that
it seeks comment whether it should rely
on voluntary consensus
recommendations, as advocated by the
Independent Panel, or whether it should
rely on other measures for enhancing
readiness and promoting more effective
response efforts.
In light of the Commission’s
comprehensive examination into these
areas, we request that parties filing
comments in this proceeding address
the applicability of the Independent
Panel’s recommendations to all types of
disasters. Specifically, parties should
address not only the applicability of the
Independent Panel’s recommendations
to areas of the country subject to
hurricanes, but to areas prone to other
types of disasters. Would other types of
disasters warrant modifications or other
changes to the Independent Panel’s
recommendations? For example, would
the characteristics of earthquakes,
floods, forest fires, or other natural
disasters require modifications to the
Independent Panel’s recommendations?
In addition, we request that parties
filing comments discuss the impact of
the country’s diverse topography on the
Independent Panel’s recommendations.
Would a region’s topography warrant
modifications or other changes to the
Independent Panel’s recommendations?
If additional steps are warranted to
account for unique topography, what
actions can the Commission take to
improve network resiliency and
reliability, recovery coordination, first
responder communications and
emergency communications to the
public in those areas? Finally, different
regions may have different
communications capabilities. For
example, a metropolitan urban area may
have greater and diverse
communications capabilities than a
rural, mountainous region. Would the
availability of different communications
capabilities in a region affect the
Independent Panel’s recommendations?
If so, what actions should be taken in
this regard?
Finally, comments in this proceeding
are due on or before August 7, 2006 and
reply comments are due on or before
August 21, 2006.
Federal Communications Commission
Kris Anne Monteith,
Chief, Enforcement Bureau.
[FR Doc. E6–12447 Filed 7–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\01AUP1.SGM
01AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 147 (Tuesday, August 1, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43406-43407]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-12447]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 25,
27, 52, 53, 54, 63, 64, 68, 73, 74, 76, 78, 79, 90, 95, 97 and 101
[EB Docket No. 06-119; DA 06-1524]
Recommendations of the Independent Panel Reviewing the Impact of
Hurricane Katrina on Communications Networks
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; comments requested.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) reminds parties about the comment cycle applicable to the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comment on the
recommendations of the Independent Panel Reviewing the Impact of
Hurricane Katrina on Communications Networks (Independent Panel). In
addition, the Commission requests that, in addressing the issues raised
in the NPRM, parties address the applicability of the Panel's
recommendations to all types of natural disasters (e.g., earthquakes,
tornados, hurricanes, forest fires) as well as other types of incidents
(e.g., terrorist attacks, flu pandemic, industrial accidents, etc.).
Parties should also discuss whether the Panel's recommendations are
broad enough to take into account the diverse topography of our Nation,
the susceptibility of a region to a particular type of disaster, and
the multitude of
[[Page 43407]]
communications capabilities a region may possess.
DATES: Comments are due on or before August 7, 2006 and reply comments
are due on or before August 21, 2006. Written comments on the Paperwork
Reduction Act proposed information collection requirements set forth in
the NPRM [71 FR 38564, 38565, July 7, 2006] must be submitted by the
public, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested
parties on or before September 5, 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. 06-119, 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/. Following 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.
In addition to filing with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on
the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements
contained in the NPRM [71 FR at 38565, July 7, 2006] should be
submitted to Judith B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room
1-B441, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet
to PRA@fcc.gov, and to Kristy L. LaLonde, OMB Desk Officer, Room 10234,
NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, via the Internet to
Kristy--L.-- LaLonde@omb.eop.gov or fax at 202-395-5167.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa M. Fowlkes, Assistant Bureau
Chief, Enforcement Bureau, at (202) 418-7452. For additional
information concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information
collection requirements contained in the NPRM [71 FR at 38565, July 7,
2006], contact Judith B. Herman at (202) 418-0214 or via the Internet
at PRA@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Public
Notice in EB Docket No. 06-119, DA 06-1524 released July 26, 2006. The
complete text of this document, as well as a complete text of the NPRM
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., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC
20554, telephone (800) 378-3160 or (202) 488-5300, facsimile (202) 488-
5563, or via e-mail at fcc@bciweb.com. It is also available on the
Commission's Web site at https://www.fcc.gov. The Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis as well as proposed information collection
requirements were set forth in the NPRM [71 FR at 38565, 38568-38573,
July 7, 2006].
Synopsis of the Public Notice
In January 2006, Chairman Kevin J. Martin established the
Independent Panel pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act,
Public Law 92-463, as amended. The mission of the Independent Panel was
to review the impact of Hurricane Katrina on the telecommunications and
media infrastructure in the areas affected by Hurricane Katrina and
make recommendations to the Commission. On June 12, 2006, the
Independent Panel submitted its Report to the Commission. On June 19,
2006, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking initiating
a comprehensive rulemaking to address and implement the recommendations
presented by the Independent Panel. [71 FR 38564, July 7, 2006]
In the NPRM, the Commission sought comment on what actions it can
take to address the Independent Panel's recommendations which were
categorized into four areas: (1) Pre-positioning the communications
industry and the government for disasters in order to achieve greater
network reliability and resiliency; (2) improving recovery coordination
to address existing shortcomings and to maximize the use of existing
resources; (3) improving the operability or interoperability of public
safety and 911 communications in times of crisis; and (4) improving
communication of emergency information to the public. As the Commission
stated in the Notice, its goal in this proceeding is to take the
lessons learned from this disaster and build upon them to promote more
effective, efficient response and recovery efforts, as well as a
heightened readiness and preparedness in the future. The Commission
also stated that it seeks comment whether it should rely on voluntary
consensus recommendations, as advocated by the Independent Panel, or
whether it should rely on other measures for enhancing readiness and
promoting more effective response efforts.
In light of the Commission's comprehensive examination into these
areas, we request that parties filing comments in this proceeding
address the applicability of the Independent Panel's recommendations to
all types of disasters. Specifically, parties should address not only
the applicability of the Independent Panel's recommendations to areas
of the country subject to hurricanes, but to areas prone to other types
of disasters. Would other types of disasters warrant modifications or
other changes to the Independent Panel's recommendations? For example,
would the characteristics of earthquakes, floods, forest fires, or
other natural disasters require modifications to the Independent
Panel's recommendations? In addition, we request that parties filing
comments discuss the impact of the country's diverse topography on the
Independent Panel's recommendations. Would a region's topography
warrant modifications or other changes to the Independent Panel's
recommendations? If additional steps are warranted to account for
unique topography, what actions can the Commission take to improve
network resiliency and reliability, recovery coordination, first
responder communications and emergency communications to the public in
those areas? Finally, different regions may have different
communications capabilities. For example, a metropolitan urban area may
have greater and diverse communications capabilities than a rural,
mountainous region. Would the availability of different communications
capabilities in a region affect the Independent Panel's
recommendations? If so, what actions should be taken in this regard?
Finally, comments in this proceeding are due on or before August 7,
2006 and reply comments are due on or before August 21, 2006.
Federal Communications Commission
Kris Anne Monteith,
Chief, Enforcement Bureau.
[FR Doc. E6-12447 Filed 7-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
