Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission, Comments Requested, 65511-65513 [E6-18687]

Download as PDF 65511 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 8, 2006 / Notices STATE NPDES PROGRAM STATUS—Continued Approved State NPDES permit program Approved to regulate Federal facilities Wyoming .............................................................................. 01/30/75 05/18/81 Totals ............................................................................ 46 41 State Approved State pretreatment program Approved general permits program Approved sludge management program ........................ 09/24/91 ........................ 35 44 08 Number of Fully Authorized Programs (Federal Facilities, Pretreatment, General Permits) = 33. Number of authorized Sludge Management Programs = 8. 1 The Florida authorizations of 05/01/95 represent a phased NPDES program authorization to be completed by the year 2000. VIII. Administrative Requirements A. National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470(f), requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and to provide the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) an opportunity to comment on such undertakings. Under the ACHP’s regulations (36 CFR part 800), agencies consult with the appropriate State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) on federal undertakings that have the potential to affect historic properties listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. By letter dated June 19, 2006, we requested concurrence from the SHPO that approval of MDEQ to implement a biosolids management program would not have an adverse impact on historical and archeological resources. After discussions with SHPO staff, it was concluded that concurrence was not needed because our action is not an undertaking as the Michigan SHPO would interpret it. It is still believed that program approval will have no effect on historic or archeological resources within the State of Michigan because the transferring of the program is an administrative act. cprice-sewell on PRODPC62 with NOTICES B. Other Provisions Based on General Counsel Opinion 78–7 (April 18, 1978), EPA has long considered a determination to approve or deny a State Clean Water Act (CWA) program submission to constitute an adjudication because an ‘‘approval,’’ within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), constitutes a ‘‘license,’’ which, in turn, is the product of an ‘‘adjudication.’’ For this reason, the statutes and Executive Orders that apply to rulemaking action are not applicable here. Authority: Clean Water Act 33, U.S.C. 1251 et seq. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:11 Nov 07, 2006 Jkt 211001 Dated: October 6, 2006. Gary Gulezian, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E6–18850 Filed 11–7–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission, Comments Requested October 31, 2006. 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 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 submitted on or before January 8, 2007. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: You may submit your all Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) comments by e-mail or U.S. postal mail. To submit your comments by e-mail send them to PRA@fcc.gov. To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark them to the attention of Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1–C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s) send an e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418–2918. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 3060–0692. Title: Home Wiring Provisions. Form Number: Not applicable. Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. Respondents: Individuals or households; business or other for-profit entities. Number of Respondents: 30,500. Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes—5 hours. Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement; on occasion reporting requirement; annual reporting requirement; third party disclosure requirement. Total Annual Burden: 45,614 hours. Total Annual Cost: None. Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s). Needs and Uses: This information collection accounts for the information collection requirement stated in 47 CFR 76.613, where MVPDs causing harmful signal interference may be required by the Commission’s engineer in charge (EIC) to prepare and submit a report regarding the cause(s) of the interference, corrective measures planned or taken, and the efficacy of the remedial measures. 47 CFR 76.620 applies the Commission’s signal leakage rules to all non-cable MVPDs. Our rules require that each cable system perform an independent signal leakage test E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1 cprice-sewell on PRODPC62 with NOTICES 65512 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 8, 2006 / Notices annually, therefore, non-cable MVPDs will now be subject to the same requirement, although the Second Order on Reconsideration, FCC 03–9, has exempted small non-cable MVPDs. We recognize, however, that immediate compliance with these requirements may present hardships to existing noncable MVPDs not previously subject to such rules. We will allow a five-year transition period from the effective date of these rules to afford non-cable MVPDs time to comply with our signal leakage rules other than 47 CFR 76.613. The transition period will apply only to systems of those non-cable MVPDs that have been substantially built as of January 1, 1998. 47 CFR 76.802, Disposition of Cable Home Wiring, gives individual video service subscribers in single unit dwellings and MDUs the opportunity to purchase their cable home wiring at replacement cost upon voluntary termination of service. In calculating hour burdens for notifying individual subscribers of their purchase rights, we make the following assumptions: (1) There are approximately 20,000 MVPDs serving approximately 72,000,000 subscribers in the United States. (2) The average rate of churn (subscriber termination) for all MVPDs is estimated to be 1% per month, or 12% per year. (3) MVPDs own the home wiring in 50% of the occurrences of voluntary subscriber termination. (4) Subscribers or property owners already have gained ownership of the wiring in the other 50% of occurrences (e.g., where the MVPD has charged the subscriber for the wiring upon installation, has treated the wiring as belonging to the subscriber for tax purposes, or where state and/or local law treats cable home wiring as a fixture). (5) Where MVPDs own the wiring, we estimate that they intend to actually remove the wiring 5% of the time, thus initiating the disclosure requirement. We believe in most cases that MVPDs will choose to abandon the home wiring because the cost and effort required to remove the wiring generally outweigh its value. The burden to disclose the information at the time of termination will vary depending on the manner of disclosure, e.g., by telephone, customer visit or registered mail. Virtually all voluntary service terminations are done by telephone. In addition, 47 CFR 76.802 states that if a subscriber in an MDU declines to purchase the wiring, the MDU owner or alternative provider (where permitted by the MDU owner) may purchase the VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:11 Nov 07, 2006 Jkt 211001 home wiring where reasonable advance notice has been provided to the incumbent. (1) According to the 2000 U.S. Census, the nation’s population was approximately 281,000,000. (2) The American Housing Survey for the United States, 2001, Table 2–25, and the 2000 Census stated that the total number of living units of all types in the United States was approximately 106,000,000, or an average of 2.65 people per unit. (3) The American Housing Survey also estimated that 24,600,000 occupied housing units were classified as ‘‘multiunits,’’ that is, they are in MDUs with two or more units per building. (4) The American Housing Survey data also found that there were approximately 7,600,000 buildings classified as MDUs in the United States. (5) Approximately 66,000,000 people resided in these 24,600,000 occupied housing units in these MDUs in 2000. (6) We estimate that 2,000 MDU owners will provide advance notice to the incumbent MVPD that the MDU owner wishes to use the home run wiring to receive service from an alternative video service provider. 47 CFR 76.802 also states that, to inform subscribers of per-foot replacement costs, MVPDs may develop replacement cost schedules based on readily available information; if the MVPD chooses to develop such schedules, it must place them in a public file available for public inspection during regular business hours. We estimate that 50% of MVPDs will develop such cost schedules to place in their public files. Virtually all individual subscribers terminate service via telephone, and few subscribers are anticipated to review cost schedules on public file. 47 CFR 76.804 Disposition of Home Run Wiring. We estimate the burden for notification and election requirements for building-by-building and unit-byunit disposition of home run wiring as described below. Note that these requirements apply only when an MVPD owns the home run wiring in an MDU and does not (or will not at the conclusion of the notice period) have a legally enforceable right to remain on the premises against the wishes of the entity that owns or controls the common areas of the MDU or have a legally enforceable right to maintain any particular home run wire dedicated to a particular unit on the premises against the MDU owner’s wishes. We use the term ‘‘MDU owner’’ to include whatever entity owns or controls the common areas of an apartment building, condominium or PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 cooperative. For building-by-building disposition of home run wiring, the MDU owner gives the incumbent service provider a minimum of 90 days’ written notice that its access to the entire building will be terminated. The incumbent then has 30 days to elect what it will do with the home run wiring. Where parties negotiate a price for the wiring and are unable to agree on a price, the incumbent service provider must elect among abandonment, removal of the wiring, or arbitration for a price determination. Also, regarding cable home wiring, when the MDU owner notifies the incumbent service provider that its access to the building will be terminated, the incumbent provider must, within 30 days of the initial notice and in accordance with our home wiring rules: (1) Offer to sell to the MDU owner any home wiring within the individual dwelling units which the incumbent provider owns and intends to remove, and (2) provide the MDU owner with the total per-foot replacement cost of such home wiring. The MDU owner must then notify the incumbent provider as to whether the MDU owner or an alternative provider intends to purchase the home wiring not later than 30 days before the incumbent’s access to the building will be terminated. For unit-by-unit disposition of home run wiring, an MDU owner must provide at least 60 days’ written notice to the incumbent MVPD that it intends to permit multiple MVPDs to compete for the right to use the individual home run wires dedicated to each unit. The incumbent service provider then has 30 days to provide the MDU owner with a written election as to whether, for all of the incumbent’s home run wires dedicated to individual subscribers who may later choose the alternative provider’s service, it will remove the wiring, abandon the wiring, or sell the wiring to the MDU owner. In other words, the incumbent service provider will be required to make a single election for how it will handle the disposition of individual home run wires whenever a subscriber wishes to switch service providers; that election will then be implemented each time an individual subscriber switches service providers. Where parties negotiate a price for the wiring and are unable to agree on a price, the incumbent service provider must elect among abandonment, removal of the wiring, or arbitration for a price determination. The MDU owner also must provide reasonable advance E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 8, 2006 / Notices notice to the incumbent provider that it will purchase, or that it will allow an alternative provider to purchase, the cable home wiring when a terminating individual subscriber declines. If the alternative provider is permitted to purchase the wiring, it will be required to make a similar election during the initial 30-day notice period for each subscriber who switches back from the alternative provider to the incumbent MVPD. While the American Housing Survey estimates that there were some 7,600,000 MDUs with 24,600,000 resident occupants in the United States in 2000, we estimate that there will be only 12,500 notices and 12,500 elections being made on an annual basis. In many buildings, the MDU owner will be unable to initiate the notice and election processes because the incumbent MVPD service provider continues to have a legally enforceable right to remain on the premises. In other buildings, the MDU owner may simply have no interest in acquiring a new MVPD service provider. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6–18687 Filed 11–7–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–10–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted for Review to the Office of Management and Budget cprice-sewell on PRODPC62 with NOTICES October 31, 2006. 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:11 Nov 07, 2006 Jkt 211001 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 submitted on or before December 8, 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 FCC contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to Allison E. Zaleski, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10236 NEOB, Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395–6466, or via fax at 202–395–5167 or via internet at Allison_E._Zaleski@eop.omb.gov and to Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1– B441, 445 12th Street, SW, DC 20554 or an e-mail to PRA@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 Number: 3060–0799. Title: FCC Ownership Disclosure Information for the Wireless Telecommunications Services. Form No.: FCC Form 602. Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. Respondents: Business or other forprofit, not-for-profit institutions; and state, local or tribal governments. Number of Respondents: 500 respondents; 5,065 responses. Estimated Time Per Response: 1.50 hours. Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement and third party disclosure requirement. Total Annual Burden: 5,065 hours. Total Annual Cost: $478,200. Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A. Needs and Uses: The Commission will submit this information collection to OMB as an extension (no change in reporting or third party requirements) in order to obtain the full three-year clearance from them. There is no change to the estimated average burden, costs, or the number of respondents. The purpose for the FCC Form 602 is to obtain the identity of the filer and to elicit information required by 47 CFR PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 65513 1.2112 of the Commission’s rules regarding: (1) Persons or entities holding a 10 percent or greater direct or indirect ownership interest or any general partners in a general partnership holding a direct or indirect ownership interest in the applicant (‘‘Disclosable Interest Holders’’); and (2) all FCCregulated entities in which the filer or any of its Disclosable Interest Holders owns a 10 percent or greater interest. The data collected on the FCC Form 602 includes the FCC Registration Number (FRN) which serves as a ‘‘common link’’ for all filings an entity has with the Commission. The Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 requires that entities filing with the Commission use a FRN. Finally, the FCC Form 602 was designed for, and must be filed by, all licensees that hold licenses in auctionable services. Without such information, the Commission could not determine whether to issue licenses to applicants that provide telecommunications services to the public and fulfill its statutory responsibilities in accordance with the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6–18733 Filed 11–7–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission for Extension Under Delegated Authority October 30, 2006. 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 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 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 8, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65511-65513]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18687]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the 
Federal Communications Commission, Comments Requested

October 31, 2006.
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 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 
submitted on or before January 8, 2007. If you anticipate that you will 
be submitting 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: You may submit your all Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 
comments by e-mail or U.S. postal mail. To submit your comments by e-
mail send them to PRA@fcc.gov. To submit your comments by U.S. mail, 
mark them to the attention of Cathy Williams, Federal Communications 
Commission, Room 1-C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the 
information collection(s) send an e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact 
Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 3060-0692.
    Title: Home Wiring Provisions.
    Form Number: Not applicable.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: Individuals or households; business or other for-
profit entities.
    Number of Respondents: 30,500.
    Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes--5 hours.
    Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement; on occasion 
reporting requirement; annual reporting requirement; third party 
disclosure requirement.
    Total Annual Burden: 45,614 hours.
    Total Annual Cost: None.
    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
    Needs and Uses: This information collection accounts for the 
information collection requirement stated in 47 CFR 76.613, where MVPDs 
causing harmful signal interference may be required by the Commission's 
engineer in charge (EIC) to prepare and submit a report regarding the 
cause(s) of the interference, corrective measures planned or taken, and 
the efficacy of the remedial measures.
    47 CFR 76.620 applies the Commission's signal leakage rules to all 
non-cable MVPDs. Our rules require that each cable system perform an 
independent signal leakage test

[[Page 65512]]

annually, therefore, non-cable MVPDs will now be subject to the same 
requirement, although the Second Order on Reconsideration, FCC 03-9, 
has exempted small non-cable MVPDs. We recognize, however, that 
immediate compliance with these requirements may present hardships to 
existing non-cable MVPDs not previously subject to such rules. We will 
allow a five-year transition period from the effective date of these 
rules to afford non-cable MVPDs time to comply with our signal leakage 
rules other than 47 CFR 76.613. The transition period will apply only 
to systems of those non-cable MVPDs that have been substantially built 
as of January 1, 1998.
    47 CFR 76.802, Disposition of Cable Home Wiring, gives individual 
video service subscribers in single unit dwellings and MDUs the 
opportunity to purchase their cable home wiring at replacement cost 
upon voluntary termination of service. In calculating hour burdens for 
notifying individual subscribers of their purchase rights, we make the 
following assumptions:
    (1) There are approximately 20,000 MVPDs serving approximately 
72,000,000 subscribers in the United States.
    (2) The average rate of churn (subscriber termination) for all 
MVPDs is estimated to be 1% per month, or 12% per year.
    (3) MVPDs own the home wiring in 50% of the occurrences of 
voluntary subscriber termination.
    (4) Subscribers or property owners already have gained ownership of 
the wiring in the other 50% of occurrences (e.g., where the MVPD has 
charged the subscriber for the wiring upon installation, has treated 
the wiring as belonging to the subscriber for tax purposes, or where 
state and/or local law treats cable home wiring as a fixture).
    (5) Where MVPDs own the wiring, we estimate that they intend to 
actually remove the wiring 5% of the time, thus initiating the 
disclosure requirement.
    We believe in most cases that MVPDs will choose to abandon the home 
wiring because the cost and effort required to remove the wiring 
generally outweigh its value. The burden to disclose the information at 
the time of termination will vary depending on the manner of 
disclosure, e.g., by telephone, customer visit or registered mail. 
Virtually all voluntary service terminations are done by telephone.
    In addition, 47 CFR 76.802 states that if a subscriber in an MDU 
declines to purchase the wiring, the MDU owner or alternative provider 
(where permitted by the MDU owner) may purchase the home wiring where 
reasonable advance notice has been provided to the incumbent.
    (1) According to the 2000 U.S. Census, the nation's population was 
approximately 281,000,000.
    (2) The American Housing Survey for the United States, 2001, Table 
2-25, and the 2000 Census stated that the total number of living units 
of all types in the United States was approximately 106,000,000, or an 
average of 2.65 people per unit.
    (3) The American Housing Survey also estimated that 24,600,000 
occupied housing units were classified as ``multi-units,'' that is, 
they are in MDUs with two or more units per building.
    (4) The American Housing Survey data also found that there were 
approximately 7,600,000 buildings classified as MDUs in the United 
States.
    (5) Approximately 66,000,000 people resided in these 24,600,000 
occupied housing units in these MDUs in 2000.
    (6) We estimate that 2,000 MDU owners will provide advance notice 
to the incumbent MVPD that the MDU owner wishes to use the home run 
wiring to receive service from an alternative video service provider. 
47 CFR 76.802 also states that, to inform subscribers of per-foot 
replacement costs, MVPDs may develop replacement cost schedules based 
on readily available information; if the MVPD chooses to develop such 
schedules, it must place them in a public file available for public 
inspection during regular business hours.
    We estimate that 50% of MVPDs will develop such cost schedules to 
place in their public files. Virtually all individual subscribers 
terminate service via telephone, and few subscribers are anticipated to 
review cost schedules on public file.
    47 CFR 76.804 Disposition of Home Run Wiring. We estimate the 
burden for notification and election requirements for building-by-
building and unit-by-unit disposition of home run wiring as described 
below. Note that these requirements apply only when an MVPD owns the 
home run wiring in an MDU and does not (or will not at the conclusion 
of the notice period) have a legally enforceable right to remain on the 
premises against the wishes of the entity that owns or controls the 
common areas of the MDU or have a legally enforceable right to maintain 
any particular home run wire dedicated to a particular unit on the 
premises against the MDU owner's wishes.
    We use the term ``MDU owner'' to include whatever entity owns or 
controls the common areas of an apartment building, condominium or 
cooperative. For building-by-building disposition of home run wiring, 
the MDU owner gives the incumbent service provider a minimum of 90 
days' written notice that its access to the entire building will be 
terminated. The incumbent then has 30 days to elect what it will do 
with the home run wiring. Where parties negotiate a price for the 
wiring and are unable to agree on a price, the incumbent service 
provider must elect among abandonment, removal of the wiring, or 
arbitration for a price determination. Also, regarding cable home 
wiring, when the MDU owner notifies the incumbent service provider that 
its access to the building will be terminated, the incumbent provider 
must, within 30 days of the initial notice and in accordance with our 
home wiring rules:
    (1) Offer to sell to the MDU owner any home wiring within the 
individual dwelling units which the incumbent provider owns and intends 
to remove, and
    (2) provide the MDU owner with the total per-foot replacement cost 
of such home wiring.
    The MDU owner must then notify the incumbent provider as to whether 
the MDU owner or an alternative provider intends to purchase the home 
wiring not later than 30 days before the incumbent's access to the 
building will be terminated. For unit-by-unit disposition of home run 
wiring, an MDU owner must provide at least 60 days' written notice to 
the incumbent MVPD that it intends to permit multiple MVPDs to compete 
for the right to use the individual home run wires dedicated to each 
unit. The incumbent service provider then has 30 days to provide the 
MDU owner with a written election as to whether, for all of the 
incumbent's home run wires dedicated to individual subscribers who may 
later choose the alternative provider's service, it will remove the 
wiring, abandon the wiring, or sell the wiring to the MDU owner.
    In other words, the incumbent service provider will be required to 
make a single election for how it will handle the disposition of 
individual home run wires whenever a subscriber wishes to switch 
service providers; that election will then be implemented each time an 
individual subscriber switches service providers.
    Where parties negotiate a price for the wiring and are unable to 
agree on a price, the incumbent service provider must elect among 
abandonment, removal of the wiring, or arbitration for a price 
determination. The MDU owner also must provide reasonable advance

[[Page 65513]]

notice to the incumbent provider that it will purchase, or that it will 
allow an alternative provider to purchase, the cable home wiring when a 
terminating individual subscriber declines. If the alternative provider 
is permitted to purchase the wiring, it will be required to make a 
similar election during the initial 30-day notice period for each 
subscriber who switches back from the alternative provider to the 
incumbent MVPD.
    While the American Housing Survey estimates that there were some 
7,600,000 MDUs with 24,600,000 resident occupants in the United States 
in 2000, we estimate that there will be only 12,500 notices and 12,500 
elections being made on an annual basis. In many buildings, the MDU 
owner will be unable to initiate the notice and election processes 
because the incumbent MVPD service provider continues to have a legally 
enforceable right to remain on the premises. In other buildings, the 
MDU owner may simply have no interest in acquiring a new MVPD service 
provider.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-18687 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-10-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.