Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval, 3138-3140 [E7-1011]
Download as PDF
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
3138
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 24, 2007 / Notices
in an FM Translator or FM Booster
Station.
Form Number: FCC Forms 302–TV,
340 and 349.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities; Not-for-profit
institutions; State, local or tribal
government.
Number of Respondents: 2,785.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.50–4
hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion
reporting requirement; Third party
disclosure requirement.
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Total Annual Burden: 8,370 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $19,389,625.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No
impact(s).
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:
There is no need for confidentiality.
Needs and Uses: On November 3,
2006, the Commission adopted the
Report and Order (‘‘R&O’’), Revision of
Procedures Governing Amendments to
FM Table of Allotments and Changes of
Community of License in the Radio
Broadcast Services, MB Docket 05–210,
FCC 06–163. In this R&O, the
Commission extended to
noncommercial educational FM
licensees and permittees the same
ability to request changes of community
of license by first come-first served
minor modification application as was
being granted to other commercial fullservice AM standard band and FM
licensees and permittees. Previously,
because a change in an NCE station’s
community of license was considered a
major modification in the station’s
facilities, an NCE applicant had to await
the opening of an announced
Noncommercial Educational (NCE) new
and major change application filing
window. Filing on a first-come firstserved basis will significantly reduce
the risk of application mutual
exclusivity. The application of this new
procedure to NCE stations was not
proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rule
Making in this proceeding, but the
Commission found it to be a logical
outgrowth of a proposal in that
proceeding based on comments
received, and accordingly adopted the
change in the R&O. Thus, the
Commission proposes to revise FCC
Form 340 to accommodate NCE
applicants who seek to change their
NCE station’s community of license by
minor modification application.
Specifically, the Commission revises
the FCC Form 340 to reflect the
requirement that NCE applicants
employing this procedure must include
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Jan 23, 2007
Jkt 211001
an exhibit demonstrating that the
proposed community of license change
comports with the fair, efficient and
equitable distribution of radio service
policies under Section 307(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended. NCE applicants proposing a
change in community of license must
provide Section 307(b) information
demonstrating the merits of locating the
station in the new community, as
opposed to the current community of
license. This form, FCC Form 340, is the
only form being revised by the FCC’s
action in this information collection.
FCC Forms 302–TV and 349 remain
unchanged.
FCC Form 302–TV is used by
licensees and permittees of TV
broadcast stations to obtain a new or
modified station license and/or to notify
the Commission of certain changes in
the licensed facilities of these stations.
FCC 340 is used to apply for authority
to construct a new noncommercial
educational FM or TV station or to make
changes in the existing facilities of such
a station. The FCC 340 is to be used if
the broadcast station will operate on a
channel that is reserved exclusively for
noncommercial educational use and on
non-reserved channels if the applicant
proposes to build and operate a NCE
station.
FCC Form 349 is used to apply for
authority to construct a new FM
translator or FM booster broadcast
station, or to make changes in the
existing facilities of such stations. This
form also includes the third party
disclosure requirement of 47 CFR
73.3580 (3060–0031). Section 73.3580
requires local public notice in a
newspaper of general circulation of all
application filings for new or major
change in facilities. This notice must be
completed within 30 days of the
tendering of the application. This notice
must be published at least twice a week
for two consecutive weeks in a threeweek period. A copy of this notice must
be placed in the public inspection file
along with the application.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–723 Filed 1–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
PO 00000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
Notice of Public Information
Collection(s) Being Submitted to OMB
for Review and Approval
January 19, 2007.
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications
Commissions, 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, 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
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 comments should be
submitted on or before February 23,
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
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 and Allison E.
Zaleski, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Room 10236 NEOB,
Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395–6466
or via the Internet at
Allison_E._Zaleski@omb.eop.gov.
For
additional information about the
information collection(s) send an e-mail
to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Cathy
Williams at (202) 418–2918. If you
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 24, 2007 / Notices
would like to obtain a copy of the
information collection, you may do so
by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at:
https://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.
SUPPLMENTARY 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: 22,500.
Estimated Time per Response: 5
minutes–20 hours.
Frequency of Response:
Recordkeeping requirement; On
occasion reporting requirement; Annual
reporting requirement; Third party
disclosure requirement.
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Total Annual Burden: 46,114 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No
impact(s).
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:
There is no need for confidentiality.
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
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Jan 23, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 ‘‘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.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3139
(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
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
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
3140
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 24, 2007 / Notices
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
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Jan 23, 2007
Jkt 211001
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.
OMB Control Number: 3060–1032.
Title: Commercial Availability of
Navigation Devices and Compatibility
Between Cable Systems and Consumer
Electronics Equipment, CS Docket No.
97–80 and PP Docket No. 00–67.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities.
Number of Respondents: 611.
Estimated Time per Response: 30
seconds–40 hours.
Frequency of Response:
Recordkeeping requirement; On
occasion reporting requirement; Third
party disclosure requirement.
Obligation to Respond: Voluntary.
Total Annual Burden: 97,928 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No
impact(s).
Nature and Extend of Confidentiality:
There is no need for confidentiality.
Needs and Uses: On March 17, 2005,
the FCC released a Second Report and
Order (2005 Deferral Order), In the
Matter of Implementation of Section 304
of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
Commercial Availability of Navigation
Devices, CS Docket No. 97–80, FCC 05–
76, in which the Commission set forth
reporting requirements for certain cable
providers, the National Cable and
Telecommunications Association
(NCTA), and the Consumer Electronics
Association (CEA). The cable providers
are responsible for filing status reports
regarding deployment and support of
point of deployment modules, more
commonly known as CableCARDs. The
NCTA and CEA are required to file
status reports to keep the FCC abreast of
negotiations over bidirectional support
and software-based security solutions
for digital cable products available at
retail.
On October 9, 2003, the FCC released
the Second Report and Order and
Second Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (2nd R&O), In the Matter of
Implementation of Section 304 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996,
Commercial Availability of Navigation
Devices, Compatibility Between Cable
Systems and Consumer Electronics
Equipment, CS Docket No. 97–80, PP
Docket No. 00–67, FCC 03–225, the
Commission adopted final rules that set
technical and other criteria that
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
manufacturers would have to meet in
order to label or market unidirectional
digital cable televisions and other
unidirectional digital cable products as
‘‘digital cable ready.’’ This regime
includes testing and self-certification
standards, certification recordkeeping
requirements, and consumer
information disclosures in appropriate
post-sale materials that describe the
functionality of these devices and the
need to obtain a security module from
their cable operator. To the extent
manufacturers have complaints
regarding the certification process, they
may file formal complaints with the
Commission. In addition, should
manufacturers have complaints
regarding administration of the Dynamic
Feedback Arrangement Scrambling
Technique or DFAST license which
governs the scrambling technology
needed to build unidirectional digital
cable products, they may also file
complaints with the FCC. The 2nd R&O
also prohibits MVPDs from encoding
content to activate selectable output
controls on unidirectional digital cable
products, or the down-resolution of
unencrypted broadcast television
programming. MVPDs are also limited
in the levels of copy protection that
could be applied to various categories of
programming. As a part of these
encoding rules is a petition process for
new services within existing business
models, a PR Newswire Notice relating
to initial classification of new business
models, and a complaints process for
disputes regarding new business
models.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–1011 Filed 1–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
[Report No. 2802]
Petition for Reconsideration of Action
in Rulemaking Proceeding
December 28, 2006.
A Petition for Reconsideration has
been filed in the Commission’s
Rulemaking proceeding listed in this
Public Notice and published pursuant to
47 CFR 1.429(e). The full text of this
document is available for viewing and
copying in Room CY–B402, 445 12th
Street, SW., Washington, DC or may be
purchased from the Commission’s copy
contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc.
(BCPI) (1–800–378–3160). Oppositions
to this petition must be filed by
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 15 (Wednesday, January 24, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3138-3140]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-1011]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted to OMB
for Review and Approval
January 19, 2007.
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commissions, 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, 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 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 comments should be submitted on or before February 23,
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 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 and Allison E.
Zaleski, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Room 10236 NEOB,
Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395-6466 or via the Internet at Allison--
E.--Zaleski@omb.eop.gov.
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. If you
[[Page 3139]]
would like to obtain a copy of the information collection, you may do
so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: https://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.
SUPPLMENTARY 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: 22,500.
Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes-20 hours.
Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement; On occasion
reporting requirement; Annual reporting requirement; Third party
disclosure requirement.
Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Total Annual Burden: 46,114 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for
confidentiality.
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 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
[[Page 3140]]
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
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.
OMB Control Number: 3060-1032.
Title: Commercial Availability of Navigation Devices and
Compatibility Between Cable Systems and Consumer Electronics Equipment,
CS Docket No. 97-80 and PP Docket No. 00-67.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.
Number of Respondents: 611.
Estimated Time per Response: 30 seconds-40 hours.
Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement; On occasion
reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.
Obligation to Respond: Voluntary.
Total Annual Burden: 97,928 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Nature and Extend of Confidentiality: There is no need for
confidentiality.
Needs and Uses: On March 17, 2005, the FCC released a Second Report
and Order (2005 Deferral Order), In the Matter of Implementation of
Section 304 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Commercial
Availability of Navigation Devices, CS Docket No. 97-80, FCC 05-76, in
which the Commission set forth reporting requirements for certain cable
providers, the National Cable and Telecommunications Association
(NCTA), and the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA). The cable
providers are responsible for filing status reports regarding
deployment and support of point of deployment modules, more commonly
known as CableCARDs. The NCTA and CEA are required to file status
reports to keep the FCC abreast of negotiations over bidirectional
support and software-based security solutions for digital cable
products available at retail.
On October 9, 2003, the FCC released the Second Report and Order
and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2nd R&O), In the
Matter of Implementation of Section 304 of the Telecommunications Act
of 1996, Commercial Availability of Navigation Devices, Compatibility
Between Cable Systems and Consumer Electronics Equipment, CS Docket No.
97-80, PP Docket No. 00-67, FCC 03-225, the Commission adopted final
rules that set technical and other criteria that manufacturers would
have to meet in order to label or market unidirectional digital cable
televisions and other unidirectional digital cable products as
``digital cable ready.'' This regime includes testing and self-
certification standards, certification recordkeeping requirements, and
consumer information disclosures in appropriate post-sale materials
that describe the functionality of these devices and the need to obtain
a security module from their cable operator. To the extent
manufacturers have complaints regarding the certification process, they
may file formal complaints with the Commission. In addition, should
manufacturers have complaints regarding administration of the Dynamic
Feedback Arrangement Scrambling Technique or DFAST license which
governs the scrambling technology needed to build unidirectional
digital cable products, they may also file complaints with the FCC. The
2nd R&O also prohibits MVPDs from encoding content to activate
selectable output controls on unidirectional digital cable products, or
the down-resolution of unencrypted broadcast television programming.
MVPDs are also limited in the levels of copy protection that could be
applied to various categories of programming. As a part of these
encoding rules is a petition process for new services within existing
business models, a PR Newswire Notice relating to initial
classification of new business models, and a complaints process for
disputes regarding new business models.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-1011 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P