High-Cost Universal Service Support; Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, 28936-28939 [E7-9837]
Download as PDF
28936
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules
PART 438—MANAGED CARE
1. The authority citation for part 438
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 1102 of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1302).
Subpart A—General Provisions
§ 438.6
2. Section 438.6 is amended by
removing paragraph (c)(5)(v).
Subpart B—State Responsibilities
3. Section 438.60 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 438.60 Limit on payment to other
providers.
The State agency must ensure that no
payment is made to a provider other
than the MCO, PIHP, or PAHP for
services available under the contract
between the State and the MCO, PIHP,
or PAHP, except when these payments
are provided for in title XIX of the Act
or in 42 CFR.
PART 447—PAYMENTS FOR
SERVICES
4. The authority citation for part 447
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 1102 of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1302).
Subpart B—Payment Methods: General
Provisions
5. Section 447.201 is amended by
adding a new paragraph (c) to read as
set forth below.
State plan requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) The plan must not include
payments for graduate medical
education to any provider or institution
or include costs of graduate medical
education as an allowable cost under
any cost-based payment system
(including costs or payments claimed as
administrative costs).
Subpart C—Payment for Inpatient
Hospital and Long-Term Care Facility
Services
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
6. Section 447.257 is amended by:
A. Designating the existing paragraph
as paragraph (a).
B. Adding a new paragraph (b) to read
as follows:
§ 447.257 FFP: Conditions relating to
institutional reimbursement.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) FFP is not available in
expenditures for graduate medical
education in hospitals and long-term
care facilities.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 May 22, 2007
Jkt 211001
§ 447.272 Inpatient services: Application
of upper payment limits.
*
[Amended]
§ 447.201
7. Section 447.272 is amended by
republishing the heading to paragraph
(b) and revising paragraph (b)(1) to read
as follows:
*
*
*
*
(b) General rules. (1) ‘‘Upper payment
limit’’ refers to a reasonable estimate of
the amount that would be paid for the
services furnished by the groups of
facilities under Medicare payment
principles in subchapter B of this
chapter. For purposes of the Medicaid
upper payment limit calculation, direct
graduate medical education payments
are not an allowable component of a
Medicare payment and must be
excluded from the calculation.
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart F—Payment Methods for
Other Institutional and NonInstitutional Services
8. Section 447.304 is amended by:
A. Revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
§ 447.304
Adherence to upper limits; FFP.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) FFP is not available in
expenditures for graduate medical
education.
*
*
*
*
*
9. Section 447.321 is amended by
republishing the heading to paragraph
(b) and revising paragraph (b)(1) to read
as follows:
§ 447.321 Outpatient hospital and clinical
services: Application of upper payment
limits.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) General rules. (1) ‘‘Upper payment
limit’’ refers to a reasonable estimate of
the amount that would be paid for the
services furnished by the groups of
facilities under Medicare payment
principles in subchapter B of this
chapter. For purposes of the Medicaid
upper payment limit calculation, direct
graduate medical education payments
are not an allowable component of a
Medicare payment and must be
excluded from the calculation.
*
*
*
*
*
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance
Program)
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dated: May 11, 2007.
Leslie V. Norwalk,
Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services.
Approved: May 17, 2007.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07–2576 Filed 5–18–07; 4:38 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[WC Docket No. 05–337, CC Docket No. 96–
45, FCC 07–88]
High-Cost Universal Service Support;
Federal-State Joint Board on Universal
Service
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the
Commission seeks comment on the
Federal-State Joint Board on Universal
Service’s recommendation that the
Commission adopt an interim cap on
support for competitive Eligible
Telecommunications Carriers.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
June 6, 2007. Reply Comments are due
on or before June 13, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by WC Docket No. 05–337
and CC Docket No. 96–45, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Web Site: https://
www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• People with Disabilities: Contact the
FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–
418–0432.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ted
Burmeister, Attorney, Wireline
Competition Bureau,
Telecommunications Access Policy
Division, (202) 418–7400, TTY (202)
418–0484.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Notice of
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Proposed Rulemaking, in WC Docket
No. 05–337 and CC Docket No. 96–45,
released May 14, 2007. The full text of
this document is available for public
inspection during regular business
hours in the FCC Reference Center,
Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
I. Introduction
In this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM), we seek comment
on the recommendation of the FederalState Joint Board on Universal Service
(Joint Board) that the Commission takes
immediate action to rein in the
explosive growth in high-cost universal
service support disbursements.
Specifically, we seek comment on the
Joint Board’s recommendation that the
Commission impose an interim,
emergency cap on the amount of highcost support that competitive eligible
telecommunications carriers (ETCs) may
receive. The Joint Board also
recommended that both it and the
Commission further explore
comprehensive high-cost distribution
reform, and sought comment on various
reform proposals in a Public Notice
released on the same day as the
Recommended Decision, in WC Docket
No. 05–337, CC Docket No. 96–45
released on May 1, 2007.
II. Procedural Matters
A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
1. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), see 5 U.S.C. 603,
the Commission has prepared this
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) of the possible significant
economic impact on small entities by
the policies and rules proposed in the
NPRM. Written public comments are
requested on this IRFA. Comments must
be identified as responses to the IRFA
and must be filed by the deadlines for
comments on the NPRM provided in
paragraph 9 of the item. The
Commission will send a copy of the
NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration (SBA). See 5
U.S.C. 603(a). In addition, the NPRM
and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be
published in the Federal Register.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
a. Need for, and Objectives of, the
Proposed Rules
2. Section 254(a)(2) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended (the Act), requires that the
Commission implement within one year
recommendations from the Joint Board
based on the universal service
requirements provided in section 254 of
the Act, which establishes a number of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 May 22, 2007
Jkt 211001
principles for the preservation and
advancement of universal service in a
competitive telecommunications
environment. On May 1, 2007, the Joint
Board recommended that the
Commission adopt an interim cap on
high-cost universal service support for
competitive ETCs to rein in the
explosive growth in universal service. In
this NPRM, the Commission seeks
comment on the Joint Board
recommendation that the Commission
cap competitive ETC support at the
amount of support received by
competitive ETCs in 2006. The objective
of the NPRM is to explore whether the
Commission should take action to cap
the high-cost universal service support
in the manner that the Joint Board
recommends, and whether there are
other issues related to the interim cap
that should be considered.
b. Legal Basis
3. The legal basis for any action that
may be taken pursuant to the NPRM is
contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(j), 201,
202, 205, 214, 254, 403 and 410 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i)–(j),
201, 202, 205, 254, 410 and sections 1.1,
1.411, 1.412, 1.415, 1.419, and 1.1200–
1.1216, of the Commission’s rules, 47
C.F.R. 1.1, 1.411, 1.412, 1.415, 1.419,
1.1200–1.1216.
c. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which
Rules Will Apply
4. The RFA directs agencies to
provide a description of, and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities that may be affected by
the rules, if adopted. 5 U.S.C. 604(b)(3).
The RFA generally defines the term
‘‘small entity,’’ 5 U.S.C. 601(6), as
having the same meaning as the terms
‘‘small business,’’ 5 U.S.C. 601(3),
‘‘small organization,’’ 5 U.S.C 601(4),
and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’
5 U.S.C. 601(5). In addition, the term
‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning
as the term ‘‘small business concern’’
under the Small Business Act, unless
the Commission has developed one or
more definitions that are U.S.C. 601(3).
Under the Small Business Act, a ‘‘small
business concern’’ is one that: (1) Is
independently owned and operated; (2)
is not dominant in its field of operation;
and (3) meets any additional criteria
established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA). 15 U.S.C. 632.
Nationwide, there are a total of
approximately 22.4 million small
businesses, according to SBA data. A
small organization is generally ‘‘any notfor-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28937
is not dominant in its field.’’
Nationwide, as of 2002, there were
approximately 1.6 million small
organizations.
5. The most reliable source of
information regarding the total numbers
of certain common carrier and related
providers nationwide, as well as the
number of commercial wireless entities,
is the data that the Commission
publishes in its Trends in Telephone
Service report. The SBA has developed
small business size standards for
wireline and wireless small businesses
within the three commercial census
categories of Wired
Telecommunications Carriers, Paging,
and Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications. Under these
categories, a business is small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. Below, using
the above size standards and others, we
discuss the total estimated numbers of
small businesses that might be affected
by our actions.
d. Wireline Carriers and Service
Providers
6. We have included small incumbent
local exchange carriers (LECs) in this
present RFA analysis. As noted above,
a ‘‘small business’’ under the RFA is one
that, inter alia, meets the pertinent
small business size standard (e.g., a
telephone communications business
having 1,500 or fewer employees), and
‘‘is not dominant in its field of
operation.’’ The SBA’s Office of
Advocacy contends that, for RFA
purposes, small incumbent LECs are not
dominant in their field of operation
because any such dominance is not
‘‘national’’ in scope. We have therefore
included small incumbent LECs in this
RFA analysis, although we emphasize
that this RFA action has no effect on
Commission analyses and
determinations in other, non-RFA
contexts.
7. Incumbent LECs. Neither the
Commission nor the SBA has developed
a size standard for small businesses
specifically applicable to incumbent
LECs. The closest applicable size
standard under SBA rules is for Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under
that size standard, such a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.
According to Commission data, 1,307
carriers reported that they were engaged
in the provision of local exchange
services. Of these 1,307 carriers, an
estimated 1,019 have 1,500 or fewer
employees, and 288 have more than
1,500 employees. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that most
providers of incumbent local exchange
service are small businesses that may be
affected by our action.
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
28938
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules
8. Competitive LECs, Competitive
Access Providers (CAPs), ‘‘SharedTenant Service Providers,’’ and ‘‘Other
Local Service Providers.’’ Neither the
Commission nor the SBA has developed
a small business size standard
specifically for these service providers.
The appropriate size standard under
SBA rules is for the category Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under
that size standard, such a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.
According to Commission data, 859
carriers reported that they were engaged
in the provision of either competitive
LEC or CAP services. Of these 859
carriers, an estimated 741 have 1,500 or
fewer employees, and 118 have more
than 1,500 employees. In addition, 16
carriers have reported that they are
‘‘Shared-Tenant Service Providers,’’ and
all 16 are estimated to have 1,500 or
fewer employees. In addition, 44
carriers have reported that they are
‘‘Other Local Service Providers.’’ Of the
44, an estimated 43 have 1,500 or fewer
employees, and one has more than 1,500
employees. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that most
competitive LECs, CAPs, ‘‘SharedTenant Service Providers,’’ and ‘‘Other
Local Service Providers’’ are small
entities that may be affected by our
action.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
e. Wireless Carriers and Service
Providers
9. Wireless Service Providers. The
SBA has developed a small business
size standard for wireless firms within
the two broad economic census
categories of ‘‘Paging’’ and ‘‘Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications.’’
Under both categories, the SBA deems
a wireless business to be small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. For the
census category of Paging, Census
Bureau data for 2002 show that there
were 807 firms in this category that
operated for the entire year. Of this
total, 804 firms had employment of 999
or fewer employees, and three firms had
employment of 1,000 employees or
more. Thus, under this category and
associated small business size standard,
the majority of firms can be considered
small. For the census category of
Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications, Census Bureau
data for 2002 show that there were 1,397
firms in this category that operated for
the entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms
had employment of 999 or fewer
employees, and 19 firms had
employment of 1,000 employees or
more. Thus, under this second category
and size standard, the majority of firms
can, again, be considered small.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 May 22, 2007
Jkt 211001
10. Wireless Telephony. Wireless
telephony includes cellular, personal
communications services (PCS), and
specialized mobile radio (SMR)
telephony carriers. As noted earlier, the
SBA has developed a small business
size standard for ‘‘Cellular and Other
Wireless Telecommunications’’ services.
Under that SBA small business size
standard, a business is small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. According to
Commission data, 432 carriers reported
that they were engaged in the provision
of wireless telephony. We have
estimated that 221 of these are small
under the SBA small business size
standard.
f. Satellite Service Providers
11. Satellite Telecommunications and
Other Telecommunications. There is no
small business size standard developed
specifically for providers of
international service. The appropriate
size standards under SBA rules are for
the two broad census categories of
‘‘Satellite Telecommunications’’ and
‘‘Other Telecommunications.’’ Under
both categories, such a business is small
if it has $13.5 million or less in average
annual receipts.
12. The first category of Satellite
Telecommunications ‘‘comprises
establishments primarily engaged in
providing point-to-point
telecommunications services to other
establishments in the
telecommunications and broadcasting
industries by forwarding and receiving
communications signals via a system of
satellites or reselling satellite
telecommunications.’’ For this category,
Census Bureau data for 2002 show that
there were a total of 371 firms that
operated for the entire year. Of this
total, 307 firms had annual receipts of
under $10 million, and 26 firms had
receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999.
Consequently, we estimate that the
majority of Satellite
Telecommunications firms are small
entities that might be affected by our
action.
13. The second category of Other
Telecommunications ‘‘comprises
establishments primarily engaged in (1)
Providing specialized
telecommunications applications, such
as satellite tracking, communications
telemetry, and radar station operations;
or (2) providing satellite terminal
stations and associated facilities
operationally connected with one or
more terrestrial communications
systems and capable of transmitting
telecommunications to or receiving
telecommunications from satellite
systems.’’ For this category, Census
Bureau data for 2002 show that there
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
were a total of 332 firms that operated
for the entire year. Of this total, 259
firms had annual receipts of under $10
million and 15 firms had annual
receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999.
Consequently, we estimate that the
majority of Other Telecommunications
firms are small entities that might be
affected by our action.
2. Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
14. The specific proposals under
consideration in the NPRM would not,
if adopted, result in additional
recordkeeping requirements for small
businesses.
3. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant
Economic Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
15. The RFA requires an agency to
describe any significant alternatives that
it has considered in reaching its
proposed approach, which may include
the following four alternatives (among
others): (1) The establishment of
differing compliance and reporting
requirements or timetables that take into
account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification,
consolidation, or simplification of
compliance or reporting requirements
under the rule for small entities; (3) the
use of performance, rather than design,
standards; and (4) an exemption from
coverage of the rule, or part thereof, for
small entities. See 5 U.S.C. 603(c).
16. This IRFA seeks comment on how
the Joint Board’s recommendation could
be implemented in a manner that
reduces the potential burden and cost of
compliance for small entities. We also
seek comment on the potential impact
of the proposed recommendations
related to the interim cap proposal on
high-cost universal support for
competitive ETCs. In the NPRM, the
Commission has offered several
alternatives and that might avoid or
mitigate reductions in the amount of
high-cost support flowing to
competitive ETCs, some of which might
be small entities. For instance, the
Commission inquires into other
methods, besides a cap, to control the
growth of high-cost support; asks about
the length of time the interim cap
should be in place; seeks comment on
the level that the cap should be set at;
and asks whether other operational,
administrative, or implementation
issues might have an impact on
implementing an interim cap.
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules
4. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rules
17. None.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
18. This NPRM does not contain
proposed information collections
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. In
addition, therefore, it does not contain
any new or modified ‘‘information
collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25
employees,’’ pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198. See 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
C. Ex Parte Presentations
19. These matters shall be treated as
a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ proceeding in
accordance with the Commission’s ex
parte rules. Persons making oral ex
parte presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing the
presentations must contain summaries
of the substance of the presentations
and not merely a listing of the subjects
discussed. More than a one or two
sentence description of the views and
arguments presented is generally
required. Other requirements pertaining
to oral and written presentations are set
forth in section 1.1206(b) of the
Commission’s rules.
D. Comment Filing Procedures
20. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and
1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file
comments on or before June 6, 2007,
and reply comments June 13, 2007.
Comments may be filed using: (1) The
Commission’s Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal
Government’s eRulemaking Portal, or (3)
by filing paper copies. See Electronic
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking
Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the Internet by
accessing the ECFS: https://www.fcc.gov/
cgb/ecfs/ or the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Filers should follow the instructions
provided on the Web site for submitting
comments.
• For ECFS filers, if multiple docket
or rulemaking numbers appear in the
caption of this proceeding, filers must
transmit one electronic copy of the
comments for each docket or
rulemaking number referenced in the
caption. In completing the transmittal
screen, filers should include their full
name, U.S. Postal Service mailing
address, and the applicable docket or
rulemaking number. Parties may also
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 May 22, 2007
Jkt 211001
submit an electronic comment by
Internet e-mail. To get filing
instructions, filers should send an email to ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the
following words in the body of the
message, ‘‘get form.’’ A sample form and
directions will be sent in response.
• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
four copies of each filing. If more than
one docket or rulemaking number
appears in the caption of this
proceeding, filers must submit two
additional copies for each additional
docket or rulemaking number. Filings
can be sent by hand or messenger
delivery, by commercial overnight
courier, or by first-class or overnight
U.S. Postal Service mail (although we
continue to experience delays in
receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
• The Commission’s contractor will
receive hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the
Commission’s Secretary at 236
Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110,
Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours
at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All
hand deliveries must be held together
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes must be disposed of before
entering the building.
• Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights,
MD 20743.
• U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
• People with Disabilities: To request
materials in accessible formats for
people with disabilities (braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format),
send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call
the Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–
418–0432 (tty). In addition, one copy of
each pleading must be sent to each of
the following:
(1) The Commission’s duplicating
contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc,
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554; Web site:
https://www.bcpiweb.com; phone: 1–
800–378–3160;
(2) Antoinette Stevens,
Telecommunications Access Policy
Division, Wireline Competition Bureau,
445 12th Street, SW., Room 5–B540,
Washington, DC 20554; e-mail:
Antoinette.Stevens@fcc.gov.
21. For further information regarding
this proceeding, contact Ted Burmeister,
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28939
Attorney Advisor, Telecommunications
Access Policy Division, Wireline
Competition Bureau at (202) 418–7389,
or theodore.burmeister@fcc.gov, or Katie
King, Telecommunications Access
Policy Division, Wireline Competition
Bureau, (202) 418–7491, or
katie.king@fcc.gov.
III. Ordering Clauses
22. Pursuant to the authority
contained in sections 1, 4(i), 201–205,
214, 254, and 403 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201–
205, 214, 254, and 403, this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
23. The Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
including the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–9837 Filed 5–22–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2003–15227]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Hydraulic and Electric
Brake Systems, Air Brake Systems
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Denial of petition for
reconsideration.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document responds to a
petition for reconsideration of our 2003
final rule establishing a braking-in-acurve performance requirement for
single unit trucks and buses. The
braking-in-a-curve requirement has
applied to air-braked truck tractors since
1997 and we determined that the
requirement should also apply to singleunit trucks and buses. The requirement
ensures that a vehicle’s antilock brake
system (ABS) maintains adequate
stability and control during a hard stop
on a curved, slippery road surface. A
petition for reconsideration was
received from the National Truck
Equipment Association (NTEA), which
seeks to exclude vehicles built in two or
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 23, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28936-28939]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9837]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[WC Docket No. 05-337, CC Docket No. 96-45, FCC 07-88]
High-Cost Universal Service Support; Federal-State Joint Board on
Universal Service
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission seeks comment on the Federal-
State Joint Board on Universal Service's recommendation that the
Commission adopt an interim cap on support for competitive Eligible
Telecommunications Carriers.
DATES: Comments are due on or before June 6, 2007. Reply Comments are
due on or before June 13, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket No. 05-337
and CC Docket No. 96-45, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: https://
www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ted Burmeister, Attorney, Wireline
Competition Bureau, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, (202)
418-7400, TTY (202) 418-0484.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of
[[Page 28937]]
Proposed Rulemaking, in WC Docket No. 05-337 and CC Docket No. 96-45,
released May 14, 2007. The full text of this document is available for
public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference
Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
I. Introduction
In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), we seek comment on
the recommendation of the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal
Service (Joint Board) that the Commission takes immediate action to
rein in the explosive growth in high-cost universal service support
disbursements. Specifically, we seek comment on the Joint Board's
recommendation that the Commission impose an interim, emergency cap on
the amount of high-cost support that competitive eligible
telecommunications carriers (ETCs) may receive. The Joint Board also
recommended that both it and the Commission further explore
comprehensive high-cost distribution reform, and sought comment on
various reform proposals in a Public Notice released on the same day as
the Recommended Decision, in WC Docket No. 05-337, CC Docket No. 96-45
released on May 1, 2007.
II. Procedural Matters
A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), see 5
U.S.C. 603, the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact
on small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the NPRM.
Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be
identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines
for comments on the NPRM provided in paragraph 9 of the item. The
Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA).
See 5 U.S.C. 603(a). In addition, the NPRM and IRFA (or summaries
thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.
a. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
2. Section 254(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
(the Act), requires that the Commission implement within one year
recommendations from the Joint Board based on the universal service
requirements provided in section 254 of the Act, which establishes a
number of principles for the preservation and advancement of universal
service in a competitive telecommunications environment. On May 1,
2007, the Joint Board recommended that the Commission adopt an interim
cap on high-cost universal service support for competitive ETCs to rein
in the explosive growth in universal service. In this NPRM, the
Commission seeks comment on the Joint Board recommendation that the
Commission cap competitive ETC support at the amount of support
received by competitive ETCs in 2006. The objective of the NPRM is to
explore whether the Commission should take action to cap the high-cost
universal service support in the manner that the Joint Board
recommends, and whether there are other issues related to the interim
cap that should be considered.
b. Legal Basis
3. The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to the
NPRM is contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(j), 201, 202, 205, 214,
254, 403 and 410 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i)-(j), 201, 202, 205, 254, 410 and sections 1.1,
1.411, 1.412, 1.415, 1.419, and 1.1200-1.1216, of the Commission's
rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.1, 1.411, 1.412, 1.415, 1.419, 1.1200-1.1216.
c. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
Rules Will Apply
4. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the rules, if adopted. 5 U.S.C. 604(b)(3). The RFA
generally defines the term ``small entity,'' 5 U.S.C. 601(6), as having
the same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' 5 U.S.C. 601(3),
``small organization,'' 5 U.S.C 601(4), and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(5). In addition, the term ``small
business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern''
under the Small Business Act, unless the Commission has developed one
or more definitions that are U.S.C. 601(3). Under the Small Business
Act, a ``small business concern'' is one that: (1) Is independently
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and
(3) meets any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA). 15 U.S.C. 632. Nationwide, there are a total of
approximately 22.4 million small businesses, according to SBA data. A
small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which
is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
Nationwide, as of 2002, there were approximately 1.6 million small
organizations.
5. The most reliable source of information regarding the total
numbers of certain common carrier and related providers nationwide, as
well as the number of commercial wireless entities, is the data that
the Commission publishes in its Trends in Telephone Service report. The
SBA has developed small business size standards for wireline and
wireless small businesses within the three commercial census categories
of Wired Telecommunications Carriers, Paging, and Cellular and Other
Wireless Telecommunications. Under these categories, a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Below, using the above size
standards and others, we discuss the total estimated numbers of small
businesses that might be affected by our actions.
d. Wireline Carriers and Service Providers
6. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs)
in this present RFA analysis. As noted above, a ``small business''
under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small
business size standard (e.g., a telephone communications business
having 1,500 or fewer employees), and ``is not dominant in its field of
operation.'' The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA
purposes, small incumbent LECs are not dominant in their field of
operation because any such dominance is not ``national'' in scope. We
have therefore included small incumbent LECs in this RFA analysis,
although we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect on Commission
analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
7. Incumbent LECs. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed
a size standard for small businesses specifically applicable to
incumbent LECs. The closest applicable size standard under SBA rules is
for Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a
business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to
Commission data, 1,307 carriers reported that they were engaged in the
provision of local exchange services. Of these 1,307 carriers, an
estimated 1,019 have 1,500 or fewer employees, and 288 have more than
1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that most
providers of incumbent local exchange service are small businesses that
may be affected by our action.
[[Page 28938]]
8. Competitive LECs, Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), ``Shared-
Tenant Service Providers,'' and ``Other Local Service Providers.''
Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size
standard specifically for these service providers. The appropriate size
standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications
Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 859 carriers
reported that they were engaged in the provision of either competitive
LEC or CAP services. Of these 859 carriers, an estimated 741 have 1,500
or fewer employees, and 118 have more than 1,500 employees. In
addition, 16 carriers have reported that they are ``Shared-Tenant
Service Providers,'' and all 16 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer
employees. In addition, 44 carriers have reported that they are ``Other
Local Service Providers.'' Of the 44, an estimated 43 have 1,500 or
fewer employees, and one has more than 1,500 employees. Consequently,
the Commission estimates that most competitive LECs, CAPs, ``Shared-
Tenant Service Providers,'' and ``Other Local Service Providers'' are
small entities that may be affected by our action.
e. Wireless Carriers and Service Providers
9. Wireless Service Providers. The SBA has developed a small
business size standard for wireless firms within the two broad economic
census categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications.'' Under both categories, the SBA deems a wireless
business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census
category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were
807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this
total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three
firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this
category and associated small business size standard, the majority of
firms can be considered small. For the census category of Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show
that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the
entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer
employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more.
Thus, under this second category and size standard, the majority of
firms can, again, be considered small.
10. Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular,
personal communications services (PCS), and specialized mobile radio
(SMR) telephony carriers. As noted earlier, the SBA has developed a
small business size standard for ``Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications'' services. Under that SBA small business size
standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.
According to Commission data, 432 carriers reported that they were
engaged in the provision of wireless telephony. We have estimated that
221 of these are small under the SBA small business size standard.
f. Satellite Service Providers
11. Satellite Telecommunications and Other Telecommunications.
There is no small business size standard developed specifically for
providers of international service. The appropriate size standards
under SBA rules are for the two broad census categories of ``Satellite
Telecommunications'' and ``Other Telecommunications.'' Under both
categories, such a business is small if it has $13.5 million or less in
average annual receipts.
12. The first category of Satellite Telecommunications ``comprises
establishments primarily engaged in providing point-to-point
telecommunications services to other establishments in the
telecommunications and broadcasting industries by forwarding and
receiving communications signals via a system of satellites or
reselling satellite telecommunications.'' For this category, Census
Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a total of 371 firms that
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 307 firms had annual
receipts of under $10 million, and 26 firms had receipts of $10 million
to $24,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of
Satellite Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be
affected by our action.
13. The second category of Other Telecommunications ``comprises
establishments primarily engaged in (1) Providing specialized
telecommunications applications, such as satellite tracking,
communications telemetry, and radar station operations; or (2)
providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities
operationally connected with one or more terrestrial communications
systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to or receiving
telecommunications from satellite systems.'' For this category, Census
Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a total of 332 firms that
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 259 firms had annual
receipts of under $10 million and 15 firms had annual receipts of $10
million to $24,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of
Other Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be
affected by our action.
2. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements
14. The specific proposals under consideration in the NPRM would
not, if adopted, result in additional recordkeeping requirements for
small businesses.
3. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
15. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach,
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1)
The establishment of differing compliance and reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an
exemption from coverage of the rule, or part thereof, for small
entities. See 5 U.S.C. 603(c).
16. This IRFA seeks comment on how the Joint Board's recommendation
could be implemented in a manner that reduces the potential burden and
cost of compliance for small entities. We also seek comment on the
potential impact of the proposed recommendations related to the interim
cap proposal on high-cost universal support for competitive ETCs. In
the NPRM, the Commission has offered several alternatives and that
might avoid or mitigate reductions in the amount of high-cost support
flowing to competitive ETCs, some of which might be small entities. For
instance, the Commission inquires into other methods, besides a cap, to
control the growth of high-cost support; asks about the length of time
the interim cap should be in place; seeks comment on the level that the
cap should be set at; and asks whether other operational,
administrative, or implementation issues might have an impact on
implementing an interim cap.
[[Page 28939]]
4. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
17. None.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
18. This NPRM does not contain proposed information collections
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-
13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified
``information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief
Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198. See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
C. Ex Parte Presentations
19. These matters shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose''
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda
summarizing the presentations must contain summaries of the substance
of the presentations and not merely a listing of the subjects
discussed. More than a one or two sentence description of the views and
arguments presented is generally required. Other requirements
pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in section
1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules.
D. Comment Filing Procedures
20. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules,
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before
June 6, 2007, and reply comments June 13, 2007. Comments may be filed
using: (1) The Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS),
(2) the Federal Government's eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing paper
copies. See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,
63 FR 24121 (1998).
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Filers
should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting
comments.
For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers
appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one
electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number
referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers
should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address,
and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit
an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions,
filers should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the following
words in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form and
directions will be sent in response.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one
docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding,
filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery,
by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in
receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to
the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission.
The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or
messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236
Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing
hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be
held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority
mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
People with Disabilities: To request materials in
accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print,
electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or
call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530
(voice), 202-418-0432 (tty). In addition, one copy of each pleading
must be sent to each of the following:
(1) The Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and
Printing, Inc, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC
20554; Web site: https://www.bcpiweb.com; phone: 1-800-378-3160;
(2) Antoinette Stevens, Telecommunications Access Policy Division,
Wireline Competition Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 5-B540,
Washington, DC 20554; e-mail: Antoinette.Stevens@fcc.gov.
21. For further information regarding this proceeding, contact Ted
Burmeister, Attorney Advisor, Telecommunications Access Policy
Division, Wireline Competition Bureau at (202) 418-7389, or
theodore.burmeister@fcc.gov, or Katie King, Telecommunications Access
Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, (202) 418-7491, or
katie.king@fcc.gov.
III. Ordering Clauses
22. Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 4(i), 201-
205, 214, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201-205, 214, 254, and 403, this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
23. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-9837 Filed 5-22-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P