Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, 2836-2843 [E9-30323]
Download as PDF
2836
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Therefore, this rule is expected to be
categorically excluded, under figure 2–
1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction,
from further environmental
documentation. We seek any comments
or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR Part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for Part 165
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.xxxx to read as follows:
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 165.xxxx Safety Zones; Hydroplane
Races within the Captain of the Port Puget
Sound Area of Responsibility.
(a) Location. The following areas are
safety zones for the purpose of
reoccurring hydroplane races:
(1) The northern section of Dyes inlet,
west of Port Orchard, WA to include all
waters of Dyes Inlet north of a line from
point 47–37.36N 122–42.29W to 47–
37.74N 122–40.64W (NAD 1983).
(2) Port Angeles, south of Ediz’s Hook,
Port Angeles, WA to include all waters
near Port Angeles within the following
points: 48–07.4N 123–25.57W; 48–
07.43N 123–24.58W; 48–07.2N 123–
25.52W; 48–07.25N 123–24.57W (NAD
1983).
(3) Lake Washington, south of
interstate 90 bridge and north of
Andrew’s Bay, WA, to include all
waters of Lake Washington east of the
shoreline within the following points:
47°34.15′ N, 122°16.40′ W; 47°34.31′ N,
122°15.96′ W; 47°35.18′ N, 122°16.31′
W; 47°35.00′ N, 122°16.71′ W (NAD
1983).
(b) Notice of Enforcement or
Suspension of Enforcement. These
safety zones will be activated and thus
subject to enforcement, under the
following conditions: The Coast Guard
must receive and approve a marine
event permit for each hydroplane event
and then the Captain of the Port will
cause notice of the enforcement of these
safety zones to be made by all
appropriate means to effect the widest
publicity among the affected segments
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:08 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
of the public as practicable, in
accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such
means of notification may include but
are not limited to, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners.
The Captain of the Port will issue a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local
Notice to Mariners notifying the public
of activation and suspension of
enforcement of these safety zones.
Additionally, an on-scene Patrol
Commander will ensure enforcement of
this safety zone by limiting the transit
of non-participating vessel in the
designated areas described above.
(c) Definitions. As used in this
section, Coast Guard Patrol Commander
means any designated commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer of the Coast
Guard. Additionally, any other Federal,
state or local law enforcement agencies
or private agencies hired by the
sponsoring organization may be
designated by the Coast Guard to fulfill
the role of the on-scene Patrol
Commander. The Patrol Commander is
empowered to control the movement of
vessels on the racecourse and in the
adjoining waters described in paragraph
(a) above when this regulation is in
effect.
Regulations. (1) When these zones are
enforced, non-participant vessels are
prohibited from entering the regulated
area unless authorized by the designated
on-scene Patrol Commander. Spectator
craft may remain in designated spectator
areas but must follow the directions of
the on-scene Patrol Commander.
Spectator craft entering, exiting or
moving within the spectator area must
operate at speeds, which will create a
minimum wake. (2) Emergency
Signaling. A succession of sharp, short
signals by whistle or horn from vessels
patrolling the areas under the discretion
of the Patrol Commander shall serve as
a signal to stop. Vessels signaled shall
stop and shall comply with the orders
of the patrol vessel. Failure to do so may
result in expulsion from the area,
citation for failure to comply, or both.
Dated: December 17, 2009.
L.R. Tumbarello,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of
the Port, Puget Sound, Acting.
[FR Doc. 2010–764 Filed 1–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[CC Docket No. 02–6; FCC 09–96]
Schools and Libraries Universal
Service Support Mechanism
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: In this document, we propose
revising the Federal Communications
Commission’s (Commission) rules
regarding the schools and libraries
universal service support mechanism,
also known as the E-rate program, to
comply with the requirements of the
Protecting Children in the 21st Century
Act. Among other things, the Protecting
Children in the 21st Century Act, titled
Promoting Online Safety in Schools,
revised the Communications Act of
1934, as amended (the Act), by adding
a new certification requirement for
elementary and secondary schools that
have computers with Internet access
and receive discounts under the E-rate
program. We also propose to revise
related Commission rules to reflect
existing statutory language more
accurately.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rules
are due on or before February 18, 2010
and reply comments are due on or
before March 5, 2010. Written
comments on the Paperwork Reduction
Act proposed information collection
requirements should be submitted on or
before March 22, 2010. 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 comments,
identified by CC Docket No. 02–6, 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://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. 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.
• In addition to filing comments with
the Secretary, a copy of any comments
on the Paperwork Reduction Act
information collection requirements
E:\FR\FM\19JAP1.SGM
19JAP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules
contained herein should be submitted to
the Federal Communications
Commission via e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov
and to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of
Management and Budget, via e-mail to
Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov or via
fax at 202–395–5167.
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:
Anita Cheng, Wireline Competition
Bureau, Telecommunications Access
Policy Division, (202) 418–7400 or TTY:
(202) 418–0484. For additional
information concerning the Paperwork
Reduction Act information collection
requirements contained in this
document, send an e-mail to
PRA@fcc.gov or contact Judith B.
Herman at 202–418–0214 or via email at
Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No.
02–6, FCC 09–96, adopted November 4,
2009, and released November 5, 2009.
The complete text of this document is
available for inspection and copying
during normal business hours in the
FCC Reference Information Center,
Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room
CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. The
document may also be purchased from
the Commission’s duplicating
contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc.,
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800)
378–3160 or (202) 863- 2893, facsimile
(202) 863–2898, or via the Internet at
https://www.bcpiweb.com. It is also
available on the Commission’s Web site
at https://www.fcc.gov. Pursuant to
sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415,
1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments on or
before the dates indicated on the first
page of this document. 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://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• 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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:08 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
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. All filings
must be addressed to the Commission’s
Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
• Effective December 28, 2009, all
hand-delivered or messenger-delivered
paper filings for the Commission’s
Secretary must be delivered to FCC
Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW., Room
TW–A325, Washington, DC 20554. All
hand deliveries must be held together
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes must be disposed of before
entering the building. Please Note:
Through December 24, 2009, 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.
This filing location will be permanently
closed after December 24, 2009. The
filing hours at both locations are 8 a.m.
to 7 p.m.
• 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.
• In addition, one copy of each
comment or reply comment must be
sent to Charles Tyler,
Telecommunications Access Policy
Division, Wireline Competition Bureau,
445 12th Street, SW., Room 5–A452,
Washington, DC 20554; e-mail:
Charles.Tyler@fcc.gov.
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).
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 Analysis:
This document contains proposed
information collection requirements.
The Commission, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
burdens, invites the general public and
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to comment on the information
collection requirements contained in
this document, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2837
Public Law 104–13. Public and agency
comments are due March 22, 2010.
Comments on the proposed
information collection requirements
should address: (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 estimates; (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.
In addition, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on
how we might further reduce the
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
OMB Control Number: 3060–0853.
Title: FCC Form 479, Certification by
Administrative Authority to Billed
Entity of Compliance with Children’s
Internet Protection Act; FCC Form 486,
Receipt of Service Confirmation Form,
FCC Form 500, Funding Commitment
(FRN) Change Request Form.
Form Number(s): FCC Forms 479, 486,
500.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit and not-for-profit institutions.
Number of Respondents and
Responses: 75,000 respondents and
75,000 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 1.07
hours (average time per response).
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Frequency of Response: Annual, on
occasion, and third party disclosure
requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 70,000 hours.
Total Annual Cost: N/A.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No
impact.
Nature of Extent of Confidentiality:
The Commission is not requesting that
the respondents submit confidential
information to the FCC. Respondents
may, however, request confidential
treatment for information they believe to
be confidential under 47 CFR 0.459 of
the Commission’s rules.
Needs and Uses: The existing
information collection requires schools
and libraries to certify that they have in
place certain Internet safety policies,
pursuant to the Children’s Internet
Protection Act (CIPA), 47 U.S.C. 254(h)
and (l), in order to receive E-rate
E:\FR\FM\19JAP1.SGM
19JAP1
2838
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules
discounts for Internet access. This
information collection is being revised
to add a new certification that the E-rate
applicant has updated its Internet safety
policy to include plans for educating
minors about appropriate online
behavior, including interacting with
other individuals on social networking
websites and in chat rooms and
cyberbullying awareness and response,
as required by the Protecting Children
in the 21st Century Act. This revision
will not require any changes to the FCC
Forms 479 or 486, which enable E-rate
participants to certify that they are
compliant with CIPA. This revision has
no effect on the FCC Form 500, which
is also part of this information
collection. In addition, this information
collection is being revised to add a rule
provision requiring each Internet safety
policy that is adopted pursuant to
section 254(l) of the Act, as amended, to
be made available to the Commission
upon request by the Commission.
Although this requirement is mandated
by the statute, it is not currently in the
Commission’s rules.
Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
I. Introduction
1. In this notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), we propose
revising the Federal Communications
Commission’s (Commission) rules
regarding the schools and libraries
universal service support mechanism,
also known as the E-rate program, to
comply with the requirements of the
Protecting Children in the 21st Century
Act. Among other things, section 215 of
the Protecting Children in the 21st
Century Act, titled Promoting Online
Safety in Schools, revised section
254(h)(5)(B) of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended (the Act), by
adding a new certification requirement
for elementary and secondary schools
that have computers with Internet
access and receive discounts under the
E-rate program. We also propose to
revise related Commission rules to
reflect existing statutory language more
accurately.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Background
2. Under the E-rate program, eligible
schools, libraries, and consortia that
include eligible schools and libraries
may apply for discounted eligible
telecommunications, Internet access,
and internal connections services. In
accordance with the Children’s Internet
Protection Act (CIPA), to be eligible for
E-rate discounts for Internet access and
internal connection services, schools
and libraries that have computers with
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:08 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
Internet access must certify that they
have in place certain Internet safety
policies and technology protection
measures. As required by CIPA,
§ 54.520(c)(i) of the Commission’s rules
requires that the Internet safety policy
must include a technology protection
measure that protects against Internet
access by both adults and minors to
visual depictions that are (1) obscene, or
(2) child pornography, or, with respect
to use of the computers by minors, (3)
harmful to minors. In addition,
§ 54.520(c)(i) requires the entity to
certify that its policy of Internet safety
includes monitoring the online
activities of minors. Applicants make
their CIPA certifications annually on the
Confirmation of Receipt of Services
Form (FCC Form 486).
3. Among other things, the Protecting
Children in the 21st Century Act revised
section 254(h)(5)(B) of the Act by adding
a new certification for elementary and
secondary schools that have computers
with Internet access and receive
discounts under the E-rate program. In
addition to the existing CIPA
certifications required of schools in
section 254(h)(5) of the Act, the
Protecting Children in the 21st Century
Act requires the school, school board,
local educational agency, or other
authority with responsibility for
administration of the school to certify
that it ‘‘as part of its Internet safety
policy is educating minors about
appropriate online behavior, including
interacting with other individuals on
social networking Web sites and in chat
rooms and cyberbullying awareness and
response.’’
III. Discussion
A. Protecting Children in the 21st
Century Act Rule Revisions
4. We seek comment on revising
§ 54.520(c)(i) of the Commission’s rules
to include the new certification
requirement added by the Protecting
Children in the 21st Century Act. We
propose to revise § 54.520(c)(i) to add a
certification provision that a school’s
Internet safety policy must include
educating minors about appropriate
online behavior, including interacting
with other individuals on social
networking websites and in chat rooms
and cyberbullying awareness and
response. We seek comment on this
proposal.
5. In addition, we tentatively
conclude that a recipient of E-rate
funding for Internet access and internal
connections should be required to
certify, on its FCC Form 486 for funding
year 2010, that it has updated its
Internet safety policy to include plans
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
for educating minors about appropriate
online behavior, including interacting
with other individuals on social
networking websites and in chat rooms
and cyberbullying awareness and
response, as required by the Protecting
Children in the 21st Century Act. We
note that the next opportunity for
applicants to certify to the CIPA
requirements, including this new
certification, would be on the FCC Form
486 for funding year 2009, which would
typically be filed after the start of the
2009 funding year (i.e., after July 1,
2009). Schools may, however, require
additional time to amend their Internet
safety policies and implement
procedures to comply with the new
requirements after the completion of
this rulemaking proceeding. In addition,
we note that Congress did not set a
timeframe for implementation of the
new certification. We seek comment on
this tentative conclusion.
B. Other Proposed Rule Revisions
6. We also seek comment on revising
certain rules to reflect more accurately
existing statutory language regarding the
CIPA certifications.
7. First, we propose to revise the rules
so that the definitions of elementary and
secondary schools are consistent
throughout. At this time, rule §§ 54.500,
54.501, and 54.504 all contain
differently worded definitions of
elementary and secondary schools. We
propose to define elementary and
secondary schools in § 54.500 of the
rules, and to revise §§ 54.501 and 54.504
to refer to § 54.500 definitions. We seek
comment on this proposal.
8. Second, we propose to revise
§ 54.520(a)(1) to add ‘‘school board’’ to
the definition of entities that are subject
to CIPA certifications. Although section
254(h) of the Act includes the term
‘‘school board’’ as an entity to which the
CIPA certifications apply, our rules do
not include this term. We seek comment
on this proposal.
9. Third, we propose to revise
§ 54.520(a)(4) to add the existing
statutory definitions of the terms
‘‘minor,’’ ‘‘obscene,’’ ‘‘child
pornography,’’ ‘‘harmful to minors,’’
‘‘sexual act,’’ ‘‘sexual contact,’’ and
‘‘technology protection measure,’’
consistent with the statute. § 54.520 of
our rules does not currently include the
definitions of these terms, but instead
refers back to the statute. Including the
statutory definitions of these terms in
the definitions section of our rules
could help clarify the CIPA
requirements. We seek comment on this
proposal.
10. Fourth, we propose to revise
§§ 54.520(c)(1)(i) and 54.520(c)(2)(i)
E:\FR\FM\19JAP1.SGM
19JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules
consistent with sections 254(h)(5)(D),
(h)(6)(D), (h)(5)(B)(ii), (C)(ii), and
(h)(6)(B)(ii), (C)(ii) of the Act to require
that the technology protection measures
be in operation during any use of
computers with Internet access, and that
the technology protection measures may
be disabled by an authorized person,
during adult use, to enable access for
bona fide research or other lawful
purpose. The statute requires that
schools and libraries certify that they
are enforcing the operation of the
technology protection measures during
the use of computers by minors and
adults. This enforcement requirement is
not currently included in the
Commission’s rules. We seek comment
on this proposal.
11. In addition, sections 254(h)(5)(D)
and (h)(6)(D) of the Act permit a school
or library administrator, supervisor, or
other person authorized by the
certifying authority to disable an entity’s
technology protection measure to allow
bona fide research or other lawful use
by an adult. We note that in the CIPA
Order, although the Commission
acknowledged this statutory provision,
it declined to adopt any implementing
rule provision, stating that
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
[w]e decline to promulgate rules
mandating how entities should implement
these provisions. Federally-imposed rules
directing school and library staff when to
disable technology protection measures
would likely be overbroad and imprecise,
potentially chilling speech, or otherwise
confusing schools and libraries about the
requirements of the statute. We leave such
determinations to local communities, whom
we believe to be most knowledgeable about
the varying circumstances of schools or
libraries within those communities.
The Commission stated that its decision
was supported by commenter concerns
about the difficulty of school or library
staff in determining whether an adult
user was engaging only in bona fide
research or other lawful purposes.
12. We propose to revise the rules to
codify this permission that a school or
library administrator, supervisor, or
other person authorized by the
certifying authority may disable an
entity’s technology protection measure,
during use by an adult, to allow bona
fide research or other lawful use. We do
not propose to adopt rules that mandate
specific implementation methods, but
merely mirror the statutory language.
This will make clear that the statutory
provision exists without imposing
undue burdens on the entities to which
it applies. We seek comment on whether
it is sufficient to adopt this rule without
specifying federal guidelines for
determination of what constitutes bona
fide research or other lawful use. We
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:08 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
seek comment on whether this statutory
provision imposes an undue burden on
E-rate beneficiaries, particularly on
small entities, and if so, we seek
comment on the least burdensome
method of implementing this provision.
For example, we note that the CIPA
Order discussed leaving these
determinations to local communities
because they would be most
knowledgeable about the varying
circumstances of schools or libraries
within those communities. We believe
that our proposed rules are consistent
with that position. We also seek
comment on any other methods of
implementing this statutory provision.
13. Fifth, we propose to revise
§§ 54.520(c)(1)(iii)(B), (2)(iii)(B), and
(3)(i)(B) to clarify that it is only in the
first year of participation in the E-rate
program that an entity may certify that
it will complete all CIPA requirements
by the next funding year and still
receive funding for that year, as adopted
in the CIPA Order. The text of the
existing rules contains an option for an
entity to certify that it will come into
compliance with the CIPA requirements
by the next funding year, but does not
specify that this certification option is
only applicable to entities that are
applying for E-rate discounts for the first
time. We seek comment on this
proposal.
14. Sixth, we propose to add a rule
provision to require local determination
of what matter is inappropriate for
minors. Among other things, the statute
states that a determination regarding
what matter is inappropriate for minors
shall be made by the school board, local
educational agency, library or other
authority responsible for making the
determination. Although this is
mandated by the statute, it is not
currently in the Commission’s rules. We
seek comment on this proposal. We also
seek comment on whether this
requirement will be burdensome,
particularly for small entities. If so, we
seek comment on how to reduce this
statutorily mandated burden.
15. Seventh, we propose to add a rule
provision requiring each Internet safety
policy that is adopted pursuant to
section 254(l) of the Act to be made
available to the Commission upon
request by the Commission. Although
this requirement is mandated by the
statute, it is not currently in the
Commission’s rules. We seek comment
on this proposal. We also seek comment
on the manner in which the Internet
safety policy should be made available
to the Commission and on the timing of
such response. We also seek comment
on the burdens that this requirement
may impose on respondents,
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2839
particularly on small entities, and on
how the burdens may be reduced.
16. Finally, we propose to add a rule
provision requiring public notice and
hearing to address any proposed
Internet safety policy adopted pursuant
to CIPA. Although this is mandated by
the statute and was discussed in the
CIPA Order, there is no provision
addressing this issue in the existing
rules. As discussed in the CIPA Order,
this public notice and hearing
requirement only applies to entities that
have not already provided such notice
and hearing relating to an Internet safety
policy and technology protection
measure. We seek comment on this
proposal.
Procedural Matters
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act
Certification
17. The Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), see 5 U.S.C. 603, requires that an
agency prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis for notice-and-comment
rulemaking proceedings, unless the
agency certifies that ‘‘the rule will not,
if promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.’’ See 5 U.S.C.
605(b). The RFA generally defines
‘‘small entity’’ as having the same
meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’
‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small
governmental jurisdiction.’’ 5 U.S.C.
601(6). In addition, the term ‘‘small
business’’ has the same meaning as the
term ‘‘small business concern’’ under the
Small Business Act. 5 U.S.C. 601(3). A
‘‘small business concern’’ is one which:
(1) Is independently owned and
operated; (2) is not dominant in its field
of operation; and (3) satisfies any
additional criteria established by the
Small Business Administration (SBA).
15 U.S.C. 632.
18. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), 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 notice of proposed
rulemaking (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. The Commission will send a
copy of this NPRM, including this IRFA,
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration (SBA).
In addition, the NPRM (or summary
thereof) will be published in the Federal
Register.
E:\FR\FM\19JAP1.SGM
19JAP1
2840
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules
1. Need for, and Objectives of, the
Proposed Rules
19. In the NPRM, we seek comment
on revising the Commission’s rules to
add a new certification for elementary
and secondary schools that have
computers with Internet access and
receive discounts under the E-rate
program, pursuant to the mandate of the
Protecting Children in the 21st Century
Act. Such action is necessary to comply
with the Protecting Children in the 21st
Century Act.
2. Legal Basis
20. The legal basis for the NPRM is
contained in sections 1, 4(i), 201
through 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, and § 1.411 of
the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.411.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
3. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which
Rules May Apply
21. 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 proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA
generally defines the term ‘‘small entity’’
as having the same meaning as the terms
‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’
and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’
In addition, the term ‘‘small business’’
has the same meaning as the term ‘‘small
business concern’’ under the Small
Business Act. A small business concern
is one which: (1) Is independently
owned and operated; (2) is not
dominant in its field of operation; and
(3) satisfies any additional criteria
established by the SBA.
22. The Commission has determined
that the group of small entities directly
affected by the rules herein includes
eligible schools and libraries. Further
descriptions of these entities are
provided below.
23. Small Businesses. Nationwide,
there are a total of approximately 22.4
million small businesses according to
SBA data.
24. Small Organizations. Nationwide,
there are approximately 1.6 million
small organizations.
25. Small Governmental Jurisdictions.
The term ‘‘small governmental
jurisdiction’’ is defined generally as
‘‘governments of cities, towns,
townships, villages, school districts, or
special districts, with a population of
less than fifty thousand.’’ Census Bureau
data for 2002 indicate that there were
87,525 local governmental jurisdictions
in the United States. We estimate that,
of this total, 84,377 entities were ‘‘small
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:08 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
governmental jurisdictions.’’ Thus, we
estimate that most governmental
jurisdictions are small.
26. As noted, ‘‘small entity’’ includes
non-profit and small government
entities. Under the schools and libraries
universal service support mechanism,
which provides support for elementary
and secondary schools and libraries, an
elementary school is generally ‘‘a nonprofit institutional day or residential
school that provides elementary
education, as determined under state
law.’’ A secondary school is generally
defined as ‘‘a non-profit institutional
day or residential school that provides
secondary education, as determined
under state law,’’ and not offering
education beyond grade 12. For-profit
schools and libraries, and schools and
libraries with endowments in excess of
$50,000,000, are not eligible to receive
discounts under the program, nor are
libraries whose budgets are not
completely separate from any schools.
Certain other statutory definitions apply
as well. The SBA has defined for-profit,
elementary and secondary schools and
libraries having $6 million or less in
annual receipts as small entities. In
funding year 2007 approximately
105,500 schools and 10,950 libraries
received funding under the schools and
libraries universal service mechanism.
Although we are unable to estimate with
precision the number of these entities
that would qualify as small entities
under SBA’s size standard, we estimate
that fewer than 105,500 schools and
10,950 libraries might be affected
annually by our action, under current
operation of the program.
4. Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
27. Schools and libraries that have
computers with Internet access must
certify that they have in place certain
Internet safety policies and technology
protection measures in order to be
eligible for E-rate discounts for Internet
access and internal connection services.
Pursuant to the mandate in the
Protecting Children in the 21st Century
Act, the NPRM proposes to revise
§ 54.520(c)(i) of the Commission’s rules
to add a provision that a school’s
Internet safety policy must include
educating minors about appropriate
online behavior, including interacting
with other individuals on social
networking websites and in chat rooms
and cyberbullying awareness and
response.
28. In addition, this NPRM revises
certain rules to more accurately reflect
the provisions of the Act with regard to
certifications made pursuant to the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Children’s Internet Protection Act
(CIPA). Specifically, the rule revisions
that may affect small entities require: (1)
Schools and libraries to enforce the
operation of technology protection
measures during use of computers by
minors and adults; (2) schools and
libraries to disable technology
protection measures to enable access for
bona fide research or other lawful
purpose; (3) local determination of what
matter is inappropriate for minors; (4)
schools and libraries to make available
to the Commission, upon request by the
Commission, any Internet safety policy
that is adopted pursuant to section
254(l) of the Act; and (5) schools and
libraries to provide public notice and
hearing to address any proposed
Internet safety policy that is adopted
pursuant to CIPA.
5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant
Economic Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
29. 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.
30. With regard to the new
certification requirements pursuant to
the Protecting Children in the 21st
Century Act, we do not believe that
there will be significant economic
impact on small entities. Currently,
schools and libraries file the FCC Form
486 to certify their compliance with the
requirements regarding Internet safety
policies and technology protection
measures. Because schools and libraries
will continue to use the same FCC Form
486 to certify their compliance with
these requirements, there will be no
additional reporting requirements.
31. With regard to the remaining rule
provisions, we believe that several of
the rule revisions will have no
economic impact on small entities
because they merely clarify existing
definitions and existing requirements.
For example, the revisions regarding the
definitions of elementary and secondary
schools did not change the definitions,
but merely clarified that the same
definitions were utilized throughout the
E:\FR\FM\19JAP1.SGM
19JAP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules
rules, or codified existing statutory
definitions.
32. Several other rule revisions will
have little economic impact on small
entities because schools and libraries
have already implemented these
measures. We acknowledge that the
existing rules do not contain provisions
requiring schools and libraries to
enforce the operation of technology
protection measures during use of
computers by minors and adults or to
provide public notice and hearing to
address any proposed Internet safety
policy that is adopted pursuant to CIPA.
However, as a practical matter, current
E-rate beneficiaries have already
implemented these requirements, even
though these statutory requirements are
not specifically stated in the text of the
Commission’s rules. Schools and
libraries would have been unable to
make the proper CIPA certifications
unless the technology protection
measures have been enforced during
computer use by minors and adults. In
addition, the requirement to provide
public notice and hearing was discussed
extensively in the CIPA Order even
though an implementing rule was not
adopted.
33. The requirement that schools and
libraries may disable technology
protection measures to enable access for
bona fide research or other lawful
purpose may impose a burden on small
entities. As stated in the NPRM, there
are concerns about the difficulty of
school or library staff determining
whether an adult user was engaging
only in bona fide research or other
lawful purposes. Accordingly, the
NPRM seeks comment on ways to
implement this statutory mandate while
keeping the burdens on entities at a
minimum. The NPRM also seeks
comment on ways to implement the rule
revision requiring local determination of
what matter is inappropriate for minors
while minimizing burdens. Finally the
NPRM proposes to require, pursuant to
the statute, that schools and libraries
make available to the Commission, upon
request by the Commission, any Internet
safety policy that is adopted pursuant to
section 254(l) of the Act. Because this
may have an impact on small economic
entities, the NPRM proposes several
methods of making the Internet safety
policy available to the Commission, as
well as seeking comment on ways to
reduce this burden on respondents.
6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rules
34. None.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:08 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
Ex Parte Presentations
35. This proceeding shall be treated as
a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ proceeding in
accordance with the Commission’s ex
parte rules. 47 CFR 1.1200 through
1.1216. 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. 47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2). Other
requirements pertaining to oral and
written presentations are set forth in
§ 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s rules.
47 CFR 1.1206(b).
C. Comment Filing Procedures
36. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and
1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments on or
before the dates indicated on the first
page of this document. 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).
37. Electronic Filers: Comments may
be filed electronically using the Internet
by accessing the ECFS: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
38. 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.
39. Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
40. Effective December 28, 2009, all
hand-delivered or messenger-delivered
paper filings for the Commission’s
Secretary must be delivered to FCC
Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW., Room
TW–A325, Washington, DC 20554. All
hand deliveries must be held together
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes must be disposed of before
entering the building. Please Note:
Through December 24, 2009, the
Commission’s contractor will receive
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2841
hand-delivered or messenger-delivered
paper filings for the Commission’s
Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue,
NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002.
This filing location will be permanently
closed after December 24, 2009. The
filing hours at both locations are 8 a.m.
to 7 p.m.
41. 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.
42. U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington DC 20554.
43. In addition, one copy of each
comment or reply comment must be
sent to Charles Tyler,
Telecommunications Access Policy
Division, Wireline Competition Bureau,
445 12th Street, SW., Room 5–A452,
Washington, DC 20554; e-mail:
Charles.Tyler@fcc.gov.
44. 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).
Ordering Clauses
45. Accordingly, it is ordered that,
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, and § 1.411 of
the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.411,
this notice of proposed rulemaking is
adopted.
46. It is further ordered that 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.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54
Communications common carriers,
Health facilities, Infants and children,
Libraries, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Schools,
Telecommunications, Telephone.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR
part 54 to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\19JAP1.SGM
19JAP1
2842
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules
PART 54—UNIVERSAL SERVICE
1. The authority citation for part 54
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201, 205,
214, and 254 unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend § 54.500 by revising
paragraphs (c) and (k) to read as follows:
§ 54.500
Terms and definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Elementary school. An ‘‘elementary
school’’ means an elementary school as
defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(18), a nonprofit institutional day or residential
school, including a public elementary
charter school, that provides elementary
education, as determined under state
law.
*
*
*
*
*
(k) Secondary school. A ‘‘secondary
school’’ means a secondary school as
defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(38), a nonprofit institutional day or residential
school that provides secondary
education, as determined under state
law. A secondary school does not offer
education beyond grade 12.
*
*
*
*
*
3. Amend § 54.501 by revising
paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
§ 54.501 Eligibility for services provided
by telecommunications carriers.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Schools. (1) Only schools meeting
the statutory definition of ‘‘elementary
school’’ or ‘‘secondary school’’ as defined
in § 54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k), and not
excluded under paragraphs (b)(2) or
(b)(3) shall be eligible for discounts in
telecommunications and other
supported services under this part.
*
*
*
*
*
4. Amend § 54.504 by revising
paragraph (b)(2)(i) and paragraph
(c)(1)(i) to read as follows:
§ 54.504
Requests for services.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) The schools meet the statutory
definition of elementary or secondary
schools in § 54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k)
of this section, do not operate as forprofit businesses, and do not have
endowments exceeding $50 million.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) The schools meet the statutory
definition of elementary or secondary
schools in § 54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k)
of this section, do not operate as forprofit businesses, and do not have
endowments exceeding $50 million.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:08 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
5. Amend § 54.520 by revising
paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(4), (c)(1)(i),
(c)(1)(iii)(B), (c)(2)(i), (c)(2)(iii)(B),
(c)(3)(i)(B), and by adding paragraphs
(c)(4), (c)(5), and (h) to read as follows:
§ 54.520 Children’s Internet Protection Act
certifications required from recipients of
discounts under the federal universal
service support mechanism for schools and
libraries.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(1) School. For the purposes of the
certification requirements of this rule,
school means school, school board,
school district, local education agency
or other authority responsible for
administration of a school.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Statutory definitions.
(i) The term ‘‘minor’’ means any
individual who has not attained the age
of 17 years.
(ii) The term ‘‘obscene’’ has the
meaning given such term in 18 U.S.C.
1460.
(iii) The term ‘‘child pornography’’ has
the meaning given such term in 18
U.S.C. 2256.
(iv) The term ‘‘harmful to minors’’
means any picture, image, graphic
image file, or other visual depiction
that—
(A) Taken as a whole and with respect
to minors, appeals to a prurient interest
in nudity, sex, or excretion;
(B) Depicts, describes, or represents,
in a patently offensive way with respect
to what is suitable for minors, an actual
or simulated sexual act or sexual
contact, actual or simulated normal or
perverted sexual acts, or a lewd
exhibition of the genitals; and
(C) Taken as a whole, lacks serious
literary, artistic, political, or scientific
value as to minors.
(v) The terms ‘‘sexual act’’ and ‘‘sexual
contact’’ have the meanings given such
terms in 18 U.S.C. 2246.
(vi) The term ‘‘technology protection
measure’’ means a specific technology
that blocks or filters Internet access to
the material covered by a certification
under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) The Internet safety policy adopted
and enforced pursuant to 47 U.S.C.
254(h) must include a technology
protection measure that protects against
Internet access by both adults and
minors to visual depictions that are
obscene, child pornography, or, with
respect to use of the computers by
minors, harmful to minors. The
technology protection measure must be
enforced during use of computers with
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Internet access, although an
administrator, supervisor, or other
person authorized by the certifying
authority under paragraph (c)(1) of this
section may disable the technology
protection measure concerned, during
use by an adult, to enable access for
bona fide research or other lawful
purpose. This Internet safety policy
must also include monitoring the online
activities of minors and must educate
minors about appropriate online
behavior, including interacting with
other individuals on social networking
websites and in chat rooms and
cyberbullying awareness and response.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) * * *
(B) Pursuant to the Children’s Internet
Protection Act, as codified at 47 U.S.C.
254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service
represented in the Funding Request
Number(s) on this Form 486, for whom
this is the first year of participation in
the federal universal service support
mechanism for schools and libraries, is
(are) undertaking such actions,
including any necessary procurement
procedures, to comply with the
requirements of CIPA for the next
funding year, but has (have) not
completed all requirements of CIPA for
this funding year.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
(i) The Internet safety policy adopted
and enforced pursuant to 47 U.S.C.
254(h) must include a technology
protection measure that protects against
Internet access by both adults and
minors to visual depictions that are
obscene, child pornography, or, with
respect to use of the computers by
minors, harmful to minors. The
technology protection measure must be
enforced during use of computers with
Internet access, although an
administrator, supervisor, or other
person authorized by the certifying
authority under paragraph (c)(1) of this
section may disable the technology
protection measure concerned, during
use by an adult, to enable access for
bona fide research or other lawful
purpose.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) * * *
(B) Pursuant to the Children’s Internet
Protection Act, as codified at 47 U.S.C.
254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service
represented in the Funding Request
Number(s) on this Form 486, for whom
this is the first year of participation in
the federal universal service support
mechanism for schools and libraries, is
(are) undertaking such actions,
including any necessary procurement
procedures, to comply with the
E:\FR\FM\19JAP1.SGM
19JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
requirements of CIPA for the next
funding year, but has (have) not
completed all requirements of CIPA for
this funding year.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Pursuant to the Children’s Internet
Protection Act, as codified at 47 U.S.C.
254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service
under my administrative authority and
represented in the Funding Request
Number(s) for which you have
requested or received Funding
Commitments, and for whom this is the
first year of participation in the federal
universal service support mechanism
for schools and libraries, is (are)
undertaking such actions, including any
necessary procurement procedures, to
comply with the requirements of CIPA
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:08 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
for the next funding year, but has (have)
not completed all requirements of CIPA
for this funding year.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Local determination of content. A
determination regarding what matter is
inappropriate for minors shall be made
by the school board, local educational
agency, library, or other authority
responsible for making the
determination. No agency or
instrumentality of the United States
Government may establish criteria for
making such determination; review the
determination made by the certifying
school, school board, local educational
agency, library, or other authority; or
consider the criteria employed by the
certifying school, school board, local
educational agency, library, or other
authority in the administration of the
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
2843
schools and libraries universal service
support mechanism.
(5) Availability for review. Each
Internet safety policy adopted pursuant
to 47 U.S.C. 254(l) shall be made
available to the Commission, upon
request for the Commission, by the
school, school board, local educational
agency, library, or other authority
responsible for adopting such Internet
safety policy for purposes of the review
of such Internet safety policy by the
Commission.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Public notice; hearing. A school or
library shall provide reasonable public
notice and hold at least one public
hearing or meeting to address the
proposed Internet safety policy.
[FR Doc. E9–30323 Filed 1–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\19JAP1.SGM
19JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2836-2843]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-30323]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[CC Docket No. 02-6; FCC 09-96]
Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, we propose revising the Federal
Communications Commission's (Commission) rules regarding the schools
and libraries universal service support mechanism, also known as the E-
rate program, to comply with the requirements of the Protecting
Children in the 21st Century Act. Among other things, the Protecting
Children in the 21st Century Act, titled Promoting Online Safety in
Schools, revised the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act),
by adding a new certification requirement for elementary and secondary
schools that have computers with Internet access and receive discounts
under the E-rate program. We also propose to revise related Commission
rules to reflect existing statutory language more accurately.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rules are due on or before February 18,
2010 and reply comments are due on or before March 5, 2010. Written
comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection
requirements should be submitted on or before March 22, 2010. 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 comments, identified by CC Docket No. 02-6,
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://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. 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.
In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy
of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection
requirements
[[Page 2837]]
contained herein should be submitted to the Federal Communications
Commission via e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov and to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office
of Management and Budget, via e-mail to Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov or via fax at 202-395-5167.
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: Anita Cheng, Wireline Competition
Bureau, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, (202) 418-7400 or
TTY: (202) 418-0484. For additional information concerning the
Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained
in this document, send an e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Judith B.
Herman at 202-418-0214 or via email at Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 02-6, FCC 09-96, adopted
November 4, 2009, and released November 5, 2009. The complete text of
this document is available for inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445
12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The document may
also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best
Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 378-3160 or (202) 863- 2893,
facsimile (202) 863-2898, or via the Internet at https://www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available on the Commission's Web site at
https://www.fcc.gov. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the
first page of this document. 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://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
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. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
Effective December 28, 2009, all hand-delivered or
messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must
be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-A325,
Washington, DC 20554. All hand deliveries must be held together with
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before
entering the building. Please Note: Through December 24, 2009, 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. This filing
location will be permanently closed after December 24, 2009. The filing
hours at both locations are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.
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.
In addition, one copy of each comment or reply comment
must be sent to Charles Tyler, Telecommunications Access Policy
Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 5-
A452, Washington, DC 20554; e-mail: Charles.Tyler@fcc.gov.
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).
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis:
This document contains proposed information collection
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments
are due March 22, 2010.
Comments on the proposed information collection requirements should
address: (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 estimates; (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. In
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment
on how we might further reduce the information collection burden for
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0853.
Title: FCC Form 479, Certification by Administrative Authority to
Billed Entity of Compliance with Children's Internet Protection Act;
FCC Form 486, Receipt of Service Confirmation Form, FCC Form 500,
Funding Commitment (FRN) Change Request Form.
Form Number(s): FCC Forms 479, 486, 500.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit and not-for-profit
institutions.
Number of Respondents and Responses: 75,000 respondents and 75,000
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 1.07 hours (average time per
response).
Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Frequency of Response: Annual, on occasion, and third party
disclosure requirement.
Total Annual Burden: 70,000 hours.
Total Annual Cost: N/A.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact.
Nature of Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission is not
requesting that the respondents submit confidential information to the
FCC. Respondents may, however, request confidential treatment for
information they believe to be confidential under 47 CFR 0.459 of the
Commission's rules.
Needs and Uses: The existing information collection requires
schools and libraries to certify that they have in place certain
Internet safety policies, pursuant to the Children's Internet
Protection Act (CIPA), 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), in order to receive E-
rate
[[Page 2838]]
discounts for Internet access. This information collection is being
revised to add a new certification that the E-rate applicant has
updated its Internet safety policy to include plans for educating
minors about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with
other individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and
cyberbullying awareness and response, as required by the Protecting
Children in the 21st Century Act. This revision will not require any
changes to the FCC Forms 479 or 486, which enable E-rate participants
to certify that they are compliant with CIPA. This revision has no
effect on the FCC Form 500, which is also part of this information
collection. In addition, this information collection is being revised
to add a rule provision requiring each Internet safety policy that is
adopted pursuant to section 254(l) of the Act, as amended, to be made
available to the Commission upon request by the Commission. Although
this requirement is mandated by the statute, it is not currently in the
Commission's rules.
Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
I. Introduction
1. In this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), we propose
revising the Federal Communications Commission's (Commission) rules
regarding the schools and libraries universal service support
mechanism, also known as the E-rate program, to comply with the
requirements of the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act. Among
other things, section 215 of the Protecting Children in the 21st
Century Act, titled Promoting Online Safety in Schools, revised section
254(h)(5)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act),
by adding a new certification requirement for elementary and secondary
schools that have computers with Internet access and receive discounts
under the E-rate program. We also propose to revise related Commission
rules to reflect existing statutory language more accurately.
II. Background
2. Under the E-rate program, eligible schools, libraries, and
consortia that include eligible schools and libraries may apply for
discounted eligible telecommunications, Internet access, and internal
connections services. In accordance with the Children's Internet
Protection Act (CIPA), to be eligible for E-rate discounts for Internet
access and internal connection services, schools and libraries that
have computers with Internet access must certify that they have in
place certain Internet safety policies and technology protection
measures. As required by CIPA, Sec. 54.520(c)(i) of the Commission's
rules requires that the Internet safety policy must include a
technology protection measure that protects against Internet access by
both adults and minors to visual depictions that are (1) obscene, or
(2) child pornography, or, with respect to use of the computers by
minors, (3) harmful to minors. In addition, Sec. 54.520(c)(i) requires
the entity to certify that its policy of Internet safety includes
monitoring the online activities of minors. Applicants make their CIPA
certifications annually on the Confirmation of Receipt of Services Form
(FCC Form 486).
3. Among other things, the Protecting Children in the 21st Century
Act revised section 254(h)(5)(B) of the Act by adding a new
certification for elementary and secondary schools that have computers
with Internet access and receive discounts under the E-rate program. In
addition to the existing CIPA certifications required of schools in
section 254(h)(5) of the Act, the Protecting Children in the 21st
Century Act requires the school, school board, local educational
agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of
the school to certify that it ``as part of its Internet safety policy
is educating minors about appropriate online behavior, including
interacting with other individuals on social networking Web sites and
in chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness and response.''
III. Discussion
A. Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act Rule Revisions
4. We seek comment on revising Sec. 54.520(c)(i) of the
Commission's rules to include the new certification requirement added
by the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act. We propose to
revise Sec. 54.520(c)(i) to add a certification provision that a
school's Internet safety policy must include educating minors about
appropriate online behavior, including interacting with other
individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and
cyberbullying awareness and response. We seek comment on this proposal.
5. In addition, we tentatively conclude that a recipient of E-rate
funding for Internet access and internal connections should be required
to certify, on its FCC Form 486 for funding year 2010, that it has
updated its Internet safety policy to include plans for educating
minors about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with
other individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and
cyberbullying awareness and response, as required by the Protecting
Children in the 21st Century Act. We note that the next opportunity for
applicants to certify to the CIPA requirements, including this new
certification, would be on the FCC Form 486 for funding year 2009,
which would typically be filed after the start of the 2009 funding year
(i.e., after July 1, 2009). Schools may, however, require additional
time to amend their Internet safety policies and implement procedures
to comply with the new requirements after the completion of this
rulemaking proceeding. In addition, we note that Congress did not set a
timeframe for implementation of the new certification. We seek comment
on this tentative conclusion.
B. Other Proposed Rule Revisions
6. We also seek comment on revising certain rules to reflect more
accurately existing statutory language regarding the CIPA
certifications.
7. First, we propose to revise the rules so that the definitions of
elementary and secondary schools are consistent throughout. At this
time, rule Sec. Sec. 54.500, 54.501, and 54.504 all contain
differently worded definitions of elementary and secondary schools. We
propose to define elementary and secondary schools in Sec. 54.500 of
the rules, and to revise Sec. Sec. 54.501 and 54.504 to refer to Sec.
54.500 definitions. We seek comment on this proposal.
8. Second, we propose to revise Sec. 54.520(a)(1) to add ``school
board'' to the definition of entities that are subject to CIPA
certifications. Although section 254(h) of the Act includes the term
``school board'' as an entity to which the CIPA certifications apply,
our rules do not include this term. We seek comment on this proposal.
9. Third, we propose to revise Sec. 54.520(a)(4) to add the
existing statutory definitions of the terms ``minor,'' ``obscene,''
``child pornography,'' ``harmful to minors,'' ``sexual act,'' ``sexual
contact,'' and ``technology protection measure,'' consistent with the
statute. Sec. 54.520 of our rules does not currently include the
definitions of these terms, but instead refers back to the statute.
Including the statutory definitions of these terms in the definitions
section of our rules could help clarify the CIPA requirements. We seek
comment on this proposal.
10. Fourth, we propose to revise Sec. Sec. 54.520(c)(1)(i) and
54.520(c)(2)(i)
[[Page 2839]]
consistent with sections 254(h)(5)(D), (h)(6)(D), (h)(5)(B)(ii),
(C)(ii), and (h)(6)(B)(ii), (C)(ii) of the Act to require that the
technology protection measures be in operation during any use of
computers with Internet access, and that the technology protection
measures may be disabled by an authorized person, during adult use, to
enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purpose. The
statute requires that schools and libraries certify that they are
enforcing the operation of the technology protection measures during
the use of computers by minors and adults. This enforcement requirement
is not currently included in the Commission's rules. We seek comment on
this proposal.
11. In addition, sections 254(h)(5)(D) and (h)(6)(D) of the Act
permit a school or library administrator, supervisor, or other person
authorized by the certifying authority to disable an entity's
technology protection measure to allow bona fide research or other
lawful use by an adult. We note that in the CIPA Order, although the
Commission acknowledged this statutory provision, it declined to adopt
any implementing rule provision, stating that
[w]e decline to promulgate rules mandating how entities should
implement these provisions. Federally-imposed rules directing school
and library staff when to disable technology protection measures
would likely be overbroad and imprecise, potentially chilling
speech, or otherwise confusing schools and libraries about the
requirements of the statute. We leave such determinations to local
communities, whom we believe to be most knowledgeable about the
varying circumstances of schools or libraries within those
communities.
The Commission stated that its decision was supported by commenter
concerns about the difficulty of school or library staff in determining
whether an adult user was engaging only in bona fide research or other
lawful purposes.
12. We propose to revise the rules to codify this permission that a
school or library administrator, supervisor, or other person authorized
by the certifying authority may disable an entity's technology
protection measure, during use by an adult, to allow bona fide research
or other lawful use. We do not propose to adopt rules that mandate
specific implementation methods, but merely mirror the statutory
language. This will make clear that the statutory provision exists
without imposing undue burdens on the entities to which it applies. We
seek comment on whether it is sufficient to adopt this rule without
specifying federal guidelines for determination of what constitutes
bona fide research or other lawful use. We seek comment on whether this
statutory provision imposes an undue burden on E-rate beneficiaries,
particularly on small entities, and if so, we seek comment on the least
burdensome method of implementing this provision. For example, we note
that the CIPA Order discussed leaving these determinations to local
communities because they would be most knowledgeable about the varying
circumstances of schools or libraries within those communities. We
believe that our proposed rules are consistent with that position. We
also seek comment on any other methods of implementing this statutory
provision.
13. Fifth, we propose to revise Sec. Sec. 54.520(c)(1)(iii)(B),
(2)(iii)(B), and (3)(i)(B) to clarify that it is only in the first year
of participation in the E-rate program that an entity may certify that
it will complete all CIPA requirements by the next funding year and
still receive funding for that year, as adopted in the CIPA Order. The
text of the existing rules contains an option for an entity to certify
that it will come into compliance with the CIPA requirements by the
next funding year, but does not specify that this certification option
is only applicable to entities that are applying for E-rate discounts
for the first time. We seek comment on this proposal.
14. Sixth, we propose to add a rule provision to require local
determination of what matter is inappropriate for minors. Among other
things, the statute states that a determination regarding what matter
is inappropriate for minors shall be made by the school board, local
educational agency, library or other authority responsible for making
the determination. Although this is mandated by the statute, it is not
currently in the Commission's rules. We seek comment on this proposal.
We also seek comment on whether this requirement will be burdensome,
particularly for small entities. If so, we seek comment on how to
reduce this statutorily mandated burden.
15. Seventh, we propose to add a rule provision requiring each
Internet safety policy that is adopted pursuant to section 254(l) of
the Act to be made available to the Commission upon request by the
Commission. Although this requirement is mandated by the statute, it is
not currently in the Commission's rules. We seek comment on this
proposal. We also seek comment on the manner in which the Internet
safety policy should be made available to the Commission and on the
timing of such response. We also seek comment on the burdens that this
requirement may impose on respondents, particularly on small entities,
and on how the burdens may be reduced.
16. Finally, we propose to add a rule provision requiring public
notice and hearing to address any proposed Internet safety policy
adopted pursuant to CIPA. Although this is mandated by the statute and
was discussed in the CIPA Order, there is no provision addressing this
issue in the existing rules. As discussed in the CIPA Order, this
public notice and hearing requirement only applies to entities that
have not already provided such notice and hearing relating to an
Internet safety policy and technology protection measure. We seek
comment on this proposal.
Procedural Matters
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
17. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), see 5 U.S.C. 603,
requires that an agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for
notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies
that ``the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' See 5 U.S.C.
605(b). The RFA generally defines ``small entity'' as having the same
meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and
``small governmental jurisdiction.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(6). In addition, the
term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small
business concern'' under the Small Business Act. 5 U.S.C. 601(3). A
``small business concern'' is one which: (1) Is independently owned and
operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA). 15 U.S.C. 632.
18. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 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 notice of proposed rulemaking
(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. The Commission will send a copy of
this NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the NPRM (or
summary thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.
[[Page 2840]]
1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
19. In the NPRM, we seek comment on revising the Commission's rules
to add a new certification for elementary and secondary schools that
have computers with Internet access and receive discounts under the E-
rate program, pursuant to the mandate of the Protecting Children in the
21st Century Act. Such action is necessary to comply with the
Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act.
2. Legal Basis
20. The legal basis for the NPRM is contained in sections 1, 4(i),
201 through 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, and
Sec. 1.411 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.411.
3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
Rules May Apply
21. 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 proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.
22. The Commission has determined that the group of small entities
directly affected by the rules herein includes eligible schools and
libraries. Further descriptions of these entities are provided below.
23. Small Businesses. Nationwide, there are a total of
approximately 22.4 million small businesses according to SBA data.
24. Small Organizations. Nationwide, there are approximately 1.6
million small organizations.
25. Small Governmental Jurisdictions. The term ``small governmental
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, towns,
townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a
population of less than fifty thousand.'' Census Bureau data for 2002
indicate that there were 87,525 local governmental jurisdictions in the
United States. We estimate that, of this total, 84,377 entities were
``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, we estimate that most
governmental jurisdictions are small.
26. As noted, ``small entity'' includes non-profit and small
government entities. Under the schools and libraries universal service
support mechanism, which provides support for elementary and secondary
schools and libraries, an elementary school is generally ``a non-profit
institutional day or residential school that provides elementary
education, as determined under state law.'' A secondary school is
generally defined as ``a non-profit institutional day or residential
school that provides secondary education, as determined under state
law,'' and not offering education beyond grade 12. For-profit schools
and libraries, and schools and libraries with endowments in excess of
$50,000,000, are not eligible to receive discounts under the program,
nor are libraries whose budgets are not completely separate from any
schools. Certain other statutory definitions apply as well. The SBA has
defined for-profit, elementary and secondary schools and libraries
having $6 million or less in annual receipts as small entities. In
funding year 2007 approximately 105,500 schools and 10,950 libraries
received funding under the schools and libraries universal service
mechanism. Although we are unable to estimate with precision the number
of these entities that would qualify as small entities under SBA's size
standard, we estimate that fewer than 105,500 schools and 10,950
libraries might be affected annually by our action, under current
operation of the program.
4. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements
27. Schools and libraries that have computers with Internet access
must certify that they have in place certain Internet safety policies
and technology protection measures in order to be eligible for E-rate
discounts for Internet access and internal connection services.
Pursuant to the mandate in the Protecting Children in the 21st Century
Act, the NPRM proposes to revise Sec. 54.520(c)(i) of the Commission's
rules to add a provision that a school's Internet safety policy must
include educating minors about appropriate online behavior, including
interacting with other individuals on social networking websites and in
chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness and response.
28. In addition, this NPRM revises certain rules to more accurately
reflect the provisions of the Act with regard to certifications made
pursuant to the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA).
Specifically, the rule revisions that may affect small entities
require: (1) Schools and libraries to enforce the operation of
technology protection measures during use of computers by minors and
adults; (2) schools and libraries to disable technology protection
measures to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful
purpose; (3) local determination of what matter is inappropriate for
minors; (4) schools and libraries to make available to the Commission,
upon request by the Commission, any Internet safety policy that is
adopted pursuant to section 254(l) of the Act; and (5) schools and
libraries to provide public notice and hearing to address any proposed
Internet safety policy that is adopted pursuant to CIPA.
5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
29. 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.
30. With regard to the new certification requirements pursuant to
the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act, we do not believe that
there will be significant economic impact on small entities. Currently,
schools and libraries file the FCC Form 486 to certify their compliance
with the requirements regarding Internet safety policies and technology
protection measures. Because schools and libraries will continue to use
the same FCC Form 486 to certify their compliance with these
requirements, there will be no additional reporting requirements.
31. With regard to the remaining rule provisions, we believe that
several of the rule revisions will have no economic impact on small
entities because they merely clarify existing definitions and existing
requirements. For example, the revisions regarding the definitions of
elementary and secondary schools did not change the definitions, but
merely clarified that the same definitions were utilized throughout the
[[Page 2841]]
rules, or codified existing statutory definitions.
32. Several other rule revisions will have little economic impact
on small entities because schools and libraries have already
implemented these measures. We acknowledge that the existing rules do
not contain provisions requiring schools and libraries to enforce the
operation of technology protection measures during use of computers by
minors and adults or to provide public notice and hearing to address
any proposed Internet safety policy that is adopted pursuant to CIPA.
However, as a practical matter, current E-rate beneficiaries have
already implemented these requirements, even though these statutory
requirements are not specifically stated in the text of the
Commission's rules. Schools and libraries would have been unable to
make the proper CIPA certifications unless the technology protection
measures have been enforced during computer use by minors and adults.
In addition, the requirement to provide public notice and hearing was
discussed extensively in the CIPA Order even though an implementing
rule was not adopted.
33. The requirement that schools and libraries may disable
technology protection measures to enable access for bona fide research
or other lawful purpose may impose a burden on small entities. As
stated in the NPRM, there are concerns about the difficulty of school
or library staff determining whether an adult user was engaging only in
bona fide research or other lawful purposes. Accordingly, the NPRM
seeks comment on ways to implement this statutory mandate while keeping
the burdens on entities at a minimum. The NPRM also seeks comment on
ways to implement the rule revision requiring local determination of
what matter is inappropriate for minors while minimizing burdens.
Finally the NPRM proposes to require, pursuant to the statute, that
schools and libraries make available to the Commission, upon request by
the Commission, any Internet safety policy that is adopted pursuant to
section 254(l) of the Act. Because this may have an impact on small
economic entities, the NPRM proposes several methods of making the
Internet safety policy available to the Commission, as well as seeking
comment on ways to reduce this burden on respondents.
6. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
34. None.
Ex Parte Presentations
35. This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose''
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. 47 CFR
1.1200 through 1.1216. 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.
47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2). Other requirements pertaining to oral and written
presentations are set forth in Sec. 1.1206(b) of the Commission's
rules. 47 CFR 1.1206(b).
C. Comment Filing Procedures
36. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules,
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this
document. 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).
37. Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using
the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or
the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
38. 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.
39. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
40. Effective December 28, 2009, all hand-delivered or messenger-
delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-A325,
Washington, DC 20554. All hand deliveries must be held together with
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before
entering the building. Please Note: Through December 24, 2009, 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. This filing
location will be permanently closed after December 24, 2009. The filing
hours at both locations are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.
41. 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.
42. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail
must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.
43. In addition, one copy of each comment or reply comment must be
sent to Charles Tyler, Telecommunications Access Policy Division,
Wireline Competition Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 5-A452,
Washington, DC 20554; e-mail: Charles.Tyler@fcc.gov.
44. 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).
Ordering Clauses
45. Accordingly, it is ordered that, 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, and Sec. 1.411 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR
1.411, this notice of proposed rulemaking is adopted.
46. It is further ordered that 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.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54
Communications common carriers, Health facilities, Infants and
children, Libraries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools,
Telecommunications, Telephone.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 54 to read as
follows:
[[Page 2842]]
PART 54--UNIVERSAL SERVICE
1. The authority citation for part 54 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201, 205, 214, and 254 unless
otherwise noted.
2. Amend Sec. 54.500 by revising paragraphs (c) and (k) to read as
follows:
Sec. 54.500 Terms and definitions.
* * * * *
(c) Elementary school. An ``elementary school'' means an elementary
school as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(18), a non-profit institutional day
or residential school, including a public elementary charter school,
that provides elementary education, as determined under state law.
* * * * *
(k) Secondary school. A ``secondary school'' means a secondary
school as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(38), a non-profit institutional day
or residential school that provides secondary education, as determined
under state law. A secondary school does not offer education beyond
grade 12.
* * * * *
3. Amend Sec. 54.501 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 54.501 Eligibility for services provided by telecommunications
carriers.
* * * * *
(b) Schools. (1) Only schools meeting the statutory definition of
``elementary school'' or ``secondary school'' as defined in Sec.
54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k), and not excluded under paragraphs (b)(2)
or (b)(3) shall be eligible for discounts in telecommunications and
other supported services under this part.
* * * * *
4. Amend Sec. 54.504 by revising paragraph (b)(2)(i) and paragraph
(c)(1)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 54.504 Requests for services.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) The schools meet the statutory definition of elementary or
secondary schools in Sec. 54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k) of this
section, do not operate as for-profit businesses, and do not have
endowments exceeding $50 million.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) The schools meet the statutory definition of elementary or
secondary schools in Sec. 54.500 paragraphs (c) or (k) of this
section, do not operate as for-profit businesses, and do not have
endowments exceeding $50 million.
* * * * *
5. Amend Sec. 54.520 by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(4),
(c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(iii)(B), (c)(2)(i), (c)(2)(iii)(B), (c)(3)(i)(B), and
by adding paragraphs (c)(4), (c)(5), and (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 54.520 Children's Internet Protection Act certifications
required from recipients of discounts under the federal universal
service support mechanism for schools and libraries.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) School. For the purposes of the certification requirements of
this rule, school means school, school board, school district, local
education agency or other authority responsible for administration of a
school.
* * * * *
(4) Statutory definitions.
(i) The term ``minor'' means any individual who has not attained
the age of 17 years.
(ii) The term ``obscene'' has the meaning given such term in 18
U.S.C. 1460.
(iii) The term ``child pornography'' has the meaning given such
term in 18 U.S.C. 2256.
(iv) The term ``harmful to minors'' means any picture, image,
graphic image file, or other visual depiction that--
(A) Taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a
prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion;
(B) Depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way
with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated
sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted
sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and
(C) Taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political,
or scientific value as to minors.
(v) The terms ``sexual act'' and ``sexual contact'' have the
meanings given such terms in 18 U.S.C. 2246.
(vi) The term ``technology protection measure'' means a specific
technology that blocks or filters Internet access to the material
covered by a certification under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) The Internet safety policy adopted and enforced pursuant to 47
U.S.C. 254(h) must include a technology protection measure that
protects against Internet access by both adults and minors to visual
depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or, with respect to use
of the computers by minors, harmful to minors. The technology
protection measure must be enforced during use of computers with
Internet access, although an administrator, supervisor, or other person
authorized by the certifying authority under paragraph (c)(1) of this
section may disable the technology protection measure concerned, during
use by an adult, to enable access for bona fide research or other
lawful purpose. This Internet safety policy must also include
monitoring the online activities of minors and must educate minors
about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with other
individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and
cyberbullying awareness and response.
* * * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) Pursuant to the Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified
at 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service represented in
the Funding Request Number(s) on this Form 486, for whom this is the
first year of participation in the federal universal service support
mechanism for schools and libraries, is (are) undertaking such actions,
including any necessary procurement procedures, to comply with the
requirements of CIPA for the next funding year, but has (have) not
completed all requirements of CIPA for this funding year.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(i) The Internet safety policy adopted and enforced pursuant to 47
U.S.C. 254(h) must include a technology protection measure that
protects against Internet access by both adults and minors to visual
depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or, with respect to use
of the computers by minors, harmful to minors. The technology
protection measure must be enforced during use of computers with
Internet access, although an administrator, supervisor, or other person
authorized by the certifying authority under paragraph (c)(1) of this
section may disable the technology protection measure concerned, during
use by an adult, to enable access for bona fide research or other
lawful purpose.
* * * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) Pursuant to the Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified
at 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service represented in
the Funding Request Number(s) on this Form 486, for whom this is the
first year of participation in the federal universal service support
mechanism for schools and libraries, is (are) undertaking such actions,
including any necessary procurement procedures, to comply with the
[[Page 2843]]
requirements of CIPA for the next funding year, but has (have) not
completed all requirements of CIPA for this funding year.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Pursuant to the Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified
at 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), the recipient(s) of service under my
administrative authority and represented in the Funding Request
Number(s) for which you have requested or received Funding Commitments,
and for whom this is the first year of participation in the federal
universal service support mechanism for schools and libraries, is (are)
undertaking such actions, including any necessary procurement
procedures, to comply with the requirements of CIPA for the next
funding year, but has (have) not completed all requirements of CIPA for
this funding year.
* * * * *
(4) Local determination of content. A determination regarding what
matter is inappropriate for minors shall be made by the school board,
local educational agency, library, or other authority responsible for
making the determination. No agency or instrumentality of the United
States Government may establish criteria for making such determination;
review the determination made by the certifying school, school board,
local educational agency, library, or other authority; or consider the
criteria employed by the certifying school, school board, local
educational agency, library, or other authority in the administration
of the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism.
(5) Availability for review. Each Internet safety policy adopted
pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 254(l) shall be made available to the Commission,
upon request for the Commission, by the school, school board, local
educational agency, library, or other authority responsible for
adopting such Internet safety policy for purposes of the review of such
Internet safety policy by the Commission.
* * * * *
(h) Public notice; hearing. A school or library shall provide
reasonable public notice and hold at least one public hearing or
meeting to address the proposed Internet safety policy.
[FR Doc. E9-30323 Filed 1-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P