Practice and Procedure; Amendment of CORES Registration System, 5652-5677 [2011-1941]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
5652
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 1
[MD Docket No. 10–234; FCC 10–192]
Practice and Procedure; Amendment
of CORES Registration System
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC)
proposes revisions to the Commission’s
Registration System (CORES), which is
used by individuals and entities doing
business with the FCC to obtain a
unique identifying number called an
FCC Registration Number, or ‘‘FRN.’’
The proposed modifications to CORES
include: Requiring entities and
individuals to rely primarily upon a
single FRN that may, at their discretion,
be linked to subsidiary or associated
accounts; allowing entities to identify
multiple points of contact; eliminating
some of our exceptions to the
requirement that entities and
individuals provide their Taxpayer
Identification Number (‘‘TIN’’) at the
time of registration; requiring FRN
holders to provide their e-mail
addresses; modifying CORES log-in
procedures; adding attention flags and
automated notices that would inform
FRN holders of their financial standing
before the Commission; and adding data
fields to enable FRN holders to indicate
their tax-exempt status and notify the
Commission of pending bankruptcy
proceedings. These modifications, if
implemented, will make CORES more
feature-friendly and improve the
Commission’s ability to comply with
various statutes that govern debt
collection and the collection of personal
information by the Federal government.
DATES: Comments must be submitted by
interested parties on or before March 3,
2011. Reply comments must be
submitted no later than March 18, 2011.
Written PRA comments on the proposed
information collection requirements
contained herein must be submitted by
the public, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), and other interested
parties on or before April 4, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by MD Docket No. 10–234,
FCC 10–192, by any of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications
Commission’s Web site: https://www.fcc.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments.
Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail
(although the Commission continues to
experience delays in receiving U.S.
Postal Service mail). All filings must be
addressed to the Commission’s
Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
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 PRA
comments on the proposed collection
requirements 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 nfraser@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:
Warren Firschein, Office of the
Managing Director, (202) 418–0844. For
additional information concerning the
information collection requirements
contained in this document, send an
e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Leslie
F. Smith, (202) 418–0217. To view or
obtain a copy of this information
collection request (ICR) submitted to
OMB: (1) Go to this OMB/GSA Web
page: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the
Web page called ‘‘Currently Under
Review,’’ (3) click on the downwardpointing arrow in the ‘‘Select Agency’’
box below the ‘‘Currently Under
Review’’ heading, (4) select ‘‘Federal
Communications Commission’’ from the
list of agencies presented in the ‘‘Select
Agency’’ box, (5) click the ‘‘Submit’’
button to the right of the ‘‘Select
Agency’’ box, and (6) when the list of
FCC ICRs currently under review
appears, look for the OMB control
number(s) of the ICR(s) as shown in the
Supplementary Information section
below (3060–0917 and/or 3060–0918)
and then click on either of the ICR
Reference Number(s). A copy of the FCC
submission(s) to OMB will be displayed.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, MD Docket No.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
10–234, FCC No. 10–192, adopted
November 19, 2010 and released
December 7, 2010. The full text of the
NPRM is available for public inspection
and copying during business hours in
the FCC Reference Information Center,
Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room
CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. It
also may be purchased from the
Commission’s duplicating contractor at
Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room
CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554; the
contractor’s Web site, https://www.
bcpiweb.com; or by calling (800) 378–
3160, facsimile (202) 488–5563, or
e-mail FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Copies of
the Notice also may be obtained via the
Commission’s Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS) by entering the
docket number MD Docket No. 10–234.
Additionally, the complete item is
available on the Federal
Communications Commission’s Web
site at https://www.fcc.gov.
This document contains proposed
information collection requirements. As
part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burden and as required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), the Federal
Communications Commission invites
the general public and other Federal
agencies to comment on the following
information collection(s). Public and
agency comments are due April 4, 2011.
Comments 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: 3060–0917.
Title: CORES Registration Form.
Form Number: FCC Form 160.
Type of Review: Revision of currently
approved collection.
Respondents: Individuals or
households; Businesses or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions; and
State, Local or Tribal Government.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Number of Respondents and
Responses: 150,000 respondents;
150,000 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 10
minutes (0.167 hours).
Frequency of Response: One time
reporting requirements.
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Total Annual Burden: 25,050 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: Not
required.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:
The Commission maintains a system of
records, FCC/OMD–9, ‘‘Commission
Registration System (CORES),’’ to cover
the collection, purpose(s), storage,
safeguards, and disposal of the
personally identifiable information (PII)
that individual respondents may submit
on FCC Form 160. The FCC will also
redact PII submitted on this form before
it makes FCC Form 160 available for
public inspection. FCC Form 160
includes a privacy statement to inform
applicants (respondents) of the
Commission’s need to obtain the
information and the protections that the
FCC has in place to protect the PII.
Needs and Uses: Respondents use
FCC Form 160 to register in the FCC’s
Commission Registration System
(CORES). When registering, the
respondent receives a unique FCC
Registration Number (FRN), which is
required for anyone doing business with
the Commission. FCC Form 160 is used
to collect information that pertains to
the entity’s name, address, contact
representative, telephone number,
e-mail address, and fax number.
Respondents may also register in
CORES on-line at https://www.fcc.gov/
frnreg. The Commission uses this
information to collect or report on any
delinquent debt arising from the
respondent’s business dealings with the
FCC, including both ‘‘feeable’’ and
‘‘nonfeeable’’ services; and to ensure that
registrants (respondents) receive any
refunds due. Use of the CORES system
is also a means of ensuring that the
Commission operates in compliance
with the Debt Collection Improvement
Act of 1996.
The NPRM proposes to eliminate
some of our exceptions to the
requirement that entities and
individuals provide their Taxpayer
Identification Number (‘‘TIN’’) at the
time of registration; require FRN holders
to provide their e-mail addresses; give
FRN holders the option to identify
multiple points of contact; and require
FRN holders to indicate their taxexempt status and notify the
Commission of pending bankruptcy
proceedings. All remaining existing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
information collection requirements
would stay as they are.
OMB Control Number: 3060–0918.
Title: CORES Update/Change Form.
Form Number: FCC Form 161.
Type of Review: Revision of currently
approved collection.
Respondents: Individuals or
households; Businesses or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions; and
State, Local or Tribal Government.
Number of Respondents and
Responses: 57,600 respondents; 57,600
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 10
minutes (0.167 hours).
Frequency of Response: On occasion
reporting requirements.
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
Total Annual Burden: 9,792 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: Not
required.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:
The Commission maintains a system of
records, FCC/OMD–9, ‘‘Commission
Registration System (CORES),’’ to cover
the collection, purpose(s), storage,
safeguards, and disposal of the
personally identifiable information (PII)
that individual respondents may submit
on FCC Form 161. The FCC will also
redact PII submitted on this form before
it makes FCC Form 161 available for
public inspection. FCC Form 161
includes a privacy statement to inform
applicants (respondents) of the
Commission’s need to obtain the
information and the protections that the
FCC has in place to protect the PII.
Needs and Uses: After respondents
have registered in the FCC’s
Commission Registration System
(CORES) and have been issued an FCC
Registration Number (FRN), they may
use FCC Form 161 to update and/or
change their contact information,
including name, address, telephone
number, e-mail address, fax number,
contact representative, contact
representative’s address, telephone
number, e-mail address, and/or fax
number. Respondents may also update
their registration information in CORES
on-line at https://www.fcc.gov/frnreg.
The Commission uses this information
to collect or report on any delinquent
debt arising from the respondent’s
business dealings with the FCC,
including both ‘‘feeable’’ and
‘‘nonfeeable’’ services; and to ensure that
registrants (respondents) receive any
refunds due. Use of the CORES system
is also a means of ensuring that the
Commission operates in compliance
with the Debt Collection Improvement
Act of 1996.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5653
The NPRM proposes to eliminate
some of our exceptions to the
requirement that entities and
individuals provide their Taxpayer
Identification Number (‘‘TIN’’) at the
time of registration; require FRN holders
to provide their e-mail addresses; give
FRN holders the option to identify
multiple points of contact; and require
FRN holders to indicate their taxexempt status and notify the
Commission of pending bankruptcy
proceedings. All remaining existing
information collection requirements
would stay as they are.
Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
Amendment of Part 1 of the
Commission’s Rules, Concerning
Practice and Procedure, Amendment of
CORES Registration System
1. This Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) proposes
amending the Commission’s rules to
make revisions to the Commission’s
Registration System, also known as
‘‘CORES.’’ Anyone doing business with
the Commission is required to first
obtain a unique identifying number
through CORES called an FCC
Registration Number, or ‘‘FRN.’’ Among
other things, an FRN allows registrants
to submit or file applications and remit
payments to the Commission. Our
proposed changes to CORES would
result in customer-related
improvements, as well as improvements
to the process by which entities and
individuals access and make use of
information that is contained in CORES.
The proposed changes would affect
rules governing Practice and Procedure
(see 47 CFR part 1).
2. We are able to offer these proposed
modifications to the current version of
CORES based on our own experience
with the system since its inception in
2000, as well as on informal suggestions
that have been provided by CORES FRN
holders themselves. We hope that
comments received in this rulemaking
will further add to and refine our efforts
for improving the CORES system. In
addition, we plan to invite the public to
participate in a public forum at the
FCC’s headquarters in Washington, DC
to discuss these proposed changes to
CORES, and to give interested parties
the opportunity to discuss their
concerns and suggest further
modifications. A public notice
announcing the date of the forum will
be released shortly. We invite parties to
indicate their interest in participating in
this public forum by contacting us
through the information provided in
Section IV.F., below.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
5654
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
3. This proceeding is part of the
Commission’s larger effort to reform and
transform the agency into a model of
excellence in government. Like the
NPRMs on the FCC’s ex parte rules and
the one focused on the rules governing
Commission practice and procedure,1
this NPRM will reform FCC procedures,
modifying CORES to make it easier for
individuals 2 and entities 3 to do
business with the FCC. In addition, this
NPRM is related both to the
Commission’s new Core Financial
System and the development and design
of the FCC’s new Consolidated
Licensing System (‘‘CLS’’).4
4. Our proposed modifications to
CORES partly include: Requiring
entities and individuals to rely
primarily upon a single FRN that may,
at their discretion, be linked to
subsidiary or associated accounts;
allowing entities to identify multiple
points of contact; eliminating some of
our exceptions to the requirement that
entities and individuals provide their
Taxpayer Identification Number
(‘‘TIN’’) 5 at the time of registration;
requiring FRN holders to provide their
e-mail addresses; giving FRN holders
the option to create a custom User ID;
modifying CORES log-in procedures for
entities so as to ease use by multiple
individuals; adding attention flags and
notices that would inform FRN holders
of their financial standing before the
Commission when logging onto CORES;
and adding data fields to enable FRN
holders to indicate their tax-exempt
status and notify the Commission of
pending bankruptcy proceedings. These
modifications, if implemented, will
make CORES more feature-friendly and
will eliminate some of the system’s
current limitations. They will also
improve the Commission’s ability to
1 Amendment of the Commission’s Ex Parte Rules
and Other Procedural Rules, GC Docket No. 10–43,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 25 FCC Rcd 2403
(2010); Amendment of Certain of the Commission’s
Part 1 Rules of Practice and Procedure and Part 0
Rules of Commission Organization, GC Docket No.
10–44, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 25 FCC Rcd
2430 (2010). See also FCC Proposes Rule Changes
to Improve Decision-Making and Efficiency,
Promote Participation in FCC Proceedings, 2010 WL
589844 (rel. February 18, 2010) (news release
announcing the commencement of the two
previously-mentioned proceedings).
2 The terms ‘‘individuals’’ and ‘‘persons’’ are used
synonymously in this NPRM.
3 An ‘‘entity’’ is any business or organization. This
includes public or private, and profit or not-forprofit, organizations.
4 Federal Communications Commission (FCC) To
Hold April 7, 2010 Workshop on Development of
Consolidated Licensing System, MD Docket No. 10–
73, Public Notice, 25 FCC Rcd 3176 (2010). See also
the Commission’s Web page on the effort to develop
the consolidated licensing system, found at
https://reboot.fcc.gov/reform/systems/cls.
5 For individuals, the TIN is their social security
number.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
comply with various statutes that
govern debt collection and the
collection of personal information by
the Federal government.
II. Background
5. The Commission is required in a
variety of contexts to manage and
collect substantial sums of money,
including annual regulatory fees and
application fees 6 and civil monetary
penalties.7 The Commission also
auctions various licenses through
competitive bidding and administers the
collection of payments for these
licenses.8 In addition, the Commission
directs the collection of mandated
contributions to the Universal Service
Fund (‘‘USF’’) and other statutory
programs.9
6. In operating these programs, the
Commission is subject to a variety of
Federal statutes designed to ensure that
the Government’s financial management
systems consistently and accurately
report assets, liabilities, revenues and
expenditures.10 In particular, the
Commission is subject to the Debt
Collection Improvement Act of 1996
(‘‘DCIA’’), which sought to address
Congressional concerns that debts owed
to the Federal government were not
being properly collected.11
7. To improve its collection activities,
the Commission established an internal
revenue management system that
supports application and regulatory fee
accounting, spectrum auction loan
portfolio management, accounting for
auction proceeds, accounting for
enforcement actions, and other accounts
receivable of the Commission. In
developing this revenue management
6 See
47 U.S.C. 159 and Assessment and
Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2009,
MD Docket No. 09–65, Report and Order, 4 FCC Rcd
10301 (2009) (regulatory fees); 47 U.S.C. 158 and
Amendment of the Schedule of Application Fees
Set Forth in Sections 1.1102 through 1.1107 of the
Commission’s Rules, GEN Docket No. 86–285,
Order, 23 FCC Rcd 14192 (2008) (application fees).
7 See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. 503; 47 CFR 1.80; see also
Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of
Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the
Forfeiture Guidelines, CI Docket No. 95–6, Report
and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied,
15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
8 See 47 U.S.C. 309(j).
9 See 47 U.S.C. 254(d); 47 CFR 54.706.
10 See, e.g., 31 U.S.C. 3512(b) (mandating the
establishment and maintenance of systems of
accounting and internal controls); 4 CFR 102.1(a)
(requiring agencies to ‘‘take aggressive action, on a
timely basis, to collect all claims of the United
States’’); 4 CFR 102.17 (requiring agencies to
establish procedures to identify the causes of
overpayments, delinquencies, and defaults, and the
corrective actions needed).
11 Public Law 104–134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996),
codified at 31 U.S.C. 3701, et seq. See United States
v. Texas, 507 U.S. 529, 536–37 (1993) (Debt
Collection Act was passed ‘‘in order to strengthen
the Government’s hand in collecting its debts’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
system, it became apparent that persons
doing business with the Commission, as
that term is defined by the DCIA,12 were
identified in various ways in our filing
and licensing systems that made unified
accounting and revenue management
difficult. To address this problem, the
Commission developed CORES.
8. CORES is a Web-based, passwordprotected, registration system that
assigns a unique 10-digit FRN to a
registrant for use when doing business
with the FCC. These FRNs are used by
all Commission systems that handle
financial, authorization of service, and
enforcement activities, and enable our
customers to be more easily identified
as the filers of applications, reports,
remittance payments and other
documents with the FCC. CORES was
designed to serve as a central standard
repository for basic regulatee and
licensee information, and to help the
Commission more effectively forecast,
assess and collect regulatory fees; track
enforcement of fines and forfeiture
actions; monitor and collect penalties;
manage the grant of waivers and
exemptions; and, provide information to
the public.13
9. When CORES first became
operational on July 19, 2000, the public
was permitted to obtain FRNs to be used
on Commission filings on a voluntary
basis.14 Then, by way of rulemaking
effective December 3, 2001, the
Commission established that FRNs were
to be used on Commission filings on a
mandatory basis.15 Since then, in an
effort to limit the unnecessary use of
social security numbers in agency
systems and programs, the Commission
12 The DCIA, 31 U.S.C. 7701(c)(2), states that ‘‘a
person shall be considered to be doing business
with a Federal agency if the person is—
(A) A lender or servicer in a Federal guaranteed
or insured loan program administered by the
agency;
(B) An applicant for, or recipient of, a Federal
license, permit, right-of-way, grant, or benefit
payment administered by the agency or insurance
administered by the agency;
(C) A contractor of the agency;
(D) Assessed a fine, fee, royalty or penalty by the
agency; and
(E) In a relationship with the agency that may
give rise to a receivable due to that agency, such
as a partner of a borrower in or a guarantor of a
Federal direct or insured loan administered by the
agency.’’
13 See Office of the Managing Director
Implements the FCC Registration Number (FRN)
and Commission Registration System (CORES)
Registration Process Effective March 27, 2000, DA
00–407, Public Notice, 15 FCC Rcd 16427 (2000).
14 See New Commission Registration System
(CORES) to be Implemented July 19, DA 00–1596,
Public Notice, 15 FCC Rcd 18754 (2000).
15 See Amendments of Parts 1, 21, 61, 73, 74 and
76 of Commission’s Rules, Adoption of Mandatory
FCC Registration Number, MD Docket No. 00–205,
Report and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 16138 (2001) (‘‘2001
CORES Order’’).
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
has expanded the use of FRNs to other
purposes beyond compliance with the
DCIA.16 Now, based on several years of
experience with CORES and the FRN
registration process, we now wish to
modify and enhance CORES to better
serve the interests of the Commission
and the public by identifying areas of
improvement in the way customers
interact with and make use of CORES,
thus enabling us to improve the
system’s features and eliminate or
reduce limitations of the system in its
current state.
10. Consolidated Licensing System.
Recently, the Commission announced
its intent to develop and deploy an
agency-wide Consolidated Licensing
System (‘‘CLS’’) in an effort to improve
its spectrum management and to
develop a transparent, easily accessible,
data driven, efficient, cost-effective and
green consolidated licensing system.17
The CLS is expected to consolidate a
number of licensing systems and
databases currently used by the
Commission’s Bureaus and Offices,
including the Antenna Structure
Registration System (‘‘ASR’’) (managed
by the Commission’s Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau); the Cable
Operations and Licensing System
(‘‘COALS’’) (managed by the Media
Bureau); the Consolidated Database
System (‘‘CDBS’’) (managed by the
Media Bureau); the Experimental
Licensing System (‘‘ELS’’) (managed by
the Office of Engineering and
Technology); the International Bureau
Filing System (‘‘IBFS’’) (managed by the
International Bureau); and, the
Universal Licensing System (‘‘ULS’’)
(managed by the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau and the
Public Safety and Homeland Security
Bureau). Among other things, the
Consolidated Licensing System is
expected to establish a single
consolidated form for filing different
types of license application, permit a
single sign-on to all of the underlying
Commission systems, and create an
enhanced environment for accessing
and searching Commission data. The
present proceeding is viewed by the
16 See para. 1, supra. These additional uses for the
FRN comport with a government-wide effort to
safeguard personally identifiable information by
reducing the unnecessary use of social security
numbers and exploring alternatives to serve as a
personal identifier for Federal programs. See, e.g.,
Safeguarding Against and Responding to the Breach
of Personally Identifiable Information, OMB
Memorandum M–07–16 (May 22, 2007).
17 Federal Communications Commission (FCC) To
Hold April 7, 2010 Workshop on Development of
Consolidated Licensing System, MD Docket No. 10–
73, Public Notice, 25 FCC Rcd 3176 (2010).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
Commission as one necessary step of the
overall development of the CLS.
III. Proposed Changes to Cores
11. In the discussion that follows, we
seek comment on specific modifications
proposed for CORES. As described
above, one of the primary goals of this
proceeding is to improve the customer
interface with CORES so that customers
can use the system in a more efficient
and effective manner. To that end, we
encourage commenters in this
proceeding to address problems that
they have experienced while navigating
CORES and using their FRN(s) on
subsequent remittance payments, filings
and applications before the
Commission. We ask that commenters
recommend specific measures that we
could take that would ease any such
navigation and usage problems.
Commenters should also propose
measures that we could take to simplify
the registration process, as well as
measures that would enhance their
ability to use the Commission’s other
automated systems, in light of the
Commission’s intent to develop an
agency-wide consolidated licensing
system, as described above.
A. A Single FRN
12. In the 2001 CORES Order,18 we
concluded that requiring entities and
individuals doing business with the
Commission to obtain an FRN would
‘‘improve the management of our
financial systems,’’ and was ‘‘part of a
long-range solution to better manage our
financial systems.’’ 19 Accordingly, we
adopted a 10-digit unique identifier
called the FRN, and chose CORES as the
automated system for assigning FRNs to
entities and individuals doing business
with the Commission.
13. Since the creation of CORES,
entities have been able to obtain
multiple FRNs in order to permit
different members of their corporate
family to obtain their own individual
FRNs, regardless of whether those
entities had different taxpayer
identification numbers (‘‘TINs’’),20 and
to allow entities to organize their
dealings with the Commission along
logical business lines.21 As a result of
this policy, however, it is difficult for
18 See
supra n. 14.
CORES Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 16139, para.
19 2001
3.
20 A TIN is a unique identifier assigned to an
entity for tax payment purposes. A TIN may either
be a Social Security Number (‘‘SSN’’) assigned to an
individual by the Social Security Administration
(‘‘SSA’’), or an employer identification number
(‘‘EIN’’) assigned to a business or organization by the
Internal Revenue Service (‘‘IRS’’).
21 2001 CORES Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 16141, para.
12.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5655
the Commission to identify all the FRNs
that are held by the same entity and tie
them together in order to examine the
entity’s entire course of dealing with the
agency. Although entities are required
to provide their TIN during the FRN
registration process, the data reported
by entities has not always been
consistent. In many cases a TIN has not
been reported at all. For example, in
some instances, due to exceptions
allowed by the Commission, entities are
not required to provide their TIN during
the CORES registration process.22 In
other cases, entities have
inappropriately selected a TIN
exception reason during the CORES
registration process that is not intended
to apply to them, thereby circumventing
the requirement that they provide a
valid TIN.
14. That the Commission is unable to
use CORES to electronically link all of
an entity’s valid FRNs has several
consequences. First, it hinders the
Commission’s ability to fulfill its debt
collection obligations under the DCIA.
Second, it limits the effectiveness of the
Red Light Display System 23 as (for
example) it is used to review
applications to participate in
Commission auctions.24 Third, it
22 Currently, entities are permitted to select from
among six ‘‘exceptions’’ to the general requirement
that they furnish a TIN during their CORES
registration process, while individuals are allowed
to select from four exception reasons. For example,
foreign citizens and entities that do not maintain a
business presence in the U.S. may be eligible to
claim an exception to this requirement. Later in this
NPRM, we propose to eliminate or otherwise
modify some of our TIN exception reasons for
CORES registrants.
23 The Commission’s Red Light Display System
(‘‘RLDS’’) enables entities and individuals doing
business with the Commission to determine if they
have any outstanding delinquent debt. When an
entity/individual applying for or seeking benefits is
delinquent in non-tax debts owed to the
Commission, we are required by law to postpone
action on applications and other requests until the
outstanding debt is repaid. See https://www.fcc.gov/
debt_collection. RLDS is electronically checked
when electronic license applications are received
by the Commission.
24 The FCC’s auction short-form application
requires applicants to certify under penalty of
perjury that they, their affiliates, their controlling
interests, and the affiliates of their controlling
interests, as defined by Section 1.2110 of the
Commission’s rules, are not in default on any
payments for Commission licenses (including down
payments), and that they are not delinquent on any
non-tax debt owed to any Federal agency. See 47
CFR 1.2105(a)(2)(x), 1.2105(b)(1), and 1.2110; see
also Amendment of Part 1 of the Commission’s
Rules—Competitive Bidding Procedures, WT Docket
No. 97–82, Order on Reconsideration of the Third
Report and Order, Fifth Report and Order, and
Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 15
FCC Rcd 15293, 15317 para. 42 and n.142 (‘‘If any
one of an applicant’s controlling interests or their
affiliates * * * is in default on any Commission
licenses or is delinquent on any non-tax debt owed
to any Federal agency at the time the applicant files
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
Continued
01FEP2
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
5656
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
inconveniences our licensing and
enforcement bureaus, and even our
licensees themselves, in their efforts to
remember, recognize, and manage the
various FRNs obtained throughout their
course of business with the
Commission.
15. After nearly a decade of
experience with CORES, for these
reasons expressed here, including our
overarching effort to reform how the
FCC interacts with the public and
ongoing reform of the way the
Commission collects and retains data,
we tentatively conclude that it is in the
best interest of all parties for the
Commission to be able to view and
search information on entities registered
in CORES by a single unique identifier.
The benefits of requiring entities to
identify themselves in Commission
filings and applications by a single
unique identifier include administrative
simplicity, enhanced search capability,
and improved reliability of basic
company data. In addition, limiting
entities to a single FRN will enhance
our ability to inform regulatees of
financial and other administrativerelated issues, such as past due
regulatory fees and impending license
renewal deadlines, through e-mail or
on-line notification messages. In section
III.K, below, we propose to institute a
company-centric ‘‘dashboard’’ that filers
would see upon login, through which
the filer would have the ability to
review the progress on their filings, fees
that are due, the history of files the filer
has submitted, as well as other
important information the filer may
need. Similarly, in section III.G, we
propose to post warning flags to each
entity’s CORES account indicating their
status in the Commission’s Red Light
Display System and their debarment
status. Such features could only be
made possible by limiting entities to a
single company-wide identifier. We
believe that the benefits of such
notifications and an entity-wide license
administration ‘‘center’’ far outweigh
any potential burden. Therefore, we
propose to limit entities and individuals
registered in CORES to the use of a
single FRN that incorporates subsidiary
it[s] FCC Form 175, the applicant will not be able
to make the certification required by Section
1.2105(a)(2)(x) * * * and will not be eligible to
participate in Commission auctions.’’). Absent
linked FRNs, every FRN of each relevant entity
must be reviewed separately in RLDS. The inability
to easily and simply link multiple FRNs therefore
limits the ability of auction participants and the
Commission to use the RLDS to determine whether
an auction applicant complies with the
Commission’s competitive bidding rules.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
FRNs or sub-accounts, as described
below.25
16. As an initial matter, we clarify
that, for the purposes of this discussion,
an entity shall be defined by the use of
a single TIN. Thus, under the proposals
described below, affiliated entities that
are part of a larger corporate structure
would not be limited to use of the same
FRN if they have obtained separate TINs
from the IRS.
17. Although we propose to permit
only a single FRN per entity, we
tentatively conclude that entities should
nevertheless retain the ability to
organize their filings and other dealings
with the Commission among logical
business lines of their choosing. This
particularly applies to larger businesses
and organizations that do business with
the Commission through various
sources, business operations, etc., and
therefore would prefer to have several
registrants associated with their single
FRN.
18. There is any number of possible
methods that could be implemented to
limit entities to the use of a single FRN
in CORES while still affording them the
ability to establish multiple registrants
within that FRN. One such option
would be to modify the structure of
existing FRNs to incorporate an alphanumeric suffix that would allow entities
to populate a single FRN with subaccounts for additional registrants.
Under this proposal, which we shall
refer to as ‘‘Option 1,’’ an entity would
be permitted to utilize a single ten-digit
FRN for all of its dealings with the FCC,
but would have the ability to create an
unlimited number of sub-accounts that
could be assigned to organizational
units, such as a geographic district
served by the entity or a distinct line of
business conducted by the entity, or
even to particular employees. These
sub-accounts would be distinguished by
a unique multi-character suffix that
would trail the entity’s single ten-digit
FRN. For example, under Option 1, an
entity with the single FRN 1234–5678–
90 may decide to establish three subaccounts within its FRN: One for Jane Q.
Smith (perhaps expressed 1234–5678–
90–JQS), one for its West Coast
Operations (perhaps expressed 1234–
5678–90–WCO), and one for Broadcast
License WXYZ (perhaps expressed
1234–5678–90–XYZ). These suffixes
25 In theory, this proposal only needs to apply to
entities. However, in practice, we seek to apply it
to individuals as well. CORES is populated with
many instances in which individuals hold multiple
FRNs. These instances are most likely the result of
individuals who have forgotten their FRNs or FRN
passwords over the course of time and who then
chose to electronically register for another FRN,
instead of resetting their original password with the
assistance of our Customer Support Help Desk.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
would not be limited to letters; an entity
could just as easily create a sub-account
expressed with a purely numeric
extension, such as 1234–5678–90–001.
Alternatively, the Commission could
automatically generate numeric suffixes
for each sub-account (that is, –001,
–002, –003, etc.), while providing
entities with the option to subsequently
customize these suffixes as it sees fit.
Thus, this proposal would require each
entity to surrender all but one of its tendigit FRNs, which would serve as the
foundation of all of its future subaccounts. Under this proposal, entities
would have the ability to create and use
additional sub-accounts within their
single FRN according to their business
and administrative needs. We seek
comment on this proposal, along with
the alternative outlined above. If
adopted, should entities have the ability
to choose which of their existing FRNs
would serve as the ten-digit FRN core?
If so, how much time should entities
have to make such a selection?
Commenters should consider any
potential burden that may be incurred
through the adoption of these options.
19. Another proposal, which we shall
refer to as ‘‘Option 2,’’ would enable
entities that currently hold multiple
FRNs to retain all of their various FRNs,
which would be electronically linked to
each other through the assignment of an
identical prefix that would precede each
of the entity’s ten-digit FRNs. It would
not be necessary for the user to input
this prefix; the system would
automatically access and attach the
appropriate prefix whenever one of an
entity’s assigned FRNs was used.
Although the prefix would be visible to
the entity, it would only be used for
internal purposes by the Commission to
link all of an entity’s FRNs for the
purposes identified above. Thus, under
Option 2, entities will be able to retain
all of their current FRNs, and would not
be required to re-register in CORES,
reducing the potential burden on both
regulated entities and the Commission,
especially in the wake of future mergers
and acquisitions among different
entities that currently hold an FRN in
CORES. We seek comment on this
option, as well as on any other proposal
for limiting entities to a single FRN,
such as requiring entities to manually
select one of their existing FRNs to serve
as their ‘‘primary’’ FRN, while their
remaining FRNs would be automatically
converted to subsidiary, or sub-FRNs,
which would be electronically linked to
its primary FRN.
20. In addition, we seek comment on
whether we should also allow an FRN
registered to an individual to have subaccounts in much the same way as
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
business entities under either option
outlined above, or whether individuals
should be prohibited from utilizing subaccounts or sub-FRNs. For example,
individuals may find it beneficial to
create sub-FRNs for use by outside
attorneys or consultants. We encourage
commenters to provide examples of
where an individual’s business needs at
the Commission would benefit from
being able to populate sub-accounts to
their FRN.
21. Our current process for how
entities and individuals obtain an FRN
from CORES requires that only a single
registrant may be associated with each
FRN. However, any proposal to limit
entities to the use of a single FRN—
regardless of the approach that is
eventually adopted—needs to address
the need for multiple individuals to
utilize the same FRN. This need is
especially evident for most businesses
and organizations, but it may apply to
some individuals as well. We seek
comment generally on if (and, if so,
how) entities and individuals will wish
to wield administrative access rights
and authority for their single FRN, or for
multiple FRNs that are electronically
linked to each other. Should CORES
allow multiple individuals to be able to
register with and access a single FRN
with their own unique user name and
password? Or rather, should CORES
adopt a new feature in which the FRN
has a ‘‘primary registrant’’ that is granted
exclusive administrative access and
authority for adding subsequent
registrants to the FRN and allowing
registrant access to the FRN? We seek
comment on the administrative burden
of having a primary registrant. Should
individuals with administrative rights to
an entity’s primary FRN have rights to
alter any data contained in any of the
entity’s sub-FRNs? Why or why not?
What about the reverse: Should
individuals with administrative rights to
a particular sub-FRN be restricted from
altering data in the primary or another
sub-FRN? With any approach taken, the
Commission can provide user-driven
options for such actions as disabling an
FRN’s sub-account feature or otherwise
managing how subsequent registrants
are added to a single FRN. We seek
comment on these thoughts, as well as
on other administrative access and
authority concerns.
22. In the event that we adopt a
process for limiting entities and
individuals to a single FRN (as opposed
to Option Two, above, which would
simply assign an identical alphanumeric prefix to existing FRNs held by
a particular entity), we seek comment
on the manner in which previouslyregistered entities and individuals
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
should migrate to their single FRN. How
and when should a single FRN for each
entity/individual be established?
Should the Commission issue a newly
assigned FRN to each entity/individual?
Should entities and individuals with
two or more FRNs currently registered
in CORES be permitted to select which
single FRN they will use on a going
forward basis (while the Commission
de-activates the entity’s remaining
unselected FRNs), or should they
simply be assigned the most recent one
they have used? We seek comment on
whether previously-registered entities
and individuals with a single FRN
should simply keep their existing FRN,
and not migrate to a newly assigned
number.
23. Finally, we invite parties to offer
other approaches for data migration
within CORES. In addition, we seek
comment on whether the migration to a
single FRN should occur
automatically—and if so, under what
criteria—or whether entities and
individuals should be required to
actively interface with CORES to
establish their single FRN. If we adopt
a scenario where previously-registered
entities and individuals are to interface
with CORES to establish a single FRN,
should registrants be required to
complete the process within a particular
time frame after the effective date of the
rules adopted in this proceeding before
all of their FRNs are automatically
deactivated? What should that time
frame be?
24. As mentioned above, we plan to
invite the public to participate in a
public forum at the FCC’s headquarters
in Washington, DC to discuss our
various proposals to limit entities and
individuals to a single FRN. All
interested parties will have the
opportunity to discuss their concerns
and to suggest other solutions that
would accomplish the goals outlined
here with a minimal amount of
disruption on the industry. A public
notice announcing the date of the forum
will be released shortly. We invite
parties to indicate their interest in
participating in this public forum by
contacting us through the information
provided in Section IV.F., below.
B. Multiple Registrants With Multiple
Points of Contact
25. Currently, CORES does not permit
FRN holders to identify anyone other
than themselves as the sole point of
contact for their FRN. Such contact
information is often used by the
Commission to contact entities and
individuals to collect delinquent debt or
resolve remittance issues that may arise
during their course of dealing with the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5657
agency. We have come to believe that
the inability of FRN holders to identify
additional points of contact for their
FRN unnecessarily limits the FRN’s
usefulness to the FRN holder, as well as
to the Commission. Because the sole
point of contact attributed to the FRN is
not always the appropriate individual to
resolve a particular issue or to provide
necessary information, it is not
uncommon for delays to occur while the
appropriate contact is established. For
this reason, we tentatively conclude that
FRN holders should have the ability to
voluntarily provide additional points of
contact for their FRNs, as well as for
each sub-account or sub-FRN as the case
may be. We seek comment on this
conclusion.
26. We propose that FRN registrants
would be permitted to voluntarily
provide point of contact information for
certain specific, pre-designated
functions, such as ‘‘Accounting,’’
‘‘Billing,’’ ‘‘Licensing,’’ ‘‘Legal Issues,’’
etc. Points of contact provided by an
FRN holder would not become
registrants to the FRN, and therefore
would not be able to gain access to
confidential data submitted by the
entity to CORES. They would simply be
static points of contact that have been
established by one of the FRN’s
registrants to address particular issues
or subject matter as needed. We seek
comment on this proposal. Also, in
addition to the functions listed above,
what other pre-designated subject
matter categories should be made
available for an FRN registrant to select
when identifying individuals that will
serve as points of contact? Should FRN
holders have the ability to create their
own categories of uses for contacts that
they provide, or should they be limited
to a menu of pre-designated functions
offered by the Commission? We seek
comment on these questions.
27. Finally, we seek comment on
whether we should extend this proposal
for multiple points of contact to FRN
holders who are individuals. Under
what circumstances and to what extent
may individuals desire to identify
multiple points of contact to be
associated with their FRN? Should
individuals have the same range of
choices as entities for points of contact?
In what ways, if any, should the point
of contact options for individuals differ
from those for entities?
C. Elimination of Certain TIN Exception
Reasons
28. Foreign Entities and Non-United
States Citizens. As noted above, if you
are doing business with the
Commission, you need to register for an
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
5658
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
FRN.26 This includes foreign registrants
and non-United States citizens who are
generally required to provide their TIN
before completing the CORES
registration process. In some instances,
foreign entities do not have a taxpayer
identification number. Since the
inception of CORES, the Commission
has permitted foreign entities and
individuals to decline to provide their
TIN in certain circumstances. With
regard to foreign entities, the prevailing
logic was that such businesses and
organizations are not required to obtain
an employer identification number
(‘‘EIN’’) from the Internal Revenue
Service (‘‘IRS’’), and are thus unable to
furnish a TIN during their CORES
registration process. Therefore, we have
historically allowed such entities to
complete the CORES registration
process without providing a valid
TIN.27 Similarly, because individuals
who are not U.S. citizens and who are
not employed within the United States
typically are not issued a social security
number (‘‘SSN’’) by the U.S. Social
Security Administration (‘‘SSA’’), we
have previously permitted individuals
to complete the CORES registration
process without providing a valid TIN
by certifying that they have not been
issued a SSN because they are not U.S.
citizens.
29. As originally crafted, our TIN
exception reason for foreign entities
failed to recognize that foreign entities
operating inside the U.S., or who have
employees working in the United States,
are required to obtain an EIN from the
IRS.28 Thus, we tentatively conclude
that foreign entities operating within the
U.S. should now be required to provide
their EIN when seeking to obtain an
FRN through CORES. We seek comment
on this conclusion. With regard to
foreign entities that do not operate in
the United States nor have employees in
the United States, we wish to operate
from the assumption that they may still
be able to provide some form of
equivalent tax identification number
issued by their respective home
government. We seek comment on the
validity of our assumption and request
that commenters provide specific
examples of developed countries whose
governments do not employ any concept
of a TIN for their businesses and
organizations. Should we determine that
26 See
n.2, supra.
2001 CORES Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 16142,
para. 18. See also the Frequently Asked Questions
section on the Commission’s CORES Web site,
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/coresWeb/html/
tin.html#q52, ‘‘What if my entity does not have a
TIN?’’
28 See Internal Revenue Service Form SS–4
Application for Employer Identifier Number.
our assumption is accurate (i.e., that the
use of taxpayer identification numbers
is a near-universal concept), we would
eliminate our taxpayer identification
number exception reason for all
businesses and organizations and
require such entities to furnish their
country’s equivalent taxpayer
identification number as issued by their
home government. To distinguish
foreign equivalent taxpayer
identification numbers from IRS-issued
EINs in CORES, we propose that all
foreign taxpayer identification numbers
would receive a prefix consisting of
their respective country’s international
two-character country code. To ensure
that we are able to uniquely identify
every entity that does business with the
Commission and deter the intentional
misuse of this exception by domestic
businesses seeking to avoid reporting
their correct EINs,, should we require all
foreign business and organizations to
furnish the Commission with a copy of
their country’s taxpayer identification
documentation at the time of registering
an FRN in CORES? If so, what would be
the most effective and least burdensome
method for foreign entities to submit a
copy of their country’s taxpayer
identification documentation?
Morevoer, we seek comment on whether
foreign entities that are existing license
holders should submit a copy of their
country’s taxpayer identification
documentation.
30. Similarly, we propose to eliminate
our TIN exception reason for foreign
individuals. We note that foreign
nationals working in the United States,
including all individuals working in the
United States on an immigrant visa, are
issued an SSN by the SSA.29 In
addition, some temporary visitors,
students, and workers on nonimmigrant visas are allowed and
sometimes required to obtain an SSN.30
We therefore conclude that in the vast
majority of cases, individuals should be
able to furnish a valid SSN as issued by
the SSA. We also note that there is
another type of TIN that may be held by
foreign individuals that CORES has
never been programmed to accept. This
TIN is known as an Individual Taxpayer
Identification Number, or ITIN. The IRS
issues ITINs to individuals who are
required to have a U.S. taxpayer
identification number but who do not
have, and are not eligible to obtain, an
SSN from the SSA.31 ITINs and SSNs
27 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
29 See ‘‘Social Security Card Application Guide,’’
https://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/socialsecurity-card.html.
30 Id.
31 See https://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/
0,,id=96287,00.html, Individual Taxpayer
Identification Number (ITIN).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
share the same nine-digit 000–00–0000
data structure. Only non-U.S. citizens
can apply for an ITIN.32 We note that
individuals who already have a valid
SSN should not apply for an ITIN
because it is not permissible for an
individual to hold both an SSN and an
ITIN.33 We tentatively conclude that
individuals should be permitted to use
their ITIN in place of an SSN when
applying for an FRN. We seek comment
on this conclusion.
31. Furthermore, foreign individuals
who are unable to furnish either an SSN
or an ITIN as their TIN may still be able
to provide some form of equivalent
taxpayer identification number or
general identification number that has
been issued by his or her home
government which the Commission
could accept in place of an SSN or ITIN.
We seek comment on this matter. We
specifically seek examples of developed
countries whose governments do not
assign taxpayer identification numbers
or utilize a general identification system
for their citizens. If used, we propose to
identify foreign-issued tax identification
numbers (or the equivalent) for
individuals in CORES by adding a
prefix that represents the individual’s
applicable international two-character
country code. We seek comment on
whether we should require supporting
documentation to be furnished to the
Commission at the time of registering an
FRN. In particular, parties should
indicate whether requiring the
submission of foreign-equivalent
taxpayer identification numbers and
supporting documentation would help
ensure that we are able to uniquely
identify every individual that does
business with the Commission, and
would deter the intentional misuse of
this exception by individuals seeking to
avoid reporting their correct social
security numbers or attempting to
register simultaneously under multiple
aliases. We seek comment on these
potential measures, including the most
effective and least burdensome method
to submit such supporting
documentation.
32. Finally, we seek comment on how
the Commission should treat FRNs that
were obtained by foreign entities and
foreign individuals through the use of
the previously-mentioned TIN
exception reasons. Should these existing
FRN holders be ‘‘grandfathered’’ into
CORES, or should they be required to
provide a valid SSN, ITIN, or foreign
equivalent taxpayer identification
number within a particular time frame?
32 See ‘‘ITIN Application,’’ https://
www.usimmigrationsupport.org/itin.html.
33 Id.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
How long of a waiting period is
appropriate to allow for previously
registered foreign entities and foreign
individuals to provide one of the
aforementioned valid identifiers? If
adopted, we tentatively conclude that
affected entities and individuals would
be electronically notified of the
requirement that they provide a valid
identifier upon logging in to the system.
Thus, we tentatively conclude that
foreign entities and foreign individuals
must furnish their TIN or TINequivalent documentation within thirty
days of their first log-in after the
effective date of any final rules adopted
in this proceeding. We seek comment on
this conclusion.
33. Petitioners and Non-Feeable
Complainants. Petitioners and nonfeeable complainants are not required
by Commission rules to provide their
TIN to the Commission, nor to obtain an
FRN,34 under the rationale that nonfeeable items do not involve payments
to the Commission. When CORES was
first developed, however, we
understood that some of these same
petitioners and non-feeable
complainants may voluntarily wish to
obtain an FRN, possibly for internal
record-keeping purposes. Thus, to
reduce the regulatory burden on such
entities, we established an exception
permitting entities and individuals to
obtain an FRN without providing their
TIN by certifying during the registration
process either that ‘‘the individual is a
petitioner’’ or ‘‘the entity (business or
organization) is a petitioner.’’ However,
our experience since then has
underscored that this particular TIN
exception reason provides an
opportunity for entities and individuals
who file license applications or
otherwise conduct business with the
Commission to circumvent their TIN
provision requirement by falsely
identifying themselves in CORES as
petitioners or non-feeable complainants.
We therefore propose to eliminate this
TIN exception reason. We seek
comment on this proposal and on how
we should treat FRNs that were
obtained by entities and individuals
holding licenses or other authorizations
(i.e., doing business with the
Commission) through inappropriate use
of this TIN exception reason.
34. Temporary Exceptions. Under our
existing processes, entities who have
applied for (but have not yet received)
their EIN from the IRS are considered
temporarily exempt from providing a
34 See the Frequently Asked Questions section on
the Commission’s CORES Web site, https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/coresWeb/html/know.html#q103,
‘‘What do you mean by ‘‘doing business’’ with the
FCC?’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
TIN when registering in CORES.
Similarly, individuals who have applied
for, but have not yet received, their SSN
from the SSA are temporarily exempt
from providing their TIN. In CORES,
these exception reasons are phrased as
‘‘The EIN has been applied for’’ and
‘‘Applied for’’ for entities and
individuals, respectively. Unfortunately,
CORES does not have the capability to
automatically revisit these temporary
exceptions, and often entities and
individuals claiming this exception are
awarded a license and fail to provide a
valid TIN at a later date. Thus, as a
practical matter, entities and
individuals who have claimed this
temporary TIN exception are effectively
treated by the Commission as having
received permanent waivers of the TIN
provision requirement. To remedy this,
we propose to establish a time frame
within which such entities and
individuals must subsequently provide
their TIN. The time remaining before the
expiration of this waiver would be
viewable when the FRN holder accesses
CORES. FRNs that have been obtained
through this TIN exception reason
would automatically expire and be deactivated after this time period unless a
valid TIN is subsequently provided. We
seek comment on this proposal.
Specifically, we seek comment on the
appropriate time frame for the
Commission to wait for entities and
individuals to furnish their newly
acquired TINs to the Commission before
deactivation of their FRNs. We note
that, according to the IRS Web site, an
entity may obtain an EIN immediately
upon completing an on-line form,35
while it may take ‘‘several weeks’’ for
foreign workers to obtain an SSN.36
Thus, we tentatively conclude that
entities should be required to provide
their newly-obtained EIN to the
Commission within fifteen days, and
that individuals should be required to
provide their newly-acquired SSN to the
Commission within sixty days. We seek
comment on these tentative
conclusions. In the event that entities
and individuals are unable to obtain a
TIN within our established time limits,
we will set aside their FRNs for an
additional period of time so that they
may retain their current FRNs once they
obtain their TIN, thus preventing the
need to re-register in CORES. Such
‘‘reserved’’ FRNs will be inactive,
however, and will not be able to be used
on remittance payments or applications
filed with the Commission until a TIN
is provided. We seek comment on the
35 See https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/
article/0,,id=102767,00.html?portlet=4.
36 See https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10107.html#time.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5659
length of time that such FRNs should
remain in an inactive status before
considered abandoned by the FRN
holder and deleted from our system.
35. Exempted Activities. Currently,
CORES allows both entities and
individuals to select a TIN exception
reason known as ‘‘exempted activities’’
when registering an FRN. For an entity,
this exception applies when IRS rules
do not require the acquisition of an EIN
due to the nature of the organization.
For now, we continue to believe that,
while rarely used, this remains a valid
TIN exception reason for entities.37
Therefore, we recommend that this
exemption be maintained for future use.
For individuals, however, we propose to
discontinue the availability of this TIN
exception reason. As we have discussed
above, we now believe that all
individuals—be they domestic or
foreign—are able to provide either a
valid SSN, or ITIN, or a foreign
equivalent taxpayer identification
number or general identification
number, as issued by their home
government. We seek comment on this
tentative conclusion. We are concerned,
however, that the phrase used by the
CORES system to identify this
exception, ‘‘exempted activities,’’ is
vague and confusing, and could result
in tax exempt entities (and possibly
individuals, should we ultimately reject
our tentative conclusion above)
erroneously attempting to use it to avoid
providing their TIN. In this proceeding,
we seek to further our understanding of
the circumstances that may lead the IRS
or SSA to exempt particular entities and
individuals from the requirement of
obtaining an EIN or SSN. Should we
require documentation to be provided
by entities claiming the proper use of
this exemption? What documentation
should we require prospective FRN
registrants to provide in order to use
this TIN exception?
36. Amateur Club. Currently, amateur
radio clubs wishing to obtain an FRN
through CORES are not required to
provide a valid TIN of one of their
members. Instead, such clubs may
complete the registration process by
selecting an exemption labeled ‘‘amateur
club.’’ We propose to keep the ‘‘amateur
club’’ TIN exception reason, but
tentatively conclude that we should
rename ‘‘amateur club’’ to ‘‘amateur
37 Virtually all entities are required to obtain an
EIN, including foreign companies with employees
in the U.S., non-profit organizations, church or
church-controlled organizations, farmers
cooperatives, State and local governments, Indian
Tribal governments, Federal agencies, the U.S.
military and the National Guard. See IRS Form
SS–4 Application for Employer Identification
Number.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
5660
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
radio club’’ for added clarity. In
addition, we propose to limit the use of
FRNs obtained through the use of the
‘‘amateur club’’ TIN exception reason to
applying for amateur licenses only. To
apply for other types of licenses, an
amateur radio club would be required to
furnish a valid TIN. We seek comment
on these conclusions. What
documentation should we require of
amateur radio clubs when seeking to use
this TIN exception reason?
37. Tribal Government or Entity. A
TIN exception reason has been offered
to Tribal governments or entities since
the inception of CORES. In some cases,
Commission staff has independently
assigned an FRN to Tribal governments
to enable their use of our Tower
Construction Notification System
(TCNS), which allows Federallyrecognized Indian Tribes and Alaska
Native Villages, Native Hawaiian
Organizations, and State Historic
Preservation Officers to receive, and
respond to, notifications about a
proposed tower construction, without
the provision of an EIN. We now
understand, however, that Federally
recognized Tribal governments, as well
as Tribally owned and operated
economic development entities,
including myriad types of businesses
involving services, products and
tourism, such as gaming, are required by
the IRS to secure an EIN if they conduct
business operations which have
employees or report gaming
withholdings.38 Moreover, an internal
review of the Commission’s records
suggests that approximately a mere 5%
of the FRNs held by Tribal governments
or enterprises have been assigned by the
Commission without the submission of
an EIN. We therefore seek comment on
whether to eliminate this exception, and
require Tribal governments and
enterprises to submit an EIN in order to
retain their FRNs. We seek comment on
how the Commission should handle the
assignment of FRNs in the rare case
where a Tribal government or enterprise
does not have an EIN. We tentatively
conclude that Tribal governments and
enterprises that have not previously
provided an EIN should be permitted to
retain their FRNs in the TCNS
indefinitely to permit the continued use
of the TCNS. In such circumstances,
these FRNs will be made inactive and
will not be able to be used on remittance
38 See IRS Form SS–4 Application for Employer
Identification Number. Although Federally
recognized Indian Tribes are not subject to income
taxes, Tribal governments are still required to
obtain an EIN if they conduct business operations
which have employees, issue information returns,
or report gaming withholdings. See generally,
https://www.irs.gov/govt/tribes/.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
payments or license applications with
the Commission until an EIN has been
provided. We seek comment on this
tentative conclusion.
D. ‘‘Special Use’’ FRNs
38. ‘‘Special use’’ FRNs are
electronically assigned to individuals
holding attributable interests in various
media licenses from whom social
security numbers could not be obtained,
and are used exclusively by media
services licensees to report ownership
interests on FCC Form 323. More
specifically, if, after using diligent and
good-faith efforts, a media service
licensee is unable to obtain, and/or does
not have permission to use, a social
security number in order to generate an
FRN for any specific individual whose
FRN must be reported on Form 323,
such licensee may obtain a ‘‘special use’’
FRN through a mechanism contained in
the electronic Form 323.39 Licensees
that use ‘‘special use’’ FRNs are deemed
to be fully compliant with the Form 323
filing obligation. These ‘‘special use’’
FRNs are generated through the Media
Bureau’s Consolidated Database System
(CDBS), not CORES, and, significantly,
can be used for no other purpose at the
Commission other than for licensees to
fulfill their Form 323 media ownership
reporting requirements.40 Thus, the
issuance of these ‘‘special use’’ FRNs
does not compromise the Commission’s
obligations under the DCIA.
39. We seek comment on whether it
would be appropriate to generate and
assign ‘‘special use’’ FRNs in other
contexts at the Commission, such as to
fulfill other ownership reporting
requirements. For example, wireless
licensees are required to report those
entities and individuals that hold a 10%
or greater interest on FCC Form 602
when seeking new licenses, transfers of
control/assignments, and renewals, or
while applying to participate in an
auction conducted through competitive
bidding.41 Similarly, companies seeking
to obtain or transfer control of domestic
or international section 214
authorizations are required to report
10% or greater ownership interests.
Would ‘‘special use’’ FRNs be helpful for
such licensees/authorization holders
that have difficulty obtaining investor
information to make FCC filings? Again,
39 See ‘‘Form 323 Frequently Asked Questions,’’ at
https://www.fcc.gov/bureaus/mb/industry_analysis/
form323faqs.html.
40 See, e.g., Promoting Diversification of
Ownership in the Broadcasting Services, MB Docket
Nos. 07–294, 06–121, 02–277, and 04–228, and MM
Docket Nos. 01–235, 01–317, and 00–244, Report
and Order and Fourth Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 24 FCC Rcd 5896, 5908, para. 21
(2009).
41 See 47 CFR 1.2112(a).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
we emphasize that these ‘‘special use’’
FRNs would not be eligible to be
utilized for any other purpose at the
Commission other than to fulfill
ownership reporting requirements. In
what other situations should we
consider making available the use of
‘‘special use’’ FRNs?
E. Registrant E-mail Addresses
40. Currently, entities and individuals
are given the opportunity to voluntarily
provide an e-mail address when
completing the CORES registration
process to obtain an FRN. Given the
significant increase in the use of and
dependence on e-mail in the years since
CORES first became operational,
however, we tentatively conclude that
all FRN holders should be required to
provide an e-mail address upon
registration. In this day and age, e-mail
communication is an efficient tool for
maintaining contact with our regulatees.
For example, the provision of a valid
e-mail address would enhance the
Commission’s ability to contact
registrants in the event that a remittance
issue arises, or if there is a need to
disseminate an important notice. In
addition, the Commission is committed
to reducing the environmental impact of
its activities, and intends to increase its
use of e-mail and other electronic means
to communicate with regulated entities
and interested parties in the future.
Therefore, we propose to require entities
and individuals who register for an FRN
for the first time to provide their e-mail
address, which will remain hidden from
public view. An e-mail address would
also be required for each sub-FRN or
sub-account that is subsequently
established. We seek comment on this
proposal.
41. We also seek comment on how the
Commission should treat previously
registered FRNs for which FRN holders
did not voluntarily furnish an e-mail
address. What is the least disruptive or
most efficient way for the Commission
to obtain these e-mail addresses? Should
current FRN holders be required to
provide their e-mail addresses the next
time they attempt to use their FRN on
an electronic Commission filing? We
also seek comment on whether entities
and individuals should be required to
provide the e-mail addresses of their
points of contact. Moreover, we
tentatively conclude that entities and
individuals should be required to
navigate an e-mail validation process at
the time of registration by clicking on a
link that CORES will automatically send
to the e-mail address that was provided.
Should we require entities and
individuals to update their e-mail
addresses that are on file in CORES as
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
part of the license renewal process? We
seek comment on these questions.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
F. Creation of a User ID
42. As is typically the case with most
online information systems, CORES
requires FRN holders to input a ‘‘User
ID’’ in order to access the system.
Currently, CORES does not offer FRN
holders the option to choose or modify
their User ID; instead, for all FRN
holders, their assigned ten-digit FRN
serves as their User ID. In the interest of
implementing customer improvements,
we tentatively conclude that FRN
holders should be provided with the
ability to create, at their discretion, a
custom User ID. We seek comment on
this conclusion. Should the FRN serve
as the initial default User ID until it is
modified by the FRN holder?
43. In addition, we are aware of
business practices in which third-party
representatives (e.g., outside legal
counsel) for several clients either
establish an FRN for each of their clients
or regularly require access to each
client’s FRN. In either event, these
third-party CORES users are currently
required to log out of the CORES system
before being able to log-in to the next
FRN in question. We seek comment on
whether we should permit third-party
CORES users to associate a custom User
ID with multiple FRNs that belong to
multiple clients, thereby permitting
access to various FRNs with just a single
log-in to the CORES system. We ask
commenters to identify any risks that
might be associated with permitting
third parties to access multiple FRNs
with a single log-in. For example, would
this feature hinder the ability of law
firms to validate or audit charges later
billed to clients for work conducted on
their behalf?
G. Log-In Information
44. As currently designed, the CORES
log-in information that is created by an
FRN holder consists of two elements: A
single password and, as a password
recovery tool, a Personal Security
Question/Answer. One drawback to this
system is that, if an FRN holder
authorizes multiple individuals to
utilize the FRN, the log-in information
must be shared among these different
individuals. This, in turn, creates a
security risk for the FRN holder every
time the entity undergoes a personnel
change.
45. To remedy this, we propose to
provide entities with the option to
create a unique User ID for each
individual that will be permitted to use
the FRN (or a particular sub-FRN, as the
case may be). Each User ID would have
a unique password and associated
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:13 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
Personal Security Question. Entities
would have the ability to delete any
particular User IDs that have been
created, or have them reset with the
help of the CORES help desk. We seek
comment on this tentative conclusion.
Should each registered entity be
permitted to designate an
‘‘administrator’’ or ‘‘primary user
account,’’ with the ability to modify or
delete the accounts of individual users?
Alternatively, should each user have the
ability to create a new User ID or modify
an existing one? If so, should we notify
a designated sub-FRN or sub-account
when a new user has been added? In
addition, we seek comment on whether
individuals should have the ability to
create additional User IDs to access their
FRN as well. Why or why not?
H. Using CORES To Alert FRN Holders
About Financial or Other
Administrative Issues
46. In its current form, CORES lacks
the capability to alert FRN holders about
known financial or other administrativerelated issues regarding their standing at
the Commission, such as their status in
the Commission’s Red Light Display
System, their debarment status,42 or the
fact that we have discovered that their
contact information is incorrect or
nonoperational. We believe adding such
features to CORES will benefit the
Commission and regulatees alike, and
tentatively conclude that the
Commission should have the ability to
communicate such issues to regulatees
through CORES. One option for
accomplishing this is to post warning
messages on CORES that would appear
the next time a regulatee accesses its
FRN through the system. Another use
for this feature might be to display
payment histories and unpaid bills for
Commission-related activities, such as
unpaid fines and forfeitures, as well as
the section 9 regulatory fee payment
status. Alternatively, or in addition to
the above, CORES could send an alert
notification electronically to the e-mail
address provided by the FRN holder.
We seek comment on these proposals.
Should displays, prompts and
notifications of this nature come to an
FRN holder’s attention immediately
upon logging in to any Commission
system, or just upon logging in to
CORES? Should certain information just
be available to the registrant of the
single FRN, to certain pre-designated
42 The Commission’s rules at 47 CFR 1.2001, et
seq., require that each applicant requesting
professional or commercial licenses certify that
neither the applicant nor any party to the
application is subject to a denial of Federal benefits
that include Commission benefits pursuant to
section 5301 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5661
FRN sub-account registrants, or to all of
an FRN’s registrants? Taking into
account any privacy or security
concerns, which information should be
available to all of an FRN’s registrants
or to just specific users? We seek
comment on how entities and
individuals would best like to see this
information displayed and managed.
I. Tax Exempt Indicator
47. We propose to add a data field to
FRNs that would enable entities and
individuals to indicate any tax exempt
status that they possess through CORES.
Under our proposal, entities and
individuals claiming to be tax exempt
would be required to provide
substantiating documentation to the
Commission through CORES for review
within thirty (30) days of registration;
otherwise, the tax exempt indicator
would be removed from the FRN
record.43 Because tax-exempt entities
generally also qualify for a reduction or
elimination of their section 8 or section
9 annual regulatory fee requirements,
the availability of such data and
documentation through CORES would
simplify the process for confirming
eligibility for a reduction of (or
exemption from) annual fee
requirements, thus improving our
financial operations. We seek comment
on this proposal. Once scanned or
uploaded, the documentation would be
publicly accessible through CORES via
a hyperlink or similar icon. In the event
that the tax exempt status is not
accepted by the Commission, most
likely due to a lack of proper
documentation, we tentatively conclude
that the entity or individual would be
notified of this determination through
its FRN in CORES, and its tax exempt
indicator would be changed as deemed
appropriate. We seek comment on this
proposal, as well as on any appeal
process that should be implemented.
J. Bankruptcy Indicator
48. In certain contexts, our various
Bureaus and Offices have an interest in
knowing when industry participants are
filing for (or emerging from) bankruptcy.
For example, the Commission is
required to process assignments or
transfers of control of licenses for
43 The most commonly accepted documentation
is an IRS determination letter. An entity’s IRS
determination letter proves that it has been
recognized by the IRS as a nonprofit, tax exempt
entity under section 501 of the Internal Revenue
Code. Acceptable documentation may also include
State or government certifications or other
documentation that nonprofit status has been
approved by a State or other governmental
authority.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
5662
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
parties that enter bankruptcy.44 Also,
the Commission’s Office of Financial
Operations routinely receives requests
for waiver of Section 9 regulatory fees
from debtors claiming to be in
bankruptcy. Furthermore, the
Commission sometimes assumes the
role of debt collector as one of a
bankrupt regulatee’s many creditors.45
Currently, the Commission does not
have a central depository of
notifications that an entity is in
bankruptcy.
49. To reduce administrative burdens
at the Commission and enable our
Bureaus and Offices to better coordinate
their efforts to fulfill our regulatory
obligations to our regulatees that have
filed for bankruptcy, we propose to add
a data field that would enable entities
and individual license holders (or their
representatives) to notify the
Commission through CORES that they
have entered into bankruptcy, or that
there has been a change in their
bankruptcy status (such as, for example,
when they emerge from bankruptcy
under Chapter 11 of the U.S.
Bankruptcy Code).46 If this proposal is
adopted, such entities and individuals
would be required to provide their
bankruptcy court filing to the
Commission in conjunction with an
FCC filing involving their bankruptcy,
such as for an involuntary transfer of
control to the debtor-in-possession or a
request for waiver of certain regulatory
fees, by electronically scanning it and
uploading it to CORES through their
FRN account. We seek comment on our
bankruptcy notification proposals.
Would it be unduly burdensome or
duplicative to require regulatees that
have filed for bankruptcy to
electronically submit their bankruptcy
court filings to the Commission through
CORES? We also seek comment on
whether bankruptcy filings that are
electronically scanned to the entity’s/
individual’s FRN account should be
made viewable to the public in CORES
or whether they only should be
viewable to Commission staff. We
emphasize that the proposed
bankruptcy notification fields would not
be intended to take the place of any of
the Commission’s existing filing
44 See, e.g., 47 CFR 1.948(g), 5.59(d), 25.119(c),
63.03(d)(2), 63.24(g), 73.3541.
45 Debt collected by the Commission includes, in
part, auction debt, fines and forfeitures for rule
violations, and regulatory fee obligations.
46 We clarify that this requirement would apply
solely to entities and individuals that hold FCC
licenses or certifications, or otherwise are
considered to be doing business with the agency.
Regulated entities’ individual investors who have
themselves filed for bankruptcy protection would
not be required to report their status to the agency
under this proposal.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
requirements for bankruptcy cases, and
that we will continue to uphold our
filing requirements for entities and
individual license holders seeking
financial relief. Thus, entities and
individuals who have notified the
Commission through CORES that they
have entered into bankruptcy will
continue to be required to formally file
for any transfers of control or
assignment of licenses, as well as for
any waivers, reductions and deferrals of
regulatory fees they seek.
K. Incorporating Data Contained in the
Commission’s Form 499 Database
50. Section 254(d) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended (the ‘‘Act’’) directs every
telecommunications carrier that
provides interstate telecommunications
service to contribute to the mechanisms
established by the Commission to
preserve and advance universal
service.47 As a result, all entities that
provide interstate telecommunications
services to the public for a fee must
contribute to the universal service
fund.48 The Commission also requires
certain other providers of interstate
telecommunications to contribute to the
universal service fund.49 Certain
providers, such as de minimis
providers, however, do not contribute
directly to the universal service fund.50
The amount that entities are required to
contribute to the fund is based on
certain revenues reported on FCC Form
499, also known as the
Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets.51 Specifically, contributors
report historical revenue annually using
FCC Form 499–A; 52 projected future
47 47
U.S.C. 254(d).
Federal-State Joint Board on Universal
Service, CC Docket No. 96–45, Report and Order, 12
FCC Rcd 8776, 8797, para. 787 (1997) (subsequent
history omitted).
49 See, e.g., Universal Service Contribution
Methodology, WC Docket Nos. 06–122 and 04–36,
CC Docket Nos. 96–45, 98–171, 90–571, 92–237,
99–200, 95–116, and 98–170, Report and Order and
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 21 FCC Rcd 7518
(2006) (requiring interconnected voice over Internet
protocol (VoIP) providers to contribute to the
universal service fund because they are providers
of interstate telecommunications).
50 See, e.g., Federal-State Joint Board on
Universal Service, Access Charge Reform, Price Cap
Performance Review for Local Exchange Carriers,
Transport Rate Structure and Pricing, End User
Common Line Charge, CC Docket Nos. 96–45, 96–
262, 94–1, 91–213, 95–72, Fourth Order on
Reconsideration, 13 FCC Rcd 5381, 5481, para. 298.
51 The forms are filed with the Universal Service
Administrative Company (‘‘USAC’’), which is the
entity responsible for administering and managing
the fund. See 47 CFR 54.711(a).
52 Form 499–A is generally filed on April 1 of
each year. See Universal Service Administrative
Company, Schedule of Filings, at https://
www.universalservice.org/fund-administration/
contributors/revenue-reporting/schedulefilings.aspx (USAC Form 499 Filing Schedule).
48 See
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
quarterly revenue is reported quarterly
using the related FCC Form 499–Q.53
51. In addition to revenue
information, Forms 499–A and 499–Q
are used by telecommunications carriers
to report basic identifying information,
such as the address of the entity’s
corporate headquarters; the name and
address of the entity’s Chief Executive
Officer, the name and address of the
entity’s agent for service of process; and
the jurisdictions in which the entity
provides telecommunications services.
This data is then compiled and made
publicly available through a searchable
electronic database that is available on
the FCC’s Web site.54 Individual records
may be accessed either by a particular
entity’s 499 Filer ID Number or,
conveniently, its FRN.
52. Thus, in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act’s requirement
that we ‘‘improve the integrity, quality,
and utility of information to all users
within and outside the agency,’’ 55 we
seek comment on how best to connect
and incorporate data reported by
registrants on FCC Form 499 (and other
data systems) into CORES. As explained
above, information filed as a part of FCC
Form 499 is already publicly available
(and searchable) through an FCC
database. Incorporating this data into
CORES will improve the ability of both
filing entities and agency staff to review
the data for errors and omissions, and
speed the identification of those entities
that have reported an erroneous FRN on
their Form 499 filings. We seek
comment on whether there are emerging
industry conventions or data formats for
combining data to which we should
adhere or from which we should take
guidance. Also, do our various
proposals to limit entities to a single
FRN create difficulties for affiliated
entities when filing FCC Form 499?
53 Id.
54 See https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgb/form499/
499a.cfm.
55 The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (‘‘PRA’’),
Public Law 104–13, 109 Stat 163 (1995) (codified
in Chapter 35 of title 44 U.S.C.). Specifically, the
PRA requires:
(b) With respect to general information resources
management, each agency shall—
(1) Manage information resources to—
(A) Reduce information collection burdens on the
public;
(B) Increase program efficiency and effectiveness;
and
(C) Improve the integrity, quality, and utility of
information to all users within and outside the
agency, including capabilities for ensuring
dissemination of public information, public access
to government information, and protections for
privacy and security [* * *]
44 U.S.C. 3506.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
L. Company Dashboard
53. In light of the Commission’s intent
to develop and deploy an agency-wide
Consolidated Licensing System,56 we
also seek comments on the usefulness of
utilizing a company dashboard or
summary profile that filers would see
upon login, which would serve as a
central repository of information for the
filer. As described above, through the
dashboard, the filer would have the
ability to quickly and easily review
various pertinent information, such as
the progress on their filings, fees that are
due, the history of files the filer has
submitted, as well as any other
important information the filer may
need. Other uses for such a dashboard
may include: Identifying any
information that is missing from a
pending application, updating their
profile, and detecting actions requiring
immediate attention. How should such
a dashboard be designed so that it is
simple for users to navigate? Should
users be able to contact the Commission
in an online chat if they have questions?
Should there be a ‘‘guided wizard’’ to
help users fill-out an application(s)/
form(s)? What other information would
be useful if readily available to users
through such a dashboard? We seek
comment on this proposal.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
M. Petition for Rulemaking
54. We wish to take this opportunity
to address a Petition for Rulemaking
that was filed with the Commission by
Frederick Maia (‘‘Maia’’) concerning
certain records contained in the CORES
system and the Commission’s Universal
Licensing System (‘‘ULS’’).57 Maia notes
that, with the exception of an
applicant’s TIN, the personal licensee
information contained in these two
systems is exactly the same.58 Maia
therefore proposes that the CORES
system be automatically updated
whenever an amateur radio operator
applicant updates his or her name and
address in ULS.59 Maia further notes
that Commission rules do not require an
amateur radio operator applicant to
provide telephone numbers, fax
numbers or e-mail addresses in CORES
or ULS, and suggests that the
Commission may wish to make
submission of this additional
56 See
para. 10, supra.
Petition for Rulemaking, WTB 07–36, filed
July 11, 2007 (‘‘Maia Petition’’). The Universal
Licensing System (‘‘ULS’’) is a Commission
electronic filing system that enables the public to
research applications, licenses, and antenna
structures, among other things, regarding wireless
services. See https://wireless.fcc.gov/uls/index.htm.
58 Maia Petition at 2.
59 Id.
57 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
information mandatory in the part 1 and
part 97 rules.60
55. The petitioner proposes this
change to CORES based on his
experience in amateur radio service.
Maia notes that while § 97.23 of the
Commission’s rules requires that license
grants ‘‘must show the grantee’s correct
name and mailing address,’’ there is
nothing in the part 97 rules that
obligates a licensee to also keep their
CORES name and address record
updated.61 The Maia Petition goes on to
state that many amateur radio operators
who have submitted a name or address
update in ULS believe that they have
fulfilled their obligation to keep their
personal information accurate at the
Commission.62 Maia maintains that few
amateur radio operators know that they
are also required to update their CORES
listing.63
56. We seek comment on this
proposal. As noted above, the
Commission has begun a proceeding
related to the development of a new
Consolidated Licensing System, which
would eventually replace ULS. Should
modifications or updates to personal
information in ULS/CLS be
automatically imported into CORES, or
vice versa? Should such information be
uploaded from ULS/CLS into CORES
(or, alternatively, from CORES to ULS/
CLS) voluntarily, that is, only at the
user’s option? Should this feature apply
to all duplicative personal information,
or should we require that users change
some information in each system
manually? Why or why not? We seek
comment on what other Commission
services would benefit from this autoupdate feature.
N. Other Considerations
57. Foreign nationals and non-United
States citizens who are not employed in
the United States currently are not
required to provide a domestic mailing
address as part of the process for
obtaining an FRN through CORES. It has
often proven difficult for the
Commission to contact or otherwise
collect delinquent debt from these
foreign individuals through their foreign
addresses. Therefore, we tentatively
conclude that foreign nationals and nonUnited States citizens who are not
employed in the United States should
be required to designate and identify an
address for a domestic agent authorized
to accept notice from the Commission
either as a prerequisite to or as part of
at 2–3.
at 5. See 47 CFR 97.23.
62 Maia Petition at 5.
63 Id. at 2 and 5 (citing 47 CFR 1.8002).
5663
the process of obtaining an FRN. We
seek comment on this proposal.
58. Finally, we seek comment on any
other issues relating to the customer
interface with CORES that the
Commission should consider in this
rulemaking proceeding. Are there
particular issues relating to performance
or access to the system that the
Commission should endeavor to
improve through this proceeding? Are
there any other issues or improvements
that we could make to the CORES
system that have not been raised above?
We particularly invite commenters to
discuss challenges they have had with
accessing, using, or exchanging
information with CORES or with their
FRNs in the past, and invite comment
on how such difficulties could be
ameliorated in the future.
IV. Procedural Matters
A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
59. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, see 5 U.S.C. 603, the
Commission has prepared an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (‘‘IRFA’’)
of the possible significant economic
impact on small entities of the proposals
suggested in this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. The IRFA is set forth in
Appendix A. Written public comments
on the IRFA must be filed in accordance
with the comment filing deadlines
indicated on the first page of this
document, and using the procedures
and format described in Appendix A
and section IV.D., below.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Analysis
60. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act
Analysis. This Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking contains proposed new and
modified information collection
requirements.64 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
proposed information collection
requirements contained in this Notice,
as required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. 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 me might further reduce the
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
61. In addition to filing comments
with the Secretary, a copy of any PRA
60 Id.
61 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
64 The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (‘‘PRA’’),
Public Law 104–13, 109 Stat 163 (1995) (codified
in Chapter 35 of title 44 U.S.C.).
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
5664
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
comments on the proposed collection
requirements 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
nfraser@omb.eop.gov or via fax at 202–
395–5167.
62. Further Information. For
additional information concerning the
proposed information collection
requirements contained in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, send an e-mail to
PRA@fcc.gov or contact Warren
Firschein, Federal Communications
Commission, Room 3–C768, 445 12th
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or
by e-mail to Warren.Firschein@fcc.gov.
To view or obtain a copy of this
information collection request (ICR)
submitted to OMB: (1) Go to this OMB/
GSA Web page: https://www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the
section of the Web page called
‘‘Currently Under Review,’’ (3) click on
the downward-pointing arrow in the
‘‘Select Agency’’ box below the
‘‘Currently Under Review’’ heading,
(4) select ‘‘Federal Communications
Commission’’ from the list of agencies
presented in the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box,
(5) click the ‘‘Submit’’ button to the right
of the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, and (6)
when the list of FCC ICRs currently
under review appears, look for the OMB
control number of this ICR as shown in
the Supplementary Information section
below (or its title if there is no OMB
control number) and then click on the
ICR Reference Number. A copy of the
FCC submission to OMB will be
displayed.
C. Ex Parte Rules
63. Permit-But-Disclose. This
proceeding will be treated as a ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ proceeding subject to the
‘‘permit-but-disclose’’ requirements
under § 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s
rules.65 Ex parte presentations are
permissible if disclosed in accordance
with Commission rules, except during
the Sunshine Agenda period when
presentations, ex parte or otherwise, are
generally prohibited. Persons making
oral ex parte presentations are reminded
that a memorandum summarizing a
presentation must contain a summary of
the substance of the presentation and
not merely a listing of the subjects
discussed. More than a one or twosentence description of the views and
arguments presented is generally
required.66 Additional rules pertaining
65 See
47 CFR 1.1206(b); see also 47 CFR 1.1202,
1.1203.
66 See 47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
to oral and written presentations are set
forth in § 1.1206(b).
D. Filing Requirements
64. Comments and Reply Comments.
Pursuant to §§ 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.
• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the
Commission’s Secretary must be
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445
12th St., SW., Room TW–A325,
Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries
must be held together with rubber bands
or fasteners. Any envelopes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
• Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights,
MD 20743.
• U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington DC 20554.
65. Parties should send a copy of their
filings to Warren Firschein, Federal
Communications Commission,
Room 3–C768, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554, or by e-mail to
Warren.Firschein@fcc.gov. Parties shall
also serve one copy with the
Commission’s copy contractor, Best
Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI), Portals
II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Washington, DC 20554, (202) 488–5300,
or via e-mail to fcc@bcpiweb.com.
66. Documents in Docket No. 10–234
will be available for public inspection
and copying during business hours at
the FCC Reference Information Center,
Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room
CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. The
documents may also be purchased from
BCPI, telephone (202) 488–5300,
facsimile (202) 488–5563, TTY (202)
488–5562, e-mail fcc@bcpiweb.com.
E. Accessible Formats
67. 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) or 202–418–0432
(TTY). Contact the FCC to request
reasonable accommodations for filing
comments (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov;
phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–418–
0432.
F. Additional Information
68. For additional information on this
proceeding, contact Warren Firschein at
(202) 418–0844, or via e-mail at
Warren.Firschein@fcc.gov. Press
inquiries should be directed to David
Fiske at (202) 418–0513.
V. Ordering Clauses
69. Accordingly, it is ordered that,
pursuant to Sections 4(i), 8(c)(2), 9(c)(2),
and 303(r) of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i),
158(c)(2), 159(c)(2), and 303(r); 5 U.S.C.
5514; and section 7701 of the Debt
Collection Improvement Act of 1996, 31
U.S.C. 7701(c)(1), notice is hereby given
of the proposals and tentative
conclusions described in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
70. It is further ordered that the
Secretary shall cause a copy of this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to be
published in the Federal Register.
71. It is further ordered that the
Commission’s Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
this Notice, including the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and
procedure.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Appendix A
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
72. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA),67 the Commission has
prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) of the possible economic
impact on small entities of the policies and
rules proposed in this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (‘‘Notice’’).68 Written public
comments are requested on the IRFA.
Comments must be identified as responses to
the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines
for comments on the Notice. The
Commission will send a copy of the Notice,
including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration (‘‘SBA’’).69 In addition, the
Notice and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will
be published in the Federal Register.70
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
A. Need for and Objectives of the Proposed
Rules
73. The Notice tentatively concludes that
the Commission should modify its electronic
registration system, known as ‘‘CORES,’’ to
make improvements to the process by which
entities and individuals access and make use
of information that is contained in CORES
and to make it easier for individuals and
entities to do business with the FCC.
Specifically, the Notice proposes to limit
entities and individuals to the use of a
primary FRN, while allowing subsidiary or
associated FRNs; allow entities to identify
multiple points of contact; eliminate some of
our exceptions to the requirement that
entities and individuals provide their
Taxpayer Identification Number (‘‘TIN’’) at
the time of registration; require FRN holders
to provide their e-mail addresses; give FRN
holders the option to create a custom User ID;
modify CORES log-in procedures for entities
so as to ease use by multiple individuals; add
attention flags and notices that would inform
FRN holders of their financial standing
before the Commission when logging onto
CORES; and add data fields to enable FRN
holders to indicate their tax-exempt status
and notify the Commission of pending
bankruptcy proceedings. These
67 See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq., has been amended by the Contract with
America Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law
104–121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (‘‘CWAA’’). Title II of
the CWAA is the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (‘‘SBREFA’’).
68 We also note that we could certify this action
under 5 U.S.C. 605, given that a substantial number
of entities and individuals doing business with the
Commission have already received their FRN by
virtue of their prior registration in CORES, and the
changes proposed here will have no significant
economic impact on them. Moreover, we have
proposed to make it extremely simple, and virtually
cost-free, for anyone else to obtain or revise their
already-existing FRN(s). Finally, the few entities
that, as a result of our action, would be required to
scan and file documentation demonstrating their
tax-exempt or bankruptcy status will experience
only a minor compliance burden.
69 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
70 Id.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
modifications, if implemented, would
eliminate some of the system’s current
limitations and improve the customer
interface with CORES so that customers can
use the system in a more efficient and
effective manner, especially in light of the
Commission’s intent to develop an agencywide consolidated licensing system. The
proposed changes would also improve the
Commission’s ability to comply with various
statutes that govern debt collection and the
collection of personal information by the
Federal government.
B. Legal Basis
74. The proposed action is authorized
under sections 4(i), 8(c)(2), 9(c)(2), and 303(r)
of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 158(c)(2),
159(c)(2), and 303(r); 5 U.S.C. 5514; and
section 7701 of the Debt Collection
Improvement Act of 1996, 31 U.S.C.
7701(c)(1).
C. Description and Estimate of the Number
of Small Entities to Which the Proposed
Rules Will Apply
75. 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.71 The RFA defines the term ‘‘small
entity’’ as having the same meaning as the
terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’
and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ 72 In
addition, the term ‘‘small business’’ has the
same meaning as the term ‘‘small business
concern’’ under the Small Business Act.73 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.74
76. Any proposed changes or additions to
the Commission’s part 1 rules that may be
made as a result of the Notice would be of
general applicability to all services, applying
to all entities of any size that apply for or
hold Commission licenses, permits,
certifications, etc., as well as entities or
individuals that have attributable ownership
interests in such entities, and have already
obtained a unique identifying number
through CORES called an FCC Registration
Number, or ‘‘FRN.’’ We also note that these
changes may also affect small entities, such
as law firms and accounting firms, that
prepare filings or otherwise access CORES on
the behalf of regulatees. The Commission
does not keep statistics on the number of
such small entities, but we conclude that any
burden on such entities is unlikely to be
significant.
71 5
U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
U.S.C. 601(6).
73 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the
definition of ‘‘small business concern’’ in 15 U.S.C.
632). Pursuant to the RFA, the statutory definition
of a small business applies ‘‘unless an agency, after
consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration and after
opportunity for public comment, establishes one or
more definitions of such term which are
appropriate to the activities of the agency and
publishes such definition(s) in the Federal
Register.’’ 5 U.S.C. 601(3).
74 Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632 (1996).
72 5
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5665
77. Small Businesses. Nationwide, there
are a total of approximately 29.6 million
small businesses, according to the SBA.75
78. Small Organizations. Nationwide, as of
2002, there were approximately 1.6 million
small organizations.76 A ‘‘small organization’’
is generally ‘‘any not-for-profit enterprise
which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.’’ 77
79. 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.’’ 78 Census Bureau data
for 2002 indicate that there were 87,525 local
governmental jurisdictions in the United
States.79 We estimate that, of this total,
84,377 entities were ‘‘small governmental
jurisdictions.’’ 80 Thus, we estimate that most
governmental jurisdictions are small.
80. We have included small incumbent
local exchange carriers in this present RFA
analysis. As noted above, a ‘‘small business’’
under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets
the pertinent small business size standard
(e.g., a telephone communications business
having 1,500 or fewer employees), and ‘‘is not
dominant in its field of operation.’’ 81 The
SBA’s Office of Advocacy contends that, for
RFA purposes, small incumbent local
exchange carriers are not dominant in their
field of operation because any such
dominance is not ‘‘national’’ in scope.82 We
have therefore included small incumbent
local exchange carriers in this RFA analysis,
although we emphasize that this RFA action
has no effect on Commission analyses and
determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
81. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers
(‘‘ILECs’’). Neither the Commission nor the
SBA has developed a small business size
standard specifically for incumbent local
exchange services. The appropriate size
standard under SBA rules is for the category
Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under
that size standard, such a business is small
75 See SBA, Office of Advocacy, ‘‘Frequently
Asked Questions,’’ https://web.sba.gov/faqs
(accessed Jan. 2009).
76 Independent Sector, The New Nonprofit
Almanac & Desk Reference (2002).
77 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
78 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
79 U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the
United States: 2006, Section 8, p. 272, Table 415.
80 We assume that the villages, school districts,
and special districts are small, and total 48,558. See
U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the
United States: 2006, section 8, p. 273, Table 417.
For 2002, Census Bureau data indicate that the total
number of county, municipal, and township
governments nationwide was 38,967, of which
35,819 were small. Id.
81 15 U.S.C. 632.
82 Letter from Jere W. Glover, Chief Counsel for
Advocacy, SBA, to William E. Kennard, Chairman,
FCC (May 27, 1999). The Small Business Act
contains a definition of ‘‘small-business concern,’’
which the RFA incorporates into its own definition
of ‘‘small business.’’ See 15 U.S.C. 632(a) (‘‘Small
Business Act’’); 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (‘‘RFA’’). SBA
regulations interpret ‘‘small business concern’’ to
include the concept of dominance on a national
basis. See 13 CFR 121.102(b).
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
5666
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.83
According to Commission data,84 1,311
carriers have reported that they are engaged
in the provision of incumbent local exchange
services. Of these 1,311 carriers, an estimated
1,024 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 287
have more than 1,500 employees.
Consequently, the Commission estimates that
most providers of incumbent local exchange
service are small businesses.
82. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers
(‘‘CLECs’’), Competitive Access Providers
(‘‘CAPs’’), ‘‘Shared-Tenant Service Providers,’’
and ‘‘Other Local Service Providers.’’ Neither
the Commission nor the SBA has developed
a small business size standard specifically for
these service providers. The appropriate size
standard under SBA rules is for the category
Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under
that size standard, such a business is small
if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.85
According to Commission data,86 1005
carriers have reported that they are engaged
in the provision of either competitive access
provider services or competitive local
exchange carrier services. Of these 1005
carriers, an estimated 918 have 1,500 or
fewer employees and 87 have more than
1,500 employees. In addition, 16 carriers
have reported that they are ‘‘Shared-Tenant
Service Providers,’’ and all 16 are estimated
to have 1,500 or fewer employees. In
addition, 89 carriers have reported that they
are ‘‘Other Local Service Providers.’’ Of the
89, all have 1,500 or fewer employees.
Consequently, the Commission estimates that
most providers of competitive local exchange
service, competitive access providers,
‘‘Shared-Tenant Service Providers,’’ and
‘‘Other Local Service Providers’’ are small
entities.
83. Local Resellers. The SBA has
developed a small business size standard for
the category of Telecommunications
Resellers. Under that size standard, such a
business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees.87 According to Commission
data,88 151 carriers have reported that they
are engaged in the provision of local resale
services. Of these, an estimated 149 have
1,500 or fewer employees and two have more
than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that the majority of
local resellers are small entities.
84. Toll Resellers. The SBA has developed
a small business size standard for the
category of Telecommunications Resellers.
Under that size standard, such a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.89
According to Commission data,90 815 carriers
have reported that they are engaged in the
provision of toll resale services. Of these, an
estimated 787 have 1,500 or fewer employees
83 13 CFR 121.201, North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code 517110.
84 FCC, Wireline Competition Bureau, Industry
Analysis and Technology Division, ‘‘Trends in
Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3, Page 5–5 (Aug.
2008) (‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’). This source
uses data that are current as of November 1, 2006.
85 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.
86 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
87 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517310.
88 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
89 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517310.
90 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
and 28 have more than 1,500 employees.
Consequently, the Commission estimates that
the majority of toll resellers are small
entities.
85. Payphone Service Providers (‘‘PSPs’’).
Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a small business size standard
specifically for payphone services providers.
The appropriate size standard under SBA
rules is for the category Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that
size standard, such a business is small if it
has 1,500 or fewer employees.91 According to
Commission data,92 526 carriers have
reported that they are engaged in the
provision of payphone services. Of these, an
estimated 524 have 1,500 or fewer employees
and two have more than 1,500 employees.
Consequently, the Commission estimates that
the majority of payphone service providers
are small entities.
86. Interexchange Carriers (‘‘IXCs’’).
Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a small business size standard
specifically for providers of interexchange
services. The appropriate size standard under
SBA rules is for the category Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that
size standard, such a business is small if it
has 1,500 or fewer employees.93 According to
Commission data,94 300 carriers have
reported that they are engaged in the
provision of interexchange service. Of these,
an estimated 268 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and 32 have more than 1,500
employees. Consequently, the Commission
estimates that the majority of IXCs are small
entities.
87. Operator Service Providers (‘‘OSPs’’).
Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a small business size standard
specifically for operator service providers.
The appropriate size standard under SBA
rules is for the category Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that
size standard, such a business is small if it
has 1,500 or fewer employees.95 According to
Commission data,96 28 carriers have reported
that they are engaged in the provision of
operator services. Of these, an estimated 27
have 1,500 or fewer employees and one has
more than 1,500 employees. Consequently,
the Commission estimates that the majority
of OSPs are small entities.
88. Prepaid Calling Card Providers. Neither
the Commission nor the SBA has developed
a small business size standard specifically for
prepaid calling card providers. The
appropriate size standard under SBA rules is
for the category Telecommunications
Resellers. Under that size standard, such a
business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees.97 According to Commission
data,98 88 carriers have reported that they are
engaged in the provision of prepaid calling
cards. Of these, an estimated 85 have 1,500
or fewer employees and three have more than
91 3
CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.
in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
93 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.
94 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
95 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.
96 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
97 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517310.
98 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
92 ‘‘Trends
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
1,500 employees. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that the majority of
prepaid calling card providers are small
entities.
89. 800 and 800-Like Service Subscribers.99
Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a small business size standard
specifically for 800 and 800-like service (‘‘toll
free’’) subscribers. The appropriate size
standard under SBA rules is for the category
Telecommunications Resellers. Under that
size standard, such a business is small if it
has 1,500 or fewer employees.100 The most
reliable source of information regarding the
number of these service subscribers appears
to be data the Commission receives from
Database Service Management on the 800,
866, 877, and 888 numbers in use.101
According to our data, at the end of
December 2007, the number of 800 numbers
assigned was 7,860,000; the number of 888
numbers assigned was 5,210,184; the number
of 877 numbers assigned was 4,388,682; and
the number of 866 numbers assigned was
7,029,116. We do not have data specifying
the number of these subscribers that are
independently owned and operated or have
1,500 or fewer employees, and thus are
unable at this time to estimate with greater
precision the number of toll free subscribers
that would qualify as small businesses under
the SBA size standard. Consequently, we
estimate that there are 7,860,000 or fewer
small entity 800 subscribers; 5,210,184 or
fewer small entity 888 subscribers; 4,388,682
or fewer small entity 877 subscribers, and
7,029,116 or fewer entity 866 subscribers.
90. Satellite Telecommunications and All
Other Telecommunications. These two
economic census categories address the
satellite industry. The first category has a
small business size standard of $15 million
or less in average annual receipts, under SBA
rules.102 The second has a size standard of
$25 million or less in annual receipts.103 The
most current Census Bureau data in this
context, however, are from the (last)
economic census of 2002, and we will use
those figures to gauge the prevalence of small
businesses in these categories.104
91. The category of Satellite
Telecommunications ‘‘comprises
establishments primarily engaged in
providing telecommunications services to
other establishments in the
telecommunications and broadcasting
industries by forwarding and receiving
communications signals via a system of
satellites or reselling satellite
telecommunications.’’ 105 For this category,
Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there
were a total of 371 firms that operated for the
entire year.106 Of this total, 307 firms had
99 We include all toll-free number subscribers in
this category.
100 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517310.
101 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Tables 18.4,
18.5, 18.6, and 18.7.
102 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517410.
103 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517919.
104 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS codes 517410 and
517910 (2002).
105 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517410 Satellite Telecommunications’’; https://
www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/ND517410.HTM.
106 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, ‘‘Establishment and
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
annual receipts of under $10 million, and 26
firms had receipts of $10 million to
$24,999,999.107 Consequently, we estimate
that the majority of Satellite
Telecommunications firms are small entities.
92. The second category of All Other
Telecommunications comprises, inter alia,
‘‘establishments primarily engaged in
providing specialized telecommunications
services, such as satellite tracking,
communications telemetry, and radar station
operation. This industry also includes
establishments primarily engaged in
providing satellite terminal stations and
associated facilities connected with one or
more terrestrial systems and capable of
transmitting telecommunications to, and
receiving telecommunications from, satellite
systems.’’ 108 For this category, Census
Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a
total of 332 firms that operated for the entire
year.109 Of this total, 303 firms had annual
receipts of under $10 million and 15 firms
had annual receipts of $10 million to
$24,999,999.110 Consequently, we estimate
that the majority of All Other
Telecommunications firms are small entities.
93. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers
(except Satellite). Since 2007, the Census
Bureau has placed wireless firms within this
new, broad, economic census category.111
Prior to that time, such firms were within the
now-superseded categories of ‘‘Paging’’ and
‘‘Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications.’’ 112 Under the present
and prior categories, the SBA has deemed a
wireless business to be small if it has 1,500
or fewer employees.113 Because Census
Bureau data are not yet available for the new
category, we will estimate small business
prevalence using the prior categories and
associated data. For the category of Paging,
data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms
that operated for the entire year.114 Of this
total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or
fewer employees, and three firms had
Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),’’
Table 4, NAICS code 517410 (issued Nov. 2005).
107 Id. An additional 38 firms had annual receipts
of $25 million or more.
108 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517919 All Other Telecommunications’’; https://
www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/
ND517919.HTM#N517919.
109 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, ‘‘Establishment and
Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),’’
Table 4, NAICS code 517910 (issued Nov. 2005).
110 Id. An additional 14 firms had annual receipts
of $25 million or more.
111 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517210 Wireless Telecommunications Categories
(Except Satellite)’’; https://www.census.gov/naics/
2007/def/ND517210.HTM#N517210.
112 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517211 Paging’’; https://www.census.gov/epcd/
naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.; U.S. Census Bureau,
2002 NAICS Definitions, ‘‘517212 Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications’’; https://
www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.
113 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210 (2007
NAICS). The now-superseded, pre-2007 CFR
citations were 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS codes
517211 and 517212 (referring to the 2002 NAICS).
114 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, ‘‘Establishment and
Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,’’
Table 5, NAICS code 517211 (issued Nov. 2005).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
employment of 1,000 employees or more.115
For the category of Cellular and Other
Wireless Telecommunications, data for 2002
show that there were 1,397 firms that
operated for the entire year.116 Of this total,
1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer
employees, and 19 firms had employment of
1,000 employees or more.117 Thus, we
estimate that the majority of wireless firms
are small.
94. Common Carrier Paging. As noted, the
SBA has developed a small business size
standard for Wireless Telecommunications
Carriers (except Satellite) firms within the
broad economic census categories of
‘‘Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications.’’ 118 Since 2007, the
Census Bureau has placed wireless firms
within this new, broad, economic census
category.119 Prior to that time, such firms
were within the now-superseded categories
of ‘‘Paging’’ and ‘‘Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications.’’ 120 Under the present
and prior categories, the SBA has deemed a
wireless business to be small if it has 1,500
or fewer employees.121 Because Census
Bureau data are not yet available for the new
category, we will estimate small business
prevalence using the prior categories and
associated data. For the category of Paging,
data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms
that operated for the entire year.122 Of this
total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or
fewer employees, and three firms had
employment of 1,000 employees or more.123
For the category of Cellular and Other
Wireless Telecommunications, data for 2002
show that there were 1,397 firms that
operated for the entire year.124 Of this total,
115 Id.
The census data do not provide a more
precise estimate of the number of firms that have
employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the
largest category provided is for firms with ‘‘1000
employees or more.’’
116 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, ‘‘Establishment and
Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,’’
Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005).
117 Id. The census data do not provide a more
precise estimate of the number of firms that have
employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the
largest category provided is for firms with ‘‘1000
employees or more.’’
118 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517212.
119 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517210 Wireless Telecommunications Categories
(Except Satellite)’’; https://www.census.gov/naics/
2007/def/ND517210.HTM#N517210.
120 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517211 Paging’’; https://www.census.gov/epcd/
naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.; U.S. Census Bureau,
2002 NAICS Definitions, ‘‘517212 Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications’’; https://
www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF517.HTM.
121 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210 (2007
NAICS). The now-superseded, pre-2007 CFR
citations were 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS codes
517211 and 517212 (referring to the 2002 NAICS).
122 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, ‘‘Establishment and
Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,’’
Table 5, NAICS code 517211 (issued Nov. 2005).
123 Id. The census data do not provide a more
precise estimate of the number of firms that have
employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the
largest category provided is for firms with ‘‘1000
employees or more.’’
124 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, ‘‘Establishment and
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5667
1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer
employees, and 19 firms had employment of
1,000 employees or more.125 Thus, we
estimate that the majority of wireless firms
are small.
95. In addition, in the Paging Second
Report and Order, the Commission adopted
a size standard for ‘‘small businesses’’ for
purposes of determining their eligibility for
special provisions such as bidding credits
and installment payments.126 A small
business is an entity that, together with its
affiliates and controlling principals, has
average gross revenues not exceeding $15
million for the preceding three years.127 The
SBA has approved this definition.128 An
initial auction of Metropolitan Economic
Area (‘‘MEA’’) licenses was conducted in the
year 2000. Of the 2,499 licenses auctioned,
985 were sold.129 Fifty-seven companies
claiming small business status won 440
licenses.130 A subsequent auction of MEA
and Economic Area (‘‘EA’’) licenses was held
in the year 2001. Of the 15,514 licenses
auctioned, 5,323 were sold.131 One hundred
thirty-two companies claiming small
business status purchased 3,724 licenses. A
third auction, consisting of 8,874 licenses in
each of 175 EAs and 1,328 licenses in all but
three of the 51 MEAs, was held in 2003.
Seventy-seven bidders claiming small or very
small business status won 2,093 licenses.132
96. Currently, there are approximately
74,000 Common Carrier Paging licenses.
According to the most recent Trends in
Telephone Service, 281 carriers reported that
they were engaged in the provision of ‘‘paging
Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization,’’
Table 5, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005).
125 Id. The census data do not provide a more
precise estimate of the number of firms that have
employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the
largest category provided is for firms with ‘‘1000
employees or more.’’
126 Revision of Part 22 and Part 90 of the
Commission’s Rules to Facilitate Future
Development of Paging Systems, Second Report and
Order, 12 FCC Rcd 2732, 2811–2812, paras. 178–
181 (‘‘Paging Second Report and Order’’); see also
Revision of Part 22 and Part 90 of the Commission’s
Rules to Facilitate Future Development of Paging
Systems, Memorandum Opinion and Order on
Reconsideration, 14 FCC Rcd 10030, 10085–10088,
paras. 98–107 (1999).
127 Paging Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd
at 2811, para. 179.
128 See Letter from Aida Alvarez, Administrator,
SBA, to Amy Zoslov, Chief, Auctions and Industry
Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications
Bureau (‘‘WTB’’), FCC (Dec. 2, 1998) (‘‘Alvarez Letter
1998’’).
129 See ‘‘929 and 931 MHz Paging Auction
Closes,’’ Public Notice, 15 FCC Rcd 4858 (WTB
2000).
130 See id.
131 See ‘‘Lower and Upper Paging Band Auction
Closes,’’ Public Notice, 16 FCC Rcd 21821 (WTB
2002).
132 See ‘‘Lower and Upper Paging Bands Auction
Closes,’’ Public Notice, 18 FCC Rcd 11154 (WTB
2003). The current number of small or very small
business entities that hold wireless licenses may
differ significantly from the number of such entities
that won in spectrum auctions due to assignments
and transfers of licenses in the secondary market
over time. In addition, some of the same small
business entities may have won licenses in more
than one auction.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
5668
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
and messaging’’ services.133 Of these, an
estimated 279 have 1,500 or fewer employees
and two have more than 1,500 employees.134
We estimate that the majority of common
carrier paging providers would qualify as
small entities under the SBA definition.
97. 2.3 GHz Wireless Communications
Services. This service can be used for fixed,
mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio
broadcasting satellite uses. The Commission
defined ‘‘small business’’ for the wireless
communications services (‘‘WCS’’) auction as
an entity with average gross revenues of $40
million for each of the three preceding years,
and a ‘‘very small business’’ as an entity with
average gross revenues of $15 million for
each of the three preceding years.135 The
SBA has approved these definitions.136 The
Commission auctioned geographic area
licenses in the WCS service. In the auction,
which was conducted in 1997, there were
seven bidders that won 31 licenses that
qualified as very small business entities, and
one bidder that won one license that
qualified as a small business entity.
98. 1670–1675 MHz Services. An auction
for one license in the 1670–1675 MHz band
was conducted in 2003. One license was
awarded. The winning bidder was not a
small entity.
99. Wireless Telephony. Wireless
telephony includes cellular, personal
communications services, and specialized
mobile radio telephony carriers. As noted,
the SBA has developed a small business size
standard for Wireless Telecommunications
Carriers (except Satellite).137 Under the SBA
small business size standard, a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.138
According to Trends in Telephone Service
data, 434 carriers reported that they were
engaged in wireless telephony.139 Of these,
an estimated 222 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and 212 have more than 1,500
employees.140 We therefore estimate that 222
of these are small under the SBA small
business size standard.
100. Broadband Personal Communications
Service. The broadband personal
communications services (‘‘PCS’’) spectrum is
divided into six frequency blocks designated
A through F, and the Commission has held
auctions for each block. The Commission has
created a small business size standard for
Blocks C and F as an entity that has average
gross revenues of less than $40 million in the
three previous calendar years.141 For Block F,
an additional small business size standard for
‘‘very small business’’ was added and is
in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
135 Amendment of the Commission’s Rules to
Establish Part 27, the Wireless Communications
Service (WCS), Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd
10785, 10879, para. 194 (1997).
136 See Alvarez Letter 1998.
137 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
138 Id.
139 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
140 ‘‘Trends in Telephone Service’’ at Table 5.3.
141 See Amendment of Parts 20 and 24 of the
Commission’s Rules—Broadband PCS Competitive
Bidding and the Commercial Mobile Radio Service
Spectrum Cap, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 7824,
7850–7852, paras. 57–60 (1996) (‘‘PCS Report and
Order’’); see also 47 CFR 24.720(b).
133 ‘‘Trends
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
134 ‘‘Trends
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
defined as an entity that, together with its
affiliates, has average gross revenues of not
more than $15 million for the preceding three
calendar years.142 These small business size
standards, in the context of broadband PCS
auctions, have been approved by the SBA.143
No small businesses within the SBAapproved small business size standards bid
successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B.
There were 90 winning bidders that qualified
as small entities in the Block C auctions. A
total of 93 ‘‘small’’ and ‘‘very small’’ business
bidders won approximately 40 percent of the
1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F.144 In
1999, the Commission reauctioned 155 C, D,
E, and F Block licenses; there were 113 small
business winning bidders.145
101. In 2001, the Commission completed
the auction of 422 C and F Broadband PCS
licenses in Auction 35. Of the 35 winning
bidders in this auction, 29 qualified as
‘‘small’’ or ‘‘very small’’ businesses.146
Subsequent events, concerning Auction 35,
including judicial and agency
determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C
and F Block licenses being available for
grant. In 2005, the Commission completed an
auction of 188 C block licenses and 21 F
block licenses in Auction 58. There were 24
winning bidders for 217 licenses.147 Of the
24 winning bidders, 16 claimed small
business status and won 156 licenses. In
2007, the Commission completed an auction
of 33 licenses in the A, C, and F Blocks in
Auction 71.148 Of the 14 winning bidders, six
were designated entities.149 In 2008, the
Commission completed an auction of 20
Broadband PCS licenses in the C, D, E and
F block licenses in Auction 78.150
102. Advanced Wireless Services. In 2008,
the Commission conducted the auction of
Advanced Wireless Services (‘‘AWS’’)
licenses.151 This auction, which as
designated as Auction 78, offered 35 licenses
in the AWS 1710–1755 MHz and 2110–2155
MHz bands (‘‘AWS–1’’). The AWS–1 licenses
were licenses for which there were no
winning bids in Auction 66. That same year,
142 See
PCS Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at
7852, para. 60.
143 See Alvarez Letter 1998.
144 FCC News, ‘‘Broadband PCS, D, E and F Block
Auction Closes,’’ No. 71744 (rel. Jan. 14, 1997).
145 See ‘‘C, D, E, and F Block Broadband PCS
Auction Closes,’’ Public Notice, 14 FCC Rcd 6688
(WTB 1999).
146 See ‘‘C and F Block Broadband PCS Auction
Closes; Winning Bidders Announced,’’ Public
Notice, 16 FCC Rcd 2339 (2001).
147 See ‘‘Broadband PCS Spectrum Auction
Closes; Winning Bidders Announced for Auction
No. 58,’’ Public Notice, 20 FCC Rcd 3703 (2005).
148 See ‘‘Auction of Broadband PCS Spectrum
Licenses Closes; Winning Bidders Announced for
Auction No. 71,’’ Public Notice, 22 FCC Rcd 9247
(2007).
149 Id.
150 See Auction of AWS–1 and Broadband PCS
Licenses Rescheduled For August 13, 2008, Notice
of Filing Requirements, Minimum Opening Bids,
Upfront Payments and Other Procedures For
Auction 78, Public Notice, 23 FCC Rcd 7496 (2008)
(‘‘AWS–1 and Broadband PCS Procedures Public
Notice’’).
151 See AWS–1 and Broadband PCS Procedures
Public Notice, 23 FCC Rcd 7496. Auction 78 also
included an auction of Broadband PCS licenses.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
the Commission completed Auction 78. A
bidder with attributed average annual gross
revenues that exceeded $15 million and did
not exceed $40 million for the preceding
three years (‘‘small business’’) received a 15
percent discount on its winning bid. A
bidder with attributed average annual gross
revenues that did not exceed $15 million for
the preceding three years (‘‘very small
business’’) received a 25 percent discount on
its winning bid. A bidder that had combined
total assets of less than $500 million and
combined gross revenues of less than $125
million in each of the last two years qualified
for entrepreneur status.152 Four winning
bidders that identified themselves as very
small businesses won 17 licenses.153 Three of
the winning bidders that identified
themselves as a small business won five
licenses. Additionally, one other winning
bidder that qualified for entrepreneur status
won 2 licenses.
103. Narrowband Personal
Communications Services. In 1994, the
Commission conducted an auction for
Narrowband PCS licenses. A second auction
was also conducted later in 1994. For
purposes of the first two Narrowband PCS
auctions, ‘‘small businesses’’ were entities
with average gross revenues for the prior
three calendar years of $40 million or less.154
Through these auctions, the Commission
awarded a total of 41 licenses, 11 of which
were obtained by four small businesses.155
To ensure meaningful participation by small
business entities in future auctions, the
Commission adopted a two-tiered small
business size standard in the Narrowband
PCS Second Report and Order.156 A ‘‘small
business’’ is an entity that, together with
affiliates and controlling interests, has
average gross revenues for the three
preceding years of not more than $40
million.157 A ‘‘very small business’’ is an
entity that, together with affiliates and
controlling interests, has average gross
revenues for the three preceding years of not
more than $15 million.158 The SBA has
152 Id.
at 23 FCC Rcd at 7521–22.
‘‘Auction of AWS–1 and Broadband PCS
Licenses Closes, Winning Bidders Announced for
Auction 78, Down Payments Due September 9,
2008, FCC Forms 601 and 602 Due September 9,
2008, Final Payments Due September 23, 2008, TenDay Petition to Deny Period’’, Public Notice, 23 FCC
Rcd 12749–65 (2008).
154 Implementation of Section 309(j) of the
Communications Act—Competitive Bidding
Narrowband PCS, Third Memorandum Opinion and
Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
10 FCC Rcd 175, 196, para. 46 (1994).
155 See ‘‘Announcing the High Bidders in the
Auction of ten Nationwide Narrowband PCS
Licenses, Winning Bids Total $617,006,674,’’ Public
Notice, PNWL 94–004 (rel. Aug. 2, 1994);
‘‘Announcing the High Bidders in the Auction of 30
Regional Narrowband PCS Licenses; Winning Bids
Total $490,901,787,’’ Public Notice, PNWL 94–27
(rel. Nov. 9, 1994).
156 Amendment of the Commission’s Rules to
Establish New Personal Communications Services,
Narrowband PCS, Second Report and Order and
Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 15
FCC Rcd 10456, 10476, para. 40 (2000)
(‘‘Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order’’).
157 Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order,
15 FCC Rcd at 10476, para. 40.
158 Id.
153 See
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
approved these small business size
standards.159 A third auction was conducted
in 2001. Here, five bidders won 317
(Metropolitan Trading Areas and nationwide)
licenses.160 Three of these claimed status as
a small or very small entity and won 311
licenses.
104. 700 MHz Band Licenses. The
Commission previously adopted criteria for
defining three groups of small businesses for
purposes of determining their eligibility for
special provisions such as bidding credits.161
The Commission defined a ‘‘small business’’
as an entity that, together with its affiliates
and controlling principals, has average gross
revenues not exceeding $40 million for the
preceding three years.162 A ‘‘very small
business’’ is defined as an entity that,
together with its affiliates and controlling
principals, has average gross revenues that
are not more than $15 million for the
preceding three years.163 Additionally, the
lower 700 MHz Service had a third category
of small business status for Metropolitan/
Rural Service Area (‘‘MSA/RSA’’) licenses.
The third category is ‘‘entrepreneur,’’ which
is defined as an entity that, together with its
affiliates and controlling principals, has
average gross revenues that are not more than
$3 million for the preceding three years.164
The SBA approved these small size
standards.165 The Commission conducted an
auction in 2002 of 740 licenses (one license
in each of the 734 MSAs/RSAs and one
license in each of the six Economic Area
Groupings (EAGs)). Of the 740 licenses
available for auction, 484 licenses were sold
to 102 winning bidders. Seventy-two of the
winning bidders claimed small business,
very small business or entrepreneur status
and won a total of 329 licenses.166 The
Commission conducted a second auction in
2003 that included 256 licenses: 5 EAG
licenses and 476 Cellular Market Area
licenses.167 Seventeen winning bidders
claimed small or very small business status
and won 60 licenses, and nine winning
bidders claimed entrepreneur status and won
154 licenses.168 In 2005, the Commission
completed an auction of 5 licenses in the
lower 700 MHz band (Auction 60). There
were three winning bidders for five licenses.
All three winning bidders claimed small
business status.
105. In 2007, the Commission adopted the
700 MHz Second Report and Order.169 The
159 See
Alvarez Letter 1998.
‘‘Narrowband PCS Auction Closes,’’ Public
Notice, 16 FCC Rcd 18663 (WTB 2001).
161 See Reallocation and Service Rules for the
698–746 MHz Spectrum Band (Television Channels
52–59), Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 1022 (2002)
(‘‘Channels 52–59 Report and Order’’).
162 See Channels 52–59 Report and Order, 17 FCC
Rcd at 1087–88, para. 172.
163 See id.
164 See id, 17 FCC Rcd at 1088, para. 173.
165 See Letter from Aida Alvarez, Administrator,
SBA, to Thomas Sugrue, Chief, WTB, FCC (Aug. 10,
1999) (‘‘Alvarez Letter 1999’’).
166 See ‘‘Lower 700 MHz Band Auction Closes,’’
Public Notice, 17 FCC Rcd 17272 (WTB 2002).
167 See ‘‘Lower 700 MHz Band Auction Closes,’’
Public Notice, 18 FCC Rcd 11873 (WTB 2003).
168 See id.
169 Service Rules for the 698–746, 747–762 and
777–792 MHz Band, WT Docket No. 06–150,
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
160 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
Order revised the band plan for the
commercial (including Guard Band) and
public safety spectrum, adopted services
rules, including stringent build-out
requirements, an open platform requirement
on the C Block, and a requirement on the D
Block licensee to construct and operate a
nationwide, interoperable wireless
broadband network for public safety users. In
2008, the Commission commenced Auction
73 which offered all available, commercial
700 MHz Band licenses (1,099 licenses) for
bidding using the Commission’s standard
simultaneous multiple-round (‘‘SMR’’)
auction format for the A, B, D, and E block
licenses and an SMR auction design with
hierarchical package bidding (‘‘HPB’’) for the
C Block licenses. Later in 2008, the
Commission concluded Auction 73.170 A
bidder with attributed average annual gross
revenues that did not exceed $15 million for
the preceding three years (very small
business) qualified for a 25 percent discount
on its winning bids. A bidder with attributed
average annual gross revenues that exceeded
$15 million, but did not exceed $40 million
for the preceding three years, qualified for a
15 percent discount on its winning bids.
There were 36 winning bidders (who won
330 of the 1,090 licenses won) that identified
themselves as very small businesses. There
were 20 winning bidders that identified
themselves as a small business that won 49
of the 1,090 licenses won.171 The
provisionally winning bids for the A, B, C,
and E Block licenses exceeded the aggregate
reserve prices for those blocks. However, the
provisionally winning bid for the D Block
license did not meet the applicable reserve
price and thus did not become a winning
bid.172
106. 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses. In the
700 MHz Guard Band Order, the Commission
adopted size standards for ‘‘small businesses’’
and ‘‘very small businesses’’ for purposes of
determining their eligibility for special
provisions such as bidding credits and
Revision of the Commission’s Rules to Ensure
Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Emergency
Calling Systems, CC Docket No. 94–102, Section
68.4(a) of the Commission’s Rules Governing
Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephone, WT Docket No.
01–309, Biennial Regulatory Review—Amendment
of Parts 1, 22, 24, 27, and 90 to Streamline and
Harmonize Various Rules Affecting Wireless Radio
Services, WT Docket No. 03–264, Former Nextel
Communications, Inc. Upper 700 MHz Guard Band
Licenses and Revisions to Part 27 of the
Commission’s Rules, WT Docket No. 06–169,
Implementing a Nationwide, Broadband
Interoperable Public Safety Network in the 700 MHz
Band, PS Docket No. 06–229, Development of
Operational, Technical and Spectrum
Requirements for Meeting Federal, State, and Local
Public Safety Communications Requirements
Through the Year 2010, WT Docket No. 96–86,
Second Report and Order, FCC 07–132 (2007) (‘‘700
MHz Second Report and Order’’), 22 FCC Rcd 15289
(2007).
170 Auction of 700 MHz Band Licenses Closes,
Winning Bidders Announced for Auction 73, Down
Payments Due April 3, 2008, FCC Forms 601 and
602 April 3, 2008, Final Payment Due April 17,
2008, Ten-Day Petition to Deny Period, Public
Notice, 23 FCC Rcd 4572 (2008).
171 Id. 23 FCC Rcd at 4572–73.
172 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5669
installment payments.173 A small business in
this service is an entity that, together with its
affiliates and controlling principals, has
average gross revenues not exceeding $40
million for the preceding three years.174
Additionally, a very small business is an
entity that, together with its affiliates and
controlling principals, has average gross
revenues that are not more than $15 million
for the preceding three years.175 SBA
approval of these definitions is not
required.176 In 2000, the Commission
conducted an auction of 52 Major Economic
Area (‘‘MEA’’) licenses.177 Of the 104 licenses
auctioned, 96 licenses were sold to nine
bidders. Five of these bidders were small
businesses that won a total of 26 licenses. A
second auction of 700 MHz Guard Band
licenses commenced and closed in 2001. All
eight of the licenses auctioned were sold to
three bidders. One of these bidders was a
small business that won a total of two
licenses.178 Subsequently, in the 700 MHz
Second Report and Order, the Commission
reorganized the licenses pursuant to an
agreement among most of the licensees,
resulting in a spectral relocation of the first
set of paired spectrum block licenses, and an
elimination of the second set of paired
spectrum block licenses (many of which were
already vacant, reclaimed by the Commission
from Nextel).179 A single licensee that did
not participate in the agreement was
grandfathered in the initial spectral location
for its two licenses in the second set of paired
spectrum blocks.180 Accordingly, at this time
there are 54 licenses in the 700 MHz Guard
Bands.
107. Specialized Mobile Radio. The
Commission awards ‘‘small entity’’ bidding
credits in auctions for Specialized Mobile
Radio (SMR) geographic area licenses in the
800 MHz and 900 MHz bands to firms that
had revenues of no more than $15 million in
each of the three previous calendar years.181
The Commission awards ‘‘very small entity’’
bidding credits to firms that had revenues of
no more than $3 million in each of the three
previous calendar years.182 The SBA has
173 See Service Rules for the 746–764 MHz Bands,
and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission’s Rules,
Second Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5299 (2000)
(‘‘746–764 MHz Band Second Report and Order’’).
174 See 746–764 MHz Band Second Report and
Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 5343, para. 108.
175 See id.
176 See id., 15 FCC Rcd 5299, 5343, para. 108
n.246 (for the 746–764 MHz and 776–794 MHz
bands, the Commission is exempt from 15 U.S.C.
632, which requires Federal agencies to obtain SBA
approval before adopting small business size
standards).
177 See ‘‘700 MHz Guard Bands Auction Closes:
Winning Bidders Announced,’’ Public Notice, 15
FCC Rcd 18026 (2000).
178 See ‘‘700 MHz Guard Bands Auction Closes:
Winning Bidders Announced,’’ Public Notice, 16
FCC Rcd 4590 (WTB 2001).
179 See In the Matter of Service Rules for the 698–
746, 747–762 and 777–792 MHz Bands, WT Docket
06–150, Second Report and Order, 22 FCC Rcd
15289, 15339–15344 ¶¶ 118–134 (2007) (700 MHz
Second Report and Order).
180 Id.
181 47 CFR 90.814(b)(1).
182 47 CFR 90.814(b)(1).
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
5670
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
approved these small business size standards
for the 900 MHz Service.183 The Commission
has held auctions for geographic area licenses
in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands. The 900
MHz SMR auction was completed in 1996.
Sixty bidders claiming that they qualified as
small businesses under the $15 million size
standard won 263 geographic area licenses in
the 900 MHz SMR band. The 800 MHz SMR
auction for the upper 200 channels was
conducted in 1997. Ten bidders claiming that
they qualified as small businesses under the
$15 million size standard won 38 geographic
area licenses for the upper 200 channels in
the 800 MHz SMR band.184 A second auction
for the 800 MHz band was conducted in 2002
and included 23 BEA licenses. One bidder
claiming small business status won five
licenses.185
108. The auction of the 1,053 800 MHz
SMR geographic area licenses for the General
Category channels was conducted in 2000.
Eleven bidders won 108 geographic area
licenses for the General Category channels in
the 800 MHz SMR band qualified as small
businesses under the $15 million size
standard.186 In an auction completed in 2000,
a total of 2,800 Economic Area licenses in the
lower 80 channels of the 800 MHz SMR
service were awarded.187 Of the 22 winning
bidders, 19 claimed small business status and
won 129 licenses. Thus, combining all three
auctions, 40 winning bidders for geographic
licenses in the 800 MHz SMR band claimed
status as small business.
109. In addition, there are numerous
incumbent site-by-site SMR licensees and
licensees with extended implementation
authorizations in the 800 and 900 MHz
bands. We do not know how many firms
provide 800 MHz or 900 MHz geographic
area SMR pursuant to extended
implementation authorizations, nor how
many of these providers have annual
revenues of no more than $15 million. One
firm has over $15 million in revenues. In
addition, we do not know how many of these
firms have 1500 or fewer employees.188 We
assume, for purposes of this analysis, that all
of the remaining existing extended
implementation authorizations are held by
small entities.
110. 220 MHz Radio Service—Phase I
Licensees. The 220 MHz service has both
Phase I and Phase II licenses. Phase I
licensing was conducted by lotteries in 1992
and 1993. There are approximately 1,515
such non-nationwide licensees and four
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
183 See
Alvarez Letter 1999.
184 See ‘‘Correction to Public Notice DA 96–586
‘FCC Announces Winning Bidders in the Auction
of 1020 Licenses to Provide 900 MHz SMR in Major
Trading Areas,’ ’’ Public Notice, 18 FCC Rcd 18367
(WTB 1996).
185 See ‘‘Multi-Radio Service Auction Closes,’’
Public Notice, 17 FCC Rcd 1446 (WTB 2002).
186 See ‘‘800 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio
(SMR) Service General Category (851–854 MHz) and
Upper Band (861–865 MHz) Auction Closes;
Winning Bidders Announced,’’ Public Notice, 15
FCC Rcd 17162 (2000).
187 See, ‘‘800 MHz SMR Service Lower 80
Channels Auction Closes; Winning Bidders
Announced,’’ Public Notice, 16 FCC Rcd 1736
(2000).
188 See generally 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code
517210.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
nationwide licensees currently authorized to
operate in the 220 MHz band. The
Commission has not developed a definition
of small entities specifically applicable to
such incumbent 220 MHz Phase I licensees.
To estimate the number of such licensees that
are small businesses, we apply the small
business size standard under the SBA rules
applicable to Wireless Telecommunications
Carriers (except Satellite).189 This category
provides that a small business is a wireless
company employing no more than 1,500
persons.190 The Commission estimates that
most such licensees are small businesses
under the SBA’s small business standard.
111. 220 MHz Radio Service—Phase II
Licensees. The 220 MHz service has both
Phase I and Phase II licenses. The Phase II
220 MHz service is a new service, and is
subject to spectrum auctions. In the 220 MHz
Third Report and Order, the Commission
adopted a small business size standard for
defining ‘‘small’’ and ‘‘very small’’ businesses
for purposes of determining their eligibility
for special provisions such as bidding credits
and installment payments.191 This small
business standard indicates that a ‘‘small
business’’ is an entity that, together with its
affiliates and controlling principals, has
average gross revenues not exceeding $15
million for the preceding three years.192 A
‘‘very small business’’ is defined as an entity
that, together with its affiliates and
controlling principals, has average gross
revenues that do not exceed $3 million for
the preceding three years.193 The SBA has
approved these small size standards.194
Auctions of Phase II licenses commenced on
and closed in 1998.195 In the first auction,
908 licenses were auctioned in three
different-sized geographic areas: three
nationwide licenses, 30 Regional Economic
Area Group (‘‘EAG’’) Licenses, and 875
Economic Area (EA) Licenses. Of the 908
licenses auctioned, 693 were sold.196 Thirtynine small businesses won 373 licenses in
the first 220 MHz auction. A second auction
included 225 licenses: 216 EA licenses and
9 EAG licenses. Fourteen companies
claiming small business status won 158
licenses.197 A third auction included four
licenses: 2 BEA licenses and 2 EAG licenses
in the 220 MHz Service. No small or very
small business won any of these licenses.198
In 2007, the Commission conducted a fourth
189 Id.
190 Id.
191 Amendment of Part 90 of the Commission’s
Rules to Provide For the Use of the 220–222 MHz
Band by the Private Land Mobile Radio Service,
Third Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 10943, 11068–
70, paras. 291–295 (1997).
192 Id. at 11068, para. 291.
193 Id.
194 See Letter from Aida Alvarez, Administrator,
SBA, to Daniel Phythyon, Chief, WTB, FCC (Jan. 6,
1998) (‘‘Alvarez to Phythyon Letter 1998’’).
195 See generally ‘‘220 MHz Service Auction
Closes,’’ Public Notice, 14 FCC Rcd 605 (1998).
196 See ‘‘FCC Announces It is Prepared to Grant
654 Phase II 220 MHz Licenses After Final Payment
is Made,’’ Public Notice, 14 FCC Rcd 1085 (1999).
197 See ‘‘Phase II 220 MHz Service Spectrum
Auction Closes,’’ Public Notice, 14 FCC Rcd 11218
(1999).
198 See ‘‘Multi-Radio Service Auction Closes,’’
Public Notice, 17 FCC Rcd 1446 (2002).
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
auction of the 220 MHz licenses.199 Bidding
credits were offered to small businesses. A
bidder with attributed average annual gross
revenues that exceeded $3 million and did
not exceed $15 million for the preceding
three years (‘‘small business’’) received a 25
percent discount on its winning bid. A
bidder with attributed average annual gross
revenues that did not exceed $3 million for
the preceding three years received a 35
percent discount on its winning bid (‘‘very
small business’’). Auction 72, which offered
94 Phase II 220 MHz Service licenses,
concluded in 2007.200 In this auction, five
winning bidders won a total of 76 licenses.
Two winning bidders identified themselves
as very small businesses won 56 of the 76
licenses. One of the winning bidders that
identified themselves as a small business
won 5 of the 76 licenses won.
112. Cellular Radiotelephone Service.
Auction 77 was held to resolve one group of
mutually exclusive applications for Cellular
Radiotelephone Service licenses for unserved
areas in New Mexico.201 Bidding credits for
designated entities were not available in
Auction 77.202 In 2008, the Commission
completed the closed auction of one
unserved service area in the Cellular
Radiotelephone Service, designated as
Auction 77. Auction 77 concluded with one
provisionally winning bid for the unserved
area totaling $25,002.203
113. Private Land Mobile Radio (‘‘PLMR’’).
PLMR systems serve an essential role in a
range of industrial, business, land
transportation, and public safety activities.
These radios are used by companies of all
sizes operating in all U.S. business
categories, and are often used in support of
the licensee’s primary (nontelecommunications) business operations.
For the purpose of determining whether a
licensee of a PLMR system is a small
business as defined by the SBA, we use the
broad census category, Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite). This definition provides that a
small entity is any such entity employing no
more than 1,500 persons.204 The Commission
does not require PLMR licensees to disclose
information about number of employees, so
the Commission does not have information
199 See ‘‘Auction of Phase II 220 MHz Service
Spectrum Scheduled for June 20, 2007, Notice and
Filing Requirements, Minimum Opening Bids,
Upfront Payments and Other Procedures for
Auction 72, Public Notice, 22 FCC Rcd 3404 (2007).
200 See ‘‘Auction of Phase II 220 MHz Service
Spectrum Licenses Closes, Winning Bidders
Announced for Auction 72, Down Payments due
July 18, 2007, FCC Forms 601 and 602 due July 18,
2007, Final Payments due August 1, 2007, Ten-Day
Petition to Deny Period, Public Notice, 22 FCC Rcd
11573 (2007).
201 See Closed Auction of Licenses for Cellular
Unserved Service Area Scheduled for June 17, 2008,
Notice and Filing Requirements, Minimum Opening
Bids, Upfront Payments, and Other Procedures for
Auction 77, Public Notice, 23 FCC Rcd 6670 (2008).
202 Id. at 6685.
203 See Auction of Cellular Unserved Service Area
License Closes, Winning Bidder Announced for
Auction 77, Down Payment due July 2, 2008, Final
Payment due July 17, 2008, Public Notice, 23 FCC
Rcd 9501 (2008).
204 See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
that could be used to determine how many
PLMR licensees constitute small entities
under this definition. We note that PLMR
licensees generally use the licensed facilities
in support of other business activities, and
therefore, it would also be helpful to assess
PLMR licensees under the standards applied
to the particular industry subsector to which
the licensee belongs.205
114. As of March 2010, there were 424,162
PLMR licensees operating 921,909
transmitters in the PLMR bands below 512
MHz. We note that any entity engaged in a
commercial activity is eligible to hold a
PLMR license, and that any revised rules in
this context could therefore potentially
impact small entities covering a great variety
of industries.
115. Fixed Microwave Services. Fixed
microwave services include common
carrier,206 private operational-fixed,207 and
broadcast auxiliary radio services.208 At
present, there are approximately 22,015
common carrier fixed licensees and 61,670
private operational-fixed licensees and
broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in the
microwave services. The Commission has not
created a size standard for a small business
specifically with respect to fixed microwave
services. For purposes of this analysis, the
Commission uses the SBA small business
size standard for the category Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite), which is 1,500 or fewer
employees.209 The Commission does not
have data specifying the number of these
licensees that have no more than 1,500
employees, and thus are unable at this time
to estimate with greater precision the number
of fixed microwave service licensees that
would qualify as small business concerns
under the SBA’s small business size
standard. Consequently, the Commission
estimates that there are 22,015 or fewer
common carrier fixed licensees and 61,670 or
fewer private operational-fixed licensees and
broadcast auxiliary radio licensees in the
microwave services that may be small and
may be affected by the rules and policies
proposed herein. We note, however, that the
205 See
generally 13 CFR 121.201.
47 CFR 101 et seq. for common carrier
fixed microwave services (except Multipoint
Distribution Service).
207 Persons eligible under parts 80 and 90 of the
Commission’s Rules can use Private OperationalFixed Microwave services. See 47 CFR Parts 80 and
90. Stations in this service are called operationalfixed to distinguish them from common carrier and
public fixed stations. Only the licensee may use the
operational-fixed station, and only for
communications related to the licensee’s
commercial, industrial, or safety operations.
208 Auxiliary Microwave Service is governed by
Part 74 of Title 47 of the Commission’s Rules. See
47 CFR Part 74. This service is available to licensees
of broadcast stations and to broadcast and cable
network entities. Broadcast auxiliary microwave
stations are used for relaying broadcast television
signals from the studio to the transmitter, or
between two points such as a main studio and an
auxiliary studio. The service also includes mobile
television pickups, which relay signals from a
remote location back to the studio.
209 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
206 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
common carrier microwave fixed licensee
category includes some large entities.
116. 39 GHz Service. The Commission
created a special small business size standard
for 39 GHz licenses—an entity that has
average gross revenues of $40 million or less
in the three previous calendar years.210 An
additional size standard for ‘‘very small
business’’ is: An entity that, together with
affiliates, has average gross revenues of not
more than $15 million for the preceding three
calendar years.211 The SBA has approved
these small business size standards.212 The
auction of the 2,173, 39 GHz licenses, began
and closed in 2000. The 18 bidders who
claimed small business status won 849
licenses.
117. Local Multipoint Distribution Service.
Local Multipoint Distribution Service
(‘‘LMDS’’) is a fixed broadband point-tomultipoint microwave service that provides
for two-way video telecommunications.213
The auction of the 986 LMDS licenses began
and closed in 1998. The Commission
established a small business size standard for
LMDS licenses as an entity that has average
gross revenues of less than $40 million in the
three previous calendar years.214 An
additional small business size standard for
‘‘very small business’’ was added as an entity
that, together with its affiliates, has average
gross revenues of not more than $15 million
for the preceding three calendar years.215 The
SBA has approved these small business size
standards in the context of LMDS
auctions.216 There were 93 winning bidders
that qualified as small entities in the LMDS
auctions. A total of 93 small and very small
business bidders won approximately 277 A
Block licenses and 387 B Block licenses. In
1999, the Commission re-auctioned 161
licenses; there were 32 small and very small
businesses winning that won 119 licenses.
118. 218–219 MHz Service. The first
auction of 218–219 MHz (previously referred
to as the Interactive and Video Data Service
or IVDS) spectrum resulted in 178 entities
winning licenses for 594 Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (‘‘MSAs’’).217 Of the 594
210 See Amendment of the Commission’s Rules
Regarding the 37.0–38.6 GHz and 38.6–40.0 GHz
Bands, ET Docket No. 95–183, Report and Order, 12
FCC Rcd 18600 (1997).
211 Id.
212 See Letter from Aida Alvarez, Administrator,
SBA, to Kathleen O’Brien Ham, Chief, Auctions and
Industry Analysis Division, WTB, FCC (Feb. 4,
1998); see Letter from Hector Barreto,
Administrator, SBA, to Margaret Wiener, Chief,
Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, WTB,
FCC (Jan. 18, 2002).
213 See Rulemaking to Amend Parts 1, 2, 21, 25,
of the Commission’s Rules to Redesignate the 27.5–
29.5 GHz Frequency Band, Reallocate the 29.5–30.5
Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for
Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed
Satellite Services, Second Report and Order, Order
on Reconsideration, and Fifth Notice of Proposed
Rule Making, 12 FCC Rcd 12545, 12689–90, para.
348 (1997) (‘‘LMDS Second Report and Order’’).
214 See LMDS Second Report and Order, 12 FCC
Rcd at 12689–90, para. 348.
215 See id.
216 See Alvarez to Phythyon Letter 1998.
217 See ‘‘Interactive Video and Data Service
(IVDS) Applications Accepted for Filing,’’ Public
Notice, 9 FCC Rcd 6227 (1994).
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5671
licenses, 567 were won by 167 entities
qualifying as a small business. For that
auction, the Commission defined a small
business as an entity that, together with its
affiliates, has no more than a $6 million net
worth and, after Federal income taxes
(excluding any carry over losses), has no
more than $2 million in annual profits each
year for the previous two years.218 In the
218–219 MHz Report and Order and
Memorandum Opinion and Order, we
defined a small business as an entity that,
together with its affiliates and persons or
entities that hold interests in such an entity
and their affiliates, has average annual gross
revenues not exceeding $15 million for the
preceding three years.219 A very small
business is defined as an entity that, together
with its affiliates and persons or entities that
hold interests in such an entity and its
affiliates, has average annual gross revenues
not exceeding $3 million for the preceding
three years.220 The SBA has approved of
these definitions.221 A subsequent auction is
not yet scheduled. Given the success of small
businesses in the previous auction, and the
prevalence of small businesses in the
subscription television services and message
communications industries, we assume for
purposes of this analysis that in future
auctions, many, and perhaps most, of the
licenses might be awarded to small
businesses.
119. Location and Monitoring Service
(‘‘LMS’’). Multilateration LMS systems use
non-voice radio techniques to determine the
location and status of mobile radio units. For
purposes of auctioning LMS licenses, the
Commission has defined ‘‘small business’’ as
an entity that, together with controlling
interests and affiliates, has average annual
gross revenues for the preceding three years
not exceeding $15 million.222 A ‘‘very small
business’’ is defined as an entity that,
together with controlling interests and
affiliates, has average annual gross revenues
for the preceding three years not exceeding
$3 million.223 These definitions have been
approved by the SBA.224 An auction for LMS
licenses commenced and closed in 1999. Of
the 528 licenses auctioned, 289 licenses were
sold to four small businesses.
120. Rural Radiotelephone Service. The
Commission has not adopted a size standard
for small businesses specific to the Rural
218 Implementation of Section 309(j) of the
Communications Act—Competitive Bidding, Fourth
Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 2330 (1994).
219 Amendment of Part 95 of the Commission’s
Rules to Provide Regulatory Flexibility in the 218–
219 MHz Service, Report and Order and
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 1497
(1999).
220 Id.
221 See Alvarez to Phythyon Letter 1998.
222 Amendment of Part 90 of the Commission’s
Rules to Adopt Regulations for Automatic Vehicle
Monitoring Systems, Second Report and Order, 13
FCC Rcd 15182, 15192, para. 20 (1998) (‘‘Automatic
Vehicle Monitoring Systems Second Report and
Order’’); see also 47 CFR 90.1103.
223 Automatic Vehicle Monitoring Systems
Second Report and Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 15192,
para. 20; see also 47 CFR 90.1103.
224 See Alvarez Letter 1998.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
5672
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
Radiotelephone Service.225 A significant
subset of the Rural Radiotelephone Service is
the Basic Exchange Telephone Radio System
(‘‘BETRS’’).226 In the present context, we will
use the SBA’s small business size standard
applicable to Wireless Telecommunications
Carriers (except Satellite), i.e., an entity
employing no more than 1,500 persons.227
There are approximately 1,000 licensees in
the Rural Radiotelephone Service, and the
Commission estimates that there are 1,000 or
fewer small entity licensees in the Rural
Radiotelephone Service that may be affected
by the rules and policies proposed herein.
121. Air-Ground Radiotelephone
Service.228 The Commission has previously
used the SBA’s small business definition
applicable to Wireless Telecommunications
Carriers (except Satellite), i.e., an entity
employing no more than 1,500 persons.229
There are approximately 100 licensees in the
Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, and
under that definition, we estimate that almost
all of them qualify as small entities under the
SBA definition. For purposes of assigning
Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service licenses
through competitive bidding, the
Commission has defined ‘‘small business’’ as
an entity that, together with controlling
interests and affiliates, has average annual
gross revenues for the preceding three years
not exceeding $40 million.230 A ‘‘very small
business’’ is defined as an entity that,
together with controlling interests and
affiliates, has average annual gross revenues
for the preceding three years not exceeding
$15 million.231 These definitions were
approved by the SBA.232 In 2006, the
Commission completed an auction of
nationwide commercial Air-Ground
Radiotelephone Service licenses in the 800
MHz band (Auction 65). Later in 2006, the
auction closed with two winning bidders
winning two Air-Ground Radiotelephone
Services licenses. Neither of the winning
bidders claimed small business status.
122. Aviation and Marine Radio Services.
There are approximately 26,162 aviation,
34,555 marine (ship), and 3,296 marine
(coast) licensees.233 The Commission has not
225 The service is defined in section 22.99 of the
Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 22.99.
226 BETRS is defined in sections 22.757 and
22.759 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 22.757
and 22.759.
227 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
228 The service is defined in section 22.99 of the
Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 22.99.
229 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS codes 517210.
230 Amendment of Part 22 of the Commission’s
Rules to Benefit the Consumers of Air-Ground
Telecommunications Services, Biennial Regulatory
Review—Amendment of Parts 1, 22, and 90 of the
Commission’s Rules, Amendment of Parts 1 and 22
of the Commission’s Rules to Adopt Competitive
Bidding Rules for Commercial and General Aviation
Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, WT Docket
Nos. 03–103 and 05–42, Order on Reconsideration
and Report and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 19663, paras.
28–42 (2005).
231 Id.
232 See Letter from Hector V. Barreto,
Administrator, SBA, to Gary D. Michaels, Deputy
Chief, Auctions and Spectrum Access Division,
WTB, FCC (Sept. 19, 2005).
233 Vessels that are not required by law to carry
a radio and do not make international voyages or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
developed a small business size standard
specifically applicable to all licensees. For
purposes of this analysis, we will use the
SBA small business size standard for the
category Wireless Telecommunications
Carriers (except Satellite), which is 1,500 or
fewer employees.234 We are unable to
determine how many of those licensed fall
under this standard. For purposes of our
evaluations in this analysis, we estimate that
there are up to approximately 62,969
licensees that are small businesses under the
SBA standard.235 In 1998, the Commission
held an auction of 42 VHF Public Coast
licenses in the 157.1875–157.4500 MHz (ship
transmit) and 161.775–162.0125 MHz (coast
transmit) bands. For this auction, the
Commission defined a ‘‘small’’ business as an
entity that, together with controlling interests
and affiliates, has average gross revenues for
the preceding three years not to exceed $15
million. In addition, a ‘‘very small’’ business
is one that, together with controlling interests
and affiliates, has average gross revenues for
the preceding three years not to exceed $3
million.236 Further, the Commission made
available Automated Maritime
Telecommunications System (‘‘AMTS’’)
licenses in Auctions 57 and 61.237 Winning
bidders could claim status as a very small
business or a very small business. A very
small business for this service is defined as
an entity with attributed average annual gross
revenues that do not exceed $3 million for
the preceding three years, and a small
business is defined as an entity with
attributed average annual gross revenues of
more than $3 million but less than $15
million for the preceding three years.238
Three of the winning bidders in Auction 57
qualified as small or very small businesses,
while three winning entities in Auction 61
qualified as very small businesses.
123. Offshore Radiotelephone Service. This
service operates on several ultra high
frequencies (‘‘UHF’’) television broadcast
channels that are not used for television
broadcasting in the coastal areas of States
communications are not required to obtain an
individual license. See Amendment of Parts 80 and
87 of the Commission’s Rules to Permit Operation
of Certain Domestic Ship and Aircraft Radio
Stations Without Individual Licenses, Report and
Order, WT Docket No. 96–82, 11 FCC Rcd 14849
(1996).
234 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
235 A licensee may have a license in more than
one category.
236 Amendment of the Commission’s Rules
Concerning Maritime Communications, PR Docket
No. 92–257, Third Report and Order and
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd
19853 (1998).
237 See ‘‘Automated Maritime
Telecommunications System Spectrum Auction
Scheduled for September 15, 2004, Notice and
Filing Requirements, Minimum Opening Bids,
Upfront Payments and Other Auction Procedures,’’
Public Notice, 19 FCC Rcd 9518 (WTB 2004);
‘‘Auction of Automated Maritime
Telecommunications System Licenses Scheduled
for August 3, 2005, Notice and Filing Requirements,
Minimum Opening Bids, Upfront Payments and
Other Auction Procedures for Auction No. 61,’’
Public Notice, 20 FCC Rcd 7811 (WTB 2005).
238 47 CFR 80.1252.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
bordering the Gulf of Mexico.239 There is
presently 1 licensee in this service. We do
not have information whether that licensee
would qualify as small under the SBA’s small
business size standard for Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite) services.240 Under that SBA small
business size standard, a business is small if
it has 1,500 or fewer employees.241
124. Multiple Address Systems (‘‘MAS’’).
Entities using MAS spectrum, in general, fall
into two categories: (1) Those using the
spectrum for profit-based uses, and (2) those
using the spectrum for private internal uses.
With respect to the first category, the
Commission defines ‘‘small entity’’ for MAS
licenses as an entity that has average gross
revenues of less than $15 million in the three
previous calendar years.242 ‘‘Very small
business’’ is defined as an entity that,
together with its affiliates, has average gross
revenues of not more than $3 million for the
preceding three calendar years.243 The SBA
has approved of these definitions.244 The
majority of these entities will most likely be
licensed in bands where the Commission has
implemented a geographic area licensing
approach that would require the use of
competitive bidding procedures to resolve
mutually exclusive applications. The
Commission’s licensing database indicates
that, as of March 5, 2010, there were over
11,500 MAS station authorizations. In
addition, an auction for 5,104 MAS licenses
in 176 EAs was conducted in 2001.245 Seven
winning bidders claimed status as small or
very small businesses and won 611 licenses.
In 2005, the Commission completed an
auction (Auction 59) of 4,226 MAS licenses
in the Fixed Microwave Services from the
928/959 and 932/941 MHz bands. Twenty-six
winning bidders won a total of 2,323
licenses. Of the 26 winning bidders in this
auction, five claimed small business status
and won 1,891 licenses.
125. With respect to the second category,
which consists of entities that use, or seek to
use, MAS spectrum to accommodate internal
communications needs, we note that MAS
serves an essential role in a range of
industrial, safety, business, and land
transportation activities. MAS radios are
used by companies of all sizes, operating in
virtually all U.S. business categories, and by
all types of public safety entities. For such
private internal users, the small business size
standard developed by the SBA would be
more appropriate. The applicable size
standard in this instance is that of Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite). This definition provides that a
small entity is any such entity employing no
more than 1,500 persons.246 The
239 This service is governed by Subpart I of Part
22 of the Commission’s Rules. See 47 CFR 22.1001–
22.1037.
240 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
241 Id.
242 See Amendment of the Commission’s Rules
Regarding Multiple Address Systems, Report and
Order, 15 FCC Rcd 11956, 12008, para. 123 (2000).
243 Id.
244 See Alvarez Letter 1999.
245 See ‘‘Multiple Address Systems Spectrum
Auction Closes,’’ Public Notice, 16 FCC Rcd 21011
(2001).
246 See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
Commission’s licensing database indicates
that, as of January 20, 1999, of the 8,670 total
MAS station authorizations, 8,410
authorizations were for private radio service,
and of these, 1,433 were for private land
mobile radio service.
126. 1.4 GHz Band Licensees. The
Commission conducted an auction of 64 1.4
GHz band licenses 247 in 2007.248 In that
auction, the Commission defined ‘‘small
business’’ as an entity that, together with its
affiliates and controlling interests, had
average gross revenues that exceed $15
million but do not exceed $40 million for the
preceding three years, and a ‘‘very small
business’’ as an entity that, together with its
affiliates and controlling interests, has had
average annual gross revenues not exceeding
$15 million for the preceding three years.249
Neither of the two winning bidders sought
designated entity status.250
127. Incumbent 24 GHz Licensees. This
analysis may affect incumbent licensees who
were relocated to the 24 GHz band from the
18 GHz band, and applicants who wish to
provide services in the 24 GHz band. The
applicable SBA small business size standard
is that of Wireless Telecommunications
Carriers (except Satellite). This category
provides that such a company is small if it
employs no more than 1,500 persons.251 The
broader census data notwithstanding, we
believe that there are only two licensees in
the 24 GHz band that were relocated from the
18 GHz band, Teligent 252 and TRW, Inc. It
is our understanding that Teligent and its
related companies have fewer than 1,500
employees, though this may change in the
future. TRW is not a small entity. There are
approximately 122 licensees in the Rural
Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission
estimates that there are 122 or fewer small
entity licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone
Service that may be affected by the rules and
policies proposed herein.
128. Future 24 GHz Licensees. With respect
to new applicants in the 24 GHz band, we
have defined ‘‘small business’’ as an entity
that, together with controlling interests and
affiliates, has average annual gross revenues
for the three preceding years not exceeding
$15 million.253 ‘‘Very small business’’ in the
24 GHz band is defined as an entity that,
together with controlling interests and
affiliates, has average gross revenues not
exceeding $3 million for the preceding three
247 See ‘‘Auction of 1.4 GHz Bands Licenses
Scheduled for February 7, 2007,’’ Public Notice, 21
FCC Rcd 12393 (WTB 2006).
248 See ‘‘Auction of 1.4 GHz Band Licenses Closes;
Winning Bidders Announced for Auction No. 69,’’
Public Notice, 22 FCC Rcd 4714 (2007) (‘‘Auction
No. 69 Closing PN’’).
249 Auction No. 69 Closing PN, Attachment C.
250 See Auction No. 69 Closing PN.
251 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
252 Teligent acquired the DEMS licenses of
FirstMark, the only licensee other than TRW in the
24 GHz band whose license has been modified to
require relocation to the 24 GHz band.
253 Amendments to Parts 1, 2, 87 and 101 of the
Commission’s Rules To License Fixed Services at 24
GHz, Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 16934, 16967,
para. 77 (2000) (‘‘24 GHz Report and Order’’); see
also 47 CFR 101.538(a)(2).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
years.254 The SBA has approved these
definitions.255 The Commission will not
know how many licensees will be small or
very small businesses until the auction, if
required, is held.
129. Broadband Radio Service and
Educational Broadband Service. Broadband
Radio Service systems, previously referred to
as Multipoint Distribution Service (‘‘MDS’’)
and Multichannel Multipoint Distribution
Service (‘‘MMDS’’) systems, and ‘‘wireless
cable,’’ transmit video programming to
subscribers and provide two-way high speed
data operations using the microwave
frequencies of the Broadband Radio Service
(‘‘BRS’’) and Educational Broadband Service
(‘‘EBS’’) (previously referred to as the
Instructional Television Fixed Service
(‘‘ITFS’’)).256 In connection with the 1996
BRS auction, the Commission established a
small business size standard as an entity that
had annual average gross revenues of no
more than $40 million in the previous three
calendar years.257 The BRS auctions resulted
in 67 successful bidders obtaining licensing
opportunities for 493 Basic Trading Areas
(‘‘BTAs’’). Of the 67 auction winners, 61 met
the definition of a small business. BRS also
includes licensees of stations authorized
prior to the auction. At this time, we estimate
that of the 61 small business BRS auction
winners, 48 remain small business licensees.
In addition to the 48 small businesses that
hold BTA authorizations, there are
approximately 392 incumbent BRS licensees
that are considered small entities.258 After
adding the number of small business auction
licensees to the number of incumbent
licensees not already counted, we find that
there are currently approximately 440 BRS
licensees that are defined as small businesses
under either the SBA or the Commission’s
rules. In 2009, the Commission conducted
Auction 86, the sale of 78 licenses in the BRS
areas.259 The Commission offered three levels
of bidding credits: (i) A bidder with
attributed average annual gross revenues that
exceed $15 million and do not exceed $40
million for the preceding three years (small
business) will receive a 15 percent discount
254 24 GHz Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at
16967, para. 77; see also 47 CFR 101.538(a)(1).
255 See Letter from Gary M. Jackson, Assistant
Administrator, SBA, to Margaret W. Wiener, Deputy
Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division,
WTB, FCC (July 28, 2000).
256 Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 of the
Commission’s Rules with Regard to Filing
Procedures in the Multipoint Distribution Service
and in the Instructional Television Fixed Service
and Implementation of Section 309(j) of the
Communications Act—Competitive Bidding, MM
Docket No. 94–131 and PP Docket No. 93–253,
Report and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 9589, 9593, para. 7
(1995) (‘‘MDS Auction R&O’’).
257 47 CFR 21.961(b)(1).
258 47 U.S.C. 309(j). Hundreds of stations were
licensed to incumbent MDS licensees prior to
implementation of Section 309(j) of the
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 309(j). For
these pre-auction licenses, the applicable standard
is SBA’s small business size standard.
259 Auction of Broadband Radio Service (BRS)
Licenses, Scheduled for October 27, 2009, Notice
and Filing Requirements, Minimum Opening Bids,
Upfront Payments, and Other Procedures for
Auction 86, Public Notice, 24 FCC Rcd 8277 (2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5673
on its winning bid; (ii) a bidder with
attributed average annual gross revenues that
exceed $3 million and do not exceed $15
million for the preceding three years (very
small business) will receive a 25 percent
discount on its winning bid; and (iii) a bidder
with attributed average annual gross
revenues that do not exceed $3 million for
the preceding three years (entrepreneur) will
receive a 35 percent discount on its winning
bid.260 Auction 86 concluded in 2009 with
the sale of 61 licenses.261 Of the ten winning
bidders, two bidders that claimed small
business status won four licenses; one bidder
that claimed very small business status won
three licenses; and two bidders that claimed
entrepreneur status won six licenses.
130. In addition, the SBA’s Cable
Television Distribution Services small
business size standard is applicable to EBS.
There are presently 2,032 EBS licensees. All
but 100 of these licenses are held by
educational institutions. Educational
institutions are included in this analysis as
small entities.262 Thus, we estimate that at
least 1,932 licensees are small businesses.
Since 2007, Cable Television Distribution
Services have been defined within the broad
economic census category of Wired
Telecommunications Carriers; that category
is defined as follows: ‘‘This industry
comprises establishments primarily engaged
in operating and/or providing access to
transmission facilities and infrastructure that
they own and/or lease for the transmission of
voice, data, text, sound, and video using
wired telecommunications networks.
Transmission facilities may be based on a
single technology or a combination of
technologies.’’ 263 The SBA has developed a
small business size standard for this category,
which is: All such firms having 1,500 or
fewer employees. To gauge small business
prevalence for these cable services we must,
however, use current census data that are
based on the previous category of Cable and
Other Program Distribution and its associated
size standard; that size standard was: All
such firms having $13.5 million or less in
annual receipts.264 According to Census
Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of
1,191 firms in this previous category that
operated for the entire year.265 Of this total,
260 Id.
at 8296.
of Broadband Radio Service Licenses
Closes, Winning Bidders Announced for Auction
86, Down Payments Due November 23, 2009, Final
Payments Due December 8, 2009, Ten-Day Petition
to Deny Period, Public Notice, 24 FCC Rcd 13572
(2009).
262 The term ‘‘small entity’’ within SBREFA
applies to small organizations (nonprofits) and to
small governmental jurisdictions (cities, counties,
towns, townships, villages, school districts, and
special districts with populations of less than
50,000). 5 U.S.C. 601(4)–(6). We do not collect
annual revenue data on EBS licensees.
263 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517110 Wired Telecommunications Carriers’’
(partial definition); https://www.census.gov/naics/
2007/def/ND517110.HTM#N517110.
264 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.
265 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, Table 4, Receipts Size
of Firms for the United States: 2002, NAICS code
517510 (issued November 2005).
261 Auction
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
5674
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
1,087 firms had annual receipts of under $10
million, and 43 firms had receipts of $10
million or more but less than $25 million.266
Thus, the majority of these firms can be
considered small.
131. Television Broadcasting. This
Economic Census category ‘‘comprises
establishments primarily engaged in
broadcasting images together with sound.
These establishments operate television
broadcasting studios and facilities for the
programming and transmission of programs
to the public.’’ 267 The SBA has created the
following small business size standard for
Television Broadcasting firms: Those having
$14 million or less in annual receipts.268 The
Commission has estimated the number of
licensed commercial television stations to be
1,395.269 In addition, according to
Commission staff review of the BIA
Publications, Inc., Master Access Television
Analyzer Database (BIA) on March 30, 2007,
about 986 of an estimated 1,395 commercial
television stations (or approximately 72
percent) had revenues of $13 million or
less.270 We therefore estimate that the
majority of commercial television
broadcasters are small entities.
132. We note, however, that in assessing
whether a business concern qualifies as small
under the above definition, business (control)
affiliations 271 must be included. Our
estimate, therefore, likely overstates the
number of small entities that might be
affected by our action, because the revenue
figure on which it is based does not include
or aggregate revenues from affiliated
companies. In addition, an element of the
definition of ‘‘small business’’ is that the
entity not be dominant in its field of
operation. We are unable at this time to
define or quantify the criteria that would
establish whether a specific television station
is dominant in its field of operation.
Accordingly, the estimate of small businesses
to which rules may apply does not exclude
any television station from the definition of
a small business on this basis and is therefore
possibly over-inclusive to that extent.
133. In addition, the Commission has
estimated the number of licensed
noncommercial educational (NCE) television
stations to be 390.272 These stations are non266 Id. An additional 61 firms had annual receipts
of $25 million or more.
267 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘515120 Television Broadcasting’’ (partial
definition); https://www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/
ND515120.HTM#N515120.
268 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 515120 (updated
for inflation in 2008).
269 See FCC News Release, ‘‘Broadcast Station
Totals as of June 30, 2009,’’ dated September 4,
2009; https://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/
Daily_Business/2008/db0318/DOC-280836A1.pdf.
270 We recognize that BIA’s estimate differs
slightly from the FCC total given supra.
271 ‘‘[Business concerns] are affiliates of each
other when one concern controls or has the power
to control the other or a third party or parties
controls or has to power to control both.’’ 13 CFR
21.103(a)(1).
272 See FCC News Release, ‘‘Broadcast Station
Totals as of June 30, 2009,’’ dated September 4,
2009; https://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/
Daily_Business/2008/db0318/DOC-280836A1.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
profit, and therefore considered to be small
entities.273
134. In addition, there are also 2,386 low
power television stations (LPTV).274 Given
the nature of this service, we will presume
that all LPTV licensees qualify as small
entities under the above SBA small business
size standard.
135. Radio Broadcasting. This Economic
Census category ‘‘comprises establishments
primarily engaged in broadcasting aural
programs by radio to the public.
Programming may originate in their own
studio, from an affiliated network, or from
external sources.’’ 275 The SBA has
established a small business size standard for
this category, which is: Such firms having $7
million or less in annual receipts.276
According to Commission staff review of BIA
Publications, Inc.’s Master Access Radio
Analyzer Database on March 31, 2005, about
10,840 (95%) of 11,410 commercial radio
stations had revenues of $6 million or less.
Therefore, the majority of such entities are
small entities.
136. We note, however, that in assessing
whether a business concern qualifies as small
under the above size standard, business
affiliations must be included.277 In addition,
to be determined to be a ‘‘small business,’’ the
entity may not be dominant in its field of
operation.278 We note that it is difficult at
times to assess these criteria in the context
of media entities, and our estimate of small
businesses may therefore be over-inclusive.
137. Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and
Other Program Distribution Services. This
service involves a variety of transmitters,
generally used to relay broadcast
programming to the public (through
translator and booster stations) or within the
program distribution chain (from a remote
news gathering unit back to the station). The
Commission has not developed a definition
of small entities applicable to broadcast
auxiliary licensees. The applicable
definitions of small entities are those, noted
previously, under the SBA rules applicable to
radio broadcasting stations and television
broadcasting stations.279
138. The Commission estimates that there
are approximately 5,618 FM translators and
boosters.280 The Commission does not collect
financial information on any broadcast
facility, and the Department of Commerce
does not collect financial information on
273 See
generally 5 U.S.C. 601(4), (6).
FCC News Release, ‘‘Broadcast Station
Totals as of June 30, 2009,’’ dated September 4,
2009; https://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/
Daily_Business/2008/db0318/DOC-280836A1.pdf.
275 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘515112 Radio Stations’’; https://www.census.gov/
naics/2007/def/ND515112.HTM#N515112.
276 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 515112 (updated
for inflation in 2008).
277 ‘‘Concerns and entities are affiliates of each
other when one controls or has the power to control
the other, or a third party or parties controls or has
the power to control both. It does not matter
whether control is exercised, so long as the power
to control exists.’’ 13 CFR 121.103(a)(1) (an SBA
regulation).
278 13 CFR 121.102(b) (an SBA regulation).
279 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS codes 515112 and
515120.
280 See supra note 242.
these auxiliary broadcast facilities. We
believe that most, if not all, of these auxiliary
facilities could be classified as small
businesses by themselves. We also recognize
that most commercial translators and
boosters are owned by a parent station
which, in some cases, would be covered by
the revenue definition of small business
entity discussed above. These stations would
likely have annual revenues that exceed the
SBA maximum to be designated as a small
business ($7.0 million for a radio station or
$14.0 million for a TV station). Furthermore,
they do not meet the Small Business Act’s
definition of a ‘‘small business concern’’
because they are not independently owned
and operated.281
139. Cable Television Distribution Services.
Since 2007, these services have been defined
within the broad economic census category
of Wired Telecommunications Carriers; that
category is defined as follows: ‘‘This industry
comprises establishments primarily engaged
in operating and/or providing access to
transmission facilities and infrastructure that
they own and/or lease for the transmission of
voice, data, text, sound, and video using
wired telecommunications networks.
Transmission facilities may be based on a
single technology or a combination of
technologies.’’ 282 The SBA has developed a
small business size standard for this category,
which is: All such firms having 1,500 or
fewer employees. To gauge small business
prevalence for these cable services we must,
however, use current census data that are
based on the previous category of Cable and
Other Program Distribution and its associated
size standard; that size standard was: All
such firms having $13.5 million or less in
annual receipts.283 According to Census
Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of
1,191 firms in this previous category that
operated for the entire year.284 Of this total,
1,087 firms had annual receipts of under $10
million, and 43 firms had receipts of $10
million or more but less than $25 million.285
Thus, the majority of these firms can be
considered small.
140. Cable Companies and Systems. The
Commission has also developed its own
small business size standards, for the
purpose of cable rate regulation. Under the
Commission’s rules, a ‘‘small cable company’’
is one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers,
nationwide.286 Industry data indicate that, of
1,076 cable operators nationwide, all but
274 See
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
281 See
15 U.S.C. 632.
Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517110 Wired Telecommunications Carriers’’
(partial definition); https://www.census.gov/naics/
2007/def/ND517110.HTM#N517110.
283 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.
284 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, Table 4, Receipts Size
of Firms for the United States: 2002, NAICS code
517510 (issued November 2005).
285 Id. An additional 61 firms had annual receipts
of $25 million or more.
286 47 CFR 76.901(e). The Commission
determined that this size standard equates
approximately to a size standard of $100 million or
less in annual revenues. Implementation of Sections
of the 1992 Cable Act: Rate Regulation, Sixth Report
and Order and Eleventh Order on Reconsideration,
10 FCC Rcd 7393, 7408 (1995).
282 U.S.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
eleven are small under this size standard.287
In addition, under the Commission’s rules, a
‘‘small system’’ is a cable system serving
15,000 or fewer subscribers.288 Industry data
indicate that, of 6,635 systems nationwide,
5,802 systems have under 10,000 subscribers,
and an additional 302 systems have 10,000–
19,999 subscribers.289 Thus, under this
second size standard, most cable systems are
small.
141. Cable System Operators. The
Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
also contains a size standard for small cable
system operators, which is ‘‘a cable operator
that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in
the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all
subscribers in the United States and is not
affiliated with any entity or entities whose
gross annual revenues in the aggregate
exceed $250,000,000.’’ 290 The Commission
has determined that an operator serving
fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be
deemed a small operator, if its annual
revenues, when combined with the total
annual revenues of all its affiliates, do not
exceed $250 million in the aggregate.291
Industry data indicate that, of 1,076 cable
operators nationwide, all but ten are small
under this size standard.292 We note that the
Commission neither requests nor collects
information on whether cable system
operators are affiliated with entities whose
gross annual revenues exceed $250
million,293 and therefore we are unable to
estimate more accurately the number of cable
system operators that would qualify as small
under this size standard.
142. Open Video Systems. The open video
system (‘‘OVS’’) framework was established in
1996, and is one of four statutorily
recognized options for the provision of video
programming services by local exchange
carriers.294 The OVS framework provides
287 These data are derived from: R.R. Bowker,
Broadcasting & Cable Yearbook 2006, ‘‘Top 25
Cable/Satellite Operators,’’ pages A–8 & C–2 (data
current as of June 30, 2005); Warren
Communications News, Television & Cable
Factbook 2006, ‘‘Ownership of Cable Systems in the
United States,’’ pages D–1805 to D–1857.
288 47 CFR 76.901(c).
289 Warren Communications News, Television &
Cable Factbook 2008, ‘‘U.S. Cable Systems by
Subscriber Size,’’ page F–2 (data current as of Oct.
2007). The data do not include 851 systems for
which classifying data were not available.
290 47 U.S.C. 543(m)(2); see 47 CFR 76.901(f) &
nn. 1–3.
291 47 CFR 76.901(f); see Public Notice, FCC
Announces New Subscriber Count for the Definition
of Small Cable Operator, DA 01–158 (Cable
Services Bureau, Jan. 24, 2001).
292 These data are derived from: R.R. Bowker,
Broadcasting & Cable Yearbook 2006, ‘‘Top 25
Cable/Satellite Operators,’’ pages A–8 & C–2 (data
current as of June 30, 2005); Warren
Communications News, Television & Cable
Factbook 2006, ‘‘Ownership of Cable Systems in the
United States,’’ pages D–1805 to D–1857.
293 The Commission does receive such
information on a case-by-case basis if a cable
operator appeals a local franchise authority’s
finding that the operator does not qualify as a small
cable operator pursuant to 76.901(f) of the
Commission’s rules. See 47 CFR 76.909(b).
294 47 U.S.C. 571(a)(3)–(4). See Annual
Assessment of the Status of Competition in the
Market for the Delivery of Video Programming,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
opportunities for the distribution of video
programming other than through cable
systems. Because OVS operators provide
subscription services,295 OVS falls within the
SBA small business size standard covering
cable services, which is ‘‘Wired
Telecommunications Carriers.’’ 296 The SBA
has developed a small business size standard
for this category, which is: All such firms
having 1,500 or fewer employees. To gauge
small business prevalence for such services
we must, however, use current census data
that are based on the previous category of
Cable and Other Program Distribution and its
associated size standard; that size standard
was: All such firms having $13.5 million or
less in annual receipts.297 According to
Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a
total of 1,191 firms in this previous category
that operated for the entire year.298 Of this
total, 1,087 firms had annual receipts of
under $10 million, and 43 firms had receipts
of $10 million or more but less than $25
million.299 Thus, the majority of cable firms
can be considered small. In addition, we note
that the Commission has certified some OVS
operators, with some now providing
service.300 Broadband service providers
(‘‘BSPs’’) are currently the only significant
holders of OVS certifications or local OVS
franchises.301 The Commission does not have
financial or employment information
regarding the entities authorized to provide
OVS, some of which may not yet be
operational. Thus, again, at least some of the
OVS operators may qualify as small entities.
143. Cable Television Relay Service. This
service includes transmitters generally used
to relay cable programming within cable
television system distribution systems. This
cable service is defined within the broad
economic census category of Wired
Telecommunications Carriers; that category
is defined as follows: ‘‘This industry
comprises establishments primarily engaged
in operating and/or providing access to
transmission facilities and infrastructure that
they own and/or lease for the transmission of
voice, data, text, sound, and video using
wired telecommunications networks.
Transmission facilities may be based on a
single technology or a combination of
technologies.’’ 302 The SBA has developed a
Thirteenth Annual Report, 24 FCC Rcd 542, 606
para. 135 (2009) (‘‘Thirteenth Annual Cable
Competition Report’’).
295 See 47 U.S.C. 573.
296 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517110 Wired Telecommunications Carriers’’;
https://www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/
ND517110.HTM#N517110.
297 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.
298 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, Table 4, Receipts Size
of Firms for the United States: 2002, NAICS code
517510 (issued November 2005).
299 Id. An additional 61 firms had annual receipts
of $25 million or more.
300 A list of OVS certifications may be found at
https://www.fcc.gov/mb/ovs/csovscer.html.
301 See Thirteenth Annual Cable Competition
Report, 24 FCC Rcd at 606–07 para. 135. BSPs are
newer firms that are building state-of-the-art,
facilities-based networks to provide video, voice,
and data services over a single network.
302 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517110 Wired Telecommunications Carriers’’
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
5675
small business size standard for this category,
which is: All such firms having 1,500 or
fewer employees. To gauge small business
prevalence for cable services we must,
however, use current census data that are
based on the previous category of Cable and
Other Program Distribution and its associated
size standard; that size standard was: All
such firms having $13.5 million or less in
annual receipts.303 According to Census
Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of
1,191 firms in this previous category that
operated for the entire year.304 Of this total,
1,087 firms had annual receipts of under $10
million, and 43 firms had receipts of $10
million or more but less than $25 million.305
Thus, the majority of these firms can be
considered small.
144. Multichannel Video Distribution and
Data Service. MVDDS is a terrestrial fixed
microwave service operating in the 12.2–12.7
GHz band. The Commission adopted criteria
for defining three groups of small businesses
for purposes of determining their eligibility
for special provisions such as bidding
credits. It defined a very small business as an
entity with average annual gross revenues not
exceeding $3 million for the preceding three
years; a small business as an entity with
average annual gross revenues not exceeding
$15 million for the preceding three years; and
an entrepreneur as an entity with average
annual gross revenues not exceeding $40
million for the preceding three years.306
These definitions were approved by the
SBA.307 On January 27, 2004, the
Commission completed an auction of 214
MVDDS licenses (Auction No. 53). In this
auction, ten winning bidders won a total of
192 MVDDS licenses.308 Eight of the ten
winning bidders claimed small business
status and won 144 of the licenses. The
Commission also held an auction of MVDDS
licenses on December 7, 2005 (Auction 63).
Of the three winning bidders who won 22
licenses, two winning bidders, winning 21 of
(partial definition); https://www.census.gov/naics/
2007/def/ND517110.HTM#N517110.
303 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110.
304 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, Table 4, Receipts Size
of Firms for the United States: 2002, NAICS code
517510 (issued November 2005).
305 Id. An additional 61 firms had annual receipts
of $25 million or more.
306 Amendment of Parts 2 and 25 of the
Commission’s Rules to Permit Operation of NGSO
FSS Systems Co-Frequency With GSO and
Terrestrial Systems in the Ku-Band Frequency
Range; Amendment of the Commission’s Rules To
Authorize Subsidiary Terrestrial Use of the 12.2–
12.7 GHz Band by Direct Broadcast Satellite
Licenses and their Affiliates; and Applications of
Broadwave USA, PDC Broadband Corporation, and
Satellite Receivers, Ltd. To Provide A Fixed Service
in the 12.2–12.7 GHz Band, ET Docket No. 98–206,
Memorandum Opinion and Order and Second
Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 9614, 9711, para. 252
(2002).
307 See Letter from Hector V. Barreto,
Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration,
to Margaret W. Wiener, Chief, Auctions and
Industry Analysis Division, WTB, FCC (Feb. 13,
2002).
308 See ‘‘Multichannel Video Distribution and
Data Service Auction Closes,’’ Public Notice, 19 FCC
Rcd 1834 (2004).
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
5676
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the licenses, claimed small business
status.309
145. Amateur Radio Service. These
licensees are held by individuals in a
noncommercial capacity; these licensees are
not small entities.
146. Aviation and Marine Services. Small
businesses in the aviation and marine radio
services use a very high frequency (‘‘VHF’’)
marine or aircraft radio and, as appropriate,
an emergency position-indicating radio
beacon (and/or radar) or an emergency
locator transmitter. The Commission has not
developed a small business size standard
specifically applicable to these small
businesses. For purposes of this analysis, the
Commission uses the SBA small business
size standard for the category Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite), which is 1,500 or fewer
employees.310 Most applicants for
recreational licenses are individuals.
Approximately 581,000 ship station licensees
and 131,000 aircraft station licensees operate
domestically and are not subject to the radio
carriage requirements of any statute or treaty.
For purposes of our evaluations in this
analysis, we estimate that there are up to
approximately 712,000 licensees that are
small businesses (or individuals) under the
SBA standard. In addition, between
December 3, 1998 and December 14, 1998,
the Commission held an auction of 42 VHF
Public Coast licenses in the 157.1875–
157.4500 MHz (ship transmit) and 161.775–
162.0125 MHz (coast transmit) bands. For
purposes of the auction, the Commission
defined a ‘‘small’’ business as an entity that,
together with controlling interests and
affiliates, has average gross revenues for the
preceding three years not to exceed $15
million. In addition, a ‘‘very small’’ business
is one that, together with controlling interests
and affiliates, has average gross revenues for
the preceding three years not to exceed $3
million.311 There are approximately 10,672
licensees in the Marine Coast Service, and
the Commission estimates that almost all of
them qualify as ‘‘small’’ businesses under the
above special small business size standards.
147. Personal Radio Services. Personal
radio services provide short-range, low
power radio for personal communications,
radio signaling, and business
communications not provided for in other
services. The Personal Radio Services
include spectrum licensed under part 95 of
our rules.312 These services include Citizen
Band Radio Service (‘‘CB’’), General Mobile
Radio Service (‘‘GMRS’’), Radio Control Radio
Service (‘‘R/C’’), Family Radio Service
(‘‘FRS’’), Wireless Medical Telemetry Service
(‘‘WMTS’’), Medical Implant Communications
Service (‘‘MICS’’), Low Power Radio Service
(‘‘LPRS’’), and Multi-Use Radio Service
309 See ‘‘Auction of Multichannel Video
Distribution and Data Service Licenses Closes;
Winning Bidders Announced for Auction No. 63,’’
Public Notice, 20 FCC Rcd 19807 (2005).
310 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517210.
311 Amendment of the Commission’s Rules
Concerning Maritime Communications, Third
Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and
Order, 13 FCC Rcd 19853 (1998).
312 47 CFR Part 90.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
(‘‘MURS’’).313 There are a variety of methods
used to license the spectrum in these rule
parts, from licensing by rule, to conditioning
operation on successful completion of a
required test, to site-based licensing, to
geographic area licensing. Under the RFA,
the Commission is required to make a
determination of which small entities are
directly affected by the rules being proposed.
Since all such entities are wireless, we apply
the definition of Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite), pursuant to which a small entity is
defined as employing 1,500 or fewer
persons.314 Many of the licensees in these
services are individuals, and thus are not
small entities. In addition, due to the mostly
unlicensed and shared nature of the
spectrum utilized in many of these services,
the Commission lacks direct information
upon which to base an estimation of the
number of small entities under an SBA
definition that might be directly affected by
the proposed rules.
148. Public Safety Radio Services. Public
Safety radio services include police, fire,
local government, forestry conservation,
highway maintenance, and emergency
medical services.315 There are a total of
approximately 127,540 licensees in these
services. Governmental entities as well as
313 The Citizens Band Radio Service, General
Mobile Radio Service, Radio Control Radio Service,
Family Radio Service, Wireless Medical Telemetry
Service, Medical Implant Communications Service,
Low Power Radio Service, and Multi-Use Radio
Service are governed by Subpart D, Subpart A,
Subpart C, Subpart B, Subpart H, Subpart I, Subpart
G, and Subpart J, respectively, of Part 95 of the
Commission’s rules. See generally 47 CFR Part 95.
314 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 517210.
315 With the exception of the special emergency
service, these services are governed by Subpart B
of part 90 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR
90.15–90.27. The police service includes
approximately 27,000 licensees that serve State,
county, and municipal enforcement through
telephony (voice), telegraphy (code) and teletype
and facsimile (printed material). The fire radio
service includes approximately 23,000 licensees
comprised of private volunteer or professional fire
companies as well as units under governmental
control. The local government service that is
presently comprised of approximately 41,000
licensees that are State, county, or municipal
entities that use the radio for official purposes not
covered by other public safety services. There are
approximately 7,000 licensees within the forestry
service which is comprised of licensees from State
departments of conservation and private forest
organizations who set up communications networks
among fire lookout towers and ground crews. The
approximately 9,000 State and local governments
are licensed to highway maintenance service
provide emergency and routine communications to
aid other public safety services to keep main roads
safe for vehicular traffic. The approximately 1,000
licensees in the Emergency Medical Radio Service
(‘‘EMRS’’) use the 39 channels allocated to this
service for emergency medical service
communications related to the delivery of
emergency medical treatment. 47 CFR 90.15–90.27.
The approximately 20,000 licensees in the special
emergency service include medical services, rescue
organizations, veterinarians, handicapped persons,
disaster relief organizations, school buses, beach
patrols, establishments in isolated areas,
communications standby facilities, and emergency
repair of public communications facilities. 47 CFR
90.33–90.55.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
private businesses comprise the licensees for
these services. All governmental entities with
populations of fewer than 50,000 fall within
the definition of a small entity.316
149. Internet Service Providers. The 2007
Economic Census places these firms, whose
services might include voice over Internet
protocol (VoIP), in either of two categories,
depending on whether the service is
provided over the provider’s own
telecommunications connections (e.g. cable
and DSL, ISPs), or over client-supplied
telecommunications connections (e.g. dial-up
ISPs). The former are within the category of
Wired Telecommunications Carriers,317
which has an SBA small business size
standard of 1,500 or fewer employees.318 The
latter are within the category of All Other
Telecommunications,319 which has a size
standard of annual receipts of $25 million or
less.320 The most current Census Bureau data
for all such firms, however, are the 2002 data
for the previous census category called
Internet Service Providers.321 That category
had a small business size standard of $21
million or less in annual receipts, which was
revised in late 2005 to $23 million. The 2002
data show that there were 2,529 such firms
that operated for the entire year.322 Of those,
2,437 firms had annual receipts of under $10
million, and an additional 47 firms had
receipts of between $10 million and
$24,999,999.323 Consequently, we estimate
that the majority of ISP firms are small
entities.
150. The ISP industry has changed
dramatically since 2002. The 2002 data cited
above may therefore include entities that no
longer provide Internet access service and
may exclude entities that now provide such
service. To ensure that this IRFA describes
the universe of small entities that our action
might affect, we discuss in turn several
different types of entities that might be
providing Internet access service.
151. We note that, although we have no
specific information on the number of small
entities that provide Internet access service
over unlicensed spectrum, we include these
entities here.
D. Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
152. The rules proposed herein would
require certain entities or individuals to
316 5
U.S.C. 601(5).
Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517110 Wired Telecommunications Carriers’’,
https://www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/
ND517110.HTM#N517110.
318 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110 (updated
for inflation in 2008).
319 U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘517919 All Other Telecommunications’’; https://
www.census.gov/naics/2007/def/
ND517919.HTM#N517919.
320 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517919 (updated
for inflation in 2008).
321 U.S. Census Bureau, ‘‘2002 NAICS Definitions,
‘‘518111 Internet Service Providers’’; https://
www.census.gov/eped/naics02/def/NDEF518.HTM.
322 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census,
Subject Series: Information, ‘‘Establishment and
Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),’’
Table 4, NAICS code 518111 (issued Nov. 2005).
323 An additional 45 firms had receipts of $25
million or more.
317 U.S.
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-PART 2
replace and/or consolidate their existing
FRNs. Some additional entities and
individuals would be required to report their
Taxpayer Identification Number. In addition,
potential CORES registrants would be
required to provide a valid e-mail address as
a prerequisite to completing the registration
process. Also, entities claiming tax-exempt
status or engaged in bankruptcy proceedings
would be required to submit documentation
demonstrating their tax-exempt or
bankruptcy status. A substantial number of
entities and individuals doing business with
the Commission have already received their
FRN by virtue of their prior registration in
CORES, and we anticipate that the changes
proposed here will have no significant
economic impact on them. We have proposed
to make it extremely simple, and virtually
cost-free, for anyone else to obtain or revise
their already-existing FRN(s). The proposals
contained in this Notice do not include any
changes in the language of FCC Forms nor
would they require extra filings.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:35 Jan 31, 2011
Jkt 223001
E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant
Economic Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
153. The RFA requires an agency to
describe any significant, specifically small
business, 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 or 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 any part thereof,
for small entities.’’ 324
154. We are attempting to reduce a possible
regulatory burden by considering different
324 5
PO 00000
methods by which we could limit
individuals and entities to a single FRN, in
order to improve the effectiveness and
efficiency of our electronic registration
system and to limit the documentation that
certain entities would be required to submit
to demonstrate their tax exempt or
bankruptcy status. We will continue to
examine alternatives in the future, with the
objective of minimizing any significant
impact on small entities. We seek comment
on significant alternatives that commenters
believe we should adopt.
F. Federal Rules That Overlap, Duplicate, or
Conflict With These Proposed Rules
155. None.
[FR Doc. 2011–1941 Filed 1–31–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
U.S.C. 603(c)(1)–(c)(4).
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
5677
E:\FR\FM\01FEP2.SGM
01FEP2
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 1, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5652-5677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1941]
[[Page 5651]]
Vol. 76
Tuesday,
No. 21
February 1, 2011
Part II
Federal Communications Commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
47 CFR Part 1
Practice and Procedure; Amendment of CORES Registration System;
Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 76 , No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2011 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 5652]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 1
[MD Docket No. 10-234; FCC 10-192]
Practice and Procedure; Amendment of CORES Registration System
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
proposes revisions to the Commission's Registration System (CORES),
which is used by individuals and entities doing business with the FCC
to obtain a unique identifying number called an FCC Registration
Number, or ``FRN.'' The proposed modifications to CORES include:
Requiring entities and individuals to rely primarily upon a single FRN
that may, at their discretion, be linked to subsidiary or associated
accounts; allowing entities to identify multiple points of contact;
eliminating some of our exceptions to the requirement that entities and
individuals provide their Taxpayer Identification Number (``TIN'') at
the time of registration; requiring FRN holders to provide their e-mail
addresses; modifying CORES log-in procedures; adding attention flags
and automated notices that would inform FRN holders of their financial
standing before the Commission; and adding data fields to enable FRN
holders to indicate their tax-exempt status and notify the Commission
of pending bankruptcy proceedings. These modifications, if implemented,
will make CORES more feature-friendly and improve the Commission's
ability to comply with various statutes that govern debt collection and
the collection of personal information by the Federal government.
DATES: Comments must be submitted by interested parties on or before
March 3, 2011. Reply comments must be submitted no later than March 18,
2011. Written PRA comments on the proposed information collection
requirements contained herein must be submitted by the public, Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on or
before April 4, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by MD Docket No. 10-234,
FCC 10-192, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Federal Communications Commission's Web site: https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail (although the Commission continues to experience
delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be
addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
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
PRA comments on the proposed collection requirements 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 nfraser@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: Warren Firschein, Office of the
Managing Director, (202) 418-0844. For additional information
concerning the information collection requirements contained in this
document, send an e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Leslie F. Smith,
(202) 418-0217. To view or obtain a copy of this information collection
request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to this OMB/GSA Web page: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the Web
page called ``Currently Under Review,'' (3) click on the downward-
pointing arrow in the ``Select Agency'' box below the ``Currently Under
Review'' heading, (4) select ``Federal Communications Commission'' from
the list of agencies presented in the ``Select Agency'' box, (5) click
the ``Submit'' button to the right of the ``Select Agency'' box, and
(6) when the list of FCC ICRs currently under review appears, look for
the OMB control number(s) of the ICR(s) as shown in the Supplementary
Information section below (3060-0917 and/or 3060-0918) and then click
on either of the ICR Reference Number(s). A copy of the FCC
submission(s) to OMB will be displayed.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, MD Docket No. 10-234, FCC No. 10-192, adopted
November 19, 2010 and released December 7, 2010. The full text of the
NPRM is available for public inspection and copying during business
hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. It also may be
purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor at Portals II,
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554; the
contractor's Web site, https://www.bcpiweb.com; or by calling (800) 378-
3160, facsimile (202) 488-5563, or e-mail FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Copies of
the Notice also may be obtained via the Commission's Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS) by entering the docket number MD Docket No. 10-
234. Additionally, the complete item is available on the Federal
Communications Commission's Web site at https://www.fcc.gov.
This document contains proposed information collection
requirements. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork
burden and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission invites the
general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the following
information collection(s). Public and agency comments are due April 4,
2011.
Comments 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: 3060-0917.
Title: CORES Registration Form.
Form Number: FCC Form 160.
Type of Review: Revision of currently approved collection.
Respondents: Individuals or households; Businesses or other for-
profit; Not-for-profit institutions; and State, Local or Tribal
Government.
[[Page 5653]]
Number of Respondents and Responses: 150,000 respondents; 150,000
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 10 minutes (0.167 hours).
Frequency of Response: One time reporting requirements.
Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Total Annual Burden: 25,050 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: Not required.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission maintains a
system of records, FCC/OMD-9, ``Commission Registration System
(CORES),'' to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards,
and disposal of the personally identifiable information (PII) that
individual respondents may submit on FCC Form 160. The FCC will also
redact PII submitted on this form before it makes FCC Form 160
available for public inspection. FCC Form 160 includes a privacy
statement to inform applicants (respondents) of the Commission's need
to obtain the information and the protections that the FCC has in place
to protect the PII.
Needs and Uses: Respondents use FCC Form 160 to register in the
FCC's Commission Registration System (CORES). When registering, the
respondent receives a unique FCC Registration Number (FRN), which is
required for anyone doing business with the Commission. FCC Form 160 is
used to collect information that pertains to the entity's name,
address, contact representative, telephone number, e-mail address, and
fax number. Respondents may also register in CORES on-line at https://www.fcc.gov/frnreg. The Commission uses this information to collect or
report on any delinquent debt arising from the respondent's business
dealings with the FCC, including both ``feeable'' and ``nonfeeable''
services; and to ensure that registrants (respondents) receive any
refunds due. Use of the CORES system is also a means of ensuring that
the Commission operates in compliance with the Debt Collection
Improvement Act of 1996.
The NPRM proposes to eliminate some of our exceptions to the
requirement that entities and individuals provide their Taxpayer
Identification Number (``TIN'') at the time of registration; require
FRN holders to provide their e-mail addresses; give FRN holders the
option to identify multiple points of contact; and require FRN holders
to indicate their tax-exempt status and notify the Commission of
pending bankruptcy proceedings. All remaining existing information
collection requirements would stay as they are.
OMB Control Number: 3060-0918.
Title: CORES Update/Change Form.
Form Number: FCC Form 161.
Type of Review: Revision of currently approved collection.
Respondents: Individuals or households; Businesses or other for-
profit; Not-for-profit institutions; and State, Local or Tribal
Government.
Number of Respondents and Responses: 57,600 respondents; 57,600
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 10 minutes (0.167 hours).
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirements.
Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.
Total Annual Burden: 9,792 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: Not required.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission maintains a
system of records, FCC/OMD-9, ``Commission Registration System
(CORES),'' to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards,
and disposal of the personally identifiable information (PII) that
individual respondents may submit on FCC Form 161. The FCC will also
redact PII submitted on this form before it makes FCC Form 161
available for public inspection. FCC Form 161 includes a privacy
statement to inform applicants (respondents) of the Commission's need
to obtain the information and the protections that the FCC has in place
to protect the PII.
Needs and Uses: After respondents have registered in the FCC's
Commission Registration System (CORES) and have been issued an FCC
Registration Number (FRN), they may use FCC Form 161 to update and/or
change their contact information, including name, address, telephone
number, e-mail address, fax number, contact representative, contact
representative's address, telephone number, e-mail address, and/or fax
number. Respondents may also update their registration information in
CORES on-line at https://www.fcc.gov/frnreg. The Commission uses this
information to collect or report on any delinquent debt arising from
the respondent's business dealings with the FCC, including both
``feeable'' and ``nonfeeable'' services; and to ensure that registrants
(respondents) receive any refunds due. Use of the CORES system is also
a means of ensuring that the Commission operates in compliance with the
Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996.
The NPRM proposes to eliminate some of our exceptions to the
requirement that entities and individuals provide their Taxpayer
Identification Number (``TIN'') at the time of registration; require
FRN holders to provide their e-mail addresses; give FRN holders the
option to identify multiple points of contact; and require FRN holders
to indicate their tax-exempt status and notify the Commission of
pending bankruptcy proceedings. All remaining existing information
collection requirements would stay as they are.
Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Amendment of Part 1 of the Commission's Rules, Concerning Practice and
Procedure, Amendment of CORES Registration System
1. This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPRM'') proposes amending
the Commission's rules to make revisions to the Commission's
Registration System, also known as ``CORES.'' Anyone doing business
with the Commission is required to first obtain a unique identifying
number through CORES called an FCC Registration Number, or ``FRN.''
Among other things, an FRN allows registrants to submit or file
applications and remit payments to the Commission. Our proposed changes
to CORES would result in customer-related improvements, as well as
improvements to the process by which entities and individuals access
and make use of information that is contained in CORES. The proposed
changes would affect rules governing Practice and Procedure (see 47 CFR
part 1).
2. We are able to offer these proposed modifications to the current
version of CORES based on our own experience with the system since its
inception in 2000, as well as on informal suggestions that have been
provided by CORES FRN holders themselves. We hope that comments
received in this rulemaking will further add to and refine our efforts
for improving the CORES system. In addition, we plan to invite the
public to participate in a public forum at the FCC's headquarters in
Washington, DC to discuss these proposed changes to CORES, and to give
interested parties the opportunity to discuss their concerns and
suggest further modifications. A public notice announcing the date of
the forum will be released shortly. We invite parties to indicate their
interest in participating in this public forum by contacting us through
the information provided in Section IV.F., below.
[[Page 5654]]
3. This proceeding is part of the Commission's larger effort to
reform and transform the agency into a model of excellence in
government. Like the NPRMs on the FCC's ex parte rules and the one
focused on the rules governing Commission practice and procedure,\1\
this NPRM will reform FCC procedures, modifying CORES to make it easier
for individuals \2\ and entities \3\ to do business with the FCC. In
addition, this NPRM is related both to the Commission's new Core
Financial System and the development and design of the FCC's new
Consolidated Licensing System (``CLS'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Amendment of the Commission's Ex Parte Rules and Other
Procedural Rules, GC Docket No. 10-43, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 25 FCC Rcd 2403 (2010); Amendment of Certain of the
Commission's Part 1 Rules of Practice and Procedure and Part 0 Rules
of Commission Organization, GC Docket No. 10-44, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 25 FCC Rcd 2430 (2010). See also FCC Proposes Rule
Changes to Improve Decision-Making and Efficiency, Promote
Participation in FCC Proceedings, 2010 WL 589844 (rel. February 18,
2010) (news release announcing the commencement of the two
previously-mentioned proceedings).
\2\ The terms ``individuals'' and ``persons'' are used
synonymously in this NPRM.
\3\ An ``entity'' is any business or organization. This includes
public or private, and profit or not-for-profit, organizations.
\4\ Federal Communications Commission (FCC) To Hold April 7,
2010 Workshop on Development of Consolidated Licensing System, MD
Docket No. 10-73, Public Notice, 25 FCC Rcd 3176 (2010). See also
the Commission's Web page on the effort to develop the consolidated
licensing system, found at https://reboot.fcc.gov/reform/systems/cls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Our proposed modifications to CORES partly include: Requiring
entities and individuals to rely primarily upon a single FRN that may,
at their discretion, be linked to subsidiary or associated accounts;
allowing entities to identify multiple points of contact; eliminating
some of our exceptions to the requirement that entities and individuals
provide their Taxpayer Identification Number (``TIN'') \5\ at the time
of registration; requiring FRN holders to provide their e-mail
addresses; giving FRN holders the option to create a custom User ID;
modifying CORES log-in procedures for entities so as to ease use by
multiple individuals; adding attention flags and notices that would
inform FRN holders of their financial standing before the Commission
when logging onto CORES; and adding data fields to enable FRN holders
to indicate their tax-exempt status and notify the Commission of
pending bankruptcy proceedings. These modifications, if implemented,
will make CORES more feature-friendly and will eliminate some of the
system's current limitations. They will also improve the Commission's
ability to comply with various statutes that govern debt collection and
the collection of personal information by the Federal government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For individuals, the TIN is their social security number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
5. The Commission is required in a variety of contexts to manage
and collect substantial sums of money, including annual regulatory fees
and application fees \6\ and civil monetary penalties.\7\ The
Commission also auctions various licenses through competitive bidding
and administers the collection of payments for these licenses.\8\ In
addition, the Commission directs the collection of mandated
contributions to the Universal Service Fund (``USF'') and other
statutory programs.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 47 U.S.C. 159 and Assessment and Collection of
Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2009, MD Docket No. 09-65, Report
and Order, 4 FCC Rcd 10301 (2009) (regulatory fees); 47 U.S.C. 158
and Amendment of the Schedule of Application Fees Set Forth in
Sections 1.1102 through 1.1107 of the Commission's Rules, GEN Docket
No. 86-285, Order, 23 FCC Rcd 14192 (2008) (application fees).
\7\ See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. 503; 47 CFR 1.80; see also Forfeiture
Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to
Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, CI Docket No. 95-6, Report
and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303
(1999).
\8\ See 47 U.S.C. 309(j).
\9\ See 47 U.S.C. 254(d); 47 CFR 54.706.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. In operating these programs, the Commission is subject to a
variety of Federal statutes designed to ensure that the Government's
financial management systems consistently and accurately report assets,
liabilities, revenues and expenditures.\10\ In particular, the
Commission is subject to the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996
(``DCIA''), which sought to address Congressional concerns that debts
owed to the Federal government were not being properly collected.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See, e.g., 31 U.S.C. 3512(b) (mandating the establishment
and maintenance of systems of accounting and internal controls); 4
CFR 102.1(a) (requiring agencies to ``take aggressive action, on a
timely basis, to collect all claims of the United States''); 4 CFR
102.17 (requiring agencies to establish procedures to identify the
causes of overpayments, delinquencies, and defaults, and the
corrective actions needed).
\11\ Public Law 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996), codified at 31
U.S.C. 3701, et seq. See United States v. Texas, 507 U.S. 529, 536-
37 (1993) (Debt Collection Act was passed ``in order to strengthen
the Government's hand in collecting its debts'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. To improve its collection activities, the Commission established
an internal revenue management system that supports application and
regulatory fee accounting, spectrum auction loan portfolio management,
accounting for auction proceeds, accounting for enforcement actions,
and other accounts receivable of the Commission. In developing this
revenue management system, it became apparent that persons doing
business with the Commission, as that term is defined by the DCIA,\12\
were identified in various ways in our filing and licensing systems
that made unified accounting and revenue management difficult. To
address this problem, the Commission developed CORES.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The DCIA, 31 U.S.C. 7701(c)(2), states that ``a person
shall be considered to be doing business with a Federal agency if
the person is--
(A) A lender or servicer in a Federal guaranteed or insured loan
program administered by the agency;
(B) An applicant for, or recipient of, a Federal license,
permit, right-of-way, grant, or benefit payment administered by the
agency or insurance administered by the agency;
(C) A contractor of the agency;
(D) Assessed a fine, fee, royalty or penalty by the agency; and
(E) In a relationship with the agency that may give rise to a
receivable due to that agency, such as a partner of a borrower in or
a guarantor of a Federal direct or insured loan administered by the
agency.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. CORES is a Web-based, password-protected, registration system
that assigns a unique 10-digit FRN to a registrant for use when doing
business with the FCC. These FRNs are used by all Commission systems
that handle financial, authorization of service, and enforcement
activities, and enable our customers to be more easily identified as
the filers of applications, reports, remittance payments and other
documents with the FCC. CORES was designed to serve as a central
standard repository for basic regulatee and licensee information, and
to help the Commission more effectively forecast, assess and collect
regulatory fees; track enforcement of fines and forfeiture actions;
monitor and collect penalties; manage the grant of waivers and
exemptions; and, provide information to the public.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Office of the Managing Director Implements the FCC
Registration Number (FRN) and Commission Registration System (CORES)
Registration Process Effective March 27, 2000, DA 00-407, Public
Notice, 15 FCC Rcd 16427 (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. When CORES first became operational on July 19, 2000, the public
was permitted to obtain FRNs to be used on Commission filings on a
voluntary basis.\14\ Then, by way of rulemaking effective December 3,
2001, the Commission established that FRNs were to be used on
Commission filings on a mandatory basis.\15\ Since then, in an effort
to limit the unnecessary use of social security numbers in agency
systems and programs, the Commission
[[Page 5655]]
has expanded the use of FRNs to other purposes beyond compliance with
the DCIA.\16\ Now, based on several years of experience with CORES and
the FRN registration process, we now wish to modify and enhance CORES
to better serve the interests of the Commission and the public by
identifying areas of improvement in the way customers interact with and
make use of CORES, thus enabling us to improve the system's features
and eliminate or reduce limitations of the system in its current state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See New Commission Registration System (CORES) to be
Implemented July 19, DA 00-1596, Public Notice, 15 FCC Rcd 18754
(2000).
\15\ See Amendments of Parts 1, 21, 61, 73, 74 and 76 of
Commission's Rules, Adoption of Mandatory FCC Registration Number,
MD Docket No. 00-205, Report and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 16138 (2001)
(``2001 CORES Order'').
\16\ See para. 1, supra. These additional uses for the FRN
comport with a government-wide effort to safeguard personally
identifiable information by reducing the unnecessary use of social
security numbers and exploring alternatives to serve as a personal
identifier for Federal programs. See, e.g., Safeguarding Against and
Responding to the Breach of Personally Identifiable Information, OMB
Memorandum M-07-16 (May 22, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Consolidated Licensing System. Recently, the Commission
announced its intent to develop and deploy an agency-wide Consolidated
Licensing System (``CLS'') in an effort to improve its spectrum
management and to develop a transparent, easily accessible, data
driven, efficient, cost-effective and green consolidated licensing
system.\17\ The CLS is expected to consolidate a number of licensing
systems and databases currently used by the Commission's Bureaus and
Offices, including the Antenna Structure Registration System (``ASR'')
(managed by the Commission's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau); the
Cable Operations and Licensing System (``COALS'') (managed by the Media
Bureau); the Consolidated Database System (``CDBS'') (managed by the
Media Bureau); the Experimental Licensing System (``ELS'') (managed by
the Office of Engineering and Technology); the International Bureau
Filing System (``IBFS'') (managed by the International Bureau); and,
the Universal Licensing System (``ULS'') (managed by the Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau and the Public Safety and Homeland Security
Bureau). Among other things, the Consolidated Licensing System is
expected to establish a single consolidated form for filing different
types of license application, permit a single sign-on to all of the
underlying Commission systems, and create an enhanced environment for
accessing and searching Commission data. The present proceeding is
viewed by the Commission as one necessary step of the overall
development of the CLS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Federal Communications Commission (FCC) To Hold April 7,
2010 Workshop on Development of Consolidated Licensing System, MD
Docket No. 10-73, Public Notice, 25 FCC Rcd 3176 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proposed Changes to Cores
11. In the discussion that follows, we seek comment on specific
modifications proposed for CORES. As described above, one of the
primary goals of this proceeding is to improve the customer interface
with CORES so that customers can use the system in a more efficient and
effective manner. To that end, we encourage commenters in this
proceeding to address problems that they have experienced while
navigating CORES and using their FRN(s) on subsequent remittance
payments, filings and applications before the Commission. We ask that
commenters recommend specific measures that we could take that would
ease any such navigation and usage problems. Commenters should also
propose measures that we could take to simplify the registration
process, as well as measures that would enhance their ability to use
the Commission's other automated systems, in light of the Commission's
intent to develop an agency-wide consolidated licensing system, as
described above.
A. A Single FRN
12. In the 2001 CORES Order,\18\ we concluded that requiring
entities and individuals doing business with the Commission to obtain
an FRN would ``improve the management of our financial systems,'' and
was ``part of a long-range solution to better manage our financial
systems.'' \19\ Accordingly, we adopted a 10-digit unique identifier
called the FRN, and chose CORES as the automated system for assigning
FRNs to entities and individuals doing business with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See supra n. 14.
\19\ 2001 CORES Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 16139, para. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Since the creation of CORES, entities have been able to obtain
multiple FRNs in order to permit different members of their corporate
family to obtain their own individual FRNs, regardless of whether those
entities had different taxpayer identification numbers (``TINs''),\20\
and to allow entities to organize their dealings with the Commission
along logical business lines.\21\ As a result of this policy, however,
it is difficult for the Commission to identify all the FRNs that are
held by the same entity and tie them together in order to examine the
entity's entire course of dealing with the agency. Although entities
are required to provide their TIN during the FRN registration process,
the data reported by entities has not always been consistent. In many
cases a TIN has not been reported at all. For example, in some
instances, due to exceptions allowed by the Commission, entities are
not required to provide their TIN during the CORES registration
process.\22\ In other cases, entities have inappropriately selected a
TIN exception reason during the CORES registration process that is not
intended to apply to them, thereby circumventing the requirement that
they provide a valid TIN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ A TIN is a unique identifier assigned to an entity for tax
payment purposes. A TIN may either be a Social Security Number
(``SSN'') assigned to an individual by the Social Security
Administration (``SSA''), or an employer identification number
(``EIN'') assigned to a business or organization by the Internal
Revenue Service (``IRS'').
\21\ 2001 CORES Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 16141, para. 12.
\22\ Currently, entities are permitted to select from among six
``exceptions'' to the general requirement that they furnish a TIN
during their CORES registration process, while individuals are
allowed to select from four exception reasons. For example, foreign
citizens and entities that do not maintain a business presence in
the U.S. may be eligible to claim an exception to this requirement.
Later in this NPRM, we propose to eliminate or otherwise modify some
of our TIN exception reasons for CORES registrants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. That the Commission is unable to use CORES to electronically
link all of an entity's valid FRNs has several consequences. First, it
hinders the Commission's ability to fulfill its debt collection
obligations under the DCIA. Second, it limits the effectiveness of the
Red Light Display System \23\ as (for example) it is used to review
applications to participate in Commission auctions.\24\ Third, it
[[Page 5656]]
inconveniences our licensing and enforcement bureaus, and even our
licensees themselves, in their efforts to remember, recognize, and
manage the various FRNs obtained throughout their course of business
with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ The Commission's Red Light Display System (``RLDS'')
enables entities and individuals doing business with the Commission
to determine if they have any outstanding delinquent debt. When an
entity/individual applying for or seeking benefits is delinquent in
non-tax debts owed to the Commission, we are required by law to
postpone action on applications and other requests until the
outstanding debt is repaid. See https://www.fcc.gov/debt_collection.
RLDS is electronically checked when electronic license applications
are received by the Commission.
\24\ The FCC's auction short-form application requires
applicants to certify under penalty of perjury that they, their
affiliates, their controlling interests, and the affiliates of their
controlling interests, as defined by Section 1.2110 of the
Commission's rules, are not in default on any payments for
Commission licenses (including down payments), and that they are not
delinquent on any non-tax debt owed to any Federal agency. See 47
CFR 1.2105(a)(2)(x), 1.2105(b)(1), and 1.2110; see also Amendment of
Part 1 of the Commission's Rules--Competitive Bidding Procedures, WT
Docket No. 97-82, Order on Reconsideration of the Third Report and
Order, Fifth Report and Order, and Fourth Further Notice of Proposed
Rule Making, 15 FCC Rcd 15293, 15317 para. 42 and n.142 (``If any
one of an applicant's controlling interests or their affiliates * *
* is in default on any Commission licenses or is delinquent on any
non-tax debt owed to any Federal agency at the time the applicant
files it[s] FCC Form 175, the applicant will not be able to make the
certification required by Section 1.2105(a)(2)(x) * * * and will not
be eligible to participate in Commission auctions.''). Absent linked
FRNs, every FRN of each relevant entity must be reviewed separately
in RLDS. The inability to easily and simply link multiple FRNs
therefore limits the ability of auction participants and the
Commission to use the RLDS to determine whether an auction applicant
complies with the Commission's competitive bidding rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. After nearly a decade of experience with CORES, for these
reasons expressed here, including our overarching effort to reform how
the FCC interacts with the public and ongoing reform of the way the
Commission collects and retains data, we tentatively conclude that it
is in the best interest of all parties for the Commission to be able to
view and search information on entities registered in CORES by a single
unique identifier. The benefits of requiring entities to identify
themselves in Commission filings and applications by a single unique
identifier include administrative simplicity, enhanced search
capability, and improved reliability of basic company data. In
addition, limiting entities to a single FRN will enhance our ability to
inform regulatees of financial and other administrative-related issues,
such as past due regulatory fees and impending license renewal
deadlines, through e-mail or on-line notification messages. In section
III.K, below, we propose to institute a company-centric ``dashboard''
that filers would see upon login, through which the filer would have
the ability to review the progress on their filings, fees that are due,
the history of files the filer has submitted, as well as other
important information the filer may need. Similarly, in section III.G,
we propose to post warning flags to each entity's CORES account
indicating their status in the Commission's Red Light Display System
and their debarment status. Such features could only be made possible
by limiting entities to a single company-wide identifier. We believe
that the benefits of such notifications and an entity-wide license
administration ``center'' far outweigh any potential burden. Therefore,
we propose to limit entities and individuals registered in CORES to the
use of a single FRN that incorporates subsidiary FRNs or sub-accounts,
as described below.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ In theory, this proposal only needs to apply to entities.
However, in practice, we seek to apply it to individuals as well.
CORES is populated with many instances in which individuals hold
multiple FRNs. These instances are most likely the result of
individuals who have forgotten their FRNs or FRN passwords over the
course of time and who then chose to electronically register for
another FRN, instead of resetting their original password with the
assistance of our Customer Support Help Desk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. As an initial matter, we clarify that, for the purposes of this
discussion, an entity shall be defined by the use of a single TIN.
Thus, under the proposals described below, affiliated entities that are
part of a larger corporate structure would not be limited to use of the
same FRN if they have obtained separate TINs from the IRS.
17. Although we propose to permit only a single FRN per entity, we
tentatively conclude that entities should nevertheless retain the
ability to organize their filings and other dealings with the
Commission among logical business lines of their choosing. This
particularly applies to larger businesses and organizations that do
business with the Commission through various sources, business
operations, etc., and therefore would prefer to have several
registrants associated with their single FRN.
18. There is any number of possible methods that could be
implemented to limit entities to the use of a single FRN in CORES while
still affording them the ability to establish multiple registrants
within that FRN. One such option would be to modify the structure of
existing FRNs to incorporate an alpha-numeric suffix that would allow
entities to populate a single FRN with sub-accounts for additional
registrants. Under this proposal, which we shall refer to as ``Option
1,'' an entity would be permitted to utilize a single ten-digit FRN for
all of its dealings with the FCC, but would have the ability to create
an unlimited number of sub-accounts that could be assigned to
organizational units, such as a geographic district served by the
entity or a distinct line of business conducted by the entity, or even
to particular employees. These sub-accounts would be distinguished by a
unique multi-character suffix that would trail the entity's single ten-
digit FRN. For example, under Option 1, an entity with the single FRN
1234-5678-90 may decide to establish three sub-accounts within its FRN:
One for Jane Q. Smith (perhaps expressed 1234-5678-90-JQS), one for its
West Coast Operations (perhaps expressed 1234-5678-90-WCO), and one for
Broadcast License WXYZ (perhaps expressed 1234-5678-90-XYZ). These
suffixes would not be limited to letters; an entity could just as
easily create a sub-account expressed with a purely numeric extension,
such as 1234-5678-90-001. Alternatively, the Commission could
automatically generate numeric suffixes for each sub-account (that is,
-001, -002, -003, etc.), while providing entities with the option to
subsequently customize these suffixes as it sees fit. Thus, this
proposal would require each entity to surrender all but one of its ten-
digit FRNs, which would serve as the foundation of all of its future
sub-accounts. Under this proposal, entities would have the ability to
create and use additional sub-accounts within their single FRN
according to their business and administrative needs. We seek comment
on this proposal, along with the alternative outlined above. If
adopted, should entities have the ability to choose which of their
existing FRNs would serve as the ten-digit FRN core? If so, how much
time should entities have to make such a selection? Commenters should
consider any potential burden that may be incurred through the adoption
of these options.
19. Another proposal, which we shall refer to as ``Option 2,''
would enable entities that currently hold multiple FRNs to retain all
of their various FRNs, which would be electronically linked to each
other through the assignment of an identical prefix that would precede
each of the entity's ten-digit FRNs. It would not be necessary for the
user to input this prefix; the system would automatically access and
attach the appropriate prefix whenever one of an entity's assigned FRNs
was used. Although the prefix would be visible to the entity, it would
only be used for internal purposes by the Commission to link all of an
entity's FRNs for the purposes identified above. Thus, under Option 2,
entities will be able to retain all of their current FRNs, and would
not be required to re-register in CORES, reducing the potential burden
on both regulated entities and the Commission, especially in the wake
of future mergers and acquisitions among different entities that
currently hold an FRN in CORES. We seek comment on this option, as well
as on any other proposal for limiting entities to a single FRN, such as
requiring entities to manually select one of their existing FRNs to
serve as their ``primary'' FRN, while their remaining FRNs would be
automatically converted to subsidiary, or sub-FRNs, which would be
electronically linked to its primary FRN.
20. In addition, we seek comment on whether we should also allow an
FRN registered to an individual to have sub-accounts in much the same
way as
[[Page 5657]]
business entities under either option outlined above, or whether
individuals should be prohibited from utilizing sub-accounts or sub-
FRNs. For example, individuals may find it beneficial to create sub-
FRNs for use by outside attorneys or consultants. We encourage
commenters to provide examples of where an individual's business needs
at the Commission would benefit from being able to populate sub-
accounts to their FRN.
21. Our current process for how entities and individuals obtain an
FRN from CORES requires that only a single registrant may be associated
with each FRN. However, any proposal to limit entities to the use of a
single FRN--regardless of the approach that is eventually adopted--
needs to address the need for multiple individuals to utilize the same
FRN. This need is especially evident for most businesses and
organizations, but it may apply to some individuals as well. We seek
comment generally on if (and, if so, how) entities and individuals will
wish to wield administrative access rights and authority for their
single FRN, or for multiple FRNs that are electronically linked to each
other. Should CORES allow multiple individuals to be able to register
with and access a single FRN with their own unique user name and
password? Or rather, should CORES adopt a new feature in which the FRN
has a ``primary registrant'' that is granted exclusive administrative
access and authority for adding subsequent registrants to the FRN and
allowing registrant access to the FRN? We seek comment on the
administrative burden of having a primary registrant. Should
individuals with administrative rights to an entity's primary FRN have
rights to alter any data contained in any of the entity's sub-FRNs? Why
or why not? What about the reverse: Should individuals with
administrative rights to a particular sub-FRN be restricted from
altering data in the primary or another sub-FRN? With any approach
taken, the Commission can provide user-driven options for such actions
as disabling an FRN's sub-account feature or otherwise managing how
subsequent registrants are added to a single FRN. We seek comment on
these thoughts, as well as on other administrative access and authority
concerns.
22. In the event that we adopt a process for limiting entities and
individuals to a single FRN (as opposed to Option Two, above, which
would simply assign an identical alpha-numeric prefix to existing FRNs
held by a particular entity), we seek comment on the manner in which
previously-registered entities and individuals should migrate to their
single FRN. How and when should a single FRN for each entity/individual
be established? Should the Commission issue a newly assigned FRN to
each entity/individual? Should entities and individuals with two or
more FRNs currently registered in CORES be permitted to select which
single FRN they will use on a going forward basis (while the Commission
de-activates the entity's remaining unselected FRNs), or should they
simply be assigned the most recent one they have used? We seek comment
on whether previously-registered entities and individuals with a single
FRN should simply keep their existing FRN, and not migrate to a newly
assigned number.
23. Finally, we invite parties to offer other approaches for data
migration within CORES. In addition, we seek comment on whether the
migration to a single FRN should occur automatically--and if so, under
what criteria--or whether entities and individuals should be required
to actively interface with CORES to establish their single FRN. If we
adopt a scenario where previously-registered entities and individuals
are to interface with CORES to establish a single FRN, should
registrants be required to complete the process within a particular
time frame after the effective date of the rules adopted in this
proceeding before all of their FRNs are automatically deactivated? What
should that time frame be?
24. As mentioned above, we plan to invite the public to participate
in a public forum at the FCC's headquarters in Washington, DC to
discuss our various proposals to limit entities and individuals to a
single FRN. All interested parties will have the opportunity to discuss
their concerns and to suggest other solutions that would accomplish the
goals outlined here with a minimal amount of disruption on the
industry. A public notice announcing the date of the forum will be
released shortly. We invite parties to indicate their interest in
participating in this public forum by contacting us through the
information provided in Section IV.F., below.
B. Multiple Registrants With Multiple Points of Contact
25. Currently, CORES does not permit FRN holders to identify anyone
other than themselves as the sole point of contact for their FRN. Such
contact information is often used by the Commission to contact entities
and individuals to collect delinquent debt or resolve remittance issues
that may arise during their course of dealing with the agency. We have
come to believe that the inability of FRN holders to identify
additional points of contact for their FRN unnecessarily limits the
FRN's usefulness to the FRN holder, as well as to the Commission.
Because the sole point of contact attributed to the FRN is not always
the appropriate individual to resolve a particular issue or to provide
necessary information, it is not uncommon for delays to occur while the
appropriate contact is established. For this reason, we tentatively
conclude that FRN holders should have the ability to voluntarily
provide additional points of contact for their FRNs, as well as for
each sub-account or sub-FRN as the case may be. We seek comment on this
conclusion.
26. We propose that FRN registrants would be permitted to
voluntarily provide point of contact information for certain specific,
pre-designated functions, such as ``Accounting,'' ``Billing,''
``Licensing,'' ``Legal Issues,'' etc. Points of contact provided by an
FRN holder would not become registrants to the FRN, and therefore would
not be able to gain access to confidential data submitted by the entity
to CORES. They would simply be static points of contact that have been
established by one of the FRN's registrants to address particular
issues or subject matter as needed. We seek comment on this proposal.
Also, in addition to the functions listed above, what other pre-
designated subject matter categories should be made available for an
FRN registrant to select when identifying individuals that will serve
as points of contact? Should FRN holders have the ability to create
their own categories of uses for contacts that they provide, or should
they be limited to a menu of pre-designated functions offered by the
Commission? We seek comment on these questions.
27. Finally, we seek comment on whether we should extend this
proposal for multiple points of contact to FRN holders who are
individuals. Under what circumstances and to what extent may
individuals desire to identify multiple points of contact to be
associated with their FRN? Should individuals have the same range of
choices as entities for points of contact? In what ways, if any, should
the point of contact options for individuals differ from those for
entities?
C. Elimination of Certain TIN Exception Reasons
28. Foreign Entities and Non-United States Citizens. As noted
above, if you are doing business with the Commission, you need to
register for an
[[Page 5658]]
FRN.\26\ This includes foreign registrants and non-United States
citizens who are generally required to provide their TIN before
completing the CORES registration process. In some instances, foreign
entities do not have a taxpayer identification number. Since the
inception of CORES, the Commission has permitted foreign entities and
individuals to decline to provide their TIN in certain circumstances.
With regard to foreign entities, the prevailing logic was that such
businesses and organizations are not required to obtain an employer
identification number (``EIN'') from the Internal Revenue Service
(``IRS''), and are thus unable to furnish a TIN during their CORES
registration process. Therefore, we have historically allowed such
entities to complete the CORES registration process without providing a
valid TIN.\27\ Similarly, because individuals who are not U.S. citizens
and who are not employed within the United States typically are not
issued a social security number (``SSN'') by the U.S. Social Security
Administration (``SSA''), we have previously permitted individuals to
complete the CORES registration process without providing a valid TIN
by certifying that they have not been issued a SSN because they are not
U.S. citizens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See n.2, supra.
\27\ See 2001 CORES Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 16142, para. 18. See
also the Frequently Asked Questions section on the Commission's
CORES Web site, https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/coresWeb/html/tin.html#q52, ``What if my entity does not have a TIN?''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. As originally crafted, our TIN exception reason for foreign
entities failed to recognize that foreign entities operating inside the
U.S., or who have employees working in the United States, are required
to obtain an EIN from the IRS.\28\ Thus, we tentatively conclude that
foreign entities operating within the U.S. should now be required to
provide their EIN when seeking to obtain an FRN through CORES. We seek
comment on this conclusion. With regard to foreign entities that do not
operate in the United States nor have employees in the United States,
we wish to operate from the assumption that they may still be able to
provide some form of equivalent tax identification number issued by
their respective home government. We seek comment on the validity of
our assumption and request that commenters provide specific examples of
developed countries whose governments do not employ any concept of a
TIN for their businesses and organizations. Should we determine that
our assumption is accurate (i.e., that the use of taxpayer
identification numbers is a near-universal concept), we would eliminate
our taxpayer identification number exception reason for all businesses
and organizations and require such entities to furnish their country's
equivalent taxpayer identification number as issued by their home
government. To distinguish foreign equivalent taxpayer identification
numbers from IRS-issued EINs in CORES, we propose that all foreign
taxpayer identification numbers would receive a prefix consisting of
their respective country's international two-character country code. To
ensure that we are able to uniquely identify every entity that does
business with the Commission and deter the intentional misuse of this
exception by domestic businesses seeking to avoid reporting their
correct EINs,, should we require all foreign business and organizations
to furnish the Commission with a copy of their country's taxpayer
identification documentation at the time of registering an FRN in
CORES? If so, what would be the most effective and least burdensome
method for foreign entities to submit a copy of their country's
taxpayer identification documentation? Morevoer, we seek comment on
whether foreign entities that are existing license holders should
submit a copy of their country's taxpayer identification documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Internal Revenue Service Form SS-4 Application for
Employer Identifier Number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. Similarly, we propose to eliminate our TIN exception reason for
foreign individuals. We note that foreign nationals working in the
United States, including all individuals working in the United States
on an immigrant visa, are issued an SSN by the SSA.\29\ In addition,
some temporary visitors, students, and workers on non-immigrant visas
are allowed and sometimes required to obtain an SSN.\30\ We therefore
conclude that in the vast majority of cases, individuals should be able
to furnish a valid SSN as issued by the SSA. We also note that there is
another type of TIN that may be held by foreign individuals that CORES
has never been programmed to accept. This TIN is known as an Individual
Taxpayer Identification Number, or ITIN. The IRS issues ITINs to
individuals who are required to have a U.S. taxpayer identification
number but who do not have, and are not eligible to obtain, an SSN from
the SSA.\31\ ITINs and SSNs share the same nine-digit 000-00-0000 data
structure. Only non-U.S. citizens can apply for an ITIN.\32\ We note
that individuals who already have a valid SSN should not apply for an
ITIN because it is not permissible for an individual to hold both an
SSN and an ITIN.\33\ We tentatively conclude that individuals should be
permitted to use their ITIN in place of an SSN when applying for an
FRN. We seek comment on this conclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See ``Social Security Card Application Guide,'' https://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/social-security-card.html.
\30\ Id.
\31\ See https://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=96287,00.html, Individual Taxpayer Identification Number
(ITIN).
\32\ See ``ITIN Application,'' https://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/itin.html.
\33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
31. Furthermore, foreign individuals who are unable to furnish
either an SSN or an ITIN as their TIN may still be able to provide some
form of equivalent taxpayer identification number or general
identification number that has been issued by his or her home
government which the Commission could accept in place of an SSN or
ITIN. We seek comment on this matter. We specifically seek examples of
developed countries whose governments do not assign taxpayer
identification numbers or utilize a general identification system for
their citizens. If used, we propose to identify foreign-issued tax
identification numbers (or the equivalent) for individuals in CORES by
adding a prefix that represents the individual's applicable
international two-character country code. We seek comment on whether we
should require supporting documentation to be furnished to the
Commission at the time of registering an FRN. In particular, parties
should indicate whether requiring the submission of foreign-equivalent
taxpayer identification numbers and supporting documentation would help
ensure that we are able to uniquely identify every individual that does
business with the Commission, and would deter the intentional misuse of
this exception by individuals seeking to avoid reporting their correct
social security numbers or attempting to register simultaneously under
multiple aliases. We seek comment on these potential measures,
including the most effective and least burdensome method to submit such
supporting documentation.
32. Finally, we seek comment on how the Commission should treat
FRNs that were obtained by foreign entities and foreign individuals
through the use of the previously-mentioned TIN exception reasons.
Should these existing FRN holders be ``grandfathered'' into CORES, or
should they be required to provide a valid SSN, ITIN, or foreign
equivalent taxpayer identification number within a particular time
frame?
[[Page 5659]]
How long of a waiting period is appropriate to allow for previously
registered foreign entities and foreign individuals to provide one of
the aforementioned valid identifiers? If adopted, we tentatively
conclude that affected entities and individuals would be electronically
notified of the requirement that they provide a valid identifier upon
logging in to the system. Thus, we tentatively conclude that foreign
entities and foreign individuals must furnish their TIN or TIN-
equivalent documentation within thirty days of their first log-in after
the effective date of any final rules adopted in this proceeding. We
seek comment on this conclusion.
33. Petitioners and Non-Feeable Complainants. Petitioners and non-
feeable complainants are not required by Commission rules to provide
their TIN to the Commission, nor to obtain an FRN,\34\ under the
rationale that non-feeable items do not involve payments to the
Commission. When CORES was first developed, however, we understood that
some of these same petitioners and non-feeable complainants may
voluntarily wish to obtain an FRN, possibly for internal record-keeping
purposes. Thus, to reduce the regulatory burden on such entities, we
established an exception permitting entities and individuals to obtain
an FRN without providing their TIN by certifying during the
registration process either that ``the individual is a petitioner'' or
``the entity (business or organization) is a petitioner.'' However, our
experience since then has underscored that this particular TIN
exception reason provides an opportunity for entities and individuals
who file license applications or otherwise conduct business with the
Commission to circumvent their TIN provision requirement by falsely
identifying themselves in CORES as petitioners or non-feeable
complainants. We therefore propose to eliminate this TIN exception
reason. We seek comment on this proposal and on how we should treat
FRNs that were obtained by entities and individuals holding licenses or
other authorizations (i.e., doing business with the Commission) through
inappropriate use of this TIN exception reason.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See the Frequently Asked Questions section on the
Commission's CORES Web site, https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/coresWeb/html/know.html#q103, ``What do you mean by ``doing business'' with
the FCC?''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. Temporary Exceptions. Under our existing processes, entities
who have applied for (but have not yet received) their EIN from the IRS
are considered temporarily exempt from providing a TIN when registering
in CORES. Similarly, individuals who have applied for, but have not yet
received, their SSN from the SSA are temporarily exempt from providing
their TIN. In CORES, these exception reasons are phrased as ``The EIN
has been applied for'' and ``Applied for'' for entities and
individuals, respectively. Unfortunately, CORES does not have the
capability to automatically revisit these temporary exceptions, and
often entities and individuals claiming this exception are awarded a
license and fail to provide a valid TIN at a later date. Thus, as a
practical matter, entities and individuals who have claimed this
temporary TIN exception are effectively treated by the Commission as
having received permanent waivers of the TIN provision requirement. To
remedy this, we propose to establish a time frame within which such
entities and individuals must subsequently provide their TIN. The time
remaining before the expiration of this waiver would be viewable when
the FRN holder accesses CORES. FRNs that have been obtained through
this TIN exception reason would automatically expire and be de-
activated after this time period unless a valid TIN is subsequently
provided. We seek comment on this proposal. Specifically, we seek
comment on the appropriate time frame for the Commission to wait for
entities and individuals to furnish their newly acquired TINs to the
Commission before deactivation of their FRNs. We note that, according
to the IRS Web site, an entity may obtain an EIN immediately upon
completing an on-line form,\35\ while it may take ``several weeks'' for
foreign workers to obtain an SSN.\36\ Thus, we tentatively conclude
that entities should be required to provide their newly-obtained EIN to
the Commission within fifteen days, and that individuals should be
required to provide their newly-acquired SSN to the Commission within
sixty days. We seek comment on these tentative conclusions. In the
event that entities and individuals are unable to obtain a TIN within
our established time limits, we will set aside their FRNs for an
additional period of time so that they may retain their current FRNs
once they obtain their TIN, thus preventing the need to re-register in
CORES. Such ``reserved'' FRNs will be inactive, however, and will not
be able to be used on remittance payments or applications filed with
the Commission until a TIN is provided. We seek comment on the length
of time that such FRNs should remain in an inactive status before
considered abandoned by the FRN holder and deleted from our system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=102767,00.html?portlet=4.
\36\ See https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10107.html#time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. Exempted Activities. Currently, CORES allows both entities and
individuals to select a TIN exception reason known as ``exempted
activities'' when registering an FRN. For an entity, this exception
applies when IRS rules do not require the acquisition of an EIN due to
the nature of the organization. For now, we continue to believe that,
while rarely used, this remains a valid TIN exception reason for
entities.\37\ Therefore, we recommend that this exemption be maintained
for future use. For individuals, however, we propose to discontinue the
availability of this TIN exception reason. As we have discussed above,
we now believe that all individuals--be they domestic or foreign--are
able to provide either a valid SSN, or ITIN, or a foreign equivalent
taxpayer identification number or general identification number, as
issued by their home government. We seek comment
