Notice of Need To File Updated Information for Some Closed Captioning Exemption Petitions, 26550-26551 [2012-10815]
Download as PDF
26550
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2012 / Notices
and reservations will be accepted on a
first-come, first-served basis.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2012–10805 Filed 5–3–12; 8:45 am]
I. Summary of Information About the
Workshop
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Questions regarding the scientific and
technical aspects of the workshop
should be directed to Dr. Beth Owens,
telephone: 919–541–0600; facsimile:
919–541–2895; email:
owens.beth@epa.gov.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Dated: April 20, 2012.
Darrell A. Winner,
Acting Director, National Center for
Environmental Assessment.
Sections 108 and 109 of the Clean Air
Act require periodic review and, if
appropriate, revisions of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and the air quality criteria on
which they are based. As a part of this
process, NCEA reviews and integrates
scientific information from across
scientific disciplines in drawing
conclusions related to exposure and
health impacts of each of the criteria air
pollutants in the Integrated Science
Assessment (ISA). EPA is planning the
development of a companion
assessment to the ISAs, the
Multipollutant Science Assessment,
whereby the health effects of exposure
to a mixture of pollutants, principally
the criteria air pollutants, may be
systematically evaluated. To this end,
EPA conducted a workshop in February
2011, entitled Multipollutant Science
and Risk Analysis: Addressing Multiple
Pollutants in the NAAQS Review
Process. One of the sessions focused on
using mode-of-action and toxicity
pathways approaches to interpret health
evidence from toxicological and
controlled human exposure studies of
criteria air pollutants. NCEA is planning
to further discuss issues related to the
interpretation and organization of
evidence used to characterize health
effects resulting from exposure to realworld mixtures of air pollutants at the
one-day workshop on May 31, 2012.
The goal of the workshop is to explore
the possible ways by which mode-ofaction and toxicity pathways
approaches may contribute to
interpretation of cumulative human
health risks of the criteria air pollutants.
Discussion points will include current
EPA plans related to an approach in
which experimental health results are
organized around key events or
biological pathways that are linked to
endpoints and outcomes of interest. In
addition, discussion will focus on the
means by which information from
epidemiologic panel studies can be
integrated into this framework, as well
as how mixtures have been evaluated in
other media and by other groups.
II. Workshop Information
Members of the public may attend the
workshop as observers. Space is limited,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 May 03, 2012
Jkt 226001
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
[CG Docket No. 06–181; DA 12–514]
Notice of Need To File Updated
Information for Some Closed
Captioning Exemption Petitions
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission, via the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau (Bureau)
alerts certain entities that filed petitions
for exemption from the Commission’s
closed captioning rules prior to the
passage of the Twenty-First Century
Communications and Video
Accessibility Act of 2010 (CVAA), of the
need to either (1) affirm that the
information provided in their
previously submitted petition is still
accurate and up-to-date, (2) update
previously submitted petitions with the
information indicated below, or (3)
withdraw their previously submitted
petitions. The intended action is to
ensure that information provided in
each petition is current and accurate.
DATES: Effective May 4, 2012, Petitions
subject to document DA 12–514 will be
dismissed on July 5, 2012, without
prejudice to filing a new petition for
exemption, if not affirmed, updated, or
withdrawn as set forth in document DA
12–514.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Traci Randolph, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, at (202)
418–0569 (voice), (202) 418–0537
(TTY); email: Traci.Randolph@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s public
notice, document DA 12–514, released
April 2, 2012, in CG Docket No. 06–181.
The full text of document DA 12–514
and copies of any subsequently filed
documents in this matter will be
available for public inspection and
copying during regular business hours
at the FCC Reference Information
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW.,
Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554.
Document DA 12–514 and copies of
subsequently filed documents in this
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
matter may also be purchased from the
Commission’s duplicating contractor,
Best Copying and Printing, Inc. (BCPI),
at Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room
CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554.
Customers may contact BCPI at its Web
site: https://www.bcpiweb.com, or by
calling (202) 488–5300. Document DA
12–514 and the Appendix listing
Unresolved Petitions for Individual
Closed Captioning Exemptions can also
be downloaded in Word or Portable
Document Format (PDF) at: https://
www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/
economically-burdensome-exemptionclosed-captioning-requirements.
Synopsis
From October 2005 through August
2006, the Commission received
approximately 600 petitions for
individual closed captioning
exemptions under section 713(d)(3) of
the Act. In 2006, the Commission’s
Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau (Bureau) granted two of these
petitions in the Anglers Order, 21 FCC
Rcd 10094, and during the weeks that
followed, granted an additional 303
petitions in reliance on the reasoning of
the Anglers Order. In 2006, the
Commission received an Application for
Review that challenged the exemptions
granted in and those that relied on the
Anglers Order. On October 20, 2011, the
FCC granted the Application for Review,
and in the Anglers Reversal MO&O,
published at 76 FR 67376, November 1,
2011; 76 FR 67377, November 1, 2011;
and at 76 FR 67397, November 1, 2011,
reversed these exemptions. The Anglers
Reversal MO&O also set forth guidance
on the information and documentation
that closed captioning petitions should
contain, along with standards that the
Bureau should use to determine when a
closed captioning exemption is
warranted.
At issue in document DA 12–514 are
the unresolved petitions for exemption
that are not subject to the Anglers
Reversal MO&O, and that were filed
before passage of the CVAA. Although
some of these petitions were previously
placed on public notice, no decision to
grant or to deny was ever made
regarding these petitions. The Bureau is
now ready to apply the standards
restored by the Anglers Reversal MO&O
to resolve the claims for an exemption
by these petitioners. However, the
Bureau realizes that considerable time
has passed since many of these petitions
were first filed, and that various
circumstances including, but not
limited to, the financial status of the
petitioners and the cost of captioning,
may have changed.
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2012 / Notices
Accordingly, in order to ensure that
information provided in each petition is
current and accurate, the Bureau
requires each petitioner whose petition
is listed in document DA 12–514 to do
one of the following by July 5, 2012: (1)
File an affirmation with the FCC that its
previously submitted petition and
supporting information is accurate and
up-to-date; (2) file updated information
in accordance with the factors listed
below to support its claim that
captioning its program(s) would be
economically burdensome; or (3)
withdraw its previously submitted
petition.
Any petitioner listed in document DA
12–514 that does not take one of the
steps listed above by July 5, 2012, will
have its pending petition dismissed
without prejudice on July 5, 2012. A
petitioner that is interested in
continuing to request a closed
captioning exemption for its
programming must include up-to-date
evidence, supported by affidavit,
demonstrating that it would be
economically burdensome to provide
closed captioning on the specific
programming for which an exemption is
sought. Specifically, each petition
should contain current and detailed
documentation, in accordance with the
original factors outlined in section
713(e) of the Act and § 79.1(f) of
Commission’s rules, to support a claim
that providing closed captions would be
economically burdensome (would result
in a ‘‘significant difficulty or expense’’)
as defined by the following criteria: (1)
The nature and cost of the closed
captions for the programming; (2) the
impact on the operation of the provider
or program owner; (3) the financial
resources of the provider or program
owner; and (4) the type of operations of
the provider or program owner.
In order to make the above showing
that providing captioning would be
economically burdensome, each
petitioner must:
• Provide documentation of its
financial status sufficient to
demonstrate its inability to afford closed
captioning—for example, profit and loss
statements or bank statement
information. (This documentation
should not just include the resources
devoted to or the costs associated with
the television program(s) at issue);
• Provide information about the costs
of captioning the specific program for
which the exemption is sought;
• Verify that it has sought closed
captioning assistance (e.g., funding,
services) from its video programming
distributor and note the extent to which
such assistance has been provided or
rejected;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:21 May 03, 2012
Jkt 226001
• Verify that it has sought additional
sponsorship sources or other sources of
revenue for captioning, and show that,
even if these efforts have not
successfully produced assistance, it
does not otherwise have the means to
provide captioning for its programming;
and
• Provide information on the type of
its operation(s) and the impact that
providing captions would have on its
programming activities, for example, the
extent to which its programming might
not be shown if it is required to provide
captions.
In addition, each petitioner may
describe other factors that it deems
relevant to an exemption determination,
as well as any alternatives that could be
a reasonable substitute for the closed
captioning requirements. Each petition
should also contain a specific list of
names of the program(s) for which the
petitioner is seeking an exemption.
Finally, as noted above, each petition
must be supported by an affidavit.
Failure to support an exemption request
with adequate explanation and evidence
to make these showings, supported by
an affidavit, will result in dismissal of
the request.
Each updated petition that provides
sufficient information will be placed on
public notice to allow the public to
comment on the merits of the petition.
After giving the public an opportunity
to submit comments, the Bureau will
conduct an individual review of each
petition to determine the extent to
which providing captioning would be
economically burdensome for the
petitioner, based on information
provided in the petition and any
comments received, and will issue an
order either granting or denying the
petition.
Federal Communications Commission.
Karen Peltz Strauss,
Deputy Chief, Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2012–10815 Filed 5–3–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection
Renewal; Comment Request
Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
AGENCY:
The FDIC, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
and respondent burden, invites the
general public and other Federal
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26551
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on renewal of an existing
information collection, as required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. chapter 35). Currently, the
FDIC is soliciting comments on renewal
of the information collection described
below.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before July 3, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments to
the FDIC by any of the following
methods:
• https://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/
laws/federal/notices.html
• Email: comments@fdic.gov Include
the name of the collection in the subject
line of the message.
• Mail: Leneta G. Gregorie (202–898–
3719), Counsel, Room NY–5050, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20429.
• Hand Delivery: Comments may be
hand-delivered to the guard station at
the rear of the 17th Street Building
(located on F Street), on business days
between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
All comments should refer to the
relevant OMB control number. A copy
of the comments may also be submitted
to the OMB desk officer for the FDIC:
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, New Executive Office Building,
Washington, DC 20503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Leneta G. Gregorie, at the FDIC address
above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposal
to renew the following currently
approved collection of information:
Title: Recordkeeping and
Confirmation Requirements for
Securities Transactions.
OMB Number: 3064–0028.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Affected Public: Business or other
financial institutions.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
4534.
Average Time per Response: 27.91
hours.
Total Annual Burden: 126,544 hours.
General Description of Collection: The
information collection requirements are
contained in 12 CFR part 344. The
regulation’s purpose is to ensure that
purchasers of securities in transactions
effected by insured state nonmember
banks are provided with adequate
records concerning the transactions. The
regulation is also designed to ensure
that insured state nonmember banks
maintain adequate records and controls
with respect to the securities
transactions they effect.
E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM
04MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 87 (Friday, May 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26550-26551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10815]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
[CG Docket No. 06-181; DA 12-514]
Notice of Need To File Updated Information for Some Closed
Captioning Exemption Petitions
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission, via the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau (Bureau) alerts certain entities that filed
petitions for exemption from the Commission's closed captioning rules
prior to the passage of the Twenty-First Century Communications and
Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (CVAA), of the need to either (1)
affirm that the information provided in their previously submitted
petition is still accurate and up-to-date, (2) update previously
submitted petitions with the information indicated below, or (3)
withdraw their previously submitted petitions. The intended action is
to ensure that information provided in each petition is current and
accurate.
DATES: Effective May 4, 2012, Petitions subject to document DA 12-514
will be dismissed on July 5, 2012, without prejudice to filing a new
petition for exemption, if not affirmed, updated, or withdrawn as set
forth in document DA 12-514.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Traci Randolph, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, at (202) 418-0569 (voice), (202) 418-0537
(TTY); email: Traci.Randolph@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's public
notice, document DA 12-514, released April 2, 2012, in CG Docket No.
06-181. The full text of document DA 12-514 and copies of any
subsequently filed documents in this matter will be available for
public inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC
Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-
A257, Washington, DC 20554. Document DA 12-514 and copies of
subsequently filed documents in this matter may also be purchased from
the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copying and Printing,
Inc. (BCPI), at Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-B402,
Washington, DC 20554. Customers may contact BCPI at its Web site:
https://www.bcpiweb.com, or by calling (202) 488-5300. Document DA 12-
514 and the Appendix listing Unresolved Petitions for Individual Closed
Captioning Exemptions can also be downloaded in Word or Portable
Document Format (PDF) at: https://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/economically-burdensome-exemption-closed-captioning-requirements.
Synopsis
From October 2005 through August 2006, the Commission received
approximately 600 petitions for individual closed captioning exemptions
under section 713(d)(3) of the Act. In 2006, the Commission's Consumer
and Governmental Affairs Bureau (Bureau) granted two of these petitions
in the Anglers Order, 21 FCC Rcd 10094, and during the weeks that
followed, granted an additional 303 petitions in reliance on the
reasoning of the Anglers Order. In 2006, the Commission received an
Application for Review that challenged the exemptions granted in and
those that relied on the Anglers Order. On October 20, 2011, the FCC
granted the Application for Review, and in the Anglers Reversal MO&O,
published at 76 FR 67376, November 1, 2011; 76 FR 67377, November 1,
2011; and at 76 FR 67397, November 1, 2011, reversed these exemptions.
The Anglers Reversal MO&O also set forth guidance on the information
and documentation that closed captioning petitions should contain,
along with standards that the Bureau should use to determine when a
closed captioning exemption is warranted.
At issue in document DA 12-514 are the unresolved petitions for
exemption that are not subject to the Anglers Reversal MO&O, and that
were filed before passage of the CVAA. Although some of these petitions
were previously placed on public notice, no decision to grant or to
deny was ever made regarding these petitions. The Bureau is now ready
to apply the standards restored by the Anglers Reversal MO&O to resolve
the claims for an exemption by these petitioners. However, the Bureau
realizes that considerable time has passed since many of these
petitions were first filed, and that various circumstances including,
but not limited to, the financial status of the petitioners and the
cost of captioning, may have changed.
[[Page 26551]]
Accordingly, in order to ensure that information provided in each
petition is current and accurate, the Bureau requires each petitioner
whose petition is listed in document DA 12-514 to do one of the
following by July 5, 2012: (1) File an affirmation with the FCC that
its previously submitted petition and supporting information is
accurate and up-to-date; (2) file updated information in accordance
with the factors listed below to support its claim that captioning its
program(s) would be economically burdensome; or (3) withdraw its
previously submitted petition.
Any petitioner listed in document DA 12-514 that does not take one
of the steps listed above by July 5, 2012, will have its pending
petition dismissed without prejudice on July 5, 2012. A petitioner that
is interested in continuing to request a closed captioning exemption
for its programming must include up-to-date evidence, supported by
affidavit, demonstrating that it would be economically burdensome to
provide closed captioning on the specific programming for which an
exemption is sought. Specifically, each petition should contain current
and detailed documentation, in accordance with the original factors
outlined in section 713(e) of the Act and Sec. 79.1(f) of Commission's
rules, to support a claim that providing closed captions would be
economically burdensome (would result in a ``significant difficulty or
expense'') as defined by the following criteria: (1) The nature and
cost of the closed captions for the programming; (2) the impact on the
operation of the provider or program owner; (3) the financial resources
of the provider or program owner; and (4) the type of operations of the
provider or program owner.
In order to make the above showing that providing captioning would
be economically burdensome, each petitioner must:
Provide documentation of its financial status sufficient
to demonstrate its inability to afford closed captioning--for example,
profit and loss statements or bank statement information. (This
documentation should not just include the resources devoted to or the
costs associated with the television program(s) at issue);
Provide information about the costs of captioning the
specific program for which the exemption is sought;
Verify that it has sought closed captioning assistance
(e.g., funding, services) from its video programming distributor and
note the extent to which such assistance has been provided or rejected;
Verify that it has sought additional sponsorship sources
or other sources of revenue for captioning, and show that, even if
these efforts have not successfully produced assistance, it does not
otherwise have the means to provide captioning for its programming; and
Provide information on the type of its operation(s) and
the impact that providing captions would have on its programming
activities, for example, the extent to which its programming might not
be shown if it is required to provide captions.
In addition, each petitioner may describe other factors that it
deems relevant to an exemption determination, as well as any
alternatives that could be a reasonable substitute for the closed
captioning requirements. Each petition should also contain a specific
list of names of the program(s) for which the petitioner is seeking an
exemption. Finally, as noted above, each petition must be supported by
an affidavit. Failure to support an exemption request with adequate
explanation and evidence to make these showings, supported by an
affidavit, will result in dismissal of the request.
Each updated petition that provides sufficient information will be
placed on public notice to allow the public to comment on the merits of
the petition. After giving the public an opportunity to submit
comments, the Bureau will conduct an individual review of each petition
to determine the extent to which providing captioning would be
economically burdensome for the petitioner, based on information
provided in the petition and any comments received, and will issue an
order either granting or denying the petition.
Federal Communications Commission.
Karen Peltz Strauss,
Deputy Chief, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2012-10815 Filed 5-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P